if gender is a social construct

Deleted · June 03, 2015, 03:19:48 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:17:16 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on June 03, 2015, 03:02:04 PM
Just what the hell is "masculine behavior"?

Oh, right, it's something that we've come to define through social gravity.

Have you ever heard of a little thing called testosterone? (probably spelled that wrong....fucking wii u)

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:19:58 PM

Quote from: Majestic Star Dragon on June 03, 2015, 03:14:33 PM

you'd think i'd knw better by now.

What you're doing is like trying to prove that race isn't a social construct by skinning a black kid at birth and seeing how he goes about his life as a non-black. And using that to try and claim that it isn't a social construct.

That's how retarded that is.

More Than Mortal · June 03, 2015, 03:20:37 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:17:16 PM

Oh, right, it's something that we've come to define through social gravity.

So?

If I see gazelles move quickly, and then define gazelles as fast, I'm hardly imposing some socially constructed view on the gazelles. The fact that we've defined masculinity is an utterly uninteresting point; we've defined everything.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:21:18 PM

Quote from: Majestic Star Dragon on June 03, 2015, 03:19:48 PM

Have you ever heard of a little thing called testosterone? (probably spelled that wrong....fucking wii u)

Because women don't have testosterone, yeah.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:23:21 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on June 03, 2015, 03:20:37 PM

So?

It's a social construct.

Quote

If I see gazelles move quickly, and then define gazelles as fast, I'm hardly imposing some socially constructed view on the gazelles.

That's a very poor analogy, because gazelles are demonstrably fast creatures. We can't demonstrate what is "masculine" behavior or "feminine" behavior. We can only measure what higher levels of testosterone or estrogen can do to the body.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:24:57 PM

"men have higher testosterone"

yes, biologically
discussing the biological differences between men and women is a discussion of sex, not gender

More Than Mortal · June 03, 2015, 03:27:18 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:23:21 PM

We can't demonstrate what is "masculine" behavior or "feminine" behavior.

Obviously we can. Planned Parenthood does a good job. Of course we can say males are demonstrably more competitive than females, or aggressive or whatever trait you're looking at.

Deleted · June 03, 2015, 03:28:01 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:21:18 PM

Quote from: Majestic Star Dragon on June 03, 2015, 03:19:48 PM
Have you ever heard of a little thing called testosterone? (probably spelled that wrong....fucking wii u)
Because women don't have testosterone, yeah.

Mens testosterone levels are higher than females which results in seperate masculine physical as well as behavioral traits. The same applies in reverse in respects to estrogen.

and in race there are verry minor differences that go beyond a social construct. they are pretty minor but they exist. nationality on the other hand is a social construct

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:28:59 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:24:57 PM

"men have higher testosterone"

yes, biologically
discussing the biological differences between men and women is a discussion of sex, not gender

Groot · June 03, 2015, 03:33:27 PM

ITT people confuse gender roles with gender.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:36:45 PM

Quote from: Groot on June 03, 2015, 03:33:27 PM

ITT people confuse gender roles with gender.

Gender represents both the roles and behaviors perceived to be associated with their respective sexes. There's nothing biological about gender, by definition. These people are arguing established definitions, and it's just silly.

"THEY CUT A BOY'S PENIS OFF AND MADE HIM THINK HE WAS A GIRL, BUT THEN HE WASN'T A GIRL! THEREFORE, NOT A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT!"

durrr

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:41:25 PM

i mean, if you really wanted to make some asinine biological argument, why not just bring up the fact that women have tits and men have dicks? therefore, gender isn't a social construct, because there's clear differences between the sexes?

it's just as stupid as trying to bring up testosterone levels, as though that's not biology
which isn't what we're talking about

Deleted · June 03, 2015, 03:42:17 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:36:45 PM

Quote from: Groot on June 03, 2015, 03:33:27 PM
ITT people confuse gender roles with gender.
Gender represents both the roles and behaviors perceived to be associated with their respective sexes. There's nothing biological about gender, by definition. These people are arguing established definitions, and it's just silly.

"THEY CUT A BOY'S PENIS OFF AND MADE HIM THINK HE WAS A GIRL, BUT THEN HE WASN'T A GIRL! THEREFORE, NOT A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT!"

durrr

says the guy using 'cause i said so' logic

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:43:08 PM

LOL

Literally where.
I'm using established definitions and common sense.

More Than Mortal · June 03, 2015, 03:44:35 PM

I'm just going to bow out of this debate now.

Partly because this is a relatively uninteresting area to me, but mostly because I want to see where Verby and Dragon take this >.>

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:48:11 PM

I'm just saying, if you wanna try to show that gender isn't a social construct, you can't cite sexual dimorphism (or the biological differences between the sexes) as an argument, because that's not what gender is about--it's a non-sequitur.

You can't bring up biology.
You're measuring a chicken with a yardstick.

it's like saying there is no red, because there's blue
the existence of blue disproves the existence of red

Deleted · June 03, 2015, 03:48:58 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:41:25 PM

i mean, if you really wanted to make some asinine biological argument, why not just bring up the fact that women have tits and men have dicks? therefore, gender isn't a social construct, because there's clear differences between the sexes?

it's just as stupid as trying to bring up testosterone levels, as though that's not biology
which isn't what we're talking about

Testosterone and estrogen levels are what affect and influene naturaly''gendered'' behavior which is the whole point. Even animals have their own gender norms on their own witout social constructs.But hey you're just gonna call me a cunt sooner or later anyway for not agreeing with whatever you say, so I guess there's no point in arguing with you. I guess Black Widdows only eat their mates out of peer pressure.

Deleted · June 03, 2015, 03:51:25 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:43:08 PM

LOL

Literally where.
I'm using established definitions and common sense.

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:12:11 PM

Quote from: Majestic Star Dragon on June 03, 2015, 02:59:27 PM
It's just about universaly agreed that the results contradict the whole ''social construct argument.
Not by me.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:54:05 PM

Quote from: Majestic Star Dragon on June 03, 2015, 03:48:58 PM

Testosterone and estrogen levels are what affect and influene naturaly''gendered'' behavior which is the whole point.

yes, but that doesn't mean shit, considering that we can influence this "gendered" behavior by altering the amounts of those hormones in the body

the fact that men happen to have more testosterone than females (usually) is arbitrary
and it doesn't constitute "male" behavior--it constitutes testosterone-influenced behavior

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 03:54:43 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:12:11 PM

Not by me.

That's not the same thing as saying "because I said so".

More Than Mortal · June 03, 2015, 03:58:27 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:48:11 PM

You can't bring up biology.

Why not?

Gender is fundamentally socio-behavioural; if you can demonstrate a causal relationship between gender and biological sex there's no non-sequitur.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 04:00:10 PM

Quote from: Majestic Star Dragon on June 03, 2015, 03:48:58 PM

Black Widdows only eat their mates out of peer pressure.

Animals probably don't have genders at all. They just have sexes. Genders are exclusively a human phenomenon, I would argue. It's a byproduct of our self-awareness as a species.

And before you say it, just because Pokémon uses the word "gender" to describe a Pokémon's sex doesn't really mean anything either. They probably just didn't want to use the word "sex" in a kid's game, but that's what it technically should be.

Groot · June 03, 2015, 04:04:17 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 03:36:45 PM

Quote from: Groot on June 03, 2015, 03:33:27 PM
ITT people confuse gender roles with gender.
Gender represents both the roles and behaviors perceived to be associated with their respective sexes. There's nothing biological about gender, by definition. These people are arguing established definitions, and it's just silly.

"THEY CUT A BOY'S PENIS OFF AND MADE HIM THINK HE WAS A GIRL, BUT THEN HE WASN'T A GIRL! THEREFORE, NOT A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT!"

durrr

Gender (as in the mind and not the body [sex]) is at least partly biological, if not completely. It's innate and can't really be changed, as demonstrated in that example that was quoted with the boy with the botched surgery who was raised as a girl.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 04:06:35 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on June 03, 2015, 03:58:27 PM

Why not?

I already explained why. Gender, by definition, represents the cultural/socio-behavioral (as you just said) differences between the sexes, outside of the biological. Bringing up biology presupposes that gender is about that subject in the first place, when it's not.

Quote

if you can demonstrate a causal relationship between gender and biological sex there's no non-sequitur.

You can't, though, and that's the point. You haven't done it, and Majestic certainly hasn't done it.

I refuted the hormone argument already. It's just like pointing out that men and women have different sexual organs, and that makes them behave differently because they produce different hormones. Well, no shit. That's a biological happening that doesn't have anything to do with gender.

We can increase these hormones (and sometimes, the hormones are already "out of whack" from birth) manually--if testosterone was truly a male-exclusive hormone, it wouldn't have any effect whatsoever in a female body, and vice-versa. That's why it's not an argument.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 04:08:06 PM

Quote from: Groot on June 03, 2015, 04:04:17 PM

Gender (as in the mind and not the body [sex]) is at least partly biological, if not completely. It's innate and can't really be changed, as demonstrated in that example that was quoted with the boy with the botched surgery who was raised as a girl.

The experiment itself was botched. You simply can't use it as an example.

It can easily be changed. Caitlyn Jenner much?

Deleted · June 03, 2015, 04:10:44 PM

I honestly have no idea what verb thinks gender is at this point. It's defined as the characheristics difetenting between masculinity and femininity.

Said traits are largely the result of biological differences between male and female due to hormones and genes thatinfluence behavior and physiology. There sre of course outliers and those who diviate from the norm but at tne end of the day it's mostly biological

Groot · June 03, 2015, 04:10:52 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 04:08:06 PM

Quote from: Groot on June 03, 2015, 04:04:17 PM
Gender (as in the mind and not the body [sex]) is at least partly biological, if not completely. It's innate and can't really be changed, as demonstrated in that example that was quoted with the boy with the botched surgery who was raised as a girl.
The experiment itself was botched. You simply can't use it as an example.

It can easily be changed. Caitlyn Jenner much?

I don't get what you're trying to say. Jenner obviously had a female mind this whole time and then physically transitioned. Gender is innate but I'm not arguing that it can't be mismatched with the wrong sex (which is why trans people exist at all).

DAS B00T x2 · June 03, 2015, 04:11:42 PM

If gender and gender roles aren't separate, explain feminine males and/or crossdressers who don't want to be a woman and happily call themselves men.

Verbatim · June 03, 2015, 04:12:35 PM

"Men are more competitive, therefore competition is a masculine trait."

Bullshit. While men tend to be more competitive than women, that does not make competition inherently a "male trait". It's a (and I used this term on the previous page, and it's important) a testosterone-influenced trait.

More Than Mortal · June 03, 2015, 04:13:22 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on June 03, 2015, 04:06:35 PM

outside of the biological

Not if you can demonstrate a causal relationship between the underlying biology and the behavioural observations. That's why there's an entire debate about this in the first place.

Quote

You haven't done it

Did you read my post with all the links?

Quote

It's just like pointing out that men and women have different sexual organs, and that makes them behave differently because they produce different hormones.

Except that is an argument and you haven't refuted it. If gender is behavioural, and there are obvious behavioural differences as a result of underlying biological causes then the behaviour is a result of biology to some extent.

Quote

Well, no shit. That's a biological happening that doesn't have anything to do with gender.

All you're doing is literally defining biology out of gender altogether, despite the fact that there is no basis for this. The fact that the thing in question may be behavioural or socially influenced to some degree doesn't preclude it from having biological causes.

Quote

if testosterone was truly a male-exclusive hormone, it wouldn't have any effect whatsoever in a female body, and vice-versa.

That doesn't hold; the point is that there is a correlation between levels of testosterone and the male sex. Nobody ever questions the existence of "outliers".