Why does Gender Theory object to a connection between sex and gender despite biological evidence that says other wise?
Gender Theory is absolutely batshit insane and has no basis in reality as it virtually ignores biology completely.
What's worse is that the entire theory is based off of a botched experiment that ended in the subject committing suicide.
>>5944722
Gender is a sociological construct dependant on performance and societal reinforcement. The idea that sex is a strict binary dichotomy becomes problematic when you consider 1) men and women not only share but REQUIRE the same hormones in wildly varying degrees person to person and 2) the gender dichotomy defines the differences between men and women in ways that leave plenty of people in a liminal gray space, and this is confounded because even the sex dichotomy itself is broken: there are people whose sexual organs don't match their chromosomal sex, and people born intersex that this binary can't account for. So fuck off.
I think all this gender stuff is bullshit. People should be able to wear whatever they likes, rocks, dress, uniforms. But some so called social scienists get the idea to create all this gender nonsense. I remind you they doing their research for goverment money, and we pay for that, and they will do this for years like in Soviet Union many "scientists" were proving whole days that marxism-leninism is most revolutionary idea in the world.
>>5944757
how does one wear rocks
>>5944742
How can you confidently say that gender is dependent on performance and societal reinforcement when there is evidence of a dependency on biology?
Intersex is a messy area but it does not/shouldn't constitute a third gender.
I need a citation on "men and women not only share but REQUIRE the same hormones in wildly varying degrees person to person "
>>5944765
They're probably German. "Rock" means skirt in German.
>>5944765
My post is deutsch-english sorry. It is a skirt.
>>5944722
Want an easy explanation hon?
Compare:
>writing academic paper about connections between gender identity and brain structure
>need access to an extremely expensive MRI machine
>need dozens of people of both genders agreeing to be tested
>need to schedule their tests, that takes time, other people probably want access to the machine too
>go through all the data meticulously to draw the conclusion
>still not nearly enough to convince anyone
>writing an academic paper about socially constructed genders
>get a cofee
>get a printer
>print out 100 questionnaries
>HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT SHAVING LEGS MANG
>hand out to your students
>or just write bunch of bullshit on WOT I THINK, pretending it matters bacause you can give citations to a bunch of other WOT I THINK papers and books
>bask in the glory of hundreds college educated feminists praising you
>>5944766
Both men and women have testosterone estrogen and progesterone in their bodies. In fact, each sex requires both hormones. Sex is not the only determining factor in how much of these hormones are produced in the body. Glandular conditions also affect thos, for example, and treatment is freely deemed necessary. So why not for this?
You're missing the point if you think I'm suggesting a third gender is the solution for intersex, you missed my point.
www.ucsf.edu/news/2012/02/11440/male-and-female-behavior-deconstructed
Yes of course biology influences gender. But an either/or construction of gender (or any that tries to reduce gender to simple categories free of nuance) is clearly insufficient.
>>5944772
You've obviously never read Butler. If you think academia on gender and queer theory is reducible to surveys and bullshit research, then you simply haven't read enough.
>granted, Butler can be a self-contradicting elitist cunt who refuses to state anything plainly
>>5944781
If you think academia on communism theory is reducible to surveys and bullshit research, then you simply haven't read enough.
>>5944787
What? Who was talking about communism? Not me. Shove your non sequitur and shove it up your ass
>>5944797
These commies books, they are countles.. each contain about 1000 pages, each written by some vladimir, joseph, sasha with scientific degree.
.. and i dont have read them to know they are bullshit were written because probably gave them benefits in communist country.
>>5944742
Explain the biological ground for transgenderism then. If gender is a construction of society, why is gender dysphoria a thing? Why should it be addressed organically instead of psychologically?
>>5944809
You might have me there. I'm not aware of any biological ground for transgenderism, and I see a lot of gender binary reinforcement on this board that I don't understand. As for "organic" treatment, do you mean hormone treatment? By psychological, do you mean psychatric therapy? If a psychiatrist recommends pills that change brain chemistry, how is that better, worse, or different from another doctor prescribing hormone treatment? Is there an effective treatment for gender dysphoria out there that doesn't rely on changing chemistry in the body? Most psychiatrists today discount the benefit that psychoanalysts and psychologists and therapists can give people with genuine disorders. They can help you cope, but they don't treat or cure.
>>5944781
That falls into WOT I THINK territory m8. Yeah, it's not bullshit research because it's not research at all.
>>5944781
>>5944722
You're that same mouthbreather who says calling himself a Radfem makes his creepy behavior acceptable, right? Shouldn't you be in R9k or something, fedora?
No we are not going to ignore overwhelming biomedical evidence on prenatal exposure and neurological development.
fuck gender. burn it all to the ground.
go read some hot and spicy discourse straight outta the ovens of tumblr.com: http://butchcommunist.tumblr.com/post/123157190391/genderkills-gender-nihilism-an-anti-manifesto
>>5944809
>instead of psychologically?
are you really claiming trans people don't experience psychological distress???
the distinction between psychological and physiological is bullshit anyway.
>>5944757
>in Soviet Union many "scientists" were proving whole days that marxism-leninism is most revolutionary idea in the world.
wow... but I thought everyone knew that marxism-leninism-maoism was the most revolutionary idea in the world :/
>>5944722
It's the social relativists, the pomo bastard child that have heard certain phrases enough to believe them.
If there is no connection between sex and gender, then why do everyone who claims there is no such connection, conform to one or the other?
Look at the typical argument >>5944742
>it's non binary
>what about intersex
even people that claim they are non binary still either exhibits a masculine or a feminine expression of sex. Intersex people either want to presents as masculine or feminine, regardless if those feelings change in them. People with gender dysphoria wants to express themselves as the opposite sex.
If this isn't binary it sure as hell looks binary on paper.
>>5944855
>implying anything not in the hard sciences isn't academic
>>5944875
>pomo
Is this even a real word you streetshitter?
>>5944886
uhh... post modernist? POst MOdernist..
c'mon :/
>>5944875
More accurately it's a body dysmorphia and possibly social dysphoria that arrises from biomedical conditions. You could argue that what manifests as "gender" is really just part of neuro and bio
Of course it's biological, numerous studies proved that. Social relativists just want to label everything they don't like a social construct, so they can try to deconstruct it.
>>5944910
>numerous studies proved that.
>actually trusting the knowledges deployed by science
wow what kind of liberal fuckery is this :/
>>5944804
>i dont have read them to know they are bullshit
Except you kind of do IF you want your declaration of bullshit to be valid and carry weight, be an authority others can trust. You have to explain WHY and HOW they are bullshit, and provide evidence and arguments, then submit this to peer review to make sure it's legit and holds a sufficient quality. Even then others will disagree, but your statement will now not be something that can be dismissed out of hand, and those who object against YOU will have to themselves provide evidence and argument. This is how academia works.
You don't HAVE to do this, obviously, if you just want to state your personal opinon on that matter. That's fine. You're free to have whatever opinion you want. But don't go conflating that personal opinon with a published paper, or even a fact. Unlike the latter, I'm free to dismiss and disregard your opinion at my leisure.
>>5944757
Unlike natural scientists, who have no agendas whatsoever and are pure seekers of the Truth - unburdened by the social, cultural or economic context in which their research takes place. Seeing as they obtain funding directly from Thoth, Egyptian god of knowledge, we can rest assured that there is no goverment , NGO or corporate agenda ever. This is why no natural scientist has ever supported a bunk idea such as eugenics or lysenkoism.
[spoiler]I'm being ironic, BTW.[/spoiler]
>>5944932
Do you realise that reading all of these books will take human life? No one does this, nobody translate worthless rag books from ruskie language. You know why? of coruse you dont. Your over-rationalizing brain tells you to read all of these books and then you can say it's a crap. In the meanwhile another 100 mln people will die in gulag.
>>5944722
Listen
There's
Man
Woman
Hermaphrodite (liberal: Intersex)
Freak (Porn: Shemale)
That's it. It was like this for a thousand years and will be like this for a thousand years, no such thing as "trans" or "non-binary" exist.
>>5945000
what kind of white nonsense...
>>5944989
>No one does this
No, not one single person. No one could. But there are projects that involve many, the MEGA-project for instance (Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe). Nor do you have to read EVERY single book, or even most, since many reference earch-other and/or are based on the same assumptions. You can attack those assumptions, i.e. the core of the philosoophy. This, too, has been done.
The point was that if you have done NO reasearch and state your opinion on the matter, than a mere opinion it is and I can discard it if I wish. If you've, however, done SOME research and have some arguments or evidence, I couldn't just dismiss you but would have to come up with my own arguments. In other words, you're entitled to your opinion but don't expect anyone to care, especially those who HAVE done some reseach and know you to be wrong.
>>5945110
I read some of commies scribble and they full of words and lack of conent. I know people who wrote some of this books and they admit, they doing this for benefits like a flat or car, social status. 40 years ago they meant everything, today they meant nothing. If someone is reading this today i recommended go to psychiatric observation.
And today so-called social scientists write similar books, and government pay him for that...
>>5945415
Yes, you're right. Repressive goverments bribing people to write propaganda is exactly the same as goverment grants given to universities in liberal democracies. And the dishonesty magically stops at the social sciences and never affects the natural sciences - even when a grant from the government goes to a Geography department, magic ensures that only the human geographers are affected by the corruption, while physical geographers remain noble truthseekers and completely neautral. See, the government has an Agenda to support the transgendered cause for some reason; an Agenda they ONLY display by supporting social scientific research, while otherwise generally making live difficult for transpeople. Except no, none of that, because that would be super dumb.
You simply can't compare social scientific research in universities of democratic countries with the propaganda of Communist dictatorships. This... is not a difficult concept. Now, people who disagree with the results that things like gender studies find, because the results disagree with their preconceived notions, like to say dumb things like you do. Because if rejecting centuries of scientific reseach and every single university in the world and inveting grand conspiracy theories is the only way to keep clinging to 19th century western gender norms, then by God you'll do so without the slightest hesitation.
Because it's run by cultural Marxists that just want to weaponize you to destroy all tradition.
I like shooting squirrels with BB guns , not kill just stun them, then rubbing the fur on my feet while i gag myself. What should I sexually identify as??
>>5944722
Because biological evidence doesn't say otherwise. Google statistics of intersex people and it is greater than the population of the United States.
>>5946306
Different anon than who you're arguing with. You're seriously doubting the amount of group think and ass pattery that goes on at colleges and universities. Instead of a trip to the gulags if you refuse to write in line with your peers, you get discredited, tenure revolked, etc.
If you want an /lgbt/ related example check out Alfred Kinsey. The man's career was tarnished and his personal life scrutinized after he wrote Behavior in the Human Female even though he had written Behavior in the Human Male years before. Only after his death was his reputation reinstated.
I don't understand why people think gender has to be either 100% decided biologically or 100% decided culturally. I think of it as like a nature vs nurture sort of thing.
Take intelligence for example. Is someone with good genetics for intelligence going to be smarter on average than someone without? Of course. But a guy who grew up with a good education, good nutrition, a supportive family, etc, is also going to be smarter on average than someone who grew up with poor or no education, poor diet or famine, and an abusive family.
I think this sex/gender stuff is similar. Sure, guys on average will naturally act stereotypically masculine and girls on average will naturally act stereotypically feminine. But if a guy grew up with certain influences he'd probably act more feminine than the average guy, sometimes even to the point that they want to transition and become a girl.
>>5944910
technically pomos deconsruct everything, including their own and each other's work.
>>5945110
There's a difference between logical argumentation and stating your opinion. Barthes, Foucault, Derrida, these men proposed THEORIES because the best they can do is analyze case studies of past events. You can't set up experiments in semiotics. The few instances of more or less "hard fact" we have in these sorts of areas are linguistic/anthropological research in cultures that show variables in what we thought were givens, like egocentric directional orientation or that language isn't an inborn brain function but learned through culture (it's both). Cultural studies, linguistics, political sciences have very few ways to set up experiments with actual control groups and almost no ways at all to do so that guarantee objectivity. They're still valuable ways of developing knowledge. There just tend to be multiple ways of reading a situation. Like Salinger's cat, or light as both a particle and a wave.
>>5952819
Tenure revoked? Hold on. There are a lot of universities where students get chucked for thinking along anti-establishment lines (Julia Kristeva being a prominent example to come to mind) but a prof with tenure is generally near-impossible to shitcan, unless you can accuse them of something scandalous or racist. You're right that in-house groupthink tends to be strong, bit once you have tenure, you have to really embarrass the University to lose it.
>>5952819
And Alfred Kinsey's research is what made him scandalous. It was the late 50s, early 60s at a Midwestern university. His research was deemed immoral, a different accusation from "logically unsound"
>>5946306
>You simply can't compare social scientific research in universities of democratic countries with the propaganda of Communist dictatorships.
oh not only can you, you should. You see what academia is today is directly influenced by the same material that those dictatorships were.
During the sixties however the communists and Marxists were sure their revolution would happen, but it didn't. That's when they understood that workers are not the true proletariat. How can we find a true proletariat to bring about the people's revolution? We find them in the fringe. Women, homosexuals, trans, minority races, immigrants. If we deconstruct the normal and pit the new normal against the old normal, the new normal will win by being in larger numbers.
So you get second wave feminism, lgbt pride, black panthers. But of course this is not enough, they are too few. We need to take marxs theories and apply them to ecology not economy, that way we can get this stuff taught in universities and several people that were before uninterested can now feel an importance in life, that they too have a cause.
>>5953501
And what exactly privileges the "normal" above the "new normal"? To me, your argument just indicates complacency with the status quo. So now all theoretical schools that advocate change or challenge established ways of thinking are autocratic or communist? If the fringe and the "new normal" outnumber the "normal" then democratically the "normal" can no longer legitimately control the others. Furthermore, domination of certain minority populations was never legitimate, most specifically any colonizer rule.
And a final note, Stalin et al so severely corrupted Marx's ideology that it really pisses me off when anyone uses "soviet" and "Marxist" as synonyms.
>>5953501
Or are you one of those Reaganite morons who thinks every group that challenged the status quo was a commie plot to destabilize the West? Apartheid's cool as long as it's not communist, eh?
>gender marxism
fuck off to North Korea if you love totalitarian forced 'equality' this much
>>5952819
Oh yes, that's certianly a problem. But I guaratee you, as someone working at a uni, that you are far more likely to get tarnished (or at least not get tenure) for expressing leftist or progressive views instead of the opposite. Joan Roughgarden for instance has been discredited for her 'Evolution's Rainbow' by a large part of the scientific community because how dare she be trans and write about gender issues, that's clearly unscientific somehow.
This whole idea that universities are not only leftist havens, but dominated by the Left, is a meme. There are more leftists, certainly, then on average and there are departments that are more accepting. But overall the dominant ideologies and norms are the same as in the outside world.
>>5953501
Sounds like a conspiracy theory IMO. Even if the connection you speak of, it doesn't mean that it's the same. The peer review process is far from perfect but it's not the Stalinist USSR for pete's sake, you're going to damn far. Seem like you're just trying to find reasons to dismiss a school of thought rather than engage with it.
>>5953594
>"soviet" and "Marxist" as synonyms.
Tell me about it... I mean you can't even use Rosa Luxemburgs theories without some cunt yelling about Stalin, even though she opposed that BS...
>>5953473
Of course, the demands for what constitutes proof, evidence or argument change depending on the object of study. My point was that one can't just hand-wave away Derrida or Foucult because 'hurr durr cultural marxism', one has to provide reasons and arguments.
>Salinger's cat
Not familar with this, phammy.
>>5944722
>Why does Gender Theory object to a connection between sex and gender despite biological evidence that says other wise?
Biological evidence doesn't solely say otherwise, and besides there's not one single gender theory or way to understand gender. Not a single serious biologist is ever going to reject the influence of environment when it comes to behavior and our way of understanding it. Why gender understood as a social construct separates between the biological sex and gender is not very complicated to wrap your mind around either. You have to assume that there is a biological basis for a gender to even be expressed and exist in the first place. Anything else would be ridiculous and that's not how social constructs are understood in the first place either. However, how gender is "supposed" to be expressed and what is considered an appropriate gender expression for the biological sex is socially constructed and influenced and controlled through norms, culture etc. That doesn't mean it's all environment either, of course. Because of the biological differences between men and women you would assume that there would be different expressions of behavior as well. But then comes the very obvious problem: How would you explain the variety of ways gender have been expressed throughout history and across cultures if it was biologically determined alone? If that was the case the gender expressions would be much the same and constant - which they aren't.
>Gender Theory is absolutely batshit insane and has no basis in reality as it virtually ignores biology completely.
So, this is where you got it wrong as gender theory does not ignore biology. The whole basis for gender is rooted in biology, but it could be more fruitful to discuss gender as a social construct rather than from a biological perspective alone if you want to understand the functions of it. This is where you would read up on structural functionalism to further understand this position.
>>5944722
that's not how it works. In gender there is theory.
