Oh, lord yes, with the gender differentiation going on way before puberty. But I agree with the assertion that enforcement goes into high gear, and also that one's own consciousness of it increases at puberty. My mother bought me a Batman cape when I was about 7, and didn't bat an eye at my jumping out of trees shouting "Batman!" at random passers-by. The passers-by had some objections, tho'! :-) Cut to 5 years later, and the bitter bitter fights I had with my mother about wearing dresses/bras/sitting properly etc etc. I know that's just me, but I also know I wasn't the only one.
Children these days seem to be getting that intensive kind of conditioning earlier and earlier, but that may well have to do with increased sexualisation in the media.
As for the biological argument, I don't think Lois was prioritising that over social conditioning - just that it's an area which could do with some additional consideration. Of course, I can't be sure without asking, but she's definitely not of the biology = destiny school (except with regard to actual reproduction). Since her SF has the fairly significant plot device of "uterine replicators" for gestating babies, she's got some interesting notions along reproductive lines as well.
But, yeah, I can see how that statement could look suss - I've forgotten what dodgy theory of animal social organisation = human sociology theory (especially wrt polyamory) we're up to now. There are the wolves, or dogs. Chimps, or gorillas. Or bonobos. Oh yeah, the last one was deer (http://community.livejournal.com/dot_poly_snark/371720.html). Heh.
As for Judith Butler, alas, I haven't tried to read her when I have had sufficient beer. She's the "performativity as gender" chickie? (ah, just looked, yes). I wish someone would do a translation of her, because I find most of the theorists who derive some of their stuff from French academe write as if they're writing academic French. I haven't had the 4 years+ tertiary education to read her without rolling my eyes at her language, unfortunately (so too with Foucault, Derrida, et al, alas).
I think I know the broad outline of her ideas, and the influence she's had on gender (and queer) theory. I also think I agree with a lot of her conclusions (that we construct gender as a response to expectations, or "regulative discourse", I should say), but not all of them. I should probably try making my way though Undoing Gender, which is supposedly more digestible. Perhaps that's the translation I've been after. :-)
Thank you for the food-for-thought and I-should-read-more-of-this-stuff prodding! And yes, the idea of "deletion" with that connotation of reduction particularly appealed to me. So to with those ideas about maturity.
Speaking of maturity, one of my thoughts is that a community shows its maturity by an increased tolerance of deviance (as one also does in a personal sense by tolerating it in oneself). Know of any academic bods who addressed that one? I know Foucault went on about deviance and societal responses to it, but did he also discuss the conditions for greater acceptance?
no subject
Children these days seem to be getting that intensive kind of conditioning earlier and earlier, but that may well have to do with increased sexualisation in the media.
As for the biological argument, I don't think Lois was prioritising that over social conditioning - just that it's an area which could do with some additional consideration. Of course, I can't be sure without asking, but she's definitely not of the biology = destiny school (except with regard to actual reproduction). Since her SF has the fairly significant plot device of "uterine replicators" for gestating babies, she's got some interesting notions along reproductive lines as well.
But, yeah, I can see how that statement could look suss - I've forgotten what dodgy theory of animal social organisation = human sociology theory (especially wrt polyamory) we're up to now. There are the wolves, or dogs. Chimps, or gorillas. Or bonobos. Oh yeah, the last one was deer (http://community.livejournal.com/dot_poly_snark/371720.html). Heh.
As for Judith Butler, alas, I haven't tried to read her when I have had sufficient beer. She's the "performativity as gender" chickie? (ah, just looked, yes). I wish someone would do a translation of her, because I find most of the theorists who derive some of their stuff from French academe write as if they're writing academic French. I haven't had the 4 years+ tertiary education to read her without rolling my eyes at her language, unfortunately (so too with Foucault, Derrida, et al, alas).
I think I know the broad outline of her ideas, and the influence she's had on gender (and queer) theory. I also think I agree with a lot of her conclusions (that we construct gender as a response to expectations, or "regulative discourse", I should say), but not all of them. I should probably try making my way though Undoing Gender, which is supposedly more digestible. Perhaps that's the translation I've been after. :-)
Thank you for the food-for-thought and I-should-read-more-of-this-stuff prodding! And yes, the idea of "deletion" with that connotation of reduction particularly appealed to me. So to with those ideas about maturity.
Speaking of maturity, one of my thoughts is that a community shows its maturity by an increased tolerance of deviance (as one also does in a personal sense by tolerating it in oneself). Know of any academic bods who addressed that one? I know Foucault went on about deviance and societal responses to it, but did he also discuss the conditions for greater acceptance?