4 ms·

I encourage you to google “biological sex isn’t real” and acquaint yourself with this line of thinking. Radical gender theory does in fact make the bold claim

by cik2e 6y ago

I encourage you to google “biological sex isn’t real” and acquaint yourself with this line of thinking. Radical gender theory does in fact make the bold claim that biological sex isn’t real. That’s right, sex, not gender. The postmodernist underpinnings used to support these types of ideas are rooted in concepts like “objective truth does not exist” and “everything is a social construct”.

Volundr 6y ago
I took your challenge, and, well I couldn't find it. I did find articles like this one https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2020/06/15/the-myth-of-biological-sex/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2020/06/15/the-myth.... If you read only the headline you might think it's making the argument your implying, but if you actually bother to read it you'll find it doesn't. From the article: "The biology of sex is real, but it’s extremely complicated, and there is sometimes no easy way to draw a line between the biologically male and female." Having now read the top 5 articles for that search term, I still haven't found one that makes the claim your suggesting. I'm sure if I dig hard enough I could find that someone has said it non-ironically, but if I dig hard enough I can find someone saying the moon landing didn't happen or talking about lizard people non-ironically. That doesn't make it a mainstream movement.
- akvadrako 6y ago
  The idea that sex is non-binary and socially constructed is certainly around. The first time I heard it was about a year ago on an podcast interview from Sam Harris with an expert in the field of gender studies or something, saying we should consider that gay men might actually be women. One recent event that brings it to light is JK Rowling said something along those lines, basically that women menstrate¹, and that caused a lot of controversy. I'm sure you'll be able to find plenty of articles against her for saying that. [1] https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1269382518362509313 https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1269382518362509313
  - Volundr 6y ago
    Sure. But they aren't saying biological sex doesn't exist. They are saying there is sex and gender and that these two things can be different. Specifically sex is biological, while gender is a social and physiological construct. What is explicitly NOT being said is that biological sex is non-existent. And they are saying that a person's gender may be female while their biological sex can be male (or ambiguous), and that these people should still be considered women. That's very different from saying biological sex doesn't exist.
    - akvadrako 6y ago
      That is comprehensible except it isn't related to what I said. This thread isn't about gender - it's about sex. It's good you haven't understood people saying sex isn't biological, because it's not a defensible position. Hopefully their voices don't become more prominent.
  - DanBC 6y ago
    > basically that women menstrate¹ Lots of women don't menstruate. Children, older women, women who've had hysterectomies, some women with intersex conditions, and transwomen. Some men do menstruate. Transmen, and some people with intersex conditions. This argument is not saying that "sex isn't real". It's saying that using terms that define sex are not good enough for some topics.
Kednicma 6y ago
Biological sex has more than two configurations of sex chromosomes possible, in humans. This isn't rocket science, although it is biology. Also, on your other points: Objective truths can exist, but not all measurements are objective. Not everything is a social construct, but the things that humans believe without empirical evidence are all social constructs. Postmodernism isn't hard. Y'all're just extremely convinced that reality is locally real, just because you can sense it so vividly, and you're blind to your biases as a result.
DanBC 6y ago
> Radical gender theory does in fact make the bold claim that biological sex isn’t real. No. Transphobes[1] will say that sex is obvious and the binary is clear. The argument being made against transphobes is that definitions for "female" (or "male") can't exclude trans-people while including everyone else traditionally thought of as female (or male). That's something that transphobes claims is easy, and they're wrong. [1] Many transphobes say this. It doesn't mean that anyone who says this is transphobic.

by cik2e 6y ago

Volundr 6y ago

I took your challenge, and, well I couldn't find it. I did find articles like this one https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2020/06/15/the-myth-of-biological-sex/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2020/06/15/the-myth.... If you read only the headline you might think it's making the argument your implying, but if you actually bother to read it you'll find it doesn't. From the article: "The biology of sex is real, but it’s extremely complicated, and there is sometimes no easy way to draw a line between the biologically male and female." Having now read the top 5 articles for that search term, I still haven't found one that makes the claim your suggesting. I'm sure if I dig hard enough I could find that someone has said it non-ironically, but if I dig hard enough I can find someone saying the moon landing didn't happen or talking about lizard people non-ironically. That doesn't make it a mainstream movement.

akvadrako 6y ago
The idea that sex is non-binary and socially constructed is certainly around. The first time I heard it was about a year ago on an podcast interview from Sam Harris with an expert in the field of gender studies or something, saying we should consider that gay men might actually be women. One recent event that brings it to light is JK Rowling said something along those lines, basically that women menstrate¹, and that caused a lot of controversy. I'm sure you'll be able to find plenty of articles against her for saying that. [1] https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1269382518362509313 https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1269382518362509313
- Volundr 6y ago
  Sure. But they aren't saying biological sex doesn't exist. They are saying there is sex and gender and that these two things can be different. Specifically sex is biological, while gender is a social and physiological construct. What is explicitly NOT being said is that biological sex is non-existent. And they are saying that a person's gender may be female while their biological sex can be male (or ambiguous), and that these people should still be considered women. That's very different from saying biological sex doesn't exist.
  - akvadrako 6y ago
    That is comprehensible except it isn't related to what I said. This thread isn't about gender - it's about sex. It's good you haven't understood people saying sex isn't biological, because it's not a defensible position. Hopefully their voices don't become more prominent.
- DanBC 6y ago
  > basically that women menstrate¹ Lots of women don't menstruate. Children, older women, women who've had hysterectomies, some women with intersex conditions, and transwomen. Some men do menstruate. Transmen, and some people with intersex conditions. This argument is not saying that "sex isn't real". It's saying that using terms that define sex are not good enough for some topics.

Kednicma 6y ago

Biological sex has more than two configurations of sex chromosomes possible, in humans. This isn't rocket science, although it is biology. Also, on your other points: Objective truths can exist, but not all measurements are objective. Not everything is a social construct, but the things that humans believe without empirical evidence are all social constructs. Postmodernism isn't hard. Y'all're just extremely convinced that reality is locally real, just because you can sense it so vividly, and you're blind to your biases as a result.

DanBC 6y ago

> Radical gender theory does in fact make the bold claim that biological sex isn’t real. No. Transphobes[1] will say that sex is obvious and the binary is clear. The argument being made against transphobes is that definitions for "female" (or "male") can't exclude trans-people while including everyone else traditionally thought of as female (or male). That's something that transphobes claims is easy, and they're wrong. [1] Many transphobes say this. It doesn't mean that anyone who says this is transphobic.