Can there be Social Genders alongside Scientific Genders?

[OddBeMe]

This is where Trans comes in. Scientists compartmentalize to study, great. Societal-wise…don’t need that. We should be able to label ourselves what we want. Be who we want.

And god willing, one day do away with labels.

Yes, we can have scientific AND social genders not the same

No! Absolutely not!

Other

[RavVid]

It is quite laughable in my view. Social genders are sexualities not genders or sex.

Gender is a language construct. French and many other languages insist on giving inanimate objects such as table and chairs a gender. Stupid that a table is feminine.

English did have gender but fortunately got rid of it pretty much entirely. Blond and Blonde is one of the few words left where there are different endings for males and females. We want 97 endings now? Pity there are only 26 alphabet letters - looks like we need to invent 71 new letters.

Early feminists wanted to get rid of him/her and replace with HIR but nobody got on board with that. This social gender is just another noisy version of the HIR attempt except not as sensible or justified. We can be quite sure that 97 gender pronouns (at current count) is an unmanageable nonsense. Who is going to use them?

I don't have problem with anybody defining their sexuality however they want but they can't expect me to remember or care a fig for the current list of 97 sexualities.

There are only two sexes but I am happy enough that there is an infinite number of sexualties. But I am not going to use anything other than male/female pronouns. And in the long run neither is anybody else.

[Laura_Marx]

"Scientists compartmentalize to study, great. Societal-wise…don’t need that."

i think this is an intuitive framing—biology can be strict, society can be flexible—but historically the concept of socially-defined 'sex roles' was introduced to rescue a stable, compartmentalized theory of gender. from encyclopedia. com, "Sex Roles":

"Because the external body can be ambiguous (for genitalia are not always clearly male or female), twentieth-century science turned to internal markers such as chromosomes, hormones, and genes to understand and secure biological sex differences. However, these internal markers are also highly ambiguous; for instance, a person with certain chromosomal abnormalities could be judged male even if that person had breasts and a vagina. 'The intensity of the search for an infallible marker of sex difference, and the uncertainties in most "biological" markers, have indicated to many scholars that cultural notions are certainly influencing science in this area, and that "gender" may actually determine '"sex" rather than the other way around' (Wiesner-Hanks 2001, p. 3)."

the term 'sex roles' was coined by John Money who is infamous today for his butchery of intersex children. read this way, the social theory of gender actually rescued gender from the biological challenge.

[DaisyM23]

technically scientific gender is sex (biological male/female) then social gender is gender as we know it now where it's a fluid identity

[Anonymous]

What is wrong with words having as few meanings as possible?

Gender is either a reference to biological sex or its a reference to some personality trait.

If it is a reference to Sex then yes that information is verifiable, useful, and important to most other people as it tells us generally what you can and can't do.

if it is a reference to a personality that information is less valuable as it is based upon your unverifiable word regarding how you think and what you are supposedly willing to do.

In the first case we don't really need to know you to trust your limits in the 2nd case we need to actually know if your word is trustworthy.

[RichieSmith]

There are only two genders. The test to figure out which one you are is to see what pair of sex chromosomes you have for chromosome pair 23. If you have two “X” chromosomes (XX) you are a woman. if you have one “X” and one “Y” (XY) you are a man. This is set in stone just like you being a biological human. Of course there are some genetic disorders where your chromosomes are (XXX) (X0) (XXY) or (XYY) but the general rule remains that if at least one Y chromosome is present, you are considered a male. Females do not have a Y chromosome.

[OddBeMe]

“Of course there are genetic disorders”…I’d just call them issues. Not klinefelters ain’t killin no one.

[Juxtapose]

If they just kept it to themselves for the most part and did it try and impose it on society via compelled speech laws in Canada for example then I would not have a problem with them.

Right now I am pretty much left with no choice but to view trans people as a problem as a whole because if left unchecked then they will take over society and pass compelled speech laws. There is also the social contagion aspect which is very malicious and ruins lives.

Again, if they just kept it to themselves for the most part and didn't try to force it on anyone then I really would not care.

[Juxtapose]

*did not try to

[OddBeMe]

I think they’re just trying to protect their own rights…

[Juxtapose]

Yeah right xD Then why the compelled speech laws man? Why the child drag shows? Why the child "gender affirming care" that uses the same chemicals to castrate sex offenders?

[TheVigilantFox]

No, there’s only 2 genders male and female, anything else is just a mental disorder.


Even trans people are male or female,


A trans man is a girl transitioning to be a boy.


A trans woman is a man transitioning to be a woman.


There’s only 2 genders.


The other million are just people being insane and ridiculous.

[OddBeMe]

Who’s in charge of labels then? Like what’s considered a white person?

[TallAnon]

There's reality and there's whatever people come up with.

You can yell about what you make up, look at hippies; they did a lot of that. Ultimately some will follow, some will respect, some will not.

Where I cross the line is when people put expectations surrounding their made up rules on others. Canada, for example, had a whole discussion surrounding a bill requiring you to call someone by their preferred pronoun.

Ultimately, I get to call you whatever I like, be that: him/her/his/bitch/helicopter. You can make up being a helicopter, I do not have to agree and can still call you bitch instead.

[Anonymous]

People can call themselves whatever they choose, but they can't force others to acknowledge that the "gender" they choose to call themselves by is real. Below is an example of a "gender" taken from the long list of what a minority of people say are "genders" now.

Astergender - a gender that feels bright and celestial

The normal majority will never support such silliness and will continue to see gender as what it has been for centuries, which is a synonym to sex. What these people have really done is turn the term "gender" into a joke, a laughing stock.

[Pohjolan]

We can invent a new word that means social gender like gencial with somen and sowomen but this would be a trivial term not tied to reality.

However if it stops people from insisting that upbringing decides which gamete human bodies will produce after puberty then so be it.

by the way if gender is a social construct then why would puberty blockers, hormone therapy or surgery be required to change genders?

[OddBeMe]

Did you know “whites” didn’t include Catholics until the 50s?

[Laura_Marx]

not every trans person takes hormone therapy or has surgery. in fact, trans people existed before such things were possible. and we had to—otherwise why would anyone have come up with them? the Hirschfield Institute didn't propose transsexuality, they coined it to describe something they encountered among their subjects. this information is obvious when you think about it, yet a lot of how we understand the transgender concept today seems to be incompatible with it to me. anyway, you're better off thinking of hrt &c as things which improve outcomes for transgender people, and which many transgender people find satisfying to use, but which are not an essential or unvarying part of what it means to be transgender.

[Laura_Marx]

this is by the way the social construction of gender in action. we now have cause to talk about 'transgender people' who have 'gender dysphoria' who take 'hormone replacement therapy' and so forth. our very concept of this subject is informed by 20th century medical discourses which, on reflection, must be new and historically contingent, subject to inconstancy and change.

[Pohjolan]

@Laura_Marx
"our very concept of this subject is informed by 20th century medical discourses which, on reflection, must be new and historically contingent, subject to inconstancy and change."

Is it though? Any major changes in human evolution take about one million years.
We didn't suddenly develop a third gender or gain frog like abilities to swap genders.

[Laura_Marx]

i am not sure all those things are true. first of all, human behaviours are not subject to the same laws—we see institutions like marriage and kinship change quite radically in much less time, and these kinds of things have proven difficult to provide evolutionary mechanisms for. even if you have to explain it all by way of an adaptation, we are free to execute adaptations in different ways given different circumstances.

second of all, i am talking about a change in how we conceptualize something which i just said must have existed previously. our concepts might change as we try to grapple with an underlying reality. i understand the term 'social construction' makes it sound like i'm saying something i don't mean—i'm using it because you did, normally i avoid it. but you understand that having a different theory about reality would make some features of reality more salient and thus subject to discussion and action. this doesn't make this different theory 'trivial and not tied to reality' as such.

finally, we DID suddenly gain frog-like abilities to swap genders. you named them yourself: puberty blockers, hormone therapy, surgeries. these things have literal, observable biological effects. they change the endocrine system, they alter both secondary and primary sexual characteristics, and so forth. these are BIOLOGICAL changes, and making these changes is a part of human behaviour that we developed suddenly. it doesn't need to mean changing sex in the restricted reproductive sense you bring up re: gametes, but it's obviously something relevant when talking about the kind of organism we are. and i would say that most of the time 'sex' and 'gender' have a much wider meaning than how you want to use it. if i call myself 'female' i obviously don't think i can get pregnant, but what i'm saying is also not trivial or totally unmoored from reality (even if i turn out to be wrong).

[Pohjolan]

@Laura_Marx
"finally, we DID suddenly gain frog-like abilities to swap genders. you named them yourself: puberty blockers, hormone therapy, surgeries. these things have literal, observable biological effects. they change the endocrine system, they alter both secondary and primary sexual characteristics, and so forth. these are BIOLOGICAL changes,"

Negative.
A trans-woman is still unable to procreate with a man after all of the surgeries, treatments and vice versa.
Or a male body reacts to a artificial vagina as a penetrating torso wound.
Its a biological change to be sure but not one in gender.
It is not a frog like change.

[D_Bone_Steak]

I think it's all bullshit. People get paid to chop some dicks and tits off, and that's why it's become a thing. All about the $$$$, and outside of that they're just gay in my opinion.

[Guy13]

Sex is sciences: male Female. These other made up gender garbage are social constructs.

[OddBeMe]

What is race?

[Redstang88]

Well I guess people can call themselves whatever they want, doesn’t really matter to me. Just don’t expect everyone else to play along

[OddBeMe]

Cool cool. Don’t they are really. Just trying to keep Repubs out of their pants…

[CaptainSmartass]

I beg your Osama? There are only biological genders, of which there are two - Male and Female.

Simples...

[OddBeMe]

How many races are there?

[CaptainSmartass]

Only one. The human race.

[OddBeMe]

so its a societal thing?

[Anonymous]

Yeah. . . because people labelling themselves what they want and forcing everyone into compliance is REALLY a step in the direction of "god willing, one day do (ing) away with labels."

[loveslongnails]

Still trying to figure out what a "social gender" is?

[InsecureLivesMatter]

What the f*ck even is a social or scientific gender?

[InsecureLivesMatter]

Anyway I think we should stop using the word gender and return to using the word sex. The idiot control freaks (feminists on the left and wannabe "Christ followers" on the right), politely speaking the PC crowd, saw everything bad in the word "sex" and saw that "gender" is the proper way to use sex, as in biological sex. Gender is what you identify as. You are free to express yourself as a man or a woman, but what you are born as is what you will always be, even if you cut off your genitals or breasts.

[OddBeMe]

Well, yeah. When do we ever really need to know gender?

[Snakeyes7]

Scientific genders? You mean biological sex?

[OddBeMe]

Social wise. Societal. Maybe not hang so much on scientific genders. That’s between them and a doc.

[Snakeyes7]

The only ones that exist are male and female.

[msc545]

I am not sure what a social gender would even consist of really

[OddBeMe]

Whatever the hell you want. Just stop passing laws against people.

[Kingofkings1992]

I identify as a grizzly bear. I guess that makes me a grizzly bear regardless of reality.

[Anonymous]

There are only 2 genders. And nothing in between or else.

[captain_voidwalker]

There's only 2 genders

[Anonymous]

Sounds like gender Vs sex

[Wise4myage]

Nope.