• 13 Posts
  • 226 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle






  • riwo@lemmy.blahaj.zoneto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonetism rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 days ago

    biology is full of social constructs. reality is complex and messy, but to wrap their heads around it, humans put it into simple categories.

    the destinction into male and female (and sometimes intersex) was creared backwards. first came the social destinctions and social importans on sex, then people searched for the reasons, to explain the destinctions.

    through this they currently arrived at the definition of sex as biological organisms producing smaller or larger gametes. as if this were actually a super sensual to classify all organisms that produce larger gametes and all organisms that produce smaller gametes in the same categories respecrively. but fair enough.

    but then anything that causes an organism to produce smaller or larger gamets is considered sex determening. and all caused or just correlated to this is also considered part of the sex, including social factors. so production of larger gametes in humans is cause by xx chromosomes, so all humans with those chromosomes are female, even if they dont produce gametes, and everything caused by the xx chromosomes like homrones and phenotypes produced by those is considered female and even certain attributes pushed majority on people categorized as such are considered part of it. but none of that is a must. people with xx chromosomes dont necessairily produce larger gametes, they dont necessairily have the hormones, they dont necessairily develop the phenotypes, they arent necessairily shaped by the same way by the same social system. and yet we categorise them as the same sex and categorize their attributes as wrong. this shit is social







  • riwo@lemmy.blahaj.zoneto196@lemmy.blahaj.zone11 years ago
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    i think its mostly an issue with not being used to it. “you” is both singular and plural as well and we manage fine. “we” is plural but it does not distinguish between inclusive and exclusive “we”. arguably those cases are more rarely relevant, and honestly id prefer if all of them had solutions, but i think we can handle it once we are used to it, or solutions will develop.

    btw not trying to be antagonistic here, just sharing my thoughts :3








  • riwo@lemmy.blahaj.zoneto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneLuigi
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    i reject the careless use of gender in the english language. there is no point in mentioning someones gender every time you mention them, other than implied sexism. bernies gender was not relevant to my comment, so i do not see a need to mention it.