Why we need critical realism in the sex and gender debate

[ChalkandScissors]

Brilliant guest post on the FPFW site.

fairplayforwomen.com/critical_realism/?fbclid=IwAR01Iqk_pPPd_lJdm8cQDszhGnCRi9tNOvylfEPbzqakPRoRtAYuyVRy81s

excerpt:

"Critical realism therefore presents the opportunity for us to remain clear about biological sex whilst also being able to discuss gender identity as a construct that humans are developing in the present generations.

One does not cancel out the other, since they are both performing different roles in society and in human life. Rather than removing sex from legislation, forms, research and government statistics – the best approach would be to encourage the use of both sex and gender identity. This way, we can usefully explore whether particular illnesses, oppressions, experiences and events are correlated better with sex or gender identity, for example.

If we conflate the two, we lose valuable human data and development. If we disregard one and keep the other, the same will happen. For example, if we conflate the two and see a large national rise in women committing suicide, how do we know whether that rise in suicide is from biological women or trans women? What if the suicide rate is much higher in trans women and we miss that vital data because we have conflated sex with gender?"

ChalkandScissors Very good article, thanks for posting it. If that blog post was put on twitter, would the author be banned I wonder?

@ChalkandScissors so clearly written and explained! Thank you for posting that!

I saw some guy post on Twitter that he described himself as "sex realist" rather than "gender critical". I liked it because it was positive rather than reactive - but it is, unfortunately, ambiguous because of the multiple meanings of "sex".

It is good to have a name for the counter arguments that we put to the allegations from trans activists that "gender critical" equals "biological essentialist". Even better that we can link to FPFW if anyone asks what "critical realism" means in practice

‘Sex realism’ sounds too much like ‘race realism’ (Charles Murray, etc).

I much prefer ‘critical realism’ because it refers to an approach rather than just a belief. It doesn’t just say what you believe but how you came by that belief.

Additionally, critical realism applies across all strata of society, belief systems, social structures, etc.

I do believe "gender critical" may be too narrow a term; while it can be helpful as a shorthand, GC =/= Radical Feminist, and GC =/= critical realist. At least, not always.

Things to think about, at any rate!

Mental Illness is not socially constructed. It is a manifestation of very real physical conditions such as the endocrine and electrical balances of the brain.

You can call it possession by demons, and that would be socially constructed.

I think the point the author is making is that many individuals are put on a medical pathway after experiencing trauma, when their reactions are trauma responses rather than endocrine and electrical imbalances of the brain. There needs to be more investigation in a person's life before they are given medical treatment, because sometimes their behaviour is a perfectly natural response to traumatic events.

So in that sense, a person suffering from trauma who is then medicalised could be argued to have a socially constructed mental illness.