This week, I've talked about the notion of sex in humans as a social construct. My aim isn't to suggest that sex is purely a fabrication of human society—given the biological definition of sex based on gamete production—but to highlight that the societal operation of the male/female distinction, primarily based on sex assignment by doctors at birth, often misaligns with this biological definition.

The demotion of Pluto from its planetary status, as decided by a scientific community vote in 2006, serves as a parallel, illustrating how societal decisions or classifications impact our understanding of scientific concepts or natural phenomena. Just as Pluto remains the same celestial body despite its reclassification, our scientific interest in it continues unabated by the social decision to label it differently. This serves as a reminder that the labels we apply, whether in astronomy or in understanding human diversity, are often more reflective of our societal consensus than of intrinsic scientific changes. Similarly, I discussed the concept of race, another societal construct based on the superficial "eye-ball test" of skin color, which lacks a solid scientific foundation.

Adding to this discourse, the construction of homosexuality as an identity further illustrates the impact of societal constructs on our understanding of human behavior and identity. Michel Foucault's work reveals that defining homosexuality as an identity is a product of social construction. Behaviors now associated with homosexual identity have always existed and are observable across the animal kingdom. A biologist once remarked to me, "Those who think it's unnatural haven't looked at nature!" Yet, it's the categorization and definition of these behaviors as an identity deviating from the 'normal' that underscores the social construct.

Alongside the construction of the concept of homosexuality, there emerged a new social construct: heterosexuality. Heterosexuality was naturalized and established as the 'new normal' through scientific inquiry. This transformation was heavily influenced by centuries of evolving culture, where moral norms intertwined with religious dogmas, and was further propelled by the burgeoning influence of Enlightenment science. Scientists, armed with the tools and authority of their discipline, sought to provide natural justifications for these emerging social distinctions, thereby becoming contributors to a patriarchal system. This system cleverly leveraged scientific discoveries to cement and normalize these constructs, embedding them deeply within the fabric of society. In this process, heterosexuality became the natural norm, while homosexuality was framed as the aberrational deviance.

This exploration into the social constructions of sex, race, homosexuality, and heterosexuality challenges us to reflect on the role of scientific inquiry in reinforcing or challenging societal norms and perceptions. It invites a reconsideration of how we define identity and deviation in the context of an ever-evolving social and scientific landscape.