7 ms·

They're describing a difference in sex vs gender. From the linked article: > Gender [...] involves a set of behaviors and norms that shape how men and women a

They're describing a difference in sex vs gender. From the linked article: > Gender [...] involves a set of behaviors and norms that shape how men and women act, prescribe how they ought to be, and specify what it means to be a man or a woman > ...Unlike in any other animal, gendered behavior in humans is wildly different across cultures Sex needs a definition too: > Sex appeared to be purely, simply genetic—until 1966, when a French zoologist discovered that the rainbow agama lizard did, in fact, rely on an environmental factor to determine sex ...no need to regurgitate the "anti-woke" talking points on this one.

rayiner 4y ago
The assertion that gender is “socially constructed” does merit the anti-woke talking point. Mammals have social roles based on biological sex: female penguins do one thing, male penguins do a different thing. Gender in humans isn’t fundamentally different. Like everything else, humans have layered social and cultural constructs on top of sex and gender. For example, cultures have different ways of marking the transition from childhood to adulthood. But the fact that e.g. a bar mitzvah is a cultural construct doesn’t mean that the behavioral and social changes accompanying puberty aren’t rooted in biology.
- cantSpellSober 4y ago
  Gendered behavior in humans is different; it's wildly different across cultures. > The assertion that gender is “socially constructed” Who asserted this? A straw man?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- RajT88 4y ago
  > Gender in humans isn’t fundamentally different. It is fundamentally different. The range of behaviors that Humans have is fundamentally far, far more broad than animals, because we are much more intelligent creatures. Example from a few thousand years ago: Farming, Cooking food. More recent examples: Fixing cars, doing taxes. Most of what Humans spend their time doing these days are things that animals don't do in nature. Human cultures like to ascribe gender roles to most of these things, but in reality most of what people do doesn't have any implicit gender role associated with it, since it's pretty far removed from biological functions at this point. Even in nature, the things people and animals do doesn't always neatly align with gender roles. For example, child rearing or even bearing live young is sometimes done by the male, even though it's usually a female gender role. What's different between us and animals (as is usually the case) is our big thinky brains, and the things which follow on from that.
  - 31337Logic 4y ago
    It is at this point, I believe, that it is entirely worth reminding ourselves that humans are, in fact, animals.
    - RajT88 4y ago
      It's usually worth reminding ourselves of. I'm not sure what you're getting at here though.
      - gatlin 4y ago
        They are getting at the point that as animals we can intellectualize all we want and will still have biological characteristics that fundamentally influence our behavior and culture.
        RajT88 4y ago
        > still have biological characteristics that fundamentally influence our behavior and culture. I suspected as such. In my life, I've often heard this point trotted out to justify "Why men/women are good/bad at X thing", which is why I was asking what they were getting at, specifically. Even if they weren't getting at that, their comment doesn't add much by itself.
        pron 4y ago
        Research findings are not "intellectualization." Intellectualization is what those who don't actually research a subject do. However, I don't think anyone claims that there is are no innate biological effects on behaviour. It's just that its scope is hard to determine, and extrapolation one species to another has proven to be an unreliable means of making such determinations.
      - bequanna 4y ago
        The point I think the parent is trying to make is that there are now many people who see all of human behavior as some sort of construct vs. innate behaviors that exist all over the animal kingdom. In fact, very few behaviors are specific to only humans. We aren’t that special. At the end of the day, we’re just very clever mammals.
- strken 4y ago
  This would be fascinating to explore outside the context of the culture war. To what extent is a penguin's social role learnt from other penguins vs biological? Do penguins raised in isolation or in small groups show more divergent sex-correlated behaviour than those raised in large groups? Would that mean they align behaviour based on what other penguins do? It would be interesting if male birds learnt how to put on more successful mate displays by watching other males, or if birds set their standards by those of the opposite sex they grew up around. Humans obviously do this, and I wouldn't be surprised if other primates did too, but which other animals might?
- burnished 4y ago
  > ...Unlike in any other animal, gendered behavior in humans is wildly different across cultures The reason to bring it up was in the comment you replied to. This reaction seems very knee jerk.
- antiterra 4y ago
  I don’t think you thought this through any further once you felt you had a somewhat rational construct that meshed with your comfort zone. Human behavior has massive amounts of variation even within a culture, both sex and gender traits inhabit overlapping bell curves. Is there a biological reason for why dresses are considered feminine in the US, and states are constructing laws restricting cross gender usage of them, but kurtas or sarongs are acceptably masculine elsewhere?
  - rayiner 4y ago
    That doesn’t mean that gender is socially constructed, it means that we have overlaid social constructs on top of gender. Which is a point nobody disagrees with.
- swalling 4y ago
  It’s not true that biological sex is completely deterministic in the behavior of non-human animals. For instance: there are gay penguins where two males will adopt eggs to hatch and raise chicks. Homosexuality and associated behavior changes are observed in a wide array of species. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals Conservatives trying to use biology to argue that gender and sex are fully equivalent is akin to 19th and 20th century attempts to use evolutionary theory to support racist social policies. It's not only wrong morally, it's bad science.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    If your homosexuality, which is biologically rooted, is associated with behavior changes, doesn’t that support the conclusion that gendered behavior is rooted in biology rather than socially constructed?
    - swalling 4y ago
      Only if you're dumb enough to assume that all or most of behavior is biologically determined, instead of being a complex mix of biology, culture, and learned individual patterns that produces a spectrum of individual expression. The question isn't "is gendered behavior rooted in biology?" it's "how much / to what degree?" and the honest answer is, we don't really know with confidence, especially when it comes to humans. The fact that Western culture seems to be currently undergoing a Cambrian explosion when it comes to gender expression contributes to how hard it is to answer this question. Unfortunately that's also why people are anxious and waging culture wars about it.
      - rayiner 4y ago
        The assertion in the article is that gender is socially constructed. You don’t seem to be defending that point. You’re making a different argument nobody disagrees with—that humans also express learned cultural and individual behaviors. You could walk into CPAC and say that women would still be women if the social convention was for them to wear pants. Nobody would disagree with you. Ironically, the social changes in gender expression you’re referring to are actually premised on the opposite of the assertion you’re making. They posit that gender expression is biologically rooted—because otherwise it would be within the purview of society to regulate it as a matter or culture or individual expression.
- jghn 4y ago
  > female penguins do one thing, male penguins do a different thing. Gender in humans isn’t fundamentally different. Do you know this to be true for the set of *all* penguins? Or just most of them?
  - xupybd 4y ago
    It's an interesting concept that generalizations can be true without applying to every case. For example, the statement "humans have one heart" is generally true, but there are exceptions where people have had an additional heart surgically added to assist a failing heart. Similarly, while it's common to say that humans have ten fingers, there are variations where some people are born with more or less, or have lost fingers due to accidents. Eye color is another example where we can't make a universal claim about humans. Although brown eyes are common, the number of people with blue or green eyes is significant enough that we can't say all humans have brown eyes. So, when we say "humans have X," it doesn't mean every single human has X. Rather, it means that a significant enough number of humans have X for us to consider it a characteristic of our species.
- jimmygrapes 4y ago
  No argument here but I feel like you used penguins as an example knowing full well someone would respond with "oh yeah well penguins are well documented to exhibit homosexual behaviors!!" I mean of all possible mammals to choose as an example for your point (presuming in good faith that your actual point was as stated), penguin is an unusual choice. Maybe you just happened to have penguins in mind as an example of a mammal, I don't know. Oh, and by the way: penguins aren't mammals! Though I'm sure someone has already pointed that out, or at least I hope they did.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    I started with lions and then switched to penguins because of Happy Feet and forgot to change the “mammals” part.
psychphysic 4y ago
I hear this reasoning often but never see it being applied in practice. For starters why are single sex sports and single sex changing rooms so controversial? Similarly if gender and sex are entirely distinct. Does that not mean that the trans community is the strongest supporter of traditional gender roles? Afterall what does it mean to change gender if differing social attitudes to gender ought be extinguished?
- cantSpellSober 4y ago
  Locker rooms? You see these exact talking points copy and pasted a lot, do they relate to this specific article?
  - psychphysic 4y ago
    The article brings it up quite early on. It's introduction and parallel with sex means the article makes a wider point about a difference between sex and gender. I agree this article could have been written better without any mention of gender so as to avoid making an out of scope claim in a pop sci article.
    - cantSpellSober 4y ago
      Where does it mention locker rooms or "the trans community is the strongest supporter of traditional gender roles?" Did you read the article?
  - seti0Cha 4y ago
    Please stop using the "that's a talking point of the enemy" dismissal tactic. It's lazy and harmful to actual discussion.
    - cantSpellSober 4y ago
      Stop paraphrasing me, it's lazy and harmful to actual discussion. I pointed out why it's irrelevant.
mantas 4y ago
It's funny that many languages don't have this „gender vs sex“ separation. For example in my native language there's just one word to describe man/woman option. Some people try to bend over and invent new terms. That doesn't play well with claiming that somehow this „gender vs sex“ separation is not a new cultural phenomena.
- cantSpellSober 4y ago
  Is Lithuanian your native language? Does this word not fit the defintion? https://www.techdico.com/translation/english-lithuanian/transgender.html https://www.techdico.com/translation/english-lithuanian/tran...
  - mantas 4y ago
    You're looking at a wrong word. The word man/woman option is „lytis“. Both „gender“ and „sex“ was usually translated as „lytis“. „Translytis“ is just a term made of two words and describing a person who is such. English translation would be literally „transgender“. And it's used for people who, well, transition. There's an attempt to call „gender“ „socialinė lytis“ (= social sex). But doesn't make it sound like it's anything beyond socially constructed cultural phenomena.
    - cantSpellSober 4y ago
      > English translation would be literally „transgender“. So you...do have a word meaning "transgender?"
      - mantas 4y ago
        Or „transsex“ if there's such English word? Word „translytis“ is used specifically for those who attempted transitioning man<->woman.
        paulddraper 4y ago
        "transsex"/"transsexual" are English words, though they're seen as more archaic and non-inclusive.
barrysteve 4y ago
We don't need the word gender. Behaviour and norms used to be called 'manners'. Men bow, women courtesy. Princes and princesses. Abstracting out a 'gender norm' across all cultures is a doomed exercise. There's too many different tones (genders) trying to be contained in the one song. The vast majority of western humanity fits in man/woman straight spiritual manners. Bikeshedding over gender definitions is something worth forgetting from the past ten years. Let the third and fourth and fifth 'gender norms' be what they may.

rayiner 4y ago

The assertion that gender is “socially constructed” does merit the anti-woke talking point. Mammals have social roles based on biological sex: female penguins do one thing, male penguins do a different thing. Gender in humans isn’t fundamentally different. Like everything else, humans have layered social and cultural constructs on top of sex and gender. For example, cultures have different ways of marking the transition from childhood to adulthood. But the fact that e.g. a bar mitzvah is a cultural construct doesn’t mean that the behavioral and social changes accompanying puberty aren’t rooted in biology.

cantSpellSober 4y ago
Gendered behavior in humans is different; it's wildly different across cultures. > The assertion that gender is “socially constructed” Who asserted this? A straw man?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
RajT88 4y ago
> Gender in humans isn’t fundamentally different. It is fundamentally different. The range of behaviors that Humans have is fundamentally far, far more broad than animals, because we are much more intelligent creatures. Example from a few thousand years ago: Farming, Cooking food. More recent examples: Fixing cars, doing taxes. Most of what Humans spend their time doing these days are things that animals don't do in nature. Human cultures like to ascribe gender roles to most of these things, but in reality most of what people do doesn't have any implicit gender role associated with it, since it's pretty far removed from biological functions at this point. Even in nature, the things people and animals do doesn't always neatly align with gender roles. For example, child rearing or even bearing live young is sometimes done by the male, even though it's usually a female gender role. What's different between us and animals (as is usually the case) is our big thinky brains, and the things which follow on from that.
- 31337Logic 4y ago
  It is at this point, I believe, that it is entirely worth reminding ourselves that humans are, in fact, animals.
  - RajT88 4y ago
    It's usually worth reminding ourselves of. I'm not sure what you're getting at here though.
    - gatlin 4y ago
      They are getting at the point that as animals we can intellectualize all we want and will still have biological characteristics that fundamentally influence our behavior and culture.
      - RajT88 4y ago
        > still have biological characteristics that fundamentally influence our behavior and culture. I suspected as such. In my life, I've often heard this point trotted out to justify "Why men/women are good/bad at X thing", which is why I was asking what they were getting at, specifically. Even if they weren't getting at that, their comment doesn't add much by itself.
      - pron 4y ago
        Research findings are not "intellectualization." Intellectualization is what those who don't actually research a subject do. However, I don't think anyone claims that there is are no innate biological effects on behaviour. It's just that its scope is hard to determine, and extrapolation one species to another has proven to be an unreliable means of making such determinations.
    - bequanna 4y ago
      The point I think the parent is trying to make is that there are now many people who see all of human behavior as some sort of construct vs. innate behaviors that exist all over the animal kingdom. In fact, very few behaviors are specific to only humans. We aren’t that special. At the end of the day, we’re just very clever mammals.
strken 4y ago
This would be fascinating to explore outside the context of the culture war. To what extent is a penguin's social role learnt from other penguins vs biological? Do penguins raised in isolation or in small groups show more divergent sex-correlated behaviour than those raised in large groups? Would that mean they align behaviour based on what other penguins do? It would be interesting if male birds learnt how to put on more successful mate displays by watching other males, or if birds set their standards by those of the opposite sex they grew up around. Humans obviously do this, and I wouldn't be surprised if other primates did too, but which other animals might?
burnished 4y ago
> ...Unlike in any other animal, gendered behavior in humans is wildly different across cultures The reason to bring it up was in the comment you replied to. This reaction seems very knee jerk.
antiterra 4y ago
I don’t think you thought this through any further once you felt you had a somewhat rational construct that meshed with your comfort zone. Human behavior has massive amounts of variation even within a culture, both sex and gender traits inhabit overlapping bell curves. Is there a biological reason for why dresses are considered feminine in the US, and states are constructing laws restricting cross gender usage of them, but kurtas or sarongs are acceptably masculine elsewhere?
- rayiner 4y ago
  That doesn’t mean that gender is socially constructed, it means that we have overlaid social constructs on top of gender. Which is a point nobody disagrees with.
swalling 4y ago
It’s not true that biological sex is completely deterministic in the behavior of non-human animals. For instance: there are gay penguins where two males will adopt eggs to hatch and raise chicks. Homosexuality and associated behavior changes are observed in a wide array of species. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals Conservatives trying to use biology to argue that gender and sex are fully equivalent is akin to 19th and 20th century attempts to use evolutionary theory to support racist social policies. It's not only wrong morally, it's bad science.
- rayiner 4y ago
  If your homosexuality, which is biologically rooted, is associated with behavior changes, doesn’t that support the conclusion that gendered behavior is rooted in biology rather than socially constructed?
  - swalling 4y ago
    Only if you're dumb enough to assume that all or most of behavior is biologically determined, instead of being a complex mix of biology, culture, and learned individual patterns that produces a spectrum of individual expression. The question isn't "is gendered behavior rooted in biology?" it's "how much / to what degree?" and the honest answer is, we don't really know with confidence, especially when it comes to humans. The fact that Western culture seems to be currently undergoing a Cambrian explosion when it comes to gender expression contributes to how hard it is to answer this question. Unfortunately that's also why people are anxious and waging culture wars about it.
    - rayiner 4y ago
      The assertion in the article is that gender is socially constructed. You don’t seem to be defending that point. You’re making a different argument nobody disagrees with—that humans also express learned cultural and individual behaviors. You could walk into CPAC and say that women would still be women if the social convention was for them to wear pants. Nobody would disagree with you. Ironically, the social changes in gender expression you’re referring to are actually premised on the opposite of the assertion you’re making. They posit that gender expression is biologically rooted—because otherwise it would be within the purview of society to regulate it as a matter or culture or individual expression.
jghn 4y ago
> female penguins do one thing, male penguins do a different thing. Gender in humans isn’t fundamentally different. Do you know this to be true for the set of *all* penguins? Or just most of them?
- xupybd 4y ago
  It's an interesting concept that generalizations can be true without applying to every case. For example, the statement "humans have one heart" is generally true, but there are exceptions where people have had an additional heart surgically added to assist a failing heart. Similarly, while it's common to say that humans have ten fingers, there are variations where some people are born with more or less, or have lost fingers due to accidents. Eye color is another example where we can't make a universal claim about humans. Although brown eyes are common, the number of people with blue or green eyes is significant enough that we can't say all humans have brown eyes. So, when we say "humans have X," it doesn't mean every single human has X. Rather, it means that a significant enough number of humans have X for us to consider it a characteristic of our species.
jimmygrapes 4y ago
No argument here but I feel like you used penguins as an example knowing full well someone would respond with "oh yeah well penguins are well documented to exhibit homosexual behaviors!!" I mean of all possible mammals to choose as an example for your point (presuming in good faith that your actual point was as stated), penguin is an unusual choice. Maybe you just happened to have penguins in mind as an example of a mammal, I don't know. Oh, and by the way: penguins aren't mammals! Though I'm sure someone has already pointed that out, or at least I hope they did.
- rayiner 4y ago
  I started with lions and then switched to penguins because of Happy Feet and forgot to change the “mammals” part.

psychphysic 4y ago

I hear this reasoning often but never see it being applied in practice. For starters why are single sex sports and single sex changing rooms so controversial? Similarly if gender and sex are entirely distinct. Does that not mean that the trans community is the strongest supporter of traditional gender roles? Afterall what does it mean to change gender if differing social attitudes to gender ought be extinguished?

cantSpellSober 4y ago
Locker rooms? You see these exact talking points copy and pasted a lot, do they relate to this specific article?
- psychphysic 4y ago
  The article brings it up quite early on. It's introduction and parallel with sex means the article makes a wider point about a difference between sex and gender. I agree this article could have been written better without any mention of gender so as to avoid making an out of scope claim in a pop sci article.
  - cantSpellSober 4y ago
    Where does it mention locker rooms or "the trans community is the strongest supporter of traditional gender roles?" Did you read the article?
- seti0Cha 4y ago
  Please stop using the "that's a talking point of the enemy" dismissal tactic. It's lazy and harmful to actual discussion.
  - cantSpellSober 4y ago
    Stop paraphrasing me, it's lazy and harmful to actual discussion. I pointed out why it's irrelevant.

mantas 4y ago

It's funny that many languages don't have this „gender vs sex“ separation. For example in my native language there's just one word to describe man/woman option. Some people try to bend over and invent new terms. That doesn't play well with claiming that somehow this „gender vs sex“ separation is not a new cultural phenomena.

cantSpellSober 4y ago
Is Lithuanian your native language? Does this word not fit the defintion? https://www.techdico.com/translation/english-lithuanian/transgender.html https://www.techdico.com/translation/english-lithuanian/tran...
- mantas 4y ago
  You're looking at a wrong word. The word man/woman option is „lytis“. Both „gender“ and „sex“ was usually translated as „lytis“. „Translytis“ is just a term made of two words and describing a person who is such. English translation would be literally „transgender“. And it's used for people who, well, transition. There's an attempt to call „gender“ „socialinė lytis“ (= social sex). But doesn't make it sound like it's anything beyond socially constructed cultural phenomena.
  - cantSpellSober 4y ago
    > English translation would be literally „transgender“. So you...do have a word meaning "transgender?"
    - mantas 4y ago
      Or „transsex“ if there's such English word? Word „translytis“ is used specifically for those who attempted transitioning man<->woman.
      - paulddraper 4y ago
        "transsex"/"transsexual" are English words, though they're seen as more archaic and non-inclusive.

barrysteve 4y ago

We don't need the word gender. Behaviour and norms used to be called 'manners'. Men bow, women courtesy. Princes and princesses. Abstracting out a 'gender norm' across all cultures is a doomed exercise. There's too many different tones (genders) trying to be contained in the one song. The vast majority of western humanity fits in man/woman straight spiritual manners. Bikeshedding over gender definitions is something worth forgetting from the past ten years. Let the third and fourth and fifth 'gender norms' be what they may.