Rachel,
It just seems that the person gets her sense of self from her clothes,
rather than it coming from herself.
/ Lene
On 13-01-2022 14:20, Rachel Hayden wrote:
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click
> links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
> content is safe.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> (At the risk of being too long-winded.)
>
> Corinne ~
>
> Thank you for the Sapolsky link! This is definitely the kind of thing
> filling in the gap of the ToK's Mental Plane with regard to gender,
> specifically related to the primate brain. It also points out some
> complications at the biological level, when looking from a nice neat
> binary point of view.
>
> One of the questions from a viewer indicates how often we fall into a
> propositional/justificatory framework when trying to understand gender
> - while Sapolsky uses the word "feel" to talk about transgender
> people's experience, the questioner uses "believe." Of course people
> do form beliefs about their gender, on the Culture-Person Plane, but
> this is also riding on top of the stream of the Experiential Self.
> There's this whole underlying Participatory Knowing, to use Vervaekian
> terminology..
>
> Handedness might be a good analogy - does a left-handed or
> ambidextrous person "believe" they're left-handed or ambidextrous?
> Well, yes, depending on their culture, but this syntactic
> justification emerges from their experiences at a motor control level.
> (Interestingly, culture might influence handedness at a functional
> level through training someone out of their basic tendency, and
> likewise I have had to unlearn certain gendered behaviors.)
> Transgender people don't simply believe we are a different sex, which
> would indeed be delusional at the propositional level; we are finding
> a mismatch at a deep level of our optimal grip on our social
> environment. I would describe this as a problem with Relational
> Recursive Relevance Realization, in Vervaekian/Henriques-ian terms.
> (How do you spell Henriques-ian? Ha.) This is something with tendrils
> running all the way from genetics up to culture.
>
> Lene ~
>
> Not having access to this person's Mind 2, I would like to say a few
> things. One might ask why this person can't just "be a woman," within
> a broader framework of womanhood. I think what we're seeing is a
> "Darwinian cultural engine" that has gotten stuck. For a long time in
> Modernism, the selective constraint of culture have held sway, and we
> had a rigid binary. Now we also have a Post-Modern explosion of
> enabling constraint from various individuals, pushing the engine in
> the opposite but still stuck direction. My (limited) understanding is
> that this type of engine requires opponent processing to function
> dynamically, and this has not been happening, partly because we're
> locked into a purely propositional understanding of things. A
> Metamodernist sensibility might allow a bit of ironic detachment,
> while taking seriously the complexification process of gender in
> culture. At some point, then, culture would be required to do some
> data compression and revise our categorical understanding as needed,
> while still recognizing this as contingent.
>
> The ToK also comes in handy regarding this person's situation. We have
> gender expression at the Culture-Person Plane, and one's felt
> sense/experience of gender being contributed to strongly by the
> Mental, but also recursively contributed to by
> anatomical/physiological and cultural factors. So gender identity
> cannot just be something one feels and then expresses, although that
> is a big part of it. It doesn't exist in an individualist Romantic
> vacuum. If our gender categories were different, like in some
> societies, then this person's direct experience of gender would be
> different to an extent, I believe. This is why the simplistic
> arguments over whether clothing has gender are, well, simplistic.
>
> This is why I personally seek a "line of best fit" with regard to
> gender. I am not really a reductionist, not even at the Mental Plane,
> and culture still matters. I could have come into this conversation
> with, "As someone who identifies as a bigender transfemme," and a list
> of pronouns and maybe a flag decal for spice, which might be more
> accurate but needlessly complicated, because my
> Participatory/Perspectival knowing only demands that I find an optimal
> social grip to afford my agency and aspiration. Socially speaking,
> womanhood works much much better for my brain and me, and has
> enormously reduced the pain of gender dysphoria. For some, a different
> fit may be needed. I do share Corinne's amusement around the heavy
> moralizing of this identity topic!
>
> I believe we are pretty far from truly understanding gender (I
> certainly don't know what gender is after many years of pondering). I
> think getting some structural clarity, and respect for what seems like
> a complex issue, will go a long way toward understanding.
>
> Thanks much! I really appreciate the conversation. My current
> understanding has also been informed by direct conversations with John
> Vervaeke and Gregg, which I also tremendously appreciate.
>
> Best,
> R
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 12:26 AM Diop, Corinne - diopcj
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Lene,
>
> My read is that the discomfort is because being called Camille or
> wearing a dress can be misunderstood as signs of a binary feminine
> identity that doesn't encompass who she/they really are, and that
> acknowledgement of her/their nonbinary nature, by themself and by
> others, is considered as important. (People nearing the end of
> their 20's think it matters that other people know who they are,
> like it would be /immoral/ to allow a misread, lol.)
>
> I heard about Robert Sapolsky somewhere in one of these threads. I
> appreciate his no-nonsense approach to this kind of discussion
> about sex/gender, as in this video:
>
>
> Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3D-2DnsQDX-5FOHNE&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=clpN0s8_Cj_VV9IiN7O6ZePg0b3eyn3KPNj961ANKWA&s=plZTE2HqAw2vOZxcbzG3tn5ubR_5XrhUUH2E9-eADOk&e=>
>
> Warm Regards,
> Corinne
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* theory of knowledge society discussion
> <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Lene Rachel Andersen
> <[log in to unmask]>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 12, 2022 11:06 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
> *Subject:* Re: TOK Postmodernism Is Not Inherently Anti-science
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Here is a young woman who is struggling with her identity:
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.huffpost.com_entry_nonbinary-2Dgender-2Drepresentation-5Fn-5F61b8d864e4b06621e42b4b15&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=P268DJn4g6ezLcqpFbrIaPDXjKjRwGFtJ4_CqUkqLUI&s=WFdwUeOOydC1f7eMYSViplWAtmdaaJvPd8uXv2WoVtA&e=
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.huffpost.com_entry_nonbinary-2Dgender-2Drepresentation-5Fn-5F61b8d864e4b06621e42b4b15&d=DwMDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=Bgj_mtbPPMvqes5KOegAPm6mSIwm4GWOvZs8fz9dj78&s=aywA9susu-y8YuvtMrkQrvDEaK6ZhpG9FsmDxZ2ZP94&e=>;
> can anybody tell what she is actually struggling with? It almost
> seems like she gets her identity from her clothes rather than her
> having an identity that she expresses through how she dresses; how
> do you read it?
>
> Warmly,
>
> Lene
>
>
> On 13-01-2022 01:23, Rachel Hayden wrote:
>> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not
>> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender
>> and know the content is safe.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Hello T.R. ~
>>
>> Oh, taking estrogen along with testosterone blockers (and
>> possibly progesterone) for a significant length of time will
>> absolutely diminish muscle mass, especially upper body muscle
>> mass, and add fat, along with a host of other changes no typical
>> man would want, related I believe to what you refer to as 'sexy.'
>> However, I share your concerns about unfair advantages from
>> lingering muscle mass, along with bone mass, height, etc. in
>> trans women, and I don't think it's okay to just say someone born
>> male is a woman now and can compete with women, without serious
>> examination of the issue, which I don't think has rightly been
>> done. I personally think that raising these concerns is
>> justified, and I have done so in other forums. I also share your
>> concerns about a black-and-white mentality with regard to this
>> issue. Of course, this also relates to issues of whether natal
>> women or intersex women who have abnormally high levels of
>> testosterone should compete with men, or vice-versa.
>>
>> I certainly don't have the answers, especially as a
>> non-scientist. Fortunately, I find serious competition in sports
>> kind of silly, so I have no skin in that particular game. My own
>> wrists and arms are tiny compared to what they used to be,
>> despite increased weight training, but for me it's all about the
>> enjoyment.
>>
>> Best,
>> R
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 2:56 PM T.R. Pickerill
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not
>> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
>> sender and know the content is safe.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_sports_2022_01_10_lia-2Dthomas-2Dpenn-2Dtransgender-2Dswimmer_&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=P268DJn4g6ezLcqpFbrIaPDXjKjRwGFtJ4_CqUkqLUI&s=JzE1Omzyl2f5rytF2ir-ylVw2vHaL1WV-3GMupwNXpM&e=
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.washingtonpost.com_sports_2022_01_10_lia-2Dthomas-2Dpenn-2Dtransgender-2Dswimmer_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=svoMr-Eo1wttCRx9AehZmeE6DC4t7okRkuzKZr3Oy1M&s=v63p08n6a4Dhf-XayzWBwzJhyMyV1AasCh43GeZsXNo&e=>
>>
>> As a former athlete I would agree that this is very unfair to
>> the women, changing your ‘sexy’ does not change your bone or
>> muscle structure. I really don't see why trans rights, which
>> I support, has to be something that hurts or infringes on
>> women's rights. No reason why a man can't transition to a
>> female and still compete in men's sports. The political and
>> social climate however seems to insist on all or nothing,
>> nuclear option, you are either with us or you are against us
>> mentality with very little room for nuance, gray zones or
>> attention to fairness and decency.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 2:43 PM Nicholas Lattanzio
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do
>> not click links or open attachments unless you recognize
>> the sender and know the content is safe.
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> I second all of what Gregg said there. Not everyone may
>> be ready for metamodernism, but you seem to be embodying
>> it. Anything that you do in your life from a metamodern
>> place of wisdom will be a tremendous accomplishment, and
>> I hope you give yourself credit for that.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022, 1:04 PM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> This is brilliant stuff, Rachel. Really. I mean I so
>> appreciate your capacity to take these really
>> complex, arcane academic ideas and internalize them
>> and apply them to real issues in the real world with
>> real consequences. Warms my heart.
>>
>> And I love what you say here about your community and
>> what kind of healthy leadership, vision and values is
>> necessary to ensure, justice, dignity, and well-being
>> with integrity.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> G
>>
>> *From:* theory of knowledge society discussion
>> <[log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of
>> *Rachel Hayden
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 12, 2022 1:52 PM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* Re: TOK Postmodernism Is Not Inherently
>> Anti-science
>>
>> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU.
>> Do not click links or open attachments unless you
>> recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Nicholas and Gregg ~
>>
>> Thank you very much. I really appreciate that.
>>
>> I actually think I'd be terrible at writing a book
>> about transgender science. This is because 1) I'm not
>> trained as a scientist or clinician, and 2) I learned
>> just enough about this issue to recognize that, while
>> the specifics of the research may turn out to be
>> wrong, there was enough convergent evidence to make a
>> naturalistic case for some kind of neurobiological
>> factor, and that I should proceed with transition on
>> that basis. Having learned that, I also realized that
>> this type of empirical knowledge couldn't tell me
>> much about how to transition, a much more of an
>> aspirational, developmental process which must
>> include the Culture-Person plane of the ToK - finding
>> a sort of "line of best fit" between biology, mind,
>> culture, and the transcendent, similar I think to
>> Gregg's wisdom stack. So I turned to John Vervaeke,
>> who also pointed me toward L.A. Paul and Agnes
>> Callard's work on transformation, which helped
>> immensely in actualizing the real potential of
>> becoming someone with a different set of values and
>> salience landscape. Finding Gregg's work later helped
>> to put all of my thoughts around this complex issue
>> into a more organized format (go figure), which has
>> become useful in guiding others toward greater
>> reflectiveness.
>>
>> I would like to write some sort of book around this
>> topic, however, perhaps in conjunction with someone
>> with a science background. What I would want to do is
>> create a better model for gender transition than the
>> "decadent Romantic" projections of some kind of
>> hypersubjective self, currently in vogue in the trans
>> community, and related to general confusion, anger,
>> and mental distress in the trans population, not to
>> mention this "trans-trender" issue. I'm envisioning
>> something like a Hitchhiker's Guide to Your Gender. I
>> think that concepts like opponent processing
>> machinery between the selective constraints of
>> culture and the enabling constraints of individual
>> neurobiology/mental idiosyncrasy could be very useful
>> for some, as they have been for me, if they were
>> explained in accessible ways. Hopefully this would
>> help people avoid simplistic ideological dead-ends,
>> for example, the tedious binary debate around whether
>> clothing has gender or not. Of course, UToK has a lot
>> to offer in terms of structuring one's understanding
>> (Tree of Knowledge, Experiential/Private/Public
>> Selves, etc.).
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> R
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 7:24 PM Nicholas Lattanzio
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of
>> JMU. Do not click links or open attachments
>> unless you recognize the sender and know the
>> content is safe.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> I got way more than I thought I would
>> response-wise here.
>>
>> Lee and Gregg,
>>
>> Lee, too your point, there are brute facts that
>> are still not clearly understood and distinctions
>> unmade with clashing social constructs (e.g.,
>> Columbus statues being taken down being fought
>> over because two sides are asserting competing
>> narratives as if they are brute facts). So for me
>> personally Gregg, I agree with JUST and the ToK
>> metamodernism but I can only accept it as a
>> theory of ontology until it actually happens, and
>> to me it's pretty clear we aren't there yet
>> culturally if we have this much apperceive
>> baggage attached to all our narratives. To me its
>> literally that we have not yet lost our ego on
>> the culture plane, and non have truly transcended
>> it until we all do.
>>
>> How we actually get there is a different
>> discussion, and I like what Lee's doing and what
>> Brandon N is doing. We are seeing the relative
>> value of various theoretical systems with values
>> and competing forces through that work (and I
>> didn't mean to call you out in my OP Lee! I was
>> moreso referencing undertones I've seen).
>>
>> Rachel,
>>
>> I hope you're doing some writing cuz you got some
>> serious knowledge and being fortunate enough to
>> possess information literacy, I appreciate the
>> degree of brute facts you just dropped on us.
>> That's the kind of stuff I want to know that
>> helps me clinically work with my transgender
>> clients. I need to know what's biological and
>> what isn't because if anything is going to define
>> any of my beliefs it's that, I can't hold someone
>> responsible for their genes, after all. So please
>> publish a book or something the market is raw and
>> ready for a book like that! Or just write and
>> send me info I can use, either is fine.😅
>>
>> TR,
>>
>> I'll have to read your response through a couple
>> of times to better respond because you also pack
>> a ton of knowledge into what you say. I'm just
>> too disorganized of a thinker to really
>> understand your writing style after just one pass.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 6:07 PM Henriques, Gregg -
>> henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks so much for this, Rachel.
>>
>> Brilliantly stated.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Gregg
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 11, 2022, at 6:31 PM, Rachel
>> Hayden <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> *CAUTION: *This email originated from
>> outside of JMU. Do not click links or
>> open attachments unless you recognize the
>> sender and know the content is safe.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> I agree with Lee that the transgender
>> issue often takes one side of the "brute
>> facts" biology vs. social constructivist
>> argument. This corresponds to the ToK's
>> biological and culture/person planes of
>> existence, and sort of a modernist vs.
>> postmodernist cultural war. So you have
>> binary biology (albeit with quirks),
>> pitted against an understanding that
>> various cultures across the world have
>> exhibited what would be described as
>> "transgender" by our culture, combined
>> with a sort of critique of patriarchy, etc.
>>
>> What often gets left out in this is the
>> animal/mental. I'm not a scientist, but
>> in the interest of trying to understand
>> how my own transgender nature came to be,
>> I followed scientists like
>> biopsychologist Dana Bevins, Alexandra
>> Hall, Robert Sapolsky, and others. What I
>> learned is that for transgender people,
>> there are factors like genetic gender
>> behavioral predispositions and
>> non-interference of epigenetics which
>> translate to changes in the brains of
>> transgender people. Evidence for this
>> includes genetic analyses, identical vs.
>> fraternal twin studies, links between
>> handedness and trans people, 2nd to 4th
>> digit ratios, differences in sense of
>> smell (prior to hormone treatment), and
>> MRI studies. While there has been debate
>> about MRI studies on the hypothalamic
>> basal nucleus of the stria terminalis
>> (BNST), due to possible interference from
>> hormone therapy (not sure where this
>> debate ended up), differences in
>> transgender brains have been noted in
>> other areas, such as the putamen, corpus
>> callosum, the insula, and the
>> corticospinal tract.
>>
>> I would hope that the inclusion of the
>> mental plane would correspond to revised,
>> somewhat metamodernist-linked
>> understanding which could create some
>> space around this and many issues.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> R
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 2:15 PM
>> Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Love this conversation and I will not
>> add much, but let me just make a note
>> that is very relevant to UTOK:
>>
>> JUST and the ToK System complete
>> change this debate. That is, from a
>> UTOK perspective, the modern versus
>> postmodern debate about knowledge is
>> woefully inadequate and poorly framed
>> and unresolvable precisely because we
>> were missing the necessary pieces.
>>
>> JUST gives an ontology, a metatheory
>> of how knowledge is socially
>> constructed. That is completely
>> novel, and if you do not have that,
>> everything is confused. So JUST is a
>> game changer when it comes to the
>> social construction of knowledge,
>> because it is an ontological theory
>> of that knowledge construction.
>>
>> Then, you get the ToK System advance,
>> and that is a game changer also.
>>
>> So, UTOK clearly gives a metamodern
>> sensibility that includes and
>> transcends via fundamentally new
>> theoretical advances that allow us to
>> clean up, clear up and grow up from
>> the modern versus postmodern
>> confusions regarding the nature of
>> human knowledge. That is, if you
>> aren’t looking at the modern versus
>> postmodern issues via JUST and the
>> ToK, you are not looking at them
>> clearly.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Gregg
>>
>> *From:* theory of knowledge society
>> discussion
>> <[log in to unmask]> *On
>> Behalf Of *lee simplyquality.org
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__simplyquality.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=LFM0nLSfbC-jXV8CctKjRFes9TMn1PHGgRkPUR0f2oE&s=fOU14EQBXub0HGDxbR0jYzZqWspViy1h5C81FEUcCew&e=>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 11, 2022 2:10 PM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* Re: TOK Postmodernism Is
>> Not Inherently Anti-science
>>
>> *CAUTION: *This email originated from
>> outside of JMU. Do not click links or
>> open attachments unless you recognize
>> the sender and know the content is safe.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Nik,
>>
>> Thanks for this.
>>
>> Here is my simplistic explanation of
>> how I see postmodernism. (And yes, I
>> am aware I included column “A” in the
>> spreadsheet, and shared my ontology
>> on this list).
>>
>> When I was in grade school we learned
>> that: 1) Christopher Columbus
>> discovered America, 2) He was a hero
>> for doing so, and 3) The world is a
>> much better place as a result of his
>> discovery. This is a (coherent)
>> narrative that is comfortable for
>> European Americans to hear. A
>> valuable postmodern contribution is
>> to recognize that this is only one of
>> many possible narratives emerging
>> from the interpretation of events,
>> and this particular narrative is
>> advanced by those in power as a way
>> of maintaining power. All of this is
>> true. I am critical of postmodernism
>> whenever it suggests that “all we
>> have is stories, these are all made
>> up, go make up your own story, they
>> all have equal veracity and value.”
>> This is not true.
>>
>> A key skill in navigating this
>> territory is to keep in mind the
>> distinction between “brut facts” and
>> “Social Constructs”.
>>
>> See: Exploring Social Constructs
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Exploring-5FSocial-5FConstructs&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=IdYu726FU31tcbpPR-eYYDI1T0vDDXcZZFFi9fPRw-g&s=uvx2rmxjXluyPk37bfZmFxTWeVovqwVRe7xfPLdShw0&e=>
>>
>> With respect to Columbus, the brute
>> facts are: 1) A person know as
>> Christopher Columbus existed at the
>> time. 2) He was on one of three ships
>> that travelled from Europe to
>> Hispaniola in the year 1492. 3) This
>> was a big deal to his European
>> sponsors. 4) Colonization began soon
>> after, 5) Perhaps millions of
>> indigenous people died, 6) Many
>> people in North America claim to own
>> land, 7) Various history books tell
>> selected portions of this story using
>> various narrative themes.
>>
>> Both brute facts (as described above)
>> and a variety of social constructs
>> (celebrating Columbus Day, various
>> celebrations (and protests), many
>> stories, books, and text books, …) exist.
>>
>> This distinction between brute fact
>> and social construct is in play now
>> in transgender discussions.
>>
>> Gregg was very helpful in reminding
>> us that (the brute facts of sex) sex
>> (at birth) is bi-modal, not binary.
>>
>> Transgender advocates are correct in
>> observing that many customs and
>> traditions we associate with gender
>> (e.g. pink is for girls, …) are
>> social constructs, likely advanced by
>> those in power to stay in power. The
>> discussion gets heated when either
>> the brute facts or the social
>> constructs are denied or distorted.
>>
>> Thebirther theories
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Barack-5FObama-5Fcitizenship-5Fconspiracy-5Ftheories&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=IdYu726FU31tcbpPR-eYYDI1T0vDDXcZZFFi9fPRw-g&s=ggAEXDUHHyRoVzQMvM_szoumfkaKMQ5FfDruqSA_2bY&e=> (and
>> now the “big lie”) are other examples
>> of how narratives can be advanced by
>> powerful people to gain power, test
>> loyalty, or for some other personal
>> gain. (And I hope it goes without
>> saying that I don’t consider Trump to
>> be a postmodern theorist.)
>>
>> I hope this is clear, accurate,
>> useful, and respectful.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Lee Beaumont
>>
>> On Jan 11, 2022, at 12:01 PM,
>> Nicholas Lattanzio
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> hat mode
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L
>> list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L
>> list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L
>> list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
>> write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write
>> to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or
>> click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>>
> --
> *Lene Rachel Andersen*
> Futurist, economist, author & keynote speaker
> President of Nordic Bildung and co-founder of the European Bildung
> Network
> Full member of the Club of Rome
> *Nordic Bildung*
> Vermlandsgade 51, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark
> www.nordicbildung.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.nordicbildung.org&d=DwMDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=Bgj_mtbPPMvqes5KOegAPm6mSIwm4GWOvZs8fz9dj78&s=7Y2wC9B0HZny66oih6LjohohEVqcMchSa4fD0NgGkY4&e=>
> +45 28 96 42 40
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or
> click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or
> click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or
> click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
> <http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1>
>
--
*Lene Rachel Andersen*
Futurist, economist, author & keynote speaker
President of Nordic Bildung and co-founder of the European Bildung Network
Full member of the Club of Rome
*Nordic Bildung*
Vermlandsgade 51, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark
www.nordicbildung.org
+45 28 96 42 40
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
|
