Gender abolition

[Damsili]

On another thread a few posters have enthused about the abolition of gender. I wonder how many people see this as the ultimate goal of feminism?

Also, is there room for people who are broadly content with the idea of femininity and masculinity being separate things, but want better treatment of women? Do the abolitionists accept this point of view?

Yes Garlic, a fetish is a good way of putting it. Here's a question - is it possible to have a fair society that is gendered? Is that imaginable? I ask because I can't see a way of ever achieving a genderless society, but I don't want to give up on the idea of a fair one.

Garlic Bobby Are we alright continuing this? I'm just shrugging and moving on... I'll try not to be the great many names I've been called today

There's always going to be some sort of issue isn't there? History has not indicated that the human race is very good at tolerating difference and, even in a completely genderless society, sex would still be a difference. I have been in sub-cultures that have been relatively blind towards colour and that's given me hope that diversity can be tolerated and respected. But those moments have hope usually don't last long.

Also, there's the issue of sexual attraction. Is it possible to say that gender doesn't exist in the animal kingdom? Is the animal kingdom any sort of measure by which look at ourselves? I'm just thinking that there are usually still issues of hierarchy based on sexuality in social animals. Or do we have higher hopes for future humankind?!

Did I miss where you set out your skin in this game? Who is "we"?

Flora If I'm so dreadful, why are you still engaging? Why are you making me the subject of the thread?

Actually, I'm not interested in the answers. I have my own theories. But, could I respectfully ask that this stops now please?

what stops now? I'm just asking what you meant. Starting a thread doesn't make you king of the thread. People are allowed to ask you questions, you know.

I don't think you're dreadful. I don't know you. "Dreadfulness" is not the measure of when I engage in a thread.

what stops now?

Making me the subject of the thread and commenting on me personally.

Starting a thread doesn't make you king of the thread. People are allowed to ask you questions, you know.

like that ^^ There's no need to accuse me of trying to control the thread so why do it? I only mentioned it because, amongst all the other accusations tonight, was a suggestion I was trying to kill the thread

The problem I have with much of what has been said is that this non-gendered Utopia sounds more like a society where a self-appointed sisterhood tells women what it's ok to wear.

I'm having difficulty buying the idea that I occasionally wear make up and false eye lashes because I want to make myself prettier for a man . No I don't. It makes me look prettier, to please myself.

I hate ugly clothes. I don't wear and never have worn revealing clothes but I'd not be seen dead in jeans, trousers,trainers , baggy jumpers and the like. All ugly clothes , as indeed are the revealing dresses in the Cyrus/Rhianna thread.

I'm not comfortable at all with the assumptions that skirts and heels and make-up will all be redundant in this non-gendered Utopia. Why would that be the case? Should I stop caring what I look like because it's been decreed it's not important? Or Big Sister doesn't approve?

You seem to think that repeating a question you've been dodging all evening is making you the subject of the thread. You keep saying "we" and I genuinely don't know what you mean. How is that me making you the subject of the thread?

Phaedra The suggestion is that men and women would be equally able to wear make up and false eye lashes (using your example). It would still be possible to discard ugly clothes for example, but also equally possible to wear ugly clothes and be judged equally for doing so.

When I said we, I meant feminists.

Ok. Not all feminists agree with you. Despite the accusations of exclusion over the last couple of days, FWR regulars don't generally talk like that because not all feminists tend to agree on something. Typically posters who come on talking about "we on this thread" or "we" this and that are men who have a debate club type of approach so not actually "we" at all.

Just so you know.

Phaedra I think the idea is that in a genderless utopia you can wear whatever you want, but things like high heels wouldn't necessarily be thought of as making men or women pretty.

I can't think of any cultures who haven't adorned themselves in some way, and I don't see why that wouldn't be the case in a genderless society. It would just be about expression of your identity instead of being rooted in narrow ideals of beauty.

In my personal ideal genderless society, clothes and jewellery would only be considered 'pretty' if they didn't restrict functional movement. So clothes we can run around and exercise in. So make up and tattoos would be common, along with loose skirts and dresses, but we'd all be wearing sensible flat shoes (or going barefoot ). And makeup would be more tribal- swirling patterns rather than enhancing features western society associates with beauty and sex appeal.

You see how these unwritten rules and conventions can be problematic? Yes, anyone new to a certain environment does well to listen more than they talk, but you have to post at some point. We are talking about normal everyday life and everyone has experience of that and opinions accordingly. I'm skeptical about the anti-academia posts that have arisen as I think academics are the necessary vanguard of thought. But the nature of this board does mean it's academic heavy and a specialist area - and there's a big gap between this and common RL experience. You surely must know this from RL conversations. It's very difficult to engage here when the clumsiness of RL discourse is not tolerated.

When I say 'we', meaning feminists, I mean everyone that is committed to bringing change in society such that women as a class achieve equality. When I say I think 'we' should do this or 'we' should be aware of that, I mean I think it's a good idea in terms of the strategy or tactics for affecting those positive changes.

It would just be about expression of your identity instead of being rooted in narrow ideals of beauty.

Oh I get that. What I don't get is who appointed the judges to decide whether I'm expressing myself or conforming to narrow ideals of beauty.

And the description above of "non ugly" clothes sounds to me to be shapeless and dowdy but eminently practical when climbing on to the feminist high horse. So you are still going to get people being judgemental

Yep damsili we've all been there.

You may not have seen Flora, but I did actually say I liked your very first post on this thread. At the time, I was returning to a car-crash of some proportion due to the way I'd phrased the OP so I got side-tracked from actually addressing it.

The image was also a helpful description, and I wanted to ask - if not of you, generally, is it thought that there can be no natural link between sex and personality?

Sex is not equal - does that lead to differences in behaviour and could that behaviour be classed as personality?

Once again, I am broadly in agreement that the chain should be broken -perhaps to leave a sort of flexible channel!?

I love the idea of being able to wear whatever I want without it being judged as ugly or not adhering to social standards!

I'm thinking... a roman gladiator style skirt (but purple), a crop top (why should I hide my stretch marks?), some gold armbands, a sparkly tiara, and some legwarmers, just because And a cape. And maybe leopard facepaint.

I'll go back to lurking in my corner now...

LittleBlueHermit

Always room for a cape. Capes are cool.

Phaedra, I commented about the heels/skirt/makeup combination being (somewhat) fetishised in our society but I really wasn't trying to lay down laws! I'm all up for extensive discussions of fashion and of fashion with relevance to feminism, but I don't consider it an essential detail in an imagined genderless society - the main point would be that we wouldn't be expected to advertise, suppress, or in any other way tailor our appearance according to social expectations based on gender.

Which was a very long way of saying something short

Damsili - You've covered an enormous range of issues in two posts there.

There's always going to be some sort of issue isn't there? History has not indicated that the human race is very good at tolerating difference

• Massive question there involving all the social sciences, behavioural science and politics.

even in a completely genderless society, sex would still be a difference.

• Yes, but it wouldn't have to be a constraint. The whole idea is that we get to be PEOPLE, rather than 'feminine', 'masculine', etc, as defined by others.

I have been in sub-cultures that have been relatively blind towards colour

• Eh? We're on to multiculturalism now?!

... and that's given me hope that diversity can be tolerated and respected.

• Intersectional issues will be jolly interesting to discuss in the context of our genderless society. But we haven't even got that out of its packet yet.

Also, there's the issue of sexual attraction.

• Yes. And? Do you find you can't be sexually attracted to someone unless their clothing & behaviour clearly mark their gender? I'd think that quite unusual.

Is it possible to say that gender doesn't exist in the animal kingdom?

• I'm not an animal behaviourist. I'd guess the answer would be "It does, but not as much", since gender is socially constructed and animals have social rules but are less self-conscious than humans (and other primates.)

Is the animal kingdom any sort of measure by which look at ourselves?

• Another enormous question that has its own studies & experts. I am not an animal feminist.

I'm just thinking that there are usually still issues of hierarchy based on sexuality in social animals.

• What? Do you mean lesbian wolves have a special place in the wolf pack? Tell me more!

Or do we have higher hopes for future humankind?!

• I bloody well do, that's why I'm a feminist. Can't answer for "us", as I don't know who "we" refers to in this context.

There is nothing to stop you wearing what you want (as long as your bits are covered) Whether you get judged or not is irrelevant. You can't stop any one doing a double take but equally it's none of their business.

I'm not an animal feminist

Oh Garlic, you do make me laugh. Thanks for that

:)

There is nothing to stop you wearing what you want

Phaedra, I do most of the time. I have this luxury because I'm fortunate () enough to be long-term unemployed and with a limited social life.

It's obvious I couldn't wear what I wanted when I had a job and was always out meeting people.

... Not 100% true, actually, because for quite a while I worked in fashion. I definitely wore whatever I wanted then, was often "judged" by oiks with no imagination, and had a ball.

You can hardly profess that's a normal state of affairs, though.