0
   

Men & Women

 
 
Reply Sun 5 Sep, 2004 03:06 pm
Do you have a philosophical definition of man and woman? or do you stick with the accepted a man has a penis, a woman, a vagina?

What makes a human being of one sex?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,285 • Replies: 17
No top replies

 
thethinkfactory
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Sep, 2004 04:00 pm
There are chromosomal markers of gender:

xx: Female
xy: Male

This happens at conception. However at about six weeks the fetus gets an androgen wash. Less androgen = female phenotypes such as breasts and vagina; More androgen = male phenotypes such as penis and testies.

These two things do not always match up. There is a decent percent of humans that are chromosomally mismatched with thier phenotypes. But, when they do match you tend to have 'normal' acting males - and normal acting females (if there is such a thing - okay bad joke).

There are also chemicals that play a factor in gender or sex. It is a complicated thing - but at its simplest level; more testosterone = more male traits (physical play, protection of others, not asking directions); more estrogen = more female traits (mothering instincts, submission in play, shopping for shoes).

This complicated and often ill matched process nets us (in my opinion) a large spectrum of males and females - on one end super males and the other super females.

The reality is though that the vast majority of us rest closer to the middle of this continuum and have multiple traights from 'both sides'.

This does not leave us a clear cut way to distinguish between the two - and often in extreme cases (hermaphrodites etc.) leaving one to simply pick by 'feeling'.

I don't think it is all relative - but I don't think it is all biological or societal either.

TF
0 Replies
 
mchol
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Sep, 2004 09:43 pm
Yin and Yang. Opposites. Men = Fire. Woman = Water. Smile
0 Replies
 
rufio
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Sep, 2004 10:12 pm
Part genetics, part cultural roles.
0 Replies
 
coming
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 03:15 am
Politically Correct
Not a philosphical one but a utilitarian one. Does the subject satisfy the rules?
0 Replies
 
Pantalones
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 03:27 am
strange thing how thinkfactory answered everything and nothing all at once.. thanks for your answer Smile

coming - what subject and what rules?
0 Replies
 
CerealKiller
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 03:36 am
When a woman sleeps around she's "a stud".

When a man sleeps around he's "a whore".

Still no explanation for Richard Simmons.
0 Replies
 
Pantalones
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 03:46 am
CerealKiller wrote:
When a woman sleeps around she's "a stud".

When a man sleeps around he's "a whore".

Still no explanation for Richard Simmons.
shouldn't it be the other way around?


... or Juan Gabriel here in Mexico
0 Replies
 
CerealKiller
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 03:48 am
JoeFX wrote:
CerealKiller wrote:
When a woman sleeps around she's "a stud".

When a man sleeps around he's "a whore".

Still no explanation for Richard Simmons.
shouldn't it be the other way around?


... or Juan Gabriel here in Mexico


Don't confuse me. Laughing
0 Replies
 
Pantalones
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 03:52 am
sorry, not my intention

but.. aren't men the 'studs' and women the 'whores'?


and Juan Gabriel is a mexican singer who is well known to be effeminate and I think it's now well known that he's gay... so he could be the mexican counterpart to Richard Simmons
0 Replies
 
CerealKiller
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 03:57 am
JoeFX wrote:
sorry, not my intention

but.. aren't men the 'studs' and women the 'whores'?


and Juan Gabriel is a mexican singer who is well known to be effeminate and I think it's now well known that he's gay... so he could be the mexican counterpart to Richard Simmons


Yes, as the saying goes. I was using irony. But there should be no difference in labeling people for the same act.

Juan Gabriel is the mexican Richard Simmons. I did not know that. Our countries should be proud.
0 Replies
 
Wanderer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 07:23 am
Gender types can be said to be social constructs but I also believe there is a natural general type of each, caused by hormonal levels and reproduction role necessity.
0 Replies
 
BoGoWo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 08:39 am
when considering sexual categorization, one should always keep two important, but often ignored aspects of sex in mind; sexuality is a continuum - i.e. whereas there are 'men' and 'women', the purity of this 'black/white' differentiation is widely blurred over a very large range of variation, with few, if any, examples of the 'absolute';
secondly the importance of sexuality is greatly overrated; it actually has an impact over a tiny fraction of life activities, where it is dominant over other personality factors. This last factor is, of course widely misunderstood and the importance of sex has been exaggerated out of proportion by social practices born of the natural kingdom's preoccupation with 'procreation' - hence 'survival'; which in the human species has been 'hyped' into a virtual obsession.
0 Replies
 
coming
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 01:26 pm
Is the subject male or female?
JoeFx
The rules.
Here are the utilitarian rules which factor into all circumstances.
If it benefit me and you pay or if we both benefits than you pass the rules. If neither of us benefit or you benefit at my expense than it is in violation of the rules. Simple!
0 Replies
 
john-nyc
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2004 06:16 pm
Re: Is the subject male or female?
coming wrote:
JoeFx
The rules.
Here are the utilitarian rules which factor into all circumstances.
If it benefit me and you pay or if we both benefits than you pass the rules. If neither of us benefit or you benefit at my expense than it is in violation of the rules. Simple!


I need an expansion of who "you" and "me" are in this context.

I assume the "rules" to be laws (or regulations).
0 Replies
 
coming
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2004 03:10 am
john/nyc wrote:
coming wrote:
JoeFx
The rules.

I need an expansion of who "you" and "me" are in this context.

I assume the "rules" to be laws (or regulations).

Do I detect the scent of a smart ass lawyer?
In layman term you refer to the applicant to be treated as male/female and me is the smug who has to decide who they are. For example if I am the club bouncer and my boss say to me its a hen night and its ladies only I am not going to deny the pleasure of a man dress to the high as a girl if hens want him there. Its a win win situation. On the other hand if the boss he is a guy and I get kick out of the door than the mob is having a good time at my expense!
0 Replies
 
Pantalones
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2004 12:13 pm
I think I understand, but at the same time I don't Razz
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2004 12:37 pm
This is why marriage, despite it's flaws can be a great equalizer. If you, as a guy, are thinking "crap, what the hell did I do now," you are probably trying to actually save your relationship, and you do not have to be married to go through that. If she's thinking "what a bastard, how could he do this to me," she is probably also thinking about saving the relationship, even if she's off to her mother, or a friend. I don't think it's so much a matter of preconceived 'roles' as it is about how much respect we give to another human being we care about. Despite what some may think, being strong does mean being strong for others. That alone makes you stronger yourself.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Men & Women
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/23/2021 at 08:54:40