Since trans activists have no idea what biological essentialism is here’s a quick little explanation.
Biological essentialism is not saying that humans are sexually dimorphic and have two sexes male and female.
Biological essentialism is the idea that men and women are different by essence, that their feminine/masculine natures determine their abilities/personalities and personal preferences that it’s all biologically pre-determined. That men are naturally more intelligent and natural leaders and that women are naturally emotional and nurturing.
As opposed to social constructivism which says that the differences between men and women behaviors/personalities etc. have little to do with biology but are rather constructed by social conditioning.
Tag: gender
aawb:
can you imagine if someone told you your hair is a social construct but your haircut is innate
This is a perfect analogy.
You hair grows from your head, it is natural.
Cutting, dying, styling your hair is a human invention.
Biological sex is natural and innate.
Your hair can only be changed so much. You work with what you have.
Gender is the styling and socialisation that is based on your sex.
I mean, yeah. I guess. The only constant is change, am I right? Kinda makes sense…
Let’s try a different analogy so you understand what we mean by gender and sex:
Gender is lipstick anyone can use it but it is intended for women because women are expected to alter our appearance in this way and perform femininity. There is no biological purpose behind it.
Sex is a tampon is it intended for women’s biological functions and has a practical purpose. Only women and girls can use it.
Now back to the haircut analogy:
You can dye your hair blonde but it doesn’t change the fact that you are naturally a brunette.
Your natural hair can be obscured but not changed permanently.
Your body can be altered (to varying extents with different methods) but your sex will not be altered.
A man can try to alter his appearance to that try and appear feminine but it doesn’t make him a woman.
He can alter himself but it can only go so far and he will still be male.
He can only change himself so much he has to work with what he has.
See where I’m going with this?
aawb:
can you imagine if someone told you your hair is a social construct but your haircut is innate
This is a perfect analogy.
You hair grows from your head, it is natural.
Cutting, dying, styling your hair is a human invention.
Biological sex is natural and innate.
Your hair can only be changed so much. You work with what you have.
Gender is the styling and socialisation that is based on your sex.
A lot of people learn that men and women should have different roles in this world in order to create “balance” and, therefore, end up with this idea that feminism is not only “anti-man” but “anti-woman” because it’s “against” femininity (or masculinity). If you think that masculine and feminine gender roles are not only innate but good, then you’re likely to see critiques of those gender roles as attacking actual males and females, rather than attacking those socialized roles and behaviours, as well as the hierarchy that is attached to said roles. This leads women to say things like “No, I’m not a feminist, I love being a woman” because they believe their womanhood is attached to a subordinate gender role which they have been told is not only natural, but empowering.
I think the phrases “masculinity is a prison” and “femininity is a weapon” have their metaphors the wrong way around.
The problem with liberal “equality” feminism is that it sees femininity and masculinity as morally neutral, natural alignments. Created equal. Just two sets of behaviors and expectations, and the real problem is just that people are restricted to one of these at a time when they should be free to ~play with gender~.
There’s no acknowledgment that the expectations and trappings of femininity are intended to turn their adherent into an object, while masculinity is about empowerment, grooming an oppressive class. They’re not created equal!
Femininity is about restricting movement, mandatory time and money investments into ever-changing beauty rituals, being small and subservient and accommodating. It’s literally about becoming a decoration. The fact that men don’t have as much access to a clearly oppressive role is not the problem here! The fact that they are being taught violence and to repress their humanity in order to subjugate women, over whom they are told they are inherently superior, is definitely more of a problem!
Essentializing gender as morally neutral instead of the framework through which women’s oppression is carried out is the worst possible thing for feminism.
The problem with liberal “equality” feminism is that it sees femininity and masculinity as morally neutral, natural alignments. Created equal. Just two sets of behaviors and expectations, and the real problem is just that people are restricted to one of these at a time when they should be free to ~play with gender~.
There’s no acknowledgment that the expectations and trappings of femininity are intended to turn their adherent into an object, while masculinity is about empowerment, grooming an oppressive class. They’re not created equal!
Femininity is about restricting movement, mandatory time and money investments into ever-changing beauty rituals, being small and subservient and accommodating. It’s literally about becoming a decoration. The fact that men don’t have as much access to a clearly oppressive role is not the problem here! The fact that they are being taught violence and to repress their humanity in order to subjugate women, over whom they are told they are inherently superior, is definitely more of a problem!
Essentializing gender as morally neutral instead of the framework through which women’s oppression is carried out is the worst possible thing for feminism.
autism is widely underdiagnosed in girls because autistic women tend to present as quiet and reserved, which is just how women are supposed to be.
personality disorders are underdiagnosed in men because they tend to present more explosively and involve more narcissistic behaviours, which is just how men are supposed to be.
sexism isn’t good for anyone. don’t be fooled.
The culture of violence has been normalized in modern society. You could credit it to the obsession with glorifying masculinity, where the only way to gain respect or power is by a show of force. Masculinity has always been about aggression- it’s not about some yin/yang energy balance between the sexes. It’s about teaching boys & men to value violence & aggression as a tool of dominance and control. Femininity on the other hand is the complimentary teaching of submissiveness to girls & women. It is mean to hurt us so we are valued for our appearances. We are expected to perform emotional labour, accepting your role as a caretaker and emotional dumping ground- those are strenuous, taxing tasks. We are expected to give up our careers- our independence- to raise families, to have children, to raise these children, as if it is our responsibility, our jobs. We were not born to be mothers, to be care takers. We can take the world for ourselves, and we should not be held down by the expectations of men and our mothers. We are more, we can be more.
Celtyradfem 