|
I think I get it. I think what Gilda and MartinGuerre are trying to tell us is that:
1. Sex - that is a person's sex is determined biologically; male or female (xy or xx). Typically evidenced by the xx, xy chromosomes and human sex organs (genitalia) as well as other physical traits.
2. Gender - is a social construction - That is, non-physical attributes are ascribed, especially in areas of behavior, social interaction, what not. Also, I suppose, there would be some sort of range of archetypically defined masculinity and femininity in which people are expected to fall within the sexual order.
We are a relatively young species so it wouldn't surprise me that we are still "evolving" or expanding our variations. As such, with any change, it is often a "painful" process, like growing pains. Our social or society, at times encounters difficulty in understanding things such as gender, race etc - that is, socially constructed race which contributes to conflict.
Human sexuality is a fascinating thing which need more study and understanding - it's too bad we are so afraid of it.
But, gender may also have genetic guidance, or "hard-wired". I think in this way, sexual preference may be inaccurate and instead, sexual orientation would make more sense as presumably, an individual did not make a conscious choice, but rather, felt "naturally inclined to orient towards one gender over another etc..
I don't know, I tries but I think I'm confused again. Maybe I will think more clearly after a beer or five....
|