/lit/ - Literature

gender is a social construct you dip; it's sex you're thinking of

>>6682701
De Beauvoir and Woolf
Maybe Plath

Gender IS a social construct the point is that a lot of things are and that's not enough reason to "abolish" it.

>Help be reinforce my preconceived notion which I cannot support myself.

Also >>>/pol/

>>6682701
Judith Butler

>>6682703
>>6682710
Some gender roles are social constructs (often with a biological basis) but gender itself isn't a social construct.

>>6682706

Woolf worked with androgyny to some extent in her work but ultimately held deeply rooted beliefs on the essentiality of genders (cf. Ms. Dalloway vs Septimus Smith; Bernard and Parcival in the Waves)

>>6682721
Oh of course, the human nature argument, how could it be any different

>>6682710

Being is a social construct. Language is a social construct. Anything that requires more than one sentient participant is a social construct. Though I fail to see how something's status as a social construct is relevant to socio-political practice, I do not believe I am short-sighted.

gaaaAAHHHHH

GEnder ROLES are a construct
GENDER is a fuckkkin fact

MALE is a euphemism for PENIS
FEMALE " for VAGINA

>>6682721
Gender is the cultural fluff we ascribe to cultural sex. In Western cultures, this has traditionally been binary, but many cultures have had 3 genders (Indian hijra, N. American two spirits) or even up to 5 genders (the Bugis). There is nothing "XX chromosome" about a certain cut of fabric that resembles a dress, or a shade of light red, or long hair, or 99% of the social constructs many people believe have essential "masculine" or "feminine" essences.

>>6682711

He's not reinforcing a notion, he's asking for the history of an idea that he opposes, probably because of interest or to challenge himself, you dense pc fuckwit.

>>6682732
>Though I fail to see how something's status as a social construct is relevant to socio-political practice

Something about being a social construct with influence on socio-political practice, maybe

>>6682733
>MALE is a euphemism for PENIS

I disagree. Someone who has suffered a penectomy can still be male.

>>6682738
>probably because of interest or to challenge himself

ahahah

>>6682738
>He's not reinforcing a notion

Yes he is. He clearly has no education on the subject, but wishes for argumentation to support his preconceived knee-jerk reaction. I've seen him make like three threads on how to argue this point in the last week.

>he's asking for the history of an idea that he opposes

Which, again, he really knows nothing about, or he wouldn't be asking.

>probably because of interest or to challenge himself

Learn what confirmation bias is.

>you dense pc fuckwit

Not everyone who disagrees with your POV is stupid. Grow up.

>>6682744
OP here, it it out of interest. As a student, I'm surrounded by sentiments like 'gender is a social construct' and I know that there's a whole academic ideology behind it. I want to work it out.

>>6682732
Neither Being nor language are social constructs; one is a metaphysical concept, the other is a biolpgical function of the human body.

honestly this board should be deleted

>>6682742
jej not really

>>6682749
The fact that you refer to it as a "myth" and "radical" in your OP suggests that you've already arrived at your conclusion and now want to reinforce it.

Radical feminism was only really a significant presence in second-wave feminism, during the 1960s/70s. They're hardly the ones who believe gender is entirely socially constructed - the fact that they bump heads with mainstream feminists (who have alienated them) over trans rights shows they cling to essentialist notions of sex - sentiments they share with conservative christians and the like. When marxism became more unpopular with academics in the late 80s and early 90s, radfems were basically dropped, and 90% of the feminists you see today are liberal capitalists who have no intention to replicate the radfem mirror of class/gender struggle, instead focusing on intersectionalism.

>>6682711
>Anyone who disagrees with me is an atavistic criminal

>>6682764
More like "anyone who disagrees with me, yet has to beg others for arguments to defend his position, is probably not educated enough on the topic to currently hold an informed opinion."

>rightists insisting that gender and sex are the same thing
It's like they have a mental deficiency where they can't understand non-physical concepts.

It's pretty easy

XY chromosomes = guy

XX chromosomes = girl

When you claim that gender is a social construct, you're implying that the people who truly believe that they have the mind or even the soul of the opposite sex are somehow deluded.

You cannot reconcile the beliefs of transgender individuals with the idea of gender as a social construct without believing, on some level, that said individuals are wrong/brainwashed.

the tabula rasa idea is as old as rousseau and the early feminist wollstonecraft is a direct response to the inadequacies of rousseau in addressing women

existentialist feminists like beauvoir mostly reject the gender role thing as facticity

paglia critiques both explicitly in sexual personae

>>6682785
No one is saying that men and women don't behave differently, it's about certain social norms regarding gender such as styles of dress, and yes, some forms of behaviour.
It doesn't mean that men and women are exactly the same. This isn't a binary argument.

Modern feminism was born in the '60s with free love.

Women wanted it because it offered them the prospect of optimizing their hypergamous natures, i.e. having lots of sex with "hot" men then settling down with a dependable "boring" man when they aged; free from moral & social constraints they could "have it all".

Men wanted it because it ostensibly offered them the prospect off optimizing their desire of unlimited sex with unlimited partners. It's important to note the context of the period, their fathers before them and fathers before that had adhered by strict moral and social codes, i.e. marriage, so many men fell for it by believing by removing the shackles men and women would just have lots of sex with one another because of course "that's what women wanted to do, because that's what I want to do". It also meant a freedom from a career, a freedom from performance, ostensibly of women loving them for "who they are" rather than "what they are" (in other words, giving them lots of sex for nothing).

Everything is clear in hindsight, and it's obvious it didn't work out that way for most men, but it's important to understand the context of situation when you ask "how did this come about" or "where did this myth come from".

>>6682788
>Women wanted it because it offered them the prospect of optimizing their hypergamous natures, i.e. having lots of sex with "hot" men then settling down with a dependable "boring" man when they aged; free from moral & social constraints they could "have it all".
Explain why so many feminists are lesbians then?

>>6682787
I agree with you—however I think that most "SJWs" would say that gender, in its entirety, is a social construct.

I think that's the "myth" that OP, you, and I disagree with.

>>6682773
And your response, rather than to educate him, is to make fun of him?
This is why there are more Christians than feminists. When someone asks a Christian to explain the premises and origins of Christianity they don't get this sort of bullshit. You could at least explain to OP what makes gender a social constrict.
>How dare you not know as much about this subject as me! How dare you make a thread asking for information about this subject you know nothing about!
That's what you sound like.

>>6682787

Most of the cultural baggage about genders is most likely a social construct. But at least some part of gender must be biologically based (inherent, not social), otherwise transgender people wont exist. So yes, the blanket statement that "gender is a social construct" is still wrong, or at least imprecise. Gender identity is not a social construct.

>>6682785
>>6682785 Radfem detected. >When you claim that gender is a social construct, you're implying that the people who truly believe that they have the mind or even the soul of the opposite sex are somehow deluded. >You cannot reconcile the beliefs of transgender individuals with the idea of gender as a social construct without believing, on some level, that said individuals are wrong/brainwashed. Not really. It's a way of expressing that their internal comfort resides with gender roles that people of their born sex are shunned for adhering to. Recognizing gender as a social construct is the freedom to define your own gender however you want; even if it's prefixed with demi- or whatever, because you recognize that individual identity is about putting yourself in your own boxes, whether others are comfortable with the labels or not. Whether their dysphoria is socially conditioned or innate is, IMO, irrelevant. We honestly don't know at this point. But in any case, even if I DID believe they were incorrect, I would respect their lifestyle as a common courtesy - just like atheists shouldn't go around rambling about how those "deluded" theists are worshiping invisible sky daddies, or whatever.

>>6682748
>Not everyone who disagrees with your POV is stupid. Grow up.
Not the guy you were replying to, but you just made my day with that line.

>>6682778
Seriously trying to understand existence through non-physical concepts is absolutely retarded, dressing it up in vaguely scientific terminology doesn't make you less of a moron.

>>6682783
dumb.

>>6682786
Actually, Ibn Tufail originated that idea, which was most famously articulated in modernity and English by Locke.

>>6682785
>>6682802
Reformatting my response because I typed it on notepad first.

>When you claim that gender is a social construct, you're implying that the people who truly believe that they have the mind or even the soul of the opposite sex are somehow deluded.
>You cannot reconcile the beliefs of transgender individuals with the idea of gender as a social construct without believing, on some level, that said individuals are wrong/brainwashed.

Not really. It's a way of expressing that their internal comfort resides with gender roles that people of their born sex are shunned for adhering to. Recognizing gender as a social construct is the freedom to define your own gender however you want; even if it's prefixed with demi- or whatever, because you recognize that individual identity is about putting yourself in your own boxes, whether others are comfortable with the labels or not. Whether their dysphoria is socially conditioned or innate is, IMO, irrelevant. We honestly don't know at this point. But in any case, even if I DID believe they were incorrect, I would respect their lifestyle as a common courtesy - just like atheists shouldn't go around rambling about how those "deluded" theists are worshiping invisible sky daddies, or whatever.

>>6682791
Lesbians tend to be extreme feminists, for obvious reasons.

Although the cause and effect of this is certainly is up for debate, you could argue women are more impressionable than most men (the "herd mentality"), and therefore when taught about the patriarchy and other such concepts (originally intended to enable them to optimize their own hypergamy) they end up so far down the path that they end up hating men, and shunning them all together

>>6682752

I know you're not going to believe me, but I must tell out of courtesy that you're out of your league and you have no absolutely business posting in this thread.

>>6682798
This. The Dr Money/David Reimer case study tells you about as much

>>6682793

It is becoming a huge problem and is fueling schisms and fracturing among social justice groups. LGBT+ groups are turning on one another, as well as various ethnicities and minorities. For the moment it's contained to individuals or small cells, but it's a steady trend so far.
Every other person on Tumblr identifying themselves with about ten words, a hexadecimal code, and a slam poem fonted in wingdings that convey their snowflake perfect sexuality and gender doesn't help matters, either.

>>6682810
You could male that argument, but in that form it's more of am assertion than anything.
>no empirical evidence
>no valid logical form
>no grace at all

>>6682816
LOL, next you'll tell me dialectic is a social construct

>>6682802
>>It's a way of expressing that their internal comfort resides with gender roles that people of their born sex are shunned for adhering to
>Internal comfort coming from external accessories
You couldn't be more of a running dog lackey if you tried

>>6682796
>And your response, rather than to educate him, is to make fun of him?

Telling someone they have a confirmation bias is hardly making fun of them. It's common to all people and it often needs to be pointed out before they can realize it. In any case, yes, knocking someone down a notch with humour can often humble them into questioning whether they're right, although that was not my intention.

>This is why there are more Christians than feminists. When someone asks a Christian to explain the premises and origins of Christianity they don't get this sort of bullshit.

Nice anecdotal evidence. I doubt most Christians would be so respectful if an equivalent question was phrased the way OP phrased his. He's hardly receptive to opposing ideas despite not being knowledgeable.

>That's what you sound like.

You're making the OP sound so neutral. My point is that if he isn't educated, he shouldn't start asking for information in a specific way that confirms his existing beliefs. That's not a way to educate yourself; it's intellectual wankery and the yearning for an echo chamber.

>>6682701
>myth

>>6682829
>My point is that if he isn't educated, he shouldn't start asking for information in a specific way that confirms his existing beliefs.
But everyone has confirmation bias.

>>6682828
>Internal comfort coming from external accessories
>You couldn't be more of a running dog lackey if you tried

Go throw your computer out the window then, Buddha. Why not live on the street while you're at it?

>>6682823
Although I have no double-blind placebo-controlled studies to back up my assertions, using empiricism I can deduct that I am correct.

>>6682837
Yes, but when we're made aware of it, we're able to circumvent it to a greater degree than if we just beg the question.

>>6682788
Women wanted feminism in the 60s because it was will still legal to rape your wife and pay women less than men you r9k dimwit.

>>6682829
Don't worry, you're absolutely right and there's no other way of dealing with people like that.

This is pretty common here on /lit/ when a thread is made already with many assumptions and implications in the OP passing off as objective fact that will then be sold as a neutral stance under the guise of naive curiosity.

If you're polite with them, you'll get hours of a horrible pseudo-socratic interrogation where they'll attempt to drive into some type of contradiction through deliberate misunderstandings of what you're saying. This whole "see! this is nobody likes you!" is their admission of defeat.

>>6682839
>Can't tell the difference between sensual pleasure and ideological desire

I'm not even a spiritual person, but when people start worrying about "putting [themselves] in [their] own boxes" and what labels really express them as human beings, it should be a hint that something's wrong.
No matter how it's excused, feeling ennui over unobservable abstract concepts is a bad sign.

>>6682844
So what? I've informed you that your way of answering OP was inadequate, as evidenced by the fact that others have posted actual information about feminist writers rather than yelling at OP, and you haven't realized yet that you're the one of us that's shitposting. Obviously, having the facts spelled out for you doesn't help you overcome your bias.

>>6682843
Links? The burden of truth has been on you all along.

>>6682852
>rape your wife
nope

>pay gap myth
nope
http://time.com/3222543/5-feminist-myths-that-will-not-die/

Way to parrot the feminist narrative, m8

>>6682852
If I remember correctly, raping your wife only became illegal in all American states in 1993. I admit that some feminists are hysterical about rape, but there is truth to the notion that rape isn't as condemned in society as it appears on the surface. I was shocked when my friend in college was raped and her own housemates and family blamed her for it.

>>6682863
Links to what?

Read my original post. If it doesn't resonate with you, then that's cool, you don't have to believe it. No skin off my back.

>>6682870
>I enjoy making baseless assertions

>>6682860
I hardly "yelled" at him, it was mild teasing with some corrective information on how he's trapped himself in egotistical thought patterns that prevent him from having a more balanced point of view. I made further posts that elaborated on the topic of feminism itself, which were not in direct response - but honestly, the thread is for everybody, not just OP. Really, your sensitivity is just a big red herring for the fact that you disagree with my viewpoint and want to take it out on the tone instead.

>>6682809
If you were to ask a transgender person: "Do you feel comfortable behaving as a woman, or do you believe that you are a woman on the inside?", wouldn't they answer in the affirmative to the latter?

I don't know any transgender people, so I honestly don't know.

>>6682876
>baseless
I base my observations on people's behaviour. It is far more reliable to watch what a women does, then listen to what she says.

One is surprisingly consistent, the other is all over the place.

I don't have any double-blind studies to prove that women aren't equal to men from the head up. I just know it.

>>6682882
Well, I am transgender, and my answer would lean towards the former. We're not all the same, but if confronted with a paradox like you mention, I would take transgender people's internal thoughts as more trustworthy on the subject than anyone else's. There's no reason we can't have an over-arching "meta" concept of gender that accommodates for cis, trans and non-binary people based on personal identification. The simple fact is that the brain isn't fully mapped out, and we don't know all the factors that actually make someone feel gender dysphoria on the inside.

>>6682878
I don't disagree with you, I'm just pointing out that your way of educating others is unhelpful.

>>6682867
IN THE 60s dimwit.

>>6682890
I'm not going to diplomatically respond to people who frame their entire premise in hostile ways to other perspectives. There's no reason for me to be held to a higher standard than OP in that respect. I gave him a perfectly correct response to his own mannerisms, and if he's not willing to pick through pig shit to get to some corn kernels, too bad. It's not hard to ask for answers from more knowledgeable people without acting like a pseudo-enlightened sage who doesn't need them - this isn't something I should have to "teach" anybody.

>>6682889
If you're not the gender you like to behave as on the inside, then what gender DO you feel like on the inside?

>>6682889
>Well, I am transgender

>>6682899
What fucked up definition of rape are you using to get to this conclusion?

Rape has never been legal.

You are seriously retarded.

>>6682905
I feel a sort of Cartesian dualism runs through these lines of questioning which I don't completely agree with, making it hard to frame my answer. The mind is reflected in behavior, there's not a clear line separating them. However, the way I would like to act, look and identify is different from what's socially accepted, causing my dysphoria. The split, to me, is not between body and mind, but identity and social pressure. There's also the fact that I'm too manly looking to really transition without looking horrible, so I'm never going to. Does that answer your question? Probably not.

>>6682915
Only because marital rape wasn't classified as rape.

>>6682915
I was talking about the pay gap actually but yes it was also legal to rape your wife.

>>6682923
>>6682927
It's not possible to for a husband to rape a wife as it's her Christian duty to submit to him.

"Wives must submit to their own husbands" Ephesians 5:32

>>6682923
That's not rape.

If I'm gonna put a ring on a woman and pay for all of her needs the least she can do is fuck me once a day.

Oh wait, you're incapable of relating to the male experience in the slightest.

>>6682927
The pay gap is a myth.

>>6682938
Ah yes let's take our rape definitions from a bronze age text full of superstitions. Kill yourself christfag scum.

>>6682945
Not in the 60s it wasn't Jesus Christ how many times you fucking idiot, look it up.

>>6682945
I am a male, and the reason I am unrelatable to you on on a fundamental level is that women actually have sex with me willingly. You're seriously a creep, dude. Get triggered by that word as much as you want, it's what you are.

>>6682946
Are you completely incapable of not insulting those who you're arguing with?

Open your mind. Consider that there may be a narrative outside of the feminist one you were brought up in. One that considers mens needs as well as womens.

>>6682957
I'm sorry to burst your bubble but I'm not a creep and I have sex with grills.

Shocking I know, someone has a different opinion to you

>>6682957
>I am a male, and the reason I am unrelatable to you on on a fundamental level is that women actually have sex with me willingly.

There is a difference between willing out of eagerness and willing because she is desperate for the money.

>>6682958
>open mind
>religion

Nope

>>6682962
Thinking it's okay to rape your wife isn't just a harmless throwaway opinion that socially well-adjusted people have. Sorry bro.

>>6682965
Someone's getting defensive.

This board gets a little heavier with nu-lib trash every day

Soon enough we'll be indistinguishable from /co/

>>6682920
It's like we're speaking two different languages. A modicum of understanding can still be obtained, however.

Your identity is unable to realize itself due to a restrictive society.

What, then, is the cause of this identity? I actually think this is very important question.

If it is innate (that is, if it is congenital), that means that (contra Butler), gender identity is not determined by society. To go back to OP, it means that gender identity is not a social construct, but a biological reality.

If, on the other hand, gender identity IS determined by society, then it is arbitrary, and it can and should be cast aside by people for convenience's sake (no more oppression, and certain gendered behaviors are actually undeniably more convenient as a cis individual [like using a urinal for a cis male]). I know that's a weak argument, but if it's really truly arbitrary, it's the difference between zero and any other amount of pain—there's no reason not to choose zero.

Yet my own lived experience makes me doubt the latter possibility. I don't feel that I have a choice as to which gender I should be (or behave as, if you prefer). I feel as if that is an unchangeable part of who I am. Do you feel that way, too?

Am I equivocating societally determined and arbitrary? Am I wrongly assuming that societal ideas (basic gender identities) are not somehow burned indelibly into one's mind at a young age, and can't be changed afterwards?

I'm sorry if I cling to defunct ideas (essentialism, mind/body). My formal education in philosophy has been quite limited.

I don't mean to be an interrogator, I'm only asking these questions for my own sake. I've thought about these issues for a long time.

>>6683000
PerdidoStreetStation.jpg

>>6682785
I mean they've got gender dysmorphia. So technically speaking they're just as delusional as the people who are convinced that they're animals or people with BIID, they're convinced they need to amputate a limb.

They're crazy. The only difference is that society is reasonably fine with people mutilating their genitals as longs as it's done in a sterile environment and someones turning a profit.

>>6682901
>Calls someone uneducated
>Claims to be better educated than that person
>Refuses to educate them and demonstrate education
You're cool

>>6682788

>hypergamous natures

>>>/r9k/

>>6682984
This really is an issue with you people. Your mind just as closed as everyone else's is, you just refuse to accept it. Christianity makes a point of living with it.

>>6682805

What do you mean by "non-physical concepts"?

>>6683044
blue

>>6682785
Yeah, exactly. It's a mental illness.

>>6683056
I'm not going to pour effort into bridging ideas with someone who isn't receptive to them. This is perfectly reasonable. You're starting to sound like a broken record in your vain attempt to portray OP as a benevolent pochemuchka who was perfectly open-minded until mean old me came along. I'm done with this shit.

>>6683094
blue

>>6682883

>I just know it

I'm sort of curious - Where do you live? What is your lifestyle like? It's very hard for me to imagine how one could arrive at your opinions.

>>6682946
If you consent to be married by a Christian priest in a Christian church, you must by definition submit to your husband. If you don't like that, have a secular 'marriage'.

>>6682749
why don't you do what students do and start some independent research into the subject. why post a board about it? you don't know how wikipedia works? or a library?

Why does everyone have to be so stupid when it comes to the "is gender a social construct?" question. As with the race being a social construct question, some aspects are completely arbitrary with no basis in anything physical or real, some things are completely physically determined. Many things fall into the vast area in between. Why are stupid people so drawn to false dichotomies and binary oppositions? Why does everyone always forget that there CAN be a combination of two elements? Why does everyone always forget there is often a VAST middle ground between two seemingly opposing ideas?

>>6682938
lol what the hell kind of translation is that

read the rest of the chapter dingus

>>6683139
most people just like making their own definitions up and shouting at other people until they go away

>>6683009
I still don't see how "choice" is relevant. Even if the gender of trans people is innate, they're still outside the traditional gender/sex binary that society would ascribe to them, regardless of what percentage of the cause is environmentally or genetically determined - this is what causes the "pain" you talk about. There isn't a hard line dividing genetic and environmental influences, anyway - the latter frequently determines the expression of the former traits. So whatever kind of biological essentialism may hold true, the fact that gender HAS been expressed so differently across many societies shows that it certainly isn't rigidly adhering to the kind of sexual dualism that right-wingers and OP seem to want. Gender as a social construct may likely stem from primal, innate influences - but the actual "fluff" that this manifests as is radically different depending on the cultural soup that the individual in question lives in. Someone who harbored hormonally-induced gender dysphoria in ancient greece wouldn't feel distressed over not being able to wear a skirt, for example, because that's perfectly acceptable in his society. The end product is very dependent on local social attitudes, is what I'm getting at, even if the origin is somewhat biological.

Language, for example, has common features between cultures that manifest in concepts like phonemes, grammar etc - and these probably have native neurological structures behind them that, over time, branch into the multitude of languages we have on Earth today. However, to reductively say that language is "genetic in origin" because of this and ignore the profound historical-social influences that have created the actual varieties of human speech we hear today would be absurd. We can't throw ideas about the flexibility and adaptability of social constructs out the window because they have some primal origin that loosely ties different cultural forms of them together.

>Yet my own lived experience makes me doubt the latter possibility. I don't feel that I have a choice as to which gender I should be (or behave as, if you prefer). I feel as if that is an unchangeable part of who I am. Do you feel that way, too?

I don't feel anything is within my control. I make choices, but they're determined by influences which constructed my mental methods of reasoning and long standing emotional sentiment. Perhaps you should look into compatibilist philosophy to reconcile the dichotomy of ideas you find yourself circling around.

>>6683228
>"research what terms mean" button is missing
top tier satire

Rape is a social construct.
We should abolish laws that make rape illegal.

>>6683228
The first one should be sex, not gender.

Nobody in the debate is claiming that sex is a social construct, and likewise, nobody is claiming that that anyone is born with any gender.

Gender is culturally conditioned, sex is not. The hard thing is telling where one ends and the other begins.

In any case, misquoting your opponent to discredit them is hardly a good way to hold a debate.

>>6683254
>>6683238
get baited nerds

You aint gonna get laid if you eat that shit up.
Funniest thing of all is how de Beauvoir worked at Radio Vichy ( she was not forced to choose that position ) and probably didnt get executed because she was a woman ( muh priviledge ) , how she got into police records for paedohpilia, how she would pimp young girls for Sartre, how she was basically a female cuck in her relationship with Sartre, how she openes "the second sex" with jihad against men, how she was signer of French petition against age of consent laws ( paedophilia).
mfw she is "the mother" of modern feminism
mfw I see a male femnist, you aint gonna get that pussy bro.

>>6683261
mfw nobody here watched Hjernevask.
Stay cucks cuckos.

>>6683258
>only pretending!!!
toppest of tiers

>>6683261
>>6683272
mfw /lit/ is just going to ignore my posts and go on cucking.

>>6682829
>is hardly making fun of them
>knocking someone down a notch
>humour can often humble them
>Nice anecdotal evidence
>He's hardly receptive to opposing
>he shouldn't start asking for information in a specific way that confirms his existing beliefs

You sound like an obtuse enormous faggot, you know that? Reading your posts is like escaping a labyrinth

>>6683261
she's second-wave bro. essentialism isn't a thing anymore

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School

>>6683352
nice meme

>>6682701
>packing your conclusion into your premise
Anon, you're going to experience a lot of conflict in your life, and you're going to think it's because others are unreasonable, dogmatic or self-delusional. But I want you to know that won't be the reason. It'll be because you're an asshole.

>>6683337
>there are no differences at birth between men and women
>there are no iq differences between man and women
>those differences do not account for educational preferences
>women have on par visual / space perception as men
>you ever read Simon Cohens work
>are not so retarded that they think "biological determinism" is underpinning stereotypes
>Camille Paglia / Errin Pizzey havent got bigger intellectual capacity than the entirety of feminist movement today

>>6683367
>a question is an argument

>>6683374
what does this have to do with sdb?

>>6683374
>iq

>>6683374
forgot pic http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/males-and-females-differ-in-specific-brain-structures

>>6682901
>There's no reason for me to be held to a higher standard than OP
There isn't? Here I thought you held knowledge of a subject, that you were a representative of those schools of thinking that your knowledge stems from. If you cannot even graps that simple premise, it just does not reflect well on the quality of your mind. Furthermore you almost have to admit that this field is far from intuitively simple.

OP on the other hand is not representing anyone but just trolling/looking for some information.

>>6683383
forgot to make a relevant response too

>>6683378
Essentialism?
Imbecile much?

>>6683392
lol you don't know what essentialism is?

>>6683390
Disprove anything I presented and we can have an argument.
Oh yeah. You cant.

>>6683397
http://science.jrank.org/pages/9219/Essentialism-Feminist-Disputes.html
Being this retarded...

>>6683400
>I think this beer tastes pretty good.
>Oh yeah? Well the sky is blue.
>What does that have to do with anyth-
>CANNOT DISPROVE!
also
>iq

>>6683400
>Oh yeah. You cant.

i disproved the idea that sdb was the 'mother of modern feminism' when essentialism isn't a thing anymore. she's second wave. modern feminism is third wave

>>6683404
this is literally saying exactly what i said

>>6683407
>>6683409
mfw you are males and femnists
mfw you are probably permavirgins
mfw you think femnisim isnt utter shite
mfw you are the cancer that contributes to the fact that people who deny global climate change are somehow more rational than liberals on some issues
So long, cuckos.

>>6683426
>he thinks i'm a feminist because i think his views on feminism are buttfuck retarded
>cue mentally rehearsed rant against feminism

this is the kind of person i'm dealing with here

>>6683426
>mfw you are males and femnists
You have a thing for posting incorrect information as the first sentence of your posts, I see.

>>6683388
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tone_argument

>>6683435
>>6683439
Read the article I posted and watch Hjernevask and/or read The Blank Slate by Pinker. There is no point discussing a point with someone who refuses to take scientific research as valid and who ignores everything that doesnt conform to his views. Femposters and christposters have a lot of incommon. I bid you farewell my cuckm8s

>>6683464
>pinker
loool

>>6683464
>Fem
Still not a feminist no matter how hard you cry. You're literally the reason tumblr is a thing.

>>6683464
you're not telling me to watch boring shit or read ass, lol!

>>6683464
>he still thinks i'm a feminist despite me literally telling him i'm not

you sound brainwashed bro

>>6683463
That's not what happened.

>>6683463
And yet I am struggling to find a single coherent argument in all of your posts.

I have a few women friends who did gender studies and stuff like that. I don't know really what they believe, they do not take take to questioning well. They are puffed upp with rhetoric and balk at reasoning and inquiry. Very dependent on their own vernacular they never seem to be able to use common terms to describe their position. What I do know is that they are some of the less smart people in my circle. They always wanted to be part of an in-group.

>>6683520
is this actual, neutral inquiry or thinly veiled anti-feminism? the way you're presenting this story i am leaning towards the latter

>>6683525
It's just experience.

>>6683525
I don't know about the bits relating to them being stupid or wanting to be a part of an in-group, but my experience of people doing gender studies and even those around them is that they are similar to the tumblr feminist thing to a surreal degree. I think a lot of them are so deep in their echo chambers they aren't even aware how much of a stereotype they are.

>>6683525
tbf, a lot of gender people are not really good at explaining themselves. but then again, the anon you quoted probably isn't any better, it's just that people are less an asshole to him than he is to his "friends".

>>6683531
that in no way addresses what i asked