They're not though. Gender roles are key to gender.

Sex is independent of all that though.

Well, "absurd" isn't really a counterargument. I'll be here when you've got some explanation as to what gender "feels" like rather than just a knee-jerk dismissal. — NKBJ

I'm not sure what it feels like exactly for others, as one only ever really feels one's own experiences. But I think it makes sense for me, for example, to say what it feels like to be male. I have some feelings, experiences and responses to stimuli which are very much a consequence of my being male. That seems uncontroversial enough.

I would say that's extremely controversial, actually. And it's easy to point into the abstract nebula, but how about some examples?

Sure. The following feelings I would characterise as typically male. The feeling of immersion and intense interest one can have when solving mechanical problems, for example when I built a recumbent bicycle (it wasn't very good - needs a lot of adjustment); the dissatisfaction that men feel if they are not working reasonably hard; I think men have a strong desire to be good providers, I know I do; men feel that conceptual clarity is important and worth pursuing.

Of course, women may also have all these experiences, but I very much doubt if they have them at the same frequency as men. I have never known a woman to mend a puncture on a bicycle. I have even shown women who profess to wish to be independent how to mend a puncture on a bicycle, and I still end up mending it for them. They leave the bike in full view with a flat tyre until my impulse to fix it overrides any other consideration. They are fundamentally not interested in mending bicycles, but they know I am intensely interested in doing so. They want functioning bicycles, but do they want to fix them? They do not, sir. Not while there is a man about.

Out of curiosity, has anyone on the forum ever know an bicycle puncture to be fixed by a female? Has any woman on the forum ever fixed a puncture?

Or "individual", assuming there are literally an infinite amount of genders that people can identify as. At that point you might as well acknowledge that if you categorize and quality literally everything that no two people are exactly alike and we can just see everyone as individuals and throw away all of the nomenclature I've seen thrown around over the last half decade integrating anything from temperature to animals into gender terms and phrases. At that point, at least to me, it's getting out of hand and quite frankly silly.

All of the above can be ignored if we're going to stick to two, or at most, a few different types of gender. — Taneras

Does that reflect what's going on in the heads of the relevant folks, though?

Most people do think they are correctly gendered to their sex and they know that intuitively, of the people who don't (which is a very small percentage), "most" transgender people think they have been misgendered which means they intuitively understood their gender is not the same as their sex.

Either this is a mental disorder or they're correct, either way it's not an argument for saying gender is socially constructed. The percentage of people who think their gender is non-binary is very small, smaller than 0.001%. These people are mere ideologues and are comparable to people who think they were born the wrong animal and so on.


So when I am talking about gender being "socially constructed" that means gender is created through social engineering. So I think that your gender corresponds to your sex, however, how exactly that plays out is impacted by social and cultural influences.

I only really posted in this thread to clear up the fact that not all or very few transgender people believe gender is a social construct.

Your position could be 10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 95% or 100% of gender is socially and culturally constructed. There's a LOT of room for interpretation but once you start going above 50%, to me, that's just not really worth debating. Either you're focusing too much on superficial things like toys, dresses, colours and other crap like that or you've been educated by philosophers about science and that's just a really bad idea.

Either this is a mental disorder or they're correct, — Judaka

That seems like a false dichotomy.

We can and do simply use the term for a psychological notion, which has obvious influences from social norms.

Your position could be 10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 95% or 100% of gender is socially and culturally constructed. There's a LOT of room for interpretation but once you start going above 50%, to me, that's just not really worth debating. Either you're focusing too much on superficial things like toys, dresses, colours and other crap like that or you've been educated by philosophers about science and that's just a really bad idea. — Judaka

You clearly haven't been educated by good philosophers at all, or you'd know not to open a conversation where you're going to dismiss a whole leg of the argument out of hand with no real logical/valid reason.

I am not arguing gender is 100% biologically informed. I am saying people don't gender themselves based on whether they played with trucks or ponies as a child.

You clearly haven't been educated by good philosophers at all, or you'd know not to open a conversation where you're going to dismiss a whole leg of the argument out of hand with no real logical/valid reason. — NKBJ

Sorry but I find this whole topic boring, I also wouldn't discuss it with someone who agreed with me. This is a scientific question and I would need to do a sizable amount of research to demonstrate to a sufficient degree proof of my claims. I would need to do enough to show I'm not cherrypicking or demonstrating confirmation bias. That seems like a lot of work to gain nothing, there's nothing a person who thinks gender is socially constructed can teach me on the subject and I don't want to be taught worthless philosophy that goes against science and evidence.

I have never known a woman to mend a puncture on a bicycle. — bert1

IF they are 25 miles out, have a pump, have a patch kit, and don't want to walk 25 miles, they had jolly well better fix it. I've known a woman with a broken chain (on her bicycle) to take out a de-linker, shorten the chain 1 or 2 links, and ride on home in a high gear (because the chain was now shorter and the high gear sprocket is a smaller diameter). (Note to young philosophers: People have not always had cell phones.)

The women at the Hub Bicycle Coop in Minneapolis not only fix flat tires, they do complete bicycle overalls--dirt, grease, solvents, and all. So do the men. Ovaries or testicles just depends on what worker is next up.

I am a male, I know how to fix tires; I have fixed many flat tires. I can't do it any better than a woman with similar practice. I don't carry a de-linker. I know how to shorten a chain, but it's a son of a bitch to do if it is raining ... I'd end up walking.

Sure, all categories are ultimately constructed. But whether or not I am a human with 10 toes does not carry many consequences, being considered male or female does. — Echarmion

There are almost an infinite amount of qualifiers one can add to any comparison. Heck, you could even make an apples to apples comparison an apples to oranges comparison. They fell from different trees. They have different weights. One came from the side of the tree that got more sunlight.

At the end of the day its true that for the vast majority of people, their gender, socially constructed or not, matches their biological sex. Whether or not there are social consequences because of that is a different conversation.

I think you're overstating your case a bit, in the absence of any reliable numbers. Sure many people get along with two genders just fine. But it's not just transgender people that get pigeonholed by gender roles. You can probably find people who don't fit into common gender roles in every classroom. — Echarmion

By definition it has to be only transgendered people. Trans/cisgender is a dichotomy. Your gender identity either matches your biological sex or it doesn't.

Less than .1% of the population identifies as transgender, meaning the other 99.9%+ identify as cisgender (their gender identity matches their biological gender). Sure certain social media platforms might make it appear as if its more than that but it's not.

The problem I generally see with what you've said is that many people who push for more than two genders see gender identity/roles as very rigid. If you're a male you have to like all sports, fast cars, beer, young women, big houses, grilling meat, cigars, fancy watches, etc. If you like all but one of those well sorry you're not actually a male, you're somewhere between the male and female spectrum. Most people do not see gender identities as that rigid. And before you suggest that there aren't any reliable numbers for that just look at the 99.9% of people who are cisgender but don't fit the ken/Barbie doll check list for male and female.

I can't do it any better than a woman with similar practice. — Bitter Crank

You probably could just considering strength differences. My wife can change a flat tire, I still had to assist her a few weeks ago because she didn't have the grip strength to get the large plastic wingnut that secured the spare tire to the bottom of her SUV's trunk.

I'm sure the greater strength would also net you a faster tire changing time (could jack it up faster, pick up/mount the tire faster, etc.).

Sure some women are stronger than some men, but the vast majority of men are stronger than the vast majority of women.

No. Gender is not about gender roles; gender is about genetals. There are sets of genetalia, and depending on which set you have defines your gender.

It's not Top and Bottom, masculine and feminine - go back to grindr.

BC said "Social construction is just egotism: I can be anything I want to be!"

That's not social construction. — bert1

The improved sentence: "I can be anything I want to be!" is socially constructed egotism.

Nor are people with genuine gender dysphoria, as far as I understand, in a position to freely choose what gender to identify with, any more than gay people choose to be gay. — bert1

Homosexuals and heterosexuals, metrosexuals, ambisexuals, ultrasexuals, desexuals, male feminists (aka eunuchs in the haram), those with gender euphoria, dysphoria, and especially those with gender dysphasia*** are all free to IDENTIFY with whatever gender they want. Hell, they can identify with whatever species they want. They just can't really BE any sex or gender they want.

***Gender dysphasia is a relatively recent disorder in which supposedly intelligent people with intact brains spout all sorts of unadulterated nonsense about gender. There is no known treatment, but gagging and handcuffing people with gender dysphasia can help everybody else.

A male turned female is still a male, I don't care what he says he is; the fact of the matter is not false because someone's belief contests it.

You probably could just considering strength differences. My wife can change a flat tire, I still had to assist her a few weeks ago because she didn't have the grip strength to get the large plastic wingnut that secured the spare tire to the bottom of her SUV's trunk. — Taneras

Just because Superman was the last person to tighten the plastic wing nut on the spare tire shouldn't be taken as a strength deficiency. Maybe your wife just hasn't had to deal with enough wing nuts in her life. (Or maybe she has,) I've been outfoxed on a number of occasions by nuts and bolts,

I believe the sky is red; does this mean the sky is identified as red in my view? Seems dodgy and inefficent.

Exactly! Every cell in his feminated body still has the xy chromosome.

Sorry but I find this whole topic boring, I also wouldn't discuss it with someone who agreed with me. — Judaka

Then why are you wasting our time commenting? Troll.

I was discussing what transgender people do or don't believe. Then I responded to your comment which quoted me and told you I'm not interested in talking to you. Get over yourself.

A) I was politely responding to some points you made first. In this thread. Thus opening the conversation.

B) You decided to first make your counterpoint, and then rudely say that discussing anything with anyone who doesn't believe exactly your version of things is not worth talking to. Seems like you're the one who needs to get over yourself.

Sex, firstly, is not the way we're meant to use our genetalia, we're meant to reproduce using them. Pleasuring from the genetalia is alternative usage.

Homosexuality is alternative genetalia usage, usually a result of abstract reality, such as man-made civilization on a solar-made planet. Homosexuality is an abstraction of heterosexuality, more specific than sex for pleasure; it's sex, with the same gender, for pleasure.

Sure some women are stronger than some men, but the vast majority of men are stronger than the vast majority of women. — Taneras

That's definitely a malleable physical trait:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/15/todays-men-are-nowhere-near-as-strong-as-their-dads-were-researchers-say/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0dd4f4c09cf9

Not only are men becoming wimpier:
"To look at it another way: In 1985, the typical 30-to-34-year-old man could squeeze your hand with 31 pounds more force than the typical woman of that age could. But today, older millennial men and women are roughly equal when it comes to grip strength."

I've been outfoxed on a number of occasions by nuts and bolts, — Bitter Crank

That is a deeply philosophical topic. Robert Pirsig dedicated a whole section of 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' to the phenomenon of stuckness, starting with its application to frozen nuts and then expanding to its occurrence in life in general.

That section brought me great solace in the seventies when I sometimes had to spend whole days trying to remove stuck cotter pins (sometimes one had to drill them almost out of existence before they would give way, and they were very drill-resistant). In my view cotterless cranks were the best invention since the wheel, but in the seventies, only the more expensive bikes had them - beyond my meagre budget.

You decided to first make your counterpoint, and then rudely say that discussing anything with anyone who doesn't believe exactly your version of things is not worth talking to — NKBJ

Haha... when you mischaracterize me to this extent, it is hard to think I should change. Anyway, enough of this.

:roll:

That's definitely a malleable physical trait: — NKBJ

And its also a trait that's heavily tied to biological sex - which was my point.

Yeah, I get your point. MY point is that biology is not always destiny.

But today, older millennial men and women are roughly equal when it comes to grip strength." — NKBJ

This is also a very misleading summary of the results.

98lbs to 75lbs is roughly equal?

So why is the seventy something cents women are supposedly paid to a man's dollar considered to be so horrible if its "roughly equal"?

It's not roughly equal. It's about 33% stronger.

Are you referring to this passage:
"Millennial women between 30 to 34 actually squeezed much harder than their forebears did, coming in at 98 pounds of force compared to 79 pounds in 1985."
?
If so, read carefully.