So, when people say gender is a social construct... how do they reconcile that with the existence of trans people and the experience of dysphoria?
Do they actually mean gender *roles* and are confusing the issue? (doesn't seem like it from what I see... it seems they actually say men and women as genders are artificial)
I tried searching about it but mostly what I found are long as fuck essays/threads which seem to avoid the issue and tbqh sound like a load of bullshit. I have that singular doubt but I can't find it specifically answered/addressed anywhere.
It's queers shitting on transsexuals so they can have their way with all the bullshit transgender genders fresh outa tumblr.
Gender is not a social construct because gender = sex.
Gender expression may be but who cares about that.
the argument that "x is a social construct" is a weak one to start with but it's especially weak when it comes to gender.
since when did something being a social construct, such as gender roles, make it obsolete and undesirable?
they are absolutely necessary and form the bedrock of how people interact with one another.
tumblr inherited this obsession from feminist "critical theorists" that absolutely everything is a "social construct" and absolutely nothing is biologically dictated, whereas the scientific consensus is that the two are both important factors, intrinsically interrelated and inform one another.
OP here. I guess my question is, are they suggesting that when we "overcome as a society" thinking about genders, trans people and dysphoria won't exist? Like, is the future supposed to be everybody that will be agender/nonbinary/whatever?
I'm really confused.
>when we "overcome as a society"
except we won't ever. it's not going to happen. they're living in la-la land because it's not just something we can shift by social consensus, it is still very much biologically engrained.
trans people don't prove that gender is innate. dysphoria could be 95% social/environment based, and in some cases it's reversible without transition. there's just almost no studies on it.
plus people hate fags. the more fags transition to become gender conforming, the happier people will be.
People who think gender is a social construct seem to have such a warped and loose view of the word "gender" that they liken them more to different personalities. It's the sole reason there's these people making endless "genders" just by adding a word as a prefix to explain some personality aspect, rather than an actual gender of which there are actually very few contrary to popular belief.
Because it tends to work and there are no methods to this day to deal with it through other means. Also, there are a bunch of studies on HRT for trans people.
If there would be no lack of studies from other methods, maybe something else than HRT really might work.
>how do they reconcile that with the existence of trans people and the experience of dysphoria?
The same way people can reconcile holocaust denial with praising Hitler for killing the jews.
There's no contradiction if you just ignore it.
>dysphoria could be 95% social/environment based
...and? how does that prove gender isn't innate?
what does it mean to be "social based?"
that people are innately wired to act towards you or treat you according to how you present.
the social roles were developed out of biological necessity back when it mattered (implying it still doesn't matter).
(anatomical) females, being the ones to carry pregnancy through a long gestation period, are inherently more valuable than (anatomical) males who are far more expendable to several orders of magnitude.
given that during the history of our evolution, the entire human population is thought to have bottlenecked to as low as 10'000 and maybe lower, it was absolutely imperative to keep women safe enough to carry pregnancy.
if a community lost 99% of its men, the remaining 1% could replace their breeding capacity. the same is not true for its women.
this is why women have always been protected while men have been the ones to hunt or go to war. it's why men have more of an innate drive to prove themselves, because their are innately worthless, where as a woman's biological capacity alone gives her worth. it's why women are disproportionally the largest net consumers.
feminists interpret it as some engrained prejudice to see them as "damsels in distress" and take offence, because once they shirk their social responsibilities, as they have done, there is no other explanation. but the truth is it's just that for the human population as a whole, women were too valuable to lose.
the "x is a social construct" argument is endemic in societies where far too much emphasis has been placed on individual expression, and not enough on social cohesion which is also inherently part of our biology.
I think elimination of gender roles (by which I mean stopping to expect people to act differently based on their gender, but not forcing androgynous behavior on everyone) would be a good thing, and would eliminate the tumblr meme trannies, but people would still have dysphoria over their body.