• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is the difference between men and women? Is it biological, cultural, or both?

BrotherFease

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2019
Messages
5,606
Reaction score
3,663
Location
Western New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Another poster kind of, sort of, made a thread about this, but framed it in a condescending fashion. Before you my title question, consider the following information:

1. Before the 20th century, we defined men and women in western, non-Native American society as penis vs. vagina. In the 20th century, we discovered sex chromosomes and found 6 different potential pairs.

2. We have intersex people. They were both with both genitals and can either have XX or XY chromosomes. There are even people who were born with XY chromosomes, but have a vagina. If we purely define men vs. women based on "inter-plumbing" concepts, then how do we categorize people with alternative biological bodies?

3. How does transgender, non-binary/two-spirit fit into the equation? These are people who are scientifically have an unaligned body and mind. Study after study have shown that transgender people have a different brain composition than a typical male or female brain.

4. If you were to ask somebody to draw a picture of a man and woman, would the picture be about culturally differences (appearance, activities, emotions) or about genitals?

5. Statistically speaking, transgender, non-binary, and intersex people make up less than 1% of the U.S population.

There's no easy answer here. It is a philosophical question for the most part. I can see people arguing "biological", but with allowing exceptions for the small minority.
 
Another poster kind of, sort of, made a thread about this, but framed it in a condescending fashion. Before you my title question, consider the following information:

1. Before the 20th century, we defined men and women in western, non-Native American society as penis vs. vagina. In the 20th century, we discovered sex chromosomes and found 6 different potential pairs.

2. We have intersex people. They were both with both genitals and can either have XX or XY chromosomes. There are even people who were born with XY chromosomes, but have a vagina. If we purely define men vs. women based on "inter-plumbing" concepts, then how do we categorize people with alternative biological bodies?

3. How does transgender, non-binary/two-spirit fit into the equation? These are people who are scientifically have an unaligned body and mind. Study after study have shown that transgender people have a different brain composition than a typical male or female brain.

4. If you were to ask somebody to draw a picture of a man and woman, would the picture be about culturally differences (appearance, activities, emotions) or about genitals?

5. Statistically speaking, transgender, non-binary, and intersex people make up less than 1% of the U.S population.

There's no easy answer here. It is a philosophical question for the most part. I can see people arguing "biological", but with allowing exceptions for the small minority.
How many people have an abnormality like, and extra finger, toe, or are born with out a limb? I'd say that happens but I wouldn't call it normal.
 
Another poster kind of, sort of, made a thread about this, but framed it in a condescending fashion. Before you my title question, consider the following information:

1. Before the 20th century, we defined men and women in western, non-Native American society as penis vs. vagina. In the 20th century, we discovered sex chromosomes and found 6 different potential pairs.

2. We have intersex people. They were both with both genitals and can either have XX or XY chromosomes. There are even people who were born with XY chromosomes, but have a vagina. If we purely define men vs. women based on "inter-plumbing" concepts, then how do we categorize people with alternative biological bodies?

3. How does transgender, non-binary/two-spirit fit into the equation? These are people who are scientifically have an unaligned body and mind. Study after study have shown that transgender people have a different brain composition than a typical male or female brain.

4. If you were to ask somebody to draw a picture of a man and woman, would the picture be about culturally differences (appearance, activities, emotions) or about genitals?

5. Statistically speaking, transgender, non-binary, and intersex people make up less than 1% of the U.S population.

There's no easy answer here. It is a philosophical question for the most part. I can see people arguing "biological", but with allowing exceptions for the small minority.
Simple. Men are adult human males women are adult human females. Males fertilize females and females gestate offspring.

It is biological and this is the case that cross a wide variety of vertebrates, that are mammals particularly other primates.

Culture sociology and history have absolutely nothing to do with it.

There are some exceptions with regard to a few reptiles that have been able to reproduce prosthetogenically and fish and amphibians that are able to change their sex.

If human beings were reptiles amphibians or fish Maybe we could blur the lines a little bit but we can't cuz they're not.
 
How many people have an abnormality like, and extra finger, toe, or are born with out a limb? I'd say that happens but I wouldn't call it normal.
Not sure what you're trying to say/prove. Does this mean an "abnormal person" couldn't be classified as a real person or not enjoy the same rights as the majority? Transgender, non-binary/two-spirit, intersex, and people with "alternative sex chromosomes" only represent a a very tiny portion of our society. How would you classify those types of people? Obviously they do not fall under a traditional definition. In other words, should there be a third or fourth category.
 
Another poster kind of, sort of, made a thread about this, but framed it in a condescending fashion. Before you my title question, consider the following information:

1. Before the 20th century, we defined men and women in western, non-Native American society as penis vs. vagina. In the 20th century, we discovered sex chromosomes and found 6 different potential pairs.

2. We have intersex people. They were both with both genitals and can either have XX or XY chromosomes. There are even people who were born with XY chromosomes, but have a vagina. If we purely define men vs. women based on "inter-plumbing" concepts, then how do we categorize people with alternative biological bodies?

3. How does transgender, non-binary/two-spirit fit into the equation? These are people who are scientifically have an unaligned body and mind. Study after study have shown that transgender people have a different brain composition than a typical male or female brain.

4. If you were to ask somebody to draw a picture of a man and woman, would the picture be about culturally differences (appearance, activities, emotions) or about genitals?

5. Statistically speaking, transgender, non-binary, and intersex people make up less than 1% of the U.S population.

There's no easy answer here. It is a philosophical question for the most part. I can see people arguing "biological", but with allowing exceptions for the small minority.

I was trying to separate social stereotypes from biological sex. The transgender movement does NOT separate these things. The social stereotypes are traditional, and based on the fact that females have babies. Those traditions no longer have to be followed. So you could be a man in a typically female career, and wear typically female clothes, if you want. You don't have to try and turn yourself into the opposite sex. Just be whatever you feel you are.

My point of view is liberal and modern, but the transgender point of view is stuck in old stereotypes.
 

What is the difference between men and women? Is it biological, cultural, or both?​


Well to answer such a question you would have to be more specific because the answer changes depending on the question.

THeres lots of science, facts to go around depending on what is being asked.

It can be biological if speaking of sex
it can be many things speaking of gender
it can also be many things speaking of culture, heck some cultures still few woman as lesser etc

But whatever the question is, id stick to facts since the question alone will trigger some of the more unhinged bigots
 
The difference between male and female is very biological. Gender roles are social constructs but gender is very biological, both our genitalia and our psychological gender identity.
 
Not all women dress the same. Not all men dress the same. I suggest that by decorating the body differently, and of course hiding the genitals, everyone expresses a different gender from everyone else.
 
Men usually don’t grow up until 30. Women are about ten years ahead of them.

That's not necessarily good. The stage of "grown up" that either of them has at 20, is rather inadequate for the rest of life.
 
Strictly biological. But it's not just the sexual organs, it's a lot more than that.

"trans", "binary" and so on, do no exist for real, they're either male or female that for reasons that we do NOT KNOW OR UNDERSTAND CURRENTLY don't feel comfortable with their biological sex and pretend to want to somehow change their sex to the opposite one - which is currently impossible! If they undergo surgery or hormone treatment, their current sexual organ will cease functioning(or will be removed completely) and a functioning sexual organ of the opposite sex cannot be assigned for real, so they'll end up mutilated(castrated/neutered), falsely claiming for ideological purposes that they are "trans" (the whole idea that there's something called "gender" different from "sex" is pure idiocy)
 
The difference between male and female is very biological. Gender roles are social constructs but gender is very biological, both our genitalia and our psychological gender identity.

You are confused. How is psychological gender identity different from social gender stereotypes?
 
Thia is all theory and most based off of the bible or laws of the land but from my understanding, I think the difference between women and men is mostly cultural or societal. I think a person's sex can be very complex, along with many variations of chromosome combinations. Some people can be born with mixed genitals or can mature in very unique ways. Some people might not ever mature at all, where there hormones don't activate while in adolescence.

Some societies value people who can produce offspring, for population reasons I suppose. Some societies need people for labor, armies, and inheritance. Some societies would benefit from protecting individuals who can produce offspring. Out of all the possible sexes that can be born,some societies label the sexes that can produce offspring as "women."

A society's future can depend on their population of women. For instance, a society with a small number of women might not be able to produce enough children for the society's future needs, especially since a child takes about 6 months to come from the womb. Combine this with the fact that the child will need to survive about 18 years in order to be beneficial for labor, armies, and inheritance. Our country has tried child labor and it wasn't really a good thing: I think it was endangering, defecting, and killing children at a growing rate. Surviving 18 years as a child can be difficult when considering viruses, predators, and that children are generally more vulneranle than adults.

Whoever can not produce children are deemed to be "men."

Now people can't actually just visually discern if a sex can produce offspring, so I guess some societies just assume that individuals who are born with no penis can produce children or should be labeled "women." And I guess that assumption is pretty accurate, though some women are barren.

There could be a better difference between the two genders, but I believe gender is a "social construct" or something created by society. So if there is another bigger difference, it would likely have to be related to a societal function or purpose. Some people may say that men are stronger than women, but this is not always the case. And if this was the case, then I guess disabled people, especially those born with a disability, would be its own gender since disabled persons have physical limitations that make them weaker than nondisabled persons.
 
I was trying to separate social stereotypes from biological sex. The transgender movement does NOT separate these things. The social stereotypes are traditional, and based on the fact that females have babies. Those traditions no longer have to be followed. So you could be a man in a typically female career, and wear typically female clothes, if you want. You don't have to try and turn yourself into the opposite sex. Just be whatever you feel you are.

My point of view is liberal and modern, but the transgender point of view is stuck in old stereotypes.
Incorrect. You apparently have misinformation on transgender individuals. This is why people are calling you out. When you don't understand concepts, it's hard for you to comprehend what a trans person could be feeling and their perceptive of the world.

The word "transgender" means movement from one gender to another. In other words, movement from ones assigned gender to ones natural gender. It doesn't mean moving from one sex to another. Those would be "transsexuals".

It is important that we separate the concept of gender vs. sex. Transgender people are well-aware of their biological sex. They are arguing (and the science) is that some people are psychologically one thing, and biologically another. More over, neurological science has consistently shown that transgender people have brains shaped differently than a typical male or typical female brain.

You have also haven't grasp the concept of gender dysphoria. It has nothing to do with bullying or "parental push" or stereotypes. We're talking about the discomfort between what the brain says vs. what the body says.
 
Incorrect. You apparently have misinformation on transgender individuals. This is why people are calling you out. When you don't understand concepts, it's hard for you to comprehend what a trans person could be feeling and their perceptive of the world.

The word "transgender" means movement from one gender to another. In other words, movement from ones assigned gender to ones natural gender. It doesn't mean moving from one sex to another. Those would be "transsexuals".

It is important that we separate the concept of gender vs. sex. Transgender people are well-aware of their biological sex. They are arguing (and the science) is that some people are psychologically one thing, and biologically another. More over, neurological science has consistently shown that transgender people have brains shaped differently than a typical male or typical female brain.

You have also haven't grasp the concept of gender dysphoria. It has nothing to do with bullying or "parental push" or stereotypes. We're talking about the discomfort between what the brain says vs. what the body says.

Show us the neurological science that says a transgender brain is shaped differently. I found just the opposite.

There is no difference between gender identity and social gender stereotypes. It is a social stereotype that women wear dresses. In ancient times, both sexes wore dresses. So you are telling me the desire to wear a dress is something biologically determined somehow by the shape of the brain. Just ridiculous.
 
Women live on an emotional level, men live on a practical level.
 
Show us the neurological science that says a transgender brain is shaped differently. I found just the opposite.

There is no difference between gender identity and social gender stereotypes. It is a social stereotype that women wear dresses. In ancient times, both sexes wore dresses. So you are telling me the desire to wear a dress is something biologically determined somehow by the shape of the brain. Just ridiculous.
Interesting. I just typed in "transgender brain" into google, and came up with at least 7 different studies. Here's one.

 
Not all women dress the same. Not all men dress the same. I suggest that by decorating the body differently, and of course hiding the genitals, everyone expresses a different gender from everyone else.
So gender is just clothing? Why would there be a need for therapy and hormone replacement and surgery if it's just clothing
 
Interesting. I just typed in "transgender brain" into google, and came up with at least 7 different studies. Here's one.

The concept of brain sex differences is highly debatable. Further it's likely the case that there isn't a distinguishing structure in the brain between males and females.
But as a neuroscientist long experienced in the field, I recently completed a painstaking analysis of 30 years of research on human brain sex differences. And what I found, with the help of excellent collaborators, is that virtually none of these claims has proven reliable.

Except for the simple difference in size, there are no meaningful differences between men’s and women’s brain structure or activity that hold up across diverse populations. Nor do any of the alleged brain differences actually explain the familiar but modest differences in personality and abilities between men and women.

 
The concept of brain sex differences is highly debatable. Further it's likely the case that there isn't a distinguishing structure in the brain between males and females.
Never heard of Neutrosciencenews.com. Not sure what they mean by "recent studies" or if this is a credible news source. But if you google transgender brains, they literally have over 10 studies on the issue -- all dated within the last 3 years. They have noticed there's something structurally different with a transgender brain compared to a typical male or female. And btw, the studies happened with credible organizations. They are .org and .edu, not .com.

Even if you throw away all the studies from credible sources out the window, it is seems pretty "no kidding" that somebody who is experiencing gender dysphoria is experiencing it because their brain and body do not align. You have to think to yourself "Why are some people experiencing a disconnect?" We see people know they are transgender before they enter school.

Here's some more to chew on:


 
So gender is just clothing? Why would there be a need for therapy and hormone replacement and surgery if it's just clothing
Strawman alert. Nobody is arguing gender is "just clothing". It has to do with expression and behavior tendency. We can hopefully agree with the concept of: Genitals don't determine our sense of style and personal pronouns.
 
Never heard of Neutrosciencenews.com. Not sure what they mean by "recent studies" or if this is a credible news source. But if you google transgender brains, they literally have over 10 studies on the issue -- all dated within the last 3 years. They have noticed there's something structurally different with a transgender brain compared to a typical male or female. And btw, the studies happened with credible organizations. They are .org and .edu, not .com.

Even if you throw away all the studies from credible sources out the window, it is seems pretty "no kidding" that somebody who is experiencing gender dysphoria is experiencing it because their brain and body do not align. You have to think to yourself "Why are some people experiencing a disconnect?" We see people know they are transgender before they enter school.

Here's some more to chew on:



The gender brain differences are debatable if you don't want to discuss it don't present it on a discussion forum.
 
Strawman alert. Nobody is arguing gender is "just clothing". It has to do with expression and behavior tendency.
it was a question. Questions aren't strawman fallacies.

So gender is just expressing and behavior tendency? Why do we need therapy, hormones, and surgery?

Before you squeal about a strawman, it isn't a strawman I'm asking you a question. I'm not misrepresenting your position.

I have no idea what all of this is if you are going to speak with authority on it, I am going to ask you questions.

We can hopefully agree with the concept of: Genitals don't determine our sense of style and personal pronouns.
People normally don't use pronouns it's how others refer to them. You don't get to dictate other's speech.

You accused me of a strawman when I asked about clothing. Now you are stating style is relevant, are you referring to hair style?

Again just a question not a misrepresentation.
 
Never heard of Neutrosciencenews.com. Not sure what they mean by "recent studies" or if this is a credible news source. But if you google transgender brains, they literally have over 10 studies on the issue -- all dated within the last 3 years. They have noticed there's something structurally different with a transgender brain compared to a typical male or female. And btw, the studies happened with credible organizations. They are .org and .edu, not .com.
I'm not really interested in how you cherry pick what sources your accept and which ones you don't.

I'll normally never present sources because it doesn't matter if it goes against an antecedently held belief it's magically discredited.

You don't want a debate you want to preach.
 
Or a woman. What does it mean to be one gender or the other. Aside from physical and reproductive differences, what does it mean to be male or female?

In almost every known human society, males are the warriors and hunters, and females gather plants and take care of their babies. There are obvious physical reasons for this.
Even historically speaking that hasn't always been true. Even during the Medieval era, Joan of Arc was a peasant woman who became a military leader, though it would've been extremely rare.

There are also plenty of ancient female rulers who held quite a bit of political power.

In our modern society, these traditional roles have evolved. Men have a tendency to go into certain kinds of work, and women generally prefer other kinds. But now it is acceptable for men to be nurses and for women to be construction workers, although it is not very common.

Are we born with these preferences, or are they mostly learned from observing others? A little girl sees what her mother, sisters, female friends, all like to do and she may imitate it. And boys may imitate their fathers, brother, friends, etc.
That wouldn't explain where it came from to begin with, though. So even when they are "learned", they're merely learned from things that were already pre-existent to begin with.

I'd argue that the vast amount is genetic or inherent in some form, and that "culture" itself is something of a fictitious and imaginary concept to begin with - in reality, there's no such thing as "culture" beyond what is simply a manifestation of nature - much as how the "culture" of an ant colony (which can be complex and be compared to large human cities complete with plumbing and irrigation systems) is nothing more than the natural manifestation of said beings.

Should this little boy be allowed to live his life as a girl, so he can do and wear the things he likes, without worrying about being judged by the bullies? And if he does live as a girl, what happens when he becomes a teenager and starts looking like a male?
There's no rationale behind forcing a boy to "live as a girl" simply because he likes something which is "stereotypically" associated with women. (When in reality, there are plenty of men who are often considered among the best even among hobbies or interests associated more with women, such as cooking and the large number of male professional chefs).

Unless by the same rationale a girl should be forced to "live as a boy" if she wants to wear jeans or play sports - that sounds rather primitive and barbaric.

Plus, if anything trying to "transform" a boy into a girl or vice versa would bring about a lot more bullying than simply letting them have a few "girlly" (or "boyish") interests. People who identify as trans have about 5X the suicide rate of normal people.

If society were more tolerant of variations in social gender roles, then maybe gender dysphoria would not occur.
The notion of "tolerance" that you're asserting seems rather histrionic and unrealistic. In the real world (beyond may the lowest common denominator of GED dropouts, socially-impaired losers, and other freaks who remain emotionally-stunted in junior high school for their entire "adult" lives) a man is admired if he's successful at anything - whether it's sterotypically "macho" or not - such as a professional career in singing, acting, dancing, or culinary pursuits. Just as a woman who is successful in sports, the business world or other endeavors is. Even most people who may have done some "bullying" at some time in their young lives eventually grow out of that as well.

You're basically just given socially worthless and defective individuals more pretense of having a "say" in the matter than they actually do. (Not to mention that your references to the "1950s" seem somewhat inaccurate and not based on deeper intellectual understanding of the culture and it's influences).
 
Back
Top Bottom