Is gender 100% bullshit? Or not

[speakingwoman]

Big question!

So, biology is a stable reality (I have been reading the well-written Hands Across the Aisle site)

Some bits of biology are visible and tangible e.g. our wider hips.

That changes some behaviours (our gait is different to men’s gaits).

And our hormone mix is different.

Where does biology stop and gender start?

Even before birth actually. In some cultures female foetus are aborted because males are valued higher than females.

I don’t have a knowledge of the research. So I fall back on presuming less, not more. Working on stuff that is more certain like size, shape, strength and maternity.... trying to get as much understanding as I can from things that are incontrovertible

alldayinbed If you let go of the idea that Testosterone is a male hormone (which it isn't, since men and women both have testosterone) does that theory still stand up? You could place thousands and thousands of (unmutilated) naked people into an arena and the number that don't fit the categories of male or female based upon the presence or absence of penis, testicals, breasts, vagina will be absolutely minute.

Totally cultural is a really hard argument to make in the face of evidence to the contrary

I think humans outsource a lot of their behaviour to culture, the cultural norms that differ across cultures (clothes etc) but there is also a base level of instinctual behaviour built up over millions of years that crosses into what you mean as gender when you say it’s all cultural.

Thanks midgebabe

*we can outsource because we have consciousness

That’s what I mean by that, BUT there are still some fundamental biological differences which cross into the ‘gender construct’ argument that feminism may benefit from addressing

Not saying you are 100% wrong mooncup but that’s all too complicated for me.

Oh is there some robust scientific evidence that there are behaviours that are more attributable to one or other sex that are not directly related to sex and are independent of culture? Please share.

there is also a base level of instinctual behaviour built up over millions of years that crosses into what you mean as gender when you say it’s all cultural

There are some instinctual behaviours but they probably account for a tiny percentage. Most are socialised.

Midgebabe is good.

I’ll try and give an example

When you give birth, those feelings and behaviours to protect and nurture your child in the feminine way (yes I do mean mothers generally nurture differently to men) is overwhelming, you aren’t taught that. You might have read some books, been to classes, but fundamentally your nurture instinct is just ‘there’. This has to be biological, a way our species has survived.

I know people will pick this up with rebuttals about some women aren’t maternal etc. But logically our species could never have survived if females did not have a biological nurture behaviour. Non maternal mothers are the exception and most will have been wiped out...we still do our but to wipe them out with SS etc.

I’m simply saying that a totallycultural argument doesn’t actually do women any favours, we need to have women accepted and valued for what they really are. That’s progress in my eyes

This is a really interesting discussion :)

I guess that even animals tend to have social structures that create different behaviours, though they may be unaware of that? I wonder at what point gendered behaviours begin to have an evolutionary point, or do all behaviours, or none? Are gendered behaviours independent of being recognised by human intelligence IYSWIM? Is a female mammal presenting herself to a male as an appeasement behaviour, any different to women who try to not to "provoke" their partners?

I didn’t feel that at birth mooncup. Yet we are bot( pretty awesome parents (compared to own parents....)

I think you are extrapolating

I’m shattered, off to bed with infinite monkeys

the babies thing is sex related though So yes, mothers do nurture their child and in the first year or two that will be very different to the nuturevthat a father can give. And that's a key role for our species (and needs be more respected by society. )

That doesn't mean that women are more likely to be good at or enjoy nursing random strangers though.

Oh is there some robust scientific evidence that there are behaviours that are more attributable to one or other sex that are not directly related to sex and are independent of culture? Please share.

Sorry, I don’t understand that question. Do you want research directly related to differences in behaviours attributed to sex or not?

And thanks..

I think you are not prepared to face the facts if you even anecdotally see that in general women tend to be better at 1:1 nurture.

I see it as a strength not something to be denied

I was asking for research that proves some non cultural behaviour differences between the sexes that is not related to sexual repeoduction.

Mooncup (am now in bed...)

What you call facts I’d call consequences......so they are not the right thing to base our fundamental questions on.

@thebewilderness
Half correct. What if you have xxy chromosomes? What if you have xx chromosome but testosterone insensitivity. Indeed there are only xs and ys, but the interplay between chromosomes, hormones and hormonal sensitivity mean that just because you have xy chromosomes does not preclude any number of weird and wonderful things happening to your biological sex. Again, Simon Levay covers this much better than I could.

If you are inclined to more podcast listening OP This American Life did a fascistic show on testosterone, testing all their staff and finding that levels were unpredictable and surprising across both genders.

Yep. You could fill an arena with humans and catagorise them by the presence of vulvas and testicles. But if you then tried to extrapolate details of personal experience, skill, personality, or anything else much based on that divergence, you'd find actually very little stacks up. As I said, the statistical thresholds for divergence are incredibly low.

Put this another way- I feel the same way about my kids as most people from my gender feel about their kids. And most people from my opposite gender. I feel the same way about my family as most humans do. I enjoy food, sex and breathing, as do most humans. I feel the same way about death as most humans. My strength and speed puts me in the category of average human, my skill at maths and sport, also average for a human.

It's fairly liberating when you interact with other humans based on the assumption that you have more in common than not, and that divergence based on gender is probably bullshit instilled by the culture.

Face the facts that because girls are praised from birth for being kind and caring we see that girls focus on that aspect and develop that aspect of their character? That is cultural not innate.
It is innate that babies rspond to please the adult.

Face the fact that gender sterotype affects us from the earliest of ages and steers and influences our behaviours, reinforcing some behaviours at the expense of others.

May I ask your own age/sex and whether you’ve given birth allDay?

Yep. You could fill an arena with humans and catagorise them by the presence of vulvas and testicles. But if you then tried to extrapolate details of personal experience, skill, personality, or anything else much based on that divergence, you'd find actually very little stacks up

Yes I absolutely agree. What I don't agree with is the idea that if I have more testosterone in my body than another woman, or less oestrogen, I am less of a woman and more of a man. As I said; the idea testosterone is a male hormone is incorrect. Sex is binary.

Here’s some:

scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=sex+differences+in+neuroticism+cross+cultures&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart#d=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DueSwTlOhATMJ

scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=sex+differences+in+neuroticism+cross+cultures&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart#d=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DYcgtjfAR8CYJ

scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=sex+differences+in+neuroticism+cross+cultures&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart#d=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DS7zcXL6sJHEJ

I’m not saying this proves my point. Again, what I’m saying is that saying gender is all cultural just isn’t proven and we have to be able to counter such evidence with a better argument than “it’s just not. It was how we were brought up”