Moldy Monday continues.

  • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m gonna guess you get push-back on this, depending on how you’ve phrased it before, because saying gender is not a construct is a strong/radical statement in the context of theory.

    I imagine your point is that, for an individual, gender is not some arbitrary choice. It is very real. I agree. That is consistent with the idea of finding oneself on a dynamic gender spectra that is collectively defined; i.e., a social construct.

    The people who try to deny an individual’s gender, who they are, by using social construct as a synonym for “not real,” do not understand the term and, more importantly, will always find some other reason to do so until they learn to be better people. That is, the term itself is not to blame.

    • lady_scarecrow (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      saying gender is not a construct is a strong/radical statement in the context of theory

      To be clear, I’m saying gender identity isn’t a social construct (gender roles definitely are). And that’s hardly a radical statement given that there is a genetic factor to being trans, as evidenced by e.g. twin studies like this one which found a much higher amount of cases where both twins are trans among identical twins (who have the same genetic code) than non-identical twins. Also, like I mentioned before, a lot of trans people feel considerable relief to their own gender dysphoria upon seeking hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgeries, which is quite hard to explain on a social basis.