[lbo-talk] Re: boycotting the unorganized

[snit snat]

At 02:16 PM 1/25/2005, ravi wrote:
>amadeus amadeus wrote:
> > Ravi writes:
> >
> > "so is being a woman, being queer, or being an animal,
> > etc... what's the
> > difference?"
> > ------
> > Amadeus, response:
> > Gender, sexuality, race, etc. are subjective
> > culturally- and/or socially-determined markers which
> > the capitalist class can use to divide workers, not to
> > mention clean up on wage differntials. These are
> > abstract concepts created by humans. The concept of
> > race, for example, served as a justification for the
> > enslavement of Africans. Class, while it can be
> > narrowly defined as an abstract cultural identity, can
> > also be determined objectively on the basis of
> > ownership of the means of production.
> >
>
>are you saying gender cannot be objectively determined? if so, i have no
>idea how to respond to such a claim.

To put it too simplistically, sex refers to biological charateristics we 
call male/female and gender refers to man/woman | masculinity/femininity 
(how we enact being male/female/both/other.

I'm sure that someone could point you at the infamous weeks long debate on 
the issue of whether and how much sex and gender are 'socially 
constituted'. A very upset minority did not like the idea that gender may 
be as 'socially constrcuted' as race. which is to say, we recognize that 
whatever attitudes/behaviors/etc we attach to skin color/eye shape/etc is 
socially constituted, but quite a few people have a hard time with the idea 
that gender might be very similar. (queue Justin :).

k
>

"We live under the Confederacy.
We're a podunk bunch of swaggering
pious hicks."

                --Bruce Sterling