Well let me explain. In a masculinised contextual environment where the sub-contextual boundaries are gender neutral one could conclude, through a process of Post-Freudian masculinisation, that modernistic societies preclude use of the term "sexist" when the impication is made that one is "menstruating". Of course if the transmutational co-efficient of femininity is at play then the opposite is true. So the question we must ask is whether the genderised subsets of the "priveliged" can be determined through a process of deconstructing the didactic elements that detrmine "privilege" in it's purely sexual societally independent form. Now some will argue that "privilege" cannot exist in such a form except where hermaphriditism is the societally transgressed norm. This is obviously nonsense because "menstruation" in a hermaphroditic hegemony would be a non-negotiable point of reference in the ontological framework upon which such a system of "privilegisation"
must logically reside. Thus in conclusion I would say that the intercontextuality of the gender metanarrative precludes "menstruation" from being considered in the desired contextual boundaries at all.
I hope that makes things clearer than "that thread".
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
(1)
