Instigator
Points: 3

Is gender a social construct?

Voting

The participant who scores the most points is declared the winner

The voting period will end in:
00:00:00:00
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Science
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two months
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Points: 42
Description
No information
Round 1
Published:
Genders is not a social construct, it's biological. In fact, many studies shows that the brain looks different in males and females. And science also has proven that chromosomes does determine someone genders. And that fender and sex are retaled to each other. In conclusion: No, gender is not a social construct.

Srouces:

Published:
== Aff ==

Biological Sex Vs. Gender
The distinction between sex and gender can be found in their definitions:

  • Sex: "The structural and functional characteristics of a person or organism that allow assignment as either male or female; sex is determined by chromosomes, hormones and external and internal genitalia (gonads)." [1] 
  • Gender: "refers to the socially constructed characteristics of women and men – such as norms, roles and relationships of and between groups of women and men. It varies from society to society and can be changed" [2] 
Con conflates these terms.  Whilst it is true that "sex" is not a social construct, the same cannot be said for "gender"; social factors are what makes these two notions distinct.  



== Rebuttals ==

Quite simply, Con's argument highlights a "biological difference" between males and females.  As aforementioned, biological determinations and characteristics pertain more accurately to "sex", not "gender".  Therefore, Con's argument ought to be rejected. 





References
Round 2
Forfeited
Published:
Extend.
Round 3
Forfeited
Published:
Extend. 
Round 4
Forfeited
Published:
Extend.
Round 5
Forfeited
Published:
Vale.
Added:
--> @Ragnar
No one saying that there are the same. We're just saying that they are related each other. That's it.
Instigator
#13
Added:
--> @Tejretics
But, isn't sex and gender related each other?
Instigator
#12
Added:
--> @Nemiroff
I didn't think it could possibly get more exciting yet it just did.
Contender
#11
Added:
What an exciting debate. I dont think i can handle 1 more round of this action.
#10
Added:
--> @billbatard
Isnt that exactly what i said in my definition of sex? Xx/xy? Reading before assuming is helpful. Btw, for all the millenial hate, what exactly do boomers and Xers have to be proud of? The cuddled lazy spoiled gen, and the nihistic defeatist gen... millenials seem amazing in comparison.
Btw, this is a discussion of gender not sex. Could be the source of your confusion.
#9
Added:
your chromasomes hav everything to do with you sex my god what s wrong with you milenials you are so far off the tracks
#8
Added:
Sex. Male/female. Not really about penis/vagina. Its about xx/xy. Either way, unchanging.
Gender: masculine/feminine. More about how you feel/act. Like comparing prince to rocky. Opposite ends of the spectrum. Both still obviously male.
Transgender are (a guess) the result of over enforcing masculine norms on feminine men, (or vise versa for women, which is much rarer). Instead of a secure girly man, you have a man convinced he should not be a man. They are sex binary, only male/female, they are just the wrong one.
3rd gender have nothing to do with sex at all and are all very ok with their sex. Their personalities are just skewed to the opposite end of the gender spectrum.
#7
Added:
--> @billbatard
Im sure most sociologists and biologists will agree with your definition of sex. What do physical body parts have to do with a social construct? Perhaps you should try reconciling definitions before making a semantic argument about similar terms?
#6
Added:
--> @Dynasty
studies show those with an obsession to correct grammar haven't been layed in years
#5
Added:
--> @billbatard
You're*
Instigator
#4
Added:
If you have a dick your a boy if you got sa pussy? and some tities you a girl, simple as dat
#3
Added:
--> @billbatard
Why would i ask a biologist about a *social* construct?
Would you ask a biologist about what movie to watch?
Wouldnt a *soci*ologist be the best person to ask about a *soci*al or *soci*etal question.
#2
Added:
ask a biologist then not a sociologist
#1
#6
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
FF
#5
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full forfeit
#4
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
FF
Con did not know the difference between sex and gender, it's a common confusion, but surely he realized there would be some counter argument...
#3
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Big F.
#2
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full forfeit.
#1
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Conduct due to multiple forfeits by Con. Arguments because Con drops Pro’s argument that gender is a social construct by definition and that Con’s argumentation conflates sex and gender.