Subject: a SUGGESTED GENDER SCALE |
Author: 10 [ Edit | View ]
|
Date Posted: 15:25:15 08/22/03 Fri
I always think about how lesbian can cope with problems like incompatibility in gender preferences .A number line is suggested after inspired by my partner.
10's imagination on this numbered-line of Gender Scale would suggest that a summation equals to 10 is preferable, though a different combination may be chosen somehow.
______________________
Following some gender expectations, should we attribute the general characteristics expected of male to tb ? And said its a "fail" if not satisfying the measurement?....(even in heteroseual world,a male is not a real male, a female is not so either, why bother such classifications?)
I personally don't agree of the attribution indeed. Since, every sorts of composition should be allowed to exist. This is a natural deveopment. The point is,the presence of an an assorted characteristics could be accepted, but not a non-labelled one. I agree to a labelling process, a subjective as well as an objective one. This is for the purpose of a functional utility, say, to seek an accurate representation of the gender characteristics of oneself to the other parties.
Perhaps, making use of a male char. or female char. to establish an identification would be too much simplified.
In the mean time, we can do nothing more than that for the expression of words in human usage is inadequate.
In everyday life , we may observe that a TBG may carries a TB personality, and TB might act like a TBG somehow. That's why we may see some tough TBG and also there's lots of sissy TB.
It depends on " how much one departs from the gender expectations, and how far one absorbs the characteristics of others." So,i would suggest a gtb, (vs the origin of the name of tbg- tomboy's gal), btbg ...
see below a suggested gender scale :
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
GGTBG TBG PURE GG PURE PURE BB TB BBTB
0 GGTBG 10 BBTB
1 GTBG 9 BTB
2 TBG 8 TB
3 PURE GG 7 PURE BB
4 PURE G 6 PURE B
5 PURE 5 PURE
(Mostly, the most compatible part would be a summation of
an answer equals to 10. Caculation is just a suggestion for fun, for functional reason or for trial an error, its surely not suggested to be binding on anybody. )
This scale of facilitating matching is like a novel, its fun but maybe functional. Of course, time elements is not included in that suggestion. That means, a TB may choose to be a TBG some later days. That's a loopholes of that suggestion , but it can be rectified by trial and error to put yourselves in different contexts here in the scale, and arrived at a final decision of yourselves. A mature couples( (mature in terms of knowing "WHAT YOU ARE" in homosexual world of a lesbian group) would not encounter such problem in self-identification, while a younger one with less experience may find it helpful somehow.
What's the point of categorization? (or identification) Its merely functional but nothing. One can surely identify oneself as such, its like a description of a product in sale (i dont mean human=product, its just an analogy). This is to ensure the client has choosen the right favourites & avoid from mutual mistake.
Scenerio I:
When A is looking for GTBG (in the heart) (the very G one being 0-2 of the gender scale created priviously here) , B comes and impliedly said :"I'm the one". However, it turns out that B is a PURE G or a PURE . Clashes on many respects appeared.
Scenerios II:
When A is looking for BTB (the very B type of TB), and
B comes for that. B is looking for PURE G,the outcome is that, A= a GTBG, and B=PURE B.
Any kind of composition/matching can happen here.
Thus,apart from physical appearences, what matters much ought to be more than that, and it's mental matters.
A well defined mental matters by yourselves( a SUBJECTIVE CATERGORIZATION). Better that its Equilavent with OTHERS'
asessment. (OBJECTIVE CATEGORIZATION) to make a perfect match. Then, Clashes of incompatibility would be reduced substantially, and unnecessary misfit & the entailed sadness would be overcome more and more.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
| Replies: | |
|