this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2025
10 points (100.0% liked)

LGBTQ+

7143 readers
100 users here now

All forms of queer news and culture. Nonsectarian and non-exclusionary.

See also this community's sister subs Feminism, Neurodivergence, Disability, and POC


Beehaw currently maintains an LGBTQ+ resource wiki, which is up to date as of July 10, 2023.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 33 points 4 months ago (4 children)

No but like it actually is. There is such diversity within what most people would call a rigidly defined "biological sex".

[–] chosensilence@pawb.social 8 points 4 months ago (3 children)

while all of this is fascinating, i think the user was replying off a gut instinct to the interpreted rejection of biological drivers factoring in to sex. hearing "biological sex is a social construct" doesn't read the same as "biological sex as an enforced standard is a social construct that prefers the binary of male and female," because that is ultimately the point being made; not that genes themselves don't matter, which is what people like the poster hear/see when flat statements without context are made.

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 13 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I don't disagree. But also genes are not a suitable criteria for the post context (r*pe survivors receiving support) so the distinction is moot here imo

[–] chosensilence@pawb.social 4 points 4 months ago

ah sure, i get ya.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)