I'm interested.
It was your claim that all words are social constructions so I was curious how you would handle those.

"not" was a meme for ages.

However again its just nittery.

Language is a system of symbols that derive their meaning from social construction.

Wat bout and tho is not a counter argument.

If we are going to that level of nittery I will just point out than "it" as a symbol has no meaning unless socially agreed upon.

If I use "it" speaking to someone who does not speak English it is just a sound.

Once again, social constructions are ideas. They can only exist within the minds of individuals.

Games and sports can have social constructions associated with them-- but they are not social constructions in and of themselves. Parents thinking that their children need to play a sport is a social construct. The sport itself is not. It's not hard.

That's definitely what I'm telling the cashier the next time they ask me for money at the coffeeshop. It only exists in your mind buddy--now hand over the drugs

Language derives its meaning from shared usage, but just because that happens through social interaction does not make it a social construction.

Your argument is essentially "because language is communication and communication is social, language is therefore a social construction". And I can see how someone could think this obviously but it's just not how the term is used.

That's pretty weird grammar. And 'women' isn't a pronoun. But sure, if you want to identify as a women or non-binary that is entirely up to you. If you are just doing it mockingly because you are still struggling with the entire concept of trans people and this is your edgy way to express that well that's a you problem.

Not a holiday but that does not mean all sorts of politicians do not go out of their way historically to get in a 'Happy Mothers day' sound bite on the news, along with thanks for the role mothers play in society.

I suspect this coming Mother's day the language used will be more covert, as i mentioned. They will not say 'Happy Birthing People day and we want to give lots of thanks to the role Birthing People play in our society' and instead will say something more along the lines of 'we want to recognize the role and importance of the process of giving birth, in our society and thank those who have undertaken that, and on behalf of all Canadians, we thank you'.


And to be clear, I have no issue with it. I just noticed that Politicians generally seem to want to avoid the term 'Birthing People' and seem to try and just generasize the term Mother instead by speaking about the process and avoiding any mention of 'Mothers'.

To uke and ganstaman, or anyone who wants to answer, since I do not know this answer. If a transman, conceives and delivers a baby, is it appropriate to say Happy Fathers day to them on Fathers day and some version of Happy Birthing person to them on Mothers day?

That may sound like a disingenuous question but it is not as it would seem to me, they SHOULD be addressed on both days, as they now participate in both roles???


That is why i legit think, the better path is to simply re-define the term Father to ALSO include 'Transmen who have babies'. Language can rightly be coopted and changed. That is part of the evolution of language, and rather redefining what a 'Mother' has historically meant to include transmen, why not instead redefine what a 'Father' has historically meant to include 'transmen who give birth'???

Luckbox, when exactly is your big thesis reveal coming? You've been swirling around with silly games about what precisely social construct means....but so ****ing what?

That is simply not true and is purely cool story bro on your behalf.

I dont know where you got this idea from but its utterly false.

This shouldn't be so incredibly hard for you. Mother/Father are gendered terms. Trans people typically use the terms associated with their gender. So yes, a trans man most likely says they are the father of his child, not the mother, and so you would wish him a happy fathers day and not a happy mothers day. But if you find this terribly confusing, just follow the lead of what the trans person in your life uses, and it is ok to respectfully ask too.

But there are linguistic traps and it should not be glossed over nor denied.

You work in an Uni setting so you might feel this is clear and easy but for most people who may have almost no interaction with this topic, this is not clear at all.

See my question above as I am curious about your answer.

A transman, has a baby. Fathers day occurs - how do you address that with that person?
Mothers day occurs - how do you address that with that person?

So a transman who just had a baby, is to be ignored on Mothers Day? No mention to them on that 'historical' recognition of the role of 'mothering = giving birth and no attempt to redefine it to include them on that day?

Don't be prickish or lecturey about this, as this is legit question.

Language uses totally arbitrary symbols, these symbols have no meaning outside of the social construct that gives them meaning, otherwise they are just random shapes and random sounds.

Language is a system of symbology, its a social construct and its not even close to debatable outside of someone who obviously full of hot takes.

Sport not a social construct is utterly false and only someone who is utterly and totally mistaken on this issue could argue otherwise.

I've already answered your trivial question so instead this is your periodic reminder that you should put spaces between trans and man/woman, as you've been told many times before. It is just like how you shouldn't say "blackman" or "fastman" or "stupidman". Spaces go between adjectives and nouns.


Is there any other "linguistic traps" you are still worried about?

Well as I said, take the lead from the trans people in your life (note: note transpeople), because it is up to them. People can be different and if a trans person wants to celebrate both, or either, or neither, then great!

But as a general rule of thumb a trans man is a father and a trans woman is a mother. Just as they would be a daughter/sister/aunt/etc and every other word using the gender they identify with.

Besides, thinking of "mother" as "birthing person" is problematic in many ways outside of trans people. Surrogates, lesbians, adoptions, etc. Motherhood is a role about being a female parent in their lives.

No disrespect but i think people need to over think this. Lets see how uke replies to my genuine questions as I suspect he will be both snarky and belittling over it, but perhaps not after reading these requests to not be.

The very fact you are saying 'each family will figure it out' shows how confusing it will be for 'others' to know how to address them, and since most 'others' know that in so many instances, any mistake (perceived failure of the purity test) is to be called out and person belittled as 'this stuff is clear and easy, so how can you not know'.

I mean, just look upthread and look how quickly uke jumps into lecturing and belittling mode. He really struggles to not address people in that way, and that is not out of the norm in this area, by so many others, who are more fluent on this topic. They expect you to know what they know, when they know it and not a day after.

I understand the basics of how phonemes combine to create words that we can use to communicate, and there is no need to explain to me how I would have a hard time having an in-depth discussion with someone who only speaks Quechua-- I get that just fine.

But what would prohibit me from having such a conversation would not be that I lack the same social constructs as a Quechua speakers-- even though I undoubtedly do lack many-- but because I don't speak Quechua.

Your mistake is assuming that because humans have created these things (sports, language, presumably other institutions like government) that these things are therefore social constructs.

But that isn't how it works. A social construct refers to a mental object, an ideation . It is a concept that exists within the field of cognitive psychology to help explain why it is people think some of the things that they think. You're mistaking what they think for how they think.

I'm very sorry if you are offended that I'm sometimes a little snarky with you, but my suggestion is you just get over it as opposed to whining to Bobo about your tone policing!

Well until you learn the language you lack the social constructions necessary to organise the random sounds they utter to you into meaning.

Those meanings all being socially constructed, largely relative and subject to massive evolution over time.

Even then its highly possible that you would never grasp Quechua fully if you have been socialised in English because many if not all languages dont have equivalents and unless you live a long time in a given society and absorb much of its culture it can be hard to grasp the full meaning and dare I say nuance of some of the socially constructed language.

No. a country is a classic formal example of a social construct. It is pure social construct.

Ideation of course can be social constructs as well.

I dont know where you got the idea that a country is not a social construct from, hopefully not from an individual with any authority as they are utterly incorrect.

The exclusion you are making only exists in your own mind.

Im guessing you have been taught positively that X is a social construct and then are making the individual assumption that this must mean Y is excluded.

So now I am reading that kids are identifying as cats. Sure why not.

Ideas about countries are the constructions. The countries themselves are real and they aren't just maintained because we all think they exist but because if you try to cross some borders without authorization you'll be shot.

Social constructions are things like 'nationality'-- what does it mean to be an "American" or a "Colombian", or to have a nationality at all.

I learned all this from cognitive psychologists and social psychologists.

Its so very American to think that just because something is "real" it cant be a social construct.