Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 12:16:22 GMT -5
That doesn't answer my question.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 5, 2018 12:39:59 GMT -5
That doesn't answer my question. Then I misunderstood your question. Could you please repeat it? Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 12:52:35 GMT -5
So how exactly is it possible for human biology to determine a person's sexual anatomy to be one way, and their own gender identity to be the opposite? What exact biological elements are determined when biology forms a gender identity in opposition to a person's biological sex? I was specifically asking about people whose gender identity doesn't match their biological sex, and how you think their gender identity is determined by biology.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 5, 2018 13:43:26 GMT -5
So how exactly is it possible for human biology to determine a person's sexual anatomy to be one way, and their own gender identity to be the opposite? What exact biological elements are determined when biology forms a gender identity in opposition to a person's biological sex? I was specifically asking about people whose gender identity doesn't match their biological sex, and how you think their gender identity is determined by biology. And I posted links to a dozen scientific articles that gave a Biological explanation. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2018 8:09:02 GMT -5
No.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 7, 2018 10:59:43 GMT -5
Once again, you are making a Dogmatic Assertion without giving any supporting facts. Are you claiming that these articles didn't support my case? Please give supporting reasons. If you can't find any supporting reasons, then please admit that you were wrong. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2018 9:53:42 GMT -5
I'm saying that they didn't provide the explanation you claim they did, because there is no reference to gender identity nor its interaction with social gender roles.
Remember, you claimed that you can explain how gender identity is determined by biology, even when it is in opposition to biological sex.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 8, 2018 20:04:40 GMT -5
I'm saying that they didn't provide the explanation you claim they did, because there is no reference to gender identity nor its interaction with social gender roles. Remember, you claimed that you can explain how gender identity is determined by biology, even when it is in opposition to biological sex. But they did. Scientific tests demonstrated that there were measurable physical differences between the brains of gay people and straight people. This accounts for the differences in behavior. Social theory, by contrast, is just that. An unsupported theory derived from philosophical considerations instead of scientific observation and measurement. From my March 16 post earlier in this thread: "" The social construction of gender is a theory in feminism, and sociology about the origin of gender difference between men and women.[1] According to this view, society and culture create gender roles, and these roles are prescribed as ideal or appropriate behavior for a person of that specific sex. Some supporters of this theory argue that the differences in behavior between men and women are entirely social conventions, whereas others believe that behavior is influenced by universal biological factors to varying degrees, with social conventions having a major effect on gendered behavior."...The roots of the social constructionist movement in psychology are related to the criticism of the objectivism assumed by positivist/empiricist concepts of knowledge (Gergen, 1985). Among the most popular variations of the social constructionist theories is the gender role theory, considered by Alsop, Fitzsimons and Lennon (2002) as an early form of social constructionism. The focus on power and hierarchy reveals inspiration stemming from a Marxist framework, utilized for instance by materialist feminism, and Foucault's writings on discourse. Social constructionism, briefly, is the concept that there are many things that people "know" or take to be "reality" that are at least partially, if not completely, socially situated.[2] For example, Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker writes that "some categories really are social constructions: they exist only because people tacitly agree to act as if they exist. Examples include money, tenure, citizenship, decorations for bravery, and the presidency of the United States."[3]" In other words, there were no scientific experiments performed to come to this "conclusion." It is simply based on the theories from Marxism and Foucault.
They are not "facts"." Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2018 20:17:51 GMT -5
What does this have to do with gender identity and gender roles?
You asked me about gender yet all you talk about s homosexuality! Are you saying that gay men don't see themselves as men? How exactly is that demonstrated in the article?
You seem to operate under the unspoken premise that being gay is in opposition to male gender identity. Where is your evidence for that? On what do you base this, apart from popular media stereotypes of "unmanly" homosexuals?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 8, 2018 22:59:39 GMT -5
What does this have to do with gender identity and gender roles? You asked me about gender yet all you talk about s homosexuality! Are you saying that gay men don't see themselves as men? How exactly is that demonstrated in the article? You seem to operate under the unspoken premise that being gay is in opposition to male gender identity. Where is your evidence for that? On what do you base this, apart from popular media stereotypes of "unmanly" homosexuals? No. I never said that gay men don't see themselves as men. What I am saying is that gender identity is a function of brain chemistry. But I only posted articles dealing with scientific evidence that homosexuality is biologically caused, not transgender cases. Let's fix that right now. And here is a study from the University of Vienna in Austria! Here's one from the Netherlands. There are plenty more articles where these came from. It appears that scientific study of the causes of transgenderism is increasing. And the facts they are uncovering are objective scientific facts, not social facts. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2018 22:36:42 GMT -5
Okay, you convinced me. Gay and transgender people are biologically abnormal mutants, and our anatomy determines gender roles in society.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 10, 2018 23:04:41 GMT -5
Okay, you convinced me. Gay and transgender people are biologically abnormal mutants, and our anatomy determines gender roles in society. "Mutants?" That's your claim, not mine. All I did was to show there is a lot of scientific evidence that gender roles are largely biologically determined. This evidence is based on objectively verifiable facts and is not determined by social facts at all. Of course if you have any evidence to the contrary, I will be more than happy to examine it. Bob
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Apr 11, 2018 15:28:52 GMT -5
Everyone is a mutant. No one is exactly 50% of each parent. We're all varying degrees of mutated DNA. Sometimes the variance is so much that the fetus is rejected early on. Sometimes our mutation produces birth defects. Sometimes we appear to be the same as others, but we're not. Whatever. But we are all at least partially different from our ancestors. Technically, mutants. 8->
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 11, 2018 16:41:43 GMT -5
Everyone is a mutant. No one is exactly 50% of each parent. We're all varying degrees of mutated DNA. Sometimes the variance is so much that the fetus is rejected early on. Sometimes our mutation produces birth defects. Sometimes we appear to be the same as others, but we're not. Whatever. But we are all at least partially different from our ancestors. Technically, mutants. 8-> Good point. Thanks Fred. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2018 17:30:00 GMT -5
Yes, but homosexuals are biologically abnormal because their brains have the wrong gender.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2018 17:37:35 GMT -5
But one thing hasn't been explained so far.
How come that gender roles have changed, when our anatomy has not? Have our brains changed gender over time?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 14, 2018 18:48:16 GMT -5
Yes, but homosexuals are biologically abnormal because their brains have the wrong gender. Wrong. All you can conclude is that their brains have a different gender. On what basis can you claim that "different" is "wrong?" Bob
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 14, 2018 18:50:15 GMT -5
But one thing hasn't been explained so far. How come that gender roles have changed, when our anatomy has not? Have our brains changed gender over time? No. Gender roles have not changed. Only people's opinions about gender have changed. Bob
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Apr 15, 2018 7:28:51 GMT -5
I think gender roles are societal constructs that change and evolve just like other societal beliefs. Back when I was a wee little tad, women stayed home and men worked. The main jobs open for women were being nurses, teachers, secretaries, waitresses, or working as a clerk in a retail store. Women-as-property is still a common belief in some cultures, but it was almost universal in my youth. Someone who could time-travel from 1958 to 2018 would be totally confused by the many changes in gender roles and would require special classes to catch up. 8->
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2018 10:34:46 GMT -5
Yes, but homosexuals are biologically abnormal because their brains have the wrong gender. Wrong. All you can conclude is that their brains have a different gender. On what basis can you claim that "different" is "wrong?" Bob It doesn't line up with their biological sex.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2018 10:35:06 GMT -5
I think gender roles are societal constructs that change and evolve just like other societal beliefs. Well, Bob disagrees.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2018 10:35:38 GMT -5
But one thing hasn't been explained so far. How come that gender roles have changed, when our anatomy has not? Have our brains changed gender over time? No. Gender roles have not changed. Only people's opinions about gender have changed. Bob Can you provide examples such unchanging gender roles? Evidently, women staying at home to take care of household and children is no such gender role.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 15, 2018 12:06:20 GMT -5
Wrong. All you can conclude is that their brains have a different gender. On what basis can you claim that "different" is "wrong?" Bob It doesn't line up with their biological sex. So? That's your own personal value judgement. What other evidence do you have? Bob
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 15, 2018 12:07:55 GMT -5
I think gender roles are societal constructs that change and evolve just like other societal beliefs. Well, Bob disagrees. What you left out is that Bob disagrees on the basis of scientific evidence that has been reproduced by different investigators. Bob
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 15, 2018 12:12:29 GMT -5
I think gender roles are societal constructs that change and evolve just like other societal beliefs. Back when I was a wee little tad, women stayed home and men worked. The main jobs open for women were being nurses, teachers, secretaries, waitresses, or working as a clerk in a retail store. Women-as-property is still a common belief in some cultures, but it was almost universal in my youth. Someone who could time-travel from 1958 to 2018 would be totally confused by the many changes in gender roles and would require special classes to catch up. 8-> McAnswer isn't talking about that Fred. His claim, as far as I can tell, is that gender roles have no biological component at all and are completely social artifacts. Scientific studies on biological processes of homosexual and transgender people clearly demonstrate that his claim is wrong. Bob
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 15, 2018 12:16:07 GMT -5
No. Gender roles have not changed. Only people's opinions about gender have changed. Bob Can you provide examples such unchanging gender roles? Evidently, women staying at home to take care of household and children is no such gender role. What I said is that people's opinions changed. There were always a few women who went into professions normally reserved for men. As opinions changed, more and more women went into professions. What is the problem here? Bob
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Apr 16, 2018 7:52:47 GMT -5
As usual, I'm in the "mix" group. Brain chemistry does indeed determine a lot of our behaviors. And we also have social influences, which can be training that overrides our biological aspects. So, I think that society defines how men and women should act, but our brain chemistry is also involved in our choices. So society defines how men and women "should" act, but our brains may or may not go along with those standards. To avoid stress and condemnation, people often have different public and private lives, so they will act out society gender roles in public and have totally different behaviors in private. Again, not a sexual preference thing.
(One classic example of this was the movie director Ed Wood. He was a heterosexual male who liked to wear women's clothing. According to him, he was wearing women's underwear when he landed on the beaches during the Normandy invasion. Outwardly, a standard male, heterosexual, soldier but a secret transvestite.)
So for me the entire subject is not an "either/or" thing, it's "a little of this and a little of that". Whatever the subject, we are all a mix of biology and sociology. 8->
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2018 11:47:23 GMT -5
Can you provide examples such unchanging gender roles? Evidently, women staying at home to take care of household and children is no such gender role. What I said is that people's opinions changed. There were always a few women who went into professions normally reserved for men. As opinions changed, more and more women went into professions. What is the problem here? Bob The problem is that you aren't using the same definition of "gender role" that I and the majority of sociologists use. So what exactly are these gender roles that "have not changed"? Can you provide an example of one such gender role?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Apr 16, 2018 14:04:37 GMT -5
What I said is that people's opinions changed. There were always a few women who went into professions normally reserved for men. As opinions changed, more and more women went into professions. What is the problem here? Bob The problem is that you aren't using the same definition of "gender role" that I and the majority of sociologists use. So what exactly are these gender roles that "have not changed"? Can you provide an example of one such gender role? No. The problem is that the sociologists' definition denies that there is any effect from biological factors at all. This is clearly not the case, as scientific research has already amply demonstrated. And there have always been people who behaved in ways contrary to what society had mandated for their "gender role." The existence of a homosexual underground demonstrates the power of biology over mere social facts, such as laws against homosexuality. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2018 12:53:24 GMT -5
So what are your examples for gender roles that have not changed?
|
|