Interesting question
Jan. 21st, 2003 06:08 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
adrienmundiIn regards to appearance, is the goal to be less "manlike", or more "womanlike"?
I suppose it could be asked more generally as well; I don't have a clear answer either way, just yet.
I suppose it could be asked more generally as well; I don't have a clear answer either way, just yet.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-01-21 03:43 pm (UTC)(dichotomies baaaaaad)
The goal, it seems to me, should be to chisel away at everything that obstructs the view from "humanlike." And that would probably be best served by subjugating gender to beauty (or realizing that no matter what, beauty is the more power/meaningful concept) not the other way around.
no subject
Date: 2003-01-21 04:04 pm (UTC)What she said...
no subject
Date: 2003-01-21 05:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-01-21 05:35 pm (UTC)not man.
not woman.
human.
no subject
Date: 2003-01-21 05:54 pm (UTC)BOW BEFORE ME PITIFUL HU-MAN!
Re:
Date: 2003-01-22 05:59 am (UTC)pardon.
must wipe a dribble of drool from the keyboard...
*fffzzt*
no subject
Date: 2003-01-21 07:53 pm (UTC)does that make allen the only definition of human? no. for some the dichotomy (or a minor modification thereof) works, and *that's okay, too*.