Kathryn Aegis writes:
> Sasha, et al:
> (Hope everyone is having a restful holiday)
> My perspective on this: the very concepts of 'feminine' and 'masculine' are
> in themselves cultural constructs based almost entirely on religious
> superstitions. A central set of human characteristics was arbitrarily
So genotype, karyotype and phenotype is irrelevant, and the animal kingdom is entirely androgynous as well, as we all well know. Always thought so. Even if, we're certainly not animals, oh no. Beep. Boys will be girls, girls will be boys, World Without End. Pass the lancet. According to the average person in the street, the latest consensus is also that there is really no difference at all, at least not where it really matters. Suction. Newsflash: Vatican is now seriously meditating about declaring obligate heterosexuality to be a cardinal sin. Gynecologists focusing on prostata jobs. More oxygen. Female pedophilia running rampant. Staples. Women now dominate the U.S. prisoner populations. Staples. Give me another toke of what you've been having, thanks. Ten joules, stand clear.
> divided into one of the two categories, and it is taught as part of most
> religious dogma. But, other than a desire to maintain a certain societal
Such a strange coincidence that the tenor of the dogma is the same all around the globe. Clerics of the world, unite. We know how they are good at providing the unified view. Oops, forgot they're part of the conspiracy. Of course verbally conjuring egality where there is none is in no ways dogmatic, oh no. What was the other word for it, errrr, political correctness? Affirmative action? Whatever you call it, trying to annihilate one bias by an another does not address the root of the problem. So; let's remove the cause, and not the symptoms.
> structure, there exists absolutely no rational basis for continuing this
> division of 'masculine/feminine', or for connecting the characteristsics so
> strongly with dominant and subservient roles. To do so only perpetuates
> irrational and entropic memes, rather than breaking new ground.
So both males and females grow pregnant, and both devote themselves equally to their offspring. Good news, this. Employers will rejoice. No, I don't really need to see the reference.
> I would also ask you to explain why it is so 'necessary' for some people to
> lead and other people to take on subservient roles, when in most advancing
> associations and corporations most persons are considered individual
> contractors, equal members of a team. All indications are that standing
You've been really digging the propaganda, have you? Or did you actually have a first-hand experience of the difference between some poor slob slaving at the outsourced (secondary and tertiary) sweatshop fringe of the project and the bona fide employee with health benefits and full stock option? Sorry, my crystal ball is cracked, lend me yours.
> concepts of heirarchy will not survive the marketplace (Read: _The Fifth
> Discipline_). A strong level of testosterone in any person might make them
> ceo of a corporation, but it might as easily render them 'persona non grata'
> in the changing world of learning corporations and horizontal heirarchies.
Hitherto I never realized that CEO behaviour was totally determined by their testosterone level. How good to know, I'll be asking tough questions at the next job interview. 'Uh, your benefits are excellent, but what I'd actually'd like to know is at what your serum testosterone value does usually average? What do you mean with "confidential"?'.
> The 'meek' may indeed inherit, simply by being able to work effectively with
> others, or by their desire to work independently outside of heirarchy.
True! True! Aggressive people can never make it to the top of the hierarchy! Personal assertiveness is a totally gender-independant trait! Wow! Now excuse me, see ya, gotta run, gotta get some lavender dye and my favourite axe!
> Neither path requires real agressiveness, only skill, determination and
> perserverance--three qualities that are not particularly informed by
> hormonal levels. The market landscape ahead: individual autonomous
> contractors and team-oriented corporations.
The day gender will become nivellated will be the day after the Singularity. Assuming that the problem is solvable prior to that is almost as foolish as assuming that it will persists after the transition.
Strange, and it isn't even spring this time.
> Kathryn Aegis