The Distinction Between Gender and Sex, or the Lack Thereof

[ScholaryTeen]

The Distinction Between Gender and Sex

This argument makes two basic assumptions:

1) There is no metaphysical trait that is unique to either sex (the only differences between the sexes are physical).

2) As a society, we strive for the sexes to be as equal as possible.

Now, if those two assumptions are true, then it is a simple matter to prove that separating the terms “gender” and “sex” is without merit.

I ask the question, how can someone “feel” more a man than a woman, or vice versa?

When I ask that question, usually it is responded with the assertion that the individual has more masculine or feminine traits.

What is a masculine trait? What is a feminine trait?

I posit that there is no such thing outside of biology.

Usually activities or metaphysical traits are associated culturally as masculine or feminine.

For example, caring for children is a feminine trait. Does that mean that caring for children makes you a woman? No, men can care for children just as much.

Aggression is considered a masculine trait. Does that mean an aggressive female is a man? No, as women can be aggressive too.

Is there any trait, not rooted in biology, unique to one sex? Can only women dance, and only men fix cars?

No, such ideology us outdated. Women can do whatever a man can do, and vice versa, assuming they are physically capable.

Therefore, the logical conclusion is that it is impossible to discern whether you are a man or a woman other than through physical means, as men and women are identical other than their physical bodies.

If it is impossible to determine one’s gender other than through physical means, then the term becomes no different than “sex”.

If we, as a society, decide that if you have more culturally-defined masculine than feminine traits you are a man, regardless of sex, then that enshrines cultural norms and gender stereotypes as a pillar of our culture. This would effectively mean that, as an example, only men can be mechanics, regardless of sex. The distinction of sex and gender inherently relies on the existence of societal gender norms/stereotypes.

Such a culture borders on absurdity, and is not one to strive for.

If we, as a society, decide that gender and sex are one and the same, then we acknowledge that men and women are equal in opportunity. Specifically, that one’s interests are not defined by their sex/gender, but by the individual. This would lead to the eventual abolition of gender norms.

*As an aside, this is applicable to transsexual individuals, but not those who suffer from sexual dysphoria. Sexual dysphoria is characterized by an extreme rejection/aversion to one’s own body. The only known treatment for sexual dysphoria is sex-reassignment surgery. If left untreated, it is likely the patient will either mutilate themselves or commit suicide. This differs from transsexual individuals as being transsexual is not a mental illness, and is characterized by a rejection of how they are perceived by others. Transsexuals are not inherently uncomfortable in their body, which makes them fundamentally distinct from those suffering from Sexual Dysphoria. However, those suffering from Sexual Dysphoria will usually be transsexual as well. This boils down to not all transsexuals have sexual dysphoria, while all those with sexual dysphoria are trans.

[cipher42]

It's not about what people can do, it's about what people expect people to do. Men CAN care for children, but women are EXPECTED to. It's a feminine role. I'd argue that if we ceased to care what gender someone was, and ceased to have roles and stereotypes associated with gender (probably even to the point of no longer differentiating gender in language- no more gendered pronouns, just words referring to physical sex features) people being trans would cease to be such an issue because there would essentially be no way to signal a transition at all. Now, it might be the case that gender is natural, as is being transgender, especially given that trans people's brains really do resemble brains of the gender they identify as more than the gender associated with their biological sex. In that case, if gender is natural, it's about something neurological, and transgender people have some kind of thing going on where their neurological configuration doesn't match up with their other sex traits.

[ScholaryTeen]

You followed the argument well.

The reason you are having minor difficulty is that you are reconciling trans with this idea.
This argument attacks the very premise of a non-physical trait being masculine or feminine.

That cannot be done as this argument means that there is no such thing as trans.

If a male who has a bunch of stereotypically feminine traits/interests, does that make him a woman?
I would argue no, as there is no metaphysical feminine trait a man cannot have.

This argument could only be defeated by an example of a trait not tied to physical biology that is uniquely found in men or women, but never the opposite gender.
If there is no such example, then this is the only logical conclusion.

This means there is no such thing as transgender, as there is no such thing as an exclusive nonphysical gender trait.

[Grobmate]

A good point of view. But (again just my opinion), I don't have an issue with transgender people. THEY do have an issue with me.

Now.. I will not change my acceptance of facts to appease someone's feelings. I dont feel this makes me intolerant. It is their life, and I don't judge them. I accept them for who they are. But the facts are they are either Male or Female, (dictated by nature). It's like being pregnant... you can't be half pregnant... a woman either is or she isn't. They may choose to identify as a Man one day and a Woman the next, (gender fluid not transgendered). But.. biologically their gender is either Male or Female.

[cipher42]

But there ARE non-physical traits that are feminine/masculine. Not inherently, but by social definition. Yeah, men can have feminine social attributes and be men, and vice versa for women. But at some point, somehow, those feminine or masculine attributes add up and equate to the category of man or woman. Which I admit is I'll defined as shit. But to be fair, so is biological sex, though perhaps to a lesser degree. Biological sex too is made up of a lot of smaller traits that can vary in their combination. Really, this is sort of how most categories that we treat as solid work.

Also, I'm not trans. I can't fully understand how this works or why it works. I'm basing this off of my understanding of gender, plus what I know about gendered brain structure and the brain structure of trans people, and the words of my trans friends (one of whom actually thought as you did as well for a long time, but never managed to escape the feeling that they didn't want to interact/be perceived as the gender associated with their biological sex)

[SkipStop]

Masculine and feminine traits, activities, etc. are real and still exist. But it doesn't mean a man can't or shouldn't do feminine things. And vise versa. It's correlated with biological norms but it's not a rule.

[ScholaryTeen]

But if there is no (non-biological) trait unique to either gender, then the genders are indistinguishable.

So this brings a dilemma.
There are only two logical conclusions at this realization: either gender doesn't exist sepsarate from sex or it is an infinite spectrum, with no two individuals having exactly the same gender.

If you were to go down the latter option, you keep gender as a idea but it loses any semblance of usefulness.

It can be likened to the statement "everyone is unique."
Yes, that is true. But if everyone is unique, then uniqueness itself becomes worthless as a descriptor.

If everyone is a different gender, then the term gender is useless at performing its one purpose: to describe.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Well, their are psychological/biological predispositions which do need to be taken into account. Now those predispositions generally come from hormones and brain structure, but they absolutely dictate behavior. This is why women are more social oriented and males are more object oriented. This has been shown to exist in infants and other primates so it is very well established. Now I would say that functionally their is no difference between gender and sex as again, those behavioral differences (which again, are well established and scientifically provable) are biological in origin. The only exception to this is transsexualism which results in brain structure differences that more resemble the opposite gender. This would be the only scientifically provable instance of gender and sex being "different", and again, that is in only the rarest of circumstances. People how ever have used this one exception to try and destroy the whole concept, that's the issue. What your describing is social "constructs" like for instance men liking sports because they are competitive, this is a generalization of a specific behavior. If you look men compete across the board but what they compete at can and is different. It can be sports, or it could be video games, the expression of the trait is different, but the root cause of it is the same. If you look at women for instance, they dominate in social and child rearing occupations. Even those who go into medical programs are overwhelmingly more likely to get into pediatrics while males are far more likely to become surgeons. Women who get into stem fields are overwhelmingly more likely to teach rather then actually practice in the field (again, their predisposition towards socialization and child rearing makes them more predisposed towards teaching proffesions). Now variability exists and the idea that we cannot be fluid in this regard is absurd, but variability means that their is a deviation from the standard, not that the standard doesn't exist. Just because some one is good at math doesn't mean they are good at science, same with people, just because a man may be really competitive, doesn't mean he cannot be nurturing but ultimately how this behavior is expressed IS dependent on their sex/gender and we can actually see that in for instance teaching where male students respond much more positively to male teachers and do have a different way of learning. I think people get hung up on specifics when they should be looking at the bigger picture.

[englisc]

I disagree with some parts of your argument.

Only an idiot would say for example that only women can dance, only men can be mechanics, only women can look after children, only men are aggressive etc.

Really the argument on differences between the sexes is about "more" or "less", "more able" or "less able", "more likely" or "less likely" to act in a certain way.

There are differences between men and women that go beyond physical traits. This is where I mainly disagree, with the idea that the differences are only physical.

The physical differences between men and women are mainly influenced by hormones, particularly testosterone vs estrogen.

A man with more testosterone is likely to have more masculine physical traits. Steroids, which are basically just chemicals that mimmick the effects of testosterone, are taken to build muscle for example. High testosterone = more muscle mass. A man with low testosterone however usually will have less masculine physical traits, in fact if they're low enough they might even develop feminine traits. Many young men today have low testosterone mostly due to bad diet, bad food, environmental toxins, and as a result many more men today are being treated for gynecomastia - development of breast tissue.

The same goes for women. A woman with high testosterone will have more masculine physical characteristics. You say that women can do whatever a man can and vice versa, so you might say "but some women are very muscular" - the only way a woman gets bulky is with abnormally high testosterone levels, usually steroids.

Our hormones influence more than just our physical characteristics however, they also influence our behaviour. A big thing many feminists/egalitarians want to push today os the idea that men should be comfortable with crying. They think that men really want to cry as easily as women do, but we're holding back. Well, crying is influenced by the ratio of testosterone to progesterone. High progesterone + low testosterone = higher likelihood of crying. Women naturally have higher progesterone vs testosterone, therefore they cry more easily. Men naturally have more testosterone vs progesterone, therefore they cry less. A man who cries often most likely has a hormonal imbalance. Even if the man is depressed for example, deoression itself is influenced by hormones, and influences hormones.

Hormones are linked with all kinds of behaviours. Empathy, emotional expression, aggression, competitiveness, agreeableness, dominant vs submissive behaviour.

We evolved the way we did for a reason, to fulfill different roles. Our physical body reflects this. Women carry children and have breasts, men have stronger bones and bodies in general. Women are designed to have children and nuture them, men are designed for combat. Our hormones influence our behaviour also in ways that reflclect this.

Women score higher on empathy - an advantage when taking care of small babies. In fact new fathers experience a temporary drop in testosterone in order to bond with the baby, since testosterone lowers empathy. Empathy isn't beneficial to a hunter or a warrior.

It seems that today equality is the new religious belief. Some would find the paragraph above to be deeply offensive, but the only way they can say that's not true is if they think purely with emotion, based on the way they wish the world was, without logic or common sense. We're not equal, we're different. Our differences are supposed to compliment each other. Again the only reason people talk this way is because of the obsession with wantinf everything to be equal.

[Naydyonov]

The reason why we can say that men are masculine, women feminine, and yet both masculine and feminine features do not make a person of one sex become the opposite, is, simply, because a man is 75% masculine, a woman is 75% feminine. These numbers will vary, but in order for a man and a woman to differ, they each need to be more than 50% masculine or feminine in their respective sexes. So why 75% and not 55%,60%,65%? Well, if 1 cube of sugar is equivalent to ¼ of a salt cube, then when both are thrown into batter, they, we'll say, cancel each other out — each minimally adding their own tastes. So, if I throw in 1 sugar cube, ¼ of a salt cube, and an extra ⅒ of a sugar cube, will someone be able to say?: "The taste is more sweet than salty." Of course not.
Thus, the different must be bigger.

Another illustration:

If masculinity is cold — 0 degrees Celsius (Water freezes at 0), and femininity warm — 50 degrees (The hottest normal desert, based off air temperature), then both cannot be 25 degrees. If both men and women were 25 degrees, then the average temperature in New York, all year around, would be at the average temperature of July — 25 degrees. But, in January it obviously isn't warm. As a difference of 20C for men and 30C would still not account for enough of a difference (somewhat warm versus warm), then the difference must be bigger. Now 10C for men and 40C is already quite a bit different. It's the difference between it being chilly and everyone on the bus being covered in sweat. However, neither are deadly. At 10C a person doesn't normally freeze to death, as opposed to at 0C, while at 40C a person doesn't normally die of dehydration. Thus, the difference is quite felt, but not to extreme extremes.
The number we thus get is 10/50 for men (or, 80% masculine), and 40/50 for women (80% feminine.)

[little_bird1]

I totally agree. "Gender" is a fake implementation by society. But a necessary one. If not for it then we wouldn't be able to distinguish our sexes between each others. We don't have that "sense" like animals do and we can't walk around naked, so there had to be a visible difference between sexes. It all started small, very long ago. Differences were very minimal. But as society grew, so did the differences. People started creating groups in order to have a sense of belonging, and those groups developed further divisions, and so on. All to the present time where we have so many groups! Religion, ethnicity, races, sexual orientation, disability, education, etc. You could say it got out of hand. Humans got way too greedy. It's the reason for every single war. And it all started with gender division, indeed. It's a big, fat lie, tho. A paradox, an illusion created by humanity to keep things in order. In the end, I truly believe that this will be the end of us one day.

[Anonymous]

If the differences are no more than physical then transgenders wouldn't exist.
Men and women think differently. Take children for instance boys play much rougher. To say men and women think the same is sexist

[Jager66]

"If the differences are no more than physical then transgenders wouldn't exist."

Now that is a soundly articulated argument, kudos. /btfo

[sonnysunshine]

that illustration you used is priceless on so many levels. It sums up the stupidity of feminism on so many levels.

[Anonymous]

You seem to be operating under the assumption that it needs to be all or nothing. I don't think anyone says anything like childcare makes a woman. I think that's a straight up misrepresentation of it. A collection of traits makes these things, just as one note doesn't make a song and one song doesn't make a genre.

"Is there any trait, not rooted in biology, unique to one sex?"
Irrelevant question. There doesn't need to be anything unique in order to identify gendered behaviour.

"This would effectively mean that, as an example, only men can be mechanics"
Faulty assumption. No, it wouldn't. I would simply identify trends in behaviour.

So basically, your conclusions are wrong, because the premises you used to build on to reach them are erroneous.

[ConnieS]

According to Josette Sona's book: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/892933 there are definite mental, behavioral, emotional, and psychological differences between the sexes - generally speaking, of course.

[animelover14]

While sex and gender are closely linked together they are still different. Though gender is how you are perceived as in society. Generally, a lot of people identify as either male or female and anyone around them perceives people as male or female based on secondary sex characteristics.

[rjroy3]

The Elliott Hulse adage "The Body is the Mind" sums this up well.

They are directly connected and one effects the other. Problems arise when we ignore this fact. Scientifically proven that simply your posture can change your mood, all around attitude and how you walk through the world as such. But we're to believe having an entirely different dominant hormone balance and hardware have no effect? Riiiiiight.

[mattdzz]

There should be congruence between biological sex and gender (that mental/ personality characteristics exhibited by said sex). When there isn't it is mental illness, just as when one's maturity doesn't match with their chronological age.

[Prankster13]

This was a very good mytake, well done. I followed your points well and they make sense-- except for the part about transsexuals. You lost me there I am not sure what you meant at that point.

[ScholaryTeen]

I elaborated further in several other comments if you are interested.

[Prankster13]

Oh okay, I think I get it. That makes sense.

[illkillu]

(maybe add a little conclusion i just read it and have no idea what point you just made) but yes gender norms/roles must perish

[Grobmate]

I dont think they should perish at all. I can't give birth or breast feed, so I think the ladies should keep that one. Gender and sex are the exact same thinf.

[ScholaryTeen]

No problem, I wrote a clarification for another commenter. Here it is:

This argument attacks the very premise of a non-physical trait being masculine or feminine.

That cannot be done as this argument means that there is no such thing as trans.

If a male who has a bunch of stereotypically feminine traits/interests, also known as a gender role/norm, does that make him a woman?
I would argue no, as there is no metaphysical feminine trait a man cannot have.

Men can cook, women can fight. Men can fight, women can clean.

This argument could only be defeated by an example of a trait not tied to physical biology that is uniquely found in men or women, but never the opposite gender.
If there is no such example, then this is the only logical conclusion.

So if you can find an example where "men can do x but women cannot," or "women can do this, but men cannot" that is not rooted in biology, then this argument is defeated.

However, wouldn't it be sexist to make any such claim? Aren't the sexes equal?

This means there is no such thing as transgender, as there is no such thing as an exclusive nonphysical gender trait.

[ScholaryTeen]

@Grobmate
I would say those are unrelated to gender.

[Grobmate]

Outside of biological functions, (and this is just my opinion), there is nothing that either gender can't do. Gender is not disconnected from sex. Indeed they are the same thing. Biology determines gender.
Therefore gender is not disconnected frim biology.

Now... we know that Males and Females are better at certain things than each other. There is a reason that Militaries use "gender norming", (lower fitness standards for women than that of men).

Nowhere is this more evident than in sport... there is a reason that Males and Females do not compete against each other in Rugby, Grid Iron. Athletics, weight lifting etc.

Is it right for a Male to decide that they identify as a Female and then compete against females who would now be at a severe and obnoxious disadvantage? I think it is wrong and not fair.

You cannot magically change your gender. Even after a sex change regardless of the number of hormones used... the cells of the body remain Male.

[Grobmate]

And can we pause for a moment and define equality. Equality is equal opportunity, equal rights and equal responsibility.

Equality of outcome is impossible. If it was.. I could Identify as a Woman, become pregnant and give birth...

[Jager66]

There are significant differences in male and female biology, psychology, and behavior. They are complex to explain and your not going to get the answer from Buzzfeed. Gender is not arbitrary.

[genericname85]

i disagree with the second assumption. as a society we strive for equal rights and equal chances as well as free choice for career and lifestyle decisions.

"being equal" should and hopefully is not the goal of society.

[Grobmate]

I identify as a lolipop... cuz the left said I can..

[Browneye57]

More bullshit. Just look in your pants - that's what you are. Dear god.

[pooper89]

what if you're a hermaphrodite? What then?

[Browneye57]

@pooper89 - Why do you care? So the one in a thousand or less is what carries meaning for you?

[pooper89]

relax I was just fucking around

[Browneye57]

@pooper89 - We figured that. ;)

[Logical_Idolist]

Gender and sex are the same thing.

[Grobmate]

Indeed they are. Well said.

[Under_Maps_OF_twigs]

Simple:

Sex is male and female.

Gender is masculine and feminine.

Call me simple minded but I don't care. I don't agree we have more than 2 of each like sexologists says.

[MollyTheOriginal]

Gender is a social construct, whereas sex is literally the biological one you were assigned at birth. Pretty simple.

[hellionthesagereborn]

So transgenderism doesn't exist?

[Sweatyotterr]

You are either a boy or a girl anything else is a mental illness or attention seeking