(no subject)
Jan. 26th, 2005 11:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
theatokosJust returned from another keynote speaker/public lecture. I'm skipping workshops today because I have to work. It's a shame becuase I'd like to attend the healthy families one or the one on AIDS/HIV within a faith context. Anyway.
This morning, again, rocked. Christine Gudorf, a scholar with an unholy amount of degrees (and working on her second PhD), presented a lecture which basically was gender/biological sex 101. We got loads of statistics and crazy information thrown our way. It was rivetting, and I think even the....um, less intellectual among us, were following her every word.
First off, a comment. If God has created a world so full of diversity and change and surprise, a world where there are at least 700 different species of the Eucalyptus tree, a world containing the platypus and moles with no eyes and all those wacky deep sea fishes that look like a Geiger nightmare, then why can't we assume that God would create humanity with similar diversity? How can we even desire a dimorphic population? Man. Woman. Dull dull dull. Should we not celebrate God's creation by loving the diversity and plurality of sex (biological, but also acts)?
That being said, Prof Gudorf proceeded to tell us that there are at least 6 different sex determiners. That's 5 more than just our genitalia. Cool, huh? Her question is if the gov't passes an amendment that marriage is between only a man and a woman, how is that to be defined and enforced? In her speaking with clergy groups she has presented this dilemma: Two couples ask to be married. One couple is XY and XY, but one has had a sex change operation and passes as a woman. The other is XX and XXY and live as a lesbian couple. Which will they marry? Gudorf says that 75% will marry the first couple because they pass and fewer questions will be asked. ! How exactly are we to determine man and woman?
This is not to say, she went on, that there are no ethics to be had in a plurality of sexes. We must still maintain fidelity to the commitments we make, we must still not allow abuse or coercion of anykind to occur. But to deny God's grace and community to those that make us uncomfortable, especially when we don't understand what we're talking about, and may not for a long long time, is just not right. Amen.
Also interesting.... While I am all for the breakdown of gender expectations and all for the authenticity of chosen self-expression.... After hearing some more information about the ways in which women rock I have to say that I am proud to be a woman. Some facts: Scientists say that the Y chromosome used to carry as much as 1000 different genes, it now carrys about 80. Women can have a wealth of different sexual experiences: multiple orgasmisms, erotic stimulation even without touch, orgasmisms even from non-genital stimulation, our sexual pleasure is not directly linked to our reproductive function. Men are almost purely sexually stimulated in the genital region, orgasm and reproduction directly linked, orgasms just not as varied. Also, women and men can recognize many different facial patterns for positive emotions (contentment, pleasure, joy, etc) but women vastly out perform men at reading negative facial patterns (sadness, grief, fear, etc). In fact, the statistics for men accurately reading negative facial expressions is the same as the numbers for random chance. This is only among western men and may have to do with women still being the overwhelming majority for child rearing, where babies can only express themselves with their faces and cries.
Now, if this makes you want to write and say "But men can be great! I'm one! I know great men!" Don't bother. I'm engaged to the greatest man on earth. I also know that plenty of men who stand against discrimination and domination in its many forms. However, men can whine all they want. Poor men. You've had it good for thousands of years. I love the sweet sweet justice of cold hard science to vindicate the centuries of women who were "put in their place" because men were so superior. Someday we will move beyond the circumstances that cause me to feel this way.
This morning, again, rocked. Christine Gudorf, a scholar with an unholy amount of degrees (and working on her second PhD), presented a lecture which basically was gender/biological sex 101. We got loads of statistics and crazy information thrown our way. It was rivetting, and I think even the....um, less intellectual among us, were following her every word.
First off, a comment. If God has created a world so full of diversity and change and surprise, a world where there are at least 700 different species of the Eucalyptus tree, a world containing the platypus and moles with no eyes and all those wacky deep sea fishes that look like a Geiger nightmare, then why can't we assume that God would create humanity with similar diversity? How can we even desire a dimorphic population? Man. Woman. Dull dull dull. Should we not celebrate God's creation by loving the diversity and plurality of sex (biological, but also acts)?
That being said, Prof Gudorf proceeded to tell us that there are at least 6 different sex determiners. That's 5 more than just our genitalia. Cool, huh? Her question is if the gov't passes an amendment that marriage is between only a man and a woman, how is that to be defined and enforced? In her speaking with clergy groups she has presented this dilemma: Two couples ask to be married. One couple is XY and XY, but one has had a sex change operation and passes as a woman. The other is XX and XXY and live as a lesbian couple. Which will they marry? Gudorf says that 75% will marry the first couple because they pass and fewer questions will be asked. ! How exactly are we to determine man and woman?
This is not to say, she went on, that there are no ethics to be had in a plurality of sexes. We must still maintain fidelity to the commitments we make, we must still not allow abuse or coercion of anykind to occur. But to deny God's grace and community to those that make us uncomfortable, especially when we don't understand what we're talking about, and may not for a long long time, is just not right. Amen.
Also interesting.... While I am all for the breakdown of gender expectations and all for the authenticity of chosen self-expression.... After hearing some more information about the ways in which women rock I have to say that I am proud to be a woman. Some facts: Scientists say that the Y chromosome used to carry as much as 1000 different genes, it now carrys about 80. Women can have a wealth of different sexual experiences: multiple orgasmisms, erotic stimulation even without touch, orgasmisms even from non-genital stimulation, our sexual pleasure is not directly linked to our reproductive function. Men are almost purely sexually stimulated in the genital region, orgasm and reproduction directly linked, orgasms just not as varied. Also, women and men can recognize many different facial patterns for positive emotions (contentment, pleasure, joy, etc) but women vastly out perform men at reading negative facial patterns (sadness, grief, fear, etc). In fact, the statistics for men accurately reading negative facial expressions is the same as the numbers for random chance. This is only among western men and may have to do with women still being the overwhelming majority for child rearing, where babies can only express themselves with their faces and cries.
Now, if this makes you want to write and say "But men can be great! I'm one! I know great men!" Don't bother. I'm engaged to the greatest man on earth. I also know that plenty of men who stand against discrimination and domination in its many forms. However, men can whine all they want. Poor men. You've had it good for thousands of years. I love the sweet sweet justice of cold hard science to vindicate the centuries of women who were "put in their place" because men were so superior. Someday we will move beyond the circumstances that cause me to feel this way.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-01-26 10:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-26 10:59 pm (UTC)Are males stale?
Date: 2005-01-27 08:28 pm (UTC)Isn't it awfully nice to have a penis
Isn't it frightfully good to have a dong
It's swell to have a stiffy
It's divine to own a dick
From the tiniest little tadger
To the world's biggest prick
So three cheers for your willy or John Thomas
Hooray for your one-eyed trouser snake
Your piece of pork, your wife's best friend
Your Percy or your cock
You can wrap it up in ribbons
You can slip it in your sock
But don't take it out in public
Or they will put you in the dock
And you won't come back
Re: Are males stale?
Date: 2005-01-27 09:25 pm (UTC)