
Originally Posted by
Barbara4242
NJ: it seems we've been discussing and debating what your post addresses for some time now. There is another thread fairly close in time to Rita's that deeply delves into this subject. At any rate, please don't think I am being critical of your post, I am just convinced there needs to be some clarity. Anatomical sex and gender are two different things. Medical evidence has established that there are differences above and beyond anatomy, though we are a long way from understanding what the medical evidence means. There are, for example, certain areas of the brain that are different between males and females (well actually it is more clusters of cells within the brain). Another example: the hormone bath (or wash) during gestation actually happens. So, both of these are not theories, they happen and/or exist. It is the effects of them, though, that can only be placed in the realm of theory at this time. We don't "come off the factory floor" the same save our "bits."
Socialization (and the arguments about the role of nurture) doesn't seem to be a valid explanation as there are too many childhood backgrounds represented that directly conflict with one another -- matriarchial/patriarchial; broken home/solid home; sibblings/no sibblings, etc. I am convinced that socialization cannot hold the answer -- it is entirely too subjective. The scientific world, as you call it, seems to be progressing in a promising direction, albeit at a snail's pace, in re certain biological factors that are demonstrable. Perhaps this is why the most current medical literature on therapy suggests that acceptance and accomodation is the prefered treatment. The most up-to-date professional view is that this isn't something that can be fixed, it just is what it is -- and I am, personally, glad that this is the way it seems to be!!!
I appreciate your academic approach and contribution.