Four threads and over 10k posts into this topic, some would say we've not made any headway. Personally, I think we've generated some excellent questions for further discussion.
1) The first unanswered question was basically "Why should people be denied entry to spaces which have been set aside for the other gender?"
and it came up in at least two ways; firstly at thread #3 post #1503
, and then again in response to this post
. Here is the latter version:
Originally Posted by theprestige
What makes this question so insightful is that it gets to the crux of an issue which has been little addressed so far: Why segregate by gender at all, once we've given up segregating by sex? What advantages of the original scheme remain which are worth preserving given the social costs of separating everyone into two groups?
2) The next question was from too far back for me to dig up a single reference, but it was basically "What should be the inclusion criteria for women's sport?"
The best answer I've seen on this one was from Rolfe (someone whom I suspect of possessing a strong background in medical science) but I'm still putting this one in the unanswered category because sporting bodies seem to be quite in flux about it themselves.
3) The last question has been asked several times, in various ways (at one point some poor misguided soul even tried to clarify the situation with a Venn diagram
). Here are just two examples:
Originally Posted by Rolfe
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat
I'm unsure how to even start unpacking this one. Lately I’ve seen at least one of our posters repeatedly referencing widely recognized expert assessments from the fields of psychiatry and psychology (e.g. DSM-5) but I remain skeptical as to whether this question has ever been addressed or even acknowledged in such sources. Perhaps someday—provided sufficiently advanced neuroimaging or other diagnostic tools—this situation will change, but for now it feels like we’re still stuck in the wheelhouse of the metaphysicians rather than the physicians.
I'm aware that the politically correct answer here is "gender identity," though that isn't an attribute to be discovered so much as an affirmation to be respected. I am also aware that the gender critical (i.e. 2nd wave feminist) answer is basically "Nothing other than gendered stereotypes," which are not so much an attribute to be observed so much as a set of social constructs to be either respected or rejected.
Do you folks have any recurring questions which you'd like to see more fully addressed?