[quote=@NightinGem] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3786754/ Here ya go! :) I have multitudes saved and am entirely willing to debate! Also, I hope you don't mind, but I cited directly rather than from memory, as that tends to be more accurate~ [/quote] That's (a) wildly out of context, (b) not an assertion, and (c) not backed up by any experimentation or evidence. A. The subject of the article, quoted here (first the objective statement, then the conclusion): [quote] First, to what extent are sex and gender incorporated into research on genetics and health? Second, how might social science understandings of sex and gender, and gender differences in health, become more integrated into scholarship in this area? ... We argue that making the connection between sex-linked biological variation and gender differences in health outcomes will benefit from greater attention to the intertwining of social and biological variation over the life course.[/quote] Social construction of gender, as it is presented in this article, relates to workplace morbidity, educational advancement, and the like. In no way is the article asserting that biological sex and gender ARE different -- rather, it argues that by considering the social factors (such as workplace risks and education), conclusions resultant from sex will make more sense. B. The article does not at any point assert there is a difference; if it did, it would have to present support for that argument, but it does not. C. The methodology of this research is metadata analysis of other articles searched by keyword. It's glorified googling. No actual science took place.