Or, the sex/gender difference that is not just one?
(This post includes research from my exceptional graduate associate, Lucia Lykke.)
Not long ago I had been corrected by another sociologist: “Phil – ‘female’ and ‘male’ refer to one’s intercourse, perhaps maybe not gender.”
Feminists — including feminist sociologists — have made progress that is important drawing the conceptual difference between intercourse and sex, with intercourse the biological and gender the social categories. Using this, possibly, we could observe that gendered behavior had not been merely a manifestation of sex groups — related to your term “sex roles” — but a socially-constructed group of practices layered along with a crude biological base.
Lucia notifies me personally we are able to date this to Simone de Beauvoir in the 2nd Intercourse. In 1949 she composed:
It seems, then, that each and every feminine person is definitely not a girl; to be so considered she must share for the reason that mystical and threatened truth called femininity.
Later on, she included, “One is certainly not created, but alternatively becomes, a female.” And also this is exactly what Judith Butler put straight down once the foot of the gender/sex difference, calling it “the distinguished contribution of Simone de Beauvoir’s formulation”:
The difference between intercourse and sex happens to be imperative to the long-standing effort that is feminist debunk the declare that structure is destiny… At its restriction, then, the sex/gender difference suggests a radical heteronomy of normal bodies and built genders aided by the consequence that ‘being’ female and ‘being’ a woman are a couple of very different kind of being. Læs videre “Why we don’t protect the sex-versus-gender distinction”