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?

Sigh.

I clicked on this and read the OP and thought 'ooh this sounds interesting'

...and then it descends immediately into a typical MNFWR bickering session. Plus ca change.

Right, to the subject...

I don't see gender abolition as one of my personal goals of feminism, as I think most of the root causes of sexism are to do with biology - to whit, the potential or expected potential to bear children. Marriage and shaming women who were unfaithful more than men was to do with this, as are, more obviously, abortion rights, parental leave etc.

OP, which examples of sexism do you think are based on gender rather than sex?

Could someone please link to the thread that Damsili refers to in the OP? Because, really, without it, this thread is missing a lot of context.

I would love to see a world without gender expectations, where the cry of "it's a boy!" does not automatically mean that child will be expected to be tough, play rough, wear shades of sludge and have a short haircut (yes, it gets that ridiculous, I had an acquaintance say the other day of another friend's newborn with a gorgeous mop of hair 'oh, you'll want to get that cut asap - can't have people thinking he's a girl!'), or, conversely, 'it's a girl!' won't mean that the child will be socialised into being quiet and 'good' and compliant, smothered in pink clothing and accessories and steered away from too much education.

I want to see a world where the concept of 'trans' is meaningless because no-one will feel their inner self/outer display has to match a set of 'rules' based on their genitals, where people are able to 'be' without fearing discrimination or violence.

In a nutshell, I hate labels, and over the last 30 years (I'm old) I have seen a huge proliferation in the number and 'value' of labels we slap on things and people.

Frau, unfortunately I don't know which thread DS is referring.

OP, I forgot to ask - what's your view on gender abolition?

I am a bit at sea with gender expectations and gender abolition.

I don't conform to gender expectations, and I don't expect my colleagues, friends, children, or acquaintances to either.

Gender abolition is a bit different - abolition comes from "abolish" which is defined as the formally putting an end to. That, to me, means some sort of official (state?) intervention? Could someone explain please?

(Sorry - I know I'm asking a lot of questions)

What Lovecat said!

And what Yonic said - I've noticed that too and it would be great to talk about the issue at hand.

I think the problem with deconstructing gender is that so many people link out psychological abilities and desires as linked to our biological sex. Eg- men being hard wired for logical thinking.

I think people need to deconstruct that more and stop seeing masculine and feminine ways of thinking as direct opposites.

More Ying and Yang, less Baron Cohen!!

what an absolutely baffling thread

arsenicsoup why didn't you just ask "please could you clarify the meaning of the terms"?

tbh i'm not sure myself what the OP's trying to get at with the questions, so would welcome clarification too

There's a great deal of irony about this thread. The OP seems to be a recent FWR poster who is combative to the FWR so-called "party line".

Hazchem seems to have tried to fill in some blanks in the OP in a good faith attempt at an interesting discussion. I can't see arsenic's contribution as anything other than hostile and not constructive. Since the OP hasn't come back, it's a bit pointless berating others for the failings of the OP. I'm pretty sure the OP would be appalled to be classified as typical FWR.

On the issue itself, I also don't know what thread the OP is referring to but since it would be impossible to abolish the biological differences between women and men, I assume she means the socially constructed expected behaviours of men and women. I like this definition from the World Health Organisation:

www.who.int/gender/whatisgender/en/

So the question could be "would you like to see an end to the classification of behaviour, activities, roles as masculine or feminine?"

I would say yes. Obviously this doesn't apply to biological functions as they are not socially constructed. Women and men should be free to express the characteristics of their personalities and not to have their role socially constructed.

I like this image:

FrauHelga Opps sorry. I'd written a bit about it in the post above and felt like I'd be droning on. I guess to me gender abolishing would see no gender. we would still be female,male, intersex but but not feminine/masculine. People would be people doing what they wanted but also respected/valued for the differences of sex. I think my last part about valuing sex differences might be controversial. The bit about state sanctioned isn't something I'd thought about to be honest. But it raises so interesting questions. Like is gender currently state controlled?

Hazchem - as I have said, I don't know. I'm willing to be educated and that is, in large part, why I am engaging on the thread.

If gender isn't formally (state?) controlled, then why does it need to be "abolished" (given the definition of abolish)?

Well, I think it's OP that used abolish.

Gender does come into law in, for example, the Gender Reassignment Act, which deals with trans issues.

However, keeping the focus on gender in general - I would agree with Flora that i would love to see all behaviours and qualities accepted as behaviours and qualities and nothing to do with masculinity/femininity.

that's the OP's word, without clarification i'm not sure what is intended by it, but people are just reflecting the fact that it is used in the OP. i would use deconstructed or similar as others have done. realistically it's not something that's going to be abolished, it will (hopefully) happen over time. but if i could wave a magic wand and gender stereotyping disappeared i don't think that would be a bad thing

I guess in the UK at least it has some state control because of things like the Gender Certification you can get. I'd think as gender is socially constructed even and act of parliament to abolish it wouldn't really abolish it in that sense it would need to be deconstructed or left to run down as other concepts were pushed further forward.
I wonder if working towards equality of the sexes actually ends up with abolishing gender if it is followed through enough.

Yy Petula,

Does the Gender Reassignment Act abolish gender or reinforce the concept of gender, or even more reinforce the notion of gender as confused with sex though?

(If sex is the biological fact and gender is the social construct - if I'm getting that right!)

i suppose in theory you could pass a law (for example) that didn't allow marketing of products to one particular sex over another where it didn't have any relation to biological sex. so sanitary towels - obviously only marketable towards women. cleaning fluid and action man - no need to market just to one sex. no sex distinctions in shops (not sure how or if this would work with clothes)

not sure whether that would be a good use of legislative powers though?

The GRA sets out the parameters under which a trans woman will be legally recognised as a woman or a trans man legally recognised as a man.

There may be other acts that reference gender, I'm not sure.

I think the GRA reinforces gender because it's about performing behaviors which are feminine and masculine. That's a rough thought.

Isn't it like saying you would like to abolish racism? Racism has elements that are / were state controlled and elements that are socially constructed. You could use a number of approaches to "abolish" racism by removing the formal elements that are in laws. You can also make legislation to address some of the social aspects (e.g. anti-discrimination laws) but ultimately you need to change the social constructions that support racism and change people's views. I see dismantling gender in the same way with the same need for a number of different approaches.

YY flora. I would say though that ideas about gender differences are more ingrained than those on race and so will take longer to shift.

Blimey, this wasn't what I was expecting!

There is a brief exchange between Bellasolanum and GarlicNovember at 2120 Sat 1 Nov on the 'why a lot of women don't come on the feminism threads'. Bella refers to herself as a gender abolitionist and Garlic responds by saying "a genderless society Oh... My... God... When's that going to happen I haven't got much time left. can we hurry it up"

It seemed a bit rude in the OP to directly quote a conversation I wasn't involved in. I hadn't seen the issue discussed here before, but it made me think and I wondered what the regular 'party-line' (unquote) posters' thoughts were. A lot of conversation is about reducing gender stereotypes and gender being entirely a social construct.. .so it seems a valid question to ask.

Whoever it was that suggested that I did this with a malign agenda can have a big fat . You can only look ridiculous if you provide ridiculous answers. (Sorry Yonic (waves back) I got combative again )

To clarify - I'd assumed gender abolition was a thing. Is it not?

Posters often use phrases and abbreviations and are often impatient with people that aren't aware of concepts... I feel a bit like you can't win sometimes