>>26670610gender isnt defined as what clothes you wear, i dont think anybody ever made that argument, if you want to get into gender roles you go into nature again, what do men traditionally do, in many species they go out and fight and kill other animals for sustenance, while females nurture the young, then there's countless others who dont even stay with their young on either end. but we're talking about humans, and humans have the distinctive exception of being aware to a degree beyond other animals we've been able to observe
Gender is Sex, sex is gender. What you're describing, and what liberals who make similar arguments are failing to realize, is you're describing conscious actions that have no relationship with gender beyond a pure level of utility. it's funny because your kind of arguments try to define nature as being the end all be all in a very dogmatc way while undermining the value of personality and individual intelligence - people do what they want. that's the way of man and it always will be - nobody enforces gender on anybody, other than parents to maybe a 3 year old who tries to put on makeup, rather, people are their own victims and worst enemies - just because 80% (made up figure - the point is majority) of these teen girls wear their little booty shorts doesnt mean society is imposing some gender standard that being a girl means wearing tight fitting ass clothes, it just means a larger majority of those girls are fucking retards who have no idea how to form a basis of how to think and act for themselves desu
the real issue beyond any of this is awareness, and this distracting "but what IS gender" nonsense is just that - nonsense to detract from bigger, more all-encompassing issues
then you've got faggy little kids who just want to detract from all of it with empty arguments and MEMES LOL which again I'm all for in the right amount, but it's easy to see where willful ignorance is winning out over any kind of actual presence of discussion
