B-b-but gender is a social construct

We never said sex's are the same. We recognize there is a difference between dicks and pussies, and with that comes differences in hormones and other physical attributes.

What we are saying though, is that on a mental level, there is no difference in terms of things like cognitive ability. While women on average are worse at maths than men, this is because of the material conditions they grow up in. Both male and female brains are the same at birth, but different at adult good. As hormones only effect sexual drive, mood and physical development, it means the only factor that can be causing this change from birth to adult hood are material conditions.

We change the material conditions, we effectively eliminate genders..

Look, another gender = sex thread!

...

Man, this got stale after the 3rd season.

How does that have anything to do with you not being a bourgeois, wedge-issue policeman?

Good thread.

Except nobody (inb4 cherrypicking) ever said human males and females are identical, faggot. But men and women being different doesn't change the fact that most differences between men and women are socially constructed – physical strength is the exception, not the norm.

Wew.

...

There is something called Saging lads, fill the email field with sage and you wont bump shit threads anymore. keep up the quallity of the board lads by saging.

...

please prove that after puberty there are no average differences between male and female brains that can't be explained by sexual dimorphism

Please prove that biological males and females have the same average IQ after puberty

If they do not, then please explain why without pointing at outliers as the cause of this IQ difference

prove it. I'm not making one assertion one way or another, on other faculties, but there's no reason to assume that men and women are genetically identical on a mental level.

You're making the positive claim, that they do effect it, so the burn of proof falls to you.

I'm just saying hormones dont effect cognitive ability, which is a negative claim.

Men are physically superior, though.

You say that something is not the case you do indeed have a burden of proof.

I want to know how you were able to come to the conclusion that males and females have no mental differences after puberty.

Please look up burden of proof fallacy

webmd.com/balance/features/how-male-female-brains-differ

It's pretty well established, buddy.

...

Not only the environment, but also the environment influence over the thousands of years before, which is influencing the genetic information.

The environment would influence in said person how the neural network is connected. How the blood flow is determined is based on other things, since the blood vessels are there before the neurons interconnect.

Those who understand diamat and its description of change and progress never subscribe to such naive interpretation.

...

?????????

Do you have anything besides reductionism to add?

gender is literally to refers to a "social construct", that is society's brainwashing of what different sexes should do.
if you want to talk about biology, there's a word 'sex' for it.

Nope.

So a social perception of gender is the only reason men have historically worked to support a household while women bore and nurtured children?

Yes and no.
We live in societies where hard manual labour was necessary, and thus males, because of their sex were delegated to this role. An indentity was formed around this, called "gender".

There's a lot more to gender though, like what you're supposed to wear, what haircut you can have, what jobs you're allowed to do regardless of ability ect.

High level athletes have to make sure they are in peak physical condition and thats difficult when you are changing your gender through drug therapy.

Case in point: Transwoman don't make up the entirety of sports teams where it is allowed. If the advantage was as extreme as these retarded right wing websites make it out to be, cis-women should have been made obsolete. Hell the one's that are there perform at an average level at best nypost.com/2013/10/13/transgender-female-mma-fighter-loses-by-knockout/

Wtf does this even have to do with leftypol? Sage

Maybe trans women are a very small portion of society.

Maybe men don't want to live a lie just to dominate a women's sports league.

You might as well bundle all of that into culture rather than creating another designation for it. The minutiae of gender roles changes dramatically from culture to culture, but overall, there are a lot of similarities.

Trannies are still a very tiny, not extremely socially acceptable minority as it stands. Give it time.

So, whats the problem? If there aren't that many of them and men are unlikely to go through such physical and mental trauma to win a sports game, then why does anyone care?

What is with pol/ and slippery slopes? And more importantly, who cares?

Because gender is a speciffic subset of culture much like, say, caste or religion is.

IQ is mostly environmental (i.e. education, living standards, etc.). The fact that there are differences in the average IQ doesn't mean these differences aren't socially constructed.

There's no reason to assume any difference, as well, but assuming no difference is a more neutral position than assuming there are innate differences in cognition between men and women.

In any case, stormfaggots, it wouldn't matter if there were as many innate biological differences between men and women as you claim, because even then gender roles would be socially constructed – unless these roles arose naturally without any societal pressure, which is not the case.

historically they were synonyms though. Feminists started playing with the definitions.

You are brining up 19th century understanding of how men and women operate physically bucko. you are absolutely the one making the assertions.

You haven't even demonstrated why anyone should care.

Pic heavily related.

Same goes with this whole fucking thread.

...

Look at the evidence for biological differences here:

That comic is very very clever

See
Differences between the sexes are evidenced, but generally not significant, with most of the meaningful differences being physical and irrelevant to one's ability to contribute socially. Even in manual labor work, a machine will outperform even the strongest man.

Also, different does not mean better or worse: what makes socjus whining about soggy knees is that female contribution to the sciences is, in fact, already prominent. One of the best sources for gender differences in neurology was written by a woman: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_F._Halpern

...

Also, I'd like to add that bigger differences technically exist in race (at least in psychology), but empirical, not statistical evidence for these differences is virtually nonexistent, despite a plethora of evidence of the cognitive detriments of single-gene disorders.

Though the spergs at TRS would just say these peer reviewed papers are j00 liez.

k.
What does this have to do with politics again?

You fail to realize that sexual dimorphism is not caused by upbringing, but is a biological result of evolution.

"As a whole, girls outperform boys in the use of language and fine motor skills until puberty, notes Denckla. Boys also fall prey to learning disabilities more frequently than girls. "Clinics see a preponderance of boys with dyslexia," Denckla tells WebMD. ADHD also strikes more boys than girls. The symptoms displayed by girls and boys with ADHD differ, too. Girls with ADHD usually exhibit inattention, while affected boys are prone to lack of impulse control. But not all differences favor girls."

So both sexes have advantages and disadvantaged. Why we are even talking about intellectual capacity in a sports thread is beyond me. Why we have a sports thread on leftypol is also bizarre.

The study that the user posted it could be a number of factors that don't involve genetics, such as upbringing, hormones, brain structure, fetal development etc.

Again, see