4 ms·
> It's not a sex characteristic, it's a gender characteristic. They're one and the same. > But denying the idea that humans have both characteristics derived
by ragall 7mo ago
> It's not a sex characteristic, it's a gender characteristic.
They're one and the same.
> But denying the idea that humans have both characteristics derived from biology (sex) and from societal expectations (gender) is simply objectively incorrect.
I don't deny the existence of social expectations (you severely misread what I wrote), but those expectations were deriving from the recognition of the objective truth of one's sex. They were never a matter of one's "internal feelings", they were an extension of one's sex.
- s1artibartfast 7mo agoWhat does "being the same" mean to you. A thought or expectation is not a chromosome. Gender having been derived from real sex historically and even predominantly today does not stop some people from redefining it otherwise.
- ragall 7mo agoThings that are dependent on each other are, essentially, the same thing. People can try to redefine whatever they please as long as the rest of society can point out the silliness of it.
- s1artibartfast 7mo agoSo you dont think actions and signals can mean different things to different people? A dress or lipstick might mean there is also a vagina to one person, but not another person. This is a testable prediction. One where the correct answer depends on what people are actually doing. If you think a dress means vaginas and people stop doing that, you simply become wrong.
- ragall 7mo agoNow that's just silly.
- ahhhhnoooo 7mo agoWhat? Wearing skirts depends on one's biological sex? Explain how. Because that doesn't seem to follow up me at all.
- ahhhhnoooo 7mo agoSo, skirt wearing has a biological component? We didn't just make it all up as a society? Cause I'm pretty sure it's a social construct. If it is a social construct, then people can elect not to accept that construct....