Difference in Gender and Sex

[TexasTiger 12,811]

Germaine Greer was one of the higher profile feminists in the 60s, 70s and 80s. She’s remained consistent. 
 

40 years ago progressives saw gender stereotypes as regressive and unduly restrictive. People should be allowed to live as they wish, free from arbitrary restraints. A man wants to wear dresses & makeup? Go ahead. A woman wants short hair, pants and no make up? Fine. Live and let live. Want to present yourself as the opposite sex by embracing the gender stereotypes associated with that sex? Go ahead. But the reality of chromosomes don’t change. 
 

Agree with her or not, she makes a point worth hearing and one that many women agree with. Give her 3 minutes. Gender is based on cultural stereotypes that differ broadly across cultures. Those stereotypes change over time. There’s nothing remotely progressive about allowing cultural stereotypes to define womanhood. Womanhood cannot be reduced to appearance and mannerisms. In fact, it’s sexist to do so and degrading to women.

 

[AUDub 11,131]

This is a strawman though. Trans women don't necessarily think femininity and womanhood are the same thing, but using feminine cultural signifiers, sometimes to a degree best desceibed as "hyperfeminine," to "pass" is really their only means of signaling "hey, I'm a woman!" to others.

[TexasTiger 12,811]

1 minute ago, AUDub said:

This is a strawman though. Trans women don't necessarily think femininity and womanhood are the same thing, but using feminine cultural signifiers, sometimes to a degree best desceibed as "hyperfeminine," to "pass" is really their only means of signaling "hey, I'm a woman!" to others.

I don’t think all trans women share the same views. In fact, I know they don’t. But answer a simple question: are trans women women?

[AUDub 11,131]

4 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

I don’t think all trans women share the same views. In fact, I know they don’t. But answer a simple question: are trans women women?

Do all women share the same views on what makes a woman a woman? 

Edited March 14, 2023 by AUDub

[TexasTiger 12,811]

3 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Do all women share the same views on what makes a woman a woman? 

Probably not, but you dodged my question.

[AUDub 11,131]

3 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Probably not, but you dodged my question.

My question was rhetorical.

But if you want a firm answer on my personal view on the matter, Catherine MacKinnon adequately reflects my opinion:

"I always thought I don’t care how someone becomes a woman or a man; it does not matter to me. It is just part of their specificity, their uniqueness, like everyone else’s. Anybody who identifies as a woman, wants to be a woman, is going around being a woman, as far as I’m concerned, is a woman."

Edited March 14, 2023 by AUDub

[TexasTiger 12,811]

Just now, AUDub said:

My question was rhetorical.

But if you want a firm answer on my personal view on the matter, it Catherine MacKinnon adequately reflects my personal opinion on the matter.

"I always thought I don’t care how someone becomes a woman or a man; it does not matter to me. It is just part of their specificity, their uniqueness, like everyone else’s. Anybody who identifies as a woman, wants to be a woman, is going around being a woman, as far as I’m concerned, is a woman."

Okay. Thanks. So if an entity is starting a commission or task force and seeking gender balance, if that commission is made up of 50% cis men and 50% trans women, should the larger population of women feel well represented?

[TitanTiger 20,471]

1 minute ago, AUDub said:

My question was rhetorical.

But if you want a firm answer on my personal view on the matter, Catherine MacKinnon adequately reflects my opinion on the matter.

"I always thought I don’t care how someone becomes a woman or a man; it does not matter to me. It is just part of their specificity, their uniqueness, like everyone else’s. Anybody who identifies as a woman, wants to be a woman, is going around being a woman, as far as I’m concerned, is a woman."

Anybody who identifies as black, wants to be black, is going around being black, as far as I’m concerned, is black. - Rachel Dolezal

[AUDub 11,131]

10 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Okay. Thanks. So if an entity is starting a commission or task force and seeking gender balance, if that commission is made up of 50% cis men and 50% trans women, should the larger population of women feel well represented?

Hell of a hypothetical.

That's up to them. It's not my place to decide who they feel best represents them. 

It's a messy conundrum. A lot of the focus is on MtF transgender individuals, but there are equally messy ones when you flip the coin too. Take FtM transgender individuals at women's colleges and universities.

[AUDub 11,131]

11 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Anybody who identifies as black, wants to be black, is going around being black, as far as I’m concerned, is black. - Rachel Dolezal

This is a ridiculous rhetorical Trojan horse specifically designed to belittle and undermine the concept of trans people being a thing. 

[TexasTiger 12,811]

2 hours ago, AUDub said:

Hell of a hypothetical.

That's up to them. It's not my place to decide who they feel best represents them. 

It's a messy conundrum. A lot of the focus is on MtF transgender individuals, but there are equally messy ones when you flip the coin too. Take FtM transgender individuals at women's colleges and universities.

You’re right. It’s not the place of men to decide whom women feel represents them. That’s exactly what many of my feminist friends have convinced me of. This was one of the questions posed to me that made me realize this was a far more complex issue than how I was previously viewing it. Clearly, if every person providing the female perspective is trans, whatever perspective they’re offering is limited and incomplete. So it’s overly simplistic and inaccurate to simply repeat the mantra “a trans woman is a woman, period.” If that was true, 100 hundred people beginning life as men could provide a perfect 50/50 gender balance. They can’t.
 

What are the inherent challenges and experiences of having been raised a woman that shapes the  perspective that women are uniquely able to bring to a situation? What was it like be a girl who hits puberty and is increasingly seen as a sexual object, often including by older men, because of their inescapable biology? To be physically smaller and less strong than most males around them? To  always have feared sexual assault when walking certain places? To experience menstruation for the first time? Every month? To deal with pregnancy and the challenge of balancing it with career goals? Being female is a unique biological experience with distinct challenges to overcome. Historically, women have been discriminated against because of biology. No one who hasn’t experienced those things can understand it no matter how empathic they are. And to dismiss women who are frustrated by those who fail to grasp this as bigots is sexism in the extreme. 

Trans women are often discriminated against for other reasons, but not because they were born into a class of persons that has been discriminated against and oppressed in almost every culture around the world throughout history. There’s no valid reason for not treating a trans person with the dignity and respect to which every human is entitled, but to pretend they’re not distinctly different from biological women is no different than failing to see the emperor has no clothes. Being a woman is not a construction. Being feminine is.

 

[TitanTiger 20,471]

6 hours ago, AUDub said:

This is a ridiculous rhetorical Trojan horse specifically designed to belittle and undermine the concept of trans people being a thing. 

No, I get that trans people are a thing. But there’s not a thing wrong with questioning the accuracy or rationality of their and their supporters’ understanding of reality. 

[TitanTiger 20,471]

7 hours ago, AUDub said:

Hell of a hypothetical.

That's up to them. It's not my place to decide who they feel best represents them. 

Hell of a dodge. 

I think you know the actual answer to this. You just don’t want to say it. 
 

7 hours ago, AUDub said:

It's a messy conundrum. A lot of the focus is on MtF transgender individuals, but there are equally messy ones when you flip the coin too. Take FtM transgender individuals at women's colleges and universities.

It’s a focus because of the historical disadvantage women have faced, the domination of positions of influence and power by men over women, and the warranted anxiety and fear produced by permitting biological males into female only spaces with such a history of male on female violence and intimidation.  Men’s reaction or relative discomfort with biological females claiming to be men, while valid depending on the specific circumstances, just doesn’t carry the same weight. 

[TexasTiger 12,811]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Hell of a dodge. 

I think you know the actual answer to this. You just don’t want to say it. 
 

It’s a focus because of the historical disadvantage women have faced, the domination of positions of influence and power by men over women, and the warranted anxiety and fear produced by permitting biological males into female only spaces with such a history of male on female violence and intimidation.  Men’s reaction or relative discomfort with biological females claiming to be men, while valid depending on the specific circumstances, just doesn’t carry the same weight. 

And it will be exceedingly rare for a woman to identify as a man and a year or two later beat out a man to be recognized in a sporting event as the best in a country or the world. And even if that happens, it won’t be the same. Women’s opportunity for Athletic competition in this country was a relatively recent hard fought gain after years of being discriminated against due to their biological sex, not gender. Before Title IX the most masculine female would not be able to compete due to biology— that’s been the basis for discrimination and less opportunities throughout time. Women who are angry and resentful over this have every right to be.

A trans man typically poses no real threat to biological men.

Years ago, it was typical for trans women to fully surgically transition and it was a more rigorous process of therapy and social transition leading up to it. These trans women demonstrated the ultimate commitment to living as a woman.  These trans women were more readily accepted by most women. These numbers were small. Now, the numbers have exploded and most trans women do not undergo the full surgical transition. It’s a dramatically different situation than it had been for years. 

[AU9377 4,914]

On 3/14/2023 at 12:47 PM, AUDub said:

This is a strawman though. Trans women don't necessarily think femininity and womanhood are the same thing, but using feminine cultural signifiers, sometimes to a degree best desceibed as "hyperfeminine," to "pass" is really their only means of signaling "hey, I'm a woman!" to others.

I just feel like it is an argument that defies explanation.  If someone is born with a vagina, they are a female.  They carry two XX chromosomes.  If someone is born with an X and Y chromosome, they are genetically male.  There is nothing that can be done to change that.  How they express themselves is their business and nobody else should impose on their right to live their life as they want.  However, if their remains are found by someone 50 years from now, regardless of the hormones they take or surgical procedures they have, they will be identified as a female based on their DNA.

[AUDub 11,131]

15 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

If someone is born with a vagina, they are a female.  They carry two XX chromosomes.  If someone is born with an X and Y chromosome, they are genetically male. 

This is a non-sequitur not how DNA works. Secondary sex characteristics are dictated by the endocrine system. There are women out there with an XY genotype, something on the order of 1 in 20,000. Some of them are even capable of procreation. 

Edited March 16, 2023 by AUDub

[TexasTiger 12,811]

10 hours ago, AUDub said:

This is a non-sequitur not how DNA works. Secondary sex characteristics are dictated by the endocrine system. There are women out there with an XY genotype, something on the order of 1 in 20,000. Some of them are even capable of procreation. 

And the other 19,999?

I assume you’re referencing Swyer Syndrome. If you are, the numbers I’ve seen range from 1 in 80k to 1 in 100k.

[AU9377 4,914]

11 hours ago, AUDub said:

This is a non-sequitur not how DNA works. Secondary sex characteristics are dictated by the endocrine system. There are women out there with an XY genotype, something on the order of 1 in 20,000. Some of them are even capable of procreation. 

Yes, it is called Swyer syndrome.  However, this has not been linked to any increased percentage of people wanting to identify as male that are born with a vagina.  It is extremely rare for these individuals to have a pregnancy.  They don't produce eggs and many do not have a uterus.

I'm not trying to hate on anyone.  I deplore that.  I simply do not understand what is so wrong with being who someone is, whatever that may be.  I don't see it as hateful for someone to be classified as male or female at birth any more than it is for someone to be noted as having 5 fingers and 5 toes on each hand and foot. 

[DKW 86 7,411]

On 3/14/2023 at 12:04 PM, TitanTiger said:

Anybody who identifies as black, wants to be black, is going around being black, as far as I’m concerned, is black. - Rachel Dolezal

Post of the Day!!! OMG How funny!!!

[DKW 86 7,411]

On 3/14/2023 at 11:09 PM, AUDub said:

This is a ridiculous rhetorical Trojan horse specifically designed to belittle and undermine the concept of trans people being a thing. 

Wrong. It is a normal, intellectual exercise to challenge whenever a societal norm is being cast to the side at 100mph just so a few can feel a few moments of Virtue Signalling.

Steve/Stephanie Seabolt: a coworker that was trans. I talked in long terms and depth with him/her at the time. Stephanie actually loved being a woman but hated a large group  of her "supporters." They all were SSSOOO UNDERSTANDING that they understood nothing. They were all ssssooo anxious to be hep that they forgot about Stephanie. It was far more important to be SEEN as Open-Minded. Stephanie had a term she used for years about her "Overly Enthusiastic, Virtue Signalling Supporters." She said many times that they were "so open-minded that their brains had fallen out." They really did not care about her or those like her at all. They just wanted the Virtue-Signalling Buzz of being OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTIVE. So Supportive that they were actually interfering with Stephanie's transition to a normal day-to-day life. We all know the type: "Oh hey yall! I want to introduce you to Stephanie, she's my trans friend I was telling yall about." Rinse and repeat every day ad nauseum...

Stephanie eventually took her own life with a bottle pills and a bottle of Jack black. She spent very few days as normal.

A good friend and a really funny person died in part because she never got to be normal. She was SSSOOO loved that no one even went to her funeral nor comforted her wife but maybe 5-6 of us. 

Edited March 17, 2023 by DKW 86

[DKW 86 7,411]

On 3/15/2023 at 10:15 PM, AU9377 said:

I just feel like it is an argument that defies explanation.  If someone is born with a vagina, they are a female.  They carry two XX chromosomes.  If someone is born with an X and Y chromosome, they are genetically male.  There is nothing that can be done to change that.  How they express themselves is their business and nobody else should impose on their right to live their life as they want.  However, if their remains are found by someone 50 years from now, regardless of the hormones they take or surgical procedures they have, they will be identified as a female based on their DNA.

In a world with 8BN people in it, the "hermaphrodite" (my simple catch-all terminology for this discussion) population is something like 136M. They make up like 1.7% of the population. My son is researching a paper on this for his degree. This includes several differing biological reasons for a person to be a non-traditional XX and XY.

[AU9377 4,914]

4 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

In a world with 8BN people in it, the "hermaphrodite" (my simple catch-all terminology for this discussion) population is something like 136M. They make up like 1.7% of the population. My son is researching a paper on this for his degree. This includes several differing biological reasons for a person to be a non-traditional XX and XY.

I get it.  My questioning is not intended to question why this group exists or if they in fact do exist.  I am more concerned about the desire that some have to die on this hill of defending a re-classification of individuals based on little more than a desire to do so.  To be frank, if someone has their male body parts, why is it wrong to classify them as male, or at the very least trans male or female.  That would be the correct classification.  It is even more problematic if the person wants to be classified as male if they are born female.  There is no surgery that can build a functional male penis where a vagina currently exists.  I think the discussion gets so far away from reality that the argument becomes a losing argument because it drifts so far from the truth.

If someone wants to live as a woman or a man, they shouldn't be punished for that decision. I don't like any group being signaled out and attacked based solely on who they are without justification.

The problem I see in defending every extreme view on this issue is that, at the end of the day, it diminishes the progress gay and lesbian men and women have fought so hard to earn.  The goal of every gay man I know is to be respected in the same manner as every other man.  In other words, they want to be respected for who they are.  They don't want special accommodations or recognition.  They don't want to be labeled as a mistake of some sort. Some gay men are feminine, while some are masculine.  That is also true with straight men. Regardless of their disposition, they had no choice in the matter.  If it was a choice, everyone would choose to be the team captain.  Most all would choose the easiest path to success in life. They certainly never chose to be different or to live a lifetime worried that who they are as dictated by nature could be used against them.

When the trans community asks them to defend sexual reassignment of minors or trans athletes participating in women's sports, they are asking them to speak from both sides of their mouth, to contradict their own argument for acceptance.  Many are not willing to do that and are growing resentful of being asked to do so.  Wearing heels and a dress doesn't make someone female any more than growing body hair makes someone male. Claiming otherwise is a pretty tall hill to climb.

[AURex 1,984]

On 3/14/2023 at 12:47 PM, AUDub said:

This is a strawman though. Trans women don't necessarily think femininity and womanhood are the same thing, but using feminine cultural signifiers, sometimes to a degree best desceibed as "hyperfeminine," to "pass" is really their only means of signaling "hey, I'm a woman!" to others.

This entire thread is men dictating how people SHOULD live their lives and men's opinions about them. Why do men feel it necessary or even appropriate to compartmentalize others, define them, hate on them.

I lived in SF for 6 years. I met a lot of lesbian, gay, and trans people. Reality is, they are people. They are human beings. As a hetero male married to a hetero woman, we accepted and were accepted by friends and acquaintances of all ilks.

Vilifying people based on view through personal hetero male glasses is repugnant and I might add, totally unChristian.

 

[TexasTiger 12,811]

3 hours ago, AURex said:

This entire thread is men dictating how people SHOULD live their lives and men's opinions about them. Why do men feel it necessary or even appropriate to compartmentalize others, define them, hate on them.

I lived in SF for 6 years. I met a lot of lesbian, gay, and trans people. Reality is, they are people. They are human beings. As a hetero male married to a hetero woman, we accepted and were accepted by friends and acquaintances of all ilks.

Vilifying people based on view through personal hetero male glasses is repugnant and I might add, totally unChristian.

 

I agree. But who is doing that on this thread and where are they doing it in your opinion?

[TexasTiger 12,811]

Whom do you think is most reasonable in this situation?

https://reduxx.info/italy-trans-identified-male-takes-home-eighth-womens-running-championship/