What is the purpose of gender (separated by SJWs from the concept of biological sex) if it doesn't tell us someone's reproductive function or sexual preference?
>>69792138
Apparently it is now personalities. We need a genocide of mass proportions for tumblrinas.
It's the new horoscope, it's just even more inexplainably tied up in sex than before.
>>69792138
Social roles. Which is what gender always referred to.
You seem to assume that it was ever identical to sex. Never, in the history of the word, was it.
>>69792374
This, fuck off op
>>69792374
So what is the social role of a freezegender?
By the definition given on nonbinary.org, and on the tumblr user's homepage, they say it means "having a cold and snowy gender". So, what does the word "gender" actually MEAN in that sentence?
If SJW society is working to demolish gender roles... why are they also creating billions of new ones at the same time?
>>69792665
>tfw born an earthgender but want to be an icegender
>>69792665
You asked what it meant and I told you.
"freezegender" doesn't mean anything--don't be a retard.
>>69792637
Shh it's okay, quiet down. I have a treat here for you.
>>69792769
You sound mad my friendo. Just admit you are ignorant and spout /pol/ shit to fit in and perpetuate your contrarian persona.
>>69792138
what is the "purpose" of hair color?
>>69792752
>>69792752
>You seem to assume it was ever identical to sex. Never, in the history of the word, was it.
>Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955. Before his work, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories.[1][2] However, Money's meaning of the word did not become widespread until the 1970s, when feminist theory embraced the concept of a distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender. Today, the distinction is strictly followed in some contexts, especially the social sciences[4][5] and documents written by the World Health Organization (WHO).[3] However, in many other contexts, including some areas of social sciences, gender includes sex or replaces it.[1][2]
>You asked what it meant and I told you.
Fair enough, I should have been more clear in OP. My question is more along the lines of: If the only thing is social role, and SJWs are working to separate gender from social role too, then what does gender actually tell us? If nothing, why bother talking about gender as a separate concept at all?
>"freezegender" doesn't mean anything--don't be a retard.
I was at the very least hoping for an explanation to what a "snowy gender" is.
>>69792138
It's an indicator of social roles primarily. Which pronouns should be used to be polite, which group to stand with while waiting for the BBQ.
The sort of things that really aren't important to anyone else anyway usually.
>>69792956
Poor analogy. Both social roles and words actually are invented by human beings for purposes. Hair color has no purpose because it resulted from biological pressures lacking intent with which to bestow purpose.
However, there is an accurate analogy to be made if you're talking about the hair colors we recognize, rather than actual hair color. Blonde, brunette, red-head, black and brown? Those five barely scratch the surface of the shades and varieties of hair-colors that a person can have, but we perceive everyone as having one of them because of the limited words that we use to describe them.
>>69793130
>I was at the very least hoping for an explanation to what a "snowy gender" is.
Well no. You were looking for an excuse to shitpost. You have no intention of learning anything at all.
>>69792138
Enabling mental illness and sexual fetish activity.
>>69793271
>You have no intention of learning anything at all.
This is untrue. I've used this argument (not exactly what is written in OP, but more along the lines of >>69793130) against SJWs twice with stellar results. I am testing it against /pol/ and /lgbt/ now to make sure I'm prepared for counterarguments. I'm legitimately not trying to shitpost.
Except that other guy who told me to fuck off, he can go fuck himself.
>>69793322
There's nothing wrong with enabling sexual fetishes. But why would I need additional genders to do that when I could just call your mom?
You fags can crossdress all you want but if you have don't a dick, don't use a urinal
This is not rocket science
>>69793594
That is shit-posting. You blatantly state that it is your intention to enter a discussion for the purpose of "beating" someone else at it. That is shit-posting. It's sophistry. What, you think having the better argument makes you right? It doesn't, believe it or not. Sure, given an infinite amount of time and education, theoretically, whoever can eventually construct the best argument is probably right. But who has sat around preparing arguments to present to people who have never thought about it before? That's just childish and stupid, and that you think it can confirm what you already believe is just an example of the fact that you're being intellectually dishonest from the get-go.
>>69793322
>>69793271
>>69792956
>samefagging this hard
>>69793594
So basically "gender are social construct" is a social construct ?
By the way, you probably saw it but there is a good documentary about it by our swedecuks friends:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70
>>69793984
I don't even get what the point of claiming I samefagged those other comments is...
>>69794015
Norway, not Sweden, sorry Norbros.
>>69793897
>That is shit-posting.
Your definition of shitposting is lacking. I want to enter discussions to change people's worldview, and on prior occasions this argument has done that. If they find a better counterargument later they can change their point of view back, and the same goes for me.
On the other hand, from the beginning of this thread you seem to have entered with the assumption that I don't want a serious discussion, despite the fact that I keep telling you I do.
But you seem so convinced of the opposite, so if you genuinely think this is shitposting, and you're not going to discuss the matter, why not step into another thread than this one?
>>69794015
Well, this is an interesting video.
>>69793842
Under rated post.
