According to the definition, gender is a socially constructed concept—not biological but shaped by society. For example, consider the fictional character Tarzan: raised in the jungle, he behaved like animals. But once socialized into human society, he began to behave like a human. This example illustrates how environment and social norms shape individuals.
Traditionally, society promoted binary gender roles (male/female). Today, many modern societies recognize 70+ gender identities and are introducing concepts like SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) into education systems.
This trend is also reflected in official documents and forms, where there are now many gender options beyond just male, female, and intersex, instead of the traditional two or three categories.
If gender is a social construct, then isn’t promoting many gender identities also a form of norm-making by society? In this view, are we simply replacing one social construct (binary gender) with another (multi-gender)?
From my perspective, I am concerned that this trend may not promote human well-being in the long term. Could it be a practice that leads to confusion rather than clarity about human identity and nature?
Biologically, we know there are female (XX), intersex variations (XXY, XYY, ambiguous cases), and male (XY). Given this, what is the need for so many gender identities? Since gender is socially constructed, why keep constructing more and more? When it is already challenging to manage biological differences, why complicate it further in the name of identity?
I wonder if this is an unnecessary complication that might obscure major social problems or even serve as a profit-making tool.
I have noticed increasing attempts to introduce new gender identities into the education system and promote LGBTQ+ rights through INGO-funded programs, presenting these changes as signs of progress and liberation. Even in Bangladesh, scholars and institutions are echoing these ideas under the banners of development, human rights, and justice.
But I ask myself—are we truly progressing, or are we just replacing one set of social constructs with another? And if yes, then why?
Hello,
Just as a contribution, I would like to respond to three points raised in the question:
1) In this view, are we simply replacing one social construct (binary gender) with another (multi-gender)? There is no problem in replacing one system with another - as long as we can guarantee that the new system is an advance on the ongoing one. In my view, since the biologically defined binary gender is no longer acceptable in view of societal demands for more inclusive demand, it is no wonder we are experiencing this miriad of propositions as far as genders.
2) Could it be a practice that leads to confusion rather than clarity about human identity and nature? Human identity must be represented by its diversity, or humanity will never be just and inclusive.
3) Biologically, we know there are female (XX), intersex variations (XXY, XYY, ambiguous cases), and male (XY). Given this, what is the need for so many gender identities? But if gender is socially costructed, then we have to drop the attempt to restrict the discussion to biologically determined sexes.
If gender is socially constructed, we are constructing more categories because society evolves and recognizes the diversity of human experiences and identities. As cultures and individuals challenge binary norms, new gender identities emerge to reflect and affirm people’s lived realities and needs for recognition and inclusion. This ongoing construction is both a response to social change and a way to ensure everyone can express themselves authentically within society
Gender is socially constructed (not individually constructed); therefore, new genders relate to identities that have become socially relevant. Moreover, we must keep in mind that gender is not necessarily linked to biological traits. We use different grammatical genders to refer to different kinds of human beings, but the only reason we do so is that gender identities are socially relevant to us.
For instance, in German, die Schildkröte (“the turtle”) is a feminine noun that refers to all turtles, both male and female. Similarly, in Spanish, el bolígrafo (“the pen”) is a masculine noun, though this classification has no basis in biological criteria.
Basically, we keep constructing genders because we need them. Whether that need is "well grounded" or "good" for society is a moral assessment that I'm in no position to make.
We keep expanding Gender because we want to maintain our cultures, religion and forefathers legacy.
Under capitalism there can be enhanced opportunities for profit via an expanded commodification of gender, so the more genders, the merrier. As a present-day Shakespeare might advise, "Assume a gender, if you have it not."
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Organizational Psychology
- Training