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.
If I may, I believe there is at least one other involved in the issue.That is, I believe there is an issue of interpersonal power involved.By using a binary conception of sex/gender enables the instantiation of the “other.”Having an other enables the male end of the binary to relegate the other female end to a subservient role.The larger male size, in general, allows the male end to use force to enforce the idea of binary other.Adopting a dimensional appreciation of sex/gender makes the “other” much more difficult to argue and maintain - thus, encouraging the use of force (of multiple kinds) to maintain the binary distinction.And, making sex/gender a cultural utilization only serves to make the binary other firmly ensconced in human intersubjectivity.Mostly, we humans don’t handle ambiguity very well.
Just a perception of mine - perhaps of some value.
Best regards,
Waldemar############################
Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD(Perseveret et Percipiunt)Sent from my iPad
On May 30, 2021, at 2:37 AM, Lene Rachel Andersen - Nordic Bildung <[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.
Nicholas,
The point made by saying it is bimodal is that it is a spectrum, it is just very thinly populated in the middle.
What is the postmodern wisdom that you find missing in bimodal?
Yes, gender is rooted in both sex and culture, what I don't understand is that the cultural gender stereotypes are so sacred that the concept of sex needs to change.
/ Lene
On 29-05-2021 17:34, Nicholas Lattanzio 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.
Lene,
When I say it needs a meamodern expansion what I'm really saying is that a purely bimodal model is not metamodern and is a 'more evolved' modernist way of thinking that does not include much postmodern wisdom nor does it transcend anything but a binary notion of gender as it relates to sex.
So I guess the way I would like to see it is to treat a bimodal distribution as a spectrum, because it is one, just a more precise spectrum than most. And further to incorporate additional levels such that the data that is distributed is allowed to re (self)organize when aspectualized from an epistemology that is not entirely 3rd-person empirical or 3rd-person systemic (i.e., upper and lower right Wilberian quadrants). An intersubjective bimodal distribution may be the best to conceptualize this as a 'meta' or 'quasi-modal' distrubition in that we can bimodaly observe gender as being rooted in sex but also in culture (lower right and lower left) and from there the lower right evolves (evolution) to more precise categorical, particularized (particle) descriptions of gender that respects upper right empiricism while the lower left involves (involution) a more diffuse wave like spectrum that is shaped with respect to upper left empiricism.
By doing this we can have our cake and eat it too. Respecting measurement and description for proper academic/scientific explorations of gender as well as individual and culturally imbued experiences of gender. This is proper dialectical transcendence, both/and, wherein the measurement of the experience and the experience are allowed to retain their identities without compromise and also are better understood as relational dependent on each other versus one being the better way to approach the other.
Arguments can be clearly framed by epistemology so that terminology is able to transliterate between quadrants without degradation of meaning (or at least it is mitigated). This is what makes it metamodern, because it facilitates postmodern and modern dialectics.
Hope this follows as well as it does in my head, there's a bit of vision logic involved, sort of an "as above so below" type of thing.
Regards,
Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D.
############################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.
How common is intersex? | Intersex Society of North America
To answer this question in an uncontroversial way, you’d have to first get everyone to agree on what counts as i...
This little article suggests the complexity of the question of "how common is this (sexual ambiguity at birth)." Also demonstrates the very uncommon nature of it; which to me suggests the strong bimodal nature of the distribution. Just to pin it down a little.
B
Bradley H. Werrell, D.O. - This email is private and copyrighted by the author.
############################On Wednesday, May 26, 2021, 06:00:50 AM MST, Lene Rachel Andersen - Nordic Bildung <[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.
Hi Nicholas,
Which aspect of metamodernity or metamodernism do you see relating to this issue and how?
/ Lene
On 26-05-2021 14:02, Nicholas Lattanzio 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.
Briefly looked at some of the links, most time on the Reddit page which was very articulate but also quite biased. I can readily accept the bimodal distribution of gender as it pertains to its ontological roots in sex, it is not a complete theory however in that it essentially denies the value of the upper left, lived experience, or gives it a go around at least. It is that aspect that drives the whole gender bus. Lived and felt experience cannot be reduced to measurement, that is antithetical.
A bimodal distribution is still a spectrum, just a much more narrow spectrum, and it is a 2D representation of what here needs to be at least 3D (gender identity, expression/orientation, and sex are not represented as equal variants). For example a nonbinary individual falls right of this bimodal spectrum. It needs a metamodern expansion otherwise it's just another attempt at culturally bypassing gender.
Just some initial thoughts.
Regards,
Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D.
########################################################Hi Folks,
Given our discussion I Googled “bimodal” and “gender” and found, perhaps not surprisingly, that this point had been made in a few places already:
In a blog
https://cadehildreth.com/gender-spectrum/
On reddit:
On YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLH-y2nLocw
And has been noted on Psychology Today:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-apes/201611/when-sex-and-gender-don-t-match
So, although it is not prominent, it is clearly made by a number of folks. I am still open to exploring this topic.
Best,
Gregg
___________________________________________
Gregg Henriques, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Graduate Psychology
216 Johnston Hall
MSC 7401
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
(540) 568-7857 (phone)
(540) 568-4747 (fax)
Be that which enhances dignity and well-being with integrity.Check out the Unified Theory Of Knowledge homepage at:
https://www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org/
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
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
--############################
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 40To 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
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
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
--############################
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 40To 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
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
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