Skip to content

No to Gender

March 6, 2015

The culture war is a war of words and those who defend reality need to choose their words carefully. The word gender has been permanently corrupted and there is no point trying to rehabilitate it. If the Sexual Left insists on defining gender as “socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for women and men.” We should let them.
Gender isn’t a synonym for sex and we should not use it as one. Gender is a creation of the mind detached from the corporeal. It floats above the material world, like ever changing clouds, constantly reshaping, renaming itself. There are two sexes –male and female.
Genders are constructions of troubled minds. Wounded, angry, and envious, the so-called transgendered covet what belongs to the other sex. To soothe their pain, they have invented an alternate reality, where people can change from one sex to other and then end up somewhere in the middle. We can sympathize with their pain. It must be terrible to feel out of place in one’s own body, but we should not encourage their rebellion against reality or validate their fantasy solution.
I cringe every time I see my allies and friends substituting gender for sex. We don’t need their word and all the baggage it carries. We already have a perfectly good word. We should say sex when we mean sex. Two sexed reality must be defended against gender activists, who demand recognition of scores of made up genders.
Gender redefined has only recently crept into the language and with a little help can be pushed out. Let us promise to never say gender when we mean sex. Let us not be afraid to use sex specific language: male and female, women and men, bride and bridegroom, husband and wife, father and mother instead of non-specific spouse, parent.
There is nothing anti-woman in defending reality. Men and women are different and equal. Pretending all the obvious difference are mere social constructions, doesn’t make women equal it denies woman’s unique originality and makes man the standard human.

2 Comments leave one →
  1. March 16, 2015 3:07 pm

    Hi Dale, here Andrea. I was wondering if I could ask you a favor. I’ve been studying gender feminism for the last 5 or 6 months and I happened to find something troubling. You know very well that the term ‘gender ideology’ is widely used to refer to gender feminism, but I found that it was employed by feminists to talk about sexism, patriarchy and male chauvinism. How do you explain this?

    This is what I found,

    1. Judith Lorber, Paradoxes of gender, Yale university press, 1994.

    Gender ideology, the justification of gender statuses, particularly, their differential evaluation. The dominant ideology tends to suppress criticism by making these evaluations seem natural.

    p. 58
    The gendered practices of everyday life reproduce a society’s view of how women and men should act (Bourdieu [1980] 1990). Gendered social arrangements are justified by religion and cultural productions and backed by law, but the most powerful means of sustaining the moral hegemony of the dominant gender ideology is that the process is made invisible; any possible alternatives are virtually unthinkable (Foucault 1972; Gramsci 1971)

    2. Bonnie Spanier, Im/partial science. Gender ideology in molecular biology, Indiana University Press, 1995

    p. 3
    “Gender Ideology” refers to a set of predominating beliefs specific to this moment in Western culture, in which male and female are considered a fundamental complementary pair of polar opposites. In this framework, male and female are inherently different from each other, with maleness assumed to be superior and associated with the natural controller, the action initiator, the “brains,” as compared to the female as weaker, more passive, inferior. Selective, nonrandom examples from the biology of nonhuman animals have been used to buttress assumptions about “human nature,” about the meanings of “male” and “female”.

    Termed Gender ideology or, more accurately, “masculinist ideology” to denote the denote the actual power asymmetry of men and women in Western society those beliefs predominant in the white western world have carried implicit and explicit values about the naturalness (and correctness) of the dominant of one group (male, white, propertied, colonizing) over subordinate groups (female, nonwhite, nonpropertied, colonized).

    • March 16, 2015 8:04 pm

      Dear Andrea, Great question. Simple answer: They’re against Gender. We call them gender feminists because they are obsessed with gender. They think everything must be looked at through the lens of gender –how everything is shaped by the socially constructed roles of men and women—apparently, according to your quotes, including molecular biology. They want a non-gendered world where men and women participate in every activity of society in statistically equal number. The fly in their ointment is motherhood. Men are never going to have half the babies. The call themselves Radical Feminists, but are really Marxist Feminists. For them all history is the history of class struggle and the first class struggle was between men and women. Woman is the first oppressed class and marriage is the means of oppression.
      Keep up the good work

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: