Wow! Well I'm really going to go out on a limb here and say that I think this war against women mirrors exactly what men are doing to our only home namely Mother Earth. They are grinding our Mother into dust.
As far as I remember and have understood it, Money actually claimed that gender identity was a result of socialization (and radical feminists got the idea from him - unfortunately). People criticising his thinking made research that showed that we are rather born with a sense of which sex we are. Money's work with the poor twin who had lost his penis proved that right, in the end - he never felt like a girl.
This is not accurate. Money believed that one's sense of self would become fixed by the age of eighteen months, which is hardly in line with the view that gender is socially constructed.
He also believed that the mother was largely responsible, again, like Freud, though this time it would be a combination of hormones in utero and how the mother raised the child.
Radical feminist Janice Raymond offers an extensive analysis of Money's theories in The Transsexual Empire. I'm not sure where you got the impression that radical feminists base any of their views of gender on the work of John Money; his notions of gender were rigid and based on sex role stereotypes, even to the extent of literal, heterosexual intercourse roles.
Raymond writes:
"Money’s statements about the effects of socialization or learning are just as deceiving. Possibly to avoid the charge of biologizer, Money emphasizes that the socialization side of the coin is more significant than the biological. In fact, it is so significant that 'core' gender identity is fixed during the first eighteen months of life. Here the theme changes from 'biology is destiny' to 'socialization is destiny.' Yet many of those who accept Money’s theories seem not to notice this switch, which takes on all the force of a new natural law."
Raymond points out Money's statement that, "People can no more be expected to decode behavior that has been locked into the core of their gender schemas than a Chinese woman whose feet were bound in childhood could be expected to walk naturally."
"In this perspective," states Raymond, "if one cannot adjust the mind to the body, it becomes perfectly reasonable to adjust the body to the mind. Since core gender identity is fixed by age two, in Money’s schema, then the body and not the psyche must be changed."
Wow! Well I'm really going to go out on a limb here and say that I think this war against women mirrors exactly what men are doing to our only home namely Mother Earth. They are grinding our Mother into dust.
I agree - total absence of reverence and respect.
As far as I remember and have understood it, Money actually claimed that gender identity was a result of socialization (and radical feminists got the idea from him - unfortunately). People criticising his thinking made research that showed that we are rather born with a sense of which sex we are. Money's work with the poor twin who had lost his penis proved that right, in the end - he never felt like a girl.
This is not accurate. Money believed that one's sense of self would become fixed by the age of eighteen months, which is hardly in line with the view that gender is socially constructed.
He also believed that the mother was largely responsible, again, like Freud, though this time it would be a combination of hormones in utero and how the mother raised the child.
Radical feminist Janice Raymond offers an extensive analysis of Money's theories in The Transsexual Empire. I'm not sure where you got the impression that radical feminists base any of their views of gender on the work of John Money; his notions of gender were rigid and based on sex role stereotypes, even to the extent of literal, heterosexual intercourse roles.
Raymond writes:
"Money’s statements about the effects of socialization or learning are just as deceiving. Possibly to avoid the charge of biologizer, Money emphasizes that the socialization side of the coin is more significant than the biological. In fact, it is so significant that 'core' gender identity is fixed during the first eighteen months of life. Here the theme changes from 'biology is destiny' to 'socialization is destiny.' Yet many of those who accept Money’s theories seem not to notice this switch, which takes on all the force of a new natural law."
Raymond points out Money's statement that, "People can no more be expected to decode behavior that has been locked into the core of their gender schemas than a Chinese woman whose feet were bound in childhood could be expected to walk naturally."
"In this perspective," states Raymond, "if one cannot adjust the mind to the body, it becomes perfectly reasonable to adjust the body to the mind. Since core gender identity is fixed by age two, in Money’s schema, then the body and not the psyche must be changed."
Thank you for answering. I'm now confused on a higher level ...