[Continuation] Trans Women are not Women II: The Bath Of Khan - Page 3

Belz... · 20th June 2019, 01:58 AM

Originally Posted by Lithrael

This looks like a swing and a miss to me. ‘We’ is just ‘the majority mainstream in the west’ opinion, and happened to be a very widely held belief.

It's not a belief. Just because you disagree with something does not make it a belief. And I'm not talking about the west. I'm talking about homo sapiens. In fact I said thousands but I could probably have said a billion and gotten away with it.

Quote:

If you use the God metaphor, your statement would look like ‘We managed on the Catholic definition for a thousand years.

Sex is not a belief system. Nice try.

Quote:

ETA even more: and I don’t get the impression that gender was something that many people ever really sat down and thought about throughout history.

Because it was clear that there were two sexes, and associated genders, with only a tiny number of people for whom that determination was harder. That has not changed. Our understanding has not changed, either. What we have here is people so dedicated to the idea of offending no one at no time that they are willing to accept counter-factual claims from said tiny number of people to upend the entire concept of sex and gender.

ponderingturtle · 20th June 2019, 04:06 AM

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Some of it is plain insanity. No matter how trans a trans woman is, she doesn't have a uterus, won't ever need a cervical smear, and is highly unlikely to develop breast cancer.

And also women stop being women if they have hysterectomies of course.

Yes everyone has unique medical issues but why does someone other than their doctor care and why does someones risk of breast cancer effect what bathroom they use?

ponderingturtle · 20th June 2019, 04:07 AM

Originally Posted by p0lka

I'm perfectly ok with treating a transwoman as a woman and a transman as a man, (I don't treat males and females differently anyway, so makes no odds to me), I'll treat people how they wish to be treated as I like seeing smiles on peoples faces, define yourself and I will just go along with it to make you ok.

But I am suspending reality as I do so.

Just like the fiction that someone who had a hysterectomy is still a woman, or someone who had a vasectomy is still a man.

ponderingturtle · 20th June 2019, 04:08 AM

Originally Posted by quadraginta

We know they had a miscarriage, and we know that there seems to have been some initial confusion about the hospital's treatment regimen as a result of their trans status. It seems apparent that fetal distress was already in progress when they presented themselves to the hospital

But as far as I could determine from the articles I read, there was nothing which established that any different treatment regimen would have prevented the miscarriage or substantially changed any outcomes.

That's all conjecture.

Yea they are supposed to simply refuse all medical treatment to them, see the goals of the Trump administration.

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 05:07 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

Sex is not a belief system. Nice try.

You laugh, but more and more I find it hard to conceptualize certain aspects of the transgender argument being used in this thread as anything else.

Sex might not be a belief system, but argue for "Personal Identity as Objective Fact" hard enough and it turns into one, or close enough to not make a difference.

More and more that's what this discussion is feeling like; arguing religion with someone.

Again I mentioned I've half but only half jokingly referred to gender identity as a "gender soul" on a few occasions in the this thread is little is making that comparison less valid as the argument goes on.

Belz... · 20th June 2019, 05:14 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

You laugh, but more and more I find it hard to conceptualize certain aspects of the transgender argument being used in this thread as anything else.

Of course sex has to be a belief system, or at the very least gender has to be a completely different thing that's only determined by the person's feelings. Otherwise, that would mean that those feelings are objectively wrong and that would be transphobic! As soon as they determined that trans people were a minority, and therefore oppressed and in need of perpetual propping up, that conclusion was inevitable.

Robin · 20th June 2019, 06:06 AM

Recently there was a picture doing the rounds on twitter of a guy in a dress at some awards ceremony.

All the "gender is the same as biological sex" crowd were saying that this was proof that there was a war on masculinity.

I don't get it. Presumably under all that crinoline he had meat and two veg. So if gender and biological sex were the same thing, how is a guy in a dress a war on masculinity?

Robin · 20th June 2019, 06:26 AM

I think it is odd that back in the 70's I was constantly arguing that if someone is an adult and biologically male then he is a man, full stop.

I was getting push back from an entirely different crowd - the macho, the blokey blokes, who would say, "No way, just having a dick doesn't make you a man, there is more to it than that".

And what they meant is that people like me didn't make the grade.

d4m10n · 20th June 2019, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I don't share D4m10n's "Well the dictionary says" focus, but I think we all need to come to the understanding that for some people in this discussion the fact that certain things are very poorly and fluidly defined is a feature, not a bug. They don't want gender/sex defined because they won't be able to use to mean whatever they need it to mean at this one particular moment in time.

This is why we need to be careful to define our terms, whether we reference common usage or stipulate our own usage.

Sex: A set of phenotypic characteristics typically associated with either karyotype 46,XX (female) or 46,XY (male).

Gender: A set of behaviors, roles & norms typically associated with one sex.

Originally Posted by Belz...

Because it was clear that there were two sexes, and associated genders, with only a tiny number of people for whom that determination was harder. That has not changed.

What has changed is that we now have the science and technology to artificially change anyone's hormonal balance, thereby opening up new treatment possibilities for those experiencing dysphoria.

ponderingturtle · 20th June 2019, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

This is why we need to be careful to define our terms, whether we reference common usage or stipulate our own usage.

Sex: A set of phenotypic characteristics typically associated with either karyotype 46,XX (female) or 46,XY (male).

Though that is a very different definition to others on offer here, those were focused on sperm and egg production not chromosomes.

Belz... · 20th June 2019, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

What has changed is that we now have the science and technology to artificially change anyone's hormonal balance, thereby opening up new treatment possibilities for those experiencing dysphoria.

True, but it doesn't magically make you into a different sex. That's why the term 'trans' is useful.

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 06:42 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

This is why we need to be careful to define our terms, whether we reference common usage or stipulate our own usage.

Sex: A set of phenotypic characteristics typically associated with either karyotype 46,XX (female) or 46,XY (male).

Gender: A set of behaviors, roles & norms typically associated with one sex..

"Typically associated" in the first definition is a bit off in my opinion since that's the literal defining quality of (as in you wouldn't say 4 right angles and 4 equal sides are "typically associated" with square so much as that's what a square is) but other then that I agree with the terms you are using.

Problem is using those definitions puts me at "Sex cannot be changed by simple wish fulfillment" and "Gender shouldn't exist" which is apparently not the right answer to a lot of people.

theprestige · 20th June 2019, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Yea they are supposed to simply refuse all medical treatment to them, see the goals of the Trump administration.

What's your solution, ponderingturtle?

theprestige · 20th June 2019, 06:57 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Just like the fiction that someone who had a hysterectomy is still a woman, or someone who had a vasectomy is still a man.

What's your solution, ponderingturtle?

Shadowdweller · 20th June 2019, 07:01 AM

Originally Posted by Robin

I think it is odd that back in the 70's I was constantly arguing that if someone is an adult and biologically male then he is a man, full stop.

I was getting push back from an entirely different crowd - the macho, the blokey blokes, who would say, "No way, just having a dick doesn't make you a man, there is more to it than that".

And what they meant is that people like me didn't make the grade.

Times may change. The imbecility never does

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by Robin

I think it is odd that back in the 70's I was constantly arguing that if someone is an adult and biologically male then he is a man, full stop.

I was getting push back from an entirely different crowd - the macho, the blokey blokes, who would say, "No way, just having a dick doesn't make you a man, there is more to it than that".

And what they meant is that people like me didn't make the grade.

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller

Times may change. The imbecility never does

And I'm still of the mind that's how we got to where we are now.

The stupid, arbitrary at best, damaging at worst "rules" placed on the two biological sexes just weren't go away fast enough, so some people decided to square the circle they would just declare who they were by fiat.

"Oh so you say I can't do X and be a 'real man?' Fine, then I'm a woman."

My only problem has been that lives nowhere to fight those stupid rolls since now they sort of have to stay in place in order to have something to subvert so people who don't put useless roles on people based on their genital structure come across as the bad guys because we're not properly acknowledging their subversion of standards we don't think exist in the way we're told we have to.

d4m10n · 20th June 2019, 07:17 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

"Typically associated" in the first definition is a bit off in my opinion since that's the literal defining quality...

I think we need to leave some conceptual elbow room for individuals who have atypical sexual development, e.g. Semenya.

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

I think we need to leave some conceptual elbow room for individuals who have atypical sexual development, e.g. Semenya.

Definitions don't have to be mathematically perfectly precise to be accurate or honest, else you'll just never stop splitting hairs upon splitting hairs in a quest to achieve some impossible level of none-ambiguity.

qayak · 20th June 2019, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

And I'm still of the mind that's how we got to where we are now.

The stupid, arbitrary at best, damaging at worst "rules" placed on the two biological sexes just weren't go away fast enough, so some people decided to square the circle they would just declare who they were by fiat.

"Oh so you say I can't do X and be a 'real man?' Fine, then I'm a woman."

My only problem has been that lives nowhere to fight those stupid rolls since now they sort of have to stay in place in order to have something to subvert so people who don't put useless roles on people based on their genital structure come across as the bad guys because we're not properly acknowledging their subversion of standards we don't think exist in the way we're told we have to.

I get a kick out of this. This thread starts off with whether or not it is fair for biological men to compete against women in sports and the people who say "No!" explain why it isn't fair but now they are bigots because someone way back when insulted your boyhood.

Most of the people who see gender as being male and female couldn't give a rats ass what trans-people want to do. Go do it. Just don't feel that we have to buy into the misinformation and language spin.

And the fluid gender believers never address the real world problems that basing bathrooms on this new, misrepresentation of gender creates. Bathrooms were created based on sex for a reason.There are more than 100 recognized genders. Are we just going to build a world of bathrooms so everyone will feel comfy?

Unless people really believe that if I am feeling emotional today I should be using the women's bathroom because that's what gender means?

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 07:31 AM

And, and I think this keeps getting lost in the shuffle, is that functionally I treat transgender people exactly as they claim they want to be treated but I'm a "bad guy" because I'm not getting there via the "right" way.

I treat a "man who identifies as a woman" like a woman... but that's because I don't treat men and women differently (in the ways and on the scale we're discussing here anyway.)

But that's not good enough. I have to treat men and women differently so that I can treat the man who identifies as a woman like a man.

Again you strip out B.S. manufactured gender differences and we're left with biological objective facts and... pronouns.

Shadowdweller · 20th June 2019, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

And I'm still of the mind that's how we got to where we are now.

The stupid, arbitrary at best, damaging at worst "rules" placed on the two biological sexes just weren't go away fast enough, so some people decided to square the circle they would just declare who they were by fiat.

"Oh so you say I can't do X and be a 'real man?' Fine, then I'm a woman."

My only problem has been that lives nowhere to fight those stupid rolls since now they sort of have to stay in place in order to have something to subvert so people who don't put useless roles on people based on their genital structure come across as the bad guys because we're not properly acknowledging their subversion of standards we don't think exist in the way we're told we have to.

Of course, your beliefs are pure hogwash. There is very strong evidence for a biological basis behind transexuality; a presence in the historical record dating back thousands of years in diverse cultures; and gender identity amongst the transgendered tends to be quite stable, and manifest itself early in life.

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller

There is very strong evidence for a biological basis behind transexuality; a presence in the historical record dating back thousands of years in diverse cultures; and gender identity amongst the transgendered tends to be quite stable, and manifest itself early in life.

If there's a strong evidence for transexuality there is strong evidence between the sexes, period.

People want to have one and not the other.

Ziggurat · 20th June 2019, 08:56 AM

Getting back to athletic competition for a moment, it appears that the highschool track case has spawned a lawsuit:
https://www.courant.com/sports/high-...osq-story.html
Several girls are suing on the basis that including biological males in their competitions denies them title IX protections.

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Several girls are suing on the basis that including biological males in their competitions denies them title IX protections.

Well obviously these girls are transphobic.

Or the transwomen are sexist.

Spin the wheel of bigotry and win a prize. No you can't quit the game.

Lithrael · 20th June 2019, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

Sex is not a belief system. Nice try.

Sex isn’t but gender, language, and belief systems, seems to me, share the quality of meaning different things to different people rather than being anything particularly to do with facts. They all just sort of live alongside humans and can evolve, change, drift, etc.

I don’t see how one could argue that gender doesn’t mean different things to someone in Canada vs someone in India, or someone in 1965 vs someone in 1750.

Belz... · 20th June 2019, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller

Of course, your beliefs are pure hogwash. There is very strong evidence for a biological basis behind transexuality; a presence in the historical record dating back thousands of years in diverse cultures; and gender identity amongst the transgendered tends to be quite stable, and manifest itself early in life.

And?

So what if there's a biological basis for it? There's a biological basis for every human behaviour. It doesn't mean that the feelings it results in overturn whatever other reality may exist independant from it.

theprestige · 20th June 2019, 11:34 AM

Q. What do you call it when a man chooses to compete athletically against women?

A. A dick move.

Shadowdweller · 20th June 2019, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

If there's a strong evidence for transexuality there is strong evidence between the sexes, period.

People want to have one and not the other.

I'm afraid I've no idea what you mean by strong evidence "between the sexes".

Shadowdweller · 20th June 2019, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

And?

So what if there's a biological basis for it? There's a biological basis for every human behaviour. It doesn't mean that the feelings it results in overturn whatever other reality may exist independant from it.

It contradicts conceptions such as:

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The stupid, arbitrary at best, damaging at worst "rules" placed on the two biological sexes just weren't go away fast enough, so some people decided to square the circle they would just declare who they were by fiat.

"Oh so you say I can't do X and be a 'real man?' Fine, then I'm a woman."

Belz... · 20th June 2019, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Q. What do you call it when a man chooses to compete athletically against women?

A. A dick move.

Not a great phrasing.

Q. What do you call a man who competes athletically against women?

A. A dick.

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller

I'm afraid I've no idea what you mean by strong evidence "between the sexes".

*Very, very slowly*

Person A is a biological female who identifies as woman. In the common parlance both her gender and her sex are female (semantics of how widely and inconsistently those terms are used aside.)

Person B is a biological female but identifies as man.We're months into this discussion and people are still arguing for qualities that can turn a woman into a man but isn't required to just be a man.

Now we have to stop and make sure we are all on the same page before we continue.

There has to be a meaningful, objective difference that actually exists independent of these two people's thoughts. If there isn't this whole thing collapses into the biggest nothingburger in history.

I don't care what you think the difference is, but you have to admit you think there is a difference. A difference, not a copout. No "Well it's complicated (and then never actually expand on that)," no "Well they think...," nothing but an actual, objective difference that exists in reality.

Again what that difference is I don't care at this point, I'm beyond that. But there is a difference. A sex-female who is a gender-woman has to be somehow distinct from a sex-female who is a gender-man or this whole thing is pointless.

Okay. So take whatever that difference is. Again don't care what it is at this this point. But just take what ever it is.

That difference. That exact same difference. Again no copouts where people just repeat "it's complicated" over and over with no intentions of ever going beyond that. That difference between a female who's a man and female who's a woman... has to also be a difference between a (for lack of a better term, I'll grant it's not perfect) traditional man and woman.

I'm sick of this... semi-permeable membrane of gender/sex identity that can somehow turn a woman into a man but doesn't exist as difference between male and female.

You, you, you, not me, you are the one arguing for meaningful, non-biological differences between the sexes.

Shadowdweller · 20th June 2019, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

*Very, very slowly*

Thank you for the explanation. Yes, I HAVE been (incompletely) skimming.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

You, you, you, not me, you are the one arguing for meaningful, non-biological differences between the sexes.

I'm reasonably certain that I haven't made any arguments in this thread, other than a claim that one set of statements you made was inconsistent with known facts.

(Certainly, I would tend to say that there are biological differences between a genetic female that identifies as a female and a genetic female that identifies as male; or at least there usually are. For example if theories about pre-natal hormone exposure are correct regarding transexuality....that doesn't necessarily prevent some small subset of the population from choosing to change gender based on whim rather than the more standard hormone exposure).

Rolfe · 20th June 2019, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

I think we need to leave some conceptual elbow room for individuals who have atypical sexual development, e.g. Semenya.

Semenya is a male with partial androgen insensitivity. She was mistakenly believed to be female when she was born because her ambiguous genitalia bore a closer resemblance to female genitalia than to male. Society in general and the sports authorities in particular are still trying to figure out what to do about all this.

However she has testicles, not ovaries, she went through male puberty and she has circulating androgens in the (lower part of the) male range. Finding a way to accommodate the original mistake and the profound effect it has had on her in such a way that her life isn't ruined doesn't alter in the slightest the fact that she's a biological male.

Shadowdweller · 20th June 2019, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I'm sick of this... semi-permeable membrane of gender/sex identity that can somehow turn a woman into a man but doesn't exist as difference between male and female.

About this though - I can't speak on behalf of whoever you've been talking to or arguing with. But are you familiar with the concept of a continuum? There exist multiple occurrences in life/science/what have you where there are not clear-cut distinctions between traits. Speciation is sometimes one of these. Color is another - what constitutes green versus blue in some cases is a matter of arbitrary decision. (Greenish blue vs Bluish Green). Unless you have some official body declaring a precise cut-off point between wavelengths of light. And it gets a lot more complicated when we are talking about traits that are multivariate.

TomB · 20th June 2019, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

And, and I think this keeps getting lost in the shuffle, is that functionally I treat transgender people exactly as they claim they want to be treated but I'm a "bad guy" because I'm not getting there via the "right" way.

I treat a "man who identifies as a woman" like a woman... but that's because I don't treat men and women differently (in the ways and on the scale we're discussing here anyway.)

But that's not good enough. I have to treat men and women differently so that I can treat the man who identifies as a woman like a man.

Again you strip out B.S. manufactured gender differences and we're left with biological objective facts and... pronouns.

First, I want to say that I agree with you. Gender roles are BS. Someone should be able to act or dress however they like regardless of their sex. That extends to employment/family roles as well. Everyone should have the choice to pursue whatever career they wish. Or to be a stay at home spouse\parent. Other than the obvious biological ability to give birth, sex shouldn't matter.

But even if we all act the same, dress the same, use the same locker rooms, etc, dysphoria will still exist.

To my limited understanding, it's not the gender role that is at issue, it's the perceived mismatch between their mental image and their physical body. I doubt there is a gene that makes someone want to wear frilly dresses, makeup and high heels. The differing gender presentations, I think, serve to minimize the disparity between mental image and their physical body, which reduces the anxiety caused by the dysphoria.

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller

About this though - I can't speak on behalf of whoever you've been talking to or arguing with. But are you familiar with the concept of a continuum? There exist multiple occurrences in life/science/what have you where there are not clear-cut distinctions between traits. Speciation is sometimes one of these. Color is another - what constitutes green versus blue in some cases is a matter of arbitrary decision. (Greenish blue vs Bluish Green). Unless you have some official body declaring a precise cut-off point between wavelengths of light. And it gets a lot more complicated when we are talking about traits that are multivariate.

Like I said "It's complicated" isn't the answer to everything.

Here's the real world truth.

If I'm okay with the biological male who identifies as a female in the women's room... Rolf screams at me that I'm anti-woman because I want her to get raped.

If I'm not okay with the biological male who identifies as a woman in the women's room (g)you are going to scream at me that I'm transphobic.

I want to make both of you of happy and that is 100% sincere but you have to give me a way to do that that isn't "Just pick which side you want to scream 'bigot!' at you."

d4m10n · 20th June 2019, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Rolfe

Semenya is a male with partial androgen insensitivity. She was mistakenly believed to be female when she was born because her ambiguous genitalia bore a closer resemblance to female genitalia than to male. Society in general and the sports authorities in particular are still trying to figure out what to do about all this.

However she has testicles, not ovaries, she went through male puberty and she has circulating androgens in the (lower part of the) male range. Finding a way to accommodate the original mistake and the profound effect it has had on her in such a way that her life isn't ruined doesn't alter in the slightest the fact that she's a biological male.

That all seems right to me; it explains (rather than contradicts) what I wrote about the need to put in a bit of wiggle room when inferring karyotype from phenotype.

TomB · 20th June 2019, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by Rolfe

Semenya is a male with partial androgen insensitivity. She was mistakenly believed to be female when she was born because her ambiguous genitalia bore a closer resemblance to female genitalia than to male. Society in general and the sports authorities in particular are still trying to figure out what to do about all this.

However she has testicles, not ovaries, she went through male puberty and she has circulating androgens in the (lower part of the) male range. Finding a way to accommodate the original mistake and the profound effect it has had on her in such a way that her life isn't ruined doesn't alter in the slightest the fact that she's a biological male.

Just for clarity, do we actually know what condition Semenya has or is it conjecture?

Does your judgement of her being male apply equally to people with Swyer syndrome?

Quote:

Swyer syndrome is a rare disorder characterized by the failure of the sex glands (i.e., testicles or ovaries) to develop. Swyer syndrome is classified as a disorder of sex development (DSD), which encompasses any disorder in which chromosomal, gonadal or anatomic sex development is abnormal. Girls with Swyer syndrome have an XY chromosomal makeup (as boys normally do) instead of an XX chromosomal makeup (as girls normally do). Despite having the XY chromosomal makeup, girls with Swyer syndrome look female and have functional female genitalia and structures including a vagina, uterus and fallopian tubes.

Girls with Swyer syndrome lack sex glands (ovaries). Instead of sex glands, women with Swyer syndrome have "gonadal streaks", in which the ovaries do not develop properly (aplasia) and are replaced by functionless scar (fibrous) tissue. Because they lack ovaries, girls with Swyer syndrome do not produce sex hormones and will not undergo puberty (unless treated with hormone replacement therapy). Mutations in several different genes are known to cause Swyer syndrome. This condition can occur as the result of a new gene mutation or can be inherited in an autosomal dominant, autosomal recessive, X-linked or Y-linked manner.

https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/swyer-syndrome/

Women with Swyer syndrome have neither testes nor ovaries. They do have a uterus, however, and can become pregnant through implantation of donor eggs.

Which sports team should they be on?
Which bathroom should they use?

JoeMorgue · 20th June 2019, 01:07 PM

Originally Posted by TomB

To my limited understanding, it's not the gender role that is at issue, it's the perceived mismatch between their mental image and their physical body. I doubt there is a gene that makes someone want to wear frilly dresses, makeup and high heels. The differing gender presentations, I think, serve to minimize the disparity between mental image and their physical body, which reduces the anxiety caused by the dysphoria.

In my mental image I'm 6"4, have 1% body fat, and a much stronger jawline. I'm not asking, demanding, or expecting anyone to literally think that's what I look like.

"Mental image" isn't magically different when its about sex. It's functionally no different from "I would like to be."

p0lka · 20th June 2019, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

And, and I think this keeps getting lost in the shuffle, is that functionally I treat transgender people exactly as they claim they want to be treated but I'm a "bad guy" because I'm not getting there via the "right" way.

I treat a "man who identifies as a woman" like a woman... but that's because I don't treat men and women differently (in the ways and on the scale we're discussing here anyway.)

But that's not good enough. I have to treat men and women differently so that I can treat the man who identifies as a woman like a man.

Again you strip out B.S. manufactured gender differences and we're left with biological objective facts and... pronouns.

This.
Especially the highlighted.

Why do girls get the princess pink fluffy wuffy stuff, why can't boys play with dolls and fluffy wuffy stuff too?
etc etc etc.

Gender is what we are pressured to do as we grow up, I would like to see what would happen if we weren't.

This whole gender self focus thing might just disappear as no one would care anymore, be yourself... the stereotypes have gone.

20th June 2019, 01:58 AM	#81
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,292	Originally Posted by Lithrael This looks like a swing and a miss to me. ‘We’ is just ‘the majority mainstream in the west’ opinion, and happened to be a very widely held belief. It's not a belief. Just because you disagree with something does not make it a belief. And I'm not talking about the west. I'm talking about homo sapiens. In fact I said thousands but I could probably have said a billion and gotten away with it. Quote: If you use the God metaphor, your statement would look like ‘We managed on the Catholic definition for a thousand years. Sex is not a belief system. Nice try. Quote: ETA even more: and I don’t get the impression that gender was something that many people ever really sat down and thought about throughout history. Because it was clear that there were two sexes, and associated genders, with only a tiny number of people for whom that determination was harder. That has not changed. Our understanding has not changed, either. What we have here is people so dedicated to the idea of offending no one at no time that they are willing to accept counter-factual claims from said tiny number of people to upend the entire concept of sex and gender.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

20th June 2019, 04:06 AM	#82
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 50,190	Originally Posted by The Atheist Some of it is plain insanity. No matter how trans a trans woman is, she doesn't have a uterus, won't ever need a cervical smear, and is highly unlikely to develop breast cancer. And also women stop being women if they have hysterectomies of course. Yes everyone has unique medical issues but why does someone other than their doctor care and why does someones risk of breast cancer effect what bathroom they use?
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

20th June 2019, 04:07 AM	#83
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 50,190	Originally Posted by p0lka I'm perfectly ok with treating a transwoman as a woman and a transman as a man, (I don't treat males and females differently anyway, so makes no odds to me), I'll treat people how they wish to be treated as I like seeing smiles on peoples faces, define yourself and I will just go along with it to make you ok. But I am suspending reality as I do so. Just like the fiction that someone who had a hysterectomy is still a woman, or someone who had a vasectomy is still a man.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

20th June 2019, 04:08 AM	#84
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 50,190	Originally Posted by quadraginta We know they had a miscarriage, and we know that there seems to have been some initial confusion about the hospital's treatment regimen as a result of their trans status. It seems apparent that fetal distress was already in progress when they presented themselves to the hospital But as far as I could determine from the articles I read, there was nothing which established that any different treatment regimen would have prevented the miscarriage or substantially changed any outcomes. That's all conjecture. Yea they are supposed to simply refuse all medical treatment to them, see the goals of the Trump administration.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

20th June 2019, 05:07 AM	#85
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,020	Originally Posted by Belz... Sex is not a belief system. Nice try. You laugh, but more and more I find it hard to conceptualize certain aspects of the transgender argument being used in this thread as anything else. Sex might not be a belief system, but argue for "Personal Identity as Objective Fact" hard enough and it turns into one, or close enough to not make a difference. More and more that's what this discussion is feeling like; arguing religion with someone. Again I mentioned I've half but only half jokingly referred to gender identity as a "gender soul" on a few occasions in the this thread is little is making that comparison less valid as the argument goes on.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th June 2019, 05:14 AM	#86
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,292	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue You laugh, but more and more I find it hard to conceptualize certain aspects of the transgender argument being used in this thread as anything else. Of course sex has to be a belief system, or at the very least gender has to be a completely different thing that's only determined by the person's feelings. Otherwise, that would mean that those feelings are objectively wrong and that would be transphobic! As soon as they determined that trans people were a minority, and therefore oppressed and in need of perpetual propping up, that conclusion was inevitable.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

20th June 2019, 06:06 AM	#87
Robin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 12,881	Recently there was a picture doing the rounds on twitter of a guy in a dress at some awards ceremony. All the "gender is the same as biological sex" crowd were saying that this was proof that there was a war on masculinity. I don't get it. Presumably under all that crinoline he had meat and two veg. So if gender and biological sex were the same thing, how is a guy in a dress a war on masculinity?
	__________________ The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax" Last edited by Robin; 20th June 2019 at 06:20 AM.

20th June 2019, 06:26 AM	#88
Robin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 12,881	I think it is odd that back in the 70's I was constantly arguing that if someone is an adult and biologically male then he is a man, full stop. I was getting push back from an entirely different crowd - the macho, the blokey blokes, who would say, "No way, just having a dick doesn't make you a man, there is more to it than that". And what they meant is that people like me didn't make the grade.
	__________________ The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"

20th June 2019, 06:27 AM	#89
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,082	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I don't share D4m10n's "Well the dictionary says" focus, but I think we all need to come to the understanding that for some people in this discussion the fact that certain things are very poorly and fluidly defined is a feature, not a bug. They don't want gender/sex defined because they won't be able to use to mean whatever they need it to mean at this one particular moment in time. This is why we need to be careful to define our terms, whether we reference common usage or stipulate our own usage. Sex: A set of phenotypic characteristics typically associated with either karyotype 46,XX (female) or 46,XY (male). Gender: A set of behaviors, roles & norms typically associated with one sex. Originally Posted by Belz... Because it was clear that there were two sexes, and associated genders, with only a tiny number of people for whom that determination was harder. That has not changed. What has changed is that we now have the science and technology to artificially change anyone's hormonal balance, thereby opening up new treatment possibilities for those experiencing dysphoria.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

20th June 2019, 06:39 AM	#90
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 50,190	Originally Posted by d4m10n This is why we need to be careful to define our terms, whether we reference common usage or stipulate our own usage. Sex: A set of phenotypic characteristics typically associated with either karyotype 46,XX (female) or 46,XY (male). Though that is a very different definition to others on offer here, those were focused on sperm and egg production not chromosomes.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

20th June 2019, 06:39 AM	#91
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,292	Originally Posted by d4m10n What has changed is that we now have the science and technology to artificially change anyone's hormonal balance, thereby opening up new treatment possibilities for those experiencing dysphoria. True, but it doesn't magically make you into a different sex. That's why the term 'trans' is useful.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

20th June 2019, 06:42 AM	#92
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,020	Originally Posted by d4m10n This is why we need to be careful to define our terms, whether we reference common usage or stipulate our own usage. Sex: A set of phenotypic characteristics typically associated with either karyotype 46,XX (female) or 46,XY (male). Gender: A set of behaviors, roles & norms typically associated with one sex.. "Typically associated" in the first definition is a bit off in my opinion since that's the literal defining quality of (as in you wouldn't say 4 right angles and 4 equal sides are "typically associated" with square so much as that's what a square is) but other then that I agree with the terms you are using. Problem is using those definitions puts me at "Sex cannot be changed by simple wish fulfillment" and "Gender shouldn't exist" which is apparently not the right answer to a lot of people.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate." Last edited by JoeMorgue; 20th June 2019 at 07:01 AM.

20th June 2019, 06:55 AM	#93
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,647	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle Yea they are supposed to simply refuse all medical treatment to them, see the goals of the Trump administration. What's your solution, ponderingturtle?

20th June 2019, 06:57 AM	#94
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,647	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle Just like the fiction that someone who had a hysterectomy is still a woman, or someone who had a vasectomy is still a man. What's your solution, ponderingturtle?

20th June 2019, 07:01 AM	#95
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,010	Originally Posted by Robin I think it is odd that back in the 70's I was constantly arguing that if someone is an adult and biologically male then he is a man, full stop. I was getting push back from an entirely different crowd - the macho, the blokey blokes, who would say, "No way, just having a dick doesn't make you a man, there is more to it than that". And what they meant is that people like me didn't make the grade. Times may change. The imbecility never does

20th June 2019, 07:06 AM	#96
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,020	Originally Posted by Robin I think it is odd that back in the 70's I was constantly arguing that if someone is an adult and biologically male then he is a man, full stop. I was getting push back from an entirely different crowd - the macho, the blokey blokes, who would say, "No way, just having a dick doesn't make you a man, there is more to it than that". And what they meant is that people like me didn't make the grade. Originally Posted by Shadowdweller Times may change. The imbecility never does And I'm still of the mind that's how we got to where we are now. The stupid, arbitrary at best, damaging at worst "rules" placed on the two biological sexes just weren't go away fast enough, so some people decided to square the circle they would just declare who they were by fiat. "Oh so you say I can't do X and be a 'real man?' Fine, then I'm a woman." My only problem has been that lives nowhere to fight those stupid rolls since now they sort of have to stay in place in order to have something to subvert so people who don't put useless roles on people based on their genital structure come across as the bad guys because we're not properly acknowledging their subversion of standards we don't think exist in the way we're told we have to.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th June 2019, 07:17 AM	#97
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,082	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue "Typically associated" in the first definition is a bit off in my opinion since that's the literal defining quality... I think we need to leave some conceptual elbow room for individuals who have atypical sexual development, e.g. Semenya.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

20th June 2019, 07:21 AM	#98
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,020	Originally Posted by d4m10n I think we need to leave some conceptual elbow room for individuals who have atypical sexual development, e.g. Semenya. Definitions don't have to be mathematically perfectly precise to be accurate or honest, else you'll just never stop splitting hairs upon splitting hairs in a quest to achieve some impossible level of none-ambiguity.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th June 2019, 07:25 AM	#99
qayak Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 13,745	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue And I'm still of the mind that's how we got to where we are now. The stupid, arbitrary at best, damaging at worst "rules" placed on the two biological sexes just weren't go away fast enough, so some people decided to square the circle they would just declare who they were by fiat. "Oh so you say I can't do X and be a 'real man?' Fine, then I'm a woman." My only problem has been that lives nowhere to fight those stupid rolls since now they sort of have to stay in place in order to have something to subvert so people who don't put useless roles on people based on their genital structure come across as the bad guys because we're not properly acknowledging their subversion of standards we don't think exist in the way we're told we have to. I get a kick out of this. This thread starts off with whether or not it is fair for biological men to compete against women in sports and the people who say "No!" explain why it isn't fair but now they are bigots because someone way back when insulted your boyhood. Most of the people who see gender as being male and female couldn't give a rats ass what trans-people want to do. Go do it. Just don't feel that we have to buy into the misinformation and language spin. And the fluid gender believers never address the real world problems that basing bathrooms on this new, misrepresentation of gender creates. Bathrooms were created based on sex for a reason.There are more than 100 recognized genders. Are we just going to build a world of bathrooms so everyone will feel comfy? Unless people really believe that if I am feeling emotional today I should be using the women's bathroom because that's what gender means?
	__________________ "How long you live, how high you fly The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry And all you touch, and all you see Is all your life will ever be."

20th June 2019, 07:31 AM	#100
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,020	And, and I think this keeps getting lost in the shuffle, is that functionally I treat transgender people exactly as they claim they want to be treated but I'm a "bad guy" because I'm not getting there via the "right" way. I treat a "man who identifies as a woman" like a woman... but that's because I don't treat men and women differently (in the ways and on the scale we're discussing here anyway.) But that's not good enough. I have to treat men and women differently so that I can treat the man who identifies as a woman like a man. Again you strip out B.S. manufactured gender differences and we're left with biological objective facts and... pronouns.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th June 2019, 08:14 AM	#101
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,010	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue And I'm still of the mind that's how we got to where we are now. The stupid, arbitrary at best, damaging at worst "rules" placed on the two biological sexes just weren't go away fast enough, so some people decided to square the circle they would just declare who they were by fiat. "Oh so you say I can't do X and be a 'real man?' Fine, then I'm a woman." My only problem has been that lives nowhere to fight those stupid rolls since now they sort of have to stay in place in order to have something to subvert so people who don't put useless roles on people based on their genital structure come across as the bad guys because we're not properly acknowledging their subversion of standards we don't think exist in the way we're told we have to. Of course, your beliefs are pure hogwash. There is very strong evidence for a biological basis behind transexuality; a presence in the historical record dating back thousands of years in diverse cultures; and gender identity amongst the transgendered tends to be quite stable, and manifest itself early in life.

20th June 2019, 08:15 AM	#102
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,020	Originally Posted by Shadowdweller There is very strong evidence for a biological basis behind transexuality; a presence in the historical record dating back thousands of years in diverse cultures; and gender identity amongst the transgendered tends to be quite stable, and manifest itself early in life. If there's a strong evidence for transexuality there is strong evidence between the sexes, period. People want to have one and not the other.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th June 2019, 08:56 AM	#103
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 48,040	Getting back to athletic competition for a moment, it appears that the highschool track case has spawned a lawsuit: https://www.courant.com/sports/high-...osq-story.html Several girls are suing on the basis that including biological males in their competitions denies them title IX protections.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

20th June 2019, 08:57 AM	#104
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,020	Originally Posted by Ziggurat Several girls are suing on the basis that including biological males in their competitions denies them title IX protections. Well obviously these girls are transphobic. Or the transwomen are sexist. Spin the wheel of bigotry and win a prize. No you can't quit the game.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th June 2019, 09:29 AM	#105
Lithrael Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,995	Originally Posted by Belz... Sex is not a belief system. Nice try. Sex isn’t but gender, language, and belief systems, seems to me, share the quality of meaning different things to different people rather than being anything particularly to do with facts. They all just sort of live alongside humans and can evolve, change, drift, etc. I don’t see how one could argue that gender doesn’t mean different things to someone in Canada vs someone in India, or someone in 1965 vs someone in 1750.

20th June 2019, 09:37 AM	#106
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,292	Originally Posted by Shadowdweller Of course, your beliefs are pure hogwash. There is very strong evidence for a biological basis behind transexuality; a presence in the historical record dating back thousands of years in diverse cultures; and gender identity amongst the transgendered tends to be quite stable, and manifest itself early in life. And? So what if there's a biological basis for it? There's a biological basis for every human behaviour. It doesn't mean that the feelings it results in overturn whatever other reality may exist independant from it.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

20th June 2019, 11:34 AM	#107
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,647	Q. What do you call it when a man chooses to compete athletically against women? A. A dick move.

20th June 2019, 11:40 AM	#108
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,010	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue If there's a strong evidence for transexuality there is strong evidence between the sexes, period. People want to have one and not the other. I'm afraid I've no idea what you mean by strong evidence "between the sexes".

20th June 2019, 11:44 AM	#109
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,010	Originally Posted by Belz... And? So what if there's a biological basis for it? There's a biological basis for every human behaviour. It doesn't mean that the feelings it results in overturn whatever other reality may exist independant from it. It contradicts conceptions such as: Originally Posted by JoeMorgue The stupid, arbitrary at best, damaging at worst "rules" placed on the two biological sexes just weren't go away fast enough, so some people decided to square the circle they would just declare who they were by fiat. "Oh so you say I can't do X and be a 'real man?' Fine, then I'm a woman."

20th June 2019, 11:44 AM	#110
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,292	Originally Posted by theprestige Q. What do you call it when a man chooses to compete athletically against women? A. A dick move. Not a great phrasing. Q. What do you call a man who competes athletically against women? A. A dick.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

20th June 2019, 11:52 AM	#111
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,020	Originally Posted by Shadowdweller I'm afraid I've no idea what you mean by strong evidence "between the sexes". Very, very slowly Person A is a biological female who identifies as woman. In the common parlance both her gender and her sex are female (semantics of how widely and inconsistently those terms are used aside.) Person B is a biological female but identifies as man.We're months into this discussion and people are still arguing for qualities that can turn a woman into a man but isn't required to just be a man. Now we have to stop and make sure we are all on the same page before we continue. There has to be a meaningful, objective difference that actually exists independent of these two people's thoughts. If there isn't this whole thing collapses into the biggest nothingburger in history. I don't care what you think the difference is, but you have to admit you think there is a difference. A difference, not a copout. No "Well it's complicated (and then never actually expand on that)," no "Well they think...," nothing but an actual, objective difference that exists in reality. Again what that difference is I don't care at this point, I'm beyond that. But there is a difference. A sex-female who is a gender-woman has to be somehow distinct from a sex-female who is a gender-man or this whole thing is pointless. Okay. So take whatever that difference is. Again don't care what it is at this this point. But just take what ever it is. That difference. That exact same difference. Again no copouts where people just repeat "it's complicated" over and over with no intentions of ever going beyond that. That difference between a female who's a man and female who's a woman... has to also be a difference between a (for lack of a better term, I'll grant it's not perfect) traditional man and woman. I'm sick of this... semi-permeable membrane of gender/sex identity that can somehow turn a woman into a man but doesn't exist as difference between male and female. You, you, you, not me, you are the one arguing for meaningful, non-biological differences between the sexes.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

20th June 2019, 12:15 PM	#112
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,010	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Very, very slowly Thank you for the explanation. Yes, I HAVE been (incompletely) skimming. Originally Posted by JoeMorgue You, you, you, not me, you are the one arguing for meaningful, non-biological differences between the sexes. I'm reasonably certain that I haven't made any arguments in this thread, other than a claim that one set of statements you made was inconsistent with known facts. (Certainly, I would tend to say that there are biological differences between a genetic female that identifies as a female and a genetic female that identifies as male; or at least there usually are. For example if theories about pre-natal hormone exposure are correct regarding transexuality....that doesn't necessarily prevent some small subset of the population from choosing to change gender based on whim rather than the more standard hormone exposure).

20th June 2019, 12:24 PM	#113
Rolfe Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: NT 150 511 Posts: 46,406	Originally Posted by d4m10n I think we need to leave some conceptual elbow room for individuals who have atypical sexual development, e.g. Semenya. Semenya is a male with partial androgen insensitivity. She was mistakenly believed to be female when she was born because her ambiguous genitalia bore a closer resemblance to female genitalia than to male. Society in general and the sports authorities in particular are still trying to figure out what to do about all this. However she has testicles, not ovaries, she went through male puberty and she has circulating androgens in the (lower part of the) male range. Finding a way to accommodate the original mistake and the profound effect it has had on her in such a way that her life isn't ruined doesn't alter in the slightest the fact that she's a biological male.
	__________________ "The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

20th June 2019, 12:31 PM	#114
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,010	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue I'm sick of this... semi-permeable membrane of gender/sex identity that can somehow turn a woman into a man but doesn't exist as difference between male and female. About this though - I can't speak on behalf of whoever you've been talking to or arguing with. But are you familiar with the concept of a continuum? There exist multiple occurrences in life/science/what have you where there are not clear-cut distinctions between traits. Speciation is sometimes one of these. Color is another - what constitutes green versus blue in some cases is a matter of arbitrary decision. (Greenish blue vs Bluish Green). Unless you have some official body declaring a precise cut-off point between wavelengths of light. And it gets a lot more complicated when we are talking about traits that are multivariate.
	Last edited by Shadowdweller; 20th June 2019 at 12:38 PM.

20th June 2019, 12:41 PM	#115
TomB Muse Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 807	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue And, and I think this keeps getting lost in the shuffle, is that functionally I treat transgender people exactly as they claim they want to be treated but I'm a "bad guy" because I'm not getting there via the "right" way. I treat a "man who identifies as a woman" like a woman... but that's because I don't treat men and women differently (in the ways and on the scale we're discussing here anyway.) But that's not good enough. I have to treat men and women differently so that I can treat the man who identifies as a woman like a man. Again you strip out B.S. manufactured gender differences and we're left with biological objective facts and... pronouns. First, I want to say that I agree with you. Gender roles are BS. Someone should be able to act or dress however they like regardless of their sex. That extends to employment/family roles as well. Everyone should have the choice to pursue whatever career they wish. Or to be a stay at home spouse\parent. Other than the obvious biological ability to give birth, sex shouldn't matter. But even if we all act the same, dress the same, use the same locker rooms, etc, dysphoria will still exist. To my limited understanding, it's not the gender role that is at issue, it's the perceived mismatch between their mental image and their physical body. I doubt there is a gene that makes someone want to wear frilly dresses, makeup and high heels. The differing gender presentations, I think, serve to minimize the disparity between mental image and their physical body, which reduces the anxiety caused by the dysphoria.
TomB Muse Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 807