Posted on 12/07/2008 1:47:04 PM PST by EveningStar
...nowhere are attitudes toward sex and gender quite as elastic as in the far reaches of the southern state of Oaxaca. There, in the indigenous communities around the town of Juchitán, the world is not divided simply into gay and straight. The local Zapotec people have made room for a third category, which they call “muxes” (pronounced MOO-shays) — men who consider themselves women and live in a socially sanctioned netherworld between the two genders...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Yes, Mexico is a society that our left would love to emulate.
Delusional people.
A much more positive sexual niche, that would help our society, would be patterned after the Chinese Amah, but with both a female and male version.
In Imperial China, a woman’s prospects for marriage were based on her families wealth, because of the dowry they would have to pay to her husband’s family. Girls without dowry had little prospect for marriage, which left them two alternatives to survive: prostitution or becoming an Amah.
Amah were women who would be hired by another family to be a combination light maid, cook, shopper, companion, nanny, etc., for room, board, and a stipend. She would not be just an employee, however, and would be treated like a respected maiden aunt. It gave respectable women a means to survive as a part of society.
Amah were expected to remain single and not become a problem to her employer’s house. Socially, it was regarded as very bad form for any family member to molest the Amah.
America, however, while it has a large number of bachelors of both sexes, it has no real social niche for them. There is no accepted way for them to not be married and not have families, and yet still have a function in society other than work.
Kinda reminds me of something I read about some American Indian tribes where the men who were effeminate were allowed to stay with the women, and do women’s work, and were pretty much left alone. Maybe it’s a native indian thing? No offense to any indigenous tribe members online, I hope.
They don’t look really happy.
Yup, I noticed that...
Must be tough to be forever fighting
against ones own biological gifts
In denial of the foundation of their nature
that is to some degree animal,
and with established gender polarity
- UNCLE REMUS -
That is so . . . culturally insensitive.
Ain't my words, exactly
Thank Walt Disney
So the NYT gives us stupid Christian traditionalists another lesson in diversity and multi-culturalism. Sorry, but just because some people do it doesn’t make it right.
It is a very backwards place, so this should not be surprising.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.