Posts

Showing posts with the label Social constructionism

WHY MALE AND FEMALE MATTER

Image
By Jeff Johnston Ask people today  if  men and women are different or  how  men and women are different. You’re likely to get a wide variety of responses. Some will insist that there is no difference between men and women – except for reproductive organs . Many will say that all differences between the two sexes are learned; they are a social construct . Some will question your basic premise that there are two sexes. Why limit it to only two? Others will insist that gender is fluid, that people can express hundreds of different genders, or that gender is changeable, that a man can transition into a woman. Many people will not even know how to respond, or whether they should respond. Isn’t it sexist to say that women are different from men? What a state of confusion we live in. While obviously we can’t delve very deeply into this topic in a short article, here are some of the things we believe about men and women and why it matters that there are two sexes. MALE AND FEMALE–CREATED IN

New European Convention Defines “Gender” as Social Construct

Image
Image via Wikipedia The 47 Member States of the Council of Europe are close to finalizing a new convention that defines “gender” as a social construct , rather than as a distinction grounded in biology. According to the new Council of Europe convention on eliminating violence against women, gender “shall mean the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for women and men.” Even though “gender” has appeared in other documents, no binding definition of the word has ever been accepted by Council of Europe members. This draft Convention would be the first international treaty to add a sociological component of gender to the universally understood biological context. Luca Volontè, a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, told the Friday Fax, “The ideological thrust of many movements and lobbies linked to the ideology of ‘gender’ has ruined the text of a convention that could be very important. D