It would be useful if people who use concepts like 'social construct' actually understood what they mean. Something that, according to the relevant theories, is 'socially constructed' is still real, as society is real. 'Socially constructed' does not mean 'fake; false; fraudulent'.
Sure, but the relevant point isn't that social constructs are "fake, false, fraudulent", but that they are potentially more flexible than if it were all biologically determined. And considering the long (and ongoing) history of arguing the latter to justify sex
ism and other discriminatory "isms" that have many, very real consequences, I reckon it's especially important to push back on the ideology that underpins it---because it
is ideology, not "an objective understanding of biology."
