>>12952956Everything is generally on a spectrum- some people are closer to 100% straight or 100% gay, most people are somewhere in between; there are clusters on the spectrum, and so we draw boxes around these clusters to make it easier to talk about differences between people at different parts of the spectrum.
Some people flip it around in their head, and instead of thinking "we drew these boxes around people's habits to capture mostly-right information", they think "these boxes are reality and people come from these boxes alone", and then get confused when someone doesn't fit into a box- "maybe there's another box I missed?" But you draw too many boxes, then you are back to square one- every person having their own box, which makes it useless.
This is what's called a "social construct" - not true boxes that we circle groups with that works for like 90% of people, so they work well enough when we speak about the groups "in general". Species is the same concept; we like to define animals based on species because it works most of the time, but it fails under close inspection (look up Ring Species). But it works 90% of the time as fake social-construct boxes, so we use it.
Unfortunately libtards took the word "social-construct" and now it triggers (lel) me every time I hear someone abuse it without knowing what it actually means
