Home » Tuck Talk » TuckerSpawn » So just when...
So just when... [message #1225] Wed, 01 October 2003 00:47 Go to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
When I first read Tuck a few months ago, I realized by the time I had hit the then-current #98, I was thinking of Tuck as female, but could not for the life of me put my finger on when during my reading that pointer had swapped. It was something that I was actively looking for when I went back to re-read the story.

I'm wondering where in the story other people put their shift in perception, if they even have a specific point. I personally mark it as happening around the camping trip, of all places. For all that Tuck is offically in "male mode" for the entire episode, it sure seems like it's Val hitting the showers and brushing off the boys at the end. So, where do other people mark that point?
Re: So just when... [message #1229] Wed, 01 October 2003 02:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ray96  is currently offline Ray96
Messages: 20
Registered: October 2002
Location: Germany
Junior Member
Tuck is Tuck. I've never really thought about his gender. That's why i'm always having trouble choosing the right pronouns for her Very Happy
Re: So just when... [message #1232] Wed, 01 October 2003 07:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Janet  is currently offline Janet
Messages: 74
Registered: December 2002
Location: Valley of the Sun
Member

As long as Tuck thinks of himself as male, Tuck is 'he'.

Yes, it is a bit ambiguous and can be confusing, but that's part of the interest in the saga in the first place. If the ambiguity weren't there, the story wouldn't be half as interesting or have entertained us so well for so long.

I think that perhaps this is a large part of Tuck's problem right now, the need to make a choice. Most people don't have to make a choice like that. Indeed, most people aren't even aware that there could be a choice, much less entertain making it.


Janet

All that glitters is not Iron Pyrite
Re: So just when... [message #1235] Wed, 01 October 2003 10:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rachel.greenham  is currently offline rachel.greenham
Messages: 290
Registered: November 2002
Location: Bristol, UK
Senior Member
Janet wrote on Wed, 01 October 2003 12:18

As long as Tuck thinks of himself as male, Tuck is 'he'.

I think that perhaps this is a large part of Tuck's problem right now, the need to make a choice. Most people don't have to make a choice like that. Indeed, most people aren't even aware that there could be a choice, much less entertain making it.


Does one choose one's gender, or does one choose to recognise one's gender?


Rachel
Re: So just when... [message #1240] Thu, 02 October 2003 00:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtherEric  is currently offline OtherEric
Messages: 589
Registered: September 2003
Senior Member
I agree that the ambiguity is a large part of the interest. That doesn't keep me from having a gut-level response, though. I'm in somewhat the position Kim and Travis are: Even though I know the situation is a hell of a lot more complicated, the default reaction is "Female". What I had found interesting was how I had missed that shift in my perception when I first read the story.

One problem with using what Tuck thinks as a guideline is the fact that Tuck doesn't consistantly think of Tuck as male, Tuck just thinks Tuck does. At least as far back as episode #65, Tuck thinks of Tuck's self as a girl, even when in male mode, and doesn't realize and correct it. (Time stamp 17:39 27 Jul)

For that matter, I don't think we've seen a thought of Tuck's that clearly shows what Tuck considers Tuck's self since Tuck started to think about the issue after the medical news, other than the one "with big internal quotes" in the latest episode. Which I take as a clue that Tuck is undecided on the issue at this point, anyway. We know for sure Tuck is thinking about the subject, Tuck may not have a position at this point.

And the above paragraphs show why I, at least, have a default reaction even when I know the situation is more complicated: It's hard, at least for me, to think without pronouns, and I don't insert "s/he", "hir", or even "it" without thinking specifically about using them. Which leads into a separate discussion of how language impacts how we think, which is drifting a bit off topic.
Re: So just when... [message #1241] Thu, 02 October 2003 04:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eric  is currently offline Eric
Messages: 641
Registered: January 2003
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
OtherEric wrote on Wed, 01 October 2003 21:34

I agree that the ambiguity is a large part of the interest. That doesn't keep me from having a gut-level response, though. I'm in somewhat the position Kim and Travis are: Even though I know the situation is a hell of a lot more complicated, the default reaction is "Female".


I'd have to say, then, in answer to your original question, that I'm with Mike and the other Boyz, with a default reaction, still, of "Male". And as a gut-level response, I'm not sure that'll change until/unless Tuck transitions to the extent that Valerie in Tuck Squared did.
Re: So just when... [message #1242] Thu, 02 October 2003 19:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Vicki  is currently offline Vicki
Messages: 159
Registered: October 2002
Location: North Texas
Senior Member

Eric wrote on Thu, 02 October 2003 03:35

OtherEric wrote on Wed, 01 October 2003 21:34

I agree that the ambiguity is a large part of the interest. That doesn't keep me from having a gut-level response, though. I'm in somewhat the position Kim and Travis are: Even though I know the situation is a hell of a lot more complicated, the default reaction is "Female".


I'd have to say, then, in answer to your original question, that I'm with Mike and the other Boyz, with a default reaction, still, of "Male". And as a gut-level response, I'm not sure that'll change until/unless Tuck transitions to the extent that Valerie in Tuck Squared did.


I don't know about that as the boyz are not a big part of Tu-Vals life now as they were many episodes back. They do play the game at school though so that accounts for something. But the excursions with the boyz is getting fewer and fewer as time goes on and Tu-Val runs with the pack more it seems. . . look at the phone calls . . . more of the pack call than the boyz. . . and I am sure the boyz sense a change of allegance in Tu-Val even if she will not admit to it, yet.


Doubt is a thief that often makes us fear to tread where we might have won --Shakespeare" --

-Vicki
Re: So just when... [message #1250] Sat, 04 October 2003 03:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
Welcome sluggo! Nice post. Smile I think I agree with pretty much everything you said.
Re: So just when... [message #1252] Sat, 04 October 2003 06:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Doragoon  is currently offline Doragoon
Messages: 334
Registered: September 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Senior Member

simple, the same time tuck first freaks out about the confusion in his head. when tuck and travis are sitting on the couch at that party and things go a little farther than tuck wanted it to. yes, it was a lot about being gay or not, but i think we all started to see that it might be something more then just the clothes.

as far as the pronouns and what tuck thinks he is... he still thinks he's male, and that he's gay and not a streight woman. and you should always go by what the person thinks they are and wants to be called. otherwise we couldn't object to people calling us by our birth sex becouse thats what they think we REALLY are.
Re: So just when... [message #1254] Sat, 04 October 2003 10:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike the Younger  is currently offline Mike the Younger
Messages: 73
Registered: July 2003
Location: Winterpeg
Member
I'm wondering where in the story other people put their shift in perception, if they even have a specific point. - OtherEric

The last act of Eugene Wallace Tucker was when he helped his father take down a hacker collectif operating from the University of Michigan. The Tucker men swapped high fives for a job well done and went to bed. Eugene never woke up. Before then, to me, Tucker was mostly Eugene while slipping into Valerie on occasion. After that very early morning, Tucker has been mostly Valerie. Also, appearances of Eugene have been fewer and farther between

Re: So just when... [message #1258] Sat, 04 October 2003 15:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Vicki  is currently offline Vicki
Messages: 159
Registered: October 2002
Location: North Texas
Senior Member

Mike the Younger wrote on Sat, 04 October 2003 09:17

I'm wondering where in the story other people put their shift in perception, if they even have a specific point. - OtherEric

The last act of Eugene Wallace Tucker was when he helped his father take down a hacker collectif operating from the University of Michigan. The Tucker men swapped high fives for a job well done and went to bed. Eugene never woke up. Before then, to me, Tucker was mostly Eugene while slipping into Valerie on occasion. After that very early morning, Tucker has been mostly Valerie. Also, appearances of Eugene have been fewer and farther between




Definately fewer and further between. . as it is to the point now that the only time ones sees Eugene is either at home when sleeping or at school. Any other time it is Valarie when out with the pack or babysitting. . going out with Travis or whatever.


Doubt is a thief that often makes us fear to tread where we might have won --Shakespeare" --

-Vicki
icon5.gif  Re: So just when... [message #1428] Mon, 01 December 2003 09:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
brudin  is currently offline brudin
Messages: 20
Registered: December 2003
Location: france, region parisienne...
Junior Member
not a boy or girl for me, tucker is between and when tucker decide what he/she is....

it's the decision's moment i am looking for Razz

P.S: BTW hello all, i am new here and i must say "sorry for the fault if any" Shocked

[Updated on: Mon, 01 December 2003 09:25]


Brudin, palanain de Moradin.
(Moradin's paladwarf, cool joke in french Wink )
Re: So just when... [message #2142] Sat, 28 August 2004 07:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Brooke  is currently offline Brooke
Messages: 695
Registered: August 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Senior Member
rachel.greenham wrote on Wed, 01 October 2003 07:58



Does one choose one's gender, or does one choose to recognise one's gender?



Depends on the person and the situation.

I could be accused of choosing my gender. But that's because my ideal situation would be one where I could swap back and forth as easily as Tuck does.

I know people for whom the only choice has been how much surgery they were going to get to make their body "right".
Re: So just when... [message #6758] Thu, 14 April 2011 21:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OtteryLexa  is currently offline OtteryLexa
Messages: 28
Registered: April 2011
Location: UK
Junior Member
OtherEric wrote on Wed, 01 October 2003 05:47


I'm wondering where in the story other people put their shift in perception, if they even have a specific point.[...]
So, where do other people mark that point?


I'm not sure exactly, but I think it's sometime during the summer while Val is babysitting, probably in the first or second week or so.

rachel.greenham wrote on Wed, 01 October 2003 07:58


Does one choose one's gender, or does one choose to recognise one's gender?


As to choosing gender, I'm very much of the opinion that gender chooses you. The only choice you get is how long you live in denial before you acknowledge it.
Re: So just when... [message #6768] Wed, 20 April 2011 15:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
[quote title=OtteryLexa wrote on Fri, 15 April 2011 02:14]
OtherEric wrote on Wed, 01 October 2003 05:47

As to choosing gender, I'm very much of the opinion that gender chooses you. The only choice you get is how long you live in denial before you acknowledge it.

Oddly enough, I utterly disagree. I think gender is more defined as a social dichotomy - social roles, etc - and that one chooses (albeit usually unconsciously and very early) one's gender. Note that 'gender' is not 'sexual preference' or 'genitalia', and I've no firm belief in what the brain firmware does.

Ellen
nosig
Re: So just when... [message #6776] Thu, 21 April 2011 01:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
I personally think that people are both more fluid and more variable than a simple answer could encapsulate.

Some people seem to be hard-wired to be one gender or the other.

Some seem able to fit into a societal role of nearly any shape.

Some seem to define their own gender in unexpectedly quirky ways.

Most people seem to muddle along, either happening to choose the gender society wants to assign them or being molded by internal or external influence into some sort of congruent self image that fits well enough into societal norms.

A few people seem to be like higher order equations, they have more than one solution to this problem.

Substitute sexual preference for gender in the above discussion and it is probably just as true.

At least, that's my take.
Re: So just when... [message #6777] Thu, 21 April 2011 12:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Doragoon  is currently offline Doragoon
Messages: 334
Registered: September 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Senior Member

Quote:

Some people seem to be hard-wired to be one gender or the other.

I go farther and say that people seem to be hard wired to assess others as either one gender of the other.

People are VERY good and very fast at deciding a person's gender, one way or the other. It's so fast and so instinctual, and so accurate, I have to believe that it's something fundamental to the human condition.

There may be multiple solutions to the equation, but like complex numbers, it either has an imaginary part or not. it's either one or the other. you can graph it out with pretty colours, but in the end, you can either be in the Mandelbrot set, or outside of it.
(sorry if I butchered math)
Re: So just when... [message #6800] Thu, 28 April 2011 05:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JenC  is currently offline JenC
Messages: 49
Registered: March 2011
Member
I would agree that we learn to assess and enforce gender "norms" from a very early age (I get the impression its about or just after toddlerhood).

But the concept of their only being two genders and what their roles are is entirely a construct of western culture and society.

Other cultures have / have had additional genders and assigned them different roles or allowed people to move between gender roles.

Unfortunately I haven't read widely enough to cite sources but I am sure others here can.

Jen
Re: So just when... [message #6803] Thu, 28 April 2011 13:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Doragoon  is currently offline Doragoon
Messages: 334
Registered: September 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Senior Member

Quote:

Other cultures have / have had additional genders and assigned them different roles or allowed people to move between gender roles.

in my opinion, those are NOT third sexes. they are more like a "none of the above". And while they may be respected by their culture, they aren't accepted. They are kept separate from normal society. They are always an "other".

I'm mostly thinking of India and Native American's with this. but the European castrati were treated in kinda a similar way. Actually, they were one of the most accepted of the unsexed. But still, Europeans were never entirely comfortable with the concept.

This is all aside from Jesus praising them in Matt 19:12. "qui potest capere capiat"
Re: So just when... [message #6814] Mon, 02 May 2011 13:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
One of the problems with using cultures (past or present) to explore gender, is that there's a biological-to-ecological rationale for a division. Breeding faster than your genetic relatives die off is the ONLY measure of success; those that didn't do this, are gone. (where are the dinosaurs?)

In humans, only females (between certain ages, with enough food, etc. etc.) can produce babies, and it takes at least nine months each. Meanwhile, males are somewhat expendable (you only need one for a very large number of women) and tend to better muscle and longer bones (leading to a larger lever bonus).

These are inherent in the organism design.

And, those societies that were 'close enough' to optimal IN THEIR LOCALE AND TIME survived; those that weren't, didn't, and are GONE.

Technology changes many points in this setup, but culture doesn't change as fast. And biology doesn't change perceptibly at all in tech-time.

It's really hard, with humans being so plastic (compared to, say, ants), to separate out biology from culture, brainwiring from environmental, nature from nuture; but they have to interact. And the only people around now are the lineal descendants of hundreds of thousands of generations of winners. Those all won at that particular place, in that particular time, in those particular circumstances.

But, evolution doesn't automatically find the optimal solution, just a workable one; and what worked there+then doesn't necessarily work here+now.

Ellen
nosig
Re: So just when... [message #6815] Mon, 02 May 2011 14:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Doragoon  is currently offline Doragoon
Messages: 334
Registered: September 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Senior Member

Quote:

Technology changes many points in this setup, but culture doesn't change as fast.

it's hard to separate culture from morality. and your point begs the question, Can technology change morality/ethics?

Re: So just when... [message #6816] Tue, 03 May 2011 08:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mkemp  is currently offline mkemp
Messages: 421
Registered: April 2006
Senior Member
Doragoon wrote on Mon, 02 May 2011 11:52

Quote:

Technology changes many points in this setup, but culture doesn't change as fast.

it's hard to separate culture from morality. and your point begs the question, Can technology change morality/ethics?



Ethics - yes, because ethics are inner-directed, the product of conscious thought, and deal with objective reality; morality - no, because morality is an artifact of religion and culture, and as such has little to do with logic and reason.
Re: So just when... [message #6821] Thu, 05 May 2011 14:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Erin Halfelven  is currently offline Erin Halfelven
Messages: 712
Registered: September 2002
Location: Surf City, USA
Senior Member
Administrator
Talk to a professional philosopher before you make that distinction. Smile I used to make the same one until I met some philosophers.

I know a few and to them, morality deals with the problem of good and evil; and to them, ethics deals with specific situations and roles -- like the ethics of not charging people for work you didn't do if you're a contractor -- the difference between right and wrong in a particular context, if you will.

"Situational ethics" to a philosopher is a tautology; there is no way to figure out the ethics of something unless you know the situation.

But your usage is the more common, I think. The problem is that the noisy religionists have co-opted morality as their word when they are simply using it to mean "sexual behavior code of my religion as I believe it should be."

To a philosopher, morality has to do with sex only if there is a question of harm. To most religionists, all morality is wrapped up in their idea of sexuality.

Language; it's a hell of a way to communicate, innit?
Re: So just when... [message #6822] Thu, 05 May 2011 15:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Doragoon  is currently offline Doragoon
Messages: 334
Registered: September 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Senior Member

"Progress should mean that we are always changing the world to fit the vision, instead we are always changing the vision."
— G.K. Chesterton

What is the vision we're building towards? and should it change when new technology becomes available? or do only our solutions change?
Re: So just when... [message #6826] Sat, 07 May 2011 12:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ellen Hayes  is currently offline Ellen Hayes
Messages: 684
Registered: September 2002
Senior Member
Doragoon wrote on Mon, 02 May 2011 19:52

it's hard to separate culture from morality. and your point begs the question, Can technology change morality/ethics?

If by "can" you mean "possible under the laws of physics"... I think, not directly. (except by the special case of efficiently killing those that have a belief you want to eradicate) But humans, in individual examples that agglutinate in populations, tend to tweak the rules; and technology can allow some rules-changes that no longer have their old repercussions - women in combat, say - and also spread the word of an innovation very fast - women in pants, say.

Ellen
nosig
Re: So just when... [message #6840] Sat, 21 May 2011 19:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
stanman  is currently offline stanman
Messages: 292
Registered: May 2008
Senior Member
there is the abortion debate that has been affected by medical advancements.
Re: So just when... [message #7064] Mon, 16 April 2012 20:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anne  is currently offline Anne
Messages: 355
Registered: April 2012
Senior Member
Weirdly enough until after Tuck was caught by his mother they were separate people... Now it sort of feels like they may merge if Ellen can bring herself to have Val become a transfer student in the next year. Also one solution would be for Val to transfer to a mostly college curricula and just take the bare minimum at high school...
icon14.gif  Re: So just when... [message #7079] Sat, 26 May 2012 22:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Em33  is currently offline Em33
Messages: 4
Registered: May 2012
Location: North America
Junior Member
Anne wrote on Mon, 16 April 2012 18:42

Also one solution would be for Val to transfer to a mostly college curricula and just take the bare minimum at high school...


This is what I assumed would be the case. If there are no more Math/Sci/CS classes at HS, and no gym...

Maybe where Rachel goes, since, it's apparently in the same city.
Re: So just when... [message #7091] Sat, 02 June 2012 20:04 Go to previous message
JenC  is currently offline JenC
Messages: 49
Registered: March 2011
Member
A few of the characters mentioned that some things about Tuck/Val seemed inbetween/both male and female (I've just reread the Jill and Kim kissing experiment in ~Ch19). However, I do think that since Val's discovery by the parentals or the attack or both Tuck seems to be less careful about showing their feminine side.

Jen
Previous Topic:Tuck's Choices
Next Topic:Will Travis Return?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Nov 17 21:41:47 EST 2018

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02522 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 2.7.7.
Copyright ©2001-2007 FUD Forum Bulletin Board Software