Hi all,
REFLECTIONS ON GENDER: WAXING PHILOSOPHICAL
(Sorry for the length, but the conclusion is truly helpful, I believe.)
One of the problems facing transsexuals is the subjectiveness of gender. We yearn for an objective measure of gender, to either justify our position (and validate our torment) or set us straight. With that in mind, let's examine gender from a different perspective. We usually think of gender in the concrete examples of males and females. This time, let's take an abstract look, characterizing gender in complementary pairs. After all, gender is about complementary pairs, just like positive/negative or heads/tails. This is the same attitude which can assign gender to inanimate objects as in some languages.
(In each pair, the male characteristic appears first.)
NOTE: Don't look at these pairings as oversimplified generalizations. It would be easy to find counterexamples to the generalizations BUT observe that those who violate the generalization may be judged as 'unfeminine' or effeminate. So the generalizations are valid. For instance, men are loud and women are softer. A loud man may be judged as obnoxious but won't be called effeminate for it. A loud woman, on the other hand, will be criticized in ways which subtly indicate the behavior is inappropriate for her gender (e.g., "shrill").
Hard/Rough vs. Soft/Smooth
A man's face is rough and his hands may be calloused. That's okay for a man. A woman's skin is smooth/soft, and callouses are not feminine.
Coarse vs. Refined
Men can use coarse language and tell coarse jokes and will never be accused of acting outside their gender. Women, on the other hand, are considered unfeminine or unladylike for such behavior.
(Do you see where this is going? We aren't defining gender by observed real behavior but rather expectations of each sex.)
Brash/Aggressive vs. Demure
Loud vs. Soft
Abrupt/to-the-point vs. Engaging/Roundabout
Reaching over a distance (slingshots, balls, guns, arrows, missles) vs. Holding things close (hugs, dollies)
Function over appearance vs. Appearance over function
Strong/sturdy vs. Weak/Fragile
Strong/functional vs. Beautiful
Associated with Men vs. Associated with Women
Things can inherit gender by virtue of which gender uses them. Similarly, a man will be judged effeminate for being too experienced with women's tools and vice versa.
Big/Coarse vs. Small/Delicate
I was thinking about this one while picking out a satin nightgown. (I love it, by the way.) As feminine as a nightgown is, it doesn't convey femininity if the wearer appears to be growing out of it. To be on the safe side, I picked out a size 3X. It fits my shoulders without that "wearing my wife's nightgown" look.
Angular vs. Round
Dependable/Stable vs. Temperamental
Active outside the home vs. homemaker
Stretcher vs. Protector
Fathers stretch their children to take risks, whereas mothers are protectors. A father is commended for stretching his children whereas a mother may be criticized as not being protective enough in similar situations.
...
That's a long enough list for now. Assuming the list is valid, we can assign gender to inanimate objects. For instance:
- Flowers are soft, fragile, and beautiful, hence feminine.
- Major appliances are strong and sturdy (masculine) but primarily used by women (feminine), so it's hard to classify their gender.
- Computers: small, delicate, and temperamental; hence feminine.
- Cars: Reaching for distance, hard, sturdy, powerful; hence masculine.
- Clouds: Soft, rounded, delicate; hence feminine.
- Rocks: Hard, sturdy, used by boys in slingshots; hence masculine.
(Side note: If you think it's ridiculous to assign gender to inanimate objects, don't complain to me. Take it up with those whose languages REQUIRE gender for inanimate objects.

The idea didn't start here.)
CONCLUSION: If we can assign gender to inanimate objects, THEN WE HAVE DISCOVERED AN OBJECTIVE CHARACTERIZATION OF GENDER! That is, if we can assign gender to flowers and appliances, WE CAN FIGURE OUT OUR OWN GENDER! Don't focus on the specific list because I'm sure there are inaccuracies; rather, consider this overall approach toward gender. By comparing our personal traits with these gendered complementary-pairs, we can see what parts of us are masculine and which are feminine. Taking them all together, we get an overall assessment of our gender.
Terri
P.S. -- I enrolled for medical insurance after being assured of privacy by the agent. In fact, I FAX'd the forms directly to him; thus no one in the office had access to them. So I can get sick now. :-\