sex, not gender

[desertanimal]

You know, I ask this because I cut my post-baccalaureate teeth in an anthropology department, so it's been bugging me for quite a while. Why does this group of scientists and amateur scientists use the word "gender" when it is referring to is the biological sex of an animal?

Typically, the humanities would define gender thusly: (stolen from internet somewhere) Unlike sex, which is a biological concept, gender is a social construct specifying the socially and culturally prescribed roles that men and women are to follow.

Here are the definitions from Mirriam Webster (sorry for all you OED snobs out there.)

Main Entry: 1gen·der
Pronunciation: 'jen-d&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English gendre, from Anglo-French genre, gendre, from Latin gener-, genus birth, race, kind, gender -- more at KIN
1 a : a subclass within a grammatical class (as noun, pronoun, adjective, or verb) of a language that is partly arbitrary but also partly based on distinguishable characteristics (as shape, social rank, manner of existence, or sex) and that determines agreement with and selection of other words or grammatical forms b : membership of a word or a grammatical form in such a subclass c : an inflectional form showing membership in such a subclass
2 a : SEX <the feminine gender> b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex

So we're clearly not talking about grammar, but definition 2 already implies something extra-biological right in the definition by using the adjective feminine. None of our snakes are feminine or masculine (except maybe sexually mature males in spring). They generally are simply male or female. They don't have a culture (or if they did we couldn't know about how it defined gender), they don't have much psychology apparent (and if they do we don't know how they FEEL about whether they are male or female), and they only rarely have behaviors that are typically associated with one sex. Which brings us to . . .

Main Entry: 1sex
Pronunciation: 'seks
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin sexus
1 : either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures
2 : the sum of the structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of organisms that are involved in reproduction marked by the union of gametes and that distinguish males and females
3 a : sexually motivated phenomena or behavior b : SEXUAL INTERCOURSE

Definitions 1 AND 2 both apply beautifully when it comes to snakes. This is unsurprising, because that's what we're actually talking about when we sort our snakes by biological sex. pssst. That part about "behavioral characteristics of organisms that are involved in reproduction . . ." accounts for that "masculine" springtime behavior without the necessity of resorting to conceiving of it as a "behavioral role that characterizes one sex." And that handy adjective biological is useful for making sure no one thinks we're talking about definition 3. :sidestep:

I can't take it anymore! I've had enough with gender confusion (an older male prof. at the community college where I am adjunct faculty just asked me yesterday, "Excuse me, young man, did someone send you in here to use a computer?")!!! I can't take gender-sex confusion, too!!!

 

[Eremita]

You don't seem to be getting any bites there, Ms. desertanimal. Methinks you have a pet peeve that, while you express it clearly and logically, doesn't resonate so much for other folks. I think "sex" is better when possible because it takes half the time to type it, but I'm not such a stickler for precise usage. If I can figure out the meaning of what someone issues verbally or in writing in a fashion generally parallel to the intention of the speaker/writer, then I feel the language is not being stretched too far.

Spelling and grammar are a whole different ballgame, though.

-Sean

 

[Serpwidgets]

Ya, I think maybe it's just that a lot of people see those two words as interchangable. Your argument would win a debate, for sure, but it's more a matter of semantics than anything else, which just isn't that important to people in everyday life. (You live in a society where many people can't distinguish between to and too or their and there, and they use the words like hundreds of times a day. :santa: )

It's not like scientists are trying to put anyone down by using gender instead of sex. Also some people might just be a little uncomfortable saying "sex" (tee hee hee) instead of gender. Kinda like the pronounciation of "Ur-anus" got changed to "Urine-us." (Yeah, that's much better... maybe they should do away with the jokes by renaming it to "Urectum.") :grin01:

If you read back through online discussions on corn genetics you'll also find that "homo" was used maybe once in a blue moon. It's only within the last year or two that people have started using it, instead of always saying the whole word "homozygous."

And someone emailed me telling me that the ACR might get blocked by some ISPs that are trying to protect kids from porn... because it had the word "sex" on every snake's record. There's like 5,000 pages and about 95% of them had the word "sex" on them, so I could see why a porn filter would flag the site as pr0n central. I wonder how well it would have done if I had Googled "sex" at the time! :grin01: Maybe I should have set some META tags to say "Hot cr0nsanke action! Thousands of jpegs!"

We changed it on the ACR site, every record now says "Gender" for that reason.

(And now I'm wondering if this site is flagged by any porn filters...)

 

[JAG 32]

Yeah, that's much better... maybe they should do away with the jokes by renaming it to "Urectum.")

:roflmao:

In school we use "gender" but i believe "sex" is used more in general, like at a reptile education event i participate in i often get asked what sex a certain snake is. Its not a great example like the others but it's the only one i can think of right now.

John

 

[desertanimal]

Ms. desertanimal.

Ha ha! Funny! Took me a minute.

(You live in a society where many people can't distinguish between to and too or their and there, and they use the words like hundreds of times a day. )

Good point.

It's not like scientists are trying to put anyone down by using gender instead of sex.

No, no. Of course not. I didn't mean to imply that. The part about not being able to take the gender-sex confusion was just a joke. What I wasn't understanding is why a bunch of scientists would take a concept that is really only dealt with in the humanities and adopt it, but use the word to mean what it doesn't mean. For example, I actually research the development of behavioral sex roles in non-human primates, but I specifically AVOID the word gender, because it has all this baggage and such. So I was puzzled how the word gender would find its way into scientific circles in the first place, and then why people would go to the trouble of bandying it about. I try to avoid humanities concepts whenever I can, so I was perplexed that other scientists would adopt one.

If you read back through online discussions on corn genetics you'll also find that "homo" was used maybe once in a blue moon. It's only within the last year or two that people have started using it, instead of always saying the whole word "homozygous."

:roflmao: That's funny. That's really funny. It had never occured to me that homo in the context of a genetics conversation would sound funny, even though I am one so that word should ring some bells for me. But, I tend to be very literal and therefore miss all kinds of things like that.

And someone emailed me telling me that the ACR might get blocked by some ISPs that are trying to protect kids from porn... because it had the word "sex" on every snake's record. There's like 5,000 pages and about 95% of them had the word "sex" on them, so I could see why a porn filter would flag the site as pr0n central.

I see. Well, knowing that makes me feel better about it on the ACR. Well, thanks for your thoughts. After hearing them, I think it will bug me much, much less now.

 

[Taceas]

Interesting...

I think Serp is kind of right, most people use "gender" and "sex" interchangeably without a care in the world. I'm sure I do it a time or two myself, but only when talking about humans. So from what I gather, "gender" has societal connotations about its expectations of that role...while "sex" is just clear and plain male or female?

I don't think I have ever used the word gender when I am speaking about animals other than the human species. For some reason it never "fit" right.

I guess if your research dealt with the sexual roles each sex plays in non-human primates, I can see how that would irk you a little...as certain lazy-spellings have worked themselves into the mainstream to bug me. But, I don't think it's all that big of a deal personally. Most people have the right idea in mind, but just have two different words to describe it. But hey, that's just me...a country bumpkin.

Please don't take this the wrong way, as I'm not meaning it rudely or offensively, I'm just basically curious...but if you're mistaken for a man, shouldn't that tell you that something might be awry somewhere?

If someone mistook me for a man, which I know would upset me (but would probably also flatter me as the "ideal feminine" body shape these days is something I don't consider healthy or attainable)...but then again I don't dress androgenously either. And even if I did, these certain evolutionary lumps of fat on my chest make it hard to see I'm anything but female.

I'm sorry but for the longest time I thought you were male. Your tattoo on a shaved head, you mannerisms on here, the degree of anal-retentiveness in your posts that I've only seen in males (with engineering backgrounds, mind you), and your lack of outward feminine attributes (whether circumstantial or intentional) are all very masculine.

Those pics of you out field collecting with friends... needless to say, I got quite the surprise when you had mentioned you were in fact female. :grin01:

I've just always thought those that "gender crossed" folks were rather interesting for the sake of my nerd mind. My grandmother has a couple living across the street from her, they're lesbians. One is very beautiful, very feminine...and the other is very masculine looking. And to be honest, for the longest time my grandmother thought it was just a typical couple. I almost didn't have the heart to tell her, as she's a traditionalist and such. But they actually make great neighbors and they call us if they're concerned about her.

So I found it interesting how one could technically be female on the most basic visceral level, but outwardly "male" at the same time. Oh heck...this is what I get for 4am ponderings when I'm extremely tired. Maybe it'll make sense, but I somehow doubt it.

 

[desertanimal]

Weird. Somehow I missed this until I was searching threads I had started to take a look at pics of my own snakes (which I do from time to time when I'm procrastinating away from home and can't just get them out).

I'm somewhat perplexed by your post, Misty, mainly because I don't understand how it is related to mine. My post was about the interchangeable use of two words that mean different things, not about gender construction per se.

However, I do have some responses to some of your points. (Naturally, because I'm loquacious--a stereotypically feminine trait.)

If I am often mistaken for a man, what should I deduce is awry? There are many possible conclusions. One is that I am insufficient in my femaleness. Another is that others are narrow-minded in their gender concepts. A third is that other people are insufficient in their skills of observation. Given that I, too, have rather _large_ evolutionary lumps of fat on my chest (that are in no way disguised by a t-shirt) that make it hard to see I'm anything but female, I usually conclude the latter. I don't REALLY think people think that because of my short hair, tattoos and cargo shorts, I must be a man even though I've got boobs. I think most people cue in on what the easiest thing is for them to see--hair--and they make a conclusion and pay no further attention. This hypothesis is supported by stories of men being mistaken for women just because they have long hair. Some of these men are about as manly as you can be, but they still get mistaken for women. Does that indicate that something is awry? It could. I doubt it, though. I find it astonishing how unobservant people are in general, not only with repect to this issue. I think lots of people just walk through life not really noticing things.

It doesn't upset me at all when someone mistakes me for a man. Actually, what I tire of is being mistaken for a 14-year old. I don't carry myself like a 14-year old. Being mistaken for a 14-year old ONLY happens with older men. And they usually seem to be totally obtuse and don't recognize their error until I flat-out tell them. In person, women of any age do not mistake me for a kid, nor do younger men, even if they mistake me for a man. And in person, most people who mistake me for a man at first usually immediately realize their error.

I'm sorry but for the longest time I thought you were male. Your tattoo on a shaved head, you mannerisms on here, the degree of anal-retentiveness in your posts that I've only seen in males (with engineering backgrounds, mind you), and your lack of outward feminine attributes (whether circumstantial or intentional) are all very masculine.

Those pics of you out field collecting with friends... needless to say, I got quite the surprise when you had mentioned you were in fact female.

I've just always thought those that "gender crossed" folks were rather interesting for the sake of my nerd mind.

So I found it interesting how one could technically be female on the most basic visceral level, but outwardly "male" at the same time.

This is interesting on many levels, but brings it back to my initial post. These conclusions are based on YOUR ideas of gender, not universal ones, and certainly not mine. I consider my tone and anal-retentiveness in posts to be more along the lines of hard-core, exacting, and sometimes close to bit@hy in a way that is VERY female. Strong female, yes, definitely strong, but very female. You, conversely, consider it masculine.

I don't consider myself to be gender crossed in the least. I tear up at dumb commercials. I like to be held (just not by men). It's important to me that my wife thinks I'm beautiful. Not just cute or attractive, but beautiful. I stop and look at strangers' babies when I'm out. I make faces at little kids to make them laugh. In fact, I wave at little kids in cars when I'm on the road on my motorcycle. I've not seen a male motorcyclist do that, though I'm sure some do. When I touch people, I touch them softly. I don't like vulgar jokes or slapstick comedy. I'm a tough, no-nonsense, woman, but I'm a woman all the way. You see me as gender crossed because I have short hair, tattoos, and am unforgivingly and argumentatively logical. I'll agree that according to the way you've presented yourself, I'm undoubtedly more masculine than you, but does that make me objectively masculine?

I can't speak for your grandma's neighbor, but though you might deem me "outwardly male," I don't feel male at all, in or out. That's what gender means. Your ideas about what defines maleness and femaleness are totally different from mine. Yours seem to be a lot about the way a person looks and acts outwardly. Mine are a lot about the way people feel about things and understand and interact with the world. I often have a really hard time relating to men, but no problem striking up and holding a long conversation with a strange woman, whether she's my age or 70 years old. My mind works the way a woman's mind works.

Gender is a social construction, not a biological one, though it does usually have a biological component (however, there are lots of people walking around out there fully fitting society's concepts of gender even though they've got the opposite equipment and genetic make-up). Your gender concepts don't match mine. American ideas about maleness and femaleness are totally different from other cultures'. Latino and African-American men tend to be held to MORE masculine gender roles than white Americans, who are held to more masculine gender roles than, mmmm, say, Brits. And that's why I prefer to use the word sex when talking about the biological sex of a snake. Because I'm pretty sure they don't have long conversations like this one about gender and being or not being gender crossed.

 

[desertanimal]

My grandmother has a couple living across the street from her, they're lesbians. One is very beautiful, very feminine...and the other is very masculine looking. And to be honest, for the longest time my grandmother thought it was just a typical couple. I almost didn't have the heart to tell her, as she's a traditionalist and such. But they actually make great neighbors and they call us if they're concerned about her.

(emphasis added)

You seem surprised that they make great neighbors. I don't know why they wouldn't. First off, you've got two women in one place, and women tend to be caretakers. We don't change personalities just because we're not attracted to men. Second, queers are just people, same as you. We don't change personalities because we're not attracted to the same sex. We've got the same proportions of a$$holes and fabulous, wonderful caring individuals in our demographic as you do in yours.

 

[diamondlil]

I have no idea why, but over the years I've amassed more queer than straight friends, I have both male and female gay friends who run the whole spectrum from butch to ultra-feminine, some with promiscuous habits, some in devoted long-term relationships. I'm shocked that 'gender' could be shocking to anyone when concerning human preferences and differences.
(In case it matters to anyone apart from the man I sleep with, I'm what my best friend describes as a 'filthy breeder' :grin01: )

 

[zwyatt]

men being mistaken for women just because they have long hair. Some of these men are about as manly as you can be

First of all, don't drag Fabio into this conversation. Second, I guess I've missed all the gender/sex stuff. I typically only hear about "sex" and most of what I read is either textbooks or primary literature. I can't, off the top of my head, remember hearing the term gender used. I can't really say that I ever have a occassion to use the term gender or sex, but I suppose if presented with said occassion I would probably use the term "sex" when speaking with anyone of like mind. However, if speaking to someone who I think may not automatically make the connection or someone who I think probably isn't used to hearing the term "sex" or may not be as comfortable using it, I would probably use gender. I dunno...

As far the homozygote/homo/heterozygote/het thing goes, I don't tend to shorten homozygote to homo. However, the only time I ever use the term "het" is pretty much on this forum or referring to corns in general. If I'm at work or in class, I tend to use the full word heterozygote. So I guess I don't find it all that weird that I don't use the term "homo" when referring to a homozygote. :shrugs:

Anyways...that's my ramblings on the subject. Don't really know if they have any relevance

 

[Checkerbelly]

"That thing got a hemi?"

...is the proper way to ask if a snake is male.


(JarrodRandell said it first. credit where credit is due..)

 

[desertanimal]

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

oh man, that brought tears . . .