Difference between "sex" & "gender"

[SoCaliGirl]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-how-and-why-sex-differences/201110/sex-difference-vs-gender-difference-oh-im-so-confused

 

Is it a sex difference or a gender difference?

 

According to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, "Gender is cultural and is the term to use when referring to women and men as social groups. Sex is biological; use it when the biological distinction is predominant." And according to the World Health Organization, "Sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women."

Neat. 

 

So a gender difference is due to nurture, and a sex difference is due to nature. Well, not really so neat after all. Let me argue that both of these august organizations are deeply confused about gender differences (...er, or did I mean sex differences?). As I have suggested previously, "nature vs. nurture" is a deeply misleading and false distinction. And yet here are two highly influential organizations that have made the egregious error of making a false distinction that leads only to confused thinking.

 

Behavior is never either nature or nurture. It is always a very complex interweaving of both. 

When it comes to differences between men and women, a far more helpful question to ask is whether the difference derives from an evolved psychological adaptation, and if so, whether it is a sexually dimorphic psychological adaptation. For example, the propensity to engage in physical aggression is a sexually dimorphic psychological adaptation (M > F). Height is an example of a physical adaptation that is sexually dimorphic.

 

Granted, not all traits are psychological adaptations—some are byproducts of adaptations, and some are random variation. And not all psychological adaptations are sexually dimorphic. Some are sexually monomorphic (the same in men and women). 

So, if we really want to better understand a difference between women and men, we need to first ask several questions: 

 

Using these distinctions we might be able to find a way past the "sex" vs. "gender" semantic minefield. For example, we need to know both whether the underlying trait is sexually dimorphic and whether the cultural socialization is dimorphic. We can use these distinctions to help to define a "sex difference" and a "gender difference."

Is the trait a manifestation of a psychological adaptation? 

  —If so, is that adaptation sexually monomorphic or dimorphic? 

Is the cultural socialization related to the trait monomorphic or dimorphic?

 

 

Using the distinctions in the table, the term "sex difference" refers to sexually dimorphic adaptations, regardless of whether cultural socialization is basically the same, or different, for males and females with respect to the trait.

 

The term "gender difference" would refer to those average group differences between men and women that are likely due to sexually monomorphic psychological adaptations combined with culturally dimorphic socialization. (Or, we may eventually find that they may be distant byproducts of sexually dimorphic adaptations.) For example, the tendency to wear trousers or dresses, cutting one's hair short or long, or wearing makeup are not likely to be directly due to sexually dimorphic psychological adaptations. We would expect gender differences to be more variable across time and cultures than sex differences.

 

Even with these new definitions, there is a fairly large gray area between sex differences and gender differences. Future research may untangle some of these distinctions, including "motherese" (the tendency of mothers to talk "baby talk" to their infants), childhood toy preferences, and occupational choice. For example, is the male preponderance in high-risk occupations (race car driver, firefighter, etc.) due to greater male preferences to take physical risks—a psychological adaptation resulting from ancestral intra-sexual competition? Of course, there is no "gene for" becoming a fire fighter or race car driver, but there are likely genetic differences between the sexes that predispose males to take more risks, and thus men may be more likely to prefer occupations in which these preferences can be expressed.

 

As time passes, I suspect that many "gender differences" will be found to actually be "sex differences," or at least distal byproducts of them. For example, I imagine that the dearth of cultures where women cut their hair short, while men let their hair grow long, is something more than just a random fluke of consistency in cultural socialization.  

 

However, it is important to keep in mind that the definitions as presented in the table above are descriptive rather than prescriptive. That is, differences between the sexes are not presumed to be a moral good. Nor is it suggested that "sex differences" are immutable and uninfluenced by cultural socialization. Because behavior is always an interaction of nature and nurture, socialization can modify even significant sex differences—if we so choose.

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-how-and-why-sex-differences/201110/sex-difference-vs-gender-difference-oh-im-so-confused

[Mister Mister]

Gender is a word that was originally applied to languages like Latin or German or French or Spanish, where nouns are male or female or sometimes neuter.  It has been used by 3rd wave feminists and postmodernists to attack traditional masculinity and femininity, and present the idea that "gender" - which could loosely be defined as behaviors traditionally associated with the male and female sex, is entirely a "social construct". 

 

In other words, they argue that there are no qualities or behaviors which are inherently, or biologically, male or female - rather that certain behaviors such as strength, hard work, and leadership for men, nurturing, passivity, and vanity for women, were invented by society and imposed on children, in order to create an oppressive class structure.  And that to argue otherwise is oppressive to women and homosexuals and trans people.

 

  The trans issue is particularly interesting because it kind of throws a wrench in this whole idea.  If gender is just a construct, then being trans doesn't really mean anything.  But if there is something distinct from the male and female brains, then it would be possible to have a female brain in a male body and vice versa.  I've often noticed that, ironically, a lot of trans women present as more traditionally feminine than many modern women.

[Donnadogsoth]

 

The term "gender difference" would refer to those average group differences between men and women that are likely due to sexually monomorphic psychological adaptations combined with culturally dimorphic socialization. (Or, we may eventually find that they may be distant byproducts of sexually dimorphic adaptations.) For example, the tendency to wear trousers or dresses, cutting one's hair short or long, or wearing makeup are not likely to be directly due to sexually dimorphic psychological adaptations. We would expect gender differences to be more variable across time and cultures than sex differences.

 

The sexes may instead be genetically predisposed to attempt to distance themselves expressively from the opposite sex.  Male and female costumes and behaviours vary greatly from culture to culture, but I have never heard of any culture where these costumes and behaviours were not mutually distinguished from each other.  Even primitive tribes in the nude are making, by that very nudity, obvious statements about sex differences.  The best lack-of-distinction I can think of is Communist countries with things like the Mao suit.  Communist boot stomping down sex differences, or bona fide example of culture?

 

 

...Of course, there is no "gene for" becoming a fire fighter or race car driver, but there are likely genetic differences between the sexes that predispose males to take more risks, and thus men may be more likely to prefer occupations in which these preferences can be expressed.

 

There may also be genetic differences between the sexes, or common genetic traits, which predispose parents, or just fathers, to encourage and help develop male children's risk-taking propensities.

[Frosty]

Sex is determined by genetics, the XX and XY chromosome pairs, in "normal" human growth that covers the vast majority of the population and has been the working mechanism powering evolution by creating diversity from which nature selects. These genetic differences in sex leads to typical differences in physical and mental characteristics, testosterone produced by men makes us more aggressive and bigger risk takers for example, men are taller on average etc. Outside of genetic abnormalities or illness sex has largely stayed a binary distinction. Sex is entirely nature and nothing to do with nurture.

 

Gender and sense of gender identity is a term which has changed with usage over time, as our understanding has improved. Gender identity is thought to be set during fetal development while the brain structure is developing, spikes in testosterone at certain weeks can cause permanent changes in brain structure and give males a more female orientated brain and females a more male orientated brain. So a sense of gender identity is also nature, whether that be congenital conditions or illness, or just environmental, nurture cannot set or undo a sense of gender identity. It can only suppress expression of it.

 

It's worth noting that gender identity leads to a type of gender expression in society and this expression is where nurture comes in, different races evolve different cultures in which gender expression is typically different although shares some commonality, this suggests that gender expression is still influenced by gender identity but not completely. That is to say there is some common elements that are feminine and masculine but this changes in subtle ways from culture to culture. In most of the important ways discussed today it seems like most gender differences come down to evolutionary traits that benefit eiher men or women. So for example females tend to do better on standardized empathy tests and have more interest in helping other people in their careers and personal lives, this would facilitate raising children while men went off to hunt, men tend to be more aggressive this facilitates protection of the family. You can pretty much tell what is a social construct and what isn't if you look to evolutionary biology for reasons we might have these different behaviors, if there's a good evolutionary reason and the trait crosses cultures then odds are its heavily influenced by nature and not by society.

 

Feminists tend to want to believe that apart from sexual organs that men and women are essentially the same and that all differences are due to society, which is getting cause and effect the wrong way around. Sexual dimorphic characteristics that come directly from evolution heavily inform gender expression which then inform societal behaviour, for example we know that people who are over exposed to testosterone as a fetus are more likely to enter the STEM field later in life, irrelevant of whether you're male or female, it's just that typically men are exposed to more testosterone under normal healthy conditions.

 

A good documentary on this investigates these issues, links here https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1vuho8/the_documentary_that_made_scandinavians_cut_all/

[SoCaliGirl]

Sex is determined by genetics, the XX and XY chromosome pairs, in "normal" human growth that covers the vast majority of the population and has been the working mechanism powering evolution by creating diversity from which nature selects. These genetic differences in sex leads to typical differences in physical and mental characteristics, testosterone produced by men makes us more aggressive and bigger risk takers for example, men are taller on average etc. Outside of genetic abnormalities or illness sex has largely stayed a binary distinction. Sex is entirely nature and nothing to do with nurture.

 

Gender and sense of gender identity is a term which has changed with usage over time, as our understanding has improved. Gender identity is thought to be set during fetal development while the brain structure is developing, spikes in testosterone at certain weeks can cause permanent changes in brain structure and give males a more female orientated brain and females a more male orientated brain. So a sense of gender identity is also nature, whether that be congenital conditions or illness, or just environmental, nurture cannot set or undo a sense of gender identity. It can only suppress expression of it.

 

It's worth noting that gender identity leads to a type of gender expression in society and this expression is where nurture comes in, different races evolve different cultures in which gender expression is typically different although shares some commonality, this suggests that gender expression is still influenced by gender identity but not completely. That is to say there is some common elements that are feminine and masculine but this changes in subtle ways from culture to culture. In most of the important ways discussed today it seems like most gender differences come down to evolutionary traits that benefit eiher men or women. So for example females tend to do better on standardized empathy tests and have more interest in helping other people in their careers and personal lives, this would facilitate raising children while men went off to hunt, men tend to be more aggressive this facilitates protection of the family. You can pretty much tell what is a social construct and what isn't if you look to evolutionary biology for reasons we might have these different behaviors, if there's a good evolutionary reason and the trait crosses cultures then odds are its heavily influenced by nature and not by society.

 

Feminists tend to want to believe that apart from sexual organs that men and women are essentially the same and that all differences are due to society, which is getting cause and effect the wrong way around. Sexual dimorphic characteristics that come directly from evolution heavily inform gender expression which then inform societal behaviour, for example we know that people who are over exposed to testosterone as a fetus are more likely to enter the STEM field later in life, irrelevant of whether you're male or female, it's just that typically men are exposed to more testosterone under normal healthy conditions.

 

A good documentary on this investigates these issues, links here https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1vuho8/the_documentary_that_made_scandinavians_cut_all/

 

Thanks for sharing your very well articulated thoughts!

 

I will watch the documentary tonight!

[Frohicky1]

I don't like the way people are saying "no no you're using the words wrong, sex means biological organs and gender means orientation" recently.  Historically these words have had nothing like those meanings, they've been much more (no pun intended) fluid.  The monopoly over language is the first step in any authoritarian scheme. The words don't matter! It's the concepts they track that matter.

[Jsbrads]

I'm okay with sex referring to scientific chromosomal sex.

Gender either means the same thing or it doesn't mean anything at all. There does seem to be a minority subset of boys and girls who were so thoroughly abused, they no longer feel comfortable in their own skin. I feel horribly bad for them.

Some of them suffer from a mental disorder called gender dysphoria. Note: Their suicide rate does not decline after incredibly invasive chemical and surgical interventions.

They deserve our best care in therapy, perhaps even antidepressants and sympathy from fellow humans. Not to be spoiled, patronized, disfigured, sterilized or to have their confusion entrenched by a form of gaslighting.

[FattyWatt]

Frohicky1 said it perfect!  Thank you!

"The monopoly over language is the first step in any authoritarian scheme."

 

I have to say,

"Communist United States can't take off ur pants & manipulate ur dangly bits.  Male or Female, which one is it?"

[HasMat]

I don't like the way people are saying "no no you're using the words wrong, sex means biological organs and gender means orientation" recently.  Historically these words have had nothing like those meanings, they've been much more (no pun intended) fluid.  The monopoly over language is the first step in any authoritarian scheme. The words don't matter! It's the concepts they track that matter.

I used to feel this way too.

 

My attitude changed because I see a need for biology and choice to be differentiated.

 

Gender is chosen in the same way a person chooses their name. It's a fully self-determined category you can change as you please, and nobody else is compelled to accept or use your claim to refer to you. It cannot be verified and has no objective measure. It is pure abstraction.

 

I think understanding this is the key to ridding it from law. Law needs specifics to not be a whimsical tool of arbitrary enforcement and exploitation. Gender doesn't have a specific quality that law can recognize/ascertain to avoid whim. You can be a man today and a woman tomorrow, and nobody could gainsay your choice.

 

Law can't talk about gender because it can't measure, predict, or control it. Bathrooms can only be sex-based, because law can measure biology.

 

Govt making laws about gender is technically a violation of the anti-establishment clause of the constitution, separation of church and state. Ideas that are not based on any objective measure are off limits to the govt. The non-falsifiable is the realm of religion.