587

Science is more like a conversation. (mander.xyz)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

106 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] shneancy@lemmy.world 34 points 5 months ago

I know right? It baffles me how transphobes use "science" to be transphobic, like Sir/Ma'am, where in the chromosomes is it written "woman" or "man" or any of the stereotypes attached to those words. We made that shit up, we looked at what was there and then added meaning to it that wasn't there. We interpreted the data according to our current age's biases. Sure those wiggly things usually determine the parts you're born with, but where in those parts is it written that women are soft and belong in the kitchen?

If you were to do some unethical science you can even add/block hormones that go into the fetus during its development for it to develop bits that it wouldn't normally. Hell, you can do that well after birth and new features will develop because human bodies are rather "customisable"

sorry rant over, I don't often get to talk about this from this perspective because getting into the intricacies of subjectivity of science in regards to how human beings and our languages are flawed is a bit too advanced for the average bigot

[-] frezik@midwest.social 13 points 5 months ago

Or if you want a shorter version, "circle the part of the chromosome where it says men hold the door open for women". There are obviously differences between what's written in genes and the billion little social rules surrounding gender. It makes sense to have different terms to differentiate biology from social rules, and "sex" and "gender" can do that just fine.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

A person's sex is science, but their gender is a social construct. I sometimes wonder if trans people would even be a thing if there were no socially defined gender roles (or assumed gendered language) and people could just be who they are. I suspect there would not be as there wouldn't be anything to be "trans" from.

[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 21 points 5 months ago

A person's sex is science, but their gender is a social construct.

Even sex is not the black and white dichotomy most people make it out to be. The way we define and dictate someone's sex isn't reproducible for everyone. The intersex population is larger than what most people assume, and can vary in ways that defy the way we normally evaluate sex. It can range from someone having different chromosomal pairings, to having a varied arrangement of secondary sexual organs.

Anyone saying that someone's sex is scientifically dependent on "x" is either ignorant, or academically dishonest.

[-] yetiftw@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

arguably science itself has been constructed in a social context ie a social construct

[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 7 points 5 months ago

It is definitely limited by the cultural understanding of linguistical norms. Because the language we utilize in the methodology predates it, the language itself can limit most people's conceptual understanding of whatever topic you are utilizing the methodology on.

Accurate communication is hard.

[-] yetiftw@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

yes thank you leto ii

[-] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

Trans people would still be a thing without socially defined gender roles. Even without gender, my sex was still wrong - my brain still told me, in times like trying to get comfortable to fall asleep, that my boobs weren't supposed to be there.