55
Almost 7% of people in UK changed sexual identity in six years, study suggests
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2023
55 points (100.0% liked)
World News
22081 readers
208 users here now
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
For US News, see the US News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I have an anthropological theory based on Engels' work.
Gender roles as we know them today were probably an innovation that emerged from the creation of private property. Sperm donors could have sex with anyone they wanted because there wasn't a way to actually track down "fathers" before DNA testing, but child bearers had to be monogamous in order to ensure the proper transfer of wealth through generations of the family because it was always possible to know who the "mother" was.
Gender, therefore, was actually a class distinction. Sperm donors became "men" and child bearers became "women". That's why hunter-gatherer societies without the concept of private property can have so many different gender expressions, whereas we have a hard man/woman dichotomy. As long as the heritability of property is in question there needs to be a legitimized dictatorial unit that can control it, and because men were more free than women they became the dominant organizers of heritability.
The advent of DNA testing and birth control and abortion changed this dynamic significantly and equalized the male/female power dynamic, so we saw the rise of feminism and challenges to patriarchy. Heritability now wasn't just a question of fatherhood, but parentage. Patriarchy still reigned, but I think it's safe to say there was a significant cultural shift and patriarchy has entered a decline.
The family unit was still intact, though, so the man/woman dichotomy still served a function and gender remained a functional innovation.
What is happening now is the decline of property ownership under late-stage capitalism. In a world where no one owns anything and everything is just being rented, what purpose does heritability serve? I have nothing to pass on to my descendants, it doesn't really matter who my parents are or who my children are or what equipment I have. I'm not a man or a woman, **I'm a labor unit. **
The decline of patriarchy has thus accelerated, but more importantly, the decline of the nuclear family unit has begun as well and the heritability question is becoming irrelevant.
And, without these rigid cultural structures, people are rediscovering who they are on their own.
(this is a rough idea obviously, just something I've been thinking about a lot since I started my transition)
Well, I was basing my idea off of Engles's "The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State". In it he writes about the role private property played in the emergence of modern gender roles (among many other things), and listening to a Red Menace podcast about it the other day caused something to twig in my brain to connect declining private property ownership to the seeming erosion of gender roles.
tbh this is just a half-baked idea I wanted to share lol
Reading that first paragraph I was thinking "oh here we go" but by the end I was like dam that's an interesting way of looking at it.
It does feel like life is more chaotic today than 50 years ago. Many people are not interested in climbing the ladder because there is no guarantee that they'll be able to retire at the end so instead are living with a short term focus. Do whatever you need to do to survive/be happy.
Sometimes I'll work for a few years then go on job seekers benefits for 8 months just to focus on enjoying life. I'd like a family but because I grew up poor I have no interest in starting one unless I can provide a comfortable middle class upbringing. At the moment it seems like I'll be unlikely to get to that position. So instead of my life path being pre defined as be man, get job, buy house, have kids, never stop working and make sure there's food on the table for everyone. It's work only as much as you need to provide for yourself. I don't feel like there is roles that men and women need to fit into we can do whatever we want to do.