• Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Now you’re admitting that gender is a subjective thing based on societal norms. Which is the point.

    • rotten@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yea, but sex isn’t. And the way it’s done now is that gender is invoked as identical to sex when it’s beneficial and rebuked when it’s not.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        We are talking about gender here. Gender is only identical with sex if the person so chooses to identify that way. If you think that’s “the way it’s done now,” you have been listening to too much conservative media.

        The fact that you don’t understand all of this does not speak well of you.

        • rotten@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          We’re talking about both. Gender was traditionally identical to sex and this issue didn’t come up much till relatively recently. Outliers, like people born with both sets of organs, were just that. To be consistent with this philosophy, race must also now be done as “whoever identifies as such”. After all, it’s just as much of a societal construct.

            • Narauko@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Something from within the last few decades isn’t really archaic, that is generally reserved for (well?) over a hundred years old or older, and the vast majority of Lemmy users are either North American or European. Anglo/Eurocentric is going to be the relative norm on social media in general outside of specific apps, and those then trend East/South East Asiacentric due to their development origin. You should not be surprised to encounter this.

              Heteronormative will also currently still trend as a default since over 80% of the population identifies as such. Intersex is also somewhere around or under 1% of the population. While gender and sex can most certainly be different, at least currently the supermajority of people will have these aligned and will use them interchangeably. This shouldn’t invalidate or be used to discriminate against those that aren’t heteronormative by any means, but something that is true 80-90% of the time falls within the colloquial or layman’s qualifications for a broad assumption of “how the world works”.

              The fact that intersex people get to decide their primary sex (or more likely had a doctor decide for them at birth) on government forms is somewhat analogous to 3 wheeled motor vehicles that can be registered as either a car or a motorcycle depending on the State and/or county. This does not invalidate car or motorcycle as categories, nor does it invalidate andly other means of transport.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                Something from within the last few decades isn’t really archaic,

                I did not read past this. You clearly did not read my link. Come back when you read it since it talks about cultures going back thousands of years.

                • Narauko@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  You can’t use archaic as a preparative against one thing and then come back and use it as a positive for its “opposite”. I read your link, it is a perfectly good link, so I guess your arguing that an archaic Indoasia-centric queernormative world view is “the way the world actually works” instead? If you think you can understand what someone is attempting to say/discuss by only half of an opening sentence, I understand why you seem to be arguing past multiple people in this thread.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 day ago

                    No, I’m arguing that your rigid definition of gender (that no reputable biologist would agree with) is not the way the world works. Because gender and biological sex are different and have always been different and biological sex is far, far more complicated than XX and XY.

                    This was your claim:

                    Gender was traditionally identical to sex and this issue didn’t come up much till relatively recently.

                    Unless by “traditionally,” you are going by an entirely Anglo/Eurocentric view of the world (and only really applies to the Christian era), which is pretty damn bigoted, I showed you that you were wrong.

                    The proper thing to do would be to admit it.

                    I doubt you will. But it’s either you were wrong or all of those other cultures are not part of humanity. Which would be very bigoted.