Quantcast
On the Social Construction of Sex

Forums - Politics Discussion - On the Social Construction of Sex

Is biological sex a social construct?

Yes 2 5.26%
 
No 36 94.74%
 
Total:38
vivster said:
o_O.Q said:

so i can infer that you would be in support of peeling away all of the rights and special protections women have due to their gender?

"The flimsy definitions of what constitutes masculine and feminine are ridiculous"

elaborate?

"anyone who adheres to them to a point where they define their personality on them is pitiful."

so women who lament going out at night alone because they perceive themselves as being more susceptible to harm from men are pitiful?

Which rights and protections that women have and are not based on their biological features do you mean?

All definitions for masculine and feminine traits are arbitrary psychological traits and preferences that can absolutely apply to both biological genders. Take fashion as a simple example. Calling a man feminine because he likes to wear high heals and dresses is just as wrong as calling a woman masculine just because she likes to do body building. They are empty classifications that don't mean anything and are just used to divide and single out people.

Women who lament that just because they are women are simply wrong. Being vulnerable applies to all humans that fall into that category. Anyone can be attacked when alone at night. Calling for special attention to just one biological gender is a slap into the face of everyone else. Everyone deserves protection.

"Which rights and protections that women have and are not based on their biological features do you mean?"

since "woman" also includes biological men who identify as women, how would you tell the difference?

"They are empty classifications that don't mean anything and are just used to divide and single out people."

and you don't think there's any utility in classifying people? not to mention that people are going to do it anyway subconsciously outside of its utility

when the group of guys agrees that the woman across the street is hot, that's classification

when the woman and her friends agree that the guys are creepy because they are staring at her that's classification

when the cars pull to the side of the road because they hear sirens, that's classification etc etc etc

yes when taken too far this can cause harm but its kind of an inherent part of reality

"Calling for special attention to just one biological gender is a slap into the face of everyone else."

you have an interesting perspective on this, so things like metoo are just women being hysterical?



Around the Network

There is an element of social construct of course, but the phrase “simply a social construct” seems to imply zero recognition of the biological differences which are also an element. There is evidence that this point of view may be causing harm, e.g. lower academic achievements for boys, or the nearly literal book burning mentioned above.

Is a book burning is okay as long as the books don’t conform to our point of view?

I support individuals in their gender and personal relationship choices wholeheartedly. I do not support overriding the rest of society in a bid to make everything “equal”.




o_O.Q said:
vivster said:

Which rights and protections that women have and are not based on their biological features do you mean?

All definitions for masculine and feminine traits are arbitrary psychological traits and preferences that can absolutely apply to both biological genders. Take fashion as a simple example. Calling a man feminine because he likes to wear high heals and dresses is just as wrong as calling a woman masculine just because she likes to do body building. They are empty classifications that don't mean anything and are just used to divide and single out people.

Women who lament that just because they are women are simply wrong. Being vulnerable applies to all humans that fall into that category. Anyone can be attacked when alone at night. Calling for special attention to just one biological gender is a slap into the face of everyone else. Everyone deserves protection.

"Which rights and protections that women have and are not based on their biological features do you mean?"

since "woman" also includes biological men who identify as women, how would you tell the difference?

"They are empty classifications that don't mean anything and are just used to divide and single out people."

and you don't think there's any utility in classifying people? not to mention that people are going to do it anyway subconsciously outside of its utility

when the group of guys agrees that the woman across the street is hot, that's classification

when the woman and her friends agree that the guys are creepy because they are staring at her that's classification

when the cars pull to the side of the road because they hear sirens, that's classification etc etc etc

yes when taken too far this can cause harm but its kind of an inherent part of reality

"Calling for special attention to just one biological gender is a slap into the face of everyone else."

you have an interesting perspective on this, so things like metoo are just women being hysterical?

You still haven't answered my Question. And the correct answer to your question is that there is no difference and there is no need for one unless for medical purposes.

What you describe is exactly what I mean. There are already perfectly fine descriptions for people. Why do you have to say "I'm attracted to women" when that's maybe not necessarily the case? What you're attracted to are entirely psychological and physical features that can be present in any kind of human, no matter the biological gender. There are trans people who look indistinguishable to the opposite sex. So instead of saying "my sexual preference are women" why not just say the physical and psychological features you find attractive when the gender doesn't matter at all. So yes, if we scrap useless genders, then sexual preference will become that of features instead of genders. You can be attracted to tits or penises or both, who cares? What biological gender you are and what the biological gender of your preferred sex partner is is laughably irrelevant. It's only made relevant by the classification of genders and by what's "normal". Which is another issue in itself. More than 50% of humans are attracted to penises, it shouldn't matter what you yourself possess.

The metoo movement is about sexual abuse, not women. It's only currently based around a single gender because of the exact problems I described. Genders that shouldn't exist anymore still exist and humans still love to divide by those highly arbitrary lines.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Sorry, didn't read through the whole thread, but is the main point that genders don't imply anything at all? If so, I would like to disagree. Yeah, let's treat men and women as equals, but they are not the same.

Also, to comment on the above, why are you offended at the idea of someone saying they are attracted to women? Especially if something is true 99.99% of the time (assuming 1 in 100,000 people that are male have transformed themselves into a female which is convincing enough to be attractive, which I think is more than generous).

And to top it off, if I found out that someone who appeared attractive to me was a man, I would not want to go down that route anyways, so I would intentionally want to exclude that, and make myself very clear when asked who I'm attracted to.

Last edited by RaptorChrist - on 02 May 2019

vivster said:
o_O.Q said:

"Which rights and protections that women have and are not based on their biological features do you mean?"

since "woman" also includes biological men who identify as women, how would you tell the difference?

"They are empty classifications that don't mean anything and are just used to divide and single out people."

and you don't think there's any utility in classifying people? not to mention that people are going to do it anyway subconsciously outside of its utility

when the group of guys agrees that the woman across the street is hot, that's classification

when the woman and her friends agree that the guys are creepy because they are staring at her that's classification

when the cars pull to the side of the road because they hear sirens, that's classification etc etc etc

yes when taken too far this can cause harm but its kind of an inherent part of reality

"Calling for special attention to just one biological gender is a slap into the face of everyone else."

you have an interesting perspective on this, so things like metoo are just women being hysterical?

You still haven't answered my Question. And the correct answer to your question is that there is no difference and there is no need for one unless for medical purposes.

What you describe is exactly what I mean. There are already perfectly fine descriptions for people. Why do you have to say "I'm attracted to women" when that's maybe not necessarily the case? What you're attracted to are entirely psychological and physical features that can be present in any kind of human, no matter the biological gender. There are trans people who look indistinguishable to the opposite sex. So instead of saying "my sexual preference are women" why not just say the physical and psychological features you find attractive when the gender doesn't matter at all. So yes, if we scrap useless genders, then sexual preference will become that of features instead of genders. You can be attracted to tits or penises or both, who cares? What biological gender you are and what the biological gender of your preferred sex partner is is laughably irrelevant. It's only made relevant by the classification of genders and by what's "normal". Which is another issue in itself. More than 50% of humans are attracted to penises, it shouldn't matter what you yourself possess.

The metoo movement is about sexual abuse, not women. It's only currently based around a single gender because of the exact problems I described. Genders that shouldn't exist anymore still exist and humans still love to divide by those highly arbitrary lines.

You do realize sexual preferences are quite hardwired in our brains? People are heterosexual or homosexual by birth. So naturally one can perfectly say "I'm attracted to men or women" and include the cultural conception of binary gender alongside their sexual preference. That trans people might have similar features is besides the point. I don't want to have a relationship with trans people, that's also a preference.



Around the Network