Thursday, April 06, 2017

"Gender Non-Binary Star Asia Kate Dillon Ponders Emmy's: Actor Or Actress?"

link
   Yeesh. Tempest in a teapot.
   So is Dillon female? If so, then Dillon's an androgynous woman. There's nothing all that notable about that. "Non-binary" is one of the trendy quasi-philosophical terms that's all the rage in the neo-pomo sectors of the humanities and social sciences. It sounds all technical and stuff! Get it? But anyway: there's nothing new nor particularly exciting about androgyny. The pendulum of fashion swings back and forth on this sort of thing. We're in a fairly long-term trend in which hyper-masculinity and femininity--even to the point of cartoonishness--is pretty popular. So maybe it'll all somewhat even out. Which IMO might be a good thing.
   But anyway, Dillon isn't in a special category of person. If Dillon is female, then Dillon's a woman, and an actress. There's nothing exciting there, really. Obviously the actor/actress distinction is drawn on the basis of sex. No such distinction is ever drawn on the basis of how one "identifies"... Yes, it's odd to divide such things up by sex--stop the presses! But that's probably for the benefit of women, since most good roles are written for men...so the left may want to think twice before going down this road. Anyway, it's hardly revolutionary to note that it's a somewhat weird system. Change it if you want...but you can see what the consequences of that are likely to be.
   The only really unusual thing about Dillon and others like Dillon is that they have a non-standard conception of what information should be public and what should be private. It's normally easy to tell whether someone is male or female--and social conventions make this even easier. People who agree with Dillon don't want others to know their sex. I don't necessarily think that's the weirdest thing in the world. It does seem a bit weird that everybody can tell what's between your legs by glancing at your face and clothes, doesn't it? I'm not sure that major social institutions should be altered to accommodate this non-standard opinion--but I don't necessarily think it's totally crazy or anything.
   As usual, we'll have to draw the line somewhere...some people, for example, don't want people of the other sex to see their faces. Others would prefer to walk around naked in public. I'm not really sure how to tell how weird such beliefs are sub specie aeternitatis...but there are limits to what the rest of us are obligated to accommodate.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home