|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 24, 2017 12:08:08 GMT -5
Gender is not biological, it is sociological. Sex is biological-one is born biologically male or female except in rare cases of hermaphrodites. Gender is the roles a society associates with a sex i.e. an interpretation of what it means to be male or female ina given society. That is correct, although in a society where we have been insisting for the past forty years that men and women have the same potential, the same dreams, the same ambitions, as well as being equally entitled to the same jobs and the same responsibilities, any distinction between men and women that does not concern biological sex strikes me as moot. Or at least quaint, a cultural echo from less egalitarian times. wildfire2099 couldn't express my opinion on the issue better: I just don't understand why it's "divisive." How are you harmed by an announcement being changed from "Good afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen" to "Good afternoon everyone." What about this makes your particular life different in any way?
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 24, 2017 12:30:54 GMT -5
That is correct, although in a society where we have been insisting for the past forty years that men and women have the same potential, the same dreams, the same ambitions, as well as being equally entitled to the same jobs and the same responsibilities, any distinction between men and women that does not concern biological sex strikes me as moot. Or at least quaint, a cultural echo from less egalitarian times. wildfire2099 couldn't express my opinion on the issue better: I just don't understand why it's "divisive." How are you harmed by an announcement being changed from "Good afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen" to "Good afternoon everyone." What about this makes your particular life different in any way? As I explained above, the expression itself poses no problem whatsoever. It is the concept that "dear ladies and gentlemen" is wrong that is the problem. There is nothing wrong with "hello everyone", but there is nothing wrong either with "hello, ladies and gentlemen". There was nothing wrong with the word " niggardly", but someone managed to get offended by it and its user had to offer a public apology.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Jul 24, 2017 12:41:23 GMT -5
Weren't "ladies" and "gentlemen" two different classes originally? Ladies were the wives and daughters of lords, while gentlemen (and gentlewomen) were one level below that - not of the peerage but having sufficient property and income that they didn't need to work. I wonder when and why the two were combined into one expression.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 24, 2017 12:50:21 GMT -5
Weren't "ladies" and "gentlemen" two different classes originally? Ladies were the wives and daughters of lords, while gentlemen (and gentlewomen) were one level below that - not of the peerage but having sufficient property and income that they didn't need to work. I wonder when and why the two were combined into one expression. An interesting question. This site provides a believable answer; basically, it's a flattering way to address everybody by implying they belong to a social rank superior to theirs. In French, the equivalent expression refers to women as "ladies" ( dames) and men as "sirs" ( sieurs). Before the revolution, that is, because then everyone became "Citizen" for a while.
|
|
|
Post by BigPapaJoe on Jul 24, 2017 14:00:58 GMT -5
Might equals right. As long as you have more power, money, and/or resources things will go your way morality be dammed. Just the way the world works. Unfortunate reality.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 24, 2017 17:53:08 GMT -5
Weren't "ladies" and "gentlemen" two different classes originally? Ladies were the wives and daughters of lords, while gentlemen (and gentlewomen) were one level below that - not of the peerage but having sufficient property and income that they didn't need to work. I wonder when and why the two were combined into one expression. An interesting question. This site provides a believable answer; basically, it's a flattering way to address everybody by implying they belong to a social rank superior to theirs. In French, the equivalent expression refers to women as "ladies" ( dames) and men as "sirs" ( sieurs). Before the revolution, that is, because then everyone became "Citizen" for a while. ... which is exactly why 'Hello Ladies and Gentlemen' is better than 'Everyone' it is more formal and meant to make people feel special... much like using 'sir' or 'miss' instead of 'guys' or 'honey'. 'everyone' is much more casual. While I don't care about that sort of thing, as someone who's been in Customer Service most of his life, LOTS of people do. I'd be willing to be they'll be more older people that complain about 'hello everyone' than there are trans gender folks complaining about 'ladies and gentlemen'. We'll have to agree to disgree about the other stuff... I consider Gender and Sex synonyms.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 17:57:29 GMT -5
We'll have to agree to disgree about the other stuff... I consider Gender and Sex synonyms. They're not. Not in biology. Not in anthropology. Not in sociology. Not even in grammar. Using them interchangeably is a false equivalency. It is simply erroneous. -M
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 24, 2017 18:05:27 GMT -5
I find that's not the case. If that's so, why do people who are transgendered get upset at the M/F indicator on applications? That's often listed as 'Sex' (though I've certainly seen it listed as Gender).
Perhaps you are correct in academic terms, but I really don't think that's the case in everyday communication.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 18:20:30 GMT -5
I find that's not the case. If that's so, why do people who are transgendered get upset at the M/F indicator on applications? That's often listed as 'Sex' (though I've certainly seen it listed as Gender). Perhaps you are correct in academic terms, but I really don't think that's the case in everyday communication. People misuse words and use words incorrectly all the time, doing so doesn't make it correct simply because it is a common mistake. What it does do is confuse the conversation because any communication has to be based on a common understanding of language. When you abandon the commonality of language because people misuse words, you add to the difficulty of communicating between people with different opinions or beliefs. Especially when you use words that don't mean what you think they mean because that leads to failure to express yourself clearly and an inability to understand what the other side is actually saying. Just because people can't meet the standards of how to use language doesn't mean the answer is lowering the standards. All that does is compound the problems and increase misunderstandings, its adds to the frustration and makes any kind of solution or even compromise more difficult. It leads to people becoming more obstinate and digging in because they feel misunderstood. Human error of this kind leads to failure of communication. If you can't even agree on a standard of usage, there will be no agreement on the issues you are trying to discuss with the language. -M
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,601
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 24, 2017 18:48:32 GMT -5
I find that's not the case. If that's so, why do people who are transgendered get upset at the M/F indicator on applications? That's often listed as 'Sex' (though I've certainly seen it listed as Gender). Perhaps you are correct in academic terms, but I really don't think that's the case in everyday communication. People misuse words and use words incorrectly all the time, doing so doesn't make it correct simply because it is a common mistake. Going off on a bit of a tangent here, but actually, that's exactly what happens when words are used erroneously by most of the population. Just take the recent re-defining of the word "literally", which in addition to meaning that something is to be taken as literally true, now also means that something is not literally true, but the word is being used for emphasis or to express strong feeling. That's a change that has come about over the last 10 years precisely because a great many people were misusing the word on a regular basis. This is how language evolves.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Jul 24, 2017 18:52:31 GMT -5
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,601
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 24, 2017 18:55:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 20:03:51 GMT -5
People misuse words and use words incorrectly all the time, doing so doesn't make it correct simply because it is a common mistake. Going off on a bit of a tangent here, but actually, that's exactly what happens when words are used erroneously by most of the population. Just take the recent re-defining of the word "literally", which in addition to meaning that something is to be taken as literally true, now also means that something is not literally true, but the word is being used for emphasis or to express strong feeling. That's a change that has come about over the last 10 years precisely because a great many people were misusing the word on a regular basis. This is how language evolves. But here's the thing, neuroscience shows us that when we conflate words in language, we conflate the definition of those words. That's how the brain is hardwired to function. So when we conflate sex with gender, we conflate the biological with the sociological. Sex is whether we have xx or xy chromosomes and demonstrated physically by which type of reproductive organs the person has and whether the mammaries are functional or vestigial among other things. Things like whether it is acceptable to show those mammaries in public, what clothes you are expected to wear, what names are commonly used for the sex, what roles in family and household the person is expected to fill, what occupations are acceptable, how much you get paid to do those jobs, what emotions are acceptably shown by the person, etc. etc. are not determined by the biological, but by the sociological, i.e. society's reaction to the sex and expectations towards it. If in our usage of language we do not acknowledge the difference between the biological and the sociological, then our brain is wired not to acknowledge a difference in the definitions and treat them no differently because we conflate the words. The sociological expectations becomes the "reality" because of the biological sex. If there is no separation is terms for the two things, then there is no difference between them in the way the brain processes and classifies the two. People are free to ignore the science and believe what they want, but the science of how our brain works vis-a-vis the usage of language shows it matters how we use words in terms of our behavior. The evidence is there. Language both shapes and reflects behavior. The menu is never the meal even if the two look the same and are used to reflect each other. Sex is not gender even if the two are perceived to be the same by some and are used to reflect each other. That is, until you change the usage and change the thought and define gender by sex because they are the same thing in the brain. And when you do that, you take away the person's ability to define their own role in society because they are straightjacketed by the perception of others and pigeonholed into a role because of their biology. Language defines perception and perception shapes reality, or at least how our brain interprets the information/stimuli we receive and organizes/shapes what we call reality and then formulates our behavior. -M
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,601
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 24, 2017 20:21:18 GMT -5
Going off on a bit of a tangent here, but actually, that's exactly what happens when words are used erroneously by most of the population. Just take the recent re-defining of the word "literally", which in addition to meaning that something is to be taken as literally true, now also means that something is not literally true, but the word is being used for emphasis or to express strong feeling. That's a change that has come about over the last 10 years precisely because a great many people were misusing the word on a regular basis. This is how language evolves. But here's the thing, neuroscience shows us that when we conflate words in language, we conflate the definition of those words. That's how the brain is hardwired to function. So when we conflate sex with gender, we conflate the biological with the sociological. Sex is whether we have xx or xy chromosomes and demonstrated physically by which type of reproductive organs the person has and whether the mammaries are functional or vestigial among other things. Things like whether it is acceptable to show those mammaries in public, what clothes you are expected to wear, what names are commonly used for the sex, what roles in family and household the person is expected to fill, what occupations are acceptable, how much you get paid to do those jobs, what emotions are acceptably shown by the person, etc. etc. are not determined by the biological, but by the sociological, i.e. society's reaction to the sex and expectations towards it. If in our usage of language we do not acknowledge the difference between the biological and the sociological, then our brain is wired not to acknowledge a difference in the definitions and treat them no differently because we conflate the words. The sociological expectations becomes the "reality" because of the biological sex. If there is no separation is terms for the two things, then there is no difference between them in the way the brain processes and classifies the two. People are free to ignore the science and believe what they want, but the science of how our brain works vis-a-vis the usage of language shows it matters how we use words in terms of our behavior. The evidence is there. Language both shapes and reflects behavior. The menu is never the meal even if the two look the same and are used to reflect each other. Sex is not gender even if the two are perceived to be the same by some and are used to reflect each other. That is, until you change the usage and change the thought and define gender by sex because they are the same thing in the brain. And when you do that, you take away the person's ability to define their own role in society because they are straightjacketed by the perception of others and pigeonholed into a role because of their biology. Language defines perception and perception shapes reality, or at least how our brain interprets the information/stimuli we receive and organizes/shapes what we call reality and then formulates our behavior. -M Sure, but my point wasn't really about gender politics. I was simply refuting your assertion that people using words incorrectly doesn't alter their actual meaning. While that's true in the short term, over time it can and frequently does alter their meaning.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 20:32:48 GMT -5
But here's the thing, neuroscience shows us that when we conflate words in language, we conflate the definition of those words. That's how the brain is hardwired to function. So when we conflate sex with gender, we conflate the biological with the sociological. Sex is whether we have xx or xy chromosomes and demonstrated physically by which type of reproductive organs the person has and whether the mammaries are functional or vestigial among other things. Things like whether it is acceptable to show those mammaries in public, what clothes you are expected to wear, what names are commonly used for the sex, what roles in family and household the person is expected to fill, what occupations are acceptable, how much you get paid to do those jobs, what emotions are acceptably shown by the person, etc. etc. are not determined by the biological, but by the sociological, i.e. society's reaction to the sex and expectations towards it. If in our usage of language we do not acknowledge the difference between the biological and the sociological, then our brain is wired not to acknowledge a difference in the definitions and treat them no differently because we conflate the words. The sociological expectations becomes the "reality" because of the biological sex. If there is no separation is terms for the two things, then there is no difference between them in the way the brain processes and classifies the two. People are free to ignore the science and believe what they want, but the science of how our brain works vis-a-vis the usage of language shows it matters how we use words in terms of our behavior. The evidence is there. Language both shapes and reflects behavior. The menu is never the meal even if the two look the same and are used to reflect each other. Sex is not gender even if the two are perceived to be the same by some and are used to reflect each other. That is, until you change the usage and change the thought and define gender by sex because they are the same thing in the brain. And when you do that, you take away the person's ability to define their own role in society because they are straightjacketed by the perception of others and pigeonholed into a role because of their biology. Language defines perception and perception shapes reality, or at least how our brain interprets the information/stimuli we receive and organizes/shapes what we call reality and then formulates our behavior. -M Sure, but my point wasn't really about gender politics. I was simply refuting your assertion that people using words incorrectly doesn't alter their actual meaning. While that's true in the short term, over time it can and frequently does alter their meaning. Language does evolve, but often when it varies too far from the common understanding of what a word is it evolves into a dialect or branches off from the main branch of the language as slang or regionalism. Sometimes slang and dialect become accepted as the common usage, but not always, and usually when such a change enhances communication and reflects a wider change is attitude or behavior and not just a misuse by a sector of the population that hinders common understanding and communication. But that process of linguistic evolution is often messy and hampers communication in the short term (and at times in the long term too). Without a common ground for language, there can be no communication. Also, the neuroscience I mentioned applies to linguistics and communication centers of the brain in general and how they work and shape behavior, not specific to gender politics. -M
|
|