MTG (and similar idiots): look, a scapegoat! Get him!
Scapegoat: I’m biologically female, dipshit.
MTG: surprised Pikachu face
Hi, I know nothing about the drag scene, curious about the definition here.
I thought drag was specifically men dressing up as women, is drag any gender putting on too much makeup and wearing gaudy outfits?
It’s just the look?
It’s not just the look, it’s performative. It can be any sex assigned at birth and any gender - including nonbinary, as the subject of the article identifies.
Depending on your viewpoint, there’s an argument to be made that KISS, Alice Cooper, and many hair metal bands were a form of drag.
There is also a wonderful argument that professional wrestling is drag
I, too, am part of the smarty pants society
Ha! Was just about to reply with “Dropout subscriber?”
Thanks.
Yeah I definitely identified those bands as drag, I just didn’t know it could be anyone.
So look plus performance equals drag?
Thanks
I think humour is a key part of what separates drag from just regular performance. The artist isn’t afraid to make fun of themselves and just have fun.
That’s a good point.
There has to be something over the top about the performance, right?
Because I think of David bowie and obviously he had different personalities and quite flashy costumes, but it would be difficult for me to say he was doing drag, partly because he was so poised.
It’s definitely an interesting piece of culture.
Plenty of classic comedians dressed in drag for performances during “wholesome family entertainment” tv days. It’s only become a problem because conservatives made it one.
I’m not part of the drag scene, but my understanding is that drag is an exaggerated performance of gender.
The actual situation of the actor doesn’t really factor into whether or not it’s drag. It’s also not exclusively an exaggerated performance of femininity.
Ah, “exaggerated” is keying me in to a more complete definition, thanks
I think the definition is getting more loose in recent year with different types of drag queens.
I like to think it’s gender clowns in the nicest way. The art is playing with gender and gender expectations in an aesthetic, comical or thought provoking way.
Haha, that’s a great way to think about it. Gender jesters
Preach queen!
I still don’t even understand what gender is, in my language there is only a word for (typically biological) sex and nothing more.
It’s pretty simple - sex is basically your reproduction capabilities (in biology even this is far from trivial “A or B”) while gender is more like how you see yourself, how you present to the world, and usually comes with certain assumptions and roles from the society you’re in. That’s why people say it’s a social construct; it’s literally constructed, socially. Being cis or trans just means whether your reproductive traits match your socially constructed traits.
Oh now I understand, thank you. I think the far right don’t understand and think that people are referring to their sex. Maybe their social circles are socially/culturally separated by sex?
They definitely don’t understand, but more importantly it doesn’t matter either way - having a group they can persecute is just how they reinforce in-group ties. They lack a coherent ideology, and simply bond over cruelty. Any hatred that can safely be stoked will suffice for such people. Every time we accept an out-group into normal society, platform and protect them, they find new prey. Whenever we give up ground and let peoples rights get taken away, the ‘far right’ go back to hating them too. Cruelty is the point, and it’s what turns them on. That’s what makes them ‘far right’, is that it’s obvious compared to normal conservatives.
It’s just a general quality of the political far right the world over. They don’t like people that don’t act, look, or think like them. Anything that challenges their beliefs about what a person is supposed to do is something to fight against for them.
When it goes to the extreme, you get Nazis.
I think it’s important to point out here that you aren’t talking about gender identity (physiological), but the social construct aroundgender roles (socisl/cultural).
Gender identity is not a social construct, and I believe this is more what we are talking about when it comes to gender because the person in the article is talking about how they were born female but identify non binary.
Intention was to encapsulate the psychological aspect within the phrase “how you see yourself”. It’s hard to get every detail into a simple explanation.
When a baby is born what color do you associate with boy and what color do you associate with girl?
Blue with the boy and pink with the girl I guess…?
But there’s no “biological” reason for that. In the same way, skirts/dresses being for women and suits/ties being for men, leg hair, haircuts, voice, mannerisms, emotional availability, all get tied one gender or another.
We, in our society, have associated some properties to one of two genders. Some of these properties tend to be associated to one sex (sex being a more “biological” thing (but still not binary or unchangeable!)), but many of them are just expectations we put upon people. This is what “gender is a social construct” means; that the general understanding and intuition about gender is constructed by the society in which we live. Different societies may have more than 2 genders or completely different sets of associations.
Unfortunately these categorizations are bad for a significant portion of the population, including trans people, gender non-confirming people, but even cishet people; how many times have you heard of some act making you “not a real man” (eg crying for a movie)?
Historically neither.
Red signifies passion and anger (male traits), and pink is the softer version of red for younger boys or representing flowers for women.
13-14th century you would have both represented by both genders, and late 1800’s was when it started to diverge.
In lefty circles such as most of Lemmy, “gender” refers to the social norms and expectations that are attached to sex.
Personally, I think choosing the word “gender” to describe gender roles was a mistake. A call to abolish gender norms seems pretty reasonable, but if you’re uninformed about this definition the call to abolish gender sounds utterly deranged.
Rare to see an anti-trans argument on lemmy
What?
gender is socially constructed
Other queer identities are not mutually exclusive with supporting trans identities.
Here is an explanation from the person who essentially created queer theory:
https://amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/sep/07/judith-butler-interview-gender
Why does a social construct require surgery to fix?
Well, beauty is a social construct as well, and yet plastic surgery is a massive industry, with shifting trends as well.
Social construct does not mean entirely abstract, but in dialectic exchange with material reality.
This is probably one of the better points I have heard. Though the plastic surgery industry is pretty problematic on its own.
Sex isn’t gender, there are plenty of trans folks that never seek surgical conversion, body dysmorphia is a common condition among trans people but not inherent to being trans and, finally, fuck off.
You won’t get long with that final statement. Consider that such statement fuels the flame of people who are against trans, drag etc etc. You can clearly that the original commenter is willing to engage in discussion.
Surgery has no impact on sex and I was precise with the term I used.
Surgery doesn’t change gender. It changes sex.
Gender is a social construct, sex is anatomical.
Sex is immutable, you are aware that sex is more than the appearance of sex organs right?
Sex is a combination of genetic, hormonal, anatomical, skeletal, dermal, muscular, trichoic, and arguably neurological factors. Most of those things are to some degree malleable, and in any case their grouping under the construct “sex” is social. Sex IS a social construct. It was not written on the bones of the universe in permanent marker that there would be males and females. Sex is a correlation that humans noticed, connected, and gave a name to.
Perhaps you are instead thinking of genotype. Which yes, is largely immutable barring retroviruses and new technologies, but trans people have conclusively proven that genotype is not the same as phenotype.
By the way, biohackers have already started using CRISPR on themselves for fun.
It’s funny how you understand sex is more than genitals then claim it’s set in stone. It’s like 8 different things and we can change most of them.
Fine in the distant future when bioengineering allows one to shape shift down to the genetic level, one could change their sex, but we do not live in such a scifi future.
There are ppl born with both you ignorant tit
deleted by creator
That thing that’s more than biology you’re thinking of is the construct of gender. 🤦♂️
Nothing is immutable. Nothing is unchanging. Even the constant of the universe can be altered.
I am referring to all the other physiological factors. The appearance of an organ and the actual function are two different things, carving a heart to look externally like a kidney does not make it a kidney.
What’s the function?
I think it’s a valid question, and I don’t think you should be downvoted actually. Now, I hope you do read my answer.
The answer is that some components of gender are socially constructed — like what different genders wear, what roles they fill, and certain behaviors. However, there is also very likely a component of gender that is biological and doesn’t always manifest itself in your bodily form or sex organs, but in the brain.
We know from genetics that it’s common for mutations to occur. We also know that certain chemicals and hormones impact brain chemistry, especially during gestation. So, why is it so far fetched that how one thinks of one’s self in their mind might not align with their bodily characteristics?
Sure, on the whole, people who identify as masculine in their brains tend to have a penis and tend to be physically attracted to those who present outwardly as feminine and have vaginas. And those who identify as feminine tend have vaginas and tend to be physically attracted to those who present outwardly as masculine.
But, nature, genetics, and hormones can result in those three components - gender, sex, and sexual preference - having different combinations. Trans folks might have a physical body that is different from the gender they feel they are in their mind. They might feel relieved to bring these two things into alignment, and even to adopt some of the socially constructed components of a gender that they identify as in their mind.
We also know from the existence of gay and lesbian people that sexual preference does not always align with one’s sex or gender. It is possible to identify as a man, and to be attracted to men. It is possible to identify as a woman and be attracted to women. Why? Well, nature, genetics, and hormones can some times create people who have small differences from the average population.
That’s all it is and the existence of these types of people poses no real threat to you. Nor are their differences from your own a valid reason to deny them equal treatment under the law, nor privacy in the medical decisions they make to feel more like themselves.
I appreciate the point you’re making, but I’m not entirely sure that on average slight differences indicates much of a biological component. Ie. trans or gay people having slight biochemical differences on average says nothing about any individual trans or gay person. Furthermore, there is very miniscule average difference between cis-AFAB and cis-AMAB brains so much so that I bet it would be impossible to find a sex difference between them for many.
There might be a biological component to sexuality or gender identity, there might not be- it doesn’t really matter. It should be enough to say, I don’t like how I look, I want surgery to correct that.
I think you’re trying to make an argument from a perspective of free will and rights — like if I one day wake up and just choose to change my gender then I shouldn’t need any scientific nor other basis to explain that decision. I don’t oppose the idea, necessarily, but I’m not sure it captures the full picture.
I have LGBTQ+ family and they describe it as something that is not a choice and that they knew from an early age that they identified this way. Even when I think of my own identity, it’s something I know about myself and not one I could choose to change on a whim.
Within the scope of the law, things that are perceived to be choices within one’s control are more likely to be regulated. It’s harder to justify regulating those components of ourselves that we inherit.
I don’t feel I could change the foods I like on a whim, that doesn’t mean there’s a biological component(for some dislikes there is though) to it. My boyfriend is gay and he admits he has no clue if he was born with it or not.
Within the scope of the law, things that are perceived to be choices within one’s control are more likely to be regulated. It’s harder to justify regulating those components of ourselves that we inherit.
I know this isn’t what you’re doing, but I feel some people use this as a justification to push something they know is unproven.
I think their point is that once biology is involved it’s no longer a social construct.
I also think that people conflate sex and gender and it makes things unnecessarily confusing.
For sake of argument let’s stick with binary for now.
There are words that describe sex. There are words that describe gender. And there are words that can be used as a shortcut for a combination of both.
For example (and if you don’t like my example substitute your own words): a masculine female is often called a tomboy or described as butch.
TERFs probably feel that the term woman is a shortcut for feminine females, and that those who aren’t female but are feminine are not Champagne, they are sparkling wine. And it’s easy to see why someone would be insulted by that opinion. Strictly speaking, being told “you’re not a woman” isn’t necessarily an attack, or stating that you shouldn’t exist. But yes (obviously!) people with extreme views jump onto that bandwagon and are willing to kill/oppress to make everyone the same cuz they can’t handle weird people.
Yes, trans people are weird (queer means weird!). But weird isn’t bad, and people who think weird is bad are not people I would want to hang out with, even if they also happen to be trans. Pride is about pride: own your weirdness.
As far as I can tell, identity is cultural. Though you are implying certain identities are programmed into our brains via genetics which is not something I am aware of. Does everyone have an intrinsic sense of gender or even other facets of identity? I don’t know if I have this sense of gender, most of the time I don’t even feel like my body is me. It is merely the instrument I interact with the physical world with.
It’s not programmed by genetics, but how other people interact with you.
I have a similar lack of attachment to my gender for instance. That, my friend, is privilege. It means that my outward gender expression and the way I am treated for it usually match up to my inner expectations enough that I don’t experience friction. For some people, both cis and trans, gender is more important than it is to us. People have differing values and that’s what makes the world interesting.
Also would trans brain(?) Be considered a neurological condition?
Surgery helps people fit into the social construct
Why not change the construct instead?
You realize you just literally asked, “Why can’t transphobes not be transphobic?”
How?
Have you tried being less transphobic? That’s probably a good first step
Since woke globalists push their ideology…
Oh, look, an antisemitic dog whistle and a complaint about people pushing an ideology. In one sentence? That’s fun.
I hope they didn’t sprain something before the mental gymnastics Olympics happen this year
“Fuck your feelings”
— MAGA
BINGO! I got troll buzzword Bingo! Are we playing with the free space rule?
u r big dum
Enlighten us to what exactly is a woke globalist and an example of one
