And, the genes for sex determination jump every so often, via transposons. And gender is far more complex than sex anyway.
-
-
Replying to @DanielleFong @bensima
All of this is sophistry. Humans have two sexes, and sometimes people are born deformed. Social science that purports to study gender empirically is not descriptive, it is prescriptive. The null hypothesis is defined by bureaucrats and lobbyists, and science simply obeys
1 reply 1 retweet 11 likes -
Moreover, if gender is a social construct then so is transgender, and quite a recent one.
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @0x49fa98 @DanielleFong
okay let's try specifying the concepts more precisely because your retort is confused. sexuality is a set of biologically-constructed categories primarily related to reproductive patterns, and is neither static nor binary (as nothing in biology is)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
gender is a set of socially-constructed categories related to how people organize themselves in society. its up to the society to determine its form (static/fluid, binary/trinary/otherwise). however you'd be hard pressed to find truly static/binary gender categories in history
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @bensima @DanielleFong
Not interested in your priestly pontificating. You types always do the same thing. You conflate the categories you construct with a prescription for how the world ought to work. Yes, there have always been some edge cases on what constitutes “man”, “woman”, “male”, “female”
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
But until extremely recently we were quite happy to define these categories in terms of a binary, and ultimately, both are prescriptive. You cannot use “science” to make normative claims about this, it comes down to power
3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
I probably agree more w Danielle on the underlying issue here. But I do think you are correct that these categories are prescriptive. Arguments about definitions in this context are not solved by gesturing to the neutral facts. Meaning is normative, it goes w a vision of society
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @ResonantPyre @0x49fa98 and
This is why on both sides it’s a rhetorical waste of time to talk about the science. Clearly sex is mostly dimorphic, everyone agrees. Then there is a social concept on top of it, linked but not restricted to the underlying biology. From there, science informs but doesn’t dictate
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @ResonantPyre @0x49fa98 and
Interestingly, science has been used by both sides in favor of their arguments. This shows how vacuous it really is for such matters. Attempts to scientifically define “woman” and “man” fail because their meaning is embedded in a particular way of life not grounded in sciencepic.twitter.com/YdCPQDTiUM
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes
An aside: The brilliant scientist who *discovered* that sex determination was on the (tiny!) Y-chromosome was a woman. This discovery was ridiculed, then taken by Wilson, admitted in a footnote, and later Wilson won the Nobel Prize. Figures! https://zenodo.org/record/1448094 pic.twitter.com/0hAoz2isJ4
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.