gender's definition was always tied to sex. If we want (let's assume) to redefine it, do it properly at least

otherwise we can just drop "gender" and just use "sex"

Pretty much.

Point being, you are talking about soda and we are talking about a specific soda. This is why i asked you not to confuse the specific definitions we are agreed upon for this discussion. Arch already state that sex is binary and gender =/= sex. Because i was interested in his views, i've been using his definition.

ill be back in a bit, need to eat

my point is simple, if gender != sex, define it in a way that is useful for society

otherwise the use of the word becomes irrelevant

well, that is what i was trying to figure out

we are in sync then

yes. which is what i was saying earlier

what would be the evolution of the word? where do you think this will go?

i was trying to figure out what Arch thought they (the left) referred to since he said he doesn't think gender exists despite saying sex exists.

clearly he must have some concept of it to stay it doesn't exist.

>that will translate into an effect on psychology and also evolutionary psychology

>the only thing gender means to me that makes sense is for it to mean social and psychological sexual characteristics

>>>psychological sexual characteristics
This is not "gender", and I wouldn't call that gender

"sexual characteristics" as in physical only?

that would be useful 🤔

i think, in that statement, psychological characteristics refers to parts of people personalities that seem prone to being affected by your sex hormone levels, and then that translates into social sphere.

that would mean gender changes

which would make the word useless

if that is gender, then it is not binary. However, it would, i agree, be useless as that there would be as many potential genders as there are individuals on earth. that seems to be where we are going, as tim pointed out in that video about the 31+ genders.

idk why people started to define their identity on the gender category

because people are dumb on average

your identity is your identity

it is not gender

also, your identity isn't defined uniquely by sexual characteristics

trying to define your "sexual characteristics", both physical and phychological all into a category is, well.. retarded

this would be why anyone not alt-left calls them stupid

it will destroy the word "gender", and that's it

that seems to be all SJWs are good at, destroying things

And yelling at the sky.

they never want to make anything new, just destroy was already here

Or change something that already exists.

but if we agree it is stupid, why are you going along with it?

It's just talking to someone on their terms/for the sake of argument.

To learn more.

sjw: "comics are sexist"
random: "make your own comics then"
sjw: "NO! NO SEXIST COMICS ARE ALLOWED"
*changes everything, killing comics*
sjw: "ah, much better"

@JadenFrostwolf we weren't all here entertaining the idea, some ppl here really think we should redefine gender

No, I know.

@.B because in order to have any kind of constructive conversation, you need to work from a common vocabulary. And its much easier to destroy a persons argument if you use their vocabulary against them rather than try and get them to use your own.