What attributes and characteristics makes a woman a woman?

Post Reply New Topic

Good one, Greentea!

Fnord - that is a common sociological and psychological definition of sex and gender - I couldn't give you a reference for it, but I taught human sexuality in a college setting for 8 years and that was in our text book

^ What was the name of the textbook?

I understand the above statement and I agree with it. But should "gender" never be referred to in the colloquial as "sex?" Both these words can function as verb, noun, and adjective. When filling out govt forms where personal information is required, ie. Name, Age, Nationality, etc., the word "sex" is always answered by ticking off M or F. Is the form asking me for my sex or my gender?

People like me have no brain/body conflict when it comes to sex/gender. Is it proper to say my gender is male and my sex male as well?

Tell that to a woman with XY chromosomes. (Link is to a pubmed index of an article about a woman with XY chromosomes who gave birth.)

Ouch...that should spark some conversation.

Anyways...I thought I would bring up the fact of how you think people will define such in the future.

Personally to avoid confusion I think society should seperate the argument into three parts, Genetics, sex, and then gender.

Genetics = chromosome type
sex = anatomy type
gender = What one considers themself

The reason I say this, is we are making advance progress in the fields of biology, genetics, and stem cell research.

Likely a person in the future will be able to duplicate full copies of their organs in their opposite Genetic structure...or possibly even somehow go through a complex process of changing their XX chromosome to XY or vice versa, AFTER birth, even long after birth.

(Though during birth is the first step of course.)

What will the arguments about sex be then? You know full well, those considering themselves one way transitioning to another, along with other technologies that reduce scarring, will then use such methods, to make themselves totally male to female, or female to male.

In such cases, you will lose the argument of genetics, and anatomy.

Personally, I prefer to stick with more methods dating back to Aristotle. Observe the surrounding and look/feel and nature of the creatures/wildlife/entity. Depending on those factors is how we define things.

It keeps things simple, easy, and direct. And avoids excess confusion. Reading any of Aristotles works shows you just how SIMPLIFIED he could make things. He basically had you reading things that kept you going "OBVIOUSLY."

However, it is rare in these more complex discussions that "obvious" information is ever represented, and the conversation suffers as a result.

Obvious might not be quite so...obvious, so to speak.

It also can get complicated with Klinefelter's syndrome. I worked with a little boy who had Klinefelter's syndrome (XXY), and he would always choose the little girl game piece when we would play Chutes and Ladders, so it is possible he is headed for some gender identity issues down the road (he is only 6). XXY individuals are considered to be genetically male, but often do have some degree of female secondary sexual characteristics (like increased breast tissue).

but, but, but. .you is the 'Eggman'!


curiously,

Merle

ut oh, looks like chinashopbull beat me to it!

I have issues with ambiguity of language...I am working hard to overcome them. In my attempt to be moderate I would opine, so long as it does not interfere with communication, people ought to use the words that best work for them.



I do not know. I suspect it depends on the purpose of the form and the intent of the agency gathering the information the form asks for.


Yes.

That is the linguistic convention in academia (ie anthropology, sociology, psychology, etc) used to denote the disparity between biological and social facts (the first referring to what is viewed as pre-social and the latter to those things perceived as socially constructed.

There is no doubt that biology does not necessitate any particular gender system for human beings. If it did, human gender systems would be singular and universal, but they are not (not all human gender systems are even binary).


The concept is explained, among other places, in most introductory cultural anthropology texts (such as "Humanity: An Introduction to Cultural Anthropology", 6th Edition, Peoples and Bailey; chapter 11 - Gender in Comparative Perspective).

1. Having the female reproductive organs.

2. Considering yourself to be female.

I think the question isn't "what makes a woman a woman?", but "what makes a man a man?", and the anser is: a Y chromosome. Female is the default sex, male is the result of Y chromosome + some protein synthesis process I don't understand but once in a sex-ed class the teacher explained to us.

Now the woman with XY chromosomes who gave birth is an interestingdebate topic.

Personally, I think all this sex and gender stuff is plain weird. I'm sure that on my home planet there is no such thing .

assuming the onlyway to earn tghe title is to produce eggs, which as it turns out it isnt so its not.

The biological genderisation process is two-stage.
Primary genderisation occurs in the womb and is largely cerebral in influence.
Hence little boys think and behave differently from little girls.

Secondary genderisation is largely corporeal, with hormones producing secondary sexual characteristics - testicular descent, semen production, voice break, musculo-skeletal developments, hairiness, etc, etc.

Women have evolved to be the gatherer to the man's hunter.
Gatherers (unsurprisingly) enjoy shopping (and have superior 2-D/pattern-recognition).
Hunters (unsurprisingly) enjoy hunting - or in its modern-day form, sport (and have superior 3-D/spatial capabilities to judge the speed and distance of woolly-mammoths or football trajectories).

Women are child (and people)-orientated - to maintain family harmony/cohesion.
Men are technology-orientated to make tools/weapons/traps to bring the bacon home.

If you want to understand what makes women women and men men, you could do worse than study gay and transgendered folk.

please catch up with what we now know. a person can be XX and have a male brain.