Why gender is a social construct
Debate Rounds (3)
i myself am an Androgenic masculine female attracted hermophro female and i am standing up against sexism and male patrechy
Pro opens the debate in round #1 with the following:
"gender is a social construct cuse we are told when we are first born by a dude what gender but if he didnt tell us that we woudnt have a gender its only cuse he told us that gender that we are that gender
i myself am an Androgenic masculine female attracted hermophro female and i am standing up against sexism and male patrechy"
1a : a subclass within a grammatical class (as noun, pronoun, adjective, or verb) of a language that is partly arbitrary but also partly based on distinguishable characteristics (as shape, social rank, manner of existence, or sex) and that determines agreement with and selection of other words or grammatical formsb : membership of a word or a grammatical form in such a subclassc : an inflectional form showing membership in such a subclass
2a : sex
Etymology of "gender": The term "gender" has been in use to denote sex since the late 14th century, and has become more commonly so recently, as the term "sex" took on a meaning less regarding one"s genitalia and became more commonly used to reference the sex act. (2). In general use, gender and sex have become synonymous in referring to males and females.
Con disagrees with the claim. The proposition that, we are told what our gender is after birth is proof that it is a social construct, is simply not the case. The physicians and other medical staff make a determination of the gender of a newborn based on physical characteristics, i.e., genitalia, which are unique to a given gender. They do not decide and assign gender. They recognize what is. Simply denying the obvious gender of a newborn does not change the fact of it. Pro goes on to claim that if we were not told our gender our gender would not exist. We know this is not the case. Everyone is aware that the gender of a child is already factual prior to the pronouncement by medical staff. A child does not enter the world without gender and suddenly develop genitalia in accordance to the spoken decree of the attendees. If pro insists on going deeper into the substance of the individual, those gender differences are based on the 23rd pair of chromosomes in humans, with females having 2 X chromosomes and males having an X and a Y chromosome in the 23rd pair. (3) (4)
The last sentence of Pro"s Round #1 argument is not disputed. Con would point however to Pro"s use of female in the description of herself.
Con finds Pro"s argument that gender is an arbitrary assignment by a male at birth as part of an anti female world preposterous and wholly without merit. Con"s argument is refuted. Gender is not a social construct.
Anthropologists that have studied cultures around the world know that a lot of the traditional gender roles we see in the west are just products of culture and not necessarily innate. For the most part, culture forces people into behaving in certain ways. That said, almost all cultures do end up having gender roles that, whatever they are, align with physical sex in some way.
As Con has shown from sources on the etymology of "gender", from its origin to its current usage, the term is commonly applied to the physical sex of an individual. Pro has not cited any sources to the contrary.
Pro argues without documentation that men are not born stronger than women. This argument is demonstrably false. Of course, we do not argue from the specific to the general, which is a logical fallacy. We do not argue since one particular woman is stronger than one particular man, the axiom does not hold any longer that men are physically more powerful. There are numerous fitness and medical sources which attest to the fact of men having greater strength. (1)(2)(3)
This is not a social construct. It is a genetic fact of gender. Pro also states without supporting evidence that anthropological study has produced the knowledge that gender roles (not to be confused with "gender") are cultural. However this, also, is documented to be incorrect, that males and females have differing roles due to differing methods of processing information. (4)
As to the original, contextual meaning of the word "gender" in this debate: The context was clearly related to physical attributes, with Pro using their unusual physical situation setting the context and as shown, the two terms, sex and gender, are used interchangeably in society. If Pro had wanted to debate solely the cultural roles of males and females, Con believes the result would have been the same. As Pro did not narrow it, either by definition, or by debating "Gender Roles Are a Social Construct", there is no reason to limit the debate to part of the meaning of gender.
It is worth noting that all 4 sources used in this round, from fitness to government to medical, use gender and sex interchangeably.
Con has proven that both cultural and physical differences within the genders are not social constructs, but are genetic in nature.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Peepette 1 month ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: The debate looks at two opposing constructs. PRO: gender being a social construct, but she needed to be more specific in her opening contention. CON points out in R3, that she implied physical characteristics. Her intent was, gender/sex roles are a social construct, but this isn?t clear until R3. CON seizes the biological descriptors for his argument and aptly, with cites for substantiation, rebuts PRO?s assertions that men are not born stronger than women, gender roles are based on information processing and gender/sex are genetically based. Sources to CON due to weigh in substantiation of his arguments. Conduct CON, PRO name calls, S&G ties both had readable arguments.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.