Trigger words: gender (2)
Indicator sentences: That's not gender, that's sex.
Negotiation parts: I'm fine with sex categories existing, I just don't think gendered behaviors and attitudes should be attached to them. but don't the two massively overlap when you hit things like clothes? What would the female-sex clothes look like if gender didn't exist? Wouldn't they look vaguely similar, wouldn't that be telling about the traits expected of people who wear those clothes and then don't we just get back to gender again? Don't we end up just shoving all the generalised personality traits onto sex rather than gender - we end up loosing the difference in language. edit: submitted before i meant to. Currently we have a situation where a person can have the female sex but be a boy. If we take out that second bit as in the person is female (sex) but then nothing. How do we target this person via advertisement? We have to have vague clusters of people to target that we attribute vague likes and dislikes (the youth like X, old people like Y) now we're no longer discriminating by gender - so it must be sex. Well the female sex likes floral patterns - boom some floral blouses for women. But no gender. But its the same. Perhaps these things need to become more specific. Couldn't you find it stifling if assumed your race all enjoyed a certain food? Why discriminate at all? There's a strong correlation between physical sex and gender, and some broad strokes we can draw in regards to the body types of the sexes. But when has it ever been a good idea to lump the outliers in with the majority? Shouldn't the goal be to give everyone equal value, even if you don't conform to the standard? well i mean clothing and gender is very different to race. clothing is fitted to certain body shapes. as soon as you produce a top with a cut for a waist and boobs you're clearly targeting the female sex. At the moment these clothes also target the female gender which may or may not correlate with sex. If we loose gender we loose the distinction: this clothing is now for the female sex only. Well now it's the same thing as before, now sex is just standing in for gender. If anything its more oppressive as now, rather than having the distinction between sex and gender, we only have one thing to target and design for: sex. At the moment we can understand that some sex-males will want to wear girl-gender clothes and accommodate for that. but if we don't have the distinction then the sex-male only has sex-male clothes because gender doesn't exist. he is his sex: he doesn't have boobs and a waist.