Why does Western society hate feminine males?

[Poetic Stone 1,041]

I think the youtube video that was posted, pretty much sum's it up, that its coded into our culture. From the time we are born we are told what to think, and I hate this about our culture. So thats about how it is, I live in the south, and its even worse here, hell I want to live in europe somewhere, it not as bad there, but its everywhere.

[Mrain901 216]

Even in this thread; some of you must be western, and if I'm not mistaken, a majority of the replies are...yet not one post has replied about how western society is justified in it's hatred.

That's because this is a forum for My Little Pony - most people here already defy gender roles in at least one way.

[Ziggy + Angel + Rain 11,302]

Barbie dolls held some appeal for me as a kid.  Because Barbie's clothing was removable, and she had...  Interesting parts. x )  Though this has little (if anything) to do with my boldly defying traditional gender roles and perhaps something to do with developing Agalmatophilia. xD

 

I think this gender role nonsense, like many very stupid things, has to do with "normal."  An illusion to which many people so firmly and thoughtlessly subscribe that anything that threatens that illusion in the slightest is an anger and gasp-inducing, world-upsetting affront.  Those who cling to this fundamentally empty and ridiculous concept of normal will even actively seek to bend logic and fact around their narrow-minded views; essentially empowering and further perpetuating a worthless, unsatisfying idea.  "This or that study which is entirely sound and valid and not at all biased and privately funded by group X shows that guys that are guy guys smile more often and girls that are girly girls laugh more frequently."

 

Here's the especially sarcastic part:

 

You are A.  You will only ever be A.  Don't try to be B!  Don't so much as look at B.  B is B.  And goddess forbid you should take a shot at C.  Because, so long as society is populated solely by A's being A's and B's being B's, everyone will be safer and happier and normal-er.  Because normal isn't at all this subjective, limiting, personality and freedom-squashing ceiling that serves to cram everyone into these preconceived little compartments.

 

Also, I wear women's socks because COLORFUL!  Men's clothing and jewelry is miserably drab in general.

[TheJLeeTeam 914]

Because America is less fun and usually doesn't accept weirdness. It seems natural to be weird in Japan for instance to have feminine males. So maybe bronies might be more accepted in Japan.

[Ziggy + Angel + Rain 11,302]

Most men will still prefer young and attractive women and most women will still long for the rich and powerful alpha male.

So the desire to be with a man who has the tallest stack of inherently worthless green paper invented and continuously generated as an instrument of complex trade is inextricably ingrained into a woman's very DNA? xD  Are there men who desire to be with wealthy women?  Can a gay man desire to be with a wealthy gay man?  I question whether attraction to wealth and / or power is genuinely relevant to gender roles, and such an attraction certainly isn't exclusive to members of the fairer sex.  And wealth is an illusion.  Power as well.  A man at the top of the world can be felled in an instant.  A man with money can lose it all in a single spin of a roulette wheel.  Money and power are fleeting gusts of air.

[Rebel the Wolfgirl 5,605]

It's very simple: Western society INSISTS that we cling to outdated morals and gender roles. HELLOOO? THE WORLD IS CHANGING, AND SO SHOULD YOU.

[Shanks 10,816]

What I find interesting is that acceptance for more "masculine" women or "tomboys" is coming much more quickly than of more "effeminate" men when they are really two sides of the same coin when you get right down to it because both are defying centuries of traditionally defined gender roles. Part of this is because feminine traits are often viewed as weak and masculine traits are often viewed as embodying strength when nothing could be further from the truth. Strength is not how "masculine" or "feminine" someone is but all boils down to their character and society will advance further as more people start to realize this. There is nothing wrong with enjoying sports or drinking beer but that dosen't make someone strong anymore than liking frilly dresses and makeup makes someone weak as Rarity has shown us in the episode A Dog and Pony Show where she used her "feminine" whining to play the diamond dogs for chumps.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Black Adam

[Commissar Alexer 763]

So the desire to be with a man who has the tallest stack of inherently worthless green paper invented and continuously generated as an instrument of complex trade is inextricably ingrained into a woman's very DNA? xD  Are there men who desire to be with wealthy women?  Can a gay man desire to be with a wealthy gay man?  I question whether attraction to wealth and / or power is genuinely relevant to gender roles, and such an attraction certainly isn't exclusive to members of the fairer sex.  And wealth is an illusion.  Power as well.  A man at the top of the world can be felled in an instant.  A man with money can lose it all in a single spin of a roulette wheel.  Money and power are fleeting gusts of air.

 

In our time it's money, in earlier time it was food. A rich male (resourceful) will ensure that the offspring is well fed and and that it will survive to have their own children.

 

And again, you come with exceptions. There are always exceptions but they are in the minority.

 

 

 

I guess they're not in mine. I personally consider myself to be more than a collection of "genes" though. I believe that gender can be overcome by free human beings.

 

I doubt that. Gender is and will be always a thing regardless what feminists and other's think.

 

You can't simply change an extremely old system in a few decades just because a movement wants it.

 

 

 

I don´t know what eating plants would have to do with being feminine(or maybe this is a metaphor that i am not quite getting), but the actual reason why men in japan have less and less sex is because of the social pressure put onto them. They have less time for relationships because jobs,educational system etc. forces them to spent so much more time worrying about their career. Similar reasons apply to the women there.I could give you links, but you just have to google around for two seconds, they are countless reports on the topic.

 

It's a term applied to men who are generally don't pursuit sex and marriage and prefer to be passive than active.

 

From what i heard it's also of the extreme high expectations of the women who demand high income and education.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

To be honest I think people frown upon feminine girls too. It's like girls are only allowed to be girly if they're  under six years old or something.

 

 I see so many tomboys hating on girly girls, the color pink, things with more girl characters than male characters, etc. That's not to say tomboys are bad. But even my family won't let me do girly stuff. I've always wanted to paint my nails but they think it's too girly and childish...and I'm a girl!

 

I guess girliness is hated in general because it's seen as weak, sissy, and immature.

 

Personally I think anyone should be able to like girly stuff without being made fun of.

 

I absolutely agree. That's the reason Rarity is my favorite of the Mane Six. She takes pride in being feminine, in being a lady. She shows to young girls that one can be pretty, aesthetically conscious, well mannered, and all around classy; and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

 

Moral of the century!

[Rebel the Wolfgirl 5,605]

I agree. If Rarity can be classy and ladylike, why can't males in this day and age?

[Steel Accord 6,660]

 

 

And yet people are bashing it, prefering it over other 'superior' cultures. People should remember that the western culture is dominating the world....for now at least.

 

Human culture is dominating the world. Prime example? Avatar. Both iterations of the show are dripping with Eastern religion, philosophy, and cultural aesthetics. Yet it's as American as apple pie. The old guards of xenophobia that was inherent to many western civs, the sentiment rising and falling in popularity throughout history, is now dying for good and our reach is now global. 

 

Nominally "western" civilization can now welcome and embrace the teachings of the East, forever now without reproach and without conquest.

 

 

 

Not all but most. It's evolution.   You all still forget the biological part. There are reason why those gender roles exist and they are thousands of years old. They are integrated into our genes and they simple won't change just because our culture demands it.   Most men will still prefer young and attractive women and most women will still long for the rich and powerful alpha male.

 

Darwinian evolution is something we need to get over. We need to take our first steps to transhumanism. Where the individual is truly the master of their destiny, not restricted even by their own biology.

 

I predict a future where I can upload my mind to a satellite and go around the world before coming back. Or spend a week as a woman should I wish.

 

"Most" shouldn't be a license to say that it's right. "Evolution" shouldn't be what the individual bends their knee to.

I agree. If Rarity can be classy and ladylike, why can't males in this day and age?

 

Or women for that matter?

 

 

I doubt that. Gender is and will be always a thing regardless what feminists and other's think.   You can't simply change an extremely old system in a few decades just because a movement wants it.

 

A thing, yes. But gender doesn't define our identity, only contributes to it.

 

"The feminists" aren't the only ones who don't believe in old school gender roles. It's just the progression of the individual's power within and over society. If race and creed should not be the barrier for success and happiness, why should gender?

So the desire to be with a man who has the tallest stack of inherently worthless green paper invented and continuously generated as an instrument of complex trade is inextricably ingrained into a woman's very DNA? xD  Are there men who desire to be with wealthy women?  Can a gay man desire to be with a wealthy gay man?  I question whether attraction to wealth and / or power is genuinely relevant to gender roles, and such an attraction certainly isn't exclusive to members of the fairer sex.  And wealth is an illusion.  Power as well.  A man at the top of the world can be felled in an instant.  A man with money can lose it all in a single spin of a roulette wheel.  Money and power are fleeting gusts of air.

 

All right, he's mostly wrong, but he's not entirely wrong. Power is attractive to some people, and power is no illusion. Power can come from many things though, money, physical strength, charisma, intelligence, any combination of these or more.

 

Power just isn't exclusive in who holds it and who is attracted by it, especially to gender or orientation.

 

I would also contest that many great people have built legacies with their fortune. Is everything Walt Disney built and laid the future ground work for, "fleeting gusts of air?"  :okiedokielokie:

Because America is less fun and usually doesn't accept weirdness. It seems natural to be weird in Japan for instance to have feminine males. So maybe bronies might be more accepted in Japan.

 

Oh! We're not fun?

 

Okay, so I guess we can declare the following non-existent.

 

 

 

 

[Commissar Alexer 763]

 

 

Human culture is dominating the world. Prime example? Avatar. Both iterations of the show are dripping with Eastern religion, philosophy, and cultural aesthetics. Yet it's as American as apple pie. The old guards of xenophobia that was inherent to many western civs, the sentiment rising and falling in popularity throughout history, is now dying for good and our reach is now global. Nominally "western" civilization can now welcome and embrace the teachings of the East, forever now without reproach and without conquest.

 

Try to settle in japan as non-japanese.

 

 

 

Darwinian evolution is something we need to get over. We need to take our first steps to transhumanism. Where the individual is truly the master of their destiny, not restricted even by their own biology. I predict a future where I can upload my mind to a satellite and go around the world before coming back. Or spend a week as a woman should I wish. "Most" shouldn't be a license to say that it's right. "Evolution" shouldn't be what the individual bends their knee to.

 

If it's right or not doesn't matter. Nature only cares if its working or not. The fact that certain values exist must mean it was successful for our species.

 

Technically you are mostly free to be what you like to want to be but you have to deal with the consequences.

 

 

 

A thing, yes. But gender doesn't define our identity, only contributes to it. "The feminists" aren't the only ones who don't believe in old school gender roles. It's just the progression of the individual's power within and over society. If race and creed should not be the barrier for success and happiness, why should gender?

 

Well, gender is something integral to us while 'race' and creed is a invention of the civilization.

[J.R. 3,183]

Because society is built to where anything out of the ordinary is a crime and that is BS. You are who you are and nopony can change who you truly are inside despite any prejudice claims by society, you are the best and only you there is! And don't you forget it!

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Try to settle in japan as non-japanese.

 

I won't because I know it's far worse there in terms of xenophobia. I'm not saying western civilization isn't open minded, just that there indeed have been times historically when tribalism was more prevalent than in others. 

 

Most of Japan's history has either been fighting foreign powers, or trying to maintain hard isolationism, of course they are going to be more enclosed a society than the U.S. or U.K.

 

 

Technically you are mostly free to be what you like to want to be but you have to deal with the consequences.

 

And I believe in that principal, we should be responsible for the consequences of our actions, both to glory and ruin. 

 

 

If it's right or not doesn't matter. Nature only cares if its working or not. The fact that certain values exist must mean it was successful for our species.

 

I viscerally disagree. Right and wrong are the only things that truly matter! The dinosaurs lived and thrived for billions of years, yet they never did anything right. Nor did they do anything wrong. Were they magnificent creatures? Yes, but so is an ant. Just another string of code in the machine of nature.

 

We are more because we know there is right and wrong. That there is more than nature. Whether one lives or dies doesn't matter. (Though every death is a loss.) Animals and plants have been doing that for billions more of years. What matters is what we choose to do! By that, we exert the supreme will of the human individual upon the natural order. Nature demanded we be weak, so we made tools. Nature demanded we be ignorant, so we recorded knowledge. Nature demanded we be prey, so we bred our own beasts.

 

Nature is just another tyrant. One could say, the last one we have to conquer. Evolution, natural selection, death itself. The immaterial can and should be greater than the material. Ideals, dreams, ambitions, choices. It is these in their purest essence that should dominate the universe, not hunger and base survival.

 

 

Well, gender is something integral to us while 'race' and creed is a invention of the civilization.

 

Exactly, civilization should exist at the behest of the individual, not the other way around. Freedom of choice, equality of opportunity, and civil rights, all pioneered by western civilization are basically saying "each person is unique and should be treated as such by the majority."

 

So again, why should gender restrict or bind one in terms of how they are regarded by others?

Edited February 16, 2015 by Steel Accord

[VitalSpark 1,830]

Parents are congratulated for allowing their daughter to play sports and to play pretend doctor instead of nurse. But how many times do we see that pride turned the other way around; sons playing with dolls, painting their nails, etc?

 

My son doesn't like stuff that is "for girls". I certainly haven't taught him that. He doesn't like pink, because it's "for girls".

He doesn't like Hello Kitty, because it's "for girls".

 

He loves My Little Pony though. (Especially Rainbow Dash, Applejack, and Daring Do.) Therefore, according to him, it is "for boys and girls". So it's not so much that he figures out that something is "for girls", and then decides to dislike it. Rather, anything he dislikes and his sister likes he decides must be "for girls". Anything he likes cannot be "for girls".

 

He also has weekly ballet lessons. This is apparently something else not in his "for girls" category, because he likes it, even if he's the only boy in his class.

Edited February 16, 2015 by VitalTwilightSparkle

[Steel Accord 6,660]

My son doesn't like stuff that is "for girls". I certainly haven't taught him that. He doesn't like pink, because it's "for girls".

He doesn't like Hello Kitty, because it's "for girls".

 

He loves My Little Pony though. (Especially Rainbow Dash, Applejack, and Daring Do.) Therefore, according to him, it is "for boys and girls". So it's not so much that he figures out that something is "for girls", and then decides to dislike it. Rather, anything he dislikes and his sister likes he decides must be "for girls". Anything he likes cannot be "for girls".

 

He also has weekly ballet lessons. This is apparently something else not in his "for girls" category, because he likes it, even if he's the only boy in his class.

 

That's actually a very good point and it speaks to something in child psychology.

 

It sounds like he's just trying to come to grips with his identity. Therefore anything that he doesn't like he labels "for girls" to put it in a category separate from himself and thus standing apart from it.

[TubeSock2018 325]

My son doesn't like stuff that is "for girls". I certainly haven't taught him that. He doesn't like pink, because it's "for girls".

He doesn't like Hello Kitty, because it's "for girls".

 

He loves My Little Pony though. (Especially Rainbow Dash, Applejack, and Daring Do.) Therefore, according to him, it is "for boys and girls". So it's not so much that he figures out that something is "for girls", and then decides to dislike it. Rather, anything he dislikes and his sister likes he decides must be "for girls". Anything he likes cannot be "for girls".

 

He also has weekly ballet lessons. This is apparently something else not in his "for girls" category, because he likes it, even if he's the only boy in his class.

And if the majority of people saw the world that way, it would be a much better place.

I agree. My little pony is for boys and girls.

 

I'm not saying "tell your children, it's ok to like girl things".

If anything, I dislike the idea that birthday cards, when organized at a store, are filed under "girl birthday" and "boy birthday".

I say, label them all under "kids birthday". Ideally, we should drop the whole for boys/for girls and let people do what they want.

 

what I'm saying is that certain things are already categorized by the majority.

painting nails is a traditionally feminine activity here in the United States as playing sports was a traditionally masculine activity. But it's only a liquid rule. It can either freeze and solidify or evaporate and disappear with the changing social climate.

 

Gender isn't real. It's only as real as your mind makes it out to be.

Your son can't naturally learn what is for girls and what is for guys because it has to be taught. When the english arrived to America, the natives laughed when they saw the men doing farmwork, a task they thought was meant for women.

But our mentality is, farmwork is the man's work and the women sews, watches the kids and cooks.

If gendered activities were natural rather than learned, all humans would think the same way.

But we don't, so it's all just the way one looks at it.

[Commissar Alexer 763]

 

 

I viscerally disagree. Right and wrong are the only things that truly matter! The dinosaurs lived and thrived for billions of years, yet they never did anything right. Nor did they do anything wrong. Were they magnificent creatures? Yes, but so is an ant. Just another string of code in the machine of nature. We are more because we know there is right and wrong. That there is more than nature. Whether one lives or dies doesn't matter. (Though every death is a loss.) Animals and plants have been doing that for billions more of years. What matters is what we choose to do! By that, we exert the supreme will of the human individual upon the natural order. Nature demanded we be weak, so we made tools. Nature demanded we be ignorant, so we recorded knowledge. Nature demanded we be prey, so we bred our own beasts. Nature is just another tyrant. One could say, the last one we have to conquer. Evolution, natural selection, death itself. The immaterial can and should be greater than the material. Ideals, dreams, ambitions, choices. It is these in their purest essence that should dominate the universe, not hunger and base survival.

 

Right or wrong are a human invention, it never mattered for nature. Why it was created i don't know but perhaps it's a byproduct of our evolution. The more complex we become the more we complex become our demands.

 

 

 

Exactly, civilization should exist at the behest of the individual, not the other way around. Freedom of choice, equality of opportunity, and civil rights, all pioneered by western civilization are basically saying "each person is unique and should be treated as such by the majority." So again, why should gender restrict or bind one in terms of how they are regarded by others?

 

Race has been disproved as nonsense, all humans belong to the same race (homo sapiens) but gender is different because we know that man and woman are different. There are of course expections but they still will be expections. What matters is the majority and they either identy as man or women.

 

Now for your restricions: Most of the time it will only happen to men. As other users said, society doesn't really care if a woman wears man clothes or does other masculine stuff....but for a guy that is different.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

And if the majority of people saw the world that way, it would be a much better place.

I agree. My little pony is for boys and girls.

 

I'm not saying "tell your children, it's ok to like girl things".

If anything, I dislike the idea that birthday cards, when organized at a store, are filed under "girl birthday" and "boy birthday".

I say, label them all under "kids birthday". Ideally, we should drop the whole for boys/for girls and let people do what they want.

 

what I'm saying is that certain things are already categorized by the majority.

painting nails is a traditionally feminine activity here in the United States as playing sports was a traditionally masculine activity. But it's only a liquid rule. It can either freeze and solidify or evaporate and disappear with the changing social climate.

 

Gender isn't real. It's only as real as your mind makes it out to be.

Your son can't naturally learn what is for girls and what is for guys because it has to be taught. When the english arrived to America, the natives laughed when they saw the men doing farmwork, a task they thought was meant for women.

But our mentality is, farmwork is the man's work and the women sews, watches the kids and cooks.

If gendered activities were natural rather than learned, all humans would think the same way.

But we don't, so it's all just the way one looks at it.

 

I would only contest then that it's not "gender" that is in the mind but "gender roles." I mean, I identify pretty strongly as a man. I like action movies, comic books, video games, and martial arts. However, I also clearly like My Little Pony. I don't see a contradiction because while my gender informs my identity, it's not the whole of it.

 

We're getting there though. I mean if things were truly that bad, Bronycon and dozens of other MLP conventions wouldn't exist without serious security risk.

 

 

Right or wrong are a human invention, it never mattered for nature. Why it was created i don't know but perhaps it's a byproduct of our evolution. The more complex we become the more we complex become our demands.

 

Morality is not a human invention! If there were only two people on the planet, and one killed the other because he was jealous, that would be murder and that would be wrong. Oh yeah, wasn't that the story of Cain and Abel?

 

If there was only one human on the planet, and he killed a baby animal out of sadistic pleasure drawn from it's pain and left the body without even using it for necessary sustenance, that would be wrong. You can't convince me otherwise.

 

Society doesn't create morality, it just codifies it's perception of it.

 

Morality wasn't created, it was discovered.

 

What matters is the majority and they either identy as man or women.   Now for your restricions: Most of the time it will only happen to men. As other users said, society doesn't really care if a woman wears man clothes or does other masculine stuff....but for a guy that is different.

 

 

It shouldn't matter though. I believe that sentiment is dying as well. Less and less people have a problem with men behaving as they see fit as far as my personal experience goes.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Steel Accord

[VitalSpark 1,830]

 

 

If gendered activities were natural rather than learned, all humans would think the same way.

 

That's largely true, but gender roles aren't entirely socially defined. About four years ago researchers published a study on the play habits of young chimpanzees. Both genders collect sticks to play with. Female chimps tended to use the sticks as dolls. Male chimps tended to use them as weapons. Of course, there was also a large degree of overlap. An earlier experiment, giving human toys to rhesus monkeys, found that male monkeys were more likely to play with toy vehicles, and female ones preferred plush toys. So, at least to a certain degree, it appears there is some biological basis for some gender-specific behaviour.

 

But even if boys are naturally drawn to one behaviour pattern, and girls to another, that doesn't mean that any behaviour outside those patterns is automatically a bad thing.

 

In general, I am very opposed to the appeal to nature. Just because something is natural, does not make it good. (After all, it's natural that if you get cancer, you die fairly soon. But I don't think those unnatural cancer treatments are a bad thing for us to have.)

 

So it may well be true that certain things are not as naturally appealing to most boys as they are to most girls, but there will still be some boys who find them appealing (and some girls who find them unappealing). And I don't think that's a bad thing.

[TubeSock2018 325]

So it may well be true that certain things are not as naturally appealing to most boys as they are to most girls, but there will still be some boys who find them appealing (and some girls who find them unappealing). And I don't think that's a bad thing.

And I agree with its not a bad thing.

[Commissar Alexer 763]

 

 

Morality is not a human invention! If there were only two people on the planet, and one killed the other because he was jealous, that would be murder and that would be wrong. Oh yeah, wasn't that the story of Cain and Abel? If there was only one human on the planet, and he killed a baby animal out of sadistic pleasure drawn from it's pain and left the body without even using it for necessary sustenance, that would be wrong. You can't convince me otherwise. Society doesn't create morality, it just codifies it's perception of it. Morality wasn't created, it was discovered.

 

In this regard i disagree.

I don't know any other species beside ours who have a concept of good and evil and even that differs from individual and society.

 

 

 

It shouldn't matter though. I believe that sentiment is dying as well. Less and less people have a problem with men behaving as they see fit as far as my personal experience goes.

 

Many things shouldn't but they do.

It's more likely they don't really care about it.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

 

 

In this regard i disagree. I don't know any other species beside ours who have a concept of good and evil and even that differs from individual and society.

 

We don't know of any other species that is sentient. Until we do, we can only go by the human model. All humans, regardless of culture perceive good and evil. They may differ, but no human society has ever advanced without saying "there is good and there is evil." Again, that's not because we invented it, that's a consequence of attaining the capability that some actions are simply immoral.

 

You could consider rape right, but that doesn't make it so.

 

 

 

Many things shouldn't but they do. It's more likely they don't really care about it.

 

Again, "does matter" doesn't make it justified and should be actively resisted. I would take people not caring as a good thing even, it's better than getting angry at violation of social constructs that no longer are relevant. 

[Silver Letter 1,832]

 

 

but gender is different because we know that man and woman are different.

But remember, there is a difference between "gender" and "sex". Sex is indeed a real thing. It is biological and in one's DNA. Chromosomes and such dictate it.

Sex is to say, "I am a male/female".

You seem to agree that "Races" are essentially fabrications so you would also extend that to ethnicity as well? Things like saying a certain group of people inherently are good or bad in certain ways or are inclined to like something or are good at something. Ethnicity is imposed culture on "races" or nationalities. It's the same with gender.

Gender is to say, "I am a male so therefore, I like playing football" or "I am a female therefore, I like playing with dolls".

Gender is based on culture and is not dictated by genetics.

That's why it's also gender roles. Maybe like a role in a play. People are taking on parts assigned to them by the dominant society they were born in.

[Sigma 768]

If you'll hear me out, this is why I'm against "feminine" males: 

 

We all know about the double-standard with "effeminate" behavior; It's okay for women to be "feminine", but not men. Yet, both men and women are encouraged to be "masculine". Arguably even more so for women, since by doing so they're being strong and independent, and not conforming to gender roles. The term "masculine" has always been associated with feats such as strength and independence, as opposed to being "feminine", which is associated with being weak and dependent.

 

But I think everyone's looking at this the wrong way.

 

I don't discourage being weak and dependent because it's "womanly". I discourage it because being weak and dependent is a bad thing, whether you're male or female. Unfortunately, this kind of submissive behavior has always been socially acceptable for women, and accepting the same behavior from men will only make things worse. Instead, we should encourage both men and women to be strong and independent, and stop associating positive and negative traits with genders.

 

I'm a feminine male who's currently dating a guy, and you think I'm weak? Pfft, I'll step on your soul.

 

As Twilight Sparkle put it: "Just because somepony is ladylike, doesn't make her weak!"

 

I'm not transgendered, but you get my point.