• stoneparchment
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Two takes:

    1. You are right that we don’t need to reinforce an essentialist view of sex or gender for it to be valid, and every time I write about the biology behind the social construct I cringe a little because I feel like I’m reinforcing the idea that we do. Still, many people can start with the reality that sex and gender is a spectrum on the biological side and then learn more about the social side. I think the cost of framing it like this is ultimately worth it

    2. I absolutely disagree that the circumstances I mentioned are abnormal. They are thousands of steps away from what you are mentioning. These cases extend into the natural kingdom, including other animals (see: Joan Roughgarden’s Evolution’s Rainbow), and they constitute valid evolutionary reproductive and social strategies.

    Just as I need to be careful when explaining the biological basis of sex and gender to avoid reinforcing the idea that “you’re only valid if we find the queer gene”, you need to be sure you don’t have internalized bias about the relative “naturalness” or validity of these alternative strategies!