Society/Culture Do you belive in Non Binary as a gender?

Do you belive in Non Binary as a gender?

  • Yes , you can be not a male or a female

    Votes: 12 36.4%
  • No, your either a Man or a Women

    Votes: 21 63.6%

  • Total voters
    33

Remove this Banner Ad

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,679
8,289
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Of course hierarchies are social constructs!

How is the existence of the King, the Lords and the Peasants, not a product of the Feudal hierarchy? How is the existence of Women being denied the vote, banned from owning property or working NOT the product of the Patriarchal Hierarchy? How is the existence of social class, or racism, or nations or cultures NOT social constructs?

Name for me a hierarchy among humans that is NOT a social construct.

Umm Malifice, you're totally missing the definition of hierarchies, and completely using the term as a negative.

How many times do is it need to be explained to you that hierarchy is NOT a social construct, it IS an evolution? This is not debatable, your angst should be directed at the humans that misuse it, and you're blinded by it's misuse.

Hierarchy does not have a conscience, it is an evolutionary necessity, without it we have anarchy. Anyone with any modicum of intelligence should know this. > You < I know, should know better.

Not sure how you're not having the light bulb moment here.

For anyone considering this is thread derailing, it is not, it is completely and utterly relevant.

Gender used as term in society as a social construct, undeniable fact.

Gender used as a term in society as a biological definition, undeniable fact.

Agreed, they are inconsistent, regardless. I'm not championing or cheerleading one or the other. And if anyone critiques my view for not taking a side, too bad I won't.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
60,551
66,420
AFL Club
West Coast
Umm, yeah. The answer is '2'.

I presume you don't go around asking people to somehow physically morph into different sexes (which is both impossible and a weird thing to say). When you say 'grow a pair' you're telling someone to 'Act like a man'; you're not saying 'Hey dude, sprout an actual pair of nuts for me can ya'.

I'm sure you've said exactly this (or similar phrases) many times in the past, asking people to act according to socially constructed expectations of gender. Yet now here you are, denying the social construction of gender.

Its no different to how 'You throw like a girl' or 'that's not very ladylike' is also reinforcing social expectations and constructions of the female gender (in this case negative ones).

Gender is socially constructed.

LOL. Who are you talking to? You are the Vizzini of saying 'socially constructed'.

For whatever reason you are fixated on gender roles and determined to separate gender from biological sex at every opportunity. Which is funny given your favourite reference source says "A gender role, also known as a sex role, is a social role encompassing a range of behaviors and attitudes that are generally considered acceptable, appropriate, or desirable for a person based on that person's sex" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role).

'Grow a pair' is a pretty pointed statement. If you really want to break it down it's linking expected behaviours to biological sex. Which is what the whole social construct of gender is. If we didn't have biological sex (some gender studies androgynous utopia) the concept of gender would not exist and we would just be talking about individual behaviours.

'Denying the social construction of gender' is a nothing statement. Women like cars and footy. Men like baking and fashion. I think we're past the point of every person born with a cock and balls being Ted Bullpitt. Your argument seems to be 'Once upon a time there were men and women. And then people developed preconceptions of what men and women should say and do etc, based on observation. And since sometimes some people don't fit the mould then gender is a spectrum of individual identity that has nothing to do with sex at all'.
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,679
8,289
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
No, society uses 'gender' as the term for the social construct:

And it also uses it as a biological definition, no one can deny this. Go to your nearest maternity ward, they'll assign a gender at birth, no one can deny this.

Can we please stop bickering about whether or not society uses the term as a social construct and a biological definition, seeing how it is clear it IS used for both.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
38,886
36,410
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
And it also uses it as a biological definition, no one can deny this. Go to your nearest maternity ward, they'll assign a gender at birth, no one can deny this.

******* watch me:

1641920348644.png


Does the above assign a [gender], or a [sex] to the newborn?
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,679
8,289
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
LOL. Who are you talking to? You are the Vizzini of saying 'socially constructed'.

For whatever reason you are fixated on gender roles and determined to separate gender from biological sex at every opportunity. Which is funny given your favourite reference source says "A gender role, also known as a sex role, is a social role encompassing a range of behaviors and attitudes that are generally considered acceptable, appropriate, or desirable for a person based on that person's sex" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role).

'Grow a pair' is a pretty pointed statement. If you really want to break it down it's linking expected behaviours to biological sex. Which is what the whole social construct of gender is. If we didn't have biological sex (some gender studies androgynous utopia) the concept of gender would not exist and we would just be talking about individual behaviours.

'Denying the social construction of gender' is a nothing statement. Women like cars and footy. Men like baking and fashion. I think we're past the point of every person born with a cock and balls being Ted Bullpitt. Your argument seems to be 'Once upon a time there were men and women. And then people developed preconceptions of what men and women should say and do etc, based on observation. And since sometimes some people don't fit the mould then gender is a spectrum of individual identity that has nothing to do with sex at all'.

That's a pretty good post.

Methinks the view of absolute 'one or the other' is folly, there is so many variables. So that leads us to what is NOT variable.

What is not variable:

  • Gender is used, by society as a socially constructed term
  • Gender is used, by society as a biological definition of biological sex
No need to go into 'variables' to unlock the question, in fact the question does not even need to be. If you're convinced of one or the other you're not getting the point.
 

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
38,886
36,410
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
LOL. Who are you talking to? You are the Vizzini of saying 'socially constructed'.

For whatever reason you are fixated on gender roles and determined to separate gender from biological sex at every opportunity. Which is funny given your favourite reference source says "A gender role, also known as a sex role, is a social role encompassing a range of behaviors and attitudes that are generally considered acceptable, appropriate, or desirable for a person based on that person's sex" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role).

HAHAHAHAHAH!

The quote you gave above also clearly separates the two (gender and sex) as different things.

'Grow a pair' is a pretty pointed statement. If you really want to break it down it's linking expected behaviours to biological sex. Which is what the whole social construct of gender is.

If that's true (gender is simply an extension of biology) why have gender roles and expectations changed over the years?

Is that matching some kind of 'biological' metamorphosis as well?

And how do you explain cultures where the women rule, and the men are the weaker and submissive sexes:

over the course of history, societies across the globe started to bend towards a more patriarchal structure, which is pervasive in most communities in modern times. However, there are still surviving matriarchal societies to be found where women, literally, are the dominant steering factor in all matters, social, political, and economical.

6 Matriarchal Societies Around the World - Matriarchal Societies List 2022 (townandcountrymag.com)

For your argument to be true, the millions of the women (and the men) in these cultures would have to have a different biology to explain this phenomenon.

Is that your position, yes or no?
 

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
38,886
36,410
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
  • Gender is used, by society as a socially constructed term
  • Gender is used, by society as a biological definition of biological sex

No, you use the term 'sex' to describe the second one (the biological one).

Gender = socially constructed.
Sex = what's hanging between your legs.
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,679
8,289
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
No, you use the term 'sex' to describe the second one (the biological one).

Gender = socially constructed.
Sex = what's hanging between your legs.

No argument, regardless, the delivering doctor will use the term 'it's a girl' or 'it's a boy' as a biological definition.

The term gender is used as BOTH a social construct AND a biological definition, by SOCIETY. This is not up for debate.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
60,551
66,420
AFL Club
West Coast
That's a pretty good post.

Methinks the view of absolute 'one or the other' is folly, there is so many variables. So that leads us to what is NOT variable.

What is not variable:
  • Gender is used, by society as a socially constructed term
  • Gender is used, by society as a biological definition of biological sex
No need to go into 'variables' to unlock the question, in fact the question does not even need to be. If you're convinced of one or the other you're not getting the point.

It's all word salad better left to academia.

I have a pretty consistent viewpoint. If you wish to create a sex/gender binary then get your ducks in a row and articulate a concise argument. None of this 'oh she is a woman but not a biological woman and she is a biological woman but doesn't identify her gender as a woman' nonsense.

That will never happen though because without the grey area a lot of the discussion goes away and people have to get real jobs. AFLW or WBBL or A-League Women are sports leagues for women, females, XX individuals - make up whatever term you like. AFLW for example is full of female players who don't conform to traditional gender stereotypes and no one gives a sh*t. If a female athlete has short hair and bikie tatts and is attracted to other women it really has no bearing on anything. No one is saying 'you don't wear pretty dresses you aren't play with us'. But when you start blurring the lines between biology and identity and calling everything social constructs people shouldn't just blindly accept it.
 

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
38,886
36,410
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
No argument, regardless, the delivering doctor will use the term 'it's a girl' or 'it's a boy' as a biological definition.

The term gender is used as BOTH a social construct AND a biological definition, by SOCIETY. This is not up for debate.

Girl and Boy (used in this context, by the Doctor) refer to the biological sex of the child. Not to the childs Gender.

Unless the Baby is somehow unable to convey to the doctor its preferred gender identity at birth, we can safely assume the Doctor is talking about the childs Sex, not their Gender identity.

I can never tell with you if you're being deliberately obtuse, or you just dont understand the things we talk about. I lean towards the latter.
 

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
38,886
36,410
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
I have a pretty consistent viewpoint. If you wish to create a sex/gender binary then get your ducks in a row and articulate a concise argument.

There is a concise argument. It's not anyone elses fault but yours you dont understand it.

A biological male can identify with (and possess) the female gender (or no gender at all). They remain a biological man though. At no stage does their sex change.

What part of that sentence do you struggle with?
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,679
8,289
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
you wish to create a sex/gender binary then get your ducks in a row and articulate a concise argument. None of this 'oh she is a woman but not a biological woman and she is a biological woman but doesn't identify her gender as a woman' nonsense.

Why? Why does it have to be a concise argument? How about just let people be what they want to be IF it does not impede on society? We let kids imagine they're wonderwoman or superman yet no impact on society.

How about we let people id as they want to be id'd

If a female athlete has short hair and bikie tatts and is attracted to other women it really has no bearing on anything. No one is saying 'you don't wear pretty dresses you aren't play with us'. But when you start blurring the lines between biology and identity and calling everything social constructs people shouldn't just blindly accept it.

'Blurring the lines', society as yet has not 'blurred the lines' that's impeding on society, not in an impractical sense anyway.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
38,886
36,410
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
This is Laverne Cox:

1641922259758.png


Laverne was born a Man (her biological sex) but has identified with the female gender her whole life.

Laverne is (biologically) of the male sex, but her gender is 'female'.

How is this hard to understand?
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,679
8,289
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
There is a concise argument. It's not anyone elses fault but yours you dont understand it.

Umm Malifice, 'gender' IS used as a biological definition. You cannot dispute this.

Again, I'm not here to dispute the should or should not.

What's happening is your misunderstanding, I'm not misunderstanding anything, I know for a fact (as do you but for some unknown reason will not admit) that gender IS used a biological definition.

We can do this till the cows come home, however it will not change the fact.
 

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
38,886
36,410
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Umm Malifice, 'gender' IS used as a biological definition. You cannot dispute this.

I can, and I am.

Gender is the term used for the social construct in Australian English:

Macquarie Dictionary

For Biological sex, we use 'Sex'.

Actually screw this. You're the one making the point, how about you prove it. Show me where 'gender' is used officially to describe someone's biological sex please.
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,679
8,289
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
I can, and I am.

Gender is the term used for the social construct in Australian English:

Macquarie Dictionary

For Biological sex, we use 'Sex'.

Actually screw this. You're the one making the point, how about you prove it. Show me where 'gender' is used officially to describe someone's biological sex please.

By society, right or wrong, people use this term as a biological definition.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
60,551
66,420
AFL Club
West Coast
There is a concise argument. It's not anyone elses fault but yours you dont understand it.

A biological male can identify with (and possess) the female gender (or no gender at all). They remain a biological man though. At no stage does their sex change.

What part of that sentence do you struggle with?

Male/female are real, actual words that mean something. Biological male is redundant. There is no 'non-biological male'. That does not mean anything. What part of that sentence do you struggle with?

Man/woman are seemingly open to interpretation. Are they gender? Are they sex? Are they both? Depends which way the wind is blowing. You don't have to identify as a woman to play women's footy, but you have to meet the certain biological criteria, so that sounds like a sex term to me.

30 seconds on your favourite website:

-> Female is the sex of an organism
-> A woman is an adult female human
-> A gender role, also known as a sex role, is a social role encompassing a range of behaviors and attitudes that are generally considered acceptable, appropriate, or desirable for a person based on that person's sex.
-> A trans woman is a woman who was assigned male at birth. Trans women have a female gender identity.
-> Sex assignment (sometimes known as gender assignment) is the discernment of an infant's sex at birth. Assignment may be done prior to birth through prenatal sex discernment. In the majority of births, a relative, midwife, nurse or physician inspects the genitalia when the baby is delivered and sex is assigned without ambiguity.

YOUR argument is that sex and gender are totally different things. 100% not interchangeable. Yet you can't write two sentences without interchanging the two. Which is not surprising given what you read.

Either you want the grey area or you don't. Which is it? Male and female belong to biology, AFAIC if you want to claim man and woman for the gender wars then have at it. The more you yell about social constructs the more you are watering down what words mean. No one cares about gender roles.

Why? Why does it have to be a concise argument? How about just let people be what they want to be IF it does not impede on society? We let kids imagine they're wonderwoman or superman yet no impact on society.

How about we let people id as they want to be id'd

'Blurring the lines', society as yet has not 'blurred the lines' that's impeding on society, not in an impractical sense anyway.

Do what you want to do be what you want to be yeeeaaah.

Go around calling yourself whatever you want. Man, woman, child, mother, father, great aunt twice removed. Just don't expect people to go along with it just because it's what you want. That's not how society works.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
60,551
66,420
AFL Club
West Coast
Carringbush2010

Take a look at your Passport and Birth certificate FFS.

Does it identify you by Gender or Sex?


Consistent with the Australian Government Guidelines on the Recognition of Sex and Gender (link is external), we print holders’ gender in the ‘Sex’ field of Australian passports. The gender markers we use are: M (male), F (female) and X (non-binary/indeterminate/intersex/unspecified/other).

I mean it doesn't get much more official than a passport and they treat gender and sex interchangeably and give you the choice of M, F or a generic X.

But yeah, no confusion in terminology at all.
 

owen87

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 23, 2016
17,702
22,530
AFL Club
Essendon
Both, viewed as one and the same by society, even given the inconsistency.

Mate calm down with the FFS, I'm not the cloud you should be yelling at.

People incorrectly using language terms doesn't therefore make those language terms mean what you want them to mean.

Gender and Sex have traditionally been used interchangeably despite actually representing different things, because for the vast majority of society their sex and gender are the same, so they simply don't care or bother to differentiate by using the terms appropriately.

Whether you agree with the idea that Gender is something you can change or not, you should at the very least understand that Sex and Gender represent different things as formal definitions in language.

There's a reason Birth Certificates specifically say "Sex" on them, for example.
 

Malifice

Moderator
Oct 2, 2007
38,886
36,410
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton

Consistent with the Australian Government Guidelines on the Recognition of Sex and Gender (link is external), we print holders’ gender in the ‘Sex’ field of Australian passports. The gender markers we use are: M (male), F (female) and X (non-binary/indeterminate/intersex/unspecified/other).

I mean it doesn't get much more official than a passport and they treat gender and sex interchangeably and give you the choice of M, F or a generic X.

But yeah, no confusion in terminology at all.

Dude, you just posted an authority that distinguishes (as in differentiates) between 'Sex' and 'Gender'.

They're not treating Sex and Gender interchangeably, they're just putting one's Gender identity in the Sex section of the passport,