Is gender 100% bullshit? Or not

I think it's really important to note that the biological divergence in humans between male and female is very small compared with the animal kingdom. In a study of brain scans, only the most divergent few percentage (2-4%) of scans are clearly male or female. All the rest could be either sex. In studies of biological differences between the sexes the statistical thresholds are so much lower - we generally WANT to find difference rather than sameness. biological sex functions as a spectrum (the interaction between chromosomes and hormones Place everyone somewhere between 'male' and 'female').

• high heels were for a long time worn more by men than women and signified that the wearer has servants- the foot wear was to impractical to do anything for yourself. We have a huge tendency to look for biological grounding in cultural trends.

It's interesting that we tend to hugely focus on what is different across the sexes, and not on what is the same. (Actually most things).

But in which case is male violence sex or gender? Does society condition men to be violent towards women, or is it innate. Do men choose to be violent, or do they choose to not be violent? Is there a default?

Women are oppressed because of their sex.

That is them being physically smaller and weaker.

That is them being the sex that gestates and feeds babies.

That is them being sexually attractive to males.

It's because of their sex, not their gender.

I know where you're coming from OP. I have been thinking about these issues a lot lately.

I'm not a scientist but I'm prepared to accept that there may be biological differences between the sexes that have contributed to what we see as gender.

However it is impossible to unpick most things that are biologically determined from things that are culturally determined because we are an immensely complex species with layers and layers of culture and history (as well as biology) which make us who we are.

And because those things are so complex and so entwined and so impossible to unpick, I'm just not prepared to buy into any claims for "gender" differences.

So I'll happily accept (of course) that my sons have penises and that they will (probably) be able to father children. And I obviously accept that they don't have vaginas and will never bear children. And I take the scientists words for it that their hormonal make up is different from that of my nieces.

But I will not accept that son #2 is sporty and physical "because" he is a boy. Or that son #1 was a particularly difficult toddler "because" he's a boy. Or that son #3 has been a PITA to toilet train "because" he's a boy (all these things have been suggested on more than one occasion).

Nor do I think that son #1 is not a "typical" boy because he has always been good at reading. Same for #2 who is nurturing and caring. And for #3 who loves dancing and dressing up.

I have three children, all very different because they have different personalities. They could not be more different if they were different sexes. I am trying to raise them to be unconfined by "gender", although from the moment I knew their sex (at 20 weeks gestation) other people have been foisting gender stereotypes onto them.

Yes

Yes, indeed, I think that's a very interesting point - we talk about 'gender' as a construct, and there's an element of deliberate artifice in that idea.

But what if the basis and outworking of gender is more fundamental and sinister than cultural conditioning, and therefore even more important to destroy as a concept?

What if our gendered female and male behaviour arose from the worst instincts of human nature - the drive to rape and dominate creating the networking for safety and appeasement characteristics in males and females respectively?

This 'innate' version of gender is no more to be respected than any other base instinct to do harm.

(I'm thinking aloud now, tbh. Please pick apart my thoughts at your leisure, I'm very willing to refine my thinking)

Let’s jusr say that it is biological that women like nurturing

Why? It's not true. You may have been socialised to think this but there is no reason to presume that.

I've found myself more confused about what exactly 'gender' is. I'm increasingly convinced it is more about assigning behaviours & presentation to different sexes, and if we differ from what is currently perceived as the 'norm' then it can be used to create insecurity and to discriminate.
I can't get my head around the idea of gender identity. Do I 'feel' like a woman? I just feel like me. Does discrimination against women make me rage? Yes it really really does.

And is many beating up women a gendered behaviour or is it sex based - because they are bigger they can and this has always been the way, and always will be ? (God that's a depressing thought)

I think this is a really interesting subject. Another example where maybe sex and gender cross over is that at a population level women are smaller and weaker than men. Stereotypically women are also more likely to be people pleasers, non-agressive unless northern , conflict resolvers etc. But is this actually a behaviour stemming from sex so men don't beat us up?

At a population level, women do have a greater interest in people than in things (men)

Women have throughout history relied on safety in numbers to protect themselves from harm. Even today, a woman rarely walks home alone in the dark.

They have learned to do this because their sex makes them vulnerable to attack by predatory males.

It’s entirely possible speakingwomen however if you look globally there are certain things that consistently appear regarding female behaviour, and I think it’s dangerous to dismiss this as being entirely cultural

What is meant by 'nurturing' in this context? I nurtured my first child by breast feeding. It was a physical activity that only a woman could do.

I spent a lot of time cradling my baby to do it. I still give lots of hugs and physical affection to my children. Their father has never breast fed them because he doesn't have the biological capacity. But he is affectionate and tactile in his care for them. He is very 'nurturing'.

I think sometimes we use these words for traits that we really need to unpick. That's where gender plays the mindfuck.

Exaggerating the different gait exaggerates the sex based difference.
Isn’t that where raising the heel comes in? Or not

Heels were worn by men originally.

This ‘fully human’ point is why I was talking about respect

Let’s jusr say that it is biological that women like nurturing, if it isn’t respected then it can become oppressive. If it is respected, it doesn’t have to be oppressive

speakingwoman, if it's any comfort, I think in the current climate it's very easy to be confused because so much work is being put into making the whole damn thing confusing. It has taken me years to distill my experience and the world around me to be able to get some kind of handle on it.

At a population level, women do have a greater interest in people than in things (men)

But in some ways that creates a circular argument because it doesn’t prove whether that’s biology or culture