|
OwlFancier posted:they are Bruce Reimer's case presents another challenge to that view. His penis was obliterated by a surgical accident at the age of 6 months, and due to a prevailing belief in the socialization model, doctors decided that the easiest way forward was to remove the testes, reassign him as female and raise him accordingly. Dr John Money, the presiding psychologist, declared the experiment a success and used it to forward his theories of gender identity, however that never happened and Reimer later in life said that he had always internally identified as male. There are a lot of things in gender roles that are purely social or cultural, but gender identity itself seems to be something deeper and difficult to square with the idea of a purely social gender.
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 04:46 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:just because we don't have a social construct of gender that fits all cases, or is often incorrect, doesn't mean that the idea that gender is socially constructed is incorrect. it just means humans are imperfect and often wrong or express flawed ideas. your argument is like saying that science doesn't know everything yet, therefore science can't know anything
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
I think that voluntary human extinction is a better endgame than government rape personally.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
Kit Walker posted:Paul Ekman is a researcher who wrote a lot of fantastic books about emotions and how we express them, and it's pretty laughable to hear anyone talk about how we'd be better off without emotions or without expressing emotions. We'd never get anything done, and the people who are already at the bottom of the ladder would get hosed over even harder. Anger and sadness have done a great deal to get us where we are, socially. Every emotion has its place and use.  Nobody would actually be happy though, because that is not a rational use of neurotransmitters.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2015 16:15
|
|