If social constructs are real, and otherkins and therians are a social construct, are they really animals trapped in a human body just like trans people are trapped in the wrong body?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
If social constructs are real, and otherkins and therians are a social construct, are they really animals trapped in a human body just like trans people are trapped in the wrong body?
Well, either you don't know what a social construct is or what real means. Or both.
Real does not mean true or false, it simply means that something exists. Say, the belief in God (or gods). It's very real, people kill and die for it, although we don't know whether it is true or false. Being an atheist I believe it to be false, but I can't prove it so, and even if I could it wouldn't be any less real for that.
A social construct is a common understanding or notion in a given society which is not an inevitable consequence of non-social factors. For example any notion of private property is a social construct, which is different among societies, and in some does not exist. Does it mean that it isn't real?
The fact that people believe in something does not make it real. I am not saying that people don't have belief. People believe all kinds of bullshit lies. It does not make them real. So just because a bunch of people think they are really girls when they are boys or the other way around does not make it real.
The idea of private property is not a social construct, even animals mark territory and defend it as their own. Society did not create that evolution and nature did. The idea of it is just that, an idea. It is not a fact or a truth. The fact and truth is there is only male and female, everything you have presented has not been based in facts.
Now you are arguing that social constructs are not real if they are just a belief that can not be proven. :/
What is it?
The belief is real. It is very important, because, true or false, these beliefs have real consequences.
Again, the belief or feeling is very real. As to whether it is true, your childish remark about chromosomes some comments above strongly suggests that you should learn very very much before you even start to assess this (did you even know that there are people who look like women, think of themselves as of women yet are genetically men?).
Some do, some do not. This does not mean that idea of private property is not a social construct, or that it is an evolved one. From what we know about so called primitive societies, their idea of private property, if at all existing, is very different from our western one. You should really do some learning.
The fact and truth is that you lack basic knowledge beyond high school level, not only in anthropology, but also in quite elementary biology and anatomy.
im still waiting for you to back up any of your claims with facts. so far your basing everything on theories. if i got the time later ill make a full post oyour points and mine so we can actually solve this disagreement we are having. to many strawmen and red harrings in this back and forth.
so go get your links ready with factual based science to prove me wrong on the new post. if you can.
Dude, a simple question to you: if there are only male and female is a person with CAIS, i.e. a person who:
a male or a female? Why one or the other? No adjectives please, just male or female and why.
Note that this happens with no intervention and the condition is often diagnosed only at puberty when the individual does not start menstruating.
Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome affects 2 to 5 per 100,000 people.
So I would say the exception to the rule does not negate the rule.
https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/androgen-insensitivity-syndrome#statistics
If there are exceptions there is no rule. You can't find a single exception to e.g. gravity, good luck trying.
So no, you are not dodging this question in that it is rare. Male or female and why?
If there are exceptions there is no rule.there are exceptions to just about any rule. The main principle of the adage is seen best when there is only one or a very few exceptions. In those cases the validity of the rule is proven. For, if only a very few exceptions to a rule can be found, then it must be a very good rule.
You can't find a single exception to e.g. gravity, good luck trying.Universal Gravity is a theory, not a fact, regarding the natural law of attraction.
https://ncse.com/library-resource/gravity-its-only-theory
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-gravity-still-technically-just-a-theory
here are your exceptions to gravity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Anomalies_and_discrepancies
so i did answer your question. the exception to the rule does not negate the rule.
you try to talk about dodging questions, go back and answer the questions i asked you. but you wont. just try to twist this crap around but it don't work.
hopefully you look up and read that stuff about how gravity is a natural occurring phonomon and we only have a theory on how it works. it is still the basis we have to go off of considering we are only going off facts when it comes to gravity. not feelings. if it was based on feeling like your argument on gender then people would be saying it is not a theoy it is a fact like you just tried to do. the exceptions to gravity are really kool. should check them out. or don't.
So no, you are not dodging this question in that it is rare. Male or female and why?if you check the first link i gave you when you first asked you would see it says "People with this condition are genetically male,"
you can not geneticly be female and have CAIS
-smh-
If there are exceptions, the rule is negated and a new rule (usually the old one amended) is needed. Often it ends as a statistical rule, like that "in 99% (or simply most) cases ..."
Folk adages is not science, dude.
These are no exceptions, we just don't know everything, so the rule as we know it is not complete and needs further research and amendments. Which may conclude in that these will refute our current understanding of gravity, and we'll need a new theory (technically, it will most likely be current theory amended), or discovery of new forces. Or both.
Either way, these are no exceptions. No responsible scientist would say hey, these are exceptions but exceptions don't negate gravity, it's all ok, no worries, which is how you attempt to dismiss CAIS example. But I agree that these are cool.
But hey, if you insist on calling these exceptions, that's of no help to you, because if only male and female has exceptions you also have to recognize that other exceptions may exist. CAIS is not the only one example where genetic, anatomic and psychological characteristics of sex and gender are not in agreement, albeit an extreme one. So where these exceptions would start/end?
So, male or female? Or where do the exceptions end? And how these exceptions are not non-binary gender?
ps. I wonder if you even bothered to read the links you supplied. Really.
ps2. If you want to quote me, please use > at the line start, not
backticks. It looks awful with backticks.I wrote just as much in my description, thanks for not reading it.
that was a response to you saying "So no, you are not dodging this question in that it is rare. Male or female and why?" i had already answered the question and provided you with a link on it. with a quote from the post you provided on the subject.
i have been reading everything, that is why i have been able to back everything i say up with facts and links to prove the sorces.
you on the other hand do nothing but red harring, strawman, and word twisting replys to not answer questions.
im sure you have a great reply about my spelling and grammerand not the points of facts.
maby you will notice it is because i don't care enuff to correct things ot hold the shift key for you. this is all noncence. i hope everyone looks at the full converstion so they can see how insane this all is.
No, you did not. For CAIS means genetical male but phenotype, behavior and identification are female. You did not answer why genes should prevail over phenotype and behavior, you did not even read my description of CAIS, or you wouldn't try to reveal in this style that CAIS happens only to genetical males.
I also doubt that you'd supply the first links about gravity as they are supporting my point, not yours. Read them, really, both have misleading titles, that's probably why you got so fooled. Though the wikipedia one also supports my point, so perhaps it's beyond you to understand it.
Yeah, trying to educate a guy like you probably is insane... sometimes this kind of thing amuses me though.