Is Gender REAL? - 8-Bit Philosophy
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лют 2025
- Join Wisecrack! ►► bit.ly/1y8Veir
Visit Audible ►► adbl.co/1dna94k
Watch 'What is WOMAN?' ►► bit.ly/1RFH0il
Press Start for “Is Gender REAL?” by 8-Bit Philosophy, where classic video games introduce famous thinkers, problems, and concepts with quotes, teachings, and more.
Episode 32: Is Gender REAL?
More 8-Bit Philosophy:
Is Capitalism Bad For You? ►► bit.ly/1NhhX2P
What is Real? ►► bit.ly/1HHC9g1
What is Marxism? ►► bit.ly/1M0dINJ
Thug Notes:
Lord of the Flies ►► bit.ly/19RhTe0
Of Mice and Men ►► bit.ly/1GokKHn
The Great Gatsby ►► bit.ly/1BoYKqs
Earthling Cinema:
Batman - The Dark Knight ►► bit.ly/1buIi1J
Pulp Fiction ►► bit.ly/18Yjbmr
Mean Girls ►► bit.ly/1GWjlpy
Pop Psych:
Mario Goes to Therapy ►► bit.ly/1GobKCl
Batman Goes to Therapy ►► bit.ly/1xhmXCy
Santa Goes to Therapy ►► bit.ly/1Iwqpuo
Email Alerts: eepurl.com/bcSRD9
Facebook: / 8bitphilosophy
Twitter: / 8bitphilosophy
Homepage: www.8bitphiloso...
Check out our Merch!: www.wisecrack.c...
Written by: Eugene Wolters
Created & Directed by: Jared Bauer
Narrator: Nathan Lowe
Animation Producer: MB X. McClain
Original Music & Sound by: David Krystal (www.davidkrysta...)
Academic Consultant: Mia Wood
Animation Consultant: Matt Reichle
Producer & Additional Artwork by: Jacob S. Salamon
© 2015 Wisecrack, Inc. -
Brand NEW Show on Wisecrack:
Boss Bitches of History ►► bit.ly/1GJ96mM
The new series from Wisecrack dedicated to celebrating emboldened women throughout the ages who bucked the system and boldly faced the sexist powers of their time.
(Addressing the commenters)
You know the segment is called 8-bit philosophy, not 8-bit science right? This video isn't about physical distinctions, but rather the usefulness of gender as a defined concept. I think all of you are missing the point of philosophy when you express your dislike in definite terms rather than engaging in actually relevant discourse; this video, as with the philosophy behind it, doesn't have an answer; but rather a proposed idea (or set of ideas). Instead of treating this concept as science treat it like a discussion, because that's what it is. If you try to shut down everyone's views you'll never learn something or expand your world view, and that's the whole point of philosophy (at least as I see it); to learn.
George Can'tstandya I know that what I am about to write here is quite obvious to you and probably your original comment was more about letting some steam off than actually an effort to change the minds of muppets that normally would not even try to entertain a notion of a mental exercise.
But...
You are preaching to the choir, man. Stop before it consumes your sanity. And get a drink. If it was possible it could be very well be on me. Cheers.
VaeSapiens
Thanks I guess.
Yeah, mostly just letting off a bit of steam, but if someone does read this and change the way they approach this content that would be great.
George Can'tstandya Gender is the only way to teach Right and Left.
George Can'tstandya Correct me if I'm reading you incorrectly, but I think science have a lot to say in this particular philosophical debate. I think simply leaving it out of this is a mistake. Philosophy, as in search of wisdom, should use the knowledge amassed by our sciences not frown upon it, although I agree with you that the dislikes are unnecessary.
George Can'tstandya Except there was no attempt at a syllogistic or empirical argument of any kind, so the entire presentation is neither science nor philosophy, but instead propaganda.
Asexual isn't a gender identity. It's a sexual orientation. It means not experiencing sexual attraction. Just figured I'd put that out there: 2:50
+Erin Flat Fingers Agender is the term they're looking for.
+Erin Flat Fingers ok lets pretend that genders are sex positions. would asexual be abstinence?
+Erin Flat Fingers Oh, I thought that said agender maybe it was a mistake.
+justin ret ...I've picked your comment apart a few ways, and none of them make sense. Care to elaborate on your question? That is, if genders are sex positions, what are the other genders' positions? How can we compare two things without defined sets of parameters? For example, if fruits were sports games, would apples be baseball? I don't know--what is a kiwi? What is a watermelon? How do I definitively affirm apples are baseball without knowing what the other fruits might be. Sex positions and gender are not connected in slightest. You'll have to provide additional parameters. Actually, considering asexual is not a gender, you're kind of asking, "Let's pretend fruits are sports games. What would a potato be?" Well, I sure as shit have no clue, because a potato is not a fruit.
But for the record, in terms of sexuality, asexuality is often said to exist on a whole different spectrum, with its own shades and degrees of arousal, attraction, and action. There are asexuals who are completely sex repulsed, while others will engage in sexual acts for the pleasure of their partner, due to societal pressure, or various other reasons, and others still are not repulsed but completely disinterested in sex. Some can only become aroused after a certain level of intellectual attraction or emotional intimacy is reached. Some experience sexual arousal once every five years if the stars are aligned and their hormones spike just so and their underwear has batman on it. Some have never been aroused in their life and never will be.
Likewise, romanticism and sexuality exist on different spectra. Just sayin'.
So, asexuality may be abstinence, or an asexual may actually have sex. Just like a gay boy might screw a girl just to say he has, but he still doesn't enjoy the V.
Pearl Carol lol before i read your massive comment... i got it from a joke bill maher said " atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex positron" and i mashed it into a question.
Asexual is not a gender, it's a sexual preference. "Agender" is what you wanted to place there.
+Nikolas Powell Are you serious?
For Commenting Yeah, it's a bit nitpicky, but you never know.
+Nikolas Powell The argument that Dr. Butler makes is not that there isn't a cultural difference in the actions of those who identify as one gender or any other, but she argues that these actions are not essential to one gender.
Forward Slash Oh, okay.
"Gender" and "biological sex" have different meanings. Many many people mean "biological sex" when saying "gender". The distinction between the two was created in 1955 (by John Money, yes THAT John Money) where previously there was none. The difference in understanding of the word is the source of much pointless conflict, going so far as creating fools who think there's no biological sex differences.
Thank you! It's so frustrating to explain the difference to idiots who can't take the time to Google the 2 separate definitions.
false, the distinction is already made by Simone de Beauvoir in 'The Second Sex' in 1949. I can not confirm she is the first to make the distinction, but it is 6 years earlier than this John Money, so I know for a fact that he isn't the first.
It helps when people call them idiots as well. Really makes people want to consider your side of the argument.
was meinst du mit mental hospital?
The definition of "gender" is gradually being changed.
However, it was originally intended to be used as a synonym for "sex".
Sex is a naughty word, so gender took its place.
Even today, gender is used to mean both "sex" and "gender identity"
So, in reality, it's both, but will likely only mean "gender identity" in the future.
whenever I hear someone say "look at this gender study, it proves 100% of either gender thinks differently", I always just say "great, now where's the control group where people were isolated to avoid mental contamination with forced ideals." the reactions are funny.
I feel Like you got a point into something
Many of those studies are made across different cultures (which lowers the probability that their cultures forced certain ideals upon them). Some studies reported gender-related behavioural differences in babies (months-old if I'm not mistaken) and even in animals (like chimps). Basically all animals have differences in gender behaviour. Why would humans be the only exception? Additionally, we know from biology that males and females have different hormone levels and that hormones influence behaviour. This already gives us reason to expect behavioural differences between genders even before checking any studies.
@@yourfutureself3392 I think you're missing the point. There is no clear definition of what a man is. If I say "I am a man" I am not saying "I am the definition of a man". If that were the case then I'd be the only man since no one else fits my definition of a man since they aren't me or it would mean there are infinite genders and therefore defining genders is inconsequential.
Slapping a label on our differences and calling it gender does nothing. We're all different and we don't need a gender to define our differences. Any gender that isn't unique to the person fails to encapsulate the person. Gender roles are unequivocally false and are just a result of sexism. A heart surgeon is still a heart surgeon regardless of their chosen gender. Gender doesn't alter a person's abilities or differences it just fails to properly label them. Why is it that we need to label ourselves and our differences? I feel it's just a result of deeper mental health problems and the forced application of a failed concept resulting from sexism. We should just toss the entire idea of gender since it does nothing.
When you realize that our social influences are a consequence of our biology
There are no gender studies with conclusions worded that poorly and my guess is that you’ve never actually spoken to anyone with knowledge of the studies, but the studies I believe you may have heard of actually do account for this by assessing gender roles across many cultures of the world, specifically focusing on isolated tribes who have not encountered any outside media. This is obvious, which is exactly why they performed them that way. No one would perform a study the way you described, that would be dumb.
Many people below me keep talking about the biological differences between men and women. Obviously he's not saying our sex organs don't exist. He's simply asking if it's necessary to prescribe specific and rigid ROLES and STEREOTYPES to us based on what's between our legs since those roles are almost entirely socially constructed. The roles change from society to society, time period to time period, and many people don't follow the roles of their time and place, nor do they really need to in order to be healthy and happy.
+Phesheya Bhembe Many people below me?
+thefriendlymadman Many comments below this one.
Phesheya Bhembe Oh you mean like literary below you lol.
+nunya baznus Genders are going to act differently, but that's not the same as having this thing where the boy is bad if he decides he wants the doll or whatever. Anyway my post was about people being like "we do in fact have penises and vaginas" as if that was what the argument was about.
nunya baznus How old are the kids?
People crying about biology, missing the entire point that this is about the Philosophy of the idea of Gender. Gender roles, and identity. Not sex.
Gender is not real.
sex =/= gender, people.
I'm not disagreeing with you on that. People take for granted gender issues of the LGBT community. Now, everyone wants to be a special snowflake. Everyone wants to be an apache attack helicopter. On respect, it's really earned, not entitled.
*****
No, the 'issues' don't exist.
im sorry but im a cup of tea, go fuck yourself (just a joke calm down)
Damn ya'll get really mad about how people identify themselves lmao
Because your brain is too smooth to understand the long term consequences of it and obviously you don’t have children.
Yesterday I was told that I'm not supposed to like philosophy because I'm a girl. I honestly had no idea how to respond.
The anime avatars aren't going to like this.
Denshuu Calm your fedora
Denshuu The comment section is their proud homeland. Enter it at your own peril!
Denshuu Umm, I don't get it, why wouldn't I?
Tol Hydra There is a stereotype that exists, not without a certain degree of good cause, of users with anime avatar pics invading videos espousing socially progressive viewpoints on gender and feminism, and talking a lot of blather.
casersatz I understand why that might be the case but he said that people with anime avatars, who (and I) are often young and _usually_ open to things being more grey, wouldn't like this. Although other than the sizable audible ad, the video was fine.
To all the people saying that gender (i.e. the association of 'femininity' with people who have a vagina and 'masculinity' with owners of a penis) is real and not a social construct, here's why you're wrong.
Our sex is our biology, and determines our hormones, genitalia, physical appearance, etc. Gender, however, is an additional layer that we as humans have equated to our sexes, and these notions of gender have been so long ingrained in our societies that they have become naturalised (a process which now is gradually becoming undone as we reassess its effects).
When you think through what is proposed by gender and the associations and roles it dictates, it's apparent how detached it really is from our biology.
What part of the female biology makes cleaning, cooking, and eating yoghurt (as advertisers love to remind us) innate to us?
What part of the male biology makes men lazy and unable to look after themselves, preferring to play Call of Duty and fix cars?
What part of our biology states that men like blue whereas women like pink? And how come in the past, and still today in countries such as Turkey and China, this is inverted?
What part of our biology states that women should cross their legs when sitting, while men should show the world their bits?
What part of our biology means that ties are for men, and necklaces for women? Do we not both have necks?
What part of our biology states that male nipples are acceptable, but female nipples are taboo and must be censored?
What part of our biology dictates that men are hairy and women are not? Our bodies grow hair in all the same places. Yet it is 'feminine' to be infantile in our hairlessness (yet we must still have long flowing locks on our heads to be proper women).
Gender, under examination, has no rationality or inherent validity. It is socially constructed.
+ohwellwhateverr I'll try to respond to this in a concise manner
Division of labor is a concept that is prominent across species. Mainly sexually dimorphic ones such as humans. The different physiology lends itself to different things. In which case you would expect the one with more strength and stamina doing more physically demanding labor, and the one with a womb and breasts nurturing the young i.e. stay at home mom that also cooks, cleans etc. this is not a hard rule (obviously) but it makes perfect sense.
I dunno bout the lazy and unable to look after themselves part, but studies have shown that males have a preference to interact with mechanical objects (like cars). When newborns were given the option to look at a face or a mechanical object, males preferred mechanical objects, whereas females preferred faces.
The blue and pink is probably something that you could argue is an actual construct, maybe I'll look into it and get back to you :)
Well crossing legs is due to women wearing dresses and not showing their vag. Pretty self explanatory. There is an argument in there about wearing dresses though, which I'm open to hearing your opinion on.
Ties and necklaces could also be considered a construct. You would have to go back to where these things originated and see the motivations behind them. I think they're mostly just tradition and I don't see anything wrong with that. (also, no one is forcing you to abide by them, but don't be surprised if you get weird looks)
Not sure I wanna go into the whole free the nipple debate right now. maybe later.
Men have more body hair than women this is easily observable. Men find smooth women more attractive because they look younger and more feminine, if you want to follow that or not is entirely up to you. I think the long hair on the head is somewhat of a social construct, because when men join military service they must cut their hair as not to obstruct any head gear and for uniformity. I think it kind of trickled into society from that. Of course though no one said you have to follow that either.
I think when some people see portrayal of men and women in media, they somehow interpret it as society trying to mandate what men and women should be. In reality, films, games, adverts are all trying to make money. They are trying to appeal to broad sensibilities while at the same time identifying a target market. I don't think they just make stuff up to put out there, they actually play to real world psychology. They have departments that specialize in that stuff. In short "art imitates life" not the other way around.
+ohwellwhateverr i can answer most of you questions ezpz. Nowdays most men are looking after themselfes, all my firends are doing their eyebrows usin skinpeelings etc. And back in the time this was litereally not needed men were working 24/7 fulltiem jobs were really fulltime jobs they had literally no time to fckin use skinpeelings etc. Why do men like to fix cars and play cod/any other game ? those are their hobbys. Men like ego shooters,because we bilogically are thristy over power, we want more and more and killing gives us this power we want. We like cars, cause bilogically we like adrenalin and havin the better shit, we can the adrenalin rushin wen we drive a superfast car and we can show off our better card if we have one. Noone says woman should cross their legs, its just that you should do it when you wear a skirt (btw i cross my legs as a guy its more comfortable,idk why this is even a prob.) Men open up their legs, because its gettin real hot between their legs and noone like sweaty balls. The color this is also simple, pink looks beautiful, thats jsut how humans think most of the time we associate it with aflowers and beauty and tons of other good things, we also associate woman with beauty, you see that it matches ? Men dont necessarily like blue , black is the "color" to go! Well im seeing woman with ties and men with necklaces, this point is just bullshit #nooffense . Nipples... ok 1. the nipples of men and women are diffrent woman got big stiffer ones and men got flat small ones and 2. Men love breasts, its a symbol for femininity #biology and women(most of the time) are not reallly interested in menbreasts, they can look good (muscular) but they never look sexually appealing. and to your last point LOOOOOOL our homons dictate that men are heairy and woman are not, its 100% biology. Testestoron pushes hair growth and men do have at least 10 times the amount of testestoron women have. So if you have less hair you are more feminin, if you have more hair you are more manly
Turpal Giskaev Bullshit bullshit bullshit. Too much bullshit for me to even waste time correcting, but in short:
1) Firstly, colours. Explain the fact that the idea of feminine or masculine colours differs between countries and culture? When I visited Turkey as a child, the stallholder shook her head disapprovingly when I pointed at a pink toy and told me that pink was for boys. And who is to say that pink is objectively beautiful? Blue is my favourite colour; does that mean I'm not a proper girl?
2) Nipples. I'm guessing you've never seen a woman's boobs in real life. Ours are flat and soft just like men's. They only become stiffer when aroused, just like with men's.
3) You mean *culturally Western* heterosexual men do. Yet in tribal parts of Africa, boobs are not societally seen as sexual, hence why women don't tend to bother covering them up. Men aren't naturally wired to find boobs sexually attractive. It is just ingrained in us through our culture, as by covering body parts up, we give them intrigue. For example, at the turn of the 20th century, a woman's ankle was seen as highly sexual, as skirts had previously always been floor-length. Now? It's amongst the least sexual parts. There's loads of psychological studies online, you should read some. Particularly interesting are the findings that say that women, even heterosexual women, exhibit more arousal by seeing sexualised photos of women than of men. Which again supports the idea that we are attracted by that which is culturally upheld as being sexual, or hidden behind clothing. Doesn't really support your argument that men are wired to love boobs, because surely women should be wired to love men's chests instead of other women's boobs?
4) Hair: Wrong again! Women get hair in all the same places as men, even our stomachs, it just tends to be finer. But nowadays it's seen as being ugly, so most girls remove it. But again, this is a cultural development. Shaving for women is forbidden in some Eastern cultures, including in Hinduism, as it is seen as being unholy. And up until the 70s or 80s, when shaving down below became mainstream, hairless vaginas were exclusively seen on prepubescent girls.
When you learn about sexuality in different cultures and time eras, it becomes obvious that many of the things we find sexual or naturally sexual are arbitrarily, not naturally, instilled in culture and upheld as common sense or fact.
ohwellwhateverr this is ridic you did not even objectivl read what i wrote. No sense in continueing this
ohwellwhateverr So you really think male and female nipples are the same. Besides not being visually the same which is very obvious. (though they are close I'll give you that, but def not the same) They are different in the way they function, one makes milk, one responds differently to arousal and is more sensitive, One is extremely more hairy than the other (I really don't know how you try to make the hair argument) Have *you* ever seen a mans chest??? How about a grown mans back or face ya know with a beard. That is a silly argument. The silliest of all of these possibly.
I myself have read many studies on gender across cultures. For example there are universals. Hip to waist ratio is a universal marker for attraction. The preferred ratios differ between what men and women find attractive. Men like hour glass shapes, women like the V shape, this is across cultures. Division of labor is another universal that just about every culture exhibits where the males do the physically demanding work and women to the majority of child care.
Don't know why people are so shocked about this. Every opinion now accepted was once eccentric. There will always be resistance to new ideas claiming that "THIS time, we've gone too far," but there was once a time when women exposing their ankles was vulgar and radical, and letting black and white people get married was also going "too far." How do we know that this is any different from that?
It's weird how people get so butt hurt over this stuff.
Akira Illogical statements hurt my brain.
Akira it's all that second-class citizen bullshit people think is in the constitution... i have a right to keep things perfectly uncomplicated the way my mama told me to... like jason vorhees
Akira Not really, To roughly 40-50% of the population "Change" and "Lack of easily definable rules" is just about the most frightening thing that can happen to a person, so any idea hinting at those things sends them into panic mode. No Judgements, it's a natural impulse for some people that, due to being such a large group of people, has been seen as a good trait to have by society(fostering that fear to extremes). Rather than crapping on them I shall thank God I don't have to deal with that fear. That known, Imagine 40% of a city was stuck inside a hole and they were all Claustrophobic.
Betsy Lee that was a nice eery closing sentiment
has undertones of depression, being in the closet, paranoia, and social anxiety
we are all so similar despite our nuanced diversity
***** Allow me to challenge you. Since you are citing what seems to be the Judeo Christian version of marriage. Explain to me why God would set a rule like that? What practicality did he have in mind?
First, the comment section is going to be insane
As soon as I saw the title I knew a **** storm is a brewin'. Enjoy the calm while it lasts.
racingboo1 Well your out of luck, comments seem pretty calm and reasonable to me, unless you dislike dissenting opinions :)
racingboo1 The amount of dysphoria and idiots here not knowing what gender is(this isn't up for debate, gender is a social construct, even studies showing animals/babies doing "manly things" are subject to intense criticism.(specifically the baby one, seriously)
Yes it is
I sexually identify as an attack helicopter. . :D
n0_punctuation That's awesome, I identify as a bag of chips.
Can I call you Apache from now on?
n0_punctuation I would like to sexual identify as a curly straw.
n0_punctuation I identify myself as a teapot, no law has a hold of me. I am not human nor an animal, they can't put me in jail
n0_punctuation search for I am Jazz. its very cool and educational :) Anyways, have you though on how you are going to transition to you attack helicopter form?
I don't get it. If a women changes sex and becomes a man because they don't feel like a women, is that also not playing into gender roles? I mean I get it for sex reasons if that women is a lesbian, but not for societal reasons. Or if a man "dresses like a women " for the purpose of dressing as a women, is that not also playing into a gender role? I mean, I am not saying I am against it, because frankly I don't give a crap what people do because they are going to be themselves regardless of my opinion, but if we lived in a world where gender didn't matter, then there wouldn't be more people being themselves rather than forcing themselves into a role? And forcing ourselves into roles is just insuring that they will never go away.
it is, and it's paradoxical. It's like one of the biggest questions in gender studies.
That is a very interesting question that I've never thought about. Thank you.
This question bugs me almost everyday. I support trangender movements and everything, but I can't undertand this, sorry if this offends anyone but it's an honest and genuine question. I am a woman, but I don't do "girly things"(whatever that means), but I am still a woman, that doesn't mean I have to force myself into a gender role, I am just myself, it doesn't matter if I use a dress or pants or if I play with dolls or cars, It's just me and I don't need to force myself or others to prove that. What is being a woman or a man? what makes you that? what is considered girly or manly and why?
"sorry if this offends anyone" awww... that's pathetically adorable. Apologizing for your thoughts because you might think differently than others and you're afraid to express it. The transgender movement completely goes against everything that progressive philosophy believes (or claims to believe) about gender roles.
i feel transgenders want to be in a different body than the one they have.
i dont really think they care what they will were as much as do i have boobs or not. that's how i understand them. i hope i am right.
after some talking with some friends i am watching gender fall a part in front of my eyes.
and i actually like girls that are not consider that girly. and stuff i might like in a relationship (it depends what the other person brings out of you, i dont have a script , even though i am psychotic enough to actually have thought of own) by my society's standards used to be considered girly like cooking for your patern for most of previous generation and thankfully are changing as ideas in mine.
and for me transgenders are one of the last examples of an oppressing society that doesnt allow to ppl to become who they are turned into by society, choices but most importantly uncontrollable factors of their own anatomy. i cannot say anything bad against the transgender movement i just hope it dies out because the idea of gender dies first.
Goddamn people, act like adults. It's just another way of thinking, and even if you don't agree with it it's good for you to see other philosophies. Take it in, accept it for what it is, critically analyze it from your own ideas, and stop getting so damned sensitive.
+acescouter1992 You speak as if the two things are mutually exclusive. I can be pissed off and my points can still be perfectly salient, just like you are being perfectly calm and intellectually dishonest.
John Madden Intellectually dishonest my left foot. I'm not saying agree with the philosophy, but to learn how to critically analyze and apply your own reasoning to a new idea, rather than shotgun it down with inflamed and insulted sentiments. Safe-spacers make me sick.
+acescouter1992
This isn't a matter of personal perspective or opinion but a matter of right and wrong. Gender is very real and is NOT socially constructed. We have biology that proves this without a shadow of a doubt, such as showing that men have a prostate that women lack, women have on average higher levels of estrogen, there exist numerous neurological differences in the brain compared to men and women, etc. The fact that none of these facts were brought up or addressed shows that the maker of the video is making an argument out of ignorance. Gender IS real and no amount of bullshit can legitimately prove otherwise...
UndertakerU2ber And I ain't saying it isn't, but that ain't my point. I'm saying folks can learn where other folks are coming from, like, objectively gender is a real thing, so what is the logic behind anti-gender arguments? Why do they feel this way, what reasoning brought them to their conclusion, and is there anything that you can learn from it? Nothing wrong with learning about an opposing opinion, hell I think it's good for you. It may be wildly philosophical, but getting that extra perspective and learning the logic behind it can only help you grow as a person. Safe-space nonsense is such bullshit.
acescouter1992
Okay I will first like to say that yes, safe spaces are complete and utter bullshit. They stifle intellectual growth and promote ignorance.
Now look, I don't mind people having different opinions than I do. I for one am a fairly religious person and take it seriously, however, when I was partnered with a self identified atheist in my philosophy class, neither of us made a fuss about it. Sure we talked about where each of us is coming from, but neither of us acted like the other had the high ground or anything like that. However, this isn't the same thing as saying that gender isn't real. It isn't a matter of opinion or personal perspective as we have science that proves that there are clear distinctions between gender in the physical world. Surely someone can say that there are some areas where gender is socially constructed, such as clothing and manners. But to say that gender isn't real or that it is entirely socially constructed is flat out wrong, no questions asked.
Biology, Gender and societal expectations define gender roles, gender roles don't define gender, you're either male, female or a hermaphrodite (being an exception to the rule). A man can still do feminine things, be gay and still be 100% male, it's only the gender roles that are different there, and people arent 45% male, 50% female and 5% mayonnaise, the idea of a spectrum of genders is just nonsense based off how people /feel/, or think they are X because they don't do Y that Z gender does, but they do A that gender B does and gender X doesnt, those are just gender roles, and I don't know if I said that properly because im tired atm, but whatever
THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINK LIKE WTF WAS HE SAYING
Biologically speaking there's also "intersex" -- people with improperly formed sexual organs or physical traits of both male and female (a hermaphrodite would be someone who has fully formed sets of both sex's reproductive organs).
Biologically it is pretty simple, if you have a Y chromosome you are male. It doesn't matter if your XX XO XXX, you are female, and if you are XY, or XXY or XYY. Biology dictates the, with want of a better word, default settings of how people behave, that's why XYY individuals have almost hyper masculine behaviour. These behaviours can be altered by environmental factors but that doesn't change your gender.
richard round
You really have no understanding of how chromosome pairing works, do you?
Please look up the following medical conditions:
Turner Syndrome, Down Syndrome and XYY syndrome, because almost everything you said about multiple chromosomes is nonsense.
Also perhaps look up the current English definitions of sex and gender while you're at it, and the biological definitions of Intersex and Hermaphrodite.
+RossOriginals no I actually have quite a good understanding of chromosome pairing. But this is a good example of why a gender binary exists. It is biological fact that humans have or are supposed to have 46 chromosomes. However individuals with the syndromes you listed above deviate from this. Does this mean that humans are supposed to have a range of 45-47 chromosomes. Does our morphology say humans have between 0-2 eyes even though there are those born with one or no eyes. Like this all it means is that hermaphrodites, should not be considered a new gender, but in case a disorder that deviates from the norm. But, does this mean that they should be discriminated against, no. I will admit that what I said about XYY behaviour was false, the source where I got my information from a while ago was apparently false, so thank you for pointing that out.
I think this is more about gender stereotypes than gender. They are two different things.
This
How do you define gender?
+David Van Drunen I realized since commenting this, that gender is nonsense. Gender is absolutely nothing! It is a pointless concept that everyone defines differently. To me, men and women aren't genders, they're sexes. If someone says a man, I think of the sex. When people use gender it seems to just mean sexual stereotypes, and there are always exceptions to stereotypes. If your a man who wants to use makeup and do STEREOTYPICALLY feminine things, you're not a woman, just a man who is more STEREOTYPICALLY feminine.
TL;DR
Gender is just stereotypes, and you shouldn't base your life on stereotypes.
Yup. People often forget the difference between sex and gender. They 'used to' mean the same thing. Sex is biological. Penis and balls, therefore male. Boobs and vagina, therefore female. Gender is whatever norm society chooses. To be honest, I feel that the narrator did a good job of explaining Butler's arguments. When you sit down and think, there really isn't any point in gender discrimination. Long gone are the days where you hear stuff like "boys are better because they're strong" or "girls should be housewives because its easier for them" and automatically accept them as gospel. Technological and economical advancements have made a lot of things a whole lot easier. I guess the main point of this whole gender argument is at the end of the day, its up to you to decide who you are, not who society chooses you to be.
Thomas Weyand Exactly my thoughts. Just be who the fuck you are
Gender and sex are very different. In this video, the philosopher deals with gender stereotypes, regardless of sex (the body part you were born with) or sexual orientation (what you want to do with the parts you were given). Associating people with their born sex is not problematic. as you can be a born male and choose to participate in gender roles typically assigned to women. Gender roles are strict and are a burden on both sexes, and we should be free to express ourselves outside of these gender roles forced upon us.
The issue is that, as is often the case with individuals not entirely familiar with trans experience, they focus their discussions on gender roles, performance, and presentation; acting as if they are hitting at the heart of trans issues.
Regardless of whether the argument is ultimately in favor of trans folk, or against them, it is fundamentally WRONG and misses a far more interesting idea: that of gender IDENTITY. The arguments often assume trans people are trans because they WANT to fulfill certain gender ROLES or forms of PRESENTATION. This misses the fact that the trans community is comprised of individuals who run the gamut in terms of performance or presentation, just as the cis population does; and that the success of treatments like HRT in reducing depression and suicidality is suggestive of some real psychological mechanism which is at work causing one to identify with a certain gender(regardless of what kind of toys you like).
"Gender" was created as a synonym for "sex", and still remains a synonym (technically) to this day, by dictionary definition.
However, definitions are altered over time as "we" see fit.
So now, gender is leaning closer to Gender Identity and drifting away from sex, as english speakers dictate.
In other words, "poop" can mean "food" as long as enough people agree that it does.
How can you begin your statement with "is not problematic" but then claim it is "strict and a burden/you should be free NOT to follow them"? Besides it IS problematic because the societal pressure to act within the conforms of your gender is very vicious. Therefore people which are biological of x sex but not psychologically is more prone to feel isolated or oppressed and less likely to attempt to voice out his discrepant sexual biological/psychological conditions.
why would people use "gender" as a synonym for "gender identity"? Gender means your sex. If they want to say that they identify as whatever they want, they should use "gender identity". It's not that hard to just add "identity" to the word gender, in fact, it makes it clearer what you are talking about and fully explains what you're actually saying. Same goes for gender roles. Just say "gender roles" or "gender identity" and don't misuse the word gender.
elephant man Indeed. I did not know those words are different, or that there is this term at all. The more you know! The bliss of the internet: although you can be dumbed down, you can also be... undumbed? I guess? well you catch my drift.
I find it extremely odd that the video largely revolved around debunking superficial societal gender roles, but never once addressed the biological traits that those roles stemmed from. It addresses the pink stereotype by saying that pink used to be a boys' colour, but doesn't mention that the reason it was a boy's colour was because red was a man's colour, and the reason for that was the association of masculinity displaying more open violence. This is true even in hunter-gatherer societies, with men doing most of the hunting. Men have more upper body strength, so are naturally built for confrontation. It seems intuitive then to suggest that if their bodies are more suited to physical confrontation, so is their brain structure. I understand you can't cover a topic as broad as gender in a 4 minute video, but the fact that there was no mention of evolutionary psychology was disappointing, and the video was so one-sided it bordered on preaching. If you're going to do a video about societal gender roles, go ahead, but don't misleadingly title it as a video on gender, and definitely don't define gender as societal gender roles. That's beyond misleading.
That's the whole point: society dictated red/pink were men's colour, but suddenly, it became's women. This is just one among several proofs that gender roles are dictated by society and not by biological traits. And besides I believe there are two 'types' genders: biological and psychological. You might biologically be a girl, but in your mind, you're a boy. And vice versa. That's where cis/trans definitions come from. If you're fine with your biological sexuality psychologically, then you're cis. Otherwise, you're trans. Needless to say, that DOES happen and is not a supposition.
Genders nowadays have a lot of people which does not fit into either due to several different reasons. However, those people are not an exception to the rule - the "gender definition system" of our society is systematically flawed, as there are TOO many cases which are exception to the rule. And as with any flawed system, we must either upgrade it for a version which actually works or thoroughly change it.
Now, to claim gender roles are NOT defined by society is in my view completely misleading. How can you believe so, assuming that gender - the role of each gender - is constantly defined by society and media?
"That's the whole point: society dictated red/pink were men's colour, but suddenly, it became's women. This is just one among several proofs that gender roles are dictated by society and not by biological traits."
You can't take one gender role and infer from it that all or even most gender roles are societal constructs. That's as flimsy a proof as generalizing an entire section of the population based on a sample size of one.
"And besides I believe there are two 'types' genders: biological and psychological. You might biologically be a girl, but in your mind, you're a boy."
You're talking about the difference between sex and gender. Sex is dictated by your chromosomes. Gender is dictated by your brain structure. Trans people have a brain structure similar to that typically expected of the gender they identify as. But this just proves that neither sex nor gender are a social construct. If there are objective, identifiable, physical differences in the brain structures of men and women, then that shows that gender is very much real and rooted in biology.
"Genders nowadays have a lot of people which does not fit into either due to several different reasons."
Wait, you've just defined two different categories of genders. Which category are you talking about here? Sex wise, you're either male or female. That's determined by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome, since the Y chromosome is a dominant gene. And if you're talking about neurology, I've just explained the evidence that mtf and fmt trans has a legitimate basis in science. I've never been able to find any such basis for a gender identity that doesn't revolve around being either male or female. Non-binary, agender, and gender fluidity all have their foundations in feminist academia, not science.
"Now, to claim gender roles are NOT defined by society is in my view completely misleading."
I never said they weren't. It's just that the roles that society dictates are as superficial as the latest fashion trends. The pink and blue colors themselves may be social constructs, but the fact that men and women constantly look for ways to differentiate themselves is definitely biological. Men want to signify their identity as men, and women want to signify their identity as women, and gender signifiers are societies way of supplying that demand. You're looking at the problem as though society is dictating everything from the top down, when in reality, it's the biological gender roles producing the societal ones as a natural consequence from the bottom up.
"How can you believe so, assuming that gender - the role of each gender - is constantly defined by society and media?"
Are you talking about the news media or entertainment media, or advertising?
If it's entertainment media, art reflects life. Gender roles are portrayed in media usually because the creator sees those roles in real life. They aren't creating them. They already existed.
If it's advertising, advertisers do market research to see who their product appeals to, and then target their advertising toward that demographic. If they make a video game console, and girls aren't interested, and if they try a pink video game console, and girls still aren't interested, then they'll advertise to boys. Again, they didn't create the gender role, they observed it in real life.
The news media is the only one I can agree with, since pretty much every news outlet has some agenda they want to push onto the masses. But as far as gender is concerned, the only news outlets I can think of are outlets like huffington post, buzzfeed, or the guardian, which are hellbent on demonizing men as oppressors and women as helpless victims. But I don't know of anyone who takes those places seriously. Even people who read those sites usually know it's clickbait horseshit The one exception to that rule is the BBC, an organization which literally takes tax money from the british public in order to churn out anti-male propaganda. But I still wouldn't call any of that creating gender-roles. It's just straight up man-hating.
Actually the idea that sex comes from chromosomes isn't entirety true. There are people with chromosomal disorders that have two Y chromosomes or a chromosome that is neither X nor Y.
Kylie Hill Aren't people with an extra Y chromosome still classified as male?
They are still classified as male, everything is a constructs to these progressivists.
Ah, so Sex is the hardware and Gender is the software. Makes sense.
*_(shameless self promotion: Check out my original narrated fiction.)_*
***** The issue that most of these commenters seem to have is being confused as to whether or not the software can run in any hardware or only in certain models.
***** now i'm no expert but for fun let me suggest a debate if you're up for it?
sex is the tupperware and gender is the flatware
i don't know where i'm going with this or have a point i would like to better understand/intuit the idea that boy and girl don't exist
i don't have an agenda or anything that just doesn't make sense to me easily
***** thetoothfulskull I suppose the question then becomes whether there is a kernel, and if there is, what os does it run ?
Lucas Grange "fuck registering and this warranty" -trans
***** Great analogy.
i dont get the point of gender. I find it complacently unnecessary, in fact, where im from, there isn't even a word for gender.
Really what country is that?
HOULWOOD Interesting...may I ask...where are you from?
I'm from Lithuania.
HOULWOOD then what does ''lytis'' mean, pardon my misogynistic google translate
TheLethlas thats referring to sex. In translation that would be the word used but thats because its the closest thing we have to gender, even if the definition is different.
I think that when discussing gender, it's important to clarify the difference between gender and sex. where sex is a persons genitals and dna, gender is more abstract and more about what you feel like you are. It's also important to point out that gender and sexuality are two completely separate things.
Exactly. Gender roles might be societal constructs, but sexs remain very real.
and the binary for both are societal constructs. saying male and female for sex ignores people who might be intersex for example and saying man and woman for gender ignores people who are genderfluid, agender, non-binary, and so much more. gender and sex are more like a spectrum than a binary.
Ava Weintzweig But I am male. How at all actually does me saying male and female ignore these people? How does me saying I have a penis and am a male ignore these people? How? When I use a word to reference a group of people, I use the specific word that represents that group. Do you expect me to first name what a certain group of people ISN'T?
jordanwalcaraz it doesn't. but saying that male and female are the only things, and that men only have penises ignores the fact that there are a lot of people that those statements aren't true for. I'm not saying that this is something that you've done, just that this is something commonly done in society.
jordanwalcaraz id highly recommend that you go check out a channel called sexplanations. they have some great resources about gender and sex.
One thing I've always wondered but never got an answer for is:
Is gender more important than biological sex?
Neko :3 but why?
In these comments: People confusing sex and gender and getting angry about it.
Let's see what "The Master" (wikipedia) says,
( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinction )
"The distinction between *sex* and *gender* differentiates *sex (the anatomy of an individual's reproductive system, and secondary sex characteristics)* from *gender (social roles based on the sex of the person)*, or personal identification of one's own gender based on an *internal awareness (gender identity)*.[1][2] In some circumstances, an individual's *assigned sex and gender do not align*, and the result is sometimes a *transgender person*.[1]"..
Well, very interesting and I agree. :-)
I mean, in the transgender case, you cannot *change your sex*, you'll always have the sex that you were born with, but you can, to some extent- if you want to and have the means to do it- to adopt social roles and secondary sex characteristics of the opposite sex.
Is gender real? Nowadays I have m/m on my passport. First is gender, second is sex. When al else fails, always go back to biology. Don't try to negate the differnce between testosterone and oestrogen. Everyting is understood through scientific, rational, thought. If my, imaginable, son would love to make 'love' with a boy; he'd be fine. Perfectly fine. A lack of testosterone.. So what? Stop defining the gap. The gap is non-existent. Be a human!! You'll be fine!! I'm more like a porn watching, rock listening, drug taking man. Or woman. Please stop defining things in a relative way. Be human, be a good human. Be the best human you can be; after this (life) it'll all be black...
Tim Jorna and yet there is a huge cohort of people who selectively "believe" in "science" when it suits them and then are "spiritual" or something when it doesn't. A scientific approach to gender would completely destroy the whole diversity and inclusion movement.
Hi, thanks for your reaction! Im not saying that a scientific approach would be best; a hollistic. I agree on everyting you say. To put it in a abstract way: if you want to be different; do your best! If you want to conform; do your best!
Tim Jorna I agree, actions are what should matter, and what should define a person. A lot of my fellow millennials just want a cookie just for being a special little snowflake.
You hit a nerve! I think you are absolutly correct. This might seem abstract but 'Being' a person is always present tense. The trick is to define yourself as a person whom defines her or himself as someone Who would be proud alllllwaaays! In 80 years I'll be death. But if i would be alive I'd be proud on myself! Whats more?
Tim Jorna Good point, but you know? the gender are real things now, and knowledging that, its easyer to aliminate those, if human were smart anyway.
Haven't we already ascertained that nothing is "real"? The point is moot, let's just move on as a society, please.
+Faal Onik Dovah Exactly, not I dont need to find a "real" job ever.
Dweliq What? ¯\(o_o)/¯
It's clear that "gender" and "biological sex" have different meanings, but it's really no surprise why they're often confused for one another. In fact, many scientific/medical textbooks have applied the same definition to both for decades until the distinction between the two was firmly clarified in 1955 by sexologist John William Money. "Sex" refers to the biological differences between males and females such as the genitalia and genetical differences. While typically harder to define in general, "gender" is the state of being male or female with adherence to social and cultural differences. For instance, "gender" can refer to the role of a male or female in society (gender role), an individual's concept of themselves (gender identity), and how they choose to express that concept (gender expression). It is worth noting that gender roles and gender expression do not exist in nature. They're social constructs that are subject to change by a variety of factors including time, culture, politics, etc. For example, in the 19th century, it was normal for women to have body hair and for men to wear dresses. Now, men must wear warm or dark colors and are given GI Joes to play with while women are expected to shave, wear dresses, and play with Barbies instead. Gender identity does exist in nature because it pertains to a person's perception of having a particular gender, which may or may not correspond with their birth sex and is the likely byproduct of both biology (nature) and environmental variables (nurture). When an individual's gender identity conflicts with that of their birth sex, they then can ascribe themselves or be ascribed by others with labels such as "transgender" or "gender nonconformist." It's not a secret why people are confused by these two words. History and willful ignorance plague any ability to advance the differences between these concepts or any concept for that matter.
(looks at title) oooooooooo flame wars
I'd say Gender is only real as the langauge we use. It's just use to convey a series of idea. That being said, we can invent a lot of languages just as we can invent a lot of gender, the only real problem is that Gender is used for classification, to simplify people into groups and would complicate things, rendering such classifications meaningless.
A nominal proclamation of its applicability to reality cannot be said to constitute a justification for its need to be thought of as existing.
I felt my heart got squeezed a little when I saw David Bowie
Yes
"Gender is the narrative we ascribe to anatomy."
That's a dang good description!
I'm just waiting to find someone in the comments saying that sexual dimorphism is a socially constructed myth....
LevittownPaIsSpecial It's also important to recognise that people do deviate from these instincts though, especially more in modern society due to the traditional evolutionary roles not being enforced in any way.
Michael Bower I'm not sure if its still there but in the article about sexual dimorphism in wikipedia, at one point, it said that the reason why men are generally 'stronger' than women (put in layman's terms) is because of social pressure.
If you checked the sources it came from some bs paper on how to evaluate sexual differences from a 'feminist' point of view. Not an scientific one, not an objective one, but a feminist one.
Toma Gomez Oh, I know. You have no idea how much it pisses me off that those are 'academic sources' in Wikipedia's eyes. Wikipedia is a useless source for anything social now.
Michael Bower I've found lots of educational stuff on sex on Wikipedia. The intersex articles are educational. I would just steer clear of Wikipedia pages on political figures as they are known to be prime targets for political opposition to vandalize.
Megalus Doomslayer For the longest time Sexual dimorphism in relation to humans was covered in things along the lines of it being a socially constructed myth. Ignoring the fact that it's inherently obvious. Such in the sticky and messy nature of the pseudo scientific articles that come out of some feminist circles. When that happened and those articles were credited as a source I lost all respect for Wikipedia.
If you're willing to put obviously false pieces of information up and lock it so it can't be edited due to it's 'controversial nature' then you don't deserve any respect.
So basically what I got from this is: We don't need to confirm to certain roles, cause technically there's no "real" rules for being a man or a woman. I like this.
The amount of salty people in the comments is making me smile.
Look at all the mad anime avatars, bad selfies, and shitty /pol/ references.
What a time to be alive.
I'm transgender and it is VERY real. Do you honestly think I would be willing to transition genders, isolating me from my family, being constantly endangering my life in the process and guaranteeing that most jobs will discriminate against me, JUST because I want to have gender roles associated with a particular gender?? Of course not, I may be depressed but I'm not insane. If I did want those things I'd just cross dress, just like how Rachel Dolezal pretended to be a race they're not in order. Crossdressers and transgender people are obviously not the same thing, so clearly that whole argument is fundamentally absurd.The whole social construction theory of gender (as opposed to the social construction of gender roles) is bs second wave radical feminists made up as a way to avoid having to deal with the reality that trans-feminists and most third wave feminists are waking up to: men and women are and think differently.That obviously doesn't mean we should have sex or gender-based discrimination outside of stuff like maternity leave, but it does mean we need to stop lying to ourselves that we are the same. Transphobic cis people (those people who identify with the gender they were assigned at birth) such as bigots and Trans exclusionary radical feminists only claim gender doesn't exist because it doesn't effect them. Its the same way that there are racist people claiming race doesn't exist as they continue to discriminate based on race. Its a tactic to normalize themselves and to de-normalize those who disagree with them.
I could chat all day but I'll let the science speak for itself:
press.endocrine.org/doi/abs/10.1210/jcem.85.5.6564
go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA293407678&v=2.1&u=s8460017&it=r&p=GPS&sw=w&asid=07fc9f2c13e03863cf3103e63b286134
go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA200507120&v=2.1&u=s8460017&it=r&p=GPS&sw=w&asid=5403b0fc07567505fbe27fe47f72021d
go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA117524890&v=2.1&u=s8460017&it=r&p=GPS&sw=w&asid=5868ae83ce42ed0e660cfaba06eca178
go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA245751475&v=2.1&u=s8460017&it=r&p=GPS&sw=w&asid=5823d0141c9f6454a2c171840339ca40
this was an awesome episode and you guys explained gender really well but I would like to point out that asexuality is a sexual orientation (or lack thereof) not a gender
Finally, a positive comment! You are spot on about asexuality, as defined on AVEN "An asexual is someone who does not experience sexual attraction". It is always good to see people out there spreading awareness.
Can we please be accepting of people without utterly subverting reality? What utter tosh.
Sexually dimorphic species with highly developed brains that tend to be structured and act like both to varying degrees.
the real question is why do people feel the need to identify themselves at all.
btw is this an american thing? i haven't notice anything like this in slovakia, nor czech republic, that's why i'm inclined to think this is an artificial issue
DakuHonoo the discussion of gender is being argued all over the world, and the definition of man and women is changing also world wide.
bromo sanovo how about being individuals with certain biological traits making us predisposed to certain behavioral patterns?
DakuHonoo
that is taken into acount, hormones do play a part in the way we behave.
this said gender altough is affected by some biological aspects is mainly a complicated construct built over the years since the dawn of history.
this can be clearly seen in history, how the definition of man and women changes, in the 50`s for example the definition of women was mainly one that stayed at home and tended the house, nowaydays this has changed, and feminity has adopted other characteristics.
the definition of man is also really different in diferent times and diferent cultures.
bromo sanovo that's why i said predisposition, and i'm sure as hell not talking only about hormones
DakuHonoo
i was jsut giving an example on biological traits.
I honestly can't think of a better example than David Bowie for the bit he played in this.
I just don't get where we as a species took a hard turn, so that this nonsense became something deemed worth debating.
When we began tolerating the aberrations in our midst instead of forcing them into conform or suffer. Or when we deemed trans people to be sane. Take your pick.
+Jeremy Huijon You mean, when did we start philosophy?
Do you think it's any more valid to debate whether a table in front of you is actually there or not?
+Jeremy Huijon It starts in the beginning of the 20th century and the Great War followed by another even greater war and the overall emancipation of everyone in every possible sense.
1:32 that's all people. Noone is 100% feminine or 100% masculine
1:06 That's not an assumption. It's very much supported by the findings of psychologists, neuroscientists, medical scientists, biologists etc. Of course those in the liberal arts tend to think they understand the dynamics of human behaviour better than the people who have studied it empirically.
Barry Gormley Hallalula.
Rusty Shackleford It just annoys me that this ridiculous notion, which is backed by no empirical evidence and in fact contradicts much of the established evidence, is still given so much credence in academic circles. To quote George Orwell: "One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool"
Nailed the timing on this one.
I might not be understanding the idea to it's fullest, Wisecrack. Is it that the term "boy" and "girl" are not a productive aspect of society and should be removed?
I'm not fully understanding this thought. Most philosophical questions presented in the past have been open to interpretation, but only in a way that advances thought on the matter. This question presented, I feel, doesn't go anywhere.
Have I misinterpreted the question?
Yasmat25y this could be because its the point where our society stands, there really hasnt been a formal decision.
the duscussion of gender is still pretty much taboo.
bromo sanovo I'd say more we punish some aspects of gender roles, yet maintain archaic attitudes because they serve others, and this causes conflict. We have learned that a woman can be part of any profession, this is great, a step forward for humanity in general. But if I told you I was a stay at home husband? The culture turns on me, because this is not "acceptable". The issue is that we maintain the notion of civility while trying to keep some archaic belifs
Joseph Hobbs
the divorce of such an ancient concept, even if false or constructed, is deeply rooted into our society, you cant expect it to complitly change from one day to the other, its a process.
I wouldn't expect it to instantly change, I'm more pointing out that many of our troubles are caused by a dual logic system. With one breath we attempt to change everyone's perceptions instantly to force a better society, and yet we are blind to other new ways of thinking because they don't correlate with the narrow perception of progress. Its a process I think is good in the time I'm living, but there are large gaps in our cultures reasoning (in my opinion)
Joseph Hobbs
binary perception has made great damage to society i agree, everything needs to be reduced into two, man and women, good and wrong, gay and straight, crime and justice.
this in my opinion it`s an over simplified view of the world that narrows our perseption and therefore narrows our minds.
i complitly agree, i think this things should be seen as a range instead of one or the other.
Gender doesn't equal role.
A gender role can mean anything you want it to be.
The only reason people believe they are is because that it's just a belief and belief doesn't always equal truth.
Beliefs change but the truth doesn't
Genders can change and roles are just beliefs.
Their was a story on NPR about a little boy in the first grade who lived in a hippie house hold where people would walk around naked. One day the kid wanted to ware barrettes to school. The mom wanted to tell him no but wanted the kid to be free. After 2 days the kid stopped wearing barrettes. The mom went to parent teacher confrence and the teacher explained what happened. This kid kept calling him a girl and you son said he was boy. Eventually he yells I'm a boy and pulls down his pants and says I have a penis. The bully says everyone has that.
Ending an episode about gender with an advert for 'IT'. Intentional...?
A video on Taoism view on masculinity and femininity would be a amazing follow up to this. Really compliments the discussion well.
Should gender exist?
Yes, Butler, it should. Just because it doesn't fit 1 person in 1000 it's not a bad thing.
founoe It doesn't fit most people to some degree or other. That's the moral of this video.
founoe It doesn't fit most people to some degree or other. That's the moral of this video.
Megalus Doomslayer
That was never said.
founoe Yea it really doesn't... girls aren't born into liking dolls and the color pink, and boys aren't born liking action figures and guns. They don't "fit" into it because of their gender, they're given these things as soon as they're born and they LEARN to like them because that's what adults tell them is right. Or some just completely reject them, I'm a girl and I never found stereotypical "girly" things to be fun while my brother did.
Trap Pepe
"girls aren't born into liking dolls and the color pink, and boys aren't born liking action figures and guns."
Wrong.
They did tests on newly borns, and there was a clear distinction girls like girly toys, and boys like manly toys.
"I'm a girl and I never found stereotypical "girly" things to be fun while my brother did."
What about the other 90% of girls that do?
"Gender is the narrative we ascribe to anatomy."
True dat.
Judith Butler never said gender wasn't real. And when she talks about the performativity of gender she isn't saying it's a construction either, but simply a cultural reflection of identity. And no one "wants" to identify as a different gender; they simply are that gender.
I personally love being a girl and even though I do not think women have to have to like certain things and men don't have to and everything like that I personally love to feel girly and when I had short hair and people thought I was a boy and would say things like "look at that boy wearing a girls top" and I would cry, because I am a girl I just wanted short hair, but I still felt feminine and like a girl.
Ugh, some people just...why do people feel like they have to guess a person's gender on sight? I know it's how everyone was raised but...it's not strictly necessary...
Yes, it would really hurt my feelings because I knew I was a girl and all my family and close friends did because I felt and wanted to be feminine- like how I'd been with long hair, every one has the right to choose who they want to identify as
People will get TRIGGERED. I guarantee it.
Ain't no rest for the triggered
Male and female is NOT something you can just choose. You can be feminine and be a male, and you can masculine and be a female. But the question of "should the distinction between girls and boys even exist" is an incredibly stupid question. There are in fact, boys, and there are girls. Sex is what's between your legs, it's written in your genes, and it's purely biological. It's the same thing as asking "should the distinction between humans and termites even exist?" it's completely irrational.
What he's talking about and you are talking about are completely different. He is describing gender, which is the stereotypes or ideas that go along with a certain sex. You are talking about sex, which is the genitals you are born with. You are right in that the question of "Is there a male and female sex" is stupid because there is obviously two clearly defined sexes. But by the same merit, his question of "Is there a boy and girl gender" is completely valid, because he is asking if society should label males and females for anything(besides their anatomy) that goes along with their sex. Because Im not him I can't say with certainty exactly what he meant, but that seemed to be his idea.
nope, but you are really close. The stereotypes are the genderroles. That is why in response to the question should boys be allowed to act like girls and vice versa butler says, that distinction does not exist. Male vs female = biologically given, man vs woman = social construct (for butler).
Actually, no. But you were almost close. The social construct is in fact the privilege given to individuals within the new parameters that modern society has crafted. Men being the strong, resourceful hunters and protectors is NOT a social construct, but a natural response to a biological inheritance of greater size and strength, meant to protect female specimens of your species, especially whilst bearing children. The stereotype of women being caregivers of children comes from their inherent ability to give birth and provide nourishment to the babies via breast feeding. Gender roles are not social constructs, rather, they are a natural response to biological phenomena.
Oh shit! Well in that case. Caitlyn Jenner is beautiful and an inspiration to us all. Down with the patriarchy, scientific fact and all who challenge or call out my delusions. Down with reason. Allah Akbar! And please don't lynch me.
Oh how I love cognitive dissonance, what are you even doing at a philosophy video if all you are willing to hear is a scientific explanation? Not saying you can't just honestly curious seeing how you seem to be lacking the critical thinking required to even make sense of who I am talking too, whether it is me saying something or whether I am quoting a philosopher and how this relates to the video.
How can gender be real if our...
Ah, fuck it.
I'm a girl but I don't wear bikinis, don't talk like a girl, I don't like dresses or skirts, I like some things that are more boyish, and I play video games because I think that dolls and ponies and stuff like that are boring and I'd have more fun watching then burn than actually playing with them.
I wanted to scroll a bit lower through the comment section but then I remembered this is UA-cam
I am going to just stick the basic biology… XY=male XX=female
Gender identity is a better term, we need to stop conflating the two.
inb4 shitstorm
good video guys
Totally off subject, but "begs the question" at (2:33) is inappropriately used. For a video about philosophy this is kind of awkward.
@2:33 *This is a rookie philosophical mistake: raises the question is the correct phrase not "begs the question" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
The first time in my life I was subjected to Judith Butler and didn't want to punch things. Thank you.
gender is not clear enough, there are biological parts and social ones
+Daniel Jackson Exactly this. Nature versus nurture isn't a versus that has only one clear winner and the other has no impact at all.
noticed that only cis dudes are whining about gender in the comment section. wut
You mean normal dudes?
Roberto Pioquinto i am a ciggy butt brain
By whining, do you mean whining about how there is infact a biological and pychological difference between genders? Or are you talking about the Social Justice Warriors?
Holy Applebutter no, talking about the cis dudes. :)
Roberto Pioquinto y
Alright. I don't want to seem unsupportive or unaccepting, but I just don't get it. Why does society today think that a man liking feminine things or a woman liking masculine things changes their gender? I'm fine with people deciding that they would be happy living their life another way, but is that even necessary? Why can't it just be okay for men and women to be uninhibited by what gender they were born with? Just because a girl doesn't like to wear makeup, that doesn't make her less of a girl. The more society encourages people to pick and choose their gender, the more we're actually enforcing gender stereotype! Now, instead of a man just deciding wear a dress, he has to "become" a woman to do so. If I'm in the wrong here, someone please explain what I'm not understanding.
In that vein, I think the idea is to rethink the way of how we define gender and assign certain scripts, rituals, performances etc. to it. Rather than saying a man has become more "feminine" because he wore a dress, we can just say that he chose to wear a dress and that the dress should not be indicative of masculinity or femininity. Clothing isn't necessarily gendered; it's the meaning that we've given them that makes dresses "for women." In my humble opinion, ideally we wouldn't have gendered products like women's clothing or men's shaving razors; they'd just be clothing and razors.
To that point, however, I think how we participate in gender roles and our gender identity are different. I can like watching mixed martial arts (MMA) as a woman, and a man can like makeup. However, it doesn't define one's identity. I like MMA, but I still identify as female.
That being said, there are those who don't feel at peace with their sex and therefore their gender assigned at birth. I'm a cisgender female and have always identified as such, so I can't adequately speak for the experiences of those who may be transgender or genderqueer. From what I've seen though, they've experienced feelings of "gender dysphoria," where an individual feels as if their physical sex does not align with their gender identity to the point of causing them mental and potentially physical anguish. A webMD article states that "the mismatch between body and internal sense of gender is not a mental illness. Instead, what need to be addressed are the stress, anxiety, and depression that go along with it."
That's my take on it, anyway. :)
Amanda Nogaki
I totally agree! Thanks for sharing.
No problem! Hope I could shed some light on the situation and help you form your opinions. :)
Thank you for being one of the few people in the world that have actual discernment. Gotta appreciate that.
To this point... I don't know, man. I'm just happy to be happy as a boy doing typical boy stuff. Beyond that, I don't really care. Do as you wish.
I was tired of looking at all those relative videos popping up online for the past few days. This is the only one I that I ended up watching to the end~ I had a nostalgic vibe and it felt more refreshing. Thanks for the information too -- Subscribed~
"plenty of people"
*.03 percent of the population*
that's 2,340,000, please oh big brain how would you refer to a group of 2 MILLION people? there are european countries that have a smaller population than that XDDDDD
@@nataliaklaudia8790 i refer to them as retards
2:54 why is "asexual" in the choices? lmao
You're mixing up gender with gender *_roles_*.
Your entire argument is 100% accurate, but it's an answer to the wrong question:
Gender _roles_ are absolutely conditioned by society, and should really be destroyed for everyone's sake, just like you said.
"Gender" itself, however, is real, and biological. It has to do with how the brain perceives itself and its instincts, and most of the time it's tied to sex. Not always, as is clearly shown by transgender people. And it's not a dichotomy, and there are points in between (nonbinary people for example), but there _are_ two (mostly alike, but with some slight differences) groups of brain structures that tend to be where most people lie.
See, a huge problem with this is that the conclusion that immediately follows from this is "gender dysphoria is exclusively caused by society", which is just not true. If there were absolutely no gender roles, and everyone accepted everyone to act how they liked, do you really think nobody would be uncomfortable with their sex? That nobody would want to undergo surgery to change their genitals?
Not everyone fits into the "man/woman" dichotomy. So let these people go with whatever they like. But most people _do_ fit into one of those groups, which means that the label is useful. The idea of groups doesn't always need to imply restrictions. You can be agender, genderqueer, nonbinary, whatever you feel you are. But if someone feels like she's a woman, isn't that her call?
The "narratives" described are gender roles. Not adhering to gender roles doesn't necessarily make you a different gender. I'm a guy who has never liked sports or been particularly interested in athletics or other traditionally male activities. As a 2 and 3 year old, I pushed around a baby doll in a pink stroller, and as a child I was more content with reading inside than playing outdoors. I just didn't adhere to gender roles, but that in no way changed my gender.
How did this channel go from fascinating introductions to philosophical concepts to 5 Rick & Morty videos a week?
Is Biology real ? Next on 8-Bit Philosophy
Oh, you shouldn't have made this. People who can't accept truth get very butthurt.
+Smashy Series troooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooll
Elbownian what
Smashy Series
I said, trooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooll
>truth
stop trying to fuck with what's worked since the beginning of mankind you fucking degenerates
Baeagon What do you mean exactly "worked since the beginning of mankind." We didn't wipe our asses with toilet paper at the beginning of mankind but we were fine without it
Dear wisecrack.. I have followed your work for a long time all your work on phylosophical breakdown of art and real life politics is fascinating ..... As an Indian I would like you to make some room for eastern mystics from India and other countries.....
Here's my Philosophy on Gender Roles or whatever you want to call it
If you think you're some special snowflake, be a special snowflake, I don't care.
Just don't come blubbering to me about all the technicalities.
Don't try to classify it into some sort of category.
Don't try to slap a bunch of words on and say you're more important than anyone else.
(and don't make fun of someone because they are different.)
Just be you
and if you love someone for being them,
and they love you back for you being you,
then it's true love
The only problems I could see are ignorant people and bathrooms
and I/we can fix the bathroom problems
It's up to you (the viewer, anyone and everyone) to treat others with respect, regardless of whatever they are
Dear 8-Bit Philosophy - if you say "this begs the question" when you mean "this raises the question", I can't take the "philosophy" part of your name very seriously. Begging the question means employing circular reasoning.
I'm so glad you guys made this video! And I'm not shocked at all to see people quickly awfulize the way the world could fall apart if we made changes to follow our emotional needs more than atavistic roles. Don't lose faith, 8-bit! You'll be remembered for your insightful theories and suggestions and intellect, which always opens the heart further!
This is too stupid. Wisecrack logic:: ""Samus doesnt do typical female things therefore gender doesnt exist""
No, shes still a female, shes still a woman, its just that her actions do not follow the typical female script. And thats ok, but shes still a female, shes still a woman.
This bandwagon has gotten way out of hand. People seem to want to adopt a certain ""there are no right or wrong answers, lets color outside the lines"" sort of mentality. Im sorry to break it to you, but sex and gender do exist.
We hail from a sexually dimorphic species. Ideally the evolutionary concept is that two specimens of opposing sexes exhibit meiosis which allows for the genetic recombination of the two individuals allowing for greater genetic diversity over the course of a single generation allowing for superior evolutionary adaptability.
Mind you, that doesnt mean that I think homo/bisexuality wrong. and yes there are MINOR examples of people not being male or female per se, (ie hermaphrodites) but this is a genetic anamoly, and a caveat, not the norm.
+aide then how do you explain sexual dimorphism? Isn't that evidence that nature intended for differences in the roles of males and females? Perhaps these differences do not need to be as drastic as society has made them, but regardless I don't think its reasonable to claim gender does not naturally exist.
+aide Sexual dimorphism is a scientific term that literally means morphological differences between the sexes of a species. Humans obviously exhibit sexual dimorphism, especially in the average size of a person of each sex. This has nothing to do with ideology, it's just a biological fact that the average human male and female exhibit morphological differences and it is not unreasonable to claim this as evidence that nature intended for different roles for the sexes. As stated earlier perhaps these roles do not have to be as drastic as they are now. Considering our way of life now is quite different from our natural state, some of these roles certainly are obsolete but they never will be completely obsolete.
+OsyenVyeter I'm not going to argue about anything you said other than when you mentioned the "let's color outside the lines" mentality. I don't see how that's a bad thing. As a punk, I'm all for being yourself and not letting any kind of authority tell you what you should be. And if you want to "color outside the lines", go for it. Expression doesn't need to stay inside the lines.
You know, John, rather good point really.
I guess what I kind of meant by that expression is the sort of ""there are no wrong answers"" mentality that society has been often putting forth.
Like, for example, during a debate about whether or not god exists. Either god exists or he doesnt, but often youll find people say things like ""hes real to me"".
The problem is that truth is not subjective and so there ARE such things as wrong answers. But society is often content with sacrificing truth/rightness for the sake of feelings.
I might have a religious relative go on some divisive religious rant and then when I debunk their claim they'll say something like """why cant you just let me believe what I want to believe?""" Again, truth matters, its not subjective and there are wrong answers.
Im glad youre Punk though, we need fewer sheeple out there. As I always say ""The more you think for yourself, the more you will thank yourself""
OsyenVyeter Thanks for explaining, that pretty much cleared my issue up.
Oh hey, it's the video that cracked my egg 8 years ago
next time on 8-bit philosophy , is race real?
If I had a penny for every gender I would have 2 pennies.
Transgender people have fought for their rights, like the fundamental one to be able to perform the gender they feel inside, not the one assigned at birth on physical features. So they need gender categories to be defined and exist. If one says that gender categories should be abolished, then it's transphobic.
Gender is not even real. It doesn't exist. And transphobia isn't real either.
God! feminist propaganda is everywhere!
Time to unsubscribe.
i know a girl who prefers sports and swords, literally, she does fencing and she's the most feminine and most beautiful girl i've ever known, i don't think your explanation of gender through activities nor the way people act and respond to things is right
There is no intellectual discussion going on in this video, none. There is no comparison drawn between theories or ideas; the whole thing is very one-sided and preachy, and it kind of spits in the face of people willing to have intellectual discussions over such things. I have lost a lot of respect for this network.
***** It is to be expected, social engineering by the far left is a real thing I tell you.
***** isnt this more a presentation of Butler's ideas?
***** Noted, then I should have unsubscribed after the takeover. I'm not a fan of pseudo-philosophy
***** I think you just don't understand the purpose of this video. Granted I'm no fan of these kinds of videos, not for the same reasons you are but because 5 minutes just isn't enough time to talk about anything substantial. But I think this channel presents the overall ideas of different philosophers. If they open up with a general question, it is always as an introduction to the work of that one philosopher. You can consider this entire channel like a philosophy textbook in 8-bit form. Which makes sense, being that their videos are so short. Still, I think 5 minutes is far too short to talk about even just one philosophers ideas. It gives you no time to go in depth into explaining what their ideas are, much less weigh the strengths and weaknesses of their ideas or offer counter arguments. So your misgivings are not unfounded, I just think largely misunderstood the purpose of these videos. These videos are not for serious philosophical discussion. They are just for people who want quick and breezy overviews of the main ideas of philosophers accompanied by cute animation.
if I had a nickel for every gender there is I'd have ten cents.
People aren't understanding the concept of gender/gender expression and biological sex. If someone feels as though they are both male and female, none, or any mixture of the things, they are talking about their gender identity, not their biological sex. Obviously they are not going to switch back and forth. What is presented in this video is the question of if we should really continue to hold onto this binary system where if you have a vagina you like or act a certain way. They are questioning whether or not to uphold the societal standards of gender-not ignore your biology, but ignore the societal mold corresponding to your genitals.
This could've been so simple...
sex is real
gender is not
The etymology: "Gender" from the root word "genus" which can be define as a biological category/type/sort used in animal classification.
unsubscribed for the shaming of ordinary, healthy gender behaviour
Retinend "Shaming"?! LOL, someone disagreeing with you is "shaming" you!? Wow.
Retinend shaming? lol
***** No. He says, parroting the crackpot lesbian, that "the RIGHT thing to do" re gender "performance" is "not to perform." That insinuates that anyone with a normal sexuality is acting in bad faith and philosophical naivete, even going so far as to say that they should be laughed at. Well I I don´t think men who are masculine or women who are feminine ought to be held out for mockery, do you? This is nothing more than the projections of bullied, sexually dissatisfied people who want to turn onto normal people the mockery they have received. Anyone with a functional sex life knows that this gender roles are part and parcel of our minds AND bodies. That´s all there is to say.
Retinend "crackpot lesbian" .... and then YOU are complaining about "shaming" ... Wow.
Retinend insinutaes... stopped reading at that exact word, because no
One thing I've noticed in discussions about sex vs gender and the "legitimacy of transgender-ness" is the complete ignorance about chromosomes. There exists XY and XX, but there are way more than just those two types (XXX, XXY, etc.). Even in terms of chromosomes there does not exist a strict binary; intersex individuals wouldn't fit into the XX/XY binary. And it's not like it's uncommon, intersex individuals are about as common as redheads. Sex is not binary.
Gender is a complicated topic on its own, but it's 100% true that sex is not and never has been binary. We've just chosen to call XX and XY individuals female and male and call intersex individuals the "outliers" and "mutations."
+ichikish you realize that XXX, XYY and everything except for XXY are variations of male or female?
XXY itself is hardly a "new gender!!" because it's just a variation of the male/female binary where they just have elements of both, and usually their reproductive organs in general are incredibly fucked up.
the problem is that men who identify as women, or the reverse, are not in fact breaking from the script. they're living by the script exactly, and often more exactly than everyone else, to a cartoonish level. they've jut chosen the other role. they perpetuate those ideas just the same. but those ideas are harmful to society and they need to go
I just puked.