| There are 35 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
|
|
But saying gender is just a social construct is simply only part of the story. What gender a person identifies with has to do with what a person thinks about himself or herself, which, in turn, has to do with the development of the brain, which clearly involves genes and biological development.
Or stated another way, it is likely not just the social environment that determines gender. It is also genes and biological development. In fact, I'd argue, that biology may be a more important determinant than the social environment, or it at least biology may explain more of the variation associated with gender in the population.
|
|
|
"What gender a person identifies with has to do with what a person thinks about himself or herself"
Therefore, it's a social construct, by definition. It doesn't matter what factors influence the self-perception, or how much genitalia and hormones influence people.
It's like snow. Snow falls from the sky, high above where humans exist. It is produced by the natural environment and humans have no part in its production. But snow becomes a social construct when people start labeling it. Some societies, like in Alabama, have just one word for snow. And other societies, like in Canada, have over a dozen words for snow because they see different categories of it.
|
|
|
But snow is more than just a social construct, because, as you yourself mentioned, snow exists without humans ever labeling it snow. Just like gender.
|
|
|
What is the meaning of social construct?
Definition of social construct. formal. : an idea that has been created and accepted by the people in a society Class distinctions are a social construct.
So then a man who is born a man is a social construct.
This vague concept is saying basically in you can get a bunch of people a society class to go along with something and accept it then ii IS. That just bullshit!
|
|
|
How come archaeologists have never found human remains other than male and female?
|
|
|
I'm tired of ABC news trying to pigeon hole us into only 58 gender roles. 
|
|
|
Is it not more Physcological warfare to control the masses ?
I label you. You label me.
The court of public opinion.
To keep fighting among our selves so that we do not look where They do it want us to look ?
|
|
|
Which one of those get free shit?
|
|
|
SixD, there is no ultimate truth and reality is relative. Both the Buddha and quantum physics have proven this to be true (but not ultimate true because that doesn't exist).
|
|
|
It seems like a persons sex at birth is not a social construct but more a biological fact. But gender as a whole is a social construct trying to define the various preferences or identities that people have. People have long recognized the feminine aspects of a man (feminine side ) and woman have long been known to have a mascuine side. It has been referred to as anima and animus. Whether this is biological or emotional or both is hard to say. But in a sense it could define todays expansion of gender identities.
|
|
|
If anima is feminine and animus is masculine, what is anime?
|
|
|
Some freaky Japanese porn!
|
|
|
I’m voting for trump again because I can’t stand liberal logic,
|
|
|
If truth is relative its opposite, absolute, by definition has to exist.
|
|
|
I reserve the right to not have to accept terms and/or definitions of some activist in their pursuit of 'social engineering.'
|
|
|
A social construct identifies one's attitude towards one's gender and someone else's attitude toward that person's gender.
BIOLOGY creates the chromosomal and genitalia anomalies that exist in human beings.
|
|
|
OP says it well!
Reality and truth are perceptions.
Humans love to label things. The labels are convenient vut meaningless. You can label 2 or 58 genders.
Some people get confused and think the labels are real and people have to conform to the arbitrary label system, but it really is other way around .
Insecure people freak out when their label system fails and people don't fit in the neat tidy boxes. But people never do.
|
|
|
Here's the conclusion of a review article with evidence that genetics may play a major role, if not the principle role, in explaining gender differences in humans.
Note this has NOTHING to do with the biology of sex. This is the biology of gender.
From "The Biological Contributions to Gender Identity and Gender Diversity: Bringing Data to the Table":
"This review of existing family and twin studies summarizes significant and consistent evidence for the role of innate genetic factors in the development of both cisgender and transgender identities, a negligible role for shared environmental factors, and a small potential role for unique environmental factors. Heritability estimates are consistent with other behavioral and personality traits, which generally fall in the range of 30−60% (Polderman et al. 2015). Additional studies with many more individuals are needed to determine the heritability of gender identity more precisely and to characterize the genetic architecture of gender identity through genome-wide association studies."
Comment: To simply label gender as a "social construct" may miss out on a lot of what's behind gender, just like labeling snow as simply a "social construct."
|
|
|
"Heritability" would measure how well differences in people’s genes account for differences in their gender.
|
|
|
Of course, the biology of sex and gender must be linked somehow. It wouldn't make sense if people that develop penises develop a gender purely randomly.
|
|
|
I admit. I am a labler.
I have two categories of people and two sub categories.
1. Men
2. Women
Then those two are then labeled either nice people or assholes.
In my mind you are permanently one of the first two (Kaitlyn/Bruce will always have a wiener to me... even if it’s surgically removed).
The nice people/asshole designation is “fluid.”
I know, I’m a Neanderthal.
Which one of you bitches want to be dragged back to the cave by your hair?
|
|
|
21st century "experts" claim "gender is a social construct" and discern 58+ "genders" in Homo sapiens. 19th century "experts" advocated phrenology and claimed that escaped slaves were suffering from drapetomania (look them up).
In the words of John Lennon, "Expert textpert choking smokers don't you thing the joker laughs at you?"
|
|
|
Gender linked to genetics doesn't mean much. Certainly has no connection with how many genders or gender labels a society may use at any time.
Funny to use snow as an example as "not a social construct. " oops bad choice... Eskimos have many more labels for snow that others. Totally social construct!
|
|
|
Not sure what IMN is trying to say...
Yes society had past mistaken ideas about race and gender, and being wrong, thought people not fitting labels must be labelled "sick" or "insane".
We're past that nonsense now. Although a few neanderthals hang on, as we see in hx blogs, but they will be gone soon.
|
|
|
Social constructs are subjective and based on the way society perceives things to be. It changes with time.
Physics, chemistry, and biology strive to be independent of the subjective whims of social constructs.
If society is indeed becoming more accurate in terms of understanding gender, it is because it is allowing itself to recognize more of the complex nature of the biology of gender.
|
|
|
There are only two gender groups tyke, Cats ain't one of them.
Ignorance is ignoring genetics, which is a very simple science in many ways. Not so much for disease, altho getting there in many ways (you're welcome), but people are not a % one gender and a % another. Race, sure, gender, nope.
Frankly, if you chop your own cock off, there are many more issues there than sexual genetics.
|
|
|
How has society made past mistakes on race and gender unless society recognized that the social constructs that were designed by society didn't get at the true characteristics of race and gender, determined in large part by genetics and biological development? So social constructs had to change to be more accurate.
|
|
|
I love how "progressive" people don't like it when someone insults someone else because the latter claims they have a certain gender, but are perfectly fine with insulting those who are skeptical about new gender labels. Maybe open your minds and realize if you don't get the opportunity to spend time around these people, it makes sense to be a bit skeptical?
|
|
|
"It seems like a persons sex at birth is not a social construct but more a biological fact. But gender as a whole is a social construct trying to define the various preferences or identities that people have." - thedon60
Exactly.
Night-Rider, I'm not sure what you're railing on about. You just seem angry. Nobody said there's no natural basis for social categories. But because societies of humans created the categories, they are social constructs. The world of humans, both figuratively and literally, isn't as black and white as you want it to be.
|
|
|
I think the problem is not so much you choosing an identity as much as you forcing others to participate.
|
|
|
^^^ you mean like this?
|
|
|
Lot of words here undercutting their own points.
Sciences are totally social constructs, even hard sciences like chemistry and physics. The theories are constantly evolving. As research and facts appear, they are debated by the society of scientists and revised by consensus.
This is what defines science and free thinkers-- ability to adapt and change when old ideas are not working.
The other way, clinging to old ideas and rejecting facts that are inconvenient to old thinking-- that's dogma, more stuff of religion and bigotry.
|
|
|
Yes balls deep!
|
|
|
At this point I think we're talking past each other. All I'm saying is that, so what if something is a social construct? That's as helpful as saying "feet" is a word or the constitution is a document. Being a social contact doesn't help us to understand the underlying true nature of sex or gender, which is really what is important.
|
|
|
"But because societies of humans created the categories, they are social constructs."
But people shouldn't just "create" categories out of thin air. They are created because there is some underlying truth that people are trying to get at. It seems like there is some scientific basis for gender to be more complex than we have thought in the past. The problem is that new genders sometimes seems like they being created out of thin air rather than being based on scientific fact.
|
| There are 35 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
