BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
i think you're making a leap.
Huge leap...
i think you're making a leap.
i think you're making a leap.
sex = biology
gender = socialization
likewise, people are naturally born male or female, in the way that they are naturally born gay or straight. but they are socialized into roles based upon whatever biology they possess -- women = subordinate roles -- and these roles are reinforced by notions of essentialism that are designed to keep women in said subordinate role.
likewise,
sexual orientation = biology
sexual identity = socialization
thus, we have the phenomenon of what's known as "MSM" -- Men who have Sex with Men. often, at least in an American context, these are men from highly macho cultures who don't think of themselves as "gay" in any sense of the word, and the fact that they seek out male sexual partners is ignored in their social identity. i didn't choose to be homosexual, i did choose to "come out" and identify as a gay person. hence, you were born with a penis, you've chosen to play the role of male in society.
Huge leap...
This one's for the adults on the forum. Maybe you can find a thread on Lemonade Stand more to your liking.
I'm not quite sure what patriarchy means, to be honest, but I think that it's a left wing sociologists' term for the traditional family unit and/or traditional family roles, i.e. father tending to be the principal breadwinner, mother tending to act as homemaker (correct me if I'm wrong).
History would prove this wrong.In other words, why should sexual inclination be in this unique category? Isn't it much more logical to assume that that what you call 'patriarchy' is every bit as natural as sexual inclination (which I fully agree, is not a matter of choice)?
I'm not quite sure what patriarchy means, to be honest
Well, it seems to me that this reasoning is being applied inconsistently. I'm not quite sure what patriarchy means, to be honest, but I think that it's a left wing sociologists' term for the traditional family unit and/or traditional family roles, i.e. father tending to be the principal breadwinner, mother tending to act as homemaker (correct me if I'm wrong).
Perhaps you could do some homework, then.
A right-wing sociologists
Any particular pointers?
Well, it seems to me that this reasoning is being applied inconsistently. I'm not quite sure what patriarchy means, to be honest, but I think that it's a left wing sociologists' term for the traditional family unit and/or traditional family roles, i.e. father tending to be the principal breadwinner, mother tending to act as homemaker (correct me if I'm wrong).
If you assume that these traditional roles - or to use another example, boys seemingly preferring to play cowboys and indians, and girls seemingly preferring to play with dolls - is purely and simply a construct and nothing else - JUST social condiitioning and nothing else, then it seems inconsistent to insist that sexuality is not - to any extent - a construct.
In other words, why should sexual inclination be in this unique category? Isn't it much more logical to assume that that what you call 'patriarchy' is every bit as natural as sexual inclination (which I fully agree, is not a matter of choice)?
Comments like this really weaken your arguments.
I've never come across such a creature. Are you sure that they exist?
It’s no secret that academic intellectuals tend to favor socialism and interventionism over the free market,...
Looks like BVS dug himself a hole again.
Poor little feller.
Why Do Sociologists Lean Left — Really Left? � Organizations and Markets
44:1 Democrat/Republican leaning of sociology faculty members. The highest of any discipline.
44:1 Democrat/Republican leaning of sociology faculty members. The highest of any discipline.
could it be that the study of sociology leads one to adopt a more left-wing viewpoint? you don't think that people decide to get PhDs in sociology -- facing a good 5-8 years of grad school and a brutal job market -- simply because they want to further a political agenda? there are much easier ways to do that, and you wont incur nearly as much debt.
Looks like BVS dug himself a hole again.
Poor little feller.
Why Do Sociologists Lean Left — Really Left? � Organizations and Markets
44:1 Democrat/Republican leaning of sociology faculty members. The highest of any discipline.
does this beg the question of whether or not there are any "left-wing economists/professors at business schools"?
could it be that the study of sociology leads one to adopt a more left-wing viewpoint?
you don't think that people decide to get PhDs in sociology -- facing a good 5-8 years of grad school and a brutal job market -- simply because they want to further a political agenda? there are much easier ways to do that, and you wont incur nearly as much debt.
This argument is as bad as "higher education = liberal". I'm almost embarassed for those individuals.
How is it that advocating the measurement, statistics, and interpretations of behavior be "left-wing"?
While I concede that Democrat/Republican can no longer be reliably associated with Left/Right, don't you find that 44:1 ratio pretty dramatic?
While I concede that Democrat/Republican can no longer be reliably associated with Left/Right, don't you find that 44:1 ratio pretty dramatic?
On the contrary, it should make one want to become the powerful.i've taken one sociology class at the university level, and the basic conclusion was this: on balance, where you wind up is where you start.
when faced with all of this evidence that society is structured to benefit the powerful, it's hard not to be left wing about all this stuff.
The first attested use of the (English) term in its present sense, i.e. to describe a social and political order characterized by men "governing over" women "by prerogative of sex" both in the family and politically, was by Sir Francis Bacon in the Case of the Post-Nati of Scotland, ca. 1620 (prior to that, it's attested only as an ecclesiastical term with no broader social reference). So, the term and concept definitely isn't an invention of sociology, even if nowadays our first associations with it tend to be of feminist critical thought. As Vincent said, you'd be very hard-pressed to find a sociologist of any political persuasion who rejects the concept, regardless of what his or her own take on 'nature vs. nurture' or any other relevant debates might be.I'm not quite sure what patriarchy means, to be honest, but I think that it's a left wing sociologists' term for the traditional family unit and/or traditional family roles, i.e. father tending to be the principal breadwinner, mother tending to act as homemaker (correct me if I'm wrong).
If I can find any I know who are around for the summer, I'll ask a few of my colleagues in sociology for their ideas on that; it's a striking enough stat to make me curious--almost three times the ratio of the next most 'Democratic-leaning' field (though note that only 55% of the faculty at the 11 San Francisco and Southern Cal schools used for the study in fact identified as either 'Democrat' or 'Republican', so the finding is perhaps more of a dearth of registered Republicans than anything else). I don't have enough background in sociology nor enough familiarity with sociologists to confidently hypothesize on that myself; I can certainly think of several influential sociologists who'd generally be considered conservative within the discipline--Bell, Berger, Popenoe, Nisbet, Luckmann, Parsons, Waite, Shils--but as to who 'tends to' study sociology and why, I could really only speculate from stereotypes.
"Why should I or anybody else have to pay for other people's choices?"
That's not the video, it's just a picture
The article explains it- he says Viagra should be covered by insurance because it's for health/medical reasons, but birth control shouldn't because it isn't