this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
865 points (100.0% liked)
196
17323 readers
1337 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts require verification from the mods first
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nah fam u wrong x
someone quoted judith buttler to me in the past with "sex is a gendering of biology" (not word for word) and i think that makes things a lot clearer.
this does not necessairily explain how gender and sex as social categories came to be, but it does explain well why both are so inconsistent.
genders are social categories imposed on every aspect of human life, but it is not done because there is a material aspect to it, rather out of the mindset "when you have a hammer (gender), everything becomes a nail (gendered)".
sex is this same thing done to biology. we gender chromosomes, hormomes, reproductive organs, bone structure, hair, biological capabilities,.. as if they could be hard categorized, when they are only loosely related.
categories like gender, that attempt to categorize everything, are sometimes useful for simplyfied, generalizing analysis, but they do not hold up on an individual level. they should not have any final say over anything that will affect people and should definitly not be assumed to be applicable to individuals.
i think this meme is very correct, in that it points out, that reality is infinitely more complex than the flawed models we construct to think about it. we should not take these models as gospel.
Though it's also not a given that being intersex even shows itself in the phenotype, is it?
Karyograms aren't something that's being done for a lot of people, so who knows how many intersex people actually exist.
Unless I'm confusing something, I'm not 100% sure.
What about intersex people makes them "unhealthy"? What makes what their bodies do "wrong"?
Intersex people are about as common than redheads. Would you agree with the statement that redheads are the exception that proves the rule that there are 3 hair colors, blond, brown, and black?
[Edit: more common -> about as common]