Femininity

[Like Ra]

I define "gender" as a multiple-trait bipolar spectrum

Like here, you mean: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychol...ches%3famp ?

But don't they use the multiple bipolar scales to determine the position in the "the gender dichotomy model"? All dichotomies are not pure 0/1, black/white anyway, there are always gradations with a grey vague area in the middle. And the more we discover, the more bipolar scales needed, the "deeper" that area becomes. Just like with that 1% of the intersex people. For example, before XXY cases were known, the line between sexes was more distinct. And this is something what does not depend on societies. Gender does, what makes this term and its meaning less "stable".

[princesitanatty]

I define "gender" as a multiple-trait bipolar spectrum

Like here, you mean: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychol...ches%3famp ?

But don't they use the multiple bipolar scales to determine the position in the "the gender dichotomy model"? All dichotomies are not pure 0/1, black/white anyway, there are always gradations with a grey vague area in the middle. And the more we discover, the more bipolar scales needed, the "deeper" that area becomes. Just like with that 1% of the intersex people. For example, before XXY cases were known, the line between sexes was more distinct. And this is something what does not depend on societies. Gender does, what makes this term and its meaning less "stable".

"Dichotomy" means "divided in two parts that are opposite or completely different", so by definition a bipolar spectrum is not a dichotomy. When you find a grey area, there is no dichotomy. When you find a third option, there is no dichotomy.
I disagree with the common view that gender is entirely a social construction. I think it has both biological and psychosocial components. I also disagree with the common view that social factors are always less stable than biological factors: it depends on the factor.

[Like Ra]

"Dichotomy" means "divided in two parts that are opposite or completely different", so by definition a bipolar spectrum is not a dichotomy.

OK, what do you call this?

Negative -3 -2 -1 | +1 +2 +3 Positive

They are still two mutually exclusive groups. However, the classification of the objects in the center is difficult. Think of 0.000000000000000001. This is what I call "the grey area", however, objects in this area still belong to one of those non-intersecting sets.

[Like Ra]

disagree with the common view that gender is entirely a social construction.

I did not say "entirely" 😊

I also disagree with the common view that social factors are always less stable than biological factors

Social expectations change with time. Hence, they are not stable. Think, for example, fashion:

[princesitanatty]

disagree with the common view that gender is entirely a social construction.

I did not say "entirely" 😊

I also disagree with the common view that social factors are always less stable than biological factors

Social expectations change with time. Hence, they are not stable. Think, for example, fashion:

 

I did not say I was disagreeing with your view. I agree that social factors can change.

[princesitanatty]

"Dichotomy" means "divided in two parts that are opposite or completely different", so by definition a bipolar spectrum is not a dichotomy.

OK, what do you call this?

Negative -3 -2 -1 | +1 +2 +3 Positive

They are still two mutually exclusive groups. However, the classification of the objects in the center is difficult. Think of 0.000000000000000001. This is what I call "the grey area", however, objects in this area still belong to one of those non-intersecting sets.

If it is a graduality, it is not a dichotomy. Also, you cannot consider the zero point in either of the two sets.

[no smile]

I disagree with the common view that gender is entirely a social construction. I think it has both biological and psychosocial components. I also disagree with the common view that social factors are always less stable than biological factors: it depends on the factor.

Well, there are far less biological factor changing in a matter of years than social factor.

The question is, if sex=biological_differences and gender=biological_differences + social_differences, then, how would you define the social_differences? And is feminity/masculinity still both sex and gender?

And here comes the 1000$ dollars question, what part of gender is not a social construct and why?

[no smile]

Negative -3 -2 -1 | +1 +2 +3 Positive

They are still two mutually exclusive groups. However, the classification of the objects in the center is difficult. Think of 0.000000000000000001. This is what I call "the grey area", however, objects in this area still belong to one of those non-intersecting sets.

In my point of view, I believe that @princesitanatty is right about it non being a dichotomy. I think, in my point of view that there are several "gender" group (socially more linked to a sex than the other) but the 2 "sexual" sets of genders do intersect a lot and are not exclusive.

[no smile]

I'll post a reaction to a post in another thread about pencil skirt:

Some time ago I made myself two pencil skirts. You really have to learn to walk in them properly. They kind of force you to walk in a more feminine way. This adds of course to why they are so sexy.

I here talk from my point of view :
Walking with heels forced together is not (at start) a feminine way to walk, it's a submissive way to walk. But since we women are supposed to be passive and submissive, well, it then is feminine in our societies. But there are ton's of men being more submissive than their gf, and I'm talking about vanilla, not bdsm/top-sub relationship. And I find it as much cute a boy being submissive to his gf than the usual reverse.

Now, less vanilla way of life, if a men want to express his submissiveness, he'll go to the feminine wardobe and gesture because there is not much for him and it's not sexy. Ans this is because it's not adequate with the virility every man should have. So it's his point of view and we lack a submissive sexy men imaginary

On the other way, if a women want to show her dominant part, well, she has the choice of taking the "men defined" sexy domina stereotype or could use part of men's wardrobe (less common) but she'll never wear flat non-compensated shoes. (in contrary of men Dom) Why? Because, sexiness has mostly been defined by men... And also because wearing a flat shoe means she'll be shorter so, more submissive in our imaginary.

So a women cannot be Dom if wearing a flat shoe while a men can be sub wearing heels...

This is, as always, the kind of gender restriction that makes me sad in our society. I'm desperate to find a sexy everyday/casual latex design I like for men not expressing virility while not being a sissy... But I can't even imagine how it should be... I'm in fact convinced that once men will again be wearing skirt in public fashion, we'll have an opportunity to create this imaginary 😊

What's your point of view here?

[Like Ra]

If it is a graduality, it is not a dichotomy. Also, you cannot consider the zero point in either of the two sets.

Yes, since zero is neither positive no negative, the correct way is:

Negative -3 -2 -1 | +1 +2 +3 Non-negative

Following the definition:

A dichotomy is a partition of a whole (or a set) into two parts (subsets). In other words, this couple of parts must be

jointly exhaustive: everything must belong to one part or the other, and
mutually exclusive: nothing can belong simultaneously to both parts.

It does not matter how big or small the numbers are. if it's -99999999 ot -1e-999999999 both are still negative,

Same for the gender. As long as it can be put into one of the two buckets only (regardless the value) it is a dichotomy.