# Gender and sex. Is it the same?



## Dinognar (Aug 1, 2017)

To my fellow NTs:

Do you believe that gender and sex are the same thing? 
Why or why not?
Non NT types can chime in if they desperately need to prove their point. 

Go crazy.


----------



## Belzy (Aug 12, 2013)

Sex is a dichotomy between male and female (biologicly having either a male or female body);

Gender is a dichotomy between being a man and a woman, including the stereotypes of gender roles.

Some would suggest being a male makes you automaticly a man also, even if you don't match the gender roles of it; this group of people tend to struggle with their identity.

Not every male is therefore a man, even though many would suggest they are.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

This is a matter of fact, not belief. "Gender" is used as a synonym of "sex" in some situations, and it means something different in other situations. Maybe you should clarify the question.


----------



## Tabris (May 6, 2017)

Basically what Belzy said. 

However, to me who dislike the very concept of "gender" and get really annoyed whenever someone brings it up as objectively important, sex and gender go together.


----------



## Ermenegildo (Feb 25, 2014)

*Gender*

*Arnold De Loof on Gender*

If sex and gender would have the very same meaning in all sexually reproducing species, there should be no need for two terms: Sex would suffice. Gender does indeed have no meaning in the few species which only produce one type of gamete, which is egg-like, thus in the few species in which no males occur. Such species have special means to maintain the diploid status of their somatic cells. Gender requires the presence of males and females. But why is there need for two terms? In non-human animal research, gender is commonly used to refer to the biological sex of the animals. Thus in classical biology, the nature of gender is not a hot topic, and hardly ever have efforts been undertaken to come up with a good definition. 

The opposite situation prevails in the humanities, in particular since the 1960-ties, when some sociologists and historians started raising questions about the reasons why males and females behave so differently, why specific tasks were typically attributed to females or males, and why man and woman were not always treated as equals, e.g. in receiving the same pay for the same work/job. An answer like e.g. God had a different set of tasks for man and woman in mind (see e.g. the story of creation in the Book Genesis of the Bible, or other stories in other cultures) when He created the species **** sapiens as heterosexual as He had done before in other species; was rightly no longer accepted as a valid argument. Even to date, defining gender remains tricky. 

There is no generally accepted definition of gender, because the concept itself is not static but dynamic [20]. According to Weed [21] the meaning of gender depends on who uses the word, in what context, and for what ends. A few examples of definitions as used in medicine or in the humanities, in particular in sociology are: 


Gender: the behavioural, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex (Merriam- Webster Medical dictionary)
Gender: is a constitutive element of social relationships based upon perceived differences between the sexes and gender is a primary way of signifying relationships of power (historian Joan Wallach Scott [22]).
Gender: is the range of characteristics pertaining to, and differentiating between masculinity and femininity. Depending on the context, these characteristics may include biological sex (i.e. the state of being male, female or an intersex variation which may complicate sex assignment), sex-based social structures (including gender roles and other social roles), or gender identity [23]).
Since 2011, the FDA [24] started using _sex_ as the biological classification and _gender_ as a person’s self-presentation as male or female, or how a person is responded to by social institutions based on the individual’s gender presentation.
To my knowledge, no specific definition of gender emerged from basic studies in animal physiology and development.
These definitions illustrate that a triplet of basic elements is taken into account, namely biological sex, psychological gender, and social gender role. Gender is wider than sex. To date gender is mainly used in a human sociological context, with a considerable input from feminist theory and with little reference to basic principles of fundamental biology [20 , 23 , 25]. 

(Source)


----------



## Allersky (Nov 22, 2017)

If gender and sex are the same thing, then why do we have terms to differentiate between the two?

Sex is about biology. This, I think, is closer to a dichotomy. But there are people who have chromosomes, genes, genitalia, etc. that don't perfectly fit into this dichotomy, so people can call that into question.

Gender - from my basic understanding - is about the expected roles and norms that are associated with being a man or woman. I'm happy to think about this as a spectrum, because there are definitely people who express more/less "masculine" or "feminine" behaviours than others.

That's my simplified opinion, anyway.


----------



## Tijaax (Dec 14, 2017)

Sex is fixed, gender is relative.

I have pennis, produce spermatozoids (sex, male) and have both masculine and femenine genders on my whole expression.


Source: Myself


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

Sex got more meanings, I mean you cant go out and ask a girl to have "gender" with her can you?


----------



## Belzy (Aug 12, 2013)

SirCanSir said:


> Sex got more meanings, I mean you cant go out and ask a girl to have "gender" with her can you?


Maybe you can ask a girl to play a gender role game with you.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

Belzy said:


> Maybe you can ask a girl to play a gender role game with you.


that sounds wrong in so many ways


----------



## Belzy (Aug 12, 2013)

SirCanSir said:


> that sounds wrong in so many ways


Oh, in what way it does? I like the sound of that, but maybe I would be more open to that what is on your mind when reading this.


----------



## SirCanSir (Mar 21, 2018)

Belzy said:


> Oh, in what way it does? I like the sound of that, but maybe I would be more open to that what is on your mind when reading this.


lets just call it a nightmare


----------



## great_pudgy_owl (Apr 20, 2015)

Sex is mechanical, gender is mental. 

I tend to assume all males = men/all females = women because the definition of gender roles are often subjectively defined by society. I.e., make-up isn't inherently feminine, a male who wears it is just a man who wears make-up (as opposed to being a man and woman, or something else).


----------



## dizzycactus (Sep 9, 2012)

Gender and sex were synonyms up until about the 70s, when fringe groups of Academia decided to use them differently, and have henceforth been insisting on the new definition. 

I hold them as being the same now due to three main reasons:

1. No one gave them the authority to re-define the words, so there's no need to recognise them. 

2. There is never a demand to _merely _accept a redefinition of the term "gender" itself - it always comes with the condition of redefining other commonly used terms. For example, people use man/woman, he/she to refer to people of a particular sex. When we agree to change "gender" to mean something else, then there's an assumption somehow that these other words must now refer to gender instead of sex, even though they should refer to the same thing as they always did by default.

3. The change is frequently demanded under threat of recourse in one way or another, so that's good enough reason to resist it by itself. Authoritarians must be held in check.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Gender and sex were not _synonyms_ before the 1970s because *grammatical gender* has been a thing for a long time.



dizzycactus said:


> 1. No one gave them the *authority* to re-define the words, so there's no need to recognise them.


Do you even know how language works

People don't need authority. New words and new usages don't come into being because someone was given authority to create them. There isn't even any body of power that exists to _give_ any such authority. Other people simply decide whether to use words/usages they find useful.


----------



## dizzycactus (Sep 9, 2012)

Super Sodomy Squad said:


> Do you even know how language works
> 
> People don't need authority. New words and new usages don't come into being because someone was given authority to create them. There isn't even any body of power that exists to _give_ any such authority. Other people simply decide whether to use words/usages they find useful.


Yes, that was my point. There is no authority, therefore they can't have it.


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Sex is nice
Gender is not as nice


----------



## starscream430 (Jan 14, 2014)

Dinognar said:


> To my fellow NTs:
> 
> Do you believe that gender and sex are the same thing?
> Why or why not?
> ...


In regards to science, the belief is that gender and sex are different since the former talks more in regards to social graces / norms while the latter refers to biological parts.

I'm in agreement with that since this sort of belief even pervades culture in terms of what is masculine and feminine. For example, some cultures seen that masculinity is hairy, stout, and muscular. However, some cultures see masculinity as clean-shaven, lean, and thin.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

dizzycactus said:


> Yes, that was my point. There is no authority, therefore they can't have it.


No one gave you the authority to decide this, therefore you cannot decide it.

The point being that it makes no sense to invoke authority or the lack thereof in the context of what amounts to personal thoughts and communication. Authority is irrelevant.


----------



## dizzycactus (Sep 9, 2012)

Super Sodomy Squad said:


> No one gave you the authority to decide this, therefore you cannot decide it.
> 
> The point being that it makes no sense to invoke authority or the lack thereof in the context of what amounts to personal thoughts and communication. Authority is irrelevant.


I think you're missing the point. There are people who claim the authority to define words, so I'm saying essentially the same thing as you're saying here, but directed at them, so I don't quite understand why you're telling me this.


----------



## flamesabers (Nov 20, 2012)

I define sex as biological. It can be verified by your chromosomes. I define gender as an identity of how masculine or feminine one feels. For most people, the two are indistinguishable. For trans people, these two things don't match up.


----------



## Wiz (Apr 8, 2014)

I think it's weird how twisted and distorted the definition of "gender" has become. In my country we use the same word for both, naturally. And also, I'd argue we have a name for what many in this post claims is "gender", and that's "gender identity". I don't believe there is such a thing like gender identity, as it all comes down to "personal identity" nonetheless.

And a question to everyone who claims that gender and sex are different; How different is your answer when someone asks you about your gender vs. when someone asks you about your sex?


----------



## flamesabers (Nov 20, 2012)

Wiz said:


> And a question to everyone who claims that gender and sex are different; How different is your answer when someone asks you about your gender vs. when someone asks you about your sex?


It's different for trans individuals. It's the same for everyone else.


----------



## Wiz (Apr 8, 2014)

flamesabers said:


> It's different for trans individuals. It's the same for everyone else.


But is it really though? Wouldn't they just respond with "woman", when asked both questions? And assuming it's possible, should all individuals have total power of self definition? Could the average man just claim "woman" despite continuing to live like a man?

And would it alter the individuals feelings of being like a woman if the second identity didn't _exist?_


----------



## flamesabers (Nov 20, 2012)

Wiz said:


> But is it really though? Wouldn't they just respond with "woman", when asked both questions? And assuming it's possible, should all individuals have total power of self definition? Could the average man just claim "woman" despite continuing to live like a man?
> 
> And would it alter the individuals feelings of being like a woman if the second identity didn't _exist?_


I think you're making this more complicated then necessary.

Let's say you have $1,000,000 in a checking account and you feel like you're a rich guy.

The amount of money in your checking account is like your biological sex. It can be verified through numerous methods. Think of your bank statements, tax records, brokerage statements, proof of income, etc. as being like your chromosomes, genitals, gonads, etc. Your feelings of being a rich guy isn't verifiable as it is completely intangible. When you have $1,000,000 in your checking account, you may feel like a rich guy but someone else may feel like he's poor. 

It's subjective in other words. Consider how most Americans wouldn't consider themselves to be rich, however, when compared to 3rd world countries, practically all Americans are. Which perspective is correct do you think? Do you think you can convince Americans that they have no right to complain about the 1% by showing them pictures of 3rd world countries? The next time a fellow American says he's broke or whatever, are you going to say he's deluded because he's richer then most of the undeveloped world or are you going to take his word for it unless you have good reason to suspect otherwise?


----------



## Wiz (Apr 8, 2014)

flamesabers said:


> I think you're making this more complicated then necessary.


I don't think I am. The lines of definition are very unclear, infact, so unclear that one can only subjectively "know" ones "gender". No one who isn't this person can objectively define that _Person A_ is gender _"Zhe". _This would only be clear after knowing this persons subjective thoughts about him/herself—in which case one could argue wether "gender" exists at all, in contrast to biological gender/sex.



> Let's say you have $1,000,000 in a checking account and you feel like you're a rich guy.
> 
> The amount of money in your checking account is like your biological sex. It can be verified through numerous methods. Think of your bank statements, tax records, brokerage statements, proof of income, etc. as being like your chromosomes, genitals, gonads, etc. Your feelings of being a rich guy isn't verifiable as it is completely intangible. When you have $1,000,000 in your checking account, you may feel like a rich guy but someone else may feel like he's poor.
> 
> It's subjective in other words. Consider how most Americans wouldn't consider themselves to be rich, however, when compared to 3rd world countries, practically all Americans are. Which perspective is correct do you think? Do you think you can convince Americans that they have no right to complain about the 1% by showing them pictures of 3rd world countries? The next time a fellow American says he's broke or whatever, are you going to say he's deluded because he's richer then most of the undeveloped world or are you going to take his word for it unless you have good reason to suspect otherwise?


But even if there exist people that have 10$ in the bank in 3rd world countries, it doesn't make a "poor" American any more rich, as the value of this persons assets are dependent on consumer prices within a geographical area.

I don't think this metaphor works, but if claims of being "broke" is like claims of having gender identity X, one could still (like with the claim of being broke) test the validity of the statement by comparing the value of assets compared with consumer prices within a geographical area.

I don't see how this validates the existence of "gender". If anything the argument acknowledges the importance of quantifiable and objective data when using definitions (rather than subjectivity)—be it sex, wealth, height etc.


----------



## flamesabers (Nov 20, 2012)

Wiz said:


> I don't see how this validates the existence of "gender". If anything the argument acknowledges the importance of quantifiable and objective data when using definitions (rather than subjectivity)—be it sex, wealth, height etc.


Do you feel like you're a man? Or do you call yourself a man only because of your genitals and the like? 

Another analogy would be like being born in country A but identifying with the culture of country B. Your ancestry is country A, but country B is much more relatable to you. 

I'm not sure how else to explain this to you. If you think sex is always the same as gender and nothing will change your mind about that, I suspect transsexuality will always be a mystery to you.


----------



## Wiz (Apr 8, 2014)

flamesabers said:


> Do you feel like you're a man? Or do you call yourself a man only because of your genitals and the like?


Wether I feel like a man or not wouldn't impact my answer. I call myself a man because that's my biological reality, and as my answer; what I do or do not feel like wouldn't impact that reality.



> Another analogy would be like being born in country A but identifying with the culture of country B. Your ancestry is country A, but country B is much more relatable to you.


Again, identifying with a different culture would not change the country in which you were born. If you're born in Finland but "feel" like an African, it wouldn't make you "African" (in another sense than _abstract_).



> I'm not sure how else to explain this to you. If you think sex is always the same as gender and nothing will change your mind about that, I suspect transsexuality will always be a mystery to you.


No, I do get it. I just don't get the point of it, or if one can even technically say that "gender" _exists_ at all (other than in an abstract categorical framework).


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

Differences and Bodies - R. Connell


----------



## Saskopia (Aug 9, 2018)

Wiz said:


> But is it really though? Wouldn't they just respond with "woman", when asked both questions? And assuming it's possible, should all individuals have total power of self definition? Could the average man just claim "woman" despite continuing to live like a man?
> 
> And would it alter the individuals feelings of being like a woman if the second identity didn't _exist?_


Good point. While the Emperor Nortons of the world may be entertaining for a while, if everyone is claiming to be emperor then the world is going to cease to function. I see gender and sex as the same. I think it should be strictly defined scientifically, based on genitals. If you are a post-op transgender person, then you are the newly assigned gender and you go that restroom and so on. Before any surgery you are the gender you were physically born with.


----------



## BlackDog (Jan 6, 2012)

Ostensibly sex is male/female and gender is man/woman. In which case, okay, maybe technically sort of different but in practice it’s exactly the same. The error occurs when one thinks that it’s possible to be a male woman or a female man.


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

The same for over 92% of population. Not same for 3%. Ambiguous for 5%.

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## Wiz (Apr 8, 2014)

Saskopia said:


> Good point. While the Emperor Nortons of the world may be entertaining for a while, if everyone is claiming to be emperor then the world is going to cease to function. I see gender and sex as the same. I think it should be strictly defined scientifically, based on genitals. If you are a post-op transgender person, then you are the newly assigned gender and you go that restroom and so on. Before any surgery you are the gender you were physically born with.


Exactly. For me, everything else falls within the realm of "personal identity", which is subjective and should not impact or distort the objective world (such as the systems in place for appropriate scientific gender classification).


----------



## PiT (May 6, 2017)

The argument that "gender" must refer to something separate from "sex", or else why would we need two terms is faulty, in that "gender" only came to take on a meaning related to "sex" due to semantic drift (in the Middle Ages it is used in a sense more akin to its Latin root; think "genre" as an analog today), and only came to be understood as something actually different much more recently. 

I can see the case for separating these in reference to transgender persons, where one can be biologically male but of female gender. The attempt to apply this more broadly to include expressions of "gender roles" invites confusion, and clashes with the previous ideological position of that camp that "gender" is determined by the individual.


----------



## xwsmithx (Jan 17, 2017)

Not the same. Sex refers to the DNA you were conceived with and the genitalia produced by that DNA, male or female, man or woman. Gender refers solely to words, but there are three of them, masculine, feminine, and neuter. It has no consequence beyond indicating which article should go with which word. English has almost no gendered words, and no distinction among articles. (alumnus/alumna is the only example I can think of off the top of my head) French, Italian, Spanish, German, and several other languages have words with a gender, and there's no useful shortcut for knowing them, one simply has to memorize that lightning is feminine and thunder is masculine (or vice-versa, I forget). A German boat is neuter (Das Boot). You can change neutral words in English to feminine by adding -ess, like actor/actress or tiger/tigress, but since the original word isn't _necessarily_ male like alumnus is, that doesn't really count as a gendered word.


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

This is probably my hugest pet peeve being a medical professional. Sex is biological and gender is a social construct. You can be male, female or intersex (for example) with sex, but there are lots of social gender identities depending on the time/situation/culture. However, how your are born (sex) stays the same. For example, if you are born a male (sex), you can decide to identify as a woman (gender), and I will absolutely respect that and address you as such. However, you still have a prostate (yes, even with a sex change) and there are health screenings and other issues I need to address in a respectful way because hormonally and biologically and even in terms of family history that doesn't change.

Gender reveals, for multiple reasons, absolutely freakin' kill me.


----------



## Melodiousfunk (Aug 20, 2017)

Not much to add really but yeah basically sex is the biological state you were born as, gender is more of a social and personal/emotional/identity thing. It's true this is a somewhat recent development but language is a living thing. Everyone in the world has been gay if we are going to cling on to old meanings for words :wink: If someone born as a male and presents as a female (or vice versa) and wishes to be viewed that way then I don't know what the problem is. It just seems like common courtesy.


----------



## Kanani (Jul 21, 2016)

great_pudgy_owl said:


> Sex is mechanical, gender is mental.


I know you mean physical, not mechanical, but as I read that I couldn't help but think about um
sex
and mechanical
moving
things

I'm sorry I will go take a nap now


----------



## Kanani (Jul 21, 2016)

Wiz said:


> And a question to everyone who claims that gender and sex are different; How different is your answer when someone asks you about your gender vs. when someone asks you about your sex?


My answers are very different, but I'm transgender so I might not be a great example. But even if you're not, "Man", what one might call a gender, and "Male", what one might call a sex, are two different words with different meanings.


----------



## Kanani (Jul 21, 2016)

Wiz said:


> No, I do get it. I just don't get the point of it, or if one can even technically say that "gender" _exists_ at all (other than in an abstract categorical framework).


The point of it is to feel more comfortable in your body and in social settings. Being a woman and being a man are not the same thing, and when a trans person looks at their body, they know they would feel more comfortable living in a body of the opposite sex and being treated as one.


----------

