The NationStates Feminism Thread IV: Fight Like A Girl!

[The Blaatschapen]

Ask any animal, and there doesn't really seem to be any when looked at independently, humans will assign on to them, especially on pets. In English, one uses gendered and grammatically animate pronouns for their pets, but for any other animal, that animal is it, the genderless inanimate. Animals do not have human social identities on their own. It's all made up by humans collectively in many different ways.

Ah I get it. So the word we should use is “sex”, not “gender”.

Correct.

Sheep have sex. For example.

[Auzkhia]

Ask any animal, and there doesn't really seem to be any when looked at independently, humans will assign on to them, especially on pets. In English, one uses gendered and grammatically animate pronouns for their pets, but for any other animal, that animal is it, the genderless inanimate. Animals do not have human social identities on their own. It's all made up by humans collectively in many different ways.

Ah I get it. So the word we should use is “sex”, not “gender”.

That's also a construct by humans to explain certain phenomena. Even so, what one sees traits of biological sex in humans does not appear in the same way in other animals, especially animals that are not mammals. It's complicated, but humans observe things, and use that to explain what, when, where, why, and how.

Even if we to look just in humans, sex is more complex than one thinks.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

Ah I get it. So the word we should use is “sex”, not “gender”.

That's also a construct by humans to explain certain phenomena. Even so, what one can think of biological sex in humans does not really apply in many other animals, especially animals that are not mammals. It's complicated, but humans observe things, and use that to explain what, when, where, why, and how.

Even if we to look just in humans, sex is more complex than one thinks.

I agree that it could be complex especially among humans since transsexuality exists.

[Auzkhia]

That's also a construct by humans to explain certain phenomena. Even so, what one can think of biological sex in humans does not really apply in many other animals, especially animals that are not mammals. It's complicated, but humans observe things, and use that to explain what, when, where, why, and how.

Even if we to look just in humans, sex is more complex than one thinks.

I agree that it could be complex especially among humans since transsexuality exists.

Not just that, because intersex people are a thing as well.

[New haven america]

Ah I get it. So the word we should use is “sex”, not “gender”.

That's also a construct by humans to explain certain phenomena. Even so, what one can think of biological sex in humans does not really apply in many other animals, especially animals that are not mammals. It's complicated, but humans observe things, and use that to explain what, when, where, why, and how.

Even if we to look just in humans, sex is more complex than one thinks.

Here we go again...

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

That's also a construct by humans to explain certain phenomena. Even so, what one can think of biological sex in humans does not really apply in many other animals, especially animals that are not mammals. It's complicated, but humans observe things, and use that to explain what, when, where, why, and how.

Even if we to look just in humans, sex is more complex than one thinks.

Here we go again...

That’s actually not very wrong. Some organisms do not have sexuality at all.

[New haven america]

Here we go again...

That’s actually not very wrong. Some organisms do not have sexuality at all.

I am aware that not every organism has sexuality.

However, almost every organism has a sex, even the hermaphroditic one's that reproduce by budding.

[Giovenith]

Ah I get it. So the word we should use is “sex”, not “gender”.

Correct.

Sheep have sex. For example.

That's a suspiciously specific assertion.

[Capitalist Gulags of Alabama]

I don't think I'm really an "alpha" or a "beta". I work out, do carpentry, weld, and do other so-called "masculine" things as well. Being myself and doing what I enjoy hasn't made me any less of a man, I don't think.


That and crushing other people's hands in the "alpha male handhake".

I don't like putting men in those reductive categories. It's not good.

exactly, this isn't an a/b/o fic if you don't know what that is, consider yourself blessed and keep it this way

[Capitalist Gulags of Alabama]

Ah I get it. So the word we should use is “sex”, not “gender”.

Correct.

Sheep have sex. For example.

odd, i could have sworn i had gender with someone's mother last night, but ok.
you don't understand how long i've been holding on to this joke really it's been a while

[Auzkhia]

That's also a construct by humans to explain certain phenomena. Even so, what one can think of biological sex in humans does not really apply in many other animals, especially animals that are not mammals. It's complicated, but humans observe things, and use that to explain what, when, where, why, and how.

Even if we to look just in humans, sex is more complex than one thinks.

Here we go again...

I meant to say sexual traits manifest and appear differently. Let me rephrase, sex traits such as chromosomes, gonads, genitalia, and other anatomical traits appear differently, that's what I had in mind. This is not backpedaling, I didn't write what I meant, because I normally don't put a lot of effort in something that's downtime for me.

[Capitalist Gulags of Alabama]

Here we go again...

I meant to say sexual traits manifest and appear differently. Let me rephrase, sex traits such as chromosomes, gonads, genitalia, and other anatomical traits appear differently, that's what I had in mind. This is not backpedaling, I didn't write what I meant, because I normally don't put a lot of effort into something that's downtime for me.

*phallic female hyena noises*

[Adamede]

Here we go again...

I meant to say sexual traits manifest and appear differently. Let me rephrase, sex traits such as chromosomes, gonads, genitalia, and other anatomical traits appear differently, that's what I had in mind. This is not backpedaling, I didn't write what I meant, because I normally don't put a lot of effort in something that's downtime for me.

That doesn’t make sex a human construct.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

I meant to say sexual traits manifest and appear differently. Let me rephrase, sex traits such as chromosomes, gonads, genitalia, and other anatomical traits appear differently, that's what I had in mind. This is not backpedaling, I didn't write what I meant, because I normally don't put a lot of effort in something that's downtime for me.

That doesn’t make sex a human construct.

when'd she say it was?

[The Blaatschapen]

Correct.

Sheep have sex. For example.

That's a suspiciously specific assertion.

Are you asking me for sources?

[Adamede]

That doesn’t make sex a human construct.

when'd she say it was?

Ah I get it. So the word we should use is “sex”, not “gender”.

That's also a construct by humans to explain certain phenomena. Even so, what one sees traits of biological sex in humans does not appear in the same way in other animals, especially animals that are not mammals. It's complicated, but humans observe things, and use that to explain what, when, where, why, and how.

Even if we to look just in humans, sex is more complex than one thinks.

Maybe I over emphasized one aspect of their argument, but that’s the gist of what I got from it.

[Crockerland]

Nobody is born a boy or a girl

If this statement were posted somewhere other than NSG, I would assume it was parody.

[Auzkhia]

Nobody is born a boy or a girl

If this statement were posted somewhere other than NSG, I would assume it was parody.

You're not, you're assigned those roles. I was not born a boy, nor a girl, I was born a baby. It's not like what they see or assume at birth holds true, like I clearly am not weighing in at 8lbs and 6 oz.

[Galloism]

I debated which thread to post this. I chose this one.

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/cu ... e-1099020/

Why Are Fewer Women Than Men Planning to Get a Covid-19 Vaccine?

Though women are more likely to wear protective gear like masks, two new studies show they’re more skeptical of a vaccine — and conspiracy theories may be to blame

With multiple promising candidates for COVID-19 vaccines inching closer to becoming a reality, much of the world is looking forward to a near-ish future marked by safe indoor family gatherings, live music, and drunken karaoke nights. But public health researchers are still concerned that some Americans, in their unwillingness to get vaccinated, will possibly endanger the rest of the public — and this fear is justified, according to two studies released this week.

A National Geographic survey of 2,201 Americans found that 69 percent of men said they would take a COVID-19 vaccine, as opposed to 51 percent of women; indeed, nearly one-quarter of women in the survey said they would “definitely not” take a vaccine. Such results squared with the results of a Pew survey released on Thursday, which similarly found that 45 percent of women would “probably not” or “definitely not” take a vaccine, as opposed to 33 percent of men.

The studies didn’t further specify the demographic breakdown of those who would refuse the vaccine, but the Pew research in particular paints a slightly fuller picture. Overall, the study authors found, “personal concern about getting a serious case of COVID-19 is lower among white adults than those in other racial and ethnic groups,” and it is also lower among middle- and upper-class adults than lower-income people.

At first glance, the skew towards women refusing the vaccine is somewhat surprising, given that previous data has shown that women are more likely to engage in many anti-COVID-19 prophylactic measures, such as wearing a mask, than men. But as disinformation reporter Ben Collins pointed out on Twitter, the gender gap aligns with the general explosion of anti-vaccine sentiment on social media, a community that has historically been largely driven by well-off white women.

Due in part to the explosive popularity of the anti-vaccine film Plandemic on Facebook, as well as the general proliferation of the QAnon-driven, anti-child trafficking #SaveTheChildren movement, women are becoming increasingly radicalized in online spaces.

This is particularly true with mothers, conspiracy theory researcher Mike Rothschild, author of the book The World’s Worst Conspiracies, previously told Rolling Stone. “A lot of moms are freaked out about what might happen with their kids, and their kids not doing so great with the pandemic. They’re too worried, too online, and have a lot of time on their hands.” Such conspiracy theories have increasingly started infiltrating larger, also female-driven communities, such as the yoga and wellness spaces on Instagram.

Researchers are also witnessing the blending together of many online-based conspiracy theories, which writer Anna Merlan has referred to as “the conspiracy singularity.” This has brought many women further down the rabbit holes of previously disparate conspiracy theories, such as QAnon and the anti-vaccine movement, that have increasingly started to converge.

“Once these communities converge, there’s increasingly cross-pollination,” Zarine Khazarian, assistant research editor at the Digital Forensic Lab, previously told Rolling Stone. “It’s been thought of as this fringe conspiracy theory that only people super into 8chan and are sort of internet-savvy adhere to, but really it has a much broader appeal and that is sort of the danger of it — it can be something thats very attractive to a suburban soccer mom.”

TL;DR is, women are less likely to want the vaccine and more likely to be opposed to getting it altogether. This is the reverse of the willingness to use PPE. They posit that because women have more free time (men work more hours) based on their sex, they’re more likely to spend that time heading down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole.

This matches anti vaccination trends in general, btw.

I would like to posit the PPE issue is for a similar reason. Men spend more time working, and tend to find the PPE getting in the way, and don’t want to deal with it. The vaccine represents an ease of their work, the PPE is a pain in the ass. Women on the other hand don’t have to wear it near as long (on average) or in as physically difficult of work (again, on average), and therefore don’t find it as intrusive as men do.

Thoughts?

[Giovenith]

Ugh, anti-vaxx conspiracy theorist housewives. My sworn enemies.

They are living proof that "popular with women" is not the same thing as "pro-woman."

[Cordel One]

Ugh, anti-vaxx conspiracy theorist housewives. My sworn enemies.

They are living proof that "popular with women" is not the same thing as "pro-woman."

I don't see how so many people could be against the vaccination after all we've gone through because of this horrible virus.

[Kowani]

Ugh, anti-vaxx conspiracy theorist housewives. My sworn enemies.

They are living proof that "popular with women" is not the same thing as "pro-woman."

I don't see how so many people could be against the vaccination after all we've gone through because of this horrible virus.

Is this rhetorical

[Cordel One]

I don't see how so many people could be against the vaccination after all we've gone through because of this horrible virus.

Is this rhetorical

It is.

[Kowani]

Is this rhetorical

It is.

Okay, cool

[Cordel One]

It is.

Okay, cool

To clarify, it is rhetorical in the sense that it's absolutely ridiculous that anti-vaxxers would do this. I think anti-vaxxers are a threat to public safety.