(no subject)
Dec. 30th, 2004 07:19 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
which_chickI'm pretty damn okay with being me these days, though it's been a long way, baby, to get here. I still wear my gender uneasily, like a pair of shoes that doesn't quite fit. I worry about that sometimes -- I feel like by now I should have a pretty solid grip on what it means to be a chick and how to be one so that I am happy about the whole business. That's always been easier said than done, though.
There's a nice post over at Alas, A Blog on the subject, kinda, which reminded me of a comment thread here a while back. Hits nicely on this, too. Go see a view of the room that's somewhat less damaged than mine.
Current area of whineyness: The linked Alas, A Blog post makes the (reasonable!!) point that when you control for height/weight, the differences are not so bad and may be damn near entirely cultural. Now, when comparing guys to other guys, I can see that this approach is statistically valid and appropriate. I can see that it'd be unfair to compare a 5' 4" guy who weighs in at a hundred and thirty pounds to a 6' guy who weighs one eighty. Different sized guys need to be compared to people their own size, like weight classes for wrestlers. However, I squirm like a slug what's had salt poured on it at the thought of managing guy-chick strength comparisons with this perfectly sensible, reasonable, entirely logical field-leveling approach. Near as I can tell, the primitive monkey brain is hooting and flinging shit because, on average, chicks are smaller than guys. They're shorter and they weigh less. Comparing them to men their own size is... cheating?
WTF? Can I have a new brain, please? This one fucking sucks.
There's a nice post over at Alas, A Blog on the subject, kinda, which reminded me of a comment thread here a while back. Hits nicely on this, too. Go see a view of the room that's somewhat less damaged than mine.
Current area of whineyness: The linked Alas, A Blog post makes the (reasonable!!) point that when you control for height/weight, the differences are not so bad and may be damn near entirely cultural. Now, when comparing guys to other guys, I can see that this approach is statistically valid and appropriate. I can see that it'd be unfair to compare a 5' 4" guy who weighs in at a hundred and thirty pounds to a 6' guy who weighs one eighty. Different sized guys need to be compared to people their own size, like weight classes for wrestlers. However, I squirm like a slug what's had salt poured on it at the thought of managing guy-chick strength comparisons with this perfectly sensible, reasonable, entirely logical field-leveling approach. Near as I can tell, the primitive monkey brain is hooting and flinging shit because, on average, chicks are smaller than guys. They're shorter and they weigh less. Comparing them to men their own size is... cheating?
WTF? Can I have a new brain, please? This one fucking sucks.
