This rant in response to the supposition that 'male' is defined in our culture as being not female, and various trans topics of discussion. KEEP IN MIND, the cosmology of gender, while I think is the predominant one in Western culture, I also think is FLAWED AND DANGEROUS. I do not describe what I wish would be, I describe what I see. At any rate:
"It's been said that our society has two genders: Male, and Not-Male. Becoming male scans. Forsaking it frightens. So I'd put it in the reverse of the way you did: female is contingent on being the lack of male in out culture. Female is viewed the void... see Freud and Jung. In our gender mythos, female equates to void. It goes back to Genesis, God creating being from nothingness. From the female void, he produced, in the true Apollonian sense, through HIS will, being. Creation: maleness emerging from void, in an Apollonian cult and mythos. Our main religions are in the Apollo Cult traditions, existence itsself is viewed as male. So, male isn't defined by not being female. Quite the reverse. Female is the absence of the masculine principle, cosmologically speaking. Trouble with trans, and mTF especially, is Apollo doesn't do very well with it. Dionysian tradition can handle fluidity. Apollo can't."
Here I was asked why males have to prove their maleness, else be looked at as female-like:
"Because once you have being, you can suddenly quantify it. Measure it. Compare it. Implicit in existence coming from nothing is the need to rank. Think of it as lights, each trying to shine brighter than the next. The dimmer the shine, the closer to the void. The threat to existence is void. The impulse to distance oneself as far from the void as possible. Hence, male distances itsself from female void by 'measuring up' against other males."
