> But, yet, we persist in seeing geeky females and butches as "women"--- in
> the same category with Barbie, Cindy Crawford, and Ricki Lake. There's
> such a range of female genders, but we have so few words. That really
> should change. We persist in using this XOR model of woman/man, but I'm
> sure there's a better way.
Why associate all these personal characteristics with gender at all? I see
gender as a fairly small part of who I am. I think of my technical /musical
/non-frilly /aggressive characteristics as independent of gender, not as
parts of a complicated new gender definition.
I think that the more we separate ideas about aptitudes and interests from
ideas about gender, the better. There's no reason why geeky females and
butches can't share a gender with Barbie, Cindy Crawford, and Ricki Lake.
It's only a small part of who we are - just one shared characteristic among
many. I guess my conception of "gender" doesn't go too far beyond "sex."
Deidre Calarco
Robert Darvas Associates
(734) 761-8713 (ext. 16)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
