Culture is influenced by biology, but not entirely shaped by it.
Brendon Carpenter
7

Culture is influenced by biology, sure, but not entirely shaped by it. You take such a simplistic view of culture, failing to recognize the vast complexity and variance between societies.
If biology alone is responsible for the differences between men and women, then these differences should be universal throughout the human species in every culture and every historical period. Instead, we see many variations of gender roles throughout humankind.

Having read through the tomes you two are writing, it seems to me that you two aren’t even having the same conversation.

Nobody in their right mind would claim that biology ALONE is responsible for differences between any two human beings. Lana certainly didn’t make that case, so I’m not sure what you’re trying to assert.

The assertation, perhaps using other words to make the matter clearer, is that biology advises gender and social roles to a very large extent; and that any attempt to remove biology from understanding is fruitless.

Does that help? And, considering we are discussing six thousand years of human history, the fact that you can even LIST exceptions to those rules means that they are rare, and cannot be used to advise an alternative view of gender.

When they are all added up, the total of intersex births approaches 2%.

Well…..so what? :-)

Your contention, stated more clearly, is that the aggregated total of all intersex conditions at birth (1.7%) is evidence that society should have a nonbinary view of gender.

The problem with that contention is that there is precisely no medical reason for aggregating those conditions. An adrenal problem that RESULTS in a nonbinary gender condition is not related to a gonadic issue that also results in an nonbinary gender condition. That’s like claiming that an achilles tendon rupture is the same as a complete ACL/MCL tear because they both put the patient in a wheelchair.

This page, which lists intersex birth conditions, lists Hypospadias as the most common intersex condition, occuring .4% of the time. The next most common, Kleinfelter Syndrome, occurs .1% of the time. The others are less common.

Sorry, but these are birth defects, not evidence of “third genders”, and certainly doesn’t justify a major re-evaluation of societies views regarding gender as binary.

This discussion is about the social construction of gender, which must be proved for us to acknowledge that the trans community is justified to exist and describe.

Nonsense. It doesn’t matter a whit. These are still human beings, and should the same rights as any other human beings under the law; where there are issues, they should be accommodated in a socially acceptable way. They don’t have to “justify” themselves in the slightest. It seems to me that you are confusing “human rights” with a “desire for social acceptance.” You can have the first one today; the second one can’t be legislated.

Otherwise, if gender was biologically constructed, the trans community should be regarded as simply a population of the mentally ill, as your dogmatic followers tend to claim.

Who cares what people think? There are always going to be people who have colorful views on sexually-related subjects. What you should care about is fairness in society; you can’t legislate what people think about a matter.

The high numbers of intersex people in our societies prove that gender should be viewed as socially-constructed. Their experience of gendering themselves despite their biological differences show definitively that gender arises out of a social environment.

Well, since it’s been pointed out that there are no “high numbers” of intersex people, unless you count….dishonestly, we can leave this one alone.

Again, we are talking about the social construction of gender. This was established by the author of the article. If I agreed to discuss sexual traits without involving personality traits, then I’d already being accepting your premise, that gender should be defined by biology alone.

I believe that the key point here is that we are born male or female, as the data actually shows. If people choose to live in a nonbinary fashion, either due to a problem with their sexual apparatus or their gender inclinations, that’s entirely their business.

It may be worthwhile here to add a more logical view of all this. It’s really ery simple, but individuals start using these terms like “sex” and “gender
 interchangeably, and that’s simply wrong. Let’s use the very familiar analogy of the machine you are currently reading this on.

That machine has hardware, software, and communications/networking protocols. Are you with me so far?

HARDWARE. Well, people have HARDWARE too. Some have penises, some have vaginas, and so few diverge from that standard that there is no reason to account for them here. HARDWARE = your SEX.

SOFTWARE. People have software as well. The Greeks called this the nous, in English we use terms like soul, spirit, intellect, reason, id, self…….you pick. It’s what’s between your ears, and in this context, its how you perceive yourself. Your software is also male, or female, and perhaps more often something “in between” than your sex does. SOFTWARE = GENDER. It normally lines up with your SEX, but not always. And that’s why some men perceive themselves as women, and women as men, and seek GRS or some intermediate solution which works for them.

NETWORK PROTOCOL. This is who you are attracted sexually to. Again, it normally lines up with your SEX, but not always. Hence, some people are homosexual and bisexual.

It would help if people would stop using the terms interchangeably. If you want to know what SEX you are, strip down and have a look between your legs. Simple. GENDER? Not so simple, obviously.

When I look at traditional gender roles, I see only a system of oppression.

What a shame, when you can have the best of both worlds.

It tends to strip us of freedom of expression, whereas understanding gender as a social construction liberates us to experience a greater range of behaviors.

You don’t have to redefine gender as a social construct to experience a full range of behaviors. All you have to do is understand what a normal distribution looks like, and recognize that people have the right to experience what they want along that distribution. And the rights we have in our legal system today defend people experiencing that range of behaviors, without any need to change one’s view of gender.

“It is why “trans people” find it very different to adopt the behavioral traits of the opposite sex. It generally doesn’t come naturally to them.”
Do you have any evidence to back up this claim that isn’t an anecdote?

Well, there are reams of youtube videos and websites purpoting to help transmen become more feminine. If Svetlana Voreskova was wrong, they wouldn’t exist, right?

What a hyperbolic claim. Unlike in Russia, in the United States of America, more than two-thirds of our population agree that changes to gender identity should be allowed with varying levels of qualification.

There you go, muddying the line between the definitions of “sex” and “gender” again. Lana says “physical sex”, and you respond with “gender”, as if they are defined in the heads of the population as the same thing.

The majority of our society, at least, seems to agree that gender is socially-constructed, and this belief is spreading globally.

The majority of our society has no idea that there’s even a debate afoot which argues that “gender is socially constructed.”

The justice system should be reformed to be egalitarian, treating every individual as wholly equal under the law.

Finally, we agree. If this were in place, nobody would care about anything that’s been written above. It just wouldn’t matter.

It means no more women’s sports teams. It means parental leave instead of maternal leave.

Those are not related whatsoever to the “justice system.” Not sure why you muddied the water there as well.

I cannot imagine that seeing my body match what I feel I am inside could ever be catastrophic. You have your work cut out for you to explain how reassignment surgery could be considered anything other than a source of joy for someone experiencing gender dysphoria.

I have yet to see statistics that show that GRS decreases the suicide rate for transsexual individuals. Do you have any?

Like what you read? Give Kady M. a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.