|
Transage (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jon_Snow |
| What’s next Lira are you going to try to convince us words have gender. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jon_Snow
What’s next Lira are you going to try to convince us words have gender. |
:stongue:
But, you're bang on the money. No one would be daft enough to say there's anything woman-like about chairs and that benches ooze manhood. But, in Portuguese chairs are "feminine" and benches are "masculine" (it wouldn't take too long to find a language in which this is the other way around).
That's because gender is a social construct, grammatical gender being the quintessential example. There's a reason we don't say "grammatical sex", and that's because it would sound wrong and unnecessarily kinky. |
|
|
| luckystrike |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Exactly, and I'm telling you that's exactly what you're missing. It's literally part of my job, and I'm not even criticising your conservative values or anything.
I'm just giving you a heads up before you look so dense not even light will bounce back from you. We don't want that, do we? |
I haven't been missing anything. You're the one who's wrongly accused me of mixing up words.
| quote: | | That's because gender is a social construct, grammatical gender being the quintessential example |
Grammatical gender in most languages is arbitrary, so that's hardly a good example of proving it is a social construct. |
|
|
| Jon_Snow |
Maybe lucky strike has a point. I remember when I took a foreign language I would wonder why is this object masculine or feminine. I’m actually curious what is the point of gender in languages. Socially it can work both ways...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ps...t-matters%3famp |
|
|
| Lira |
Yes, it can vary, and that's precisely what shows grammatical gender is cultural, not intrinsic to the objects described.
| quote: | Originally posted by luckystrike
I haven't been missing anything. You're the one who's wrongly accused me of mixing up words. |
We've shown definitions. We've explained how these definitions come about. We've explained what it is you're missing, yet you insist you're being wrongly accused of doing something since your first comment in this thread.
What would it take for you to understand there's a difference between sex and gender?
| quote: | Originally posted by luckystrike
Grammatical gender in most languages is arbitrary |
Erase the word "grammatical" from your post, and it's precisely what we're trying to tell you. Gender, as a concept, is social. That's part of the very definition of the word since its inception :conf:
You're mixing up the words "gender" and "sex". One refers to social constructs inherent to different cultures, the other has to do with biology. |
|
|
| luckystrike |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Yes, it can vary, and that's precisely what shows grammatical gender is cultural, not intrinsic to the objects described.
|
You cannot compare grammatical genders of inanimate objects to the genders of living beings. You just said that yourself by saying that you can't say there's anything woman-like about chairs and that benches ooze manhood.
| quote: |
We've shown definitions. We've explained how these definitions come about. We've explained what it is you're missing, yet you insist you're being wrongly accused of doing something since your first comment in this thread. |
And as I said, those dictionary definitions have changed and if you look at older dictionaries they won't say anything about social or cultural differences pertaining to gender (for example). And I don't think this is natural evolution of the English language. The far left are always trying to redefine words to fit their agenda. At the moment they're trying to change the definition of the word 'racism' so that only white people in the USA can be racist and minorities cannot, like this utter garbage. Yes, I know that the dictionaries haven't changed this word yet but I wouldn't be surprised if they do the near future.
| quote: | | You're mixing up the words "gender" and "sex". One refers to social constructs inherent to different cultures, the other has to do with biology. |
I'm not mixing them up. I understand there is a difference. However, that does not mean that gender is a social construct. Do you deny that biology plays a major role in determining gender-specific behaviors?
For the record, I am not some backwards ass conservative dinosaur and I hate ing Trump and the rise of the far right in recent times. But I'm sick of all this ridiculous PC nonsense from the left (especially with regards to gender and race) and IMO it is getting out of control. Wikipedia is now entertaining 'gender neutral' pronouns for people who identify as 'agender', and when someone suddenly announce they identify as the opposite sex, they change their pronouns accordingly. Meanwhile, 'gender fluid' and the theory of there being multiple genders are gaining acceptance, and IMO this is just ridiculous. |
|
|
| wotyzoid |
Nice meltdown.
Edit: lol and what the is gender specific behavior? It's ironic that it seems you're sort of talking about indoctrination while you are unknowingly simultaneously the poster child for it. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| Guy is obviously trolling. All these years here and you guys all still freely take the bait provided by these tired hacks. Shame on you! |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by luckystrike
I'm not mixing them up. I understand there is a difference. However, that does not mean that gender is a social construct. Do you deny that biology plays a major role in determining gender-specific behaviors? |
You're just endlessly begging the question about one of the most fundamental social issues: nature versus nurture. Anyone who isn't a myopic ideologue should recognise that the truth of this subject lies somewhere in the middle - there are aspects of "manliness" and "femininity" which are inherent natural qualities, and there are also aspects which have been constructed through centuries of social convention. As such, it doesn't seem unreasonable to tweak the definition of the terminology we have to refer to both factors. That is how language has evolved in the last half-century, so "sex" now refers to the biological, and "gender" to the social.
It's difficult to tell if you're so opposed to this definition because you're -dumb enough to think that there's no social element in determining male/female stereotypes, or if you've just got some indiscriminate red-mist rage about "social justice warriors" and "the PC agenda" that make you attack any perceived "PC appeasement" without any thought of how it might actually be accurate or useful. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Silky Johnson
Guy is obviously trolling. All these years here and you guys all still freely take the bait provided by these tired hacks. Shame on you! |
Depends on what you mean by "trolling". Is he arguing with the deliberate aim of conflagration? Yes. Is he arguing something he doesn't sincerely believe, or deploying logic he knows not to be sound? No. Also, when the "troll" is still whining on weakly whilst getting lynched entertainingly from all angles, who is the real sucker? |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| I don't really see it as a lynching when the guy clearly doesn't give a /remains unaffected by it. Imo completely ignoring him would be better punishment for his type of . |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| If we'd followed that logic, none of TA's epic beatdown threads would have ever come to pass. |
|
|
|
|
