Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="wait whattt? :o" data-source="post: 75643" data-attributes="member: 564">No. I think I did not articulate myself clearly. That&#039;s on me.I don&#039;t want sex to be &quot;a set of elements that are a) physical and b) biological&quot;, nor do I wantgender to be &quot;a set of elements that references sex&quot;.What I want is simply a descriptive framework. A framework that describes society&#039;s use and manifestation of sex and gender.As such, I think that a descriptive framework would purport that1. sex is a set of elements that are a) physical and b) biological2. gender is a set of elements that references sexAgain, the idea here is that I want to describe society. To describe society, you observe it, and when I observed it, I noticed that people, verbally, used external genitalia as - for the lack of a better word - the main and initial differentiator between &quot;men&quot; and &quot;women&quot; because it is a reliable and common (but not always true) difference, but then I noticed that, to people, there are MORE things that differentiates &quot;men&quot; from &quot;women&quot;. Pretending like the only differentiator between &quot;men&quot; and &quot;women&quot; that people in society have in mind is &quot;one has a functioning SRY gene in their Y chromosome&quot; is not only folly, but it is literally denial of reality.You answered the question yourself, because it is not &quot;totally divorced from it rather than replacing &#039;sex&#039;&quot;. A concept needs not replace another concept for it to use the same words. The reason why gender uses the same words is simple: gender and sex often overlap, a lot. This is already strongly suggested if you noticed that the framework I suggested defined gender as &quot;a set of elements that references sex&quot;. The very fact it references sex means that, in one way or another, any &quot;gendered&quot; term has roots in sex. There is no need to replace or use different words altogether.But again, boys having a &quot;penis&quot; and girls having a &quot;vagina&quot;, as I said, is not the only differentiator we use. It is insufficient as a differentiator. Hence why, as you can see, we have many other differentiators. You don&#039;t differentiate a &quot;man&quot; from another &quot;man&quot; because one of them has a penis or because that &quot;man&quot; has a &quot;functioning SRY gene in the Y chromosome&quot;. That&#039;s nonsense. You differentiate &quot;man&quot; based on a plethora of signals from the build of the body, their gait, their clothing, their physical characteristics, and so on.This is why we can say things like&quot;He taught me how to be a man&quot; or &quot;Man up&quot; without it being incoherent and nonsensical.Obviously I am not saying &quot;He taught me how to be a person who possesses a functioning SRY gene in the Y chromosome&quot;.I am simply saying &quot;He taught me how to be a person who aligns with the traits associated with the male sex&quot;.When you view it under such lenses, a descriptive lens, then all these phrases, cultural sayings, wisdoms, and symbolisms start to make sense. Then you realize &quot;gender roles&quot; isn&#039;t a modern concept, but something that predates human civilization itself. It started when men were typically the hunters because they were able-bodied, and women were typically the gatherers because of implications from reproduction and pregnancy.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="wait whattt? :o, post: 75643, member: 564"] No. I think I did not articulate myself clearly. That's on me. I don't [I]want [/I]sex to be "a set of elements that are a) physical and b) biological", nor do I [I]want[/I] gender to be "a set of elements that references sex". What I [I]want [/I]is simply a descriptive framework. A framework that [I]describes[/I] society's use and manifestation of sex and gender. As such, I [I]think [/I]that a descriptive framework would purport that 1. sex is a set of elements that are a) physical and b) biological 2. gender is a set of elements that references sex Again, the idea here is that I [I]want [/I]to describe society. To describe society, you observe it, and when I observed it, I noticed that people, verbally, used external genitalia as - for the lack of a better word - the main and initial differentiator between "men" and "women" because it is a reliable and common (but not always true) difference, but then I noticed that, to people, there are MORE things that differentiates "men" from "women". Pretending like the only differentiator between "men" and "women" that people in society have in mind is "one has a functioning SRY gene in their Y chromosome" is not only folly, but it is literally denial of reality. You answered the question yourself, because it is not "totally divorced from it rather than replacing 'sex'". A concept needs not replace another concept for it to use the same words. The reason why gender uses the same words is simple: gender and sex often overlap, [I]a lot.[/I] This is already strongly suggested if you noticed that the framework I suggested defined gender as "a set of elements that references sex". The very fact it references sex means that, in one way or another, any "gendered" term has roots in sex. There is no need to replace or use different words altogether. But again, boys having a "penis" and girls having a "vagina", as I said, is not the only differentiator we use. It is insufficient as a differentiator. Hence why, as you can see, we have many other differentiators. You don't differentiate a "man" from another "man" because one of them has a penis or because that "man" has a "functioning SRY gene in the Y chromosome". That's nonsense. You differentiate "man" based on a plethora of signals from the build of the body, their gait, their clothing, their physical characteristics, and so on. This is why we can say things like "He taught me how to be a man" or "Man up" without it being incoherent and nonsensical. Obviously I am not saying "He taught me how to be a person who possesses a functioning SRY gene in the Y chromosome". I am simply saying "He taught me how to be a person who aligns with the traits associated with the male sex". When you view it under such lenses, a descriptive lens, then all these phrases, cultural sayings, wisdoms, and symbolisms start to make sense. Then you realize "gender roles" isn't a modern concept, but something that predates human civilization itself. It started when men were typically the hunters because they were able-bodied, and women were typically the gatherers because of implications from reproduction and pregnancy. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Layout Options

Color Schemes

Reply to thread