Breaking Gender
- Thread starter slant
- Start date
i agree with you, but although i realise my preferences are somewhat arbitrary, i'm fairly comfortable with them. there are genuine physical realities to negotiate.
I am not sure how one really goes about it. I have never used gender to define people, I believe partly due to believing that gender is a societal construct that is box to manipulate people. I think being self aware may help though- questioning your own conclusions. Asking yourself, " Why would I think that about person X? What bias in my own paradigms may have led to me to conclusion Y?" and many other questions like that. I am guessing something along the lines of restructuring one's own thought patterns surrounding people by trying one's best to examine the big picture and examine people holistically. After a while ingraining the concept that all people are individuals are as such as a logical principle in Ti it may also help. Ti would filter and adjust one's thoughts as such I presume; as ensuring that information that is produced from data is coherent with logical principles is one of Ti's functions.
With regards to you being panromantic, there is a question regarding if affectional orientation is pliable.
With regards to you being panromantic, there is a question regarding if affectional orientation is pliable.
The only times I've really been able to consider someone's personality without it being affected by gender is when I first meet them on the internet. Inevitably I find out about their gender and I can't help but subconsciously factor that in with every discussion and thought process concerning them from that point on. I really don't consider it being biased, though I hold true to acting a gentleman in the presence of a lady I still consider a woman my equal. I reckon it is more of a reference marker that helps me further distinguish individuals I meet.
I never felt confusion when it came to deciding on which sex I found attractive, the cave man inside my head grunts and howls whenever a beautiful woman walks by...I temper that into a kind smile and a nod. I guess there was a time when all I considered was the intellectual capabilities of a potential mate, then later decided that for myself it takes a balance of attractiveness, intelligence, sense of humor, and emotional warmth for a woman to feel like a suitable match.
I hope yer able to get all this sorted out. I reckon I've probably not been much help but maybe something in that drivel might be helpful. Good luck!
I never felt confusion when it came to deciding on which sex I found attractive, the cave man inside my head grunts and howls whenever a beautiful woman walks by...I temper that into a kind smile and a nod. I guess there was a time when all I considered was the intellectual capabilities of a potential mate, then later decided that for myself it takes a balance of attractiveness, intelligence, sense of humor, and emotional warmth for a woman to feel like a suitable match.
I hope yer able to get all this sorted out. I reckon I've probably not been much help but maybe something in that drivel might be helpful. Good luck!
I don't have very many expectations about people to begin with.
For the most part, I naturally allow people to unfold before me.
I'm more interested in what actually is than what should be.
I prefer to let people define themselves when I interact with them.
It's more interesting that way I think.
For the most part, I naturally allow people to unfold before me.
I'm more interested in what actually is than what should be.
I prefer to let people define themselves when I interact with them.
It's more interesting that way I think.
But, I don't apply personality traits or anything like that based on sex; it's not a stereotype or about gender stereotypes at all. I acknowledge that a person is not a certain way because of their sex, but what I am saying is that at certain times I have liked someone simply because of their gender, but not for sexual reasons, but for romantic reasons. Mainly what I am shattering from is the stigma that a person is only valuable romantically/sexually due to their gender; I'd like to focus more on intellectual properties than physical attributes because an individual is not responsible for their body parts that they were born with, it does not define them. There are no personality traits attached to a penis or vagina; this is no struggle for me to accept.
The distinction is merely the fact that I attribute a penis and a vagina to a person as a defining factor of who they are; I do not do this for things like race, and age, generally speaking. I may make assumptions based on these things but I do not assume on any measure that because they have a vagina they have a certain value or appeal to me or because they are a male they have a certain value or appeal to me. It's seriously not constructive for me to think in these ways.
Although, I still feel the contributions made to this thread are in some way gender-shattering.
The distinction is merely the fact that I attribute a penis and a vagina to a person as a defining factor of who they are; I do not do this for things like race, and age, generally speaking. I may make assumptions based on these things but I do not assume on any measure that because they have a vagina they have a certain value or appeal to me or because they are a male they have a certain value or appeal to me. It's seriously not constructive for me to think in these ways.
Although, I still feel the contributions made to this thread are in some way gender-shattering.
i feel that my physical preference which is not entirely empty of meaning (both cultural and "actual") acts as a sort of precondition for my assessment of romantic possibilities. and i'm fairly comfortable with that. although, i have thought about women romantically at moments in the past. so if i didn't have those preferences, then i agree with you that it's arbitrary.
I'm kind of confused.
Because I have no idea what this statement means.
Actually. I don't get it. Can you explain? (As if to a ten year old? Sometimes I'm kind of daft.)
Because I have no idea what this statement means.
How do you do that without stereotyping personality traits and gender roles?
Last edited:
Well. When I am in a stage or point in my life where I am sole interested in females ( for some odd reason ? ) I only look at females in a romantic context and the questions surface my mind 'what is she like? I wonder what she thinks, what her ideas are', and it is pretty much for every female that I see except people who are like fifty years older than me who I sort of just...I don't know, disqualify?
But it's nothing gender based at all...it's just merely the fact that I'll only look at one gender for an extent of time and it MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO BLOODY SENSE why it would be that way but it occurs so often that I don't understand. And it is never bother genders, it switches. Either I focus on males or females. I can't seem to integrate the fact that it doesn't matter if the individual is male or female as I am just looking for intellectual qualities into my brain. It seems, I have to target one gender and it's very frustrating to me.
I would like to eliminate this, I believe I would feel a lot freer.
Ok I think I got it.
You'd rather not go through phases where you're interested in either one or the other? Well, it can seem like it makes no sense.. but there is sense in it. I'm sure if you really think about it and remain aware of it you'll come to some understanding of what is going on.
I'm pretty confident you can figure out the motivation for your interests.
What's going on in your life when your interests change? Anything in common that you can think of?
You'd rather not go through phases where you're interested in either one or the other? Well, it can seem like it makes no sense.. but there is sense in it. I'm sure if you really think about it and remain aware of it you'll come to some understanding of what is going on.
I'm pretty confident you can figure out the motivation for your interests.
What's going on in your life when your interests change? Anything in common that you can think of?
Hmm. I don't know. It just seems like a day to day thing. Sometimes I'll get stuck on one for a week or months but generally it's a day to day thing either I'll be looking at men only, women only, or apathetic to both.
The point is, how would one eliminate that? Because...like, gender isn't even relevant to intellectual ideas and whatnot and...in fact just looking at someone doesn't tell you anything.
Last edited:
I am not sure I understand :/
So what your saying is you'll see a man or woman walking down the street and desire to form a romantic pairing with them simply because of their gender? Not because of anything else like how they look or the way they carry themselves?
What kind of romantic reasons do you mean?
This is something that comes up often in professional work environments. As an INFJ, the way I like to be a team leader is by focusing on the strengths and weaknesses of team members, providing avenues for them to grow, and also finding ways to address their shortcomings.
Sometimes, gender identification can get in the way. I wish I could claim that I was able to entirely objectify my Fe goals for my colleagues, but sometimes this can become 'thwarted' by baser instincts.
What I try to do in this situation is emphasis focusing on the wants of the individual that is distracting me. So for example, if I find that I am thinking in a gender specific way about an individual, I will instead try to think about how their recent actions relate to the kind of environment they want to work in, their career goals as expressed through their work, etc.
By focusing on seeing things from their perspective, placing oneself in their viewpoint, one can diminish the role that perceived gender has on the model, because first-person perspective, in my world, is far more gender neutral than second-person and third-person perspective. Putting yourself into the 'first-person' of others may lessen the impact of gender upon your perception of other.
I realize that I have answered your question from the perspective of someone clouded by typical sexuality, as opposed to your more interesting situation of having a tenuous relationship with the issue. None-the-less, I think the concept of perspective might work for the issue from both directions. In one of your earlier posts, it sounds like you are doing this. But perhaps if you start with the questions of 'what is x thinking', and arrive at the question prior to identifying gender, you will begin to neutralize the bias.
It is also possible, though, that your fluctuating emphasis on one sex or another is helping your subconscious deal with concepts of identity through traditional fantasy. It may need to deal with identify at that level even if your intellectual side has advanced far beyond. In that case, maybe a better answer would be to let it indulge itself and then, on top of that, engage your intellectual element to probe deeper into the fantasy beyond the fascination with a gender role. In that strategy, you would ACCEPT the fixation and then override it with more interesting questions. Almost like the way biologists tag animals and then follow them, you would tag your fantasies and then follow them to ask meta questions of them.
Sometimes, gender identification can get in the way. I wish I could claim that I was able to entirely objectify my Fe goals for my colleagues, but sometimes this can become 'thwarted' by baser instincts.
What I try to do in this situation is emphasis focusing on the wants of the individual that is distracting me. So for example, if I find that I am thinking in a gender specific way about an individual, I will instead try to think about how their recent actions relate to the kind of environment they want to work in, their career goals as expressed through their work, etc.
By focusing on seeing things from their perspective, placing oneself in their viewpoint, one can diminish the role that perceived gender has on the model, because first-person perspective, in my world, is far more gender neutral than second-person and third-person perspective. Putting yourself into the 'first-person' of others may lessen the impact of gender upon your perception of other.
I realize that I have answered your question from the perspective of someone clouded by typical sexuality, as opposed to your more interesting situation of having a tenuous relationship with the issue. None-the-less, I think the concept of perspective might work for the issue from both directions. In one of your earlier posts, it sounds like you are doing this. But perhaps if you start with the questions of 'what is x thinking', and arrive at the question prior to identifying gender, you will begin to neutralize the bias.
It is also possible, though, that your fluctuating emphasis on one sex or another is helping your subconscious deal with concepts of identity through traditional fantasy. It may need to deal with identify at that level even if your intellectual side has advanced far beyond. In that case, maybe a better answer would be to let it indulge itself and then, on top of that, engage your intellectual element to probe deeper into the fantasy beyond the fascination with a gender role. In that strategy, you would ACCEPT the fixation and then override it with more interesting questions. Almost like the way biologists tag animals and then follow them, you would tag your fantasies and then follow them to ask meta questions of them.
Last edited: