Instigator / Con
3
1411
rating
11
debates
13.64%
won
Topic
#1369
Is gender a social construct?
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 13 votes and with 88 points ahead, the winner is...
semperfortis
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two months
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Pro
91
1684
rating
15
debates
100.0%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
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:
== 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
Extend.
Round 3
Forfeited
Extend.
Round 4
Forfeited
Extend.
Round 5
Forfeited
Vale.
and you knew who you were then giols was goils and men was men o/~
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Harleygator // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 5 points awarded to Dynasty
>Reason for Decision:"Forfeit grants a technical win to Con, though the substance of the argument was nonetheless in favor of Con regardless. Pro's failure in instigating this debate was to cite a good source, but then fail to properly define the terms he was attempting to connect. Thus, while Con's somewhat basic appeal to codified definitions - which is essentially what Pro would've been rebutting in proposing and introducing this motion, thereby rendering such an appeal fallacious - was simply stated, it defined and therefore grounded the debate in a favorable semantic framework."
>Reason for Mod Action: The voter has not earned the privilege to vote by completing 2 debates and has voted for the user who conceded the debate by accident. These are violations of the Voting Guidelines.
************************************************************************
and yoi knew who you were then giols was giols and men was men
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 forfeits are a social media construct
Yeah. I could.
You could have argued that in the last 4 rounds.
No one saying that there are the same. We're just saying that they are related each other. That's it.
But, isn't sex and gender related each other?
I didn't think it could possibly get more exciting yet it just did.
What an exciting debate. I dont think i can handle 1 more round of this action.
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.
your chromasomes hav everything to do with you sex my god what s wrong with you milenials you are so far off the tracks
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.
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?
studies show those with an obsession to correct grammar haven't been layed in years
You're*
If you have a dick your a boy if you got sa pussy? and some tities you a girl, simple as dat
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.
ask a biologist then not a sociologist