gender

Mine-

I think I agree with what you're saying about gender (I'm no expert) with
one exception:


> Regarding your last question, let me reiterate that gender is a social
> construct. There are two biological sexes or variations between the two.


OK, so far so good.  (No Derridean "failure to communicate.")



> 
> What I know is that gender has nothing to do with the biological basis of
> sex differences. 


This is where I lose you.  If you mean that the sex differences do not
*determine any particular gender*, then fine, of course.  (Logically
there are but 2 sexes, and an infinite number of possible genders.)  But
gender, I thought, was precisely about how social roles are defined for
people according to their sex.  Nothing complicated or sinister here, just
a simple definition.  If the role is not defined in relation to sex, then
it could be wage laborer, or episcopalian, or something else, but we
wouldn't call it gender.  Right?  So gender in that simple way has
everything to do with biological sex difference.

Richard