Salon.com once again promoting pedos.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-25-2016, 12:13 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: OED specifies that it typically refers to social or cultural characteristics and not biological. But definitions on the topic vary. APA defines it as such:

Not everything is in agreement on it, but the way the language is moving is that gender refers to behavioral and sex refers to biological.

Edit: Not really arguing, just bringing some information into this.

Understood. But, really, if the word 'gender' does indeed become to mean 'gender role', fine, I'll admit that 'gender' (as defined in that manner) IS a social construct, but then people need to realize there's no such thing as being a transperson, outside of post-op. Since gender roles (or 'gender') are defined by society, but sex is defined by sexual organ, then you are either male because you have a penis and female because you have a vagina (and I acknowledge the exceptions like hermaphrodites). It doesn't matter what you THINK you are, if you have a penis you're male and so on, etc. Now, how you act as a male or female is entirely up to you, according to our society nowadays, so if you have a penis but want to wear a dress and makeup, etc., then make yourself happy. However, you're NOT a woman no matter how much you want to be because you have a penis.

Thus, I'm confused as to why there's seemingly such a huge trans-issue in our country currently. You're either male or female (or hermaphrodite and whatever you call those born with neither a penis or a vagina- neuters?) and how you act, dress, think, etc. is up to you and not set in stone as male or female. So why the push to have people view you as a man or woman if you're not?