Comedy, more specifically, making fun, has definite purpose in the uniquely human trait of intelligence (a trait I find sadly lacking among self-described humans...) Making fun of something is useful because it requires you to organize your thoughts and collate them into an argument against what is seen as a preposterous idea that is somehow believed.

Let's use an example of gender arguments and media pundits. In reading a story about this ridiculous distraction from real issues (oops, some truth...), I found myself wanting to make fun of the whole notion of gender being any different than genetic biological sexual identity based strictly on production of hormones which define the outward characteristics of biological sexual identity (debate solved folks.) The pundit in the story I read used the example of an animal as a gender, with the opposing viewpoint stating how preposterous it was that an animal could be a gender.

Comedy erupted in my mind at the notion of the possibilities this man allowed for as counterargument to his own notion which, believe it or not, supports the notion of 100 distinctly defined genders. The fact is there are only three possible genders: Female, Male, and Not Female (XX, XY, and X0). Gender is based on sexual characteristics, which are based on chromosonal sexual identity as noted above. Y is the male gene. X must be present. Two define the gender. Therefore XX is female, and XY is male. X0 is not female because it cannot be male because it lacks the Y chromosome, but because we are born of females, the body is basically female, but lacks sufficient potency to be vital as a reproductive female.

Appearance of gender can be affected by hormone levels which differ from what is expected based on genetic makeup. A genetically female (XX) body which produces too much androgenic (male) hormones will appear more male and less female, and could be confused as a male but which is physically female. This does not mean that the person's gender is defined by appearance. It just means that their appearance is affected by problems with the genetics which define their gender. The person is still a female, but one whose masculine features are explained by hormones. Suggesting that someone has a gender defined by the differential production of hormones is tantamount to a person suffering from lung cancer being called a cancer.

The fact is that what is going on is in fact that diseases are being called identities, and instead of being treated as diseases, are being catered to as identities. This means it normalizes disease. And normalizing disease demeans the healthy and can only serve to cause chaos in society.

I recognize this fact, consciously, and I understand it. And for me, comedy is the best way to try to reach those who believe those who defy all logic and want to either sew chaos, or who ignorantly sew chaos in their pursuit of whatever selfish agenda. Society simply cannot tolerate the notion of people identifying by differences on the basis of biological malfunction. This is one step from total collapse of society because acceptance of such a notion inverts the whole notion of definition, and turns the structure of society inside out by giving power to the diseased and making the strong, who hold society together, be seen as the problem. This will lead to their attack and thus an attack on society itself.

So, suggesting that an animal can be a gender seems quite appropriately comedic to me. And I hope a lot of people out there started thinking about the notion of penguin and other animals mentioned as possible genders. Because comedy like that does what it is supposed to do: it makes us think about how preposterous ideas can be which are not well conceived or are otherwise just plain wrong.

Comments are not available for this entry.