bloodyrosemccoy | I Was Thinking ALL Of The Major Genders

I Want You To Be Happy Day
National Anthem Day
Purim (begins at sundown - Jewish)
What If Cats And Dogs Had Opposable Thumbs Day
Birthday - Alexander Graham Bell
Admission Day (Florida)
Hinamatsuri (Japan)
Holi (Hindu - India)
Liberation Day (Bulgaria)

I think I’ve been misled.

When I signed up for this anthropology class, I was basing my interest on the title: Gender in a Cross-Cultural Perspective. “Say,” I thought to myself. “That could be a good broadening topic, and as someone who has been writing stories that feature cultures with interesting new gender definitions, perhaps I should take a look at some of the existing cultures’ definition of gender! This was touched upon in my introductory class, but it would be good to explore in greater detail.”

I was going upon the theory—which I thought was a pretty good inference, considering that title—that it would discuss the construct of genders, delving into gender identity issues across culture. We could take a look at how our and other societies divide and perceive gender, noting the challenge it presents to those who claim that gender is biologically defined. I wanted to know about all of it: women, men, heterosexuality, homosexuality, transgenderism, transsexualism, androgeny, puberty, intersexuality, the differing definitions cultures applied to gender, anything I could think of. Clearly, I thought, this course cannot cover all of that, but it could be a good start.

Well.

It turns out that I forgot to check my secret college-course-title decoder ring. It could have reminded me of one of the most important codewords of college courses: gender studies = women’s studies.

And now I’m eight weeks into a course on women around the world.

Now, clearly I’m still interested, or I would have transferred out. The women’s studies course has been informative and fun. But it’s not what I was expecting or hoping for in any sense. I wanted something much broader.

I guess this will have to do for now. But you’d think a school like this one would have at least some study of the rest of it. I guess I’ll have to keep looking, and remember to take along my decoder ring when I do.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Yeah, I've noticed that trend as well. It's really annoying, too, because all of these women studies classes seem to have the same thing to say. I was really jealous of my friend at Loyola-Marymount University when she got to take a male studies class called something like "History of Masculinity".

I took an anthropology class on diversity. The instructor refused to acknowledge that somebody, somewhere, may have, at one time, been black. Or even dark skinned.

What was the reasoning?

I don't think she wanted to offend the black people in class.

When she was listing differences between herself and them, she always said "athelete" (which is true, they were.)

oh, grar, that would piss me off, too. Gender does not equal women! I mean, I'd love to take a women's studies class, but if I'm taking a gender studies class, I want a gender studies class!

I started reading a great library book (which sadly I didn't finish and had to return) and I think it was even called something like "Gender does not mean women". If I figure out what it was, I'll let you know.

Yeah, it always made it sound like men are the default, and women are the deviation. "We had to invent the term gender because there were all these non-men around!"

Urgh, I find that annoying, too. Same with "religion" which apparently means "Christianity." Which is why I'm not longer a "Religion" major. :P

Exactly! The subfield becomes synonymous with the field. I have had to explain to people that anthropology =/= archaeology before.

I think I would have been just as frustrated with a class like that for very similar reasons - nothing against women, naturally. n_n I would have preferred something with questions more along the lines of

Are you female or male?
__ yes
__ no

Well put. ;)

I wasn't aware that there were more genders...?

Depends on how you look at it. *whips on anthropology hat*

"sex" = all of the biological/physical characteristics, primary and secondary (genitals, hormones, breasts, musculature and fat)
"gender" = all of the cultural definitions associated with sex, which can vary pretty greatly

So while you've got two basic sex possibilities, you've got a lot of gender possibilities. A lot of gender roles get complicated by age--I think it's a culture in Papua New Guinea that believes that women get more masculine as they age. A lot of cultures look at prepubescent children as having slightly different gender roles than their sexually mature counterparts. Some cultures had women who could become 'women-men' and take wives and do all the men's activities. In our culture we have expectations of gender that depend on sexual orientation or lifestyle--gay men are expected to be effeminate, and some lesbians are butch.. So while it's based on sex, there are a lot of other variables, too.

*takes off anthropology hat*

Also, the phrase "all of the major genders" is from humorist Dave Barry, and I thought it was funny. ;)

It is an amusing phrase, *nod*

I was aware of the some of the cultural things... very interesting! I guess that's where the term 'gender roles' comes from?

I personally have a lot of trouble identifying people by their sexuality. It never really occurred to me as being possible until last year, when I entered college. I hardly consider my sexuality part of myself at all, so it confuses me when other people classify others or themselves on those terms?

I went to a women's college. *Every* class involved women's studies, or tried to. Well, most of them. The awful book that the instructor used for my early Xtianity class was written in an era when "men" meant, of course, men, since apparently there weren't any women in the past, but most of the other classes managed some women's studies in them somehow.

That's what bugs me about a class labelled "women's studies." If you look at a list of subjects that includes math, language, literature, science, humanities, history, and women, then it looks like they are cordoned off from the other subjects. I prefer there be women's points of view into the rest of the curriculum.

It is an interesting subject, but it seems a little bit patronizing, too. It looks like everything else = men's studies. The history of the women's movement is a viable class, but I'm not sure about just a study of women in general.

I Was Thinking ALL Of The Major Genders

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject