Is there any scientific evidence of gender being separated from

Yes there is.

Sociologist would say gender is learned behavior while sex is biological. Wanting to play with a doll doesn't mean you should cut your dick off though.

No there isn't.

>>8721843
>gender is learned behavior
So just because i like girly things it means i'm a girl...
Also, are there any differences between male and female brain? Does that mean a transgender woman may be born with the female brain?

No. Gender and sex used to be tightly coupled terms that essentially meant the same thing. Sociologists and other soft scientists with agendas co-opted the term "gender" to mean some kind of subjective, hazily defined sex spin off. Now it is fairly meaningless.

These questions have no relevance to science.

Whether you call it a he or a she, it still is the same biological entity.

>>8721855
The association of certain things and actions with "femininity" and "masculinity" is learned and constructed within society. This doesn't mean that a person who likes girly things is a girl, necessarily. And it also doesn't mean that we must reject the concepts of femininity and masculinity.

But none of this has to do with science.

A better question would be if science is ok with calling a trans woman a woman

>>8721843
>gender is learned behavior
No

>>8721833
Sex = Sic/sick
Intimacy = Love
I always cross out sex and put gender. Some people are so twisted and confused they can't tell up from right, left from down.

Isn't gender quite literally a social construct? Does there exist any definition of the word "gender" that is anything else?

>>8722063
gender is sex. Even if a man likes to wear makeup or read women's magazines, he is still male.

>>8721833
People are just fucking stupid.

>Gender is just a social construct! There's nothing inherently gendered about the way someone behaves!
>But I really like playing with dolls and talking about feelings so I must be a girl trapped inside a boy's body!
>(but nothing is inherently gendered)

They're your genitals and nothing more, get over it.

>>8722074
Who defines gender as the same as sex?

>>8722085
For centuries the words were used as synonymous

>>8722085
You can even find some dictionaries that makes no distintion between gender and sex

>>8722085
Retarded /pol crossposters. But it's strange because they like trap so much, and still claim not to be gay.

I think either admitting full gayness or that gender is not the same as sex would lessen their cognitive dissonance.

>>8722089

Only for Adam/Eve believers. You'll be surprised to learn that there exists something outside your little world.

>>8722089
The original use of the word "gender" was grammatical. For example many languages have "masculine" and "feminine" nouns.

However some languages also have "neuter" nouns. But "neuter" is not a sex. You don't change someone's X or Y chromosomes by neutering them, the same way you don't change it if you get sex reassignment surgery.

Also, whether a word is considered masculine or feminine within a particular language is clearly a construct.

>>8721833
>Is there any scientific evidence of gender being separated from sex?

Yes and it's called "transsexualism".

>>8722120
Transsexualism is just people mentally ill who want to be something they cannot be. Just because you like socially constructed feminine things does not mean you are not a man,

>>8722054
>I always cross out sex and put gender
'Tism.

>>8722130
>Transsexualism is just people mentally ill
gb2>>>/pol/

>>8721839
>>8721845
>>8721843
>>8721855
>>8721887
>>8721857
>>8721867
>>8721890
>>8722063
>>8722074
>>8722085
>>8722089
>>8722094
>>8722098

Well, if this isn't a nice motley of what people think of the topic, I don't know what is.

Either you have XX or XY and that's what defines your gender and you can't change it.
And if you think you're a different gender than you are, that's after the definition a mental illness.

>>8722226
It's not a mental illness to think the Earth is flat, it's just stupid.

It's not a mental illness to think you're a different sex than you are, it's just stupid.

>>8722226
The word "gender" has been used since before people knew what chromosomes were, Mr. Traditionalist

>>8721833
Google John Money
You're welcome

>>8722236
That's like saying

"The word 'Green' was used before they knew that it corresponded to a particular wavelength of light, Mr. Traditionalist"

Just because you know something more now about what you already knew doesn't mean the whole thing was wrong in the first place.

>>8722244
Therefore if someone asks what the word "green" means and you give them a wavelength, you're being silly. Just like if you refer to chromosomes to define gender.

File: 6f946e6a00cf65f9a9d4eb71289ad252.jpg (1MB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 900x1200px

Questioning something because of "science" when transchildren are LITERALLY killing themselves right now

This is EXTREMELY problematic.

>>8722266
Just because you can't see chromosomes doesn't mean they don't matter you stupid tranny

Holy fuck

>>8722266
Give another definition for the word "Green".

No, seriously, try to define it objectively any other way.

>>8722275
I never said they didn't matter. I said they don't determine gender, and I stand by that. But they do matter for other reasons.

>>8722270
It's actually quite a good lesson in natural selection, if you think about it, which is perfect for those who don't understand chromosomes.

>>8722283
>the genetic building blocks of humans don't determine gender

wew.jpg

>>8722283
> Everything that defines an organism doesn't define this one particular aspect about the organism

You realize what you're saying is on a science board, right?

>>8722287
First of all we were talking about X and Y chromosomes, which are not the only chromosomes.

But your assumption that gender must be determined by genetics is also unfounded. Do you believe that every aspect of your life is 100% determined by your DNA?

>>8722294
>Do you believe that every aspect of your life is 100% determined by your DNA?

Only the biological parts.

>>8721833
Sex is a biological property while gender is a linguistic property. Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.

>>8722294
Yes.
What else determines it? The stars? The environment?

Everything about you is encoded in your genetic material, including how you respond to environmental stimuli.

>>8722302
So for example you think that what languages you are able to speak is determined by your DNA.

>>8722299
And gender is biological?

>>8722301

Quam ad vestrum genus synonymum stuprorum genitalibus.

>>8722307
Obviously yes

>>8722305
No, I don't, because language is learned ability. You learn how to speak, just as you learn how to swim and how to use a computer.

You do not learn your gender. You ARE that gender. You don't pick up a polly pocket doll and say "oh hey I kind of like playing with this" or look in the mirror and say "you know I think my hair could be longer" and "learn" your gender. You have simply discovered that you have different likes and dislikes than other people.

Congratulations, you're not exactly the same as everyone else with a penis. That doesn't mean you have a vagina.

>>8722314
That's funny because it's obvious to me that it isn't.

>>8722315
Every time you just said "gender" you meant "sex"

>>8722270
>transchildren
This happens because you brain-wash kids into thinking they can be the other gender

>>8722244
>The word 'Green' was used before they knew that it corresponded to a particular wavelength of light, Mr. Traditionalist
Yes. Yes, yes, that's right. Yes? Yes.

If
>Just because you know something more now about what you already knew
>doesn't mean the whole thing was wrong in the first place
then using the word "gender" before you knew about chromosomes, means you were using the word "gender" without the context of chromosomes- and it means that, even if you know about chromosomes, that the original use of "gender" is not wrong. It means, if you stick by the use of the word "gender" as it was used long ago, then it has nothing to do with chromosomes. Even if chromosomes exist. It doesn't define or depict chromosomes. It does not deal with them. No.

If the whole thing was not wrong in the first place, then it means that gender is not the same as sex, and then that sex deals with chromosomes- because it is not dealing with a person in the same way gender did/does. Which, was without the context of chromosomes. Feminine, Masculine.

>>8722112
This anon even mentions it better.

Right there and then, gender and sex are two different things. Gender is mostly abstract, and otherwise deals with the behavioral or psychological traits of an individual- no chromosomes, no DNA. Sort of wishy-washy. It's a container for sex characteristics that may be physical, and some that may not be physical. Do you present yourself in a "girly" way? Do you "look girly"? You may have a penis, you may be a man, but you may act like a woman. You act: feminine. This does not change the fact that you are a man, sex wise, but it does put the arbitrary collage of your collective "masculinity" at risk. Perhaps even void it.

Sex, deals with the DNA, and the chromosomes, and is the reason the behavioral or psychological traits may emerge/present themselves.

Gender deals with what emerges from sex as well as what does not; sex is not gender.

>>8722320

Gender is a made up word from social science (social sciences are not real sciences)

Stop it.

>>8722326
>>8722063
>>8722085
>>8722089
Some of these things are not like the other.

>>8722322
How is it brain-washing to teach kids about the evils of being a cis white person?

>>8722338
>>8722318
>>8722244
>>8722305


You have proven yourself to be an idiot.

>>8722343
Only one of those is me? I don't think those are all the same people, and I also don't think some of those people even agree with one another.

Also, can you explain why this is the case? Maybe you made a mistake?

>>8722320
See, that's why you're not understanding all of this.

"Gender" and "sex" are synonyms. They both refer to the genitals of an organism that reproduces sexually.
They are labels that we have come up to distinguish the two parents that come together to reproduce.

There is nothing more to it. Your likes, dislikes, feelings, thoughts, hopes, dreams, behaviors, none of that plays any role in it at all.

Your whole argument is under the assumption that humans are somehow "special" and separate from the rest of life on Earth, in that somehow there is a connection between the way one behaves and something as concrete as sex and gender. Just because traditionally, males and females have had different likes, dislikes and personalities AS A RESULT of the roles they were taught to assume from a young age, doesn't mean that you can take one of the words used entirely to describe a physical characteristic and apply it to personality in order for it to agree with those purely traditional, prior, behavior aspects that men and women GENERALLY could be catagorized by.

>>8722349
>gender
>refer to the genitals of an organism

>gender
>labels we have come up with to distinguish the two parents that come together to reproduce

>gender
>behaviors
>none of that plays any role in it at all
>implying likes, dislikes, feelings, thoughts, hopes, dreams are not all behaviors

>gender
>somehow implying all humans are special and separate from the rest of life on Earth

>gender
>implying gender not being a connection between the way one behaves and something as concrete as sex
>behaves
>behaviors
>rest of life on Earth
>behaviors

>gender
>traditionally, males and females have had different
>behaviors
>AS A RESULT of the roles they were taught
>the roles they were taught
>behaviors

>gender
>purely traditional, prior, behavior aspects
>behavior
>that men and women GENERALLY could be catagorized by

Uh. I don't know if you realized this, anon, but you just described gender. Also, you misspelled "categorized".

File: baileyjay.jpg (5KB, 176x286px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 176x286px

How anyone could think this is a man because of "muh chromosomes" is beyond

that is CLEARLY a women you nazi scum

Arguing semantics is annoying. I am not anti-trans, but I can admit that both the words "gender" and "sex" have been hijacked to some extent. In the past I think they were synonymous or closer to being synonymous than they are now.

I understand the annoyance at people hijacking terminology.

However, I think most of these anti-trans people are mad about more than hijacking words. They would be mad no matter what words were used, because they just don't want words to exist that can possibly describe the trans phenomenon.

File: 1467783713168.jpg (265KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 720x720px

>>8722358
>jawline says he is a man
>arms say he is a man
>hips say he is a man
>fat distribution says he is a man
>bone structure says he is a man
>dick says he is a man
BUT
>his feelings says he is a women.

This is a tough one....

>>8722358
No, he is a man because he has a penis

>>8722325
>then using the word "gender" before you knew about chromosomes, means you were using the word "gender" without the context of chromosomes- and it means that, even if you know about chromosomes, that the original use of "gender" is not wrong. It means, if you stick by the use of the word "gender" as it was used long ago, then it has nothing to do with chromosomes.

See that's the logical fallacy in all of this.

The use of the word "gender" prior to the discovery of chromosomes and the role they play in the development in humans was still used to differentiate between the two physically distinguishable partners that define sexual reproduction.

It was not known, however, where gender and sex came from - the biological process that caused it. this DOES NOT imply that gender is not a result of chromosomes because it didn't refer to chromosomes hundreds of years ago. It referred to ones genitals (ever wonder why the words are so similar?).
We now know that genitals are a result of chromosomes. This means that gender - the word used refer to genitals - is caused by chromosomes.

>>8722356
I described the word that refers to genitalia because that's what sex and gender are synonyms for.

File: 1488580335349.jpg (32KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 640x480px

>>8722372
>>8722377
Cite.

>>8722358
That is a man dressed in a fashion that women commonly dress.

>>8722378
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gender

Why are you people questioning something when transkids are killing themselves?

Stop it.

Science is not more important than human life.

If a person identifies as a women THEY ARE FOR EVERY PRACTICAL PURPOSE A WOMEN YOU NAZI SCUM

>>8722358

If a man can be a woman if he just get boobs, it means i'm not a woman because i'm flat-chested as fuck?

>>8722372
I usually don't look at someone's genitals before I decide whether I should say "he" or "she". It's about how they act and present themselves, i.e. social cues.

People assume that every individual's parents look at their genitals when they're born and then make the decision to raise them as a boy or girl, and that they never change. But unless you're personally checking everyone's genitals when you meet them, you can't claim that gender is physically determined by that.

you most likely decide to call people "he" or "she" the same way I do. you just assume that under their clothes they have what you think they have

>>8722384
See this
>>8722322

>>8722389
Exaclt

You don't look at their genitals.
Because sex = gender = genitals

You don't get to decide, they don't get to decide, no one decides.

It's in their DNA.

>>8722393
Exactly*

>>8722393
They can't decide what their biological sex is.

They effectively can decide the social aspect, e.g. what pronouns they want you to use. You have no authority to check their genitals to determine what pronoun to use.

>>8722396
Biological sex = gender = what "he" and "she" refer to

>>8722396
You also misunderstand my argument.

I don't give a fuck how people dress, talk, what they do for fun, whatever.

If a man wants to dress up in a pink dress and put on makeup then that's totally fine.

But none of that changes the fact that he is a male.

>>8722397
so how do you decide whether to call a person "he" or "she"?

Do you give them a DNA test? Or tell them they have to drop their pants?

Or do you just make an educated guess based on how they act and look?

>>8722401
I look at them, make an educated guess about what their genitals are based on how they dress, and 99.9999% of the time I'm right.

The other times that I'm wrong, then whoopsie, I made a mistake. Sorry if that offends you but that's really the least of your concerns in the real world.

>>8722413
So you check their genitals later and verify that you were right? Like, what percentage of your acquaintance's genitals have you seen?

>>8722417
Not very many, but I make the valid assumption that if I'm not corrected, then I wasn't incorrect.

>>8722423
Wait so do you explicitly ask them whether they have a penis or vagina at least? Or do you just assume that because they don't object to the pronoun that you used, that automatically means they have the genitals you assume they have?

After all, there are plenty of biological males with penises who would be happy for you to call them "she" and would not correct you.

>>8722427
Nope, I look at the length of the hair, their facial structure, their clothes, and I make an assumption about their gender = sex.
Then, if I talk to them or refer to them later, I will use the pronoun that corresponds to my assumption.

I make the assumption that the way they look approximately reflects their genitals.This assumption is almost always accurate.

And I additionally assume that if I am not corrected then I was correct.

Out of all the years I have been alive, I have been corrected once.

>>8721843

Gender is not learned. Gender roles (to an extent) are but gender is a sense. Like I feel like my body fits me, I have a dick and it feels like I should.

Gender dysphoria stems from a neurological cause. It isn't learned.

>>8722438
And you have no way of knowing how many people didn't correct you because you used the prounoun they wanted you to use, despite the fact that it didn't match their genitals or chromosomes.

Also, unless you checked the ol genitals, you have no way of knowing the true biological sex of the person who did correct you. You only know what they told you.

>Gender is just a social construct, it has nothing to do with biology!
>Let me just cut my dick off so I can be part of the other gender, although remember it's not biological lol

Someone explain this reasoning to me

>>8722382
It first says, "kind, sort, class". So, yes, back then, the word "gender" would be used to differentiate between the two physically distinguishable partners that define sexual reproduction.

In what fashion? "Kind, sort, class".

>>8722325
makes reference to
>>8722244
which is making reference to
>>8722236
which is making reference to
>>8722226

>The word "gender" has been used since before people knew what chromosomes were, Mr. Traditionalist
>"The word 'Green' was used before they knew that it corresponded to a particular wavelength of light, Mr. Traditionalist"

So, I was operating by the logic above. Let's step away from that for a moment, because it isn't the logic I would like to use.

Let's recap.

Gender; "kind, sort, class", circa 1300s. Borrows from 12th century definition in Latin; "race, stock, family; kind, rank, order; species," also "(male or female) sex". No context for chromosomes, interchangeable with sex. Used primarily to differentiate between "kinds" or "classes" of what can only be understood as "sex"; men, women, mostly physical, based mostly on looks- like one's genitals.

>It was not known
>where gender and sex came from

>of what can only be understood as "sex"; men, women

Language evolves, and so does the knowledge of things. According to your source, "[t]he grammatical sense is attested in English from late 14c". That word, attested? It allegedly means "to affirm to be correct, true, or genuine". In the late 15th century, the word "gender" is asserted, it is maintained to be true, that the use of "gender" in a grammatical context was valid, was true, was genuine. And yet, "[t]he "male-or-female sex" sense is attested in English from early 15c".

At that point, between the late 14th and early 15th century, the word had evolved to mean two different things, both uses being valid enough. Feminine, Masculine, Grammatical; Sex, Male, Female; Sex, Gender.

>>8722372
By the 20th century, "gender came to be the usual English word for 'sex of a human being,' in which use it was at first regarded as colloquial or humorous".
>gender came to be the usual English word for
>sex
>sex of a human being
>of a human being
>colloquial

"Later often in feminist writing with reference to social attributes as much as biological qualities; this sense first attested 1963".

The word evolved from meaning one thing, to being colloquial, to meaning only another thing. As of today, the two words, officially, mean different things. This is most likely due to the increase in understanding of the human self, biology and sociology included. If the use of the word "gender" prior to the discovery of chromosomes and the role they play in the development of humans, did not include said knowledge, then the use of the word "gender" did not mean those things. If the word has changed over time, especially since the discovery of chromosomes, then the word "gender", by definition given in your source, does not define chromosomes, because it now affirmed to define biological qualities or social attributes than the "kind" or "class" of peoples, male or female.

The science behind the nature of chromosomes seems to reaffirm that sentiment. "Gender" is seldom used in modern context to describe XX or XY by those who write the abstracts, reports, or studies, because the word "gender" has changed, as our understanding of things have changed.

>>>/lgbt/7859354

LGBT has a thread on this

Pure autism.

File: sigh.jpg (3KB, 127x131px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 127x131px

>>8721833
>Is there any scientific evidence of gender being separated from sex?

Nothing that is not based in plausibilities.

But by all means, cherry pick an answer from here that agrees with you like a true conformation bias.

>>8722540
>>7859777
The boards are melding together.

File: 206_14-Cool-Sinks-To-Leave-You-Overflowing-With-Joy_3-l.jpg (32KB, 600x504px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x504px

http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943
>Battle of the sexes
>According to some scientists, that balance can shift long after development is over. Studies in mice suggest that the gonad teeters between being male and female throughout life, its identity requiring constant maintenance. In 2009, researchers reported deactivating an ovarian gene called Foxl2 in adult female mice; they found that the granulosa cells that support the development of eggs transformed into Sertoli cells, which support sperm development. Two years later, a separate team showed the opposite: that inactivating a gene called Dmrt1 could turn adult testicular cells into ovarian ones. “That was the big shock, the fact that it was going on post-natally,” says Vincent Harley, a geneticist who studies gonad development at the MIMR-PHI Institute for Medical Research in Melbourne.

>>8722592
REFUTE THIS

>>8722603
>Humans are mice

There is no scientific basis for 'gender' - S.Crowder

>>8721833
Well there's things like gender identity disorder, but it's import to understand that gender is innate in most people look at the case of David Reimer, he had a botched circumcision that left him mutilated, clearly he was never going to live a proper life, they were advised to raise him as girl.
(cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer)

It was a complete failure, he was deeply depressed, hated himself and was constantly "behaving as a boy". Eventually he killed himself but not before transitioning back to being male and living (relatively) happily as a man for a few decades.

It's a complicated subject that can't easily be addressed with just a yes/no answer.

It's a sticky subject, but as far as anatomy is concerned, there is no physical indicator of gender, due to the fact that gender is a non-scientific term which has always been used to class a behaviour instead of a biological state.

It is similair to how people misinterpret the meaning of sub-species as including some sort of biological variance (ergo human's have sub-species), when in actuallity it simply refers to a small group of potentially biologically similair animals which are behaviorally different from the standard observed in the species (refuse or are unable to breed with members outside their sub-species).

>>8722592
>if you transform genes you transform cells
GENDER CONFIRMED ALL IN YOUR HEAD
SCIENTISTS BTFO
HOW WILL /sci/ EVER RECOVER

>>8722592
>>8722603
>>8722665
This is pretty much off-topic though?
It doesn't address wether the mice then lived as females typically do in mice society, which is what gender is.

This is just nice research into the fact that our bodies are a constantly changing swirl of hormones and other chemicals, and an imbalance can cause insane things to go "wrong", which I am pretty sure everyone knew?

>>8722678
It's a testament to how clueless most pro-transgender people are since one minute they'll argue it's a social construct then the next will point to biological anomalies as though it serves as proof that it isn't biological either

>>8722688
Ah kek, I understand the reasoning now.

Not too sure why people back their causes with such blatant retardation, I suppose it is the only path open to them now.
If gender was recognised as purely societal we would probably have to reclassify trans as a mental disorder imo.

>>8721833
It's really a matter of semantics. What's true is that there is behavior in some males which is that they dress and act like females, as well as the converse behavior in females. This behavior has been reported since Antiquity. Whether you want to define gender in terms of behavior or in terms of sex is truly meaningless.

>>8722688
>most pro-transgender people
have you actually talked to hundreds of millions of people about this?

because I think you might be lying.

>>8722697
Both online and in real life I've discussed with over about 50 people I know were pro-transgender movement and of these people not a single one could explain how gender being a social construct was an excuse for people to go under the scalpel, other than just "if it makes them happy"

>>8722806
>over about 50 people
>most... people

>>8722842
It's a pretty good sample size 2bh and if you're going to be so pedantic over this go ahead and prove to me that indeed hundreds of millions of people actually advocate this bullshit

>>8722806
"Gender" has multiple different meanings. Some of those are social constructs, others are not. In the context of trans people, the most relevant is probably psychological identity, which is definitely not a social construct. Also, I'm calling bullshit on your anecdote.

>>8722886
If gender is a social construct then why do trannies need their dick cut off?

File: image.jpg (64KB, 500x431px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 500x431px

>>8722886
>psychological identity
>not social construct

Are you implying that we (men) are born knowing that we are expected to pay for the first date?

Anything that is a complex thought driven by reason/data, and not just a base need/desire, is socially derived. Humans are not born with developed instincts, hence why children are such fucking retards and have to be taught literally everything.

If a child thinks they are the wrong gender, someone has implanted this idea. Same as being gay, at some stage the idea was presented and it took hold.
Same as being straight, same as being schizophrenic, external stimuli from the world around the individual creates stresses on the brain which causes it to act out.
I say this as a bi man, and I am almost 100% looking at "traps" during my developmental years caused this.

>>8722384
>THEY ARE FOR EVERY PRACTICAL PURPOSE A WOMEN YOU NAZI SCUM
>NAZI SCUM

Holy fuck, I hope this is a bait.

>>8721833
No.
Unless you mean by evidence the autistic screeching of a lunatic.

>>8722384

you can turn in your computer now

This type of stuff is best dealt with with new age bs.
Everyone possesses a male energy and a female energy. Effeminate men choose the female energy. This is considered biophilosophically incorrect as you have a penis and should therefore fuck bitches. Not that there's anything wrong with it.

I really question the mental health of people who give a shit

>>8722384
>Science is not more important than human life

what you're saying is not human life but rather muh feelings.
everything you have right now is thanks to science.
i dont give a single fuck about your shitty depressive feelings or your identity, that's your problem not mine, go solve it by yourself or from a therapist

>>8722081

Underrated

>gender is a social construct
>but I specifically identify as female so i do female things like wear dresses and lipstick

You have a body, just use it and maybe read more books

If the body truly is just a shell for the brain, gender shouldn't matter once you attain the highest level of consciousness.

People saying they 'identify' as female are just saying they are shallow, vain people who enjoy wearing dresses and thinking too much about their appearance in the physical world.

>>8721843
OP asked about science

>>8722110

He's right. English has two words for the same concept because English takes its vocabulary from two sources: Anglo Saxon and French. (There are a lost of these 'paired' words with the equivalent meaning, like harbour/port and fall/autumn).

Some time in the 20th century, sociologists decided to change the meaning of the word gender, and then berate people for not using the "correct" meaning. It is their own fucking fault that they have run into such opposition. They wouldn't have had such a hard time if just created a new word for their "mental gender" idea, instead of appropriating one with centuries of meaning and baggage.

>>8722443
since when are assumptions seen as the truth? Anon specifically said that he ASSUMES that he is correct. He didn't say that he knew he was correct because they didn't correct him.

File: 1488074166802.png (354KB, 594x593px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 594x593px

>>8722098
>Retarded /pol crossposters. But it's strange because they like trap so much, and still claim not to be gay.
You're thinking of >>>/b/ not >>>/pol/

>>>/pol/ is a Christian board

>>8723655
I went back and forth with that guy for a few posts. He said he was guessing their genitalia, and that he was right 99.99999% of the time.

He has no way of knowing if that's true. He only knows that they didn't correct him when he said "he" or "she".

>>8723876
Even if a person can decieve others into thinking he/she is the other sex, that does not change the reallity.

>>8723893
Clearly. My point was that most people say "he" or "she" without checking the person's chromosomes or genitals to determine their sex. We choose a pronoun based on what we can see and hear (the person's clothes, hair, voice, etc.)

Of course, if you're doing this to try to guess whether the person has a penis or vagina, you'll be right the vast majority of the time since most people present themselves in an obvious way. However it's worth pointing out that you will hardly ever *know* for certain that you've correctly guessed the persons genitals, because we don't usually get to see our acquaintances naked.

Therefore the genitals are irrelevant unless you plan to do something with them. Unless you are planning to fuck the person, your choice to call them "he" or "she" is based solely on factors other than chromosomes and genitalia. It's 100% social, 0% biological.

>>8723914
except for the fact that different genders tend to have different facial structures not to mention BOOBS

>>8721833
>gender

Gender is a grammatical construct. Nouns are partitioned into "genders;" in European languages, these are either male, female or neuter. There is no biological concept of gender.

Sage for shitty thread that isn't about science.

>>8723929
sure and I guess that's biological, but if you guess based on that you'll still be wrong about the chromosomes/genitals some of the time.

It's a fucking semantics issue.

Every argument about gender being a social construct or not a social construct comes down to "please define gender", and there are far more important questions.

The real questions are things like "What are the impacts of sex hormones on the cognitive development of the human brain?"

Nobody educated believes that dresses are innately linked to vaginas or whatever the fuck. There are many things in society that are likely attributed to gendered factors that are purely the result of social momentum.

But I ain't no biomagician so

File: 2m21iPP.jpg (33KB, 650x366px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 650x366px

>>8723932
>neuter
The word you're looking for is neutral. Neuter is what Bob Barker wants you to do to your dogs.

>>8722085
Any sane rational human.

>>8723947
>Nobody educated believes that dresses are innately linked to vaginas
They don't consciously believe that, no. However if they meet a person wearing a dress who has long hair, they will either assume there's a vagina underneath (if the person seems otherwise feminine) or they'll think to themselves "why is that dude wearing a dress" if they see beard stubble or an adams apple, etc.

>>8723979
it is accurate to say "neuter". German language has masculine, feminine, and neuter nouns.

>>8723979
No, it's neuter.
>t. linguist

File: ThatWord.jpg (78KB, 625x625px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 625x625px

>>8723979
Your misunderstanding of "neutral", your meme, and your eagerness to share, all comprise complementary evidence of your cognitive dissonance.

>>8723979
Wrong, you illiterate faggot.

>>8721843
>Sociology
>Science

Pick one.

>>8724320
Sociology is the best science we have on how societies work. Nobody claims the knowledge we have of societies is comparable to the knowledge we have of physical laws, but it's better to study them with our limited means than to not study them at all. What's unscientific is to claim that we cannot have a scientific understanding of societies.

>>8722120
That's like presenting the fact that the Flat Earth Society exists as proof that the earth is flat.

>>8724845
except that one uses scientific methodologies in it's attempts to discover the truth.

All is one

>>8724876
proof?

>>8721833
Social identity determines what you see yourself as. A doctor might not see themselves as an ordinary someone who just performs surgeries and diagnoses colds "sometimes", but as an actual doctor. Same holds true for people who fit the social roles of their opposite sex. Someone may see themselves as someone who acts like a woman sometimes or they might actually see themselves as a woman. Because certain social roles tell you what you ARE, not only what you DO, they can make you believe that you are something different than you ordinarily would.

>>8721833
My hypothesis; confusion and to much opinion. A guy born ten thousand years ago was going to be a hunter or a forager. I'm fairly certain he wasn't going to be a woman. It just wasn't in the cards; ya know

>>8722182
Except it literally is. The reason why you had the kneejerk reaction of "gb2/pol/" is because youre one of the fucking mongs who still falls for the "mentall illness is spoopy and bad!!!!!" meme, a meme that will drive us back to the stone age.

>mfw the concept that gender is independent of sex was invented by a sociopath whose only noteworthy contribution to academia was forcing a boy who had a botched circumcision to take absurd amounts of female hormones from infancy into adolescence, molesting him during his routine checkups, and giving him mental trauma that drove him to suicide after going on national TV and saying "chopping off my dick, giving me female hormones, and raising me as a woman for 13 years did not convince me that I'm not a man"
>mfw modern academia and the most important cultural figures in western society take this man's ideas as fact

W E W
E
W

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

One just has to look at gender/sex in animals vs humans to understand that it's a learned behavior / social construct.

>>8725266
the concept was not invented by John Money though.

If transgenderism wasn't a learned behavior, they would've been extinct by now.

>>8722182
It literally is, their brains develope similarly to the other sex

>>8725281
Then why arent schizophrenics extinct?

>>8725281
Or certain people are predisposed to it / instinctually gravitate towards it without "learning" it from anywhere

>>8725266
Reimer was not a healthy boy who started acting like / wanting to be a girl by his own choice.

His dick got cut off after a botched circumcision.

In fact he acted like a boy even after his dick got cut off.

This is very different from an otherwise healthy boy who starts acting like / wanting to be a girl.

>>8725296
He is pointing to the fact that your identity is not a social construct, you're born with it.

>>8725308
It's hard to prove whether it's 100% nature or nurture.

But even if we assume that gender identity is determined at or before birth, why can't it still be independent of biological sex?

Why couldn't there be someone who is born with a penis and also born with the predisposition to be feminine?

>>8722266
>if someone asks what the word "green" means and you give them a wavelength, you're being silly.

Green: a color intermediate in the spectrum between yellow and blue, an effect of light with a wavelength between 500 and 570 nm; found in nature as the color of most grasses and leaves while growing, of some fruits while ripening, and of the sea.
(source: Dictionary. com)

>2017 when being unbiased and accurate is regarded as "silly"

>>8725319
Because thats fucking gay as fuck, faggot.

File: image.jpg (40KB, 480x372px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 480x372px

>>8725322
>the sea is green

Delet

>>8721833
They certainly don't vary independently by any definition of "independent"

>>8725330
oh my gosh let me clutch my pearls at how edgy you are after your pseudoscientific arguments are all shot down

>>8725319
>you can't just be a feminine man

>>8725350
they could, but why should they have to be? They have muh freedom to cut off their dick and take pills if they want.

>>8725358
Well yeah, why not, the problem is that physicians are literally not allowed to suggest that you take some more time to think on it, suggest alternatives to mangling your own genitals, or try to figure out what's up deeper via some mental health help. At the very least they should be up front with the fact that such a drastic surgery is has the possibility of later complications, the mental ramifications of being unable to reproduce, and just general possiblity of regret down the road. I think we're going to see a ton of that in the next several years.

And fuck people who want to do this shit to kids.

>>8725366
I agree that they should be well informed before they make any decisions about surgery or hormones.

I have not heard that doctors are forbidden from saying any of that stuff. source?

>>8725371
Kenneth Zucker is the immediate one I think of because he was where I am in Toronto. He ran a program that by most accounts helped loads of people that had gender dysphoria, most ended up just leaving the program and being gay, but settling into their birth gender. He got crucified and removed from his position in 2015, despite being one of the world's most renowned psychologists on the subject.

If you walk into a service centre here and want to get the F/M on your ID switched to the other, it is gov't policy not to question it at all. That's not related to surgery but it's the same basic issue. It's too taboo to question any of it because you get vilified. All that matters is their feelings, it doesn't matter if your ID system becomes compromised and the suspect who some eyewitness IDd as a man is in the system as a woman just to fuck with everything.