Originally Posted by MaterPrimaePuellae
IMO, biological abnormalities do not justify reevaluating gender roles.
The thing is there isn't just one biological abnormality that blurs the lines between the "two sexes", there's a whole ton. It turns out, the closer we look at gender and sex, that people run the gamut. XX people's physiology and hormones run across a certain spectrum, same with XY. There are places where those spectrums meet, including in those individuals who cannot be clearly defined as one of two sexes. Sure, not all of those can reproduce--but they are all
people and no one call will away their existence. If some of those people are XY and can still breastfeed and accept whatever risk to their bodies, what's it to you?Obviously
this is not the reality most people see or live. They see the vast majority of humanity fitting into two little neat boxes. Cool, if it works for you, go for it, color your world pink and blue--without any purple--but don't impose such a stilted worldview on me, because I live in that purple space between those two boxes. So, for me
the existence of what you call "biological abnormalities" are evidence of how wonderfully diverse and beautiful we humans are. But, if you look around and expect to only see pink and blue, you'll convince yourself that every other color really does fit in your neat little boxes.
I'm not jumping up and down and cheerleading for immediate male BFing, just really interested in the level of emotional response to changing gender roles around child rearing. Maybe it's so fascinating because there are so many people who can't seem to interact with me like a normal human being when I wear a suit and tie with my butch dyke short hair or don't think I should be raising kids. Seems pretty similar to me--immediately reject or punish any suggestion of breaking out of the nice little boxes. Maybe those boxes are just too comfortable?
When it comes to BFing there are a lot of really good questions folks have raised that should be answered if anyone is seriously considering this (and gay men who adopt infants, are, btw: http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/...families/77524
and as referenced by NARTH, who are obviously against it, http://www.narth.com/docs/brfeed.html
). It seems there are three important questions to assess in terms of any real world use (1) is if there's any risk (hormone change, cancer) to a man using the Lact-Aid type thing with donor milk or formula? (2) if men do start lactating, what is the milk composition like? (3) Questions 1 and 2 for MTF women.
If this post is a little terse and snippy, it's just that I really react strongly to dismissing the real lives of people outside the nice two sex/gender boxes by just calling them "biological abnormalities" and refusing to take seriously the questions raised by their living as if we can sweep everyone who doesn't fit those boxes under the table and make us stay there. I refuse to stay under the table!!