Pubblicato da res publica : quaderni europei maggio 2025
Biological and Cultural Sex
Giovanni De Sio Cesari
Becoming a Man or a Woman
Male and female are natural biological designations, determined by an
individual’s sexual organs; "man" and "woman," however, are cultural and
variable concepts. Females give birth, but it is women who wear necklaces, high
heels, and skirts. Yet, in other times and places, it was men who wore necklaces,
high heels, and skirts. Males fertilize females, but in the past, men were the
ones with short hair and pants—even though this is no longer exclusive today.
Clothing, like customs and traditions, changes over time and is learned, but it
is still essential that men and women reflect their biological sex, male or
female.
Nowadays, behaviors that do not align with biological data are increasingly seen
as normal, in what is often referred to as "liquid sex." As in every domain,
sexuality also includes anomalies, such as same-sex desire or fetishism. In my
view, the issue is not whether these are anomalies, but how they are regarded.
In the past, such behaviors were criminalized, while today it seems right and
reasonable to accept these anomalies—just as we accept other conditions like
infertility, sensory impairments, or limited mobility. In fact, people affected
by such conditions are often treated with particular care.
Biologically, we are born male or female, but we become men and women according
to the culture of the society we live in. The social construct gives concrete
form and meaning to the natural fact of sex, as happens in all aspects of life.
Parents educate their children by natural instinct, but the characteristics of
this education depend on cultural context. Certainly, education in Sparta was
not the same as it is today, and even that of just a few generations ago was
quite different from our own.
According to the education received, females become women and males become men,
following cultural models that, however, cannot deny the facts of biological
nature.
When we say someone is a "real man" or a "real woman," we are always referring
to a particular model of man or woman, which varies across time, place, and
personal perspective.
Democracy and Sex
Democracy proclaims equal rights for minorities, but these usually refer to
ethnic, linguistic, or religious minorities. The differences between men and
women do not fall into these categories.
For centuries, democracies accepted that the father was the head of the
household, that women were excluded from voting, and that dowries—although
belonging to the wife—were managed by the husband, who was seen as the competent
party.
Likewise, even in democracies, homosexuality was once considered a dangerous
social degeneration, whereas today it is increasingly seen as a harmless
variation.
The perception of women and homosexuality has changed over time, and this has
little to do with democracy itself. As proof, in the ancient world, democracy as
we know it was practically unknown, yet homosexuality was often accepted and
even practiced by great thinkers and emperors.
It is true, however, that our Constitution—like all modern ones—proclaims
equality between men and women. But this does not necessarily mean they must
have the same functions and roles. Certainly, no gender discrimination should
occur in political, administrative, or managerial roles. But within couples and
families, can mother and father really be interchangeable roles? I don’t think
so.
Everyone acknowledges that real differences exist and I believe they always will:
men and women differ physically and psychologically.
I would say that in the past, differences were emphasized, and now they are
underestimated—but they exist and cannot be erased by any regulation.
Indeed, in reality, even judges in custody cases generally assign children to
the mother. In common practice, for example, a marriage or partnership can occur
even if only the man has a job—but not the other way around.
Roles always persist, despite abstract theories that deny them.
It seems to me that feminism—or rather, a certain type of feminism—fails to see
this and views sexual differences as purely accidental, almost as if they were
like hair color.
Some say that one day (who knows when) there will be no more differences between
men and women, while I believe there always will be—because they correspond to
inherent human nature. In the human species, there is a marked sexual dimorphism.
Indeed, despite theories that deny it, even in our world today, there are
differences between men and women. Let’s look at a few examples.
Man and Woman
In the past, marriage was mostly arranged by families, based on dowries and
social status, with little regard for age or mutual attraction (what we call
love). At best, moral qualities—especially of the woman—were carefully
considered.
Today, social convention dictates that young people choose for themselves.
However, it is still the man who must declare his love, and the woman who
accepts or refuses.
At least formally—because it is often said that it is the woman who chooses who
will choose her, and I think that’s true.
This is why the first invitation to "go out" must come from the man, who then
also pays the bill (splitting it in half is frowned upon).
I've always seen boys driving scooters with girls on the back—but never the
reverse.
By nature, it is the woman who seduces the man with her body, smile, tears, and
gestures, and it is hard for a man to resist.
A woman in need of help is irresistibly attractive to a man, while the man women
find attractive is strong and decisive.
A crying woman (or one who pretends to cry) is irresistible, while a crying man
seems laughable.
I believe a woman prefers a confident and determined man because she
instinctively feels more protected. Insecurity, weakness, and excessive
emotionality are not attractive.
Still, the question remains: what does it mean to be strong and determined?
These are somewhat ambiguous concepts. A woman is instinctively drawn to a
strong man because he offers protection for herself and her children.
But protection does not mean abuse—abuse is its opposite.
Fortunately, in our civilization, we have a sense of what used to be called
chivalry: hitting women is vile and shameful.
A woman, on the other hand, may give a symbolic slap to a man who disrespects
her by touching her without consent—but this is a special case.
It was once considered normal—socially acceptable—for a husband to beat his wife
if she misbehaved, at least in his judgment.
Then the idea that "a woman shouldn't be struck, not even with a flower" spread
from the upper classes to society as a whole.
In the past, a beaten woman could say so aloud, and society would decide whether
she deserved it. Today, it is harder for a woman to speak out.
She would be expected to take drastic action—to break off the relationship—and
that is not always materially possible, or maybe she doesn’t want to.
So she prefers to remain silent, and society often tries to reconcile the couple,
with the husband expressing regret.
In short, once it was the beaten woman who apologized; now it is the husband.
The problem may also be tied to machismo: a "macho" man is one who satisfies
women sexually.
Because sexuality has a certain element of violence, the rough, slightly
aggressive man is often seen as macho.
Literature is full of women who, disappointed by overly kind and understanding
husbands, are drawn to rude and domineering men.
But couple relationships are about much more than sex. So, young women drawn to
machos later, as mature women, regret their choices—this is often the story of
abused women.
Sexuality and Frugality
For men, sexual desire and performance (potency) are a source of pride. For
women, a certain moderation is preferred: she shouldn’t be frigid, but excessive
desire (nymphomania) is frowned upon.
This also has a physiological basis: the male needs to release semen, which he
produces in cycles that vary by individual, while the female has no such
physiological necessity and can go without sex for long periods.
From this stems a different ethical evaluation of sexuality—stricter for women.
In the past, virginity was strictly demanded of brides—no longer.
In fact, remaining a virgin past a certain (ever-lowering) age is now seen as
shameful.
I would say that the term whore (prostitute) refers to two opposing categories
of women: those who have sex only for money, without pleasure, and those who do
it only for pleasure.
An honest woman, by contrast, is one who has sex for love or as a life choice—though
in this case, she must also ensure the means to support a family; two hearts and
a hut are not enough.
A man prefers an easy woman for a fling, but wants a reserved, hard-to-get woman
as a partner—because she seems more likely to be faithful.
One major change in our
times compared to the past is the inclination to spend money.
In the past, when poverty was widespread, one of the most valued traits in a
woman was her ability to spend wisely; good wives were champions of frugality.
The husband gave his entire salary to his wife, who left him a small amount for
personal expenses (basically, an allowance), and she managed everything.
So, even if the man was considered the head of the household, in practice, it
was the wife who actually ran things.