It's not "male" and "female" that are social constructs, it's actually "masculine" and "feminine" that are

It's not "male" and "female" that are social constructs, it's actually "masculine" and "feminine" that are.

Prove me wrong.

Attached: FWKErItXwAAvYwm.jpg (1080x740, 87.28K)

True if big. Do you have a link OP? Are you talking about the majestic Tomboy?

Don't feel bad for "TERFS". They wanted feminism, so here you fucking go. Instead, hate both trannies and these stupid ass brain dead feminists that invited this in the first place.

>Prove me wrong.
Men and women have acted the same thoughout all of history. If it were just a social construct it would have to have been constructed the same way simultaneously all over the world.

All you have to do is live in the world to be proved wrong everyday all around you. Boys and girls act and think differently in every culture ever.

Is that not because boys tend to act their cultures idea of masculine and girls tend to act their cultures idea of feminine?

in the first place, what is wrong with """"social constructs"""", ignoring whether they are a thing or not? why is this phrase used like some kind of magic spell that automatically invalidates whatever it is said with?

How does that prove anything wrong

I meant that not even masculine and feminine are social constructs. To some extent, I mean women wearing dresses and men not obviously is.

John Money's mutilation of boys is the strongest evidence that gender isn't a social construct. You can take an intersex child, remove their penis, raise them as a girl, and they still act and behave like a boy. Look up John Money if you want all the proof and evidence for this.

Otherwise, there's a recent trend in Nordic countries to raise their children in a gender neutral way, and despite this, boys will still gravitate to masculine activities and girls will still gravitate to feminine activities. I'm too busy to look up names for you, so do your own google research.

If you're talking about things like high heeled shoes and the colour pink switching from being masculine and feminine fashion. That's a whole separate thing.

Attached: FIp-m9HaQAYbLbU.jpg (2048x1536, 743.62K)

Except in some cultures, wearing certain kinds of dresses could be seen as masculine.

None of them are social constructs because gender roles are based in biological reality
Also ynbaw kys

Attached: 1624322281776.jpg (768x719, 113.58K)

But why does it keep happening in every culture? Why did both Rome and China have patriarchal societies? Why did the patriarchal Portuguese land on Japanese shores for the first time to find a patriarchal Japan? Our cultures are adapting around nature.

"Gender roles" and "masculine and feminine" aren't synonym. The idea of a skirt being feminine here, but a kilt being masculine in Scotland, is not based on a "biological reality."

>Why did both Rome and China have patriarchal societies? Why did the patriarchal Portuguese land on Japanese shores for the first time to find a patriarchal Japan?
Uh, because men are smarter and stronger than women? Was this supposed to be a hard question?

Thou art 110% correct.

Right, that's not. But men doing things like fight wars and women raising the childen is actually based in biology.

name one thing that isn't a social construct

none of this matters

faggot

Fighting a war goes a bit beyond a "social construct" kiddo. Men do that because they're biologically capable of doing so over women, it's not just because of perceptions of masculinity.

The sun.

That's what I meant.