Babies and Gender roles

Babies and Gender roles.jpg

  • Leave a comment ?

    14 Responses to Babies and Gender roles

    1. I take solace on the thought that every single one of those people will die a horrible, painful death in the near future. Hopefully from cancer or flesh-eating bacteria, or something like that.

      Reply

    2. Nature decided what gender you are, and you cannot change that, it is built into the basic building blocks of life. How you choose to express yourself is your business and I couldn’t care less how you do it but don’t fool yourself into thinking you have overcome nature.

      Reply

      • Well there is the 1-3% of the population that express a gender confusion – this ranges from actively seeking out gender manipulation surgery to just liking the other sex’s underpants. And this doesn’t come from people putting their son in ballet, or anything like that. It’s a “Nature decides” kind of thing too.

        That being said, I don’t think it’s unnecessarily gender biased to presume that a baby will probably fall into the 95th percentile. So I agree with what you’re saying without agreeing with how you say it.

        Reply

      • Perhaps someone should explain what the words “gender” and “sex” mean to you.

        Reply

        • Ok, I’ll give it a try…

          “Sex” is the term used to sum up physical and biological features that identify a living creature as male, female, hermaphrodite or asexual.

          “Gender” is the term used to sum the sociological attributes that are used by humans to identify another human being as male, female, etc. in a social context.

          How’s that?

          Reply

        • I am guessing you do not want to be that somebody.

          It seems you are correct I used gender and sex interchangeably, I wonder how often that happens, I wonder if finding offence to that is justified.

          But regardless like I said before I have no problems with the way anyone feels the need to express their identity.

          Reply

    3. These people have deluded themselves and expect everyone else to embrace their delusion. The child has XY chromosomes and male genitals, that makes it a boy. Believing it to be anything else is insane.

      Reply

      • As soon as we all get people on board with “gays are ok” we can start to work on acceptance of transgenderism. I’m an open minded guy, and even I can’t quite wrap my head around trans issues. I get “Man, I’d love to stick my dong in that dude”, but I don’t get “Man…wish I didn’t have this dong.”

        That being said, insensitivity is ugly, no matter where you place it. So I console myself that comments like “this semantic debate only has one side” will eventually go away.

        Also, “boy” is a word, not an actual thing. It’s a code. We call “x” a boy, but it isn’t a “boy”. A boy does not exist but in our nomenclature. Neither does “baby”, “child”, “adolescent” or “adult”, for that matter. Not concretely. We have ideas of these things, but they are not set in stone. Yes, nature gives you a weiner. Nature also gives people the confusion about wanting it or not. Just at a much much lower rate (last I checked, getting a weiner runs at around 50%… I’ll check some notes and get back to you.)

        Reply

        • I don’t think this has anything to do with accepting transgenderism. What I see in the pic above is a bunch of people overreacting and/or taking progressive concepts too far until they become absurd.

          What would make them happy? “Hey, a baby was born… it could be male or female, we’ll let you know when it makes up its mind. Also, we won’t name it, and we’ll just call it ‘the baby” until it chooses its own name.”

          Reply

          • Don’t get me wrong. I’m not talking about the pic. And I think those people are taking it too far too.

            BUT

            The Poster above said “Believing it to be anything else is insane”. That kind of black and white assessment of anything is worded too strongly for my taste. I think some of those people in the twitter tornado up there are getting their panties in a bunch a little early on this one. But I think that attributing them with a mental illness because they are sensitive to trans issues is wrong.

            Reply

            • Fair enough, point conceded. However…

              On one hand, the poster you responded to may or may not have a point, depending on what they actually meant. If they meant just this example, then they’re right, as a newborn infant has male/female/etc. attributes and has not yet gone through the psychological and physical changes that come with age which may cause it to embrace its gender/sex or reject it. Ergo, in this case, it’s a boy in what we may call its “default setting.” If it chooses to become female or anything else when it grows up, then it’s an entirely different matter.

              On the other hand, if the OP meant that one’s gender/sex is set in stone, and that questioning that is “insane” then you are fully justified in objecting to the statement in question.

              Reply

    4. You know, it botheres me when people use binary to mean “two-valued”, “lacking in subtlety”, “lacking in more than one choice”,etc. on the internet.

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Movie posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Visual Tricks Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas