#how do your ideas of masculinity intersect with what being non-binary means?

[natugood]

In one of my classes today a prof mentioned “male presenting, female presenting, and non-binary presenting folks” and as a non-binary person… what does non-binary presenting even mean? I’m not trying to start discourse lol I’m genuinely curious

#like I get they’re trying to use inclusive language #but like…. non-binary doesn’t have a specific look or presentation??? #like do you just mean ppl who you think look queer or gnc? #and what does that look like? how does that intersect with people who aren’t white or/and are fat or/and are visibly disabled? #idk to me it feels really preformative but not at all productive. but maybe I’m missing something #googoogajoob #and like I am white and fairly thin and able bodied and like. I know I’d get put into male presenting #how do your ideas of masculinity intersect with what being non-binary means?

[butchfairyzine]

Butch Fairy Zine: Answering Questions p2!

Do you need to be Butch to apply? Are you including non-binary people? What about femme fairies?

The Frog answers these questions just for you. If you have any further questions you can leave them on our interest form or throw em at our inbox. Maybe some bugs too, for the frog.

Do you want to stay up to date and get email notifications when the forms open or when pre-orders start? You can fill our interest form here and we will keep you in the loop.

Artist and writer applications open on the 12th of January.

text version under the cut

Will this be focused just on lesbians, or can this include other sapphics? Also, does the focus have to be on women/femmes or can it be broader across non-binary folks?

The term “butch” can mean more than identifying as lesbian or masculine, it overlaps and intersects with so many other factions of queer identity and we want to celebrate that! We don’t want to exclude anyone and how the term “Butch” resonates with them.

There are so many talented artists in our community, and we want to show them off in our art zine! And we look forward to having artists explore the theme in their own interesting and different ways.

So yes, all gender identities are welcome here, and artists are welcome to explore those in their art for this zine.

~

Why just butch faeries? Will there be a femme faeries? Interested in both.

This zine focuses on butch depictions of fairies, as it’s something we don’t get to see very often and want to celebrate in particular at this time.

That being said, artists will be able to draw multiple fairies in their illustrations if they wish, including femme fairies. We will simply ask that the butch fairies be the main centerpoint of the artworks.

If accepted as a contributor, you may also ask a mod for further clarification when settling on an idea for your illustration.

~

Is this zine for “butch” creators only? Can people who don't identify as butch apply?

Anyone can apply for an artist position or writer position for our zine, you need not identify as butch or queer. That being said, we will be prioritizing queer creators, and specifically butch creators for positions on this project.

We will also have sensitivity consultants on this project, to oversee the work and ensure that butch people are being represented authentically and respectfully.

#fairy zine #butch fairy zine #art zine #ask #faq #answering questions with the frog

[princetonuniversitypress]

Women, as Virginia Woolf recognized, need rooms of their own to write. So, too, have women writers throughout history needed a term to describe what it is they do. In How Women Became Poets, Emily Hauser rewrites the story of ancient Greek literature as one of gender—redefining the canon as a constant struggle for women to be heard through, and sometimes despite, gender. She follows ancient Greek poets, philosophers, and historians as they developed and debated the vocabulary for authorship on the battleground of gender—and reinserts women into the traditionally all-male canon of Greek literature, arguing for the centrality of their role in shaping ideas around what it means to be an author.

Why is it important to reclaim the voices of female poets?

EH: Sappho was one of the most important poets (not just female poets: poets) in antiquity: her literary status surpassed that of most men. Yet Sappho was by no means the norm for a woman in ancient Greece. Most women lacked the same kind of access to education that their male peers had; those women who did become poets struggled to make their voices heard; and the subsequent erasure of their work by the male-ringfenced tradition that handed down ancient literature, that curated “the Classics” and said what should and shouldn’t be read, marginalized women’s writing even more. By delving into the surviving fragments of women’s poetry from the ancient world, and looking at what women were saying, in their own words, about what it meant to them to be a poet, I’m attempting not only to give the female poets a voice again, but also to demonstrate that they were actually central participants in the ancient Greek conversation around what it meant to be “a poet”. Although men ended up being seen as the prototypical poets, because authorship (in the West, looking back to classically-inspired models) was for hundreds of years the province of men, the early years represented a fiercely contested battleground of gender. In other words: it didn’t have to be this way.

I know you’re a writer yourself: did your experience of writing as a woman speak to how you looked back to poets like Sappho?

EH: All my writing—both my fiction and non-fiction—focuses on reclaiming the voices of the women of the ancient world. So the positionality of my experience as a woman writer in the present is inevitably on my mind. I actually had the idea for the book during a seminar I was attending at Oxford on Sappho in 2014—right around the time I was finishing my first novel, For the Most Beautiful, rewriting the women of Homer’s Iliad—and I came away thinking: what would Sappho have called herself? I knew Homer had a word to talk about his identity as a bard—aoidos, or “male singer”. But did she have any words, any space, to acknowledge what she did? This reflection on Sappho’s context and her role in history intersected with my journey as a woman and a writer, and sparked my contemplation on issues of gender and identity, all the way back to antiquity.

So is this just a story about Sappho?

EH: Absolutely not: although Sappho was the starting point, I quickly realised, as I came to write the book, that it’s not possible to talk about women in ancient literature without thinking about the category of gender more broadly. This includes the kinds of dichotomies that get set up, particularly in male-authored poetry, the way men work hard to construct the ‘masculinity’ of authorship and reinforce the binary opposition of gender (words are for men, not for women—a near-perfect quote of a brush-off that Telemachus gives to his mother Penelope near the opening of Homer’s Odyssey). One of the biggest revelations of the book, for me, was that this is a much bigger story about how we tell the story of gender in words: we can’t extract gendered identities from the way we speak, perform and write, and the way that traditional scholarship talks about “the poet” elides the fraught and high-stakes battle that continually unfolded to shape the gendering of literature. So we witness men constructing the edifice of the “male poet” and working to make it appear inevitable; playwrights playing around with the gender binary and modelling what a nonbinary poet might look like; as well as women attempting to make their voices heard by using a new language to express their identity.

Can you explain the image of the bird on the book’s cover?

EH: It comes from a gorgeous wall painting from an ancient Bronze Age town at Akrotiri, Santorini. The buildings were buried under the eruption of Santorini’s volcano around 1600 BCE. The painting—incredibly well-preserved under the thick layer of volcanic ash—shows a lush scene of a mountain landscape in spring: blue and red crags sprouting lilies, with swallows spiralling above. The bird motif recurs throughout the book, as a representation of how men try to pigeonhole women’s writing and silence their voices (I’m thinking particularly of the legend of Philomela, who was raped by her sister’s husband, had her tongue cut out to stop her speaking, and was turned by the gods into a swallow or, in some accounts, a nightingale). But it’s also an emblem of how women reclaim that image and turn it into a new word to describe their own song: the nightingale is a well-known songbird, and the Greek word for nightingale, aēdōn, is a feminine noun that translates literally as “female singer”—a clever analogy for a woman poet. The book’s cover, with the bird flying free out of the words that describe her, captures this beautifully.

What do we find when we read ‘women’ into histories that often exclude them?

EH: We get a better, more accurate, more informed picture of history. If we keep telling a male-oriented history of Greek literature, we’ll be fostering a story about the ancient world that fails to represent the voices of all the women who sought to be heard. The legacies of that past, and those strategies of gender marginalization, are still palpable today. Writing more inclusive histories of ancient literature (and that means all kinds of inclusivity, whether that’s along the lines of race, gender, class, or sexuality) means we can interrogate the past and foreground the voices that weren’t heard, in the hopes that they can be now.

Emily Hauser is Senior Lecturer in Classics and Ancient History at the University of Exeter, and the author of the acclaimed Golden Apple trilogy retelling the stories of the women of Greek myth, including For the Most Beautiful (2016).

#Emily Hauser #Greek Literature #Poetry #Poets #female writers

[weaselle]

I've decided.... I'm trans man.... how do I learn to be comfortable with accepting myself existing in ways that other people will criticize? Coming from someone who is scared of anyone being mad -E

Oh wow, I’m like, flattered AND worried that you would ask me, as if I have enough experience and strength of character to be offering solid advice in this area.

Okay, so, first of all, I’m struggling a bit with the inverse of this myself currently; like, I present very masculine to the people around me these daysa, and keep my feminine self largely hidden away. So please take this all with a grain of salt. Hell, you should probably take it with a whole layer of salt and include the lime and tequila.

BUT. I do have some experience that may be relevant, and I’m happy to share that with you in case it helps.

Before anything else, let’s just get this out of the way: on being scared to be around anyone who is mad. That’s. Listen, if somebody is actually ANGRY that you are just expressing your gender, I’m not going to tell you to be comfortable around that -- that’s a danger sign my guy.

Idk how old you are, maybe you’re talking about your parents and that’s something I’m not sure how to council you about, I would maybe refer you to your close friends that know both you and your parents for insight there.But in the rest of the world, if somebody is actually mad because of your gender, there’s nothing about life that says you should be comfortable about that, and it’s perfectly okay to not be comfortable with that. Your discomfort is there to prompt you to assess your safety, and while you are not in danger every single time somebody is mad about your gender, it is reasonable to assess that. Just like it is reasonable to assess your safety if someone is mad about the way you eat a sandwich or anything else there’s no real reason to be angry about, that’s a situation you have to evaluate for safety every time, and I won’t try to tell you to be more comfortable in those situations.

If it’s a big deal, if your life is being impacted negatively by how you feel when people are mad at you, I would recommend either therapy or self defense classes, depending on what you think the root of that issue is for you.

Okay, let’s talk about things.

One thing is, because of my inherent femininity (and some other complicated stuff) it took me forever to fit into masculine spaces well. So I know a little about what it might be like for a trans man. And here is something you may as well know - even if you are 100% perceived as male bodied, if you are in a group of men with no women present and you don’t meet their criteria of “masculine” behavior, often men will treat you in many of the same shitty ways that shitty men treat women. I mean, they will talk over and interrupt you, they will pick you to fetch coffee or clean up after the meeting or take the notes or whatever, they will ignore your good idea and then five minutes later think it’s a great idea when some other man in the group offers the same idea reworded. It’s often not your perceived gender as much as it’s your perceived manliness. 

I don’t know how old you are, but this does seem to improve significantly once you get solidly into adulthood. Still happens tho, especially depending on what group you’re in.

Now, I don’t mean to discourage you, nor tell you to try to fit in -- nobody should try to fit in with shitty people, that’s a recipe for turning out shitty.

What worked for me as a teen and in my twenties was building my own definition of masculinity, really thinking for myself what it means to be a man, how a “real” man talks and behaves. Doing a lot of this is probably the reason I’m non-binary instead of a trans woman today, and comfortable with the world perceiving me as a man -- because I have worked hard on defining and becoming a kind of man that I can be happy as.

This is the route I would recommend to you. Observe men, find role models in both your own life and literature, really consider what being a man means to you... take all the parts you like and a couple you invent and put it all together and call it manhood. Your manhood. 

For me, this meant deciding things like, the kind of masculinity that defines ME is comfortable with male physical contact, publicly enjoys things that don’t fit a narrow view of masculine behavior, and doesn’t care if other people think I’m a “real” man or not, because MY definition of a “real” man is a man whose masculinity comes from within and isn’t defined by others. So I’ll say I think a man is attractive, or talk about crying, or, idk, not know anything about cars or whatever, without feeling like I’m being un-masculine.

Being clear about what you personally consider to be a working definition of positive masculinity will help you be comfortable around people who are going to criticize your manhood. Being able to confidently say “Real men ____”, even just to yourself, will help you feel comfortable around people who might judge you or question your manliness.

There will be pressure and criticism, some doubt and discomfort. Even if you are an adult already, you may have to go through a little second childhood and work through some of the things a boy works through. But that’s fine and normal, right, to be a man you probably have to go through being a boy first, it’s only natural.

You’ll get through that, and when you’re comfortable with the man you are, the script flips on those hyper critical types, because suddenly you’re more sure of your own masculinity than they are their own gender expression -- there’s a fair bit of gender insecurity in people, especially men, a lot of whom have not taken the time to open-mindedly explore what being a man really means to them, and honestly the only reason to be super strict about enforcing generic gender concepts is if conforming to a gender standard they didn’t understand was the only thing defining their own manhood.

Basically, just do you, sir, be your own man. You’ll get comfortable with it, and until you are, remember that every man was once a boy experiencing the same uncertainties. 

Another thing I can tell you is: it’s better in cities.

Like, one of the reasons I’m presenting as masculine all the time right now is because I moved back to a very small town. When I was in San Francisco and Oakland it was just.. easier. In a city, you are never the most interesting person other people have seen that day. For real, like, there’s a woman screaming at a street sign over there and the other direction some dude is walking two snakes on leashes, and ten minutes ago there was a guy running around naked in the middle of a busy intersection; nobody gives a fuck about what you’re wearing or whatever. It’s very freeing.

And in a city you’ll witness plenty of other people living in ways that overlap with your own lifestyle, which is nice. People’s attitudes about things are different, there are so many people, living so many kinds of life, that everybody tends to have a very expanded expectation of what normal is (like, anybody NOT running around naked in a busy intersection has a good start on ‘normal’ already, even the snake guy) and folks usually mind their own business. In Oakland I can keep my beard, put on a pair of heels and some makeup, and walk around running errands and nobody bats an eye. In a small town, it’s often harder to have a normal day if there’s anything “unusual” about how you’re presenting yourself.

So I might consider trying to live for a while in a larger city if you don’t currently and could do so. 

So, that’s most of what I think I can tell you bout being a man around people criticizing or reacting negatively to your gender expression  Feel free to ask for clarification on anything, I hope I didn’t assume too much or come off as lecture-y, I’m really very touched that you would trust me with a question like that.

Go get ‘em, sir!

[arcticdementor]

In the mid-2010s, a curious new vocabulary began to unspool itself in our media. A data site, storywrangling.org, which measures the frequency of words in news stories, revealed some remarkable shifts. Terms that had previously been almost entirely obscure suddenly became ubiquitous—and an analysis of the New York Times, using these tools, is a useful example. Looking at stories from 1970 to 2018, several terms came out of nowhere in the past few years to reach sudden new heights of repetition and frequency. Here’s a list of the most successful neologisms: non-binary, toxic masculinity, white supremacy, traumatizing, queer, transphobia, whiteness, mansplaining. And here are a few that were rising in frequency in the last decade but only took off in the last few years: triggering, hurtful, gender, stereotypes.

Language changes, and we shouldn’t worry about that. Maybe some of these terms will stick around. But the linguistic changes have occurred so rapidly, and touched so many topics, that it has all the appearance of a top-down re-ordering of language, rather than a slow, organic evolution from below. While the New York Times once had a reputation for being a bit stodgy on linguistic matters, pedantic, precise and slow-to-change, as any paper of record might be, in the last few years, its pages have been flushed with so many neologisms that a reader from, say, a decade ago would have a hard time understanding large swathes of it. And for many of us regular readers, we’ve just gotten used to brand new words popping up suddenly to re-describe something we thought we knew already. We notice a new word, make a brief mental check, and move on with our lives.

But we need to do more than that. We need to understand that all these words have one thing in common: they are products of an esoteric, academic discipline called critical theory, which has gained extraordinary popularity in elite education in the past few decades, and appears to have reached a cultural tipping point in the middle of the 2010s. Most normal people have never heard of this theory—or rather an interlocking web of theories—that is nonetheless changing the very words we speak and write and the very rationale of the institutions integral to liberal democracy.

What we have long needed is an intelligible, intelligent description of this theory which most people can grasp. And we’ve just gotten one: “Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything About Race, Gender and Identity,” by former math prof James Lindsay and British academic, Helen Pluckrose. It’s as deep a dive into this often impenetrable philosophy as anyone would want to attempt. But it’s well worth grappling with.

…

During the 1980s and 1990s, this somewhat aimless critique of everything hardened into a plan for action. Analyzing how truth was a mere function of power, and then seeing that power used against distinct and oppressed identity groups, led to an understandable desire to do something about it, and to turn this critique into a form of activism. Lindsay and Pluckrose call this “applied postmodernism”, which, in turn, hardened into what we now know as Social Justice.  

You can see the rationale. After all, the core truth of our condition, this theory argues, is that we live in a system of interlocking oppressions that penalize various identity groups in a society. And all power is zero-sum: you either have power over others or they have power over you. To the extent that men exercise power, for example, women don’t; in so far as straight people wield power, gays don’t; and so on. There is no mutually beneficial, non-zero-sum advancement in this worldview. All power is gained only through some other group’s loss. And so the point became not simply to interpret the world, but to change it, to coin a phrase, an imperative which explains why some critics call this theory a form of neo-Marxism.

The “neo” comes from switching out Marxism’s focus on materialism and class in favor of various oppressed group identities, who are constantly in conflict the way classes were always in conflict. And in this worldview, individuals only exist at all as a place where these group identities intersect. You have no independent existence outside these power dynamics. I am never just me. I’m a point where the intersecting identities of white, gay, male, Catholic, immigrant, HIV-positive, cis, and English all somehow collide. You can hear this echoed in the famous words of Ayanna Pressley: “We don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice. We don’t need any more black faces that don’t want to be a black voice.” An assertion of individuality is, in fact, an attack upon the group and an enabling of oppression.

…

There is no such thing as persuasion in this paradigm, because persuasion assumes an equal relationship between two people based on reason. And there is no reason and no equality. There is only power. This is the point of telling students, for example, to “check their privilege” before opening their mouths on campus. You have to measure the power dynamic between you and the other person first of all; you do this by quickly noting your interlocutor’s place in the system of oppression, and your own, before any dialogue can occur. And if your interlocutor is lower down in the matrix of identity, your job is to defer and to listen. That’s partly why diversity at the New York Times, say, has nothing to do with a diversity of ideas. Within critical theory, the very concept of a “diversity of ideas” is a function of oppression. What matters is a diversity of identities that can all express the same idea: that liberalism is a con-job. Which is why almost every NYT op-ed now and almost every left-leaning magazine reads exactly alike.

Language is vital for critical theory—not as a means of persuasion but of resistance to oppressive discourses. So take the words I started with. “Non-binary” is a term for someone who subjectively feels neither male nor female. Since there is no objective truth, and since any criticism of that person’s “lived experience” is a form of traumatizing violence, that individual’s feelings are the actual fact. To subject such an idea to, say, the scrutiny of science is therefore a denial of that person’s humanity and existence. To inquire what it means to “feel like a man,” is also unacceptable. An oppressed person’s word is always the last one. To question this reality, even to ask questions about it, is a form of oppression itself. In the rhetoric of social justice, it is a form of linguistic violence. Whereas using the term nonbinary is a form of resistance to cis heteronormativity. One is evil; the other good.

Becoming “woke” to these power dynamics alters your perspective of reality. And so our unprecedentedly multicultural, and multiracial democracy is now described as a mere front for “white supremacy.” This is the reality of our world, the critical theorists argue, even if we cannot see it. A gay person is not an individual who makes her own mind up about the world and can have any politics or religion she wants; she is “queer,” part of an identity that interrogates and subverts heteronormativity. A man explaining something is actually “mansplaining” it—because his authority is entirely wrapped up in his toxic identity. Questioning whether a trans woman is entirely interchangeable with a woman—or bringing up biology to distinguish between men and women—is not a mode of inquiry. It is itself a form of “transphobia”, of fear and loathing of an entire group of people and a desire to exterminate them. It’s an assault.

My view is that there is nothing wrong with exploring these ideas. They’re almost interesting if you can get past the hideous prose. And I can say this because liberalism can include critical theory as one view of the world worth interrogating. But critical theory cannot include liberalism, because it views liberalism itself as a mode of white supremacy that acts against the imperative of social and racial justice. That’s why liberalism is supple enough to sustain countless theories and ideas and arguments, and is always widening the field of debate; and why institutions under the sway of Social Justice necessarily must constrain avenues of thought and ideas. That’s why liberalism is dedicated to allowing Ibram X. Kendi to speak and write, but Ibram X. Kendi would create an unelected tribunal to police anyone and any institution from perpetuating what he regards as white supremacy—which is any racial balance not exactly representative of the population as a whole. 

#andrew sullivan #substack #read the whole thing

[transadvice]

im really confused, ive been questioning for YEARS but im still confused. I feel like I should have been born with a cis male body but I love feminity and women’s fashion. I have dysphoria over being seen as a woman and having breasts but Im scared if I transition and still express myself femininely ill be fake or something or still seen like im a woman. i also feel like i *have* to be cis woman or else ill be considered ugly and no one will date me?

You came to the right place! I feel you so hard. This is basically my story. I have always been very femme in my gender expression. I love women’s fashion, the color pink, flowers, and so on. I enjoy baking, and I hate sports. Jane Austen is my favorite writer; I don’t get what’s so great about Fight Club. Also, I was assigned female at birth, and looked by any account like your garden variety cis girl/woman. Being a girl should have been an open and shut case. Yet, starting in puberty, and throughout my adult life, I felt a strong sense of discomfort and “wrongness” about body characteristics associated with femaleness, such as breasts. I wanted to be rid of them and have more male-associated body characteristics, like muscles and a beard. Although I believed I was a woman because that’s what people told me, and that’s what I looked down and saw, I was always somehow surprised about it. It was like my brain expected my body to be male.  The sex your brain expects your body to be, is what Julia Serano calls “subconscious sex” in her excellent book, Whipping Girl. Cis people have a subconscious sex that lines up with what they were assigned at birth. People who don’t? These are the trans people that experience physical dysphoria (Serano calls it “gender discordance”, a sense that your brain and body are out of sync where gender is concerned).  What about gender expression? Well, that’s another thing altogether! Just as many cis people express themselves in gender non-conforming ways, so too can trans people experience the full range of behaviors and interests and clothing preferences, whether or not they match up with what society says people of our sex are “supposed” to do or feel or wear.  Your sex assigned at birth does not necessarily line up with your subconscious sex does not necessarily line up with your gender expression. And even if you gender expression and your sex assigned at birth “match,” you aren’t doomed to be cis, or to live out your life as a sex that feels wrong to you. Subconscious sex can be hard to explain, especially to cis people who have never experienced discordance, but it is a real thing. Your feelings of being out of sync with your body are real, and the name for them is dysphoria. 

Look at it this way: if you were assigned male at birth, and you still loved women’s fashion and femininity, do you think you’d transition to female for that reason? Or would you embrace your love of heels but stick with your masculine body shape and appearance, perhaps joining a subculture of others like you, like the drag scene? Does that idea appeal to you? (You can go to there!)

Okay, getting real: yeah, expressing yourself in a feminine way may be a barrier to you being read by cis people as male, especially if you don’t medically transition (as many people don’t, either because they don’t want to or they can’t). Even if you do transition, early on, you will be frustrated that people continue to read you as a woman. That doesn’t mean you need to put your head down and live a lie. You can still ask people to treat you the way you want to be treated, such as by using “he/him” pronouns for you (if that’s what you want). You don’t need to “earn” it by “looking male enough” or by wearing boring clothes.  It should also be noted that if you do get on hormone replacement therapy, you have a good chance of developing masculine-associated body characteristics and being read as male most of the time within a year or two, no matter what you wear, because testosterone is a powerful drug. (That’s what happened to me!)  Now, onto the part of your question about attractiveness.

I think a lot of us worry that if we transition, we won’t be cute. Even the most goddamn hot trans people I’ve ever met have had this worry. It’s a natural to be nervous, given that we have to commit having no idea what we’ll look like post-transition, and given that beauty is so highly prized in our society. Plus, even if we do get to a point where we’ll be attractive by cis standards again (using the other binary sex’s standards), to get there, we have to go through a period where we are androgynous or have a mix of gendered cues going on, and that’s considered unattractive to some cis people.

I could say a lot about the intersection of cis beauty standards and trans shame, and about how AFAB people are conditioned to protect their sex appeal to cis straight men at all costs even at the expense of their own psyche, Naomi Wolf’s “Beauty Myth”, blah blah blah. But this answer is already really long. So I’ll just say this: 1. Cis beauty standards aren’t necessarily the end-all be-all. Androgynous or masculine does not mean ugly. Looking trans does not mean ugly.  2. So let’s say you’re ugly! Being ugly and yourself is better for your mental health than being beautiful and pretending to be someone else. 3. What if you’re hot as a boy though On a personal level, my love and dating life is much better now that I’ve transitioned, because I can interact authentically with people instead of hiding a huge part of myself. The first summer that I dated as a trans man was so much fun and revelatory: I had a different set of options for people to date, and honestly, a better set?? And it felt so good about MYSELF, and that made me feel more confident and attractive. I don’t know if cis people would consider me cute, and I don’t care. I don’t want to look or be cis. 

[dyinglightroleplay]

𝐁𝐀𝐒𝐈𝐂𝐒.

NAME : Davey Ariel Gudgeon RELATIONSHIP TO THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX : Ally / Informant AGE / BIRTHDATE : 18 Years Old / born 7 May 1961 at 4:10pm IDT ZODIAC SIGN : Gemini ( sun ), Scorpio ( moon ), Scorpio ( rising ) EDUCATION : Hogwarts Graduate ( Slytherin House ) BLOOD STATUS : Muggleborn

𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐍𝐄𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐒.

✧     Alastor Moody ( platonic ) ✧     Frank Longbottom ( antagonistic ) ✧     Bilius Weasley ( wild card )

𝐋𝐀𝐒𝐓 𝐒𝐄𝐄𝐍.

In Diagon Alley.  They’ll learn of the Battle of Hogwarts as the rest of the Wizarding world does.

𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐓𝐔𝐒 : 𝐓𝐀𝐊𝐄𝐍.

PLAYER : Mod Rivka FACECLAIM : Ezra Miller URL : @goodgeon​

𝐀𝐏𝐏𝐋𝐈𝐂𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍.

TRIGGER WARNINGS: BIOLOGICAL ESSENTIALISM, ABLEISM, NON - BINARY PHOBIA / BINARY APOLOGISM, SEXISM, ANTI - SEMITISM, ALLUSIONS TO THE SHOAH, DRUG USE

ZERO / RISING. * How is your character perceived by others?  What mask do they wear, and is there more than one?

Davey is a person comprised of many, many layers, not all of which are shared with all people.  To say they were mysterious would be a misnomer --- --- truly, they're a pretty quick study, just don't tell them that --- --- but they are . . . complicated.  They're easygoing, affable, in possession of a quick and scathing sense of humor and an equally vicious wit ; they're difficult, they're petty, they can veer straight into condescension and self - isolation if given the slightest provocation.  They're a show - off, certainly, and they're a know - it - all, too.  They are many things, they are many, made up entirely of a rainbow of facets they flit between from day - to - day depending on their mood, surroundings, relationships, and desires.  ( Does this manifest with a hefty handful of flakiness, too ?  Sure it does.  Alongside a loyalty that's selective, hard - won, and blood - deep. )

Throughout their life, Davey's experiences have asked them to form a particular set of armor, a beautiful, well - maintained shell they've created for themselves to safeguard what they care about most : their Self, their soul, the body that carries them through the world.  A childhood spent learning to trust themselves, despite what others would seek to tell them, built the scaffolding of teenage years spent aggressively reclaiming that energy, outright refusing to budge along or to reduce themselves to accommodate anyone, even in situations where, objectively, they likely should've.  Their reaction to being told they're too much, too feminine, not masculine enough, what are you wearing, what's wrong with you, are you a boy or a girl ? has become to double down, and their reaction to similar taunts about their blood status or disability or family is the same --- --- they've created a life in which any barb aimed in their direction simply plinks off the chestplate of the armor they've spent so long forging.

Davey was raised to never apologize for who they were, told from childhood by their family that what they are is perfect, is priceless, is hard - fought and deserving of defense.  The discovery of their magic and their acceptance to Hogwarts did nothing to challenge this, although the sudden realization of the sliding scale of indifference to HATRED that Davey's blood status fostered once at school certainly did.  But rather than quail beneath it, rather than dim themselves, Davey only got more proud, louder, BRIGHTER, something that made them just as many enemies as friends as they passed through school.  For every student who looked down at them, for every slur thrown their way, every judgmental look, Davey took it and added it to their armor.  And this pride doesn't stem simply from the dawning knowledge of the war rising up outside the castle's walls ; Davey would be proud of who they have become no matter the climate.  They've spent too much time feeling unwelcome in their body to waste another second.

And Davey doesn't have the privilege of living in only one world, either ; they leave Hogwarts every summer to return to their family home in London, as equally a stand - out in their family's community of Orthodox Jews as they are walking the castle's halls.  They could allow all of this to dull them, but they don't.  Instead, they just burn brighter.  But that shouldn't be mistook for extroversion, either.  Davey keeps their circle of genuine friends small --- --- they gravitate toward others on the fringes, the misfits, the loners, the people for whom life has been made hard through no fault of their own, and they are willing to lay it on the line for them.  That's what their parents taught them, from a young age, a story born from millennia of persecution, from scant decades separating them and so, so much death : there is no honor in neutrality, no goodness in standing by simply because what's happening does not directly affect you.  This is what drives them, it's what makes them difficult right alongside what makes them so, so incredible --- --- Davey will never, has never and won't ever begin to go down without a fight.

ONE / THE SUN. * Choose one to explore : what about their personality, general preferences, sense of self / ego, or fundamental traits attracted you to them?

Davey has really presented me the opportunity to indulge in a lot of my Very Favorite Meta Concepts in this universe : I've always had a massive soft - spot for investigating how ' Muggle ' religion and culture intersect with the magical world, how muggleborn children adjust to life at Hogwarts and to life with powers, how the global history and political climate of this time period influence these students coming of age inside a private, closed community locked in a secret war, how disability and difference present and are handled by the wizarding community, how gender and sexuality are examined by a group of people who know that the world has never, will never, be binary or black - and - white.  They're really a neat reason to delve way into a lot of these ideas that I've been kicking around as long as I've been a fan of this medium, and truthfully, I've never really had the chance to stretch my legs - and - creative - muscles with a character that's essentially an OC, before, and there's no time like the present, right ?

Geminis are people of many talents, sometimes disjointed but always insatiable ; adaptable, excitable, and open to whatever the world has to offer them, their investment can sometimes be overwhelming, particularly for people who are unprepared to have their worldviews challenged.  A Gemini Sun inspires an unstoppable force, trading flexibility for fire, tact for speed.  They're flexible, mercurial, and often polarizing, and can shift sharply between being charming and outright off - putting.  Their Scorpio Moon intensifies this, opening a well of emotional sensitivity, fostering vulnerability right alongside an everlasting ability to form and hold grudges based upon mistreatment.  STUBBORNNESS and hard - headedness becomes a dominating trait, only magnified by the rising sign's indication that darkness must be faced head - on in this lifetime, rather than excused or ignored.  Concerned most with the soul, Scorpio rising encourages a life that doesn't dwell in the negative, but seeks to abolish it, by any means necessary, even, sometimes, to the person's detriment.

Gemini is also aligned most closely with Hod ( הוד ) the eighth sephira of the Kabbalah Tree of Life, which houses the ten attributes through which G-d reveals themselves.  Hod is the act of submission to obstacles, not in surrender, but rather to overcome : its astrological significance weighs heavily upon Gemini's often aggressive shoulders, warning of times when battles can be fought by simply leaving them behind.  Hod is also thought to be where the truest form of magic is available, and is closely associated with intellectual pursuits, ritual, and the act of breaking concept into smaller pieces for specific mastery.

I really am leaning into duality here as well : Davey's entire existence is politicized --- --- Jewish, disabled, muggleborn, non - binary.  They exist in a space they've made for themselves, a space they've more often then not had to TAKE BY FORCE.  Their perspective on blood supremacy, on this war as a person who was born entirely outside it is so interesting, and I want to see where it goes ; Davey's family fled Occupied France, they were raised by Jews who survived an atrocity that would've seen them eradicated, the concept of some stodgy old group of in - bred idiots convinced of their own mythical superiority isn't a totally new or groundbreaking thing for them.  In a lot of ways, Davey's a wildcard this way : they're neutral, not because they don't have strong opinions, but because they do, because they lie outside a pre - established order of things in a world they weren't born into.  Davey is . . . far too radical for groups like the Order, and I doubt they would've accepted an invitation even if they'd received one, because in their mind, caution is synonymous with inaction.  They have a unique perspective, informed by their family's history, by their people's history, and the understanding that plotting something as simple as the Loss of a Leader by no means fosters a victory, by no means untangles the tendrils of hate that allowed that leader to take power in the first place.

Davey hardly trusts his Order - adjacent friends, sparing that for the closest few muggleborns he considers to be nearly family.  Davey doesn't consider themselves wixen as much as they consider themselves a person with magical abilities, in fact they hold very little affinity for the greater magical world.  And while they aren't privy to all of the Order's dealings, obviously, their anger runs deeper and burns hotter, born from a place of exclusion rather than anything particularly righteous.  I want to see Davey's arc take them to confrontation with --- --- and hopefully, eventual understanding alongside --- --- witches and wizards who believe that Voldemort's death brings the end of blood supremacy.  I want Davey to continue their life - long refusal to be cowed, refusal to be quiet, refusal to shut up and go along for the ride, refusal to be pushed aside ; they come from a very, very long line of people who should've been dead, they aren't wasting time letting their life or their rights languish in anyone else's hands but their own.  The Ministry, the Order and its supporters, the Death Eaters, even the blessed true neutrals who can't be bothered to care : none of them are on Davey's side.  For them, there isn't growth or protection in joining ; I want to see them get proved wrong, or maybe get proved right.  The distinct separation between Davey's worldview, seen from beneath the oppressive lens of day - in, day - out institutionalized and INBORN blood supremacy and hatred, and that of half - blood or pureblood wizards for whom this war has become more about defeating an enemy is vital to this.

TWO / THE MOON. * Which color would you associate most strongly with them and the emotions that dominate them?  Describe however you’d like.

NEON.  Buzzing signs and the black - lit smudges of a blotter sheet, a rainy city’s night reflected back in puddles disrupted by quick steps in patent - leather boots.  Hallucinations and their accustomed heaviness, the soft - edged weight of exhaled smoke and candlelight, unnatural pinks and reds crawling from flowerpots in a greenhouse that could make any child fall in love.  The brilliance of blood against white teeth, fuchsia lipstick against stubble, satin, silk, leather, velvet, something sumptuous and traffic - stopping worn with all the impenetrable confidence of chainmail.  Spell - pops, spell zings, the heat of magic and how it always feels just the smallest bit of a miracle, the brilliant - blue of a withering patronus and the rainbow’s worth of charms and hexes yet unmastered.  Loud prints, pasted - up posters, glow - in - the - dark and glitter and the wash of bar - room bathroom halogen light.  The sunset flare at the end of a cigarette, at the end of a joint, at the tip of a match held to a braided candle bearing witness to Havdalah.

THREE / MERCURY. * What is this character’s area of expertise? Where do they excel?

Davey is a gifted Herbologist ; they took to the subject overwhelmingly well at Hogwarts, and count Professor Sprout as both a tremendous influence and a friend.  They’ve gone out of their way to combine Muggle sensibilities with magic, and alongside acting as a drug dealer ( ' florist ' was the slang term of the day ) for both the Magical and Muggle communities in London, Davey spends their time experimenting with new ways to grow marijuana plants and synthesize other psychedelics, as well as cultivating various expensive, rare, or otherwise uhhhhh illegal plants to sell to potioneers or anyone else in need of such ingredients.  They tend to test most of their experiments on themselves, especially to ensure they're safe --- --- their magical physiology affords them a bit more protection and durability than their muggle family members, for example --- --- but they also have a habit of asking their magical friends to test the final products, free of charge of course, as long as they allow them to hang around and see what happens.

#marauders rp #harry potter rp #hp rp #lsrp #oc rp #davey gudgeon #takennb #takenneutral #taken #ableism tw #sexism tw #antisemitism tw #shoah tw #drugs tw

[rotationalsymmetry]

commenting on without reblogging (which is taking a lot more willpower than usual):

Sometimes trans people with weird identities latch onto a way of describing that experience that is problematic. They encounter the term "two spirit" and it seems to fit but they're not native american and they don't have the context to fully and accurately understand what that means. Or they use "transgender" as a gender identity rather than a modifier of a gender identity. Or they use outdated language. Etc.

(Or, in this case, an afab person feels like a trans woman. What does that mean? I don't know. But I sure hope she figures it out. I too sometimes identify more, in specific ways, with transfeminine people than with people who share my assigned gender at birth. Specifically, and I don't think this is what this other person was saying, I'm about 100% sure that if I was born into a male body I'd identify as a crossdresser, because as it is I want to be seen as masculine (or at least not actively feminine?) in my everyday life and feminine for sex, and that's a common enough thing for amab people, and I've never encountered anyone else expressing that as part of their sense of who they are who is afab. Maybe there are more people like that, maybe it gets just written off as "well, I'm a feminist, of course I don't want men sexualizing me in my everyday life" idk. I don't think it's just that though. And at this point I'm sure that gravitating towards femininity in a sexual context isn't just socialization, it's actively part of who I am, at my core, in a way that not all people are.) (There's an older book called GenderQueer: Voices from Beyond the Sexual Binary that I strongly recommend for anyone who finds themselves resonating with this. It's nearly 20 years old and from well before the modern idea of "nonbinary" crystallized.) Trans people (and people who aren't entirely sure if they're "really trans" but whose identity is more complicated than "100% and exclusively identify with the gender everyone else thinks I am") have the right to try to figure out what their deal is, and figuring it out is more important than using the precise right wording for our own experiences. That isn't to say you have to grit your teeth and ignore it when a trans person says something painful, but it does mean that before you step in and tell them they're wrong, you should check yourself. Do I know this person, and do I have the sort of relationship where they'll welcome feedback from me? Am I sure about the correction/call out I want to make? Can I do it with compassion? Am I able to differentiate between what this person is trying to say and how they're saying it, so that my criticism comes across as "phrasing!" and not as "you are bad and wrong for talking about this/for having the identity you have." I got into a weird online fight with a cis person online one time for trying to express that bisexuals should be able to explain our orientation in words that make sense to us, and some of my words came out in a way that was Not Great because there was context I didn't understand. But my concept was right: bisexuals (and m-spec people who use other labels like pansexual) should have their ability to express feelings and thoughts about their own identity, that that should be given a higher priority than using the exact most PC language. (This is also an issue for intersectional identities: class and educational background, english as a second language, developmental disabilities can all create barriers to using the "right" language.) That's also the case for trans people looking around for the best way to explain what they are in a world that is fundamentally hostile to trans people and doesn't want to give us words to explain ourselves. The last thing trans people need is to be shouted down and told to be silent by our own fucking community. To be told that unless we can say things perfectly according to someone else's standard, then we shouldn't say anything at all. Again, not to say you can't ever call someone out for questionable/problematic language use. But be kind. And don't suppress people's attempts at self-exploration and self-understanding, because that's more important than getting the words right. (I mean, technically I can't determine how important it is for non-indigenous people to keep our hands off culturally specific terms? But I don't think the occasional non-binary person misusing the term "two-spirit" as they're trying to figure out what they are, is the worst problem here.) (Plus...sometimes people aim for

cultural appropriators and hit people who are actually from the culture that is supposedly being appropriated. It's a concept that has to be handled with some finesse, and balanced against the basic principle of "be careful about telling other people they're doing it wrong.") (And no, I still don't think that a bisexual getting told they're wrong for expressing their orientation in terms of genitals* is more important than a bisexual figuring out that they are bisexual and communicating that, in whatever words come most naturally to them. And I still don't think a bisexual telling a family member or whoever "I'm bisexual, that means I'm attracted to men and women, I don't switch orientations every time I switch dating partners" is remotely a problem. It's not the most precise language. And some bisexuals are not attracted to both men and women. But someone who doesn't get what bisexual means is also going to have difficulty understanding nonbinary people, and it often makes sense to have those awkward conversations separately, and the person with the confused relative gets to make that call, not the entire freaking internet.) (Also, it is so bad that whenever I want to have a conversation online with bisexuals about bisexuality, we invariably get derailed by the great bi/pan wars and how bisexuality should be defined and I hate that, that actively interferes with us understanding ourselves and finding community, it is not OK.) (*This does happen. There is a hugely popular FB group nominally about bisexuality, and whenever a bisexual expresses their orientation in terms of genitals or uses language that implies that there are only men and women, that person gets dogpiled by dozens of other group members. Even when it's eg a post about coming out to that person's parents, or something else vitally important to that person's personal life. A situation where that person should be centered, and using the exact right language for another marginalized group that happens to overlap a lot with bisexuals should not be. This happens. And it's wrong.)

#intracommunity discourse #if you're not queer don't reblog #probably don't reblog even if you are #lgbtq+ #discourse #callout culture #commenting on without reblogging #personal #pain #like yes using more trans inclusive language is good #that doesn't mean it's appropriate to yell at everyone every time they don't

[inferno-sytem]

Seen people talking about how Trans Day of Visibility is preformative and for cis people. I agree, we need real change, not just to be visible. But.

For me, being a visible trans person is very very important. Let me paint you a picture: my high school is conservative, trump-flag-waving, 97% white, there's only about 15 out queer people total, the administration that did nothing when told that a student had been PAID by another student to assault a queet person, I as a trans student am not allowed in ANY public bathroom on the premises, its so Christian that teaching evolution is a debate, the superintendent mocked a visible queer person to an entire classroom of students this week, misogyny and sexism are ever present, ablism also runs rampant, and thats hardly the beginning. The environment can feel like hell, yet every day I go with my head held high as a disabled queer person. As a nonbinary transgender man.

And when I say I'm visible, I mean it. I've painted my face with the trans and non binary flags at school, I wear pride pins and a rainbow mask, I've brought my flag to school and worn it around as a cape, and dress very distinctively. Even if I have no flags on that day, people can tell I'm queer, I make sure of it.

Sometimes it can seem counter productive. Why dress in a way you know will make bigots angry? I go through a lot of unnecessary harassment that maybe would be lessened if I wasn't so up front about it. Maybe I look like I just want attention, or maybe its too "stereotypical." But if I make anything clear with this post its that I do not do it for me. I love being trans, and Im very proud of my trans and disabled self, but that is not the main motivator for why I do it.

Its other queer people. I've had younger queer people come out to me. Theres a few middle schoolers that have talked to me, and that I've become pretty close with because I'm so visible. Sometimes I'm the only person that isn't in their same grade level that they feel comfortable around.

I've also educated some people. It's something I'm very open to talking about, and there are people who have gone from telling me that I cant be a "real boy" because of my anatomy and wardrobe to correcting other people when I get misgendered. There are people that may never have met a trans person before, and I get to be the first impression. Even when people are ignorant I do my best to be kind and non confrontational. Most of all, though, I'm human. Seeing me in person and talking has helped humanize trans people as a whole, and made people more sympathetic to understanding trans issues

Other queer people have told me my confidence is inspiring, too. They look up to me, wish they could dress like me, or are just happy to see someone whose comfortable. Its so helpful to see someone who is like you be comfortable and happy, especially in a place like our school. There is a narrative that trans people are selfish, bitter, pushy, and unhappy. Being open about myself, and genuine when I show my joy fights that. I remember first coming out and being surrounded by the idea that I would be better off if I were just a cis boy, being trans sucks, and its just cycles of hating yourself, your body, and not being satisfied. That is wrong, and I want to make sure every trans kid I gave the possibility of reaching knows it. There are parts that suck, discrimination and dysphoria are obviously bad, but transness is not centered around such things. Trans is beautiful, and its something to be proud of. It's a part of yourself that you can learn to love, and when you do you will be so much happier. Visible trans people showed that to me, and now I am showing it to younger trans people.

This is a bit rambly, but what I'm saying here is that visibility is valuable. Let other queer people see that they're not alone. Let younger trans people see the happy person they can grow to be. Embrace what makes you different, and be proud of what the oppressors want you to be ashamed of. You are beautiful, and stronger than they think you are. When you're visible you will be a beacon to those who need to see themselves, a safe space for those who need to be protected, and a friend to those who felt alone. We, my fellow trans people, live in a world where existing is a powerful thing to do, and that alone can help change the world for the better. Even if you're not as visible, or visible at all. You are powerful, and I am proud of you.

Also! A special nod to intersectional trans people. Trans people of color have brought about so much necessary change in the world that we all bennifit from today, and they continue to be a beautiful, powerful, and foundational part of the community. Fellow disabled trans people, we are not too much, and we can take up as much space as we need. You are entitled to accommodations, your correct pronouns, and respect. Im proud of you all, very much so. Gay and not hetero trans people (including aro and ace trans people!), fat trans people, trans people in religious minorities, trans feminine people, trans masculine people, and nonbinary people all have a unique experience that you deserve to share with the world. Even if you're stealth or closeted I am so proud of you. I love this community, amd I want you to know that you are loved. Im a couple days late, but happy trams day of visibility ❤

[junemermaid]

Getting It On, Dragon Age Edition

(or: That Big Fat Sexual Politics Meta)

Listen up, kids and mossbacks, flesh persons and anthropomorphic manifestations, we need to talk about a thing.

First order of business: this is all my opinion, pondering and extrapolation.

You don't care for my ideas, that is grand. I'm not telling you how to fandom. Raising a moral crusade on me will get you the block button. Otherwise, I'd love to talk about this more.

Clear? Clear.

Content warnings: Discussion of homophobia, misogyny, the workings of sex. Brief mentions of rape and sexual slavery. Nothing graphic.

That said, let's go. The thing we need to talk about is this: Thedas and its sexual politics.

I posit for your consideration that sex in Thedas is NOT viewed

like in the modern West

like in the medieval West (meaning roughly Europe).

I speak broadly, of course. There's plenty of difference between Ferelden and Rivain, Orlais and Tevinter. Thedas as we know it is a bundle of worldbuilding by writers who also by and large come from the modern West. They try, albeit imperfectly, to create a late-medieval fantasy world dashed with present-day ideals. Two of these ideals are key to the matter at hand, namely

the lack of systemic misogyny and

the lack of religion-imposed sexual guilt.

(We haven't actually achieved either. For the sake of the argument, these issues aren't supposed to exist in Thedas like they did in Ye Olde Mediaeval Tymes. Another topic, another day.)

Thedas attempts to be a world in which they have that mythical beast, equality of genders, and in which the Chantry doesn't dictate what you're allowed to get up to in the bedroom, or against the wall, or on the kitchen table. I'm mostly talking about Chantry-abiding human (and by extension city elf) cultures here, because the dwarves, the Avvar, the Qun and the Dalish etc. deserve their own posts.

To be clear: I'm also a modern Western person. I'm aware it's very hard, on some level, to conceive of a world that doesn't view everyone not (cis) male as somewhat less than a person, or even a world where sex is not mired in the idea of it as sinful. We have examples of both here on this Earth, but I come to those examples as someone who's not accultured to them.

So.

The writing of the games is not free of misogyny. The writers try. I'm sure they do their damnedest. For our purposes here, let's pretend that Thedas does not systemically and culturally discriminate against women. Let's pretend women aren't viewed as inherently inferior to men. Assume that Thedasian marriages don't confer legal ownership of the wife to the husband. Let's pretend rape is not a gendered crime in Thedas.

This isn't the same as having no prejudice against a certain gender, or that all genders have the exact same social roles or responsibilities. It just means that regardless of their junk or their presentation, everyone's more or less on the same line. (I'm not going to be talking about gender minorities in any great detail here. The intersection of my topics with how Thedasian cultures treat non-binary, trans, etc. people would need another post. Apologies!)

There are other factors that put people in unequal positions. Social class, race, wealth, lineage, the prestige of certain trades and professions, being born a mage, etc. I don't think there's a single known country in Thedas that isn't in some way a class society. Plus, there's stuff like Antivans not having female soldiers (female assassins are apparently a-okay), women having restricted roles in the Tevinter military, the Andrastian Chantry not allowing men into the priesthood, and so on. Gender segregation is a fact of life to some degree.

However, fewer things are going to be coded as explicitly feminine/masculine, and then there's the really important bit: things will not have less value because they're coded as feminine. A phenomenon associated with men won't be more important than a woman-associated one just by virtue of that connection.

Such as: the Chantry clergy is revered and influential because the Chantry is the pillar of most known societies and a strong unifying force (despite its many, many shortcomings). The clergy being female is not the sole deciding factor in this esteem. @serenity-fails kindly pointed out that World of Thedas elaborates on the leading role of women in the Chantry: women are seen as more morally pure, as men are all considered guilty of Maferath’s betrayal of Andraste.

We do see many more male Templars than female ones (possibly because devout men can't become priests and thus find their way into the Order). The Templars are respected by most of the population for their stewardship of the mages. I'm talking on the level of Daveth the Peasant here: the Circles were a rotten system, but the common people most likely viewed them as a good and necessary safeguard against the dangers of magic.

Anyway. Thedasian women are ambassadors, merchants, doctors, military commanders. Their testimony is treated identically to a man's in courts of law. Wives can divorce their husbands of their own initiative. Women wield power in society on equal footing with men. We don't know much about the home lives of the average Thedasian, but you could assume that while women likely handle early childcare while breastfeeding (nobles probably have access to wet nurses, too), there is less of a division into male and female household work. Men can and do take part in child-rearing, and there are few if any professions that are restricted by gender.

All of this means: in Thedas, prestige (mostly) doesn't tie into gender.

But, June, you say, you said you'd talk to us about sex. You've rambled about gender for seven paragraphs.

Glad you asked. Because now we're getting to the point.

So. Sex. Politics, mores, concepts. Power dynamics, notions of modesty, ideas of vice and virtue. A right wondrous mess whatever you do.

We have some notes on the social aspects of sex in Thedas thanks to the DA:I lore entries. We know that among the Orlesian aristocracy, not having a lover or two on the side might be a worse gaffe than appearing at court with the right extramarital paramour. Fereldans don't much care as long as you keep your affairs your affair. Then, of course, Tevinter high society obsesses over bloodlines and lineages, and not gonna lie, I'm going to talk about Tevinter a fair bit here.

First, a detour into the religion aspect.

The Chantry is loosely modelled on the Catholic Church. This is particularly evident in how the Chantry is a social glue for the disparate countries of Thedas. Even Tevinter, with its Imperial Chantry, is linked into a common religious legacy. Not coincidentally, this parallels medieval Europe, where Christianity provided a moral and cultural common ground across a continent.

The Chantry teaches and preaches a defined moral code. It also seems to preside over marriages, as seen in the city elf prologue in Origins and in the wedding scenes in Trespasser. However, it's not clear if the Chantry has the power to validate a marriage, or if this power rests with a secular authority (such as a local lord or judge). A revered mother might be able to bless a marriage/conduct a wedding but not actually make it legal.

Based on Leliana's dialogue in DA:O, clergy members can't marry, and even lay sisters and brothers observe sexual abstinence. Leliana has no problem banging the Warden, though, or committing to a long-term relationship with them. Given that Leliana is a bit of a maverick believer, we could also look at Sebastian Vael as another, more typically devout example, but what I take out of this is that celibacy is a choice rather than a stricture for the lay members. Further, Aveline and Wesley demonstrate to us that Templars can marry, at least in Ferelden. Cassandra's Seeker vows don't prevent her tryst with Regalyan or a romance with the Inquisitor.

All in all, this paints an incomplete but nuanced picture of the Chantry's attitude to sex. Priests commit themselves to the Maker (in emulation of Andraste's heavenly marriage to Him) and so choose celibacy, but not because sex is a sin. Sex is a worldly, sensual thing, a distraction from their calling. The clergy should devote themselves to the faith and the faithful, and thus they abstain from most earthly pleasures. One assumes this list also includes rich foods, luxurious clothing, assorted hedonistic pursuits, personal wealth etc. That would be fairly typical of initiated members of a religious organisation.

It doesn't mean that engaging in those pleasures is forbidden to Daveth the Peasant (insofar as he can on a peasant's budget), or indeed to the rest of lay society.

We don't have an itemised list of what the Chantry does consider a sin. Hubris seems pretty high up there, given the whole Black City debacle. You could round it out with the rest of the classic seven, if the demon classification from the games is any clue. Out of those, lust is the one that springs to mind, but lust and sex aren't one and the same. It would be morally reprehensible to fuck someone else's spouse even if you really wanted to, because that'd lead to broken trust and heartache for someone you swore fidelity to. It might also result in unwelcome out-of-wedlock children in a society that puts a lot of weight on the continuity of (noble) lineages.

Thus, sexual infidelity might be regarded a sin. However, sex itself is never painted as a bad thing in the game lore. The ways in which you have it matter. With whom you have it matters. Between individuals at liberty to have sex with each other, sex is mad fine.

In the medieval West, “individuals at liberty” pretty much meant a married heterosexual couple. In the modern West, this definition is broader, though there are parties who prefer the medieval one, or who condemn sex between same-gender people, or whatever other subsets of humanity that they find immoral.

In our fictional universe of Thedas, the definition hews closer to however many consenting people without conflicting commitments you can find. Tevinter being the big fat exception, most countries that we know don't discriminate against same-gender sex/love/relationships. This suggests to me that in Tevinter, too, the ostracism is cultural, not religious in origin. Even in the Imperium, the church doesn't tell you who (not) to fuck, but society will.

We've never had a Tevinter female character who'd be exclusively into women, but extrapolating from Dorian in DA:I, it's likely women-loving women face similar issues as men who prefer men, especially among the nobility. The general rule is that the more important your lineage is, the more it gets societally policed. The laetan and soporati classes probably don't face the same level of scrutiny of their sexual liaisons as the alti do. The alti have much greater power and wealth to indulge themselves sexually. The price of discovery and the chance of scandal just are correspondingly higher.

However. You remember what I said above about sex and sin. When a society declares a behaviour taboo or undesirable, there's a reason. That reason most often relates to control and its exercise.

For the alti, breeding is everything. They preserve the Dreamer lineages with near-religious fervour (but this fervour doesn't seem to stem from Chantry teachings, which rather denounce Tevinter's ancient magister lords). I'm sure that in Orlais or Ferelden, nobles who prefer their own gender can make arrangements to adopt or foster heirs who aren't their biological children. Tevinter nobles can't resort to this, unless there's a child of matching lineage up for adoption. I don't imagine that happens too often.

Thus control of the bloodline is a major means for a family to maintain its power and prestige. If an heir refuses to marry and procreate, social and economic ruin may well follow. A worthwhile aside: Thedasian marriages aren't assumed to be love unions. They're economic arrangements meant to ensure that lands, titles, and wealth stay intact and pass to properly recognised heirs. They're political plaster to cement alliances and keep the peace. It's preferable that the spouses are amicable, but love may not even be desirable, and it's the duty of noble children to find or agree to a match that suits the interests of their family.

Let's pull this back to Dorian. Dorian pretty much extends a rude hand gesture to his familial obligations, declares that he's going to live free, and then burns his bridges in pursuit of being his genuine self. From a standpoint of personal freedom, self-expression, and general humanity, he does a brave, admirable thing. He refuses to settle and conform, because he believes there's more to be found.

He also makes it clear that it's not that he couldn't find willing sexual partners in Tevinter. The issue is that liaisons between men or between women are not seen as lasting in the Imperium. They're hidden and potentially scandalous, in part because they damage the marriageability of a noble. You're obliged to marry someone you can reproduce with, and clearly magic hasn't answered this question yet.

Dorian's problem is not this. His problem is that what Tevinter offers is not enough. Tevinter is an old, decadent empire, with a ruling class mired in luxuries. They've figured out ways to accommodate people in arranged marriages before Ferelden was even a kingdom. You marry, you have children, and then you amuse yourself with whoever you like—-discreetly. The Chantry probably frowns, but not too loudly. Even so, the problem is the adultery, not the gender of the mentioned extramarital partners.

What I take out of this is: Dorian's sin, in the eyes of his native society, is not wanting and fucking men. His sin is the selfish, prideful disregard of his filial duty that arises from his desires and their rejection by said society. In Tevinter (and more broadly Thedasian) society, a moral, upstanding citizen will place the interest of their family above their own wants. Thus, the blood ritual is Dorian's father's awful last-ditch effort to make his son conform, because Dorian is the last hope of the Pavus lineage, and because his father can't imagine any other way for Dorian to be content than the way of the alti.

Yes, it's hideous. No, I'm not making excuses. I'm prying at the complex and incomplete weave of this fictional society we've only seen in glimpses. Tevinter homophobia is rooted in this conflict between the need for pure-blooded heirs and the free expression of one's sexual/romantic desires. It's useful to try and quash the latter, because the continuity of the society rests on keeping the bloodlines strong and producing skilled mages. This is a rude simplification, but it hopefully illustrates my point.

This is not real-world homophobia. It's likely not religious in origin, it probably hits harder in the upper social classes, and it's missing the misogynistic element that pervades homophobia in our societies.

Here I have to address in-game moments like Gamlen asking an Anders-romancing male Hawke “which of [them] is the girl”. Because yeah, that's misogyny at work. The thing---the saving grace, for me---is that we've had fewer of these jarring moments in each successive Dragon Age game. DA:O is pretty bad. DA2 is a little better. DA:I is again another step forward, and I hope this continues as they refine the writing closer to this ideal version of Thedas where, again, gender equality is broadly supposed to be a thing.

So, let's carry that assumption to its logical conclusion in the issue of how same-gender relationships are viewed.

If this society has no particular tradition of hating and denigrating women, the association of the feminine and the undesirable is broken. In Thedas, a man who prefers men is unlikely to be compared negatively to a woman, because their version of heteronormativity does not include the presumption that the female party (parties) is the weak, lesser or subservient one.

It also breaks the automatic assumption that penetration equals dominance. That getting boned means you submit. That it makes you effeminate, that it's more shameful than sticking your cock in someone because at least when you're doing the fucking, you're on top.

In a world without systemic misogyny, sexual roles and mores reflect this. Women can be full-fledged sexual beings with independent desires. Sex between women is considered actual sex, because nobody needs a penis in there for it to be real. In sex between men, there's no shame in submitting. Gender does not codify sex in the way it does in Western societies, and that leads to comparatively greater freedom to have the kind of sex one wants without guilt or remorse. Roles for men, women and other genders are more fluid; women can assert and control, men can show tenderness and vulnerability, etc. etc.

I might note that there surely are still sexual hierarchies. Power enters the bedroom in other forms, and many of them are ugly. Tevinter nobles keep body slaves, brothels assumably keep slave prostitutes, and this leads to casual abuse that Imperium society condones. Even mutual romantic relationships between humans and elves can be fraught with tensions because city elves aren't full citizens of any country that we know in detail. City elves are otherwise at constant risk of exploitation from the human population. There can be hierarchies of social class or age, even with the gender component removed.

This is a scratch at the surface of a huge, rich, complex issue. I didn't talk about poly configurations! I didn't talk about open marriages, or other religions beside the Chantry, or non-binary or trans people (which topic I'll leave for others to cover in detail), or even very much about the nature of marriage in the medieval world. Maybe, later on, I will.

But. My dudes. My darlings. My dauntless romantics and brave pornographers. Bioware has, however haltingly, imagined for us a world in which all this is possible. Our rules don't apply in Thedas, and we're free to prance. To me, that is what fantasy as a genre is all about. The liberty to imagine better, yes, but also different. To picture how things might be, if we dared to go there.

Let's fucking frolic.

#dragon age: inquisition #dragon age #thedas #dorian pavus #meta #worldbuilding #dorian is central so I tagged him; I talk about others as well #sex and sexuality #the chantry #tevinter #gender roles #june rambles #this has been a post

[kbfoto]

International Trans Day of Visibility is here! This event, which happens each year on March 31st, was started by Rachel Crandall, the leader of Transgender Michigan. It exists so that we can focus on the trans people around us and the good that they do. She wanted a day that celebrated and recognized trans people who are still with us to go alongside Trans Day of Remembrance, which remembers those amazing souls that we have lost over the years.  A little positivity to balance the negativity, if you will. 

This is my Transgender Day of Visibility post. I, personally, am ‪ #Genderfluid‬, this falls under the ‪#Transgender‬ umbrella. This is something not a lot of people know about, or so it seems. And a lot of others want to deny it. But the  ‪#transumbrella‬  actually encompasses #NonBinary people such as myself, as well as #crossdressers, ‪#transexuals, ‪#Intersex‬, ‪‎#bigender, ‪#thirdgender‬, and even our ‪#drag‬ brothers and sisters and non-binary siblings. So, for my ‪#InternationalTransDayofVisibility‬ post, I want to try make myself, and other ‪non-binary‬ genderfluid people like me, be more #VISIBLE‬. I want us to be seen, and recognized, and no longer belittled or ridiculed. We are people too. I am #GenderFluid. Though I was assigned female at birth, use female pronouns sometimes, and have some female characteristics from time to time, I also exclusively wear men’s or unisex apparel, I tend to shy away from most ‘girly’ activities and attributes, and I have a much more dominant and masculine personality on a daily basis. BUT, I do not feel as if I am in the wrong body. I do NOT feel as if I have to transition medically or surgically in order to be happy with who I am inside and out. I suffer from some dysphoria, but it is not enough to make me want to change my body. I had some issues growing up, accepting myself. Coming to terms with who I am, and how I wanted myself to be seen. In the photos below, you can see before and after realizing that I could be me in this body. When I finally came out I was so much happier, and more confident. I was done trying to hide behind a hat, and hoodie. I was done with the plain jane long hair, that I didn’t do anything to, because I had no idea what to do and no real desire to do anything with it. I just wasn’t girly, but I also wasn’t a typical boy and all of what I saw around me just didn’t fit, and because I wasn’t your typical little girl or boy, I felt like I was somehow wrong. So I hid. I hid my looks, I hid my personality. I was made fun of, called a dog, ridiculed, and embarrassed on multiple occasions. Hell, I still am. But one day I finally grew the courage to be myself. I cut my hair off, and a few weeks later I officially came out to friends and family.

But what exactly does all of this mean? Well, for me, it means accepting that I am a woman and I am a man because I am , simply put and labeled - #Genderfluid. I do not mean that sometimes I simply FEEL masculine or feminine; I mean that all the time I feel as though I am a mix of genders. To the very core of me. I do not need to switch from one or the other, on a daily basis, because for me I feel as if I am both male and female all of the time. This is my #genderfluidity, and I am a proud Genderfluid member of the ‪#LGBT‬ community. I demand respect and to be seen, just as much as the next human being.  ❤ ♀ ♂

Before I end this post I just want to say how proud I am of all of my fellow community members who take a stand to spread awareness and positivity within and outside of the community.  Awareness of transgender people has finally been on the fast-track for the past couple of years, but with that comes many missteps and a lot more danger. As transgender people are given more visibility, we all need to work to make sure that visibility is accurate, intersectional, empowering, and most importantly I think, safe. Visibility becomes dangerous if it’s lazy, abridged representations of our true lives and needs. It is vital that we continue speaking up and showing the world who we actually are so people like those who support bathroom bills and other “anti-discrimination” laws will no longer base their decisions on outdated, inaccurate stereotypes perpetuated by the media, but rather on the facts and faces of real people living in the real world. 

If you want to help make the world a safer place for people of all genders and expressions, you can work to amplify trans voices, educate yourself and others, and take a stand. Here are some good places to get started:

• The National Center for Transgender Equality - http://www.transequality.org/

• Trans Student Educational Resources - http://www.transstudent.org/tdov

• GLAAD’s transgender portal - http://www.glaad.org/transgender 

• And if you or someone you know needs help, The Trevor Project -http://www.thetrevorproject.org/pages/get-help-now 

‪#MoreThanVisibility‬#Trans #Transgender #NonBinary ‪#TransgenderUmbrella‬ ‪#TransgenderAwareness‬‪ #TransgenderVisibility ‪#IAmVisible #Genderfluid #Genderfluidity ‪#GenderfluidAwareness ‪#Androgyny‬ #Androgynous #NonConforming ‪#Genderbending‬ ‪#Awareness #Visibility #Share ‪#SignalBoost‬‪ #Queer ‪#LGBTQ‬ ‪#TheyThemTheir ‪#Pronouns

My Tumblr — My Twitter — My Instagram — My Facebook — My YouTube — My YouCare Fundraiser — My PayPal  — My Wishlist — Why Donate or Help? ♥

#My Post #KendallBarron.com #Kendall Barron #kbfoto #IG: kbfoto615 #Facebook: KBisRad #Transgender Day Of Visibility #TDOV #TDOV 2017 #Trans Day Of Visibility #Trans Day Of Visibility 2017 #Transgender #Non-Binary #Genderfluid #My Story #Trans Umbrella #Trans Awareness #Genderfluid Awareness #Genderfluidity #My Photo #Me #Selfie #kbfoto615 #Trans #Trans Masculine #FTM #MTF #BiGender #Gender Non-Conforming #coolest-humans

[butchfairyzine]

Answering some questions

What type of artists are you looking for? And are you after a specific style or a range of styles?

We are looking for artists who can create pieces with fully rendered fairies and a background within the specified schedule. These can be digital artworks that are flat colour artworks, paintings, a mixture, or another style entirely.

We will also accept mixed media and traditional artworks, but they will need to be scanned at a minimum of 300dpi.

~

When you sign up for an artist position, are there any requirements to be a part of the team?

E-mail communication is required (discord is optional).

You must have a PayPal account to receive payment.

You must be able to communicate comfortably in English.

You must be 18 or older at the time of signing the contract by the 16th of February.

~

For artists accepted into the zine what would be the timeline for completing and submitting artwork?

Our current schedule for the artists requires concept ideas to be submitted by Feb 16th, and the final version by May 16th! Progress check-ins will be on Feb 29th, March 21st, and April 11th.

(In the image there is also a table including this information as well as the final submissions date being May 16th)

~

When the zine is for sale, where would the profits go to (charity, zine admin, etc.)?

We are aiming to hold pre-orders in June/July of 2024, with a flat fee paid to all contributors and additional proceeds split between contributors and mods.

Our priority is to make sure each contributor is paid fairly for their work. If sales do well enough, 20% will be used for future books and projects, and 80% split between taxes and fees, production costs, contributors and shipping costs.

~

Is this physical or digital and will there be prints of the art available? Got any merch ideas planned to go along with the zine?

Both physical and digital! Our goal is to make a 210 x 148 mm (A5) perfect-bound soft cover book.

We also plan to add some paper merch, including prints of some of the art from the book. Additional merch ideas include stickers, sticker sheets and bookmarks.

~

Will this be focused just on lesbians, or can this include other sapphics? Also, does the focus have to be on women/femmes or can it be broader across non-binary folks?

The term “butch” can mean more than identifying as lesbian or masculine, it overlaps and intersects with so many other factions of queer identity and we want to celebrate that! We don’t want to exclude anyone and how the term “Butch” resonates with them.

There are so many talented artists in our community, and we want to show them off in our art zine! And we look forward to having artists explore the theme in their own interesting and different ways.

So yes, all gender identities are welcome here, and artists are welcome to explore those in their art for this zine.

~

Why just butch faeries? Will there be a femme faeries? Interested in both.

This zine focuses on butch depictions of fairies, as it’s something we don’t get to see very often and want to celebrate in particular at this time.

That being said, artists will be able to draw multiple fairies in their illustrations if they wish, including femme fairies. We will simply ask that the butch fairies be the main centerpoint of the artworks.

If accepted as a contributor, you may also ask a mod for further clarification when settling on an idea for your illustration.

~

Is this zine for “butch” creators only? Can people who don't identify as butch apply?

Anyone can apply for an artist position or writer position for our zine, you need not identify as butch or queer. That being said, we will be prioritizing queer creators, and specifically butch creators for positions on this project.

We will also have sensitivity consultants on this project, to oversee the work and ensure that butch people are being represented authentically and respectfully.

#long post #butch fairy zine #fey: A guide to fae of the butch variety #faq #answering questions with the frog

[dna-identity-power-blog]

Podcast Transcription 5/25

Elizabeth: Good afternoon and welcome back to Contentious Conversations, your podcast for all things biological, social, and always controversial! If this is your first time tuning in with us, let’s give a little bit of background about who we are. Here are our bodacious bios…

Connor: I’m connor and I’m a public health professional and physician with a primary focus on the intersection between medicine and gender/racial inequalities.

Elizabeth: Works as a biologist, doing research mainly in endocrinology, the study of hormones. with a focus on sex and gender differences in hormone metabolism.

Gabby: I have my PhD in neurobiology physiology and behavior and I work for the the Wilson Institute of Brain Sciences. My research interests include pediatric behavior, identity, and mental illness.

April: I work in public outreach of science education, especially anthropology and archaeology, I teach classes on early material culture, how humans change landscapes, and classes focusing on women gender and sexuality studies at my local community college!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sURH-GLKxCc

Elizabeth: Today’s topic of conversation is human sex and gender variation. It’s a big one, so let’s jump in. We are going to be picking apart the biological basis of sex and gender. As always, we have a variety of viewpoints represented among us and we’ll be pulling from some of the more highly regarded literature. If you would like to follow along with the literature, copies of these articles or links to the originals are posted to our website, DNA-Power-Identity.tumblr.com! Our website also includes a complete transcript of this talk, for those who like to read or those who need to.

April: As we discuss today, let’s also keep in mind how timely and relevant this conversation is -- sex and gender are concepts that affect every individual every day and unfortunately serve as a mechanism of discrimination and injustice for many. As we heard in the beginning clip, just a couple months ago, Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services put forth the notion that all newborns would be designated male or female based “solely and immutably” on their genitalia, with genetic testing being pulled on as a resource in the event of ambiguous genitals. The administration’s memo claims this new process will be “clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.”

Gabby: Anyways, we will return to the problems of this proposal at the end of the podcast. Let’s first figure out where this all started? Clearly some people believe the genitals you are born with reflect your sex, which should then reflect your gender. How can we parse all this out?

Connor: Let’s begin with a clear and simple question here - When most Americans think about sex, we think about two sexes: men and women. But is it really this simple?

Our categorization of people on the basis of sex even has ramifications for the ways in which we treat and bestow rights to others. One could legitimately say that sex is the organizing feature upon which our American society is based. But so often we assume that binary sex - the idea that you’re either a woman or a man (or trying to become one) - has a distinct biological basis. In other words, your chromosomes, your brain, your hormones must make you male or female. If you have a different set of chromosomes, or differently organized brain (whatever that looks like), or different levels of hormones than one may expect - you are often described by the medical community as possessing a “disorder of sex development” (or DSD). And although that wide catch-all category of “disorder” really fails to capture all of the biological variation that exists within it and even assumes that such variation is pathological in nature, that’s where the discussion about sex often ends.

April: Yet although many Americans assume that sex has always been thought of in this binary way, ideas about sex have actually always been in a state of flux. So before we begin to interrogate our current understanding of sex, we really need to take a brief look into the ways in which this has been historically conceptualized. We must come to understand how our notions of there being only two distinct sexes came to be.

Connor: To begin our discussion of how sex has been thought of, we’re going to focus on ways in which binary sex has been questioned, contradicted, and solidified, often all at the same time. One thing that is clear in examining historical records, is that people’s ideas of sex have always been rem. And thinking of sex in binary terms is far from the only way in which sex has been historically conceptualized. But since our idea of sex being binary is so influential today, it must be the one most cultures share, or at least the one that is right?

Elizabeth: Well, actually, in terms of the commonality of the idea of a strict binary, in turns out that different cultures have very different perceptions of sex, and often ones that defy the male/female binary. In fact, many non-Western cultures in particular have for a long time thought of sex as being more complicated than the binary male/female division suggests.

April: Yes, for example, Navajo culture has historically included categories that cross the male female gender divide, and disrupt the idea that sex always corresponds to gender. The Nadlehee were men and women who adopted the gender role of the other biological sex in dressing, behavior, sexuality and work and had a gender status between men and women.

Connor: These individuals were not necessarily those with genetic differences that we know today as the “disorders of sex development (or DSD),” but rather performed alternative gender roles within Navajo culture. They both fit into the “neither-male-nor-female” groups, and were often seen as functioning as mediators in quarrels and arguments between the sexes and thus filling a recognized social roles. And “neither-male-nor-female” concepts of sex exist in a wide variety of non- Western European colonial norms as well. We have the hijra in India, the shamans in Siberia, the vaze e betuar in Albania, the fa’afafine in Polynesia - I could go on and on, but what you should get a sense of is here is the fact that a wide variety of cultures who have thought of sex in wildly different ways than we do today.

Gabby: Okay, so we get that there are many different cultures that possess ideas about sex that are much more complicated than the male/female divide. But then how did we come to where we are today? It must be because the sex binary was shown to be a correct or effective way of thinking about sex, right?

Connor:  Well before we discuss whether the binary idea of sex is actually correct or effective, as you say, let’s first consider how the idea of the binary became entrenched in the context of colonial America. European colonists came to the present-day United States with certain sort of contradictory ideas about sex in the sense that they acknowledged differences in sex but also persecuted it. Nevertheless, historically Western European cultures and the Catholic Church acknowledged that some individuals did not fit within the prescribed male/female categories. Originally, many people who did not fit within these categories - typically designated as hermaphrodites - seemed to be to be generally tolerated at least in the context of the Church, although the degree to which this is the case has definitely been debated. Nevertheless, what is clear is that ideas of sex and gender became much more restrictive in European circles during the Age of Exploration, and as Foucault points out, by the late 16th century, “hermaphrodites were considered to be monsters and were executed, burnt at the stake and their ashes thrown to the winds.” Western Europeans coming to British North America in the 17th and 18th Centuries may have come from countries with a history of penalizing those who didn’t fit the binary, but the fact that they recognized intersexuality as a threat and something to be destroyed suggests they knew these variant existed. [potential Morgensen bit]. In time, European colonists not only continued to target individuals whose sex could not be easily determined, but they categorized Native cultures that did not endorse the binary as a cultural norm as inferior and subject to targeting. Therefore, European colonists used differences in conceptions of gender itself as a means of othering ‘inferior’ groups who posed barriers to settler colonialism. This idea not only made European ideas about the sex binary even more restrictive, but they reinforced the nature of binary sex by erasing ‘deviant,’ non-European forms through cultural or physical elimination. But how do these strict European ideas of gender and sex - informed by increasingly rigid colonial cultural constructions - relate to the naturalization of the sex binary? That is, how did Western cultural values become further reinforced by medical practitioners to produce the sex binary we have come to know today?

Elizabeth: The evidence shows that European physicians embedded in this colonial cultural setting were preoccupied with gender, sex, and the sex binary. There is a wide variety of sources that document “borderline cases” whereby medical practitioners in early America attempted to classify intersexual individuals - those individuals who did not fall in either the male or female category -  in terms of which sex they better fit. Embedded in both European and American doctors’ judgments, which labeled ambiguous bodies male or female, were traditional notions of femininity and masculinity. These decisions were made not only on one’s performance of a gender role, but also the size of their genitalia, their facial features, and their sexual orientation. Often these features were conflicting, but physicians were sure to always label borderline patients - even those with especially unusual conformations of external genitalia - as either mostly female or mostly male - and hence people could be prescribed their ‘true sex.’ Just as importantly, this allowed the two-sex system to remain largely intact. We see the threads of this today with gender reassignment surgery in children who are born with genitalia or outward appearances that don’t conform neatly to either sex. We often just choose one based on shifty and often inconclusive external appearances.

April: Okay, so sex has neither always been thought of as a binary nor is it always - even from a medical perspective - simple to designate it as such. But why does there exist such a dissonance between the way Americans and medical professionals commonly conceptualize sex and the actual variation in sex that exists?

Maybe this dissonance stems from how sex and sex development are taught. Or how ideas about binary sex are reflected in gendered bathrooms, gym classes, and certain gender roles ascribed to “men” and “women.” Or maybe it’s the way we conceptualize sex and gender and muddle the two.

Gabby: Perhaps a reorientation of our notions about sex - moving from a sex binary to thinking of sex as ‘layers’ - could be useful. Focusing on the history of science and how science intersects with gender and sexuality, Dr. Fausto-Sterling provides what may be a useful way of rethinking the way we conceptualize sex.  Fausto-Sterling describes sex not as a binary biological phenomenon, but rather points to five distinct ‘layers of sex’ to  underscore just how biologically complicated sex can be. We often think of sex as being almost exclusively chromosomal or based on external genitalia, but Fausto-Sterling describes this as only one layer of the complex network of features and processes that contribute to our sex. We also had a fetal gonadal sex, which involves the induction of a very complex genetic program that leads to the development of testes or ovaries from what is called a bipotential gonad.

Connor: But that’s not all, because we also have a fetal hormonal sex. Once we develop either ovaries or testes, levels of circulating hormones such as estrogen or testosterone generally increase, which allows for the development of internal reproductive sex - the formation of the vas deferens, epididymis, and seminal vesicles in males and uterus, cervix, and upper vagina in the females. One’s genital sex is also influenced by circulating levels of hormones which produce either a penis or clitoris from “an identical phallus structure.” All of these layers of sex are interconnected, but they can be discordant. For example, one can have male chromosomes and female external genitals. We’ll talk about that more later, but what you should come to understand is that sex isn’t just about one’s genitalia or chromosomes, it’s far more complex than that.

April: Wow, this is a lot to process. I guess I had always assumed that sex determination was a simple and streamlined process that produced either males or females. But one thing I don’t understand is how we came to conceptualize sex development this way?

Elizabeth:  I get what you mean. I think some of this comes down to the way that the assumptions that scientists have about sex influences other scientists, medical professionals, teachers, and greater society. For example, when I was taught about sex determination in genetics courses, the assumption was that female development is the default program, and requires no active molecular/biological switch. Male development however, was described as requiring the action of certain genes, particularly those found on the Y-chromosome. The science from which this simple genetic explanation arises has important effects on the assumptions we all have about sex. We now know that females are not and should not be considered the developmental defaults; there is an important dance between genes, hormones, and environmental factors that all contribute to the development of different sex characteristics, both primary and secondary.

Gabby: With this simplistic explanation of sex determination as a binary switch, there appears to be little room for sexual complexity. The way we think about the chromosomes and hormones as gendered - either exclusively male or female - further reinforces this binary model. Even the cultural way we think of the chromosomes - the X as “sociable, controlling, conservative, and motherly” and Y as “macho, active, wily, and hyperactive” support this binary model in important ways. Science is beginning to elucidate the molecular details of female development, and the complexity underlying even chromosomal sex, but we have a long way to go. But what you should understand is that sex is complex and contested, and the way we teach sex development doesn’t capture even close to the whole story. The ways that sex intersects with gender - now that’s a whole other mess, and here the binary unravels even more….

Elizabeth: Thinking about gender in our society is inextricably linked to thinking about sex. So now let’s dive into gender a bit more, specifically with a focus on scientific studies that have worked to pinpoint biological foundations of gender. Now that we are going to launch into some more technical and biological discussion, let’s establish a couple overarching themes to keep ourselves oriented throughout. As researchers have looked at a biological basis for gender, they tend to focus on three levels of understanding: brains, genes, and hormones. So, in keeping with this method of analysis, we will look at results from studies that contribute to an understanding of gender at all three levels.

We are incredibly focused on that binary; even as people become more “progressive” and “liberal” in their understanding that gender is a social construct, they seem to ignore the ways in which what is viewed as biological sex profoundly informs the expectations and assumptions made about one’s gender. Work done as recently as 2004 by Craig, Harper, and Loat demonstrates this obsession with pinpointing a biological basis for gender differences and the lack of acknowledgement of any deviation from the binary -- male or female. Craig, the first author, published the paper out of the Institute of Psychiatry at St. Catherine’s College in Oxford. He has a Ph.D. in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, so he clearly has a focus on the sciences -- he’s been published in Nature and Science, which are two very well respected journals. Currently, he is a professor of Genetics and head of the Social Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre at Kings College in London. Keeping in mind this background in the sciences in mind, what did Craig do? The researchers review several studies that deal with genetic and biological mechanisms underlying sex differences in human behavior.

Connor: In reading that paper, I noticed that Craig operates from the underlying assumption that “human males and females tend to behave differently is an undeniable fact.” Isn’t this problematic from the beginning? His entire paper, analyzing the role of the sex chromosomes in producing tangible differences between men and women, is predicated on the fact that biology will reproduce the results he sees in his everyday life. He argues that there is compelling evidence that the “stereotypes may be based upon genuine disparities between male and female cognition and behaviour, which can be measured empirically.”

April: What about the social pressures? You can’t ignore social expectations! To begin with gender differences at the level of the brain, Craig cites several papers that have shown that the human brain is highly sexually dimorphic, but I hardly find it convincing when he posits that the organizational differences in the brain hemispheres between men and women result in different cognitive abilities, with men being more inclined towards spatial tasks and women verbal tasks. Overall, Craig’s analysis seems rather one-sided and fails to consider the complexity of sex and gender development in real life; he operates through extreme confirmation bias and fully ignores the idea that the brain is plastic, which is a very important concept that we will return to later.

Elizabeth: Yes, but Craig does bring up one compelling piece of evidence I don’t think we can ignore. More specifically, Craig discusses a brain region known as INAH3, which is a specific group of cells in the hypothalamus, the part of the brain responsible for regulating bodily functions. This is an important brain structure because Simon Levay, in 1991, documented differences in the INAH3 of homosexual men, meaning that the INAH3 was on the science communities radar as being implicated in homosexuality. Then, 13 years later, Craig says brain structure is three times larger in males than females. In other words, he is saying that there is a difference in the INAH3 that Levay posited was important for sexual behaviors. Four years later, esteemed researchers Dick Swaab, a neuro-endocrinologist and neurobiologist, and Alicia Garcia-Falgueras, an Assistant Professor with her PhD and a research focus on neurophysiology underlying gender differences, studied this region in the brain in depth. I think their results, building on Craig’s, have the potential to be viewed as convincing.

Gabby: In Garcia-Falgueras’ study they also studied the same INAH3 brain region that Craig brings up, as well as the BSTc, which is a brain region that is thought to be “sexually dimorphic.” They report that transgender individuals have BSTc and INAH3 structures that resemble their gender identity, not their natal sex. Trans women’s brains looked more similar to female control subjects. Furthermore, trans men had a similar INAH3 to the male control subjects -- without the influence of testosterone treatment. Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab even used pre- and post-menopausal women as controls to prove that estrogen treatment did not influence the trans women’s INAH3 resemblance to female controls. This study has to convince you that there are meaningful biological differences between the genders, right?

April: No! There have been many studies looking at the brain, hormone, and genetic phenotypes of trans people. That doesn’t make the evidence compelling. First, the authors reported subjects whose data points fit neither category, but brushed this off as an aside. Second, once again, the human brain is plastic. Regardless of pre and post menopausal women being used as a control, the brain changes based on how you interact with people, and also how they treat you. Lastly, we do not even know what that area of the brain really does, so how is a size difference between genders possibly important or significant? We have no idea whether it connotes a difference in function, so this study seems to be encroaching on phrenology. Clearly, the evidence for sex and gender differences in the brain are lacking.

Connor: Okay, so if there are no compelling differences in brain structures, what about at the level of genes? Genes are the underlying basis for each individual, so there must be some differentiation occurring in our DNA!

April: I wouldn’t make that jump. Thinking about another paper published at a similar time to Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab’s piece, by Eva-Katrin Bentz, I grow skeptical of the genetic evidence as well. Bentz is an MD who works in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. She’s published several pieces on whether being trans is associated with single nucleotide polymorphisms, SNP,  which are single changes in the DNA sequence. She has also worked on how hormone replacement therapy, HRT, used for gender confirmation in trans patients affects the body. So she does have the background and expertise to be studying this topic.

Elizabeth: To frame our discussion, let’s define a few biological terms first. She looks at alleles, which are the alternate forms of a gene, and genotypes, which are the combinations of alleles that an individual has. Bentz demonstrates that there is an association between an SNP of a specific gene, CYP17, and trans-men. The data, in my opinion, is tenuous, and the way she frames the discussion is incredibly problematic. Let’s break this down a bit, shall we?

They work with 104 trans women, 49 trans men, 756 control cis men, and 915 control cis women. First of all, these numbers are not instilling confidence in me with respect to statistical practices and power. The difference in the number of transgender people compared to control individuals is staggering; a good study would have equal control and target population sizes. Then, she finds a statistically significant difference in the allele frequencies and genotype distributions between trans men and cis females, but not between trans women and cis men. But, if we zoom in on this data a bit, the allele that she is targeting as a SNP is present in 44% of trans men and 31% of cis women.

Gabby: I don’t know about you, but the fact that this allele of interest is present in less than half of trans men does not convince me when she then argues that this SNP is associated with trans men. Functionally, how different is 44% compared to 31%? It doesn’t seem that big of a difference to me! This may be statistically significant, but especially given the fact that there was no associated difference in the blood levels of estrogen or testosterone -- which is the way of testing functional significance -- I don’t find these results compelling. Once again, we see that gender/sex-based biological differences are not significant at the level of the brain or genes. What’s left?

Elizabeth: Well, we haven’t formally yet discussed hormones yet, which you just alluded to, so let’s jump into that. And I think that despite the numbers, we should remember that CYP17 is a gene that encodes an enzyme to ultimately create testosterone and estrogen. If this change increases function of the enzyme and it implicates hormone metabolism, I could see how it may be logical that this gene SNP is associated with trans men. Hormones are relevant to consider, are they not? If we think about work that authors P.C. Kreukels and Antonio Guillamon did in 2015, I think we might begin to elucidate an important role for hormones in this discussion even if genes and the brain may not play the role we might have previously thought. Kreukels has a masters in psychology and also received her PhD from the Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology. She now works in a Department of Medical Psychology and focuses on gender roles and identity and transgender health care. Her co-author, Antonio Guillamon, has an MD PhD and currently works in psychobiology and does similar work in HRT for trans patients and the potential effects in cortical thickness and other brain structures.

Connor: The authors perform an in-depth review that essentially establishes that there have been reported differences in grey matter, subcortical structures, hypothalamic activation, and brain connectivity between individuals with gender incongruence and those of their natal sex. But, the results I find the most intriguing are those pertaining to HRT. The authors report that the hormones did affect brain morphology. Trans women experienced a decrease in intracranial brain volume, a decrease in cortical thickness, and an expansion of ventricles. On the other hand, trans men have seen increased intracranial and hypothalamic volumes with androgen therapy. These profound morphological changes at the level of the brain coincide with a shift towards the individuals’ identified gender.

April: Okay, thinking about Kreukels and Guillamon’s work and the effects of HRT, perhaps Bentz, with her analysis of the SNP and being transgender, is onto something then. Even though a correlation/association is not causation and there was little-to-know discussion and no proof of functional biological significance found. I can admit that hormones have an effect on brain structures and therefore a SNP in a gene that is implicated in hormone metabolism may be relevant. But I also want to remind us that the brain is plastic, and the HRT that Kreukels and Guillamon point to may not have been the factor that changed the intracranial and hypothalamic volumes, for instance. The brains of trans women and trans men no doubt change in response to stress, social pressures, and lived experiences.

Elizabeth: Now that we are discussing hormones, I want to briefly return to that review by Craig that we talked about earlier -- the one that assumed the brain was sexually dimorphic and men and women were biologically entirely distinct. At one point, Craig discusses Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia, or CAH, which is an autosomal recessive disorder characterized by difficulty producing specific hormones. He begins his discussion of CAH with analyzing testosterone and androgen impacts on rodent fetal development and then connects this to CAH and the overproduction of adrenal androgens during fetal development. He posits that the excessive adrenal androgen exposure in utero has a “masculinizing” effect on play behavior, aggression, and spatial ability of a female child once born.

Gabby: Okay, but I think he is making a gross oversimplification. How can we transition from rodent studies to human beings without taking a closer look at the additional factors at play. First of all, there is stereotyping involved in assuming testosterone is associated with male aggression and cognitive development favoring better spatial awareness. Where does this data come from? And how do we know men aren’t aggressive because society shows them they can and should behave this way? And in thinking about CAH, there are human factors that are very relevant to consider -- hormones aren’t that simple.

Connor: I want to jump in and complicate this argument, particularly as it pertains to hormones, a bit more by bringing in an article by van Anders. She studies queer science, social neuro-endocrinology and feminist neuroscience. In 2015, she studied the effect of gendered behavior on testosterone levels in women and men. I thought this work was interesting because the authors found support for a theory that “wielding power increased testosterone in women compared with a control, regardless of whether it was performed in gender-stereotyped masculine or feminine ways.” Testosterone levels are not simply higher in men and lower in women -- the issue is far more complicated than that. Differences in testosterone levels are embodied based on the ways people are socialized over the course of their lives with respect to gender. I fully recognize some of the potential issues with this study. For instance, the researchers had to employ “actors” so the situation they used as a representation of competition and “wielding power” -- firing a subordinate -- may not have been fully representative or authentic. But overall, I think van Anders is on to something here. It makes sense to me that given how entrenched gender norms are in our society, they could become a part of our biology.

Elizabeth: Okay, so let’s step away from the data and study results for a moment and summarize what we’ve covered so far. First, on the level of the brain, we see certain brain structures, such as the INAH3, that are thought to more closely resemble one’s gender identity as compared to natal sex, but once again, we don’t even know what the INAH3 does. Second, on the level of genes, we’ve seen that certain SNP have been associated with certain groups of trans individuals, although no functional or causal relationship has been elucidated, which is a major gap. So that’s brains and genes...what’s left? Hormones. We see that HRT does change brain structure morphology and people think that exposure to certain androgens in utero, for example, may impact “gendered” behavior, but these results seem lacking and based on stereotypes as well, especially when you consider that social pressures and power dynamics that characterize everyday life, such as those studied by van Anders, may affect testosterone levels in women. These hormone levels aren’t necessarily an innate method of differentiating men from women, but an embodied result of our lived experiences. So the idea of an innate, biological basis of gender beings begins to unravel at the level of brain structures, genes, and hormones.

April: I couldn’t agree more. And I can’t help but think about some of the dangers of conceptualizing these differences as “innate.” For instance, I am appalled at the way Bentz discusses transgender individuals. Even after explicitly establishing that there were cis- females with the SNP and trans men without it, and therefore the CYP17 SNP is not necessary or sufficient in identifying as transgender, she thinks she has localized a “genetic risk factor of “transsexualism.” She engages in the medicalization of being trans being trans-- making it seem as if those who don’t conform to our deeply entrenched binary are “abnormal” or “faulty” or even diseased, when in fact, no one fits perfectly into the binary! The binary isn’t even a binary…

Gabby: What do you mean the binary isn’t even a true binary? Let’s think about sex, which is where this binary all started…

April: Yes let’s explore this idea of a binary a little deeper, and in its exploration I believe we will find that sex is not singularly dimorphic, or at the very least is more complicated than we think. As we have stated defining biological sex is not as discrete as it might at first seem. Fausto-Sterling shows how there are lots of characteristics that are a part of sex determination. Fausto-Sterlings layered sex model manages to catch a lot of that complexity. However, we have not explored exactly what differences in those layers can mean. Claire Ainsworth (2015), a scientific freelance journalist, discusses yet another layer unexplored by Fausto-Sterling, sex on a cellular level. In her article, exploring biological sex in Nature magazine she explains that many people harbor cells of the opposite sex in their body even without their knowing! Mothers of XY babies experience a two way exchange of genetic material through the placenta. This means that she often will have XY cells that are incorporated into her body.

Connor: But I’m sure those do not stay, the body should treat them as foreign and rid itself of them!

Elizabeth: Ah but they do stay, and often incorporate themselves into important functions. The oldest woman found with these XY cells in a 2012 study by immunologist Lee Nelson and her team at the University of Washington in Seattle, was 94! These new cells often integrate into their new environment and can perform vital functions, like becoming neurons, at least in mice. This cellular exchange works both ways, as sons have been found to have XX cells from their mothers well through adulthood. This kind of cellular exchange, known by scientists as microchimaerism, is complemented with the much rarer macro-chimerism where you absorb a twin in the womb, and this twin does not need have the same karyotype, a term that refers to the number and appearance of one’s chromosomes. This completely derails the argument that one need only look at a karyotype in order to determine biological sex.

Connor: So is there any one factor that truly truly determines biological sex?

April: No, not really, and I really like the quote that Ainsworth used from Dr. Vilain, who at the  Center for Gender-Based Biology at UCLA. He says that there is not one biological parameter for sex that takes over every other parameter.

Gabby: Ainsworth also brings up what are medically referred to as differences or disorders of sex development or DSD’s. People with DSD’s are intersex. These people do not have to have any kind of chimerism but differences in utero or postnatally that affect Fausto-Sterling’s layers of sex differentiation. Some DSD’s have been found to have genetic factors, where others do not. There is a broad diversity of differences of sex development.

April: I am glad you use the term differences instead of disorders because it humanizes and depathologizes these conditions and people.

Gabby: Right, I agree. In order to understand what forms these kinds of differences can exist as, let’s talk through an example, Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. Again there are some problems with the term syndrome as it makes the people with it sound sick or unwhole, but this is how the medical community has chosen to name it. People with CAIS have XY karyotypes and develop testes in utero. However when these testes release androgens, the body cannot process them. Therefore the rest of the body develops “femininely” and goes through a “female” puberty, as it can only respond to the estrogen that the body releases, not the testosterone. This person looks like a cis woman. Often people with CAIS do not know that they are intersex until they do not get their periods, and can live their lives without others knowing that they have XY chromosomes. By some estimates, about 2 percent of the population have some kind of difference of sex development, which is about the same as the amount of natural redheads.

Elizabeth: This reminds me of the diagram that Ainsworth put in her article. It shows the sliding scale of biological sex between male and female, with different DSD’s in between the two sexes.

April: She does but I’m not sure that that is also a good way to look at sex. Terms that get at the complexity of sexual variation might be better. Polymorphism, meaning many forms, could be more appropriate than continuum.

Connor: I agree. Looking to the opinions of actual intersex people, viewing biological sex as a continuum is quite reductionary. Biological anthropologist Claire Astorino, who is herself intersex, puts forth this idea of sexual polymorphism, instead of sexual dimorphism, meaning two forms. The only way to truly appreciate the variety of human sex characteristics is to stop viewing them along a binary sliding scale. If we do not do this, then our research then stays skewed by our view of the false sexual dimorphism. We will still be looking at people as part male and part female, and not as whole people as they deserve to be treated. .

April: The idea that there are two end members and those in between is disrespectful to those who do have a DSD. Polymorphism also allows for people to have more freedom to choose who they want to be, as it stops shoving people into strict boxes.  This socially constructed veil of dimorphic sex colors all research that we do, in the hard and in the social sciences. Also by loosening up the idea of simple biologic sexes, it opens the door for a loosening the idea of gender and its rigidity. By ridding ourselves of the dimorphic idea of sex, we also automatically improve the lives of intersex people by ridding the idea of sexual reassignment surgery of infants with “ambiguous genitalia”. The truth of the matter with these surgeries is they are often quite damaging and reduce sensation in a very sensitive area as show by the Minto paper. Also according to the Human Rights watch and a study by Reiner and Gearhart this assignment surgery about half the time assigns the wrong sex based on the gender that these children identify as when they grow up.

Gabby: Now that we have talked about the social and biological construction of sex and gender, let’s take something that is at the crux of biological and social understanding: the concept of evolution. Evolution is based off of biological reproduction of people who are viewed as wholly men or wholly women. Knowing that no such clear distinction exists complicates this idea. The entire concept is structured around men performing certain tasks and women performing others in order to increase fitness and out-compete others. But these categories are incredibly socially based and, as we have shown, even biological sex is not a concrete black and white phenomenon. Moreover, acknowledging that not all people have the same reproductive capabilities yet still fully exist in our society disrupts the notion that evolutionarily, people are “fit” based on their ability to pass on their genes.

April: How can I be careful to talk about sex in an appropriate manner in my Introductory Biological Anthropology class? Or more broadly, how can any educator talk about this subject while being conscious of its societal implications?

Elizabeth: Well, I know when I was taking my biology courses as an undergrad and even graduate student, the construction of the distinction between gender and sex was presented as a strict binary, most likely for simplicity for professors and the textbooks that are available. If we think of gender as something that is variable and flexible to lived experiences and exposures, then sex is something that is biological concrete and rooted in hard science. This is how it is traditionally taught in science classes, but that definitely needs to change.

Gabby: Moving forward, I think it would be a huge step to address the variations. For example, as you talk about XX is female and XY and male, you must also address how this may not always be the case. In some individuals there may be excess hormones or a total sensitivity to hormones that actually lead to fluidity in gender and sex assignment.

April : Yeah, I also think in the discussion of intersex individuals, it is not okay to frame it is a disorder or a negative experience that families are burdened with.

Elizabeth: I absolutely agree. Okay, so stepping outside of science as a whole, how does this affect our thinking?  

Connor: We have previously considered gender and sex to be two distinct concepts. Gender is the socially constructed phenomenon, while sex is the biological construct. But, are these really different? First, what our society has coined ‘gender’ is strongly influenced by ‘sex’. Whether you are XX or XY, you experience different hormone levels in utero and develop either phenotypically female or male genitalia. Both of these factors have an undeniable impact on how one chooses to identify. This is apparent because the vast majority of individuals identify with their biologically born sex. But, biology shows us that sex is more complex than a binary. By creating a simple binary, we are invisibilizing the complexity of sex and recreating the social construction.These imposed categories are not sufficient for describing the variation that exists. On the other hand, one’s gender also impacts the biological construct called “sex”. And as we have shown, the behaviors we display (whether those are culturally considered feminine, masculine, or neutral) can affect our hormones in different ways, which society sees as an indicator of biological sex.

April: Since sex affects gender and gender affects sex, this eradicates the distinction between the biological and social construct. It seems like our society has created this distinction to neatly categorize individuals when really the lines are blurred or nonexistent. What do you guys think?

Gabby: What can we do to respond to these issues we’ve raised?

Elizabeth: I think one way would be as a society, we need to change our conversation about gender and sex, but this is easier said than done. One small step that we and all our listeners can begin asking other’s pronouns.

Gabby: Dr. Vilain, who we discussed previously said “My feeling is that since there is not one biological parameter that takes over every other parameter, at the end of the day, gender identity seems to be the most reasonable parameter”. As Dr Valian argues, sex is a very complex idea that encompasses a whole lot of biological variation. For example for intersex people, their biological and physical characteristics may not be wholly male or female but lie somewhere in the grey area between. Dr. Valian understands that variations in gonadal tissue, ambiguous genitalia, missing or extra chromosomes, fluctuating hormones, brain development and more influence one’s sex. But, these characteristics don’t necessarily influence one another and can develop independently, which complicates sex. Even the biology supports that identity can be more fluid and polymorphic than a binary OR a continuum can support. Given the fluidity, asking for one’s pronouns can help people feel empowered by their own gender identity.

Connor: So with the idea that early experiences have a huge impact on identity, is there a proper way to interact with kids?

April: This reminds me of a New york times article about a preschool in Sweden. They noticed that the boys tended to be more physical while the girls would whimper, so the school decided to make changes! In order to reverse gender roles, the teachers put the boys in charge of the play kitchen, and made the girls shout No to help promote confidence! For recess, they organized play so that children would not sort by gender. The state curriculum even urged teachers to “counteract traditional gender roles and gender patterns.”

Connor: Oh yeah, and they had students refer to their peers as friends or by name rather than “boys and girls”. In 2012, they even introduced the gender-neutral pronoun “hen” to Swedish culture. Once the school began to make changes, they saw how intertwined these patterns of gender norms were. For example, the teachers would help one boy after another to get dressed and run out the door. But the girls were expected to dress themselves.

Gabby: I feel like even parents today in the US could learn a lot from this example!

April: Today, parents are so concerned with doing gender reveals with the classic pink balloons or blue balloons. We have already accessorized all of their future clothes and room in their respective color before they are even born into the world.

Elizabeth: That reminds me of the “Pink and Blue Project” that artist JeongMee Yoo designed. She took photographs of kids surrounded by all of their belongings, and the images were striking. It was interesting that a few of the girls did own a few purple or blue things amongst their sea of pink, but for the boys there was no pink. Kind of weird how our society has made it more acceptable for girls to be tomboys, yet are quick to judge boys who show an ounce of “femininity.”

Gabby: Reflecting back on my own childhood, my first room was painted a darker pink. My parents bought me barbies, while they bought my brother pokemon cards, trucks, and painted his room with animals. Infact, my brother and I both had bunk beds and mine was in the shape of a castle and his was a jungle tree house. Bu then when we were in lower and middle school, we did play a lot of the same sports including basketball, gymnastics, soccer, golf, tennis, and I would occasionally play football with my brother and dad.

Elizabeth: Yeah my parents definitely took advantage of gender norms when making decisions about the activities my brother, sister, and I were enrolled in. I truly believe they had the best intentions, but looking back, enrolling my sister and I in dance, figure skating, and gymnastics while they enrolling my brother in every sport under the sun definitely played into prescribed gender expectations.

Connor: My parents definitely did structure my after-school activities and playtime around with the assumption that I would 1) identify as a boy and 2) enjoy “male” activities and sports, but they weren’t necessarily trying to be restrictive in any overt way. I think they would have been fine if I chose a more quote-on-quote “feminine” activities, but there was no deliberate attempt to actually offer me those opportunities unless I asked for them.

April: Yeah, looking back, when I was little my room was a pale yellow, and it was Sesame Street themed. My mom said that she tried to pick lots of green and yellow clothes, as they were gender neutral. The next time my room was painted I was old enough to chose bright purple. She also enrolled me in both sports and dance from an early age until I decided I wanted to do neither!

Gabby: I was also reading article about this couple in Toronto who never revealed the sex of their child. They instead thought it was more important that they wait until their children were old enough to decide what gender they identify as. It was not until Star, their youngest child, was five and a half years old that she confidently admitted her pronoun of “she”. This was a choice that they let all three of their children have. Jazz, Star’s older sibling, prefers the pronouns “she” and “her” and identifies as a transgender girl. Kio- the other sibling-  identifies as non-binary and uses the pronoun “they.” Kathy - one parents -also opts for “they,” while David, the other parent,  uses “he or they.”

Elizabeth: Wow that is super interesting! And a good direction for parenting to go. Beyond parenting, this question of gender and sex has come up a ton in sports. Almost a little too much if you ask me. Maybe it's our competitive nature, but in women’s sports, there are always comments about a player being too masculine and may not even be a woman. Testosterone is the huge marker that is measured to predict if they are eligible to play.

Gabby: I remember I used to watch Brittney Griner play basketball at Baylor and there would be so many comments of “you sure that's a girl” or even demanding proof of her gender. I am not really sure what “evidence” they wanted. All of these comments just go to derail her accomplishments because she’s tall, strong, and possess some more masculine traits. She is now someone who loves her body and is proud of her image, but this could not have been an easy road. She even said “Being 6-foot-8, I definitely get stares. I think my feet are bigger than Kareem’s. They are size 17 men's. My hands are even bigger than LeBron's….. I remember around sixth or seventh grade the "cool girls" would reach out and touch my chest: "Yep, nothing." I felt like less than a person. It was crazy. I felt frozen. That was one of the worst things they could do.” She went on to talk about an incident in China where “One time when I went into the bathroom there, a lady was so shocked that she was pushing me out; she was so hysterically shocked that I was in there. I couldn't do anything but laugh. I didn't even try to defend myself and tell her I was a girl. I ended up just going over to the men's room and went into one of the stalls. I've even had to do that in the States a couple of times.”

April: For Caster Semnya, a cis-woman, was required by the International Association of Athletics Federations’ rule to take testosterone suppressants to compete in the women’s division 800 and 1500-meter races. This desire to categorize individuals into explicit male and female boxes, stems from the belief that there is some essential difference between men and women, leading to the presence of sex testing in women’s sports. The thought is that men will disguise themselves as women to win medals even though no man has ever been caught doing this. This is a classic scare tactic, one that is used in the same way that the discussions about trans women in womens bathrooms is. There have been no documented cases of trans women harassing cis women in bathrooms.

Connor: This discussion of gendered bathrooms ties backs to Trump’s proposal - which we talked about at the beginning. Let’s listen to a part of what we heard at the beginning and see what we can make of this after our discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sURH-GLKxCc

Connor: So you have it, in 2018 “the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposes to establish a legal definition of whether someone is male or female based solely and immutably on the genitals they are born with.”

If the external genitalia is ambiguous for whatever reason, than genetic testing for the presence of the Y chromosome will be used to determine sex.

Elizabeth: In that article about Trump’s proposal, it actually said that this memo for deciding the sex on a birth certificate will be “clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable,” which we now know is an absurd idea. To explicitly tie biological sex to gender makes this proposal even further from scientific and social reality, as scientists define gender as separate from sex.

Gabby: At this point, the issues with this proposal are pretty clear. As we’ve established, any mother who has had previous male offspring has the chance to test positive for a Y chromosome -- so what is she male now?

April: Yeah, also this single proposal has the power to underdo years of works that has gone into fighting to understand gender and sex. This proposal has no foundation in science and is rooted in strong societal norms. Additionally, this would lead to more discrimination and isolation of trans people or individuals who do not fall into the socially constructed Western male/female binary.

Connor: Given all we have talked about during this podcast today, it is clear that there is no biological binary for sex or gender. It follows logical thinking that if there is no biological binary for sex, that there exists similar complexity in gender identities. To say that there exists a simple biological determinant for sex, and that factor also determines gender, is a gross misrepresentation of what we scientifically know to be true.

Elizabeth: We know they are misrepresenting what we scientifically know to be true, so this leads me to question, why are they doing this? What are their motivations?

Gabby: The ones in power -- white cis men -- are explicitly targeting trans people with the intent of limiting their ability to operate comfortably in society.

April: For example, defining one’s sex and gender on a birth certificate prevents their ability to transition in the eyes of the government. This inability functionally limits how they can work in society in any place where their gender markers on their identification play into social interactions. This may occur in offices, going through airport security, and traffic stops. I remember reading about two trans women who were referred to as “it” at the DMV and told that they had to remove their makeup and wigs to better represent the “male” marker on their licenses. These are seemingly miniscule events that most of us don’t think of as important, but for someone whose rights have been stripped away, these everyday occurrences carry immense importance.

Connor: And finally, tying this back to what we discussed in the beginning, we need to be cognizant of the history behind the American state reinforcing the gender binary and controlling individual gender identity. From the arrival of Western Europeans to North America, colonists attempted to highlight their embodied gender binary as evidence of European superiority. This strict gender binary was imposed on non-Europeans, backed by scientists and physicians, and used to discriminate and eliminate. It’s hard not to see the legacy of this today.

So let’s do a quick recap of the main points from today’s discussion:

Ideas about gender and sex have their basis in cultural constructs developed in the colonial context. Physicians and scientists perpetuate this idea.

Elizabeth: Gender differences have no single biological basis at level of brain structures, genes, or hormones.

April: Sex is neither a binary ntor a continuum, but rather better conceptualized as polymorphic.

Gabby: A slippage occurs between gender and sex that affects people’s everyday lives.

[foursprout-blog]

We Need To Talk About ‘Top Privilege’

New Post has been published on http://foursprout.com/happiness/we-need-to-talk-about-top-privilege/

We Need To Talk About ‘Top Privilege’

Charlotte Butcher / Unsplash

One of the most valuable insights I learned from studying sociology is that there is a big difference between what people say and what they do. Humans are complex, contradictory creatures whose behaviors evade simple explanations. Yet, more often than not, we opt for the simplicity of common sense ways of thinking because it’s comforting, and the alternative can be mentally exhausting.

Rembrandt Duran’s recent think piece on gay sex, while seemingly progressive at first glance, commits precisely this type of error by treating socially constructed identities as indisputable truths. A self-professed expert on the matter, Duran begins by informing readers that the time has come to talk about “top privilege.” Extending ideas about race made famous by Peggy McIntosh back in 1989—which have recently gained cultural traction with the rise of Black Lives Matter and other social movements—the author wants to make tops (i.e., insertive partners) aware of their social and cultural advantages in comparison with their passive counterparts. But what exactly he wants tops to do with this political consciousness remains unclear.

Beginning with a brief, if limited, overview of gay men’s sex categories, he goes on to explain how tops—who by mainstream logic are masculine and therefore dominant and strong—get the better end of the cultural stick. In this popular narrative, penetrative sex between men is reduced to a mirror of straight sex, a copy of the original. At this point most of the gay readers out there are probably nodding in agreement thinking about all the times we’ve been asked by clueless straight people: “But which one is the girl in your relationship?”

Next, Remy (as he is known by his following of sex-positive Bushwick hipsters) lists all the ways he is different from those non-self-aware dudes out there. As a “woke top” (my term) he gets it. Whether it’s with higher rates of STIs or the double standard of slut-shaming, the bottom struggle is real.

While Duran points, correctly in my view, to the “internalized homophobia and sexist attitudes towards penetration” many gay men, unfortunately, use to understand our experience of sex, he stops short of actually challenging the entrenched forms of heterosexism and misogyny written into our sexual scripts. He seems to understand there is a problem with the equation of top with masculine and bottom with feminine. However, in taking the meaning behind these perceived identities for granted, he is unable to offer a vision of what a more egalitarian form of sexuality may look like.

So let’s revisit Peggy McIntosh’s metaphorical knapsack and take a moment to “unpack” top privilege.

For starters, any discussion of privilege that narrowly focuses on a singular identity is insufficient in that it fails to recognize the multiple interlocking systems of power that structure our lives—a fact black feminists have been reminding us of for decades. We are not just tops and bottoms, a complementary pair of masc and femme in the bedroom; rather, we bring a multitude of classed, raced, and gendered identities from the public world into the intimate space of our private lives.

If Duran were to examine privilege through an intersectional lens, he could see how racially marginalized men may not find the role of the top as empowering as their white counterparts. Take, for example, Jordan Anderson’s recent feature in Teen Vogue in which he discusses what it’s like to use Grindr (the gay dating and hookup app) as a black man while vacationing in Italy. “The European gay community that I encountered was interested in having me help them fulfill the fantasies they’d created based solely on the color of my skin,” he regrettably finds. “But they were completely opposed to the idea of a date or a relationship.” In considering this case, which is borne out by the data on race and online dating, it is incumbent on us to ask: Can someone who is objectified as an exotic Other have top privilege?

Moreover, are self-proclaimed tops privileged in similar ways to other dominant groups? Although I do not dispute Duran’s argument that many gay men talk about tops in ways that place them on a higher rung in the ladder of social hierarchies, I nonetheless hesitate to compare sex positions with other markers of social location such as class, race, and gender. Not only does such a logical leap reify the top/bottom binary (and I remain highly skeptical that any gay man is uniformly one thing across his entire sexual lifespan), but it also renders serious discussions of power and privilege meaningless.

It is more accurate, in my view, to decry masculinity as the privileged culprit in our oppressively gendered sexual relations. Being a top is just one feature within a whole field of heterosexual masculinity that is ripe for deconstruction. The real work ahead for queer revolutionaries rests in troubling the compulsory narrative that claims we must all be either males or females with appropriately corresponding gender presentations who, in turn, naturally desire members of the opposite sex. All of this goes without mentioning practices out there that already challenge compulsory heterosexuality: women into pegging, trans tops, power bottoms (which could be a whole essay unto itself), gay sex which (gasp!) doesn’t involve penetration, and the list goes on.

Queer sex needs to tell a different story, one that doesn’t position receptivity or femininity as necessarily inferior. Duran’s suggestion to end sexual stigma, however, doesn’t rewrite this script. Instead, it proposes a tepid politics of appreciation. “We need to cherish our Bottoms for all they put up with and do for us,” he concludes. “Let’s talk about our Top privilege and try and do better by them.” Going back to the racial genesis of the concept of privilege, it’s hard to see how such a solution holds up. It’s like saying: If only white people cherished minorities more. If only men cherished women. If only the straights cherished the gays.

A more enlightened approach might critically engage with deeper social structures and move beyond a simple analysis of thoughts, feelings, and individual biases. This is how we can challenge heteronormative modes of thinking that automatically assume sex positions are essential aspects of gay identity and that automatically cast bottoms as passive and weak. If “tops” are really interested in democratizing sex, we don’t need them to check their privilege. We need them to recognize their partners’ agency and stop pretending that imaginary identities grant them privilege in the first place.

#Happiness

[foursprouthappiness-blog]

We Need To Talk About ‘Top Privilege’

New Post has been published on http://foursprout.com/happiness/we-need-to-talk-about-top-privilege/

We Need To Talk About ‘Top Privilege’

Charlotte Butcher / Unsplash

One of the most valuable insights I learned from studying sociology is that there is a big difference between what people say and what they do. Humans are complex, contradictory creatures whose behaviors evade simple explanations. Yet, more often than not, we opt for the simplicity of common sense ways of thinking because it’s comforting, and the alternative can be mentally exhausting.

Rembrandt Duran’s recent think piece on gay sex, while seemingly progressive at first glance, commits precisely this type of error by treating socially constructed identities as indisputable truths. A self-professed expert on the matter, Duran begins by informing readers that the time has come to talk about “top privilege.” Extending ideas about race made famous by Peggy McIntosh back in 1989—which have recently gained cultural traction with the rise of Black Lives Matter and other social movements—the author wants to make tops (i.e., insertive partners) aware of their social and cultural advantages in comparison with their passive counterparts. But what exactly he wants tops to do with this political consciousness remains unclear.

Beginning with a brief, if limited, overview of gay men’s sex categories, he goes on to explain how tops—who by mainstream logic are masculine and therefore dominant and strong—get the better end of the cultural stick. In this popular narrative, penetrative sex between men is reduced to a mirror of straight sex, a copy of the original. At this point most of the gay readers out there are probably nodding in agreement thinking about all the times we’ve been asked by clueless straight people: “But which one is the girl in your relationship?”

Next, Remy (as he is known by his following of sex-positive Bushwick hipsters) lists all the ways he is different from those non-self-aware dudes out there. As a “woke top” (my term) he gets it. Whether it’s with higher rates of STIs or the double standard of slut-shaming, the bottom struggle is real.

While Duran points, correctly in my view, to the “internalized homophobia and sexist attitudes towards penetration” many gay men, unfortunately, use to understand our experience of sex, he stops short of actually challenging the entrenched forms of heterosexism and misogyny written into our sexual scripts. He seems to understand there is a problem with the equation of top with masculine and bottom with feminine. However, in taking the meaning behind these perceived identities for granted, he is unable to offer a vision of what a more egalitarian form of sexuality may look like.

So let’s revisit Peggy McIntosh’s metaphorical knapsack and take a moment to “unpack” top privilege.

For starters, any discussion of privilege that narrowly focuses on a singular identity is insufficient in that it fails to recognize the multiple interlocking systems of power that structure our lives—a fact black feminists have been reminding us of for decades. We are not just tops and bottoms, a complementary pair of masc and femme in the bedroom; rather, we bring a multitude of classed, raced, and gendered identities from the public world into the intimate space of our private lives.

If Duran were to examine privilege through an intersectional lens, he could see how racially marginalized men may not find the role of the top as empowering as their white counterparts. Take, for example, Jordan Anderson’s recent feature in Teen Vogue in which he discusses what it’s like to use Grindr (the gay dating and hookup app) as a black man while vacationing in Italy. “The European gay community that I encountered was interested in having me help them fulfill the fantasies they’d created based solely on the color of my skin,” he regrettably finds. “But they were completely opposed to the idea of a date or a relationship.” In considering this case, which is borne out by the data on race and online dating, it is incumbent on us to ask: Can someone who is objectified as an exotic Other have top privilege?

Moreover, are self-proclaimed tops privileged in similar ways to other dominant groups? Although I do not dispute Duran’s argument that many gay men talk about tops in ways that place them on a higher rung in the ladder of social hierarchies, I nonetheless hesitate to compare sex positions with other markers of social location such as class, race, and gender. Not only does such a logical leap reify the top/bottom binary (and I remain highly skeptical that any gay man is uniformly one thing across his entire sexual lifespan), but it also renders serious discussions of power and privilege meaningless.

It is more accurate, in my view, to decry masculinity as the privileged culprit in our oppressively gendered sexual relations. Being a top is just one feature within a whole field of heterosexual masculinity that is ripe for deconstruction. The real work ahead for queer revolutionaries rests in troubling the compulsory narrative that claims we must all be either males or females with appropriately corresponding gender presentations who, in turn, naturally desire members of the opposite sex. All of this goes without mentioning practices out there that already challenge compulsory heterosexuality: women into pegging, trans tops, power bottoms (which could be a whole essay unto itself), gay sex which (gasp!) doesn’t involve penetration, and the list goes on.

Queer sex needs to tell a different story, one that doesn’t position receptivity or femininity as necessarily inferior. Duran’s suggestion to end sexual stigma, however, doesn’t rewrite this script. Instead, it proposes a tepid politics of appreciation. “We need to cherish our Bottoms for all they put up with and do for us,” he concludes. “Let’s talk about our Top privilege and try and do better by them.” Going back to the racial genesis of the concept of privilege, it’s hard to see how such a solution holds up. It’s like saying: If only white people cherished minorities more. If only men cherished women. If only the straights cherished the gays.

A more enlightened approach might critically engage with deeper social structures and move beyond a simple analysis of thoughts, feelings, and individual biases. This is how we can challenge heteronormative modes of thinking that automatically assume sex positions are essential aspects of gay identity and that automatically cast bottoms as passive and weak. If “tops” are really interested in democratizing sex, we don’t need them to check their privilege. We need them to recognize their partners’ agency and stop pretending that imaginary identities grant them privilege in the first place.

#Happiness

[casynsgsscrapbook-blog]

Scrapbook Analysis

This scrapbook project serves as a way to summarize the Gender studies class by taking four “artifacts” from each chapter discussed in class and relating them to those chapters. When searching for my artifacts I tried to relate them to pop culture and this generation. A lot of my artifacts come from other posts on social media sites, including Instagram and Twitter. I also had artifacts about well-known social media influencers that many people would recognize, as well as a character from a well-known TV franchise. I also made sure to include artifacts that I found entertaining, and not too many long articles that may seem boring.

Part II

When making my scrapbook, I decided to keep things in order. The first part I posted was ideas. In this section I posted a video called “Sexist Toys” the video was uploaded by Rachel Ballinger who is the person talking. She made this video because she saw Target was selling a selfie kit that was “for girls only”. This sparks some anger inside her and she discusses other harmful stereotypes in toys. I put this under ideas because it touches on what we stereotypically believe is “for boys” and “for girls”. The next thing I posted is an article about a genderfluid Character on the Netflix show Degrassi. The “Ideas” chapter touches on the binary and the character, Yael, feels as though they do not fit in the binary, they don't feel like a boy or girl. The article provides basic information about the particular episode where Yael comes out, without spoiling. My next post is a video of Youtuber, Gigi Gorgeous, coming out as transgender. The video was uploaded a few years ago and Gigi has recently made a documentary showing her process. I would definitely recommend the documentary to anyone who is still confused about what being transgender means, so I included a link to the trailer in the caption of my post. My last post for the Ideas section is an Instagram post by the account “greenboxshop”. The image shows someone wearing a shirt that says, “gender is a social construct”. The owner of the account also owns a clothing business with shirts like this one. The Ideas chapter mentions the idea of gender being a social construct, which this shirt claims to be true.

Part VI

The next section I have in my scrapbook is inequalities, and my first post is an Instagram post, from “soft.feminism”, of a screenshot from Twitter. User @MrLawson posted a picture of a list of things 4th-grade boys don't like about being boys. The chapter discusses inequalities that men and women both face including some of the things on the list. The next post is a video about school dress codes. The woman in the video interviews female students at a high school in Kentucky who are fighting the dress code which has very specific measurements for the skirt and short lengths. The video not only talks about the inequalities for these young women, but it also touches on how it impacts the male students as well, saying they often feel insulted by the rules. The next thing is an article that suggests that men use sexist and homophobic jokes because they are insecure about their own masculinity. The chapter talks about men avoiding feminine things in order to boost their masculinity, this may involve putting femininity down. The last item in this section is a video of fathers reacting to their daughters getting catcalled. Catcalling is a common example of an inequality women face. Usually, men are not aware of how serious and scary this experience is unless they witness it happening to loved ones. In this video, it's obvious that they care that it is happening to their daughters but, is that the only way we can get them to understand?

Part III

The next section on my scrapbook is bodies, starting with a short video about the nature vs nurture debate which was discussed in the chapter. The next item is another video that talks about the nature vs nurture debate, but this one goes more in depth and provides claims and evidence for both sides. It also questions whether gender is a social construct or not. The next artifact is an Instagram post from “stayfrostyfob” of a screenshot of a Tumblr post. The image shows two identical babies, one is a “big, strong, boy” and the other is a “little, cute, girl”. The description basically says that there have been experiments where people reacted differently to a babies behavior based on whether they thought it was a boy or girl. When babies cried, for example, people described the “male” babies as being angry and the “female” babies as being scared. The last thing in this section is a video called, “are boys smarter than girls?” it provides information about the differences between the sexes.

Part IV

Next, I moved on to performances starting with a TED talk with a teacher talking about how her kindergarten students taught her about gender. She begins by talking about a student she had in the past named Michael who was extremely shy. She then explains how she bumped into that student who now identifies as female and goes by Mandy. This inspired her to ask her kindergarten students to list the differences between boys and girls. And they, herself included, learned that there weren't many significant differences. The artifact is a video of a guy listing five times schools tried to enforce gender roles. One school made a boy remove his makeup because it was “distracting”. And another school kicked a girl out of prom because she wore jeans. They claimed it went against the dress code, that did not exist. The performances chapter talks about gender rules and when breaking the rules is acceptable. For these students, it was not acceptable for them to break the rules, and for these schools, gender rules and roles are important to maintain. I then posted another video, this one talking about gendered marketing. It points out how companies can sell the same product to men and women by simply changing the packaging, and many other ways they do it. The last thing is something I feel sums up performances, and how silly gender roles actually are, is a drawing of a little boy dressed as Elsa, and a little girl dressed as Spiderman. The writing on the drawing says, “It’s okay for girls to be Spiderman, and it’s okay for boys to be Elsa”. The Instagram account, “activistbitches” posted this image, however, I am not sure if they are the original artist. The image really questions society’s reasoning for specific gender rules.

Part V

I posted artifacts that related to the Intersections chapter, and to start it off I reposted a simple image reading, “Your feminism isn’t feminism unless it’s intersectional”. This was posted by the Instagram account, “idonthatemenchill”. A lot of people who claim to be feminists only care about problems that they face, and do not acknowledge sexism for people of a different race, class, sexual orientation, or ability. The next post comes from the same Instagram user and relates well to the previous post.  It is a screenshot from a tweet from @ThatBoyYouLike, that basically explains how gender fluidity had been widely accepted amongst cultures in the past, and because of colonialism, trans people of color suffer. This chapter talks about how it may be harder for people who aren’t wealthy, white, straight, and able-bodied to express their gender identity. This post provides a potential reason why people of color in countries that dominantly white have a harder time expressing their non-binary gender identity. The next post is a video that explains “white feminism”, or feminism that is not intersectional. It is important that we learn to identify white feminism in order to educate people about intersectionality. The last artifact I have for intersections is an article about intersectionality and stereotypes that harm people. It also discusses how it can be hard for people of minority groups to move past those stereotypes.

Part VII

The last section in my scrapbook is sexualities which talks about hookup and rape culture for not only cisgendered straight people but for those in the LGBTQ+ community. The first thing I posted was a video that questions if hookup culture is real. It provides evidence to disprove that hookup culture is a new thing. The next item in this section is a video interviewing young people from Toronto about hookup culture. They ask about what happens the morning after and how they get people to leave. This video does not say if the students are all straight, but it seems like they are. The next artifact I posted was a video talking about rape culture, which is discussed in the sexualities chapter. The speaker in the video provides a good explanation of rape culture and her own personal experiences. She talks about rape culture and how it impacts men and women, she also provides an example of how it does this. The last artifact I have is a video uploaded by a gay man named, Alex. He talks about hookup culture in the gay community. My previous videos about hookup culture did not seem to be gay-inclusive. From watching this video I figured that this is because straight hookup culture is different from gay hookup culture. The book talks about hookup culture not including people with sexualities other than straight. The books reasoning was that the LGBTQ+ community is not accepted in the straight party scene. This video confirms that gay people experience a different hookup culture, inclusive of LGBTQ+ community. Alex also talks about how hookup culture not being a new thing, like the first video from this section.

To conclude, this gender studies class has opened my eyes and introduced me to new topics about gender I had never been exposed to. I learned a lot from researching these artifacts, and I hope they provide people with the information they need to start to understand the complexity of gender. We live in an era where this information is at our fingertips, it is easy for us to share and educate others with our technology. Things like Gender rules greatly impact the way kids are raised. Future generations will be able to take this into consideration when raising their children. This class has taught me a lot about the binary and just how ridiculous it is. It’s crazy to think that for so long society has made us believe we can only be one thing or the other. That is not the case for many things, especially gender.