Mr. SmartyPants (post: 1514385) wrote:I'll pull a quote from wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_construction_of_gender_differenceTo summarize, people internalize what society describes as "male behaviors" or "female behaviors" (because gender is not the same as sex, this is very important to differentiate between). There's no inherent or intrinsic value/meaning to "masculine" or "feminine". They only exist because people have socially defined what those traits are and what they mean. Thus, they don't "exist" in the sense that they hold any sort of concrete meaning. They're made up ideas which people collectively accept as true. It's like money. Money has no actual worth. It's only worth something because society has created it as a means for exchange of other goods and services. Thus, its value is socially constructed, i.e. nonexistent.
Real currency-based economies are not compatible with monopoly money as you just outlined. If this was so, Zimbabwe would be the overall richest nation in the world. If it was totally abject of any value whatsoever, then elements such as inflation, purchasing power and general econometrics would not have existed. All of whom grant real power and balance to said money. It is not 'just' socially constructed with no intent of value or worth, and that's why you have monetary policies.
But if it really is nonexistent of value or worth as you claim, would you mind giving me some?
As far as the on-topic goes. I think this got a bit heated over a generalization. Nothing to jump up and down about as I am sure there was no intention of stating all females are a cloned with the same understanding, moral compass ect.