I find the way gender has been divided from biological sex fascinating, given that biological sex defines one of the fundamental elements of human existence (reproduction) and gender is primarily explained as a subjective mental phenomenon. If I were to divide the two, I would be forced to conclude that the more important category was sex, as it carries more profound meaning for human inter-relations. With that said, This points to an important difference in perspective as the people who advocate the idea of separating gender from sex do not accord a central place to reproduction in their anthropology and instead focus on other elements.
They do; perhaps just not necessarily in the way you would wish it. Stating that 'a man can get pregnant'; accepting the premise that a trans man may carry a child, and is still a man, is essentially 'according a central place to reproduction' in that specific incidence.
If the article had said that men can get ovarian cancer, would that be according a central place to ovarian cancer? (Incidentally, I googled it and found an
article discussing the topic of ovarian cancer in FTM transgender individuals.) Articles are frequently written about topics that society overall accords a low level of importance to. That an article was written about human reproduction does not mean that society overall accords sufficient importance to human reproduction. And you admit that I do not find this level of focus satisfactory, so I am overall unsure what your point is intended to be.
Poll
