Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lightbyte 2424 days ago
Gender identity is an emergent social construct, there isn't anything biological about it.
3 comments

The distinction between a social construct and biology is artificial. Reading and writing are a social construct but learning to read and write at a young age has a profound impact on your brain structure.[1] I think what you mean to say is that there is no instinctual sense of gender identity that people are born with... that it is purely a learned identity. I'm not certain that is true as gender distinctions are pretty deeply ingrained nearly every culture around the world including most hunter-gather cultures, (The exact extent and nature of the distinction varies, but mere existence of an distinction is close to a constant.) and there is reason to believe that the sexual division of labor was key to the evolution of human sociality, which would make gender identity distinction hundreds of thousands of years old at the youngest. I'd be interested in any studies demonstrating that there is no instinctual component.

1. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23273798.2018.1...

Besides the concepts of motherhood and fatherhood. Ignoring those glaring omissions, you're closer to having a point.
The parent is completely correct, why are you fighting it? This isn’t something you can out-logic, the words have definitions. Sex is the biological part and gender is the social & cultural aspects of sex.
According to Merriam-Webster, gender /includes/ the social & cultural aspects of sex. The exclusion of sex from gender is an extremely recent development that isn't widely accepted yet.

Also, motherhood and fatherhood are biologically gender-linked roles. They are measurable biological phenomena that tie strongly into your definition of gender.

Gender doesn’t exclude sex. Gender relates to sex, but it is not the same thing.

> The exclusion of sex from gender is an extremely recent development that isn’t widely accepted yet.

What are you talking about? The use of gender as a sex “role” was coined in 1955, over 60 years ago. Before that “gender” referred to grammatical gender, not to people. So if you use “gender” relating to people, that form of the word has always meant the social aspects of sex, not the biological aspects. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender

There was never a time when “gender” meant the same thing as “sex”.

> Also, motherhood and fatherhood are biologically gender-linked roles.

You’re confusing yourself. Being a mother & father are sex based facts. Fatherhood and motherhood as words that can mean that someone is factually a mother or father, or it can in context be referring to the gender roles of motherhood and fatherhood. The stereotype of a father playing catch with a son is a gender role, not biology. You’re choosing words which have both meanings, which doesn’t help you understand what sex and gender actually mean.

>The exclusion of sex from gender is an extremely recent development that isn't widely accepted yet.

This is not an extremely recent development in the slightest, the distinction was being made almost 60 years ago in modern dictionaries.

If there is nothing innate to the human on Gender identity, if its purely a construct, then you can engage in full repression of gender identities with no consequences.
Weird, doesn't seem to work that way with religion.
Religion is an organization. Gender identity is an individual concept.