Calling people with education in social sciences?

Calling people with education in social sciences! I have been told that my knowledge about the difference between gender and gender roles, and their difference from biological sex is wrong. Never mind my college degree and everything I have been taught, I am wrong.

Could you please explain these matters in a way that can get the difference across since I apparently can not? My argument, based on fact, is sex=biological fact while gender=social construction. The controversy can be found on page 24, post #232 and following from this board:askville.amazon.com/Prop-102-Arizona-pro...?requestId=18649852&page=26#db_9 Asked by e.v.

E 42 months ago Similar Questions: Calling people education social sciences Recent Questions About: Calling people education social sciences Science > Psychology.

Similar Questions: Calling people education social sciences Recent Questions About: Calling people education social sciences.

Your knowledge is absolutely right You are absolutely right in everything you say. Gender is, in fact, constructed socially (and in different ways in different societies), while sex is a biological fact. If gender were not constructed socially, then how would we explain differencs in gender roles, perceptions and expectations between societies?

My research concentrates on gender and identity formation, and everything I have discovered on the matter tends to agree with your point of view. Here are some sources for my opinion on the subject: Sources: URL1 Makbara's Recommendations Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (Thinking Gender Series) Amazon List Price: $19.99 Used from: $1.99 Average Customer Rating: 3.5 out of 5 (based on 25 reviews) Sexual Politics Used from: $25.00 .

1 I would agree with your definition of sex as a biological construct and gender as a social construct, but the edges have been blurred by different people's usages, and (probably) by the likelihood that 'biology' is seen to offer firmer definitions than 'society. ' (By the way, having read a bit of the discussion, I wouldn't rely on wikipedia as a source of expertise). However, I would offer in support of the 'societal' construct the fact that in a number of Polynesian societies there is a third gender, accepted completely normally by the community and the gender-members themselves.

They're known as fa'fafini; they're biologically male but everyone accepts that they behave more like women than men, including the way they dress; but they're not homosexual as we in the West understand the term, and almost always they have sexual relations with 'straight' men. My old statistics teacher used to say 'Never underestimate the value of a single-subject experiment. If you want to know whether rats can solve differential equations, you need only find one.

' Following along his lines, here's one piece of evidence that comes down firmly on the 'societal construct' side of the argument. Hope that helps.

I would agree with your definition of sex as a biological construct and gender as a social construct, but the edges have been blurred by different people's usages, and (probably) by the likelihood that 'biology' is seen to offer firmer definitions than 'society. ' (By the way, having read a bit of the discussion, I wouldn't rely on wikipedia as a source of expertise). However, I would offer in support of the 'societal' construct the fact that in a number of Polynesian societies there is a third gender, accepted completely normally by the community and the gender-members themselves.

They're known as fa'fafini; they're biologically male but everyone accepts that they behave more like women than men, including the way they dress; but they're not homosexual as we in the West understand the term, and almost always they have sexual relations with 'straight' men. My old statistics teacher used to say 'Never underestimate the value of a single-subject experiment. If you want to know whether rats can solve differential equations, you need only find one.

' Following along his lines, here's one piece of evidence that comes down firmly on the 'societal construct' side of the argument. Hope that helps.

2 Thank you. Generally I would not rely on Wikipedia for anything, but a simple and readily available information was provided on that site. And in all actuality, I was not the person that first referenced Wikipedia.

I find it interesting that I was accused of getting my information from Wikipedia when I only posted information from that source in response to information from that source. " replied to post #253:Incorrect : Gender includes biological distinction. See here to learn : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GenderIt is not purely social.

" This user has been banned from Askville.

2 Thank you. Generally I would not rely on Wikipedia for anything, but a simple and readily available information was provided on that site. And in all actuality, I was not the person that first referenced Wikipedia.

I find it interesting that I was accused of getting my information from Wikipedia when I only posted information from that source in response to information from that source. " replied to post #253:Incorrect : Gender includes biological distinction. See here to learn : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GenderIt is not purely social.

" .

Thank you. Generally I would not rely on Wikipedia for anything, but a simple and readily available information was provided on that site. And in all actuality, I was not the person that first referenced Wikipedia.

I find it interesting that I was accused of getting my information from Wikipedia when I only posted information from that source in response to information from that source. " replied to post #253:Incorrect : Gender includes biological distinction. See here to learn : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GenderIt is not purely social.

3 You are still limiting the definition of the word itself to the social sciences rather than general science. If you want to claim exclusivity - that's fine - but it is inaccurate because you are working within a specific vernacular rather than a general. If you refer to gender in a broad scientific journal - it is assumed to be biological.

In your specific area of study - you may mean gender as "gender identity" but outside of social sciences - the term does not hold the same connotation. I hope this clears it up for you.

You are still limiting the definition of the word itself to the social sciences rather than general science. If you want to claim exclusivity - that's fine - but it is inaccurate because you are working within a specific vernacular rather than a general. If you refer to gender in a broad scientific journal - it is assumed to be biological.

In your specific area of study - you may mean gender as "gender identity" but outside of social sciences - the term does not hold the same connotation. I hope this clears it up for you.

E.v. E replied to post #1: 4 Is there another group like this, who are of a "third gender," in India or am I recalling incorrectly? This user has been banned from Askville.

E.v. E replied to post #1: 4 Is there another group like this, who are of a "third gender," in India or am I recalling incorrectly? .

Looking for a book about psychology called The Shell People, I think," "Here's a tricky one.. calling all computer smart people.. read details.........." "do any scholars suspect that the concept of empiricism used by physicists might not be ideal for the social sciences" "difference between social psychology international version and us version" "WARNING: This question is guaranteed to offend and to get people calling each other names! " "Why don't people appreciate the work of Social Workers? " "Shouldn't Obama be Calling on Fellow Democrats Rather Than the American People in General?

" "Calling all people in Maryland! " "Are there any rewarding jobs for people graduating with a BS in psychology? " "in the realm of Education Psychology, where can I find info on studies/research on current curriculum taught in schools?

Looking for a book about psychology called The Shell People, I think.

Here's a tricky one.. calling all computer smart people.. read details..........

Do any scholars suspect that the concept of empiricism used by physicists might not be ideal for the social sciences.

Difference between social psychology international version and us version.

WARNING: This question is guaranteed to offend and to get people calling each other names!

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.