Gender Identification Requirement! Why?

[sesame]

Quote:
Originally Posted by sesame
All human beings have a different set of behaviors reserved for the opposite sex.

Marlowe:

Do they? Highly debatable, I'm not sure how you can speak for all human beings. Certainly it can be the case when some people adopt different behavior towards the opposite sex that it's despicable. Also, surely it's not possible in some cases of gender self-identity to define an 'opposite'.

Its in the nature of things, my friend. Like poles repel, unlike attract. Haven't you ever heard of magnets?

[marlowe]

Originally Posted by sesame

Its in the nature of things, my friend. Like poles repel, unlike attract. Haven't you ever heard of magnets?

Hmm..... er..... um.....
Magnets? Magnets magnets magnets magnets.... *scratch*.... er... um...
*stumped*..... magnets?..... *more coffee*...... er.... er.... *maybe*.....

Ok.... let's have a go.....

Magnets? Is that really a good metaphor for gender identity and how it affects behavioral interaction? I beg to disagree: *smug*

Magnets only have two poles, if we are talking about gender identity that doesn't scan. And if we're talking of attraction / repulsion what about all the vagaries in the toing and froing, all the points inbetween, it's not always as polarised as 'she loves me, she loves me not, she loves me, she loves me not'. And finally...
(*here's my really big gun haha*)
.... in this context how do you make magnets work for homosexuality, as in two people sharing the same gender identity being attracted to each other?

VoilÃ*. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!
(*triumphant*.... *hmmm*.... *not so sure*.... *he'll find a way of weedling out*....)

Cheers

[sesame]

After setting much tobacco to fire, I have come to this inference.
There are always 2 poles in all cases that involve partners. Even among Homosexual relationships. One is more dominant (Lesbian => Dyke type) another is submissive (more feminine type).
Case solved, Watson! Anything once explained is easy.: Holmes

[GRH]

Originally Posted by sesame

After setting much tobacco to fire, I have come to this inference.
There are always 2 poles in all cases that involve partners. Even among Homosexual relationships. One is more dominant (Lesbian => Dyke type) another is submissive (more feminine type).
Case solved, Watson! Anything once explained is easy.: Holmes

Sesame, I love you, but you are WAY over simplifying all things sexual/intimate. If everything boils down to that dichotomy, why not ask for people to express their preference to be a "top" or "bottom?" "Submissive" or "masculine?" I'm sure that you would find a WIDE range of sexuality that appreciates submissive masculinity, submissive feminimity, dominant masculinity, dominant feminimity, etc. Further, your reckoning doesn't even take into account homosexual men, nor does it account for a relationship where the partners are seemingly matched in terms of switching ends of being "receiving" and "giving" on a more or less equal basis. Sorry if you feel the need to justify your own communications by pigeonholing people into a finite set of categories-- I myself do not follow this trend.

[sesame]

Ok, Ok, GRH,
I am not over-generalizing the nature of relations.
My idea is, whatever the gender of the partners are, in a longterm relationship... they gradually fall back into the two stereotype behaviors of nature: masculine and feminine. And I am not only referring to sexual relations.

submissive masculinity, submissive feminimity, dominant masculinity, dominant feminimity

If partners switch ends frequently... maybe they are experimenting, OR,
Those can be described as getting a kick out of role playing, may be?

[sesame]

GRH

justify your own communications by pigeonholing people

Ouch, baby, that sounds like an attack!
I am only expressing my view; I ain't sticking labels on anyone in particular. Its just an opinion. If you disagree, tell me your point of view. I am always interested.