Yes, but it doesn't pay to get too hung up on the extremes of the curve. The disparities after all are not there because of the people on the edges not being acknowledged.
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. It is, of course, the extremes of the curve which drives the perception of sexual difference--if the beginning and ends of the graph were cut off, so that the strongest man was no stronger than the strongest woman and the weakest woman no weaker than the weakest man, a difference (although, still, a difference between two groups which are not natural categories, because my metaphysics does not permit any such thing as a natural category) might still be statistically demonstrable, but I doubt it'd feel as real.
I'm not sure if you could say that it wasn't 'real' though, I suppose it depends on what value you are giving to 'real'.
Well, I suppose the key is that my metaphysics has no place for anything being any more "real" than that value of "real"--except for the unspeakably mystical, which is "really real," but of course we can't talk about that.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-22 07:36 pm (UTC)I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. It is, of course, the extremes of the curve which drives the perception of sexual difference--if the beginning and ends of the graph were cut off, so that the strongest man was no stronger than the strongest woman and the weakest woman no weaker than the weakest man, a difference (although, still, a difference between two groups which are not natural categories, because my metaphysics does not permit any such thing as a natural category) might still be statistically demonstrable, but I doubt it'd feel as real.
I'm not sure if you could say that it wasn't 'real' though, I suppose it depends on what value you are giving to 'real'.
Well, I suppose the key is that my metaphysics has no place for anything being any more "real" than that value of "real"--except for the unspeakably mystical, which is "really real," but of course we can't talk about that.