chaotically-neutral:

It’s always disappointing when an anti-SJW turns out to be anti-actual SJ as well.

And many of them overreact just as badly as their SJW counterparts.

View text
  • #this #timesinfinity
  • 3 days ago
  • 226
View photo
  • 3 days ago
  • 2022
View photo
  • #retail robin
  • 3 days ago
  • 68
  • AnonymousHave you seen the post going good around saying that biological sex is a social construct? Because that post confuses me... especially since being trans is when your brain sex and your biological body sex don't match up, right? So I feel like it's saying that being trans is a social construct, which sounds kind of transphobic to me...
  • biologyweeps

    no no sex is most certainly not a social construct as you can see by the fact that human reproduction is entirely reliant on the fact that humans need two distinct type of gametes to reproduce.

    The idea that sex is a social construct is one of those things that are either tumblr-getting-it-wrong or postmodernism-in-biology. Both of those things are incredible annoying and only lead to confusion.

    And yes, people saying that sex is constructed are implying that transsexuality is either a construct, too, a choice. I think it ties into the ‘trans without dysphoria’ thing that seems so popular on tumblr. 

  • Rockstar Nailbomb!

    socialscienceweeps:

    When people say that sex is a social construct, this isn’t what they mean.

    On a cellular level, we need two distinct types of gametes to reproduce; that much is true. But when assigning sex to a newborn infant, the distinction is actually socially constructed. Although most infants are dyadically sexed (i.e. not intersex), the distinction between ‘intersex’ and ‘dyadic’ is blurred, and very much dependent on social constructions. Even within the ‘intersex’ category, the decision to sex a neonate as male or female is highly dependent on social constructs which dictate the expected appearance of male or female genitalia. For example, a biologically female infant with a large clitoris (or a biologically male infant with a small penis) can be labelled as intersex based solely on socially constructed expectations of genital configuration, even when there is no identifiable genetic disorder contributing to the supposedly ‘abnormal’ size of their genitals.

    When an infant is identified as having an intersex condition, the decision to ‘normalise’ them through unnecessary cosmetic surgery is based entirely on the feelings of the parents about having an ‘abnormal’ baby, and very rarely on any kind of genuine medical need. Misogyny overlaps massively with this - infants assigned female will often be subjected to unnecessary ‘corrective’ surgery intended only to reduce the clitoris to ‘normal’ size, and/or to enable penetration of the vagina. In this way, heterosexism and patriarchal values around sexuality hugely affect the supposedly ‘objective’ and ‘scientific’ assignation of sex to infants.

    So when people say ‘sex is a social construct’, they are not denying the fact that humans are sexually dimorphic. They are pointing out that the distinction between ‘male’ and ‘female’, on both a biological and social level, is blurred, and that the attempt to turn it into a strict dichotomy is both unscientific and harmful.

    tl;dr there are two biological sexes, in that there isn’t a third gamete involved in human reproduction, but the process of assigning sex to human infants is very heavily influenced by social constructs around gender.

View answer
  • #thank you for this explanation #the social construct thing really confuses me sometimes ngl #this was helpful
  • 3 days ago
  • 14
View photo
  • 4 days ago
  • 8
x