How do YOU define masculinity and/or femininity?

[Mr. Mopery]

Originally posted by Gangrell: Can you be more specific on what you're asking?

Actually, no. I'd rather leave it open to interpretation.

[Legolas]

Originally posted by Reeka: I have to agree with Attalus. Male and Female are genetically determined but masculinity and femeninity is a societal convention and perception. Now saying that, I do believe that hormones contributed to some traits in males and females. I believe that testoterone makes males "tends" to be more aggressive; estrogen "tends" to make females more nuturinb. But that is just a tendency, not engraved in stone and we all know vest exceptions to this.

Hormones are not just something teenagers go through. Everyone has them, all the time. If you feel happy, or depressed, or hungry, that's all because there's some kind of substance in your blood which decided to interact with your brain.
But what you sense and think does of course have an effect on how much of which hormones are released into the bloodstream, and all they do is encourage or discourage cells to do certain things (like divide, produce a different hormone, selfdestruct or produce more enzymes). Most of the effects don't affect the brain, but work on other organs instead. The ones that do influence your thinking, influence your thinking. They don't usually override everything else in there.

Originally posted by Zero Alpha: just because a woman learns to box would make her 'mascuine' even thoough in reality she may still be the most efeminate woman you ever met.

It's not the boxing, it's the aquiring of muscle mass under the influence of anabolic-androgenic steroids (like for example... uhm, testosterone) that causes physical changes which we usually associate with a masculing appearance. These steroids don't always enter the bloodstream through needles (doping) but many can and will be produced naturally as well.
That people would think her masculine based on what she does rather than what she looks like comes from our knowledge on what most boxing women look like in our experience. Culture, or what the society thinks of as proper behaviour for a man/woman, play a part in the forming of an opinion as well.

[WillowIX]

Originally posted by Attalus: Masculinity: possessing an XY genotype Feminity: possessing an XX genotype All else is cultural. Well, except an excessive interest in shoes.

Yepp this is my thougts as well not counting the shoes that is! [img]tongue.gif[/img] Had you said clothes I would haev agreed to all.

[Thoran]

IMO masculine and feminine are standards of behavior that allow us to categorize people (something the human brain is quite good at and REALLY likes to do... not always to it's benefit).

They are also highly subjective and gender sensitive... the definition of "masculine" for a male is somewhat different from "masculine" for a female.

My subjective opinion of masculine:
- independant
- creative
- logical
- strong
- physical
- internally focused
- morally absolute
and many more...

feminine:
- dependant (not in a negative way... but more along the lines of a person that creates webs of relationships as opposed to "going it alone")
- nurturing
- emotional
- collective
- externally focused
- morally relative
and many more...

Masculinity = being a man.
Femininity = being a woman.

Used to be, that this was the only definition that was needed [img]smile.gif[/img]
Life is sooo complicated now, and Men have let themselves become so feminized that it is no wonder so many of them have no idea what being a man is.
I think this blurring of gender roles has caused more problems than it has solved. Record numbers of Psychiatrists, Psychologists, Psychoanalysts asnd new age feel good programs seem to indicate a real and growing problem.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by MagiK: Men have let themselves become so feminized that it is no wonder so many of them have no idea what being a man is. I think this blurring of gender roles has caused more problems than it has solved.

Preach it, brother. I was pondering this while doing groceries late last night, looking for such idiosyncratic treasures as diced pimientos that my wife had put on the grocery list.

I think that both the "stay at home caregiver" and the "breadwinner" roles play an important part with kids. My problem with the feminist movement is that rather than empower women for what attributes that are traditionally associated with "feminine," the movement has instead encouraged women to become men, and told them they are not a success unless they do in fact assume what were traditionally male roles. This has left a dearth in society, a void, of the "stay at home caregiver" role -- which these days is relegated to a day care service.

Oh, and sex. Feminism has really sexed-up women, and I guess the one female attribute it has made great use of is the ever-increasing showing of skin (low rise pants + cut off top + thong string peeking out is all too common these days) as a way to turn men into drivelling idiots. As if we couldn't do just fine at being drivelling idiots without all the help.

I'm not saying women should not work or should not be empowered. I am saying that there is something incredibly worthwhile about the "female" qualities and we should dislike seeing them disappear from society. Lucy and Wilma Flintstone may not have been the breadwinners in their families, but they were powerful figures nonetheless.

[Barry the Sprout]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: I think that both the "stay at home caregiver" and the "breadwinner" roles play an important part with kids. My problem with the feminist movement is that rather than empower women for what attributes that are traditionally associated with "feminine," the movement has instead encouraged women to become men, and told them they are not a success unless they do in fact assume what were traditionally male roles. This has left a dearth in society, a void, of the "stay at home caregiver" role -- which these days is relegated to a day care service.

Had to take issue with this Timber - I don't think this was ever the goal of "feminists" as a whole. It may have been the goal of a some of them, but pretty much any book I've read about feminism has decried exactly this phenomenon you describe - if you simply encourage women to become men, as opposed to encouraging them to become liberated, then they end up simply sharing the problems men have always had. And of course adding a whole new level of psychological baggage as well. The thing is not to make femininity the same as masculinity, but instead to stop the artificial elements of femininity from dominating women, and vice versa for masculinity.

Well, thats my take on it anyway.

[Thoran]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: I think that both the "stay at home caregiver" and the "breadwinner" roles play an important part with kids. My problem with the feminist movement is that rather than empower women for what attributes that are traditionally associated with "feminine," the movement has instead encouraged women to become men, and told them they are not a success unless they do in fact assume what were traditionally male roles. This has left a dearth in society, a void, of the "stay at home caregiver" role -- which these days is relegated to a day care service. Oh, and sex. Feminism has really sexed-up women, and I guess the one female attribute it has made great use of is the ever-increasing showing of skin (low rise pants + cut off top + thong string peeking out is all too common these days) as a way to turn men into drivelling idiots. As if we couldn't do just fine at being drivelling idiots without all the help. I'm not saying women should not work or should not be empowered. I am saying that there is something incredibly worthwhile about the "female" qualities and we should dislike seeing them disappear from society. Lucy and Wilma Flintstone may not have been the breadwinners in their families, but they were powerful figures nonetheless.

Modern feminism relies on the idea of "victomhood", believing that the Wilma and Betty were being "oppressed by the patriarchy". The radicals believe that women won't be free until they've destroyed "male dominated" society.

Here's an interesting discussion that was broadcast on KRLA 870 am in LA recently:

http://www.glennsacks.com/audio/hs_7_6_03_mp3.mp3

it's a discussion between Glenn Sax and Prof. Daphne Patai on Academic Feminism (she used to teach Womens Studies, a fairly draconian feminist/lesbian indoctrination program in many schools)... it discusses a number of the issues you touched on (like the idea that women have no power).

I've read recently that the occurances of stay at home parents has slightly increased after decades of decreases. While the vast majority are still women, men have been gaining ground as the stigma of the stay at home dad has been attacked. Interestingly it's most often WOMEN who attack men who don't work... there's a number of interesting articles about "the lace cieling" (or maybe it was "the lace curtain"... can't remember) and the methods employed by women to keep men out of traditionally female roles, even as they push farther into male ones.

IMO more dedicated moms and dads at home is very good news for our children, now if we can just get our schools moving in the right direction.

[ 07-08-2003, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: Thoran ]

[Xen]

I really do not know what to think!

[WillowIX]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Preach it, brother. I was pondering this while doing groceries late last night, looking for such idiosyncratic treasures as diced pimientos that my wife had put on the grocery list. I think that both the "stay at home caregiver" and the "breadwinner" roles play an important part with kids. My problem with the feminist movement is that rather than empower women for what attributes that are traditionally associated with "feminine," the movement has instead encouraged women to become men, and told them they are not a success unless they do in fact assume what were traditionally male roles. This has left a dearth in society, a void, of the "stay at home caregiver" role -- which these days is relegated to a day care service.

So you are saying that feminists should fight for the right to stay at home? But I'll agree to the "stay at home caregiver" when you scratch feminists from the same paragraph. A child (may) benefit from having his/her mother around while growing up (I wouldn't give up my rights for maternal leave!). BUT a child benefits an equal amount from having his/her father around. I wonder why that has never come up in politics. A huge [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] to all IW fathers who stayed at home from work after their children were born! Perhaps it is time to encourage men to become women.