A New Gender Paradigm (excerpt from upcoming book ‘Gender for dummies, and smarty pants)
The Western cultures are on the cusp of a new gender paradigm. Some would say they are already in it, but I suggest instead a current position of ‘transitional extremism’ is closer to the truth. This seems to affect every set-in-its-ways area of a culture when a change is needed/underway, eg T. Emin and D. Hurst could be considered transitional extremist artists, breaking down the old model and ideas of what ‘art’ is, the 60’s hippies were transitional extremists for a new definition of ‘love’ with their kind of open relating . Transitional extremists are always replaced by more balanced and grounded individuals in successive generations of the field as the pendulum swing of change moves back toward equilibrium.
For gender, transitional extremism is only just peaking with its feminist (not to be confused with an equal rights movement) and gender non-normative (LGBTQIA+) thinkers and writers of the last 30+ years dominating the mainstream fields of gender.
This work intends to present a firm and reliable new paradigm for this gender transition to stabilise and find balance while fulfilling the proper rules of a ‘new scientific paradigm.’
According to Kuhn in ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’ he states ‘Paradigm shifts tend to appear in response to the accumulation of critical anomalies as well as the proposal of a new theory with the power to encompass both older relevant data and explain relevant anomalies. New paradigms tend to be most dramatic in sciences that appear to be stable and mature’
If here we call gender a ‘science’ as defined by Google’s definition (for simplicity) as “the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.” Where here we are referring to exactly that but related to gender and the sexes.
No one could argue that ‘gender normative’ identities and roles were not VERY mature by the time the ‘accumulation of critical anomalies’ picked up a pace. Examples of these are the ongoing collapse of traditional family / rise of divorce; an increase in open homosexuality and gender swinging/confusion which all accelerated from around the 60’s onwards; rising disidentification with birth sex; having happy heterosexual marriage and family for many years only to ‘swing and come out’ in middle age; and, on the outer fringe, transgenderism (which is a human cosmetic intervention of surgery and lifelong hormone treatment rather than actual factual sex changing.) These are not the only anomalies coming out of the end of the historical monogamous-hetero-centric social model of gender, but they are the most obvious and prevalent.
The seeds of a new paradigm are clearly emerging, but with no real qualifying ‘new paradigm’ theories other than ‘gender is a social construct’ or ‘gender is a (subjective) spectrum’ gaining mainstream traction. And these without any real definition of what ‘gender’ is a spectrum OF, or what agency within society would have had motivation for such ‘construction.’
While these transitional theories explain such authors experiences and justifications for their behaviours and preferences, they do not make any real headway to properly explain or incorporate the anomalies coming out of the tattered preceding paradigm (other than perhaps to blame men, as in the case of feminism).
I will here solidify the gender swing and new gender paradigm within a single theory*, without missing anyone person or category out. What makes this presentation significant is that it is not a new model, and nor is it one which requires ANY new language or terminology, at any level of consideration (as compared with some efforts to replace ‘masculine/feminine’ with ‘agency/communion’).
On the contrary, what is revealed is that we ALREADY have perfect language that already perfectly describes the fundamental, natural gender positions and situation humans find themselves in. This includes the wide range of ways younger generations have chosen to refer to and express the gender spectrum of potential behaviours and preferences.
What it does not cater to nor include, is soft-stepping due to some individuals sensitivity to gender-specific language such as ‘masculine/feminine’ since the new paradigm perspective fulfils Kuhns’ concept of ‘incommensurability’ (meaning it cannot be compared) with the preceding paradigm and its flawed interpretations. In my experience, those with issues around the terms masculine and feminine are those with gender identification/disidentification issues.
Since this ‘new paradigm’ presentation offers clarity to the confusion that produced those identification/distidentification issues, the issues those individuals have with ‘masculine and feminine’ and related gender terms are covered under Kuhn’s concept of incommensurability and their reactivity under old paradigm measures are not applicable under the new. On this basis, such terms are used with safety.
It is the highlighting of the existent ubiquitous pattern in both language terminology and usage across different contexts that makes this model so robust and easy to understand and use.
In my use of this language framework in my group work over the last decade, I have noticed time and again how effortlessly groups fall into using the language with a gender context naturally and easily even after just a few hours introduction. I also notice how quickly self-learning and extrapolation into new practical social contexts takes place almost instantly and, usually, with much fun and levity.
I wish you the same easy absorption as prior to now this work has only been taught using the Oral Tradition and this is the first attempt to render it in Spelled format. Be aware that the linguistic work used in this volume is not NLP. Some may consider it semantics, but since I am wholly unschooled in that approach, I cannot claim it is so. It does, however, fall under a category of language work I refer to as Spelling.
* theories based on self-evident facts always remain theories to those new to them until they appraise the data, facts and materials themselves. My reference to a theory is to humour the newcomer, when really, this paradigm definition is a series of mutually, and repeatedly, observable, and experience-able facts.