In general terms? Yes, I agree.

There's a lot of social upbringing that drills this into us. Our biology also helps pave the way for this. There's a lot of reinforcement at every turn - some of it is positive, some of it is negative.

I rather enjoy being a protector. That's not universal for all women though, I'd wager.

Women are expected to manage their homes and the people around them, to facilitate and communicate, to be aware of everyone and their emotions. That's not to say men don't have those skills, but they're not as enforced through indirect, and sometimes direct social cues.

It's a lesson we learn over and over, that strategy and diplomacy pave the way for peace - not open violence. In this sense women, in general, have more learned skills when it comes to negotiating and empathizing.

But again, these skills are learned through socialization and aren't inherent.

Thank you for your service

Edit: Sorry, just realized this was "Womens Stuff" after posting

I have a sneaking suspicion this was sarcastic.

Could've just deleted your comment instead of editing it.

Absolutely those skills are learned through socialization and reinforced over and over by society. There is a little bit of a biological thing that happens with pregnancy that I find quite interesting:

But a recent study - the largest to date - indicates that pregnancy has a profound structural impact on brains and offers new clues into the neurological changes in mums‑to‑be.

It suggests that grey matter - the nerve-rich part of the brain involved in processing information, emotions and empathy - decreases by an average of nearly 5% during pregnancy.

But rather than being a cause for concern, these changes may be beneficial when it comes to caring for newborns, say scientists working on the project in Spain.

One of the dozens of women, now a new mum, who took part in the study told us she welcomed the findings and was "tired of pregnant women being infantilised".

"Rather than becoming dumber, we are becoming more specialised for the job," said Tania Esparza.

The BBC was given exclusive access to the Be Mother project and those who have been taking part in it.

The brains of 127 pregnant women were scanned - before, during and after pregnancy - and compared to scans from a smaller number of women who were not expecting.

The greater the changes in the brain, the more likely women were to say they were relating to, and bonding well, with their babies - the team of scientists found.

It's a temporary change for the most part, but people who have been pregnant have a difference in their grey matter from people who were never pregnant in their life.

Just an interesting little part of biology that is still incredibly under-studied.

It was not

Apologies for my negative-first thinking then. I've got men arguing with me that children can consent to sex with adults and my mindset is not in a very positive place.

Thank you!

That's fascinating. There's so much about women's biology that remains far behind men's medical research. Where is this quoted from?

Oh oops, I forgot to include the source! I pulled it from this BBC article

Thank you!

I think it's a nice thought to reclaim the harsh expectations on women. I think men have been taught to protect male supremacy and other men, not society. When I hear a man say they protect society I just hear an excuse for them to prop up patriarchy.

I've never been pregnant or wished to be, but it still blows my mind. On a podcast recently I discovered that women who've been pregnant carry the cells of their offspring for the rest of their lives, which makes sense that they've been 'hosting' another living organism, but keeps the connection and bond in a beautiful way

The fact these things are just being learnt, is tragic and relegates the biological as well as social importance of women who raise children (including the grannies, aunties, and other women in their 'tribal group')

Society had really done a number on women, and has become the lesser for it

On a podcast recently I discovered that women who’ve been pregnant carry the cells of their offspring for the rest of their lives, which makes sense that they’ve been ‘hosting’ another living organism, but keeps the connection and bond in a beautiful way.

I've always loved this factoid! Knowing I've got my son's imprint on my body for the rest of my life is poetic <3

Its like how mitochondrial DNA passes down through the female line only... we are connected to all our mothers going way back into the past, while keeping a part of any children always in the present

It is beautiful and poetic

This is pretty disappointing to read and leans into the TERF angles of “female/male socialisation” and bioessentialism.

And that’s before we get into the fact that not all cis women become mothers.

In adopted, I have no dna connection to my mother.

This is a real thing that happens during pregnancy.

I have never claimed that all women are mothers or should be mothers.

Edit: I want to make it really, really clear here. I am in no way a TERF and I resent the accusation.

Your mitochondria may beg to differ.

This conversation is not an attack on adopted people or trans women.

Twice in this thread you’ve pushed the socialisation and biology angle about womanhood. It’s upsetting to see.

What about it specifically is upsetting you?

My mitochondria may link me to the person who birthed me, it does not link me to my mother.

My mitochondria may link me to the person who birthed me

That was the exact point that was made.

That you are using these definitions to define womanhood when they are the two most frequently used to discredit mine.

You are not a woman because of your sex, nor are you a woman because of what society told you to be/do growing up.

We are talking about women's roles as protectors. Context matters.

I am not saying that those criteria define women.

Yes, and mine is that such a person is not my mother. The words used by the person I was responding to and the notion I am challenging that motherhood is biologically linked.

You're projecting a lot onto these comments.

Acknowledging how mitochondrial DNA is passed is not a judgment on adopted people.

So women without them are not protectors?

It’s problematic language and thinking, and like I said it’s upsetting to see it here.

No, that's not what I said.

I’m explaining my connections with these concepts and how they are not absolute truths.

What people think of as a mother/woman is a judgement on how society views mothers/women.

I may be a killjoy, but I need to challenge these ways of thinking.

You're attacking allies and very real biological truths of the cis women in here.

Scientific facts, like how mitochondrial DNA is passed from cis women to their offspring, are not TERF ideas that need to be challenged.

I am not “attacking” cis women at all, I am attacking ideas about what biology means in relation to womanhood.

I never claimed dna being passed down was TERF, I used that word in response to your bioessentialiasm and socialisation language when I responded to your comment.

To this users comment I was talking about what motherhood is, and that is not defined by one’s mitochondrial DNA. Mothers and the people who birth us can be completely seperate things, to see the world as everyone’s mother is the person who birthed them strips motherhood from those who did not. It’s something to be mindful of in how we view things.

I’m removing myself from this conversation now, I’ve said my views on these topics and I feel this is starting to get heated.

I am not attacking cis women at all, I am attacking ideas about what biology means in relation to womanhood.

Responding to a study about how cis women's brains are changed during pregnancy by accusing me of pushing TERF ideas sure feels like an attack on cis women.

I'm not equating any of this as definitions of what a woman is. And again, I openly resent you trying to paint me as a TERF here.

Edit:

I’m removing myself from this conversation now, I’ve said my views on these topics and I feel this is starting to get heated.

Yeah, accusing others of pushing TERF ideas with absolutely no basis will get people pretty heated.

I apologise, I wasn’t trying to call you a TERF, and I don’t believe you are one.

I was trying to show where I see that language coming from, it’s something my entire existence depends on pushing back against and challenging these views in relation to womanhood and even motherhood.

I appreciate the apology.

Alot of comments in this thread leave a bad taste so I'll just say my two bits and peace out.

The binary gender system is harmful to all of us. We all have different roles in society, there are protectors among every gender regardless of AGAB.

Also yes, under our current patriarchal society men's "protection" amounts to little more than the organized crime protection money racket.

Gender is a social construct, one that should be challenged at every turn, but it has a huge impact on upbringing and how people treat someone, socially

And, most women are assigned female at birth. Not all women — most. How a body works will influence the kind of person someone becomes. It's an important field of research that lagged behind men's health for centuries. Only recently have we begun to catch up.

No one here is saying there are specific social and biological markers that need to be met to be a woman, but that being a woman often comes with being socialized differently from men and having a different physiology.

Ngl, my heart hurts from this conversation. I try to step really carefully with my words and make sure no one is intentionally excluded or othered with my comments here. I was enjoying the offshoot topics that were developing as well.

Ah well.

There's always someone who thinks you hate waffles just because you like pancakes.

True that lol

Not that it matters, but I've had my own struggles with my gender and dysmorphia. It just so happened that I had posted about it in another community right before these comments were made to me. That doesn't make me immune from saying the wrong thing sometimes, but my intent has never been to exclude trans people. We are on the same side, we are allies.

Humans have a small degree of sexual dimorphism. And that extends to neurology. Those minute differences get magnified many fold by cultural norms, but we're physical beings made of atoms. We're not disembodied spirits floating in the astral plane. We're sexually dimorphic on the outside and on the inside. And most of what differences do exist are a function of hormones rather than genetics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism_in_human_physiology#Brain_and_nervous_system

An example of this magnification is seen externally in something like size and strength. Men naturally are a bit larger and stronger than women. This is an objective and undeniable physical reality. But what gets tacked onto that is a bunch of stuff that isn't scientific or rational. People irrationally use this small kernel of truth to conclude that women are unsuitable for certain careers that involve a lot of physical labor. A real physical example of sexual dimorphism gets wildly blown out of proportion by culture.

We can acknowledge these differences without embracing stereotypes. We can reject bioessentialism without veering into unscientific mysticism.

We don't need to act like conservatives. We don't need to pillory someone who acknowledges very real and objective matters of human biology. Velma did not suggest that pregnant woman were stupid, emotional, or incapable of supporting themselves. She simply made reference to objective physically measurable things.

It's disappointing to see someone slander someone as a Terf or to imply that they said things that they never claimed. I get that this can be a triggering topic, but there's a fine line between rejecting irrational stereotypes and becoming as anti-science as a Republican.

Eh. Trans women can be biologically female and socialized female. I would argue that if your hormones are estrogen-dominated, and have been for a prolonged period, than you're biologically more female than male. And if you live as a woman, out and open in the world, being seen and read as female by the people you meet? What you're experiencing IS female socialization. Socialization is not something unique to children. Anyone read by strangers as female will experience female socialization.

Velma did not suggest that pregnant woman were stupid, emotional, or incapable of supporting themselves. She simply made reference to objective physically measurable things.

Did anyone ever say she did?

Who says you can't change your sex? I for one think it's perfectly possible to do so. Sure, some people like to latch onto a chromosomal definition. But people latch onto that simply because it's the one option that allows them to nearly-universally exclude trans people.

And there's people who say breakfast is delicious because it's cooked round in a pan.

This is pretty disappointing to read and leans into the TERF angles of “female/male socialisation” and bioessentialism.

And that’s before we get into the fact that not all cis women become mothers.

It was pretty heavily implied with this comment that I was resorting to bio-essentialism in order to other transpeople when I was referencing an objective physical process that happens during pregnancy.

Try diagramming Mia's argument. It's a core part of the argument, it's just left for the reader to imply. At best, this was done because Mia assumed the reader would be intelligent enough to connect the dots. At worse, it's a mott-and-bailey argument, pulling the old Charlie Kirk trick of heavily implying something (to the point of being a core part of an argument), and then pretending offense because "I never said that."

Thank you

This is exactly the problem. By differentiating people in binary gender in government legal system, it not only gives less rights to specific genders, which in partiarchal society is mostly women, but especially lgbtq people. For example, by strictly requiring men and women in marriage, gay, trans and nonbinary people have a lot of problems getting them. If only law reffered to every citizen as an ungendered "person" or "human", it will solve many problems and make everyones life happier.

Agreed on all accounts.

It might have been a fun little fact you wanted to share, but it gets perceived in relation to conversation about women's inclination to being protectors.