What exactly makes someone a TERF?

[Viker]

Some women who've been raped or assaulted will self-exclude from events and from places where only unisex is offered for facilities. I personally will not go in a unisex, which means I don't go to places where I might need to use the facilities and that's the only option.

Of course you don't see any "drama" because women who are concerned about putting themselves in these situations usually just don't go. It's the "urinary leash" of the Victorian era all over again.

A woman bringing a male young child or disabled adult male child into the women's room is of course just fine because a young child or a disabled adult male is not a threat to the women, and women can instantly see that those people are not a threat.

Most men are not a threat. But 98% of rapes and sexual assaults are committed by men. So we exclude ALL men (caveats for young children and disabled people who need help) from spaces where women are vulnerable to dramatically lower the risk. We never policed this in restrooms before, and sometimes men slipped in and caused great concern for the women who were there. Back in those days, we could complain. Complaining is now no longer an option. Again, this means that women self-exclude from public life to some degree.

Having women's (only) restrooms has never stopped sexual assault before.

By having unisex facilities near a security post could mitigate the risks.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

Ahh, there is indeed an instinctual reaction that assesses for danger. But I would need to see studies that confirm that women can innately detect the sex of another. They might be able to see discrepancies in cultural presentations of gender, both masculine and feminine. Which in itself begs the question, is that really truly innate instinct or reaction to cultural climates?
And indeed such discrepancies affects cis individuals quite a bit more than people might want to admit


Whilst simultaneously condemning those with gender dysphoria to a life of misery, self harm, potential suicide, all against the established advice of medical experts worldwide. Umm okay?

Gender dysphoria (actually, body dysmorphia is a better name for that condition in my opinion) is a psychological condition that can be treated.
Having men use the men's and women use the women's and not having unisex will not lead anyone who is not seriously mentally ill to be miserable, self harm, or commit suicide.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

Having women's (only) restrooms has never stopped sexual assault before.

By having unisex facilities near a security post could mitigate the risks.

No, but at least we could complain if a man walked into the women's. Now, we can't.
Men and women both need (and want) privacy and dignity when using the bathroom and changing their clothes. A better solution is to have women's and men's. That won't stop people determined to commit a crime, but it will certainly alleviate most extreme discomfort and bring back basic privacy and dignity for women when they are vulnerable.

 

[SomeRandom]

Gender dysphoria (actually, body dysmorphia is a better name for that condition in my opinion) is a psychological condition that can be treated.
Having men use the men's and women use the women's and not having unisex will not lead anyone who is not seriously mentally ill to be miserable, self harm, or commit suicide.

I didn’t say it would. Just that going against the advice of the medical profession (ie stopping folks from using the hormones, or drugs whatever you wish to label it as you suggested) would.
Or is that not what you meant?

Also I think the term body dysmorphia was already taken. Or it used to be labeled as such.
I’m not sure. Labels have changed a few times in even my short lifetime.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

I didn’t say it would. Just that going against the advice of the medical profession (ie stopping folks from using the hormones, or drugs whatever you wish to label it as you suggested) would.
Or is that not what you meant?

Oh sorry, I misread your response to mean the bathrooms, rather than the drugs.

Giving people drugs such as hormones to treat the delusion that one is "born in the wrong body" should be (and hopefully will be soon) considered medical malpractice. The appropriate response is to help make that person feel comfortable in their body, since we *are* our bodies. A doctor giving their anorexia patient diet drugs or liposuction because that patient has a delusion they are fat when in fact they are thin would surely be considered malpractice, right?

Also I think the term body dysmorphia was already taken. Or it used to be labeled as such.
I’m not sure. Labels have changed a few times in even my short lifetime.

"Body dysmorphic disorder is a mental health condition in which you can't stop thinking about one or more perceived defects or flaws in your appearance". Seems about right to me.

"Gender dysphoria" makes no sense to me. Can you define it? All the definitions for it I find are circular and make no sense at all and rely on other terms like "gender identity" that also make no sense. We are all either male or female. There is no other option. If one is uncomfortable with one's sexed body, feeling like it has "flaws" then that seems like body dysmorphia to me.

 

[icehorse]

No, but at least we could complain if a man walked into the women's. Now, we can't.

Well and succinctly put.

 

[SomeRandom]

Oh sorry, I misread your response to mean the bathrooms, rather than the drugs.

Giving people drugs such as hormones to treat the delusion that one is "born in the wrong body" should be (and hopefully will be soon) considered medical malpractice. The appropriate response is to help make that person feel comfortable in their body, since we *are* our bodies. A doctor giving their anorexia patient diet drugs or liposuction because that patient has a delusion they are fat when in fact they are thin would surely be considered malpractice, right?

Ahh fair enough

Honestly, it’s probably a bit more complicated.
I’ll admit that I haven’t exactly brushed up on the scientific literature as of late (pertaining to this specifically.)
Plus I am but a layman, so forgive me if I appear to be presenting info in a sort of “dumb way.”

I vaguely recall, and someone can correct me if I’m wrong, that there was noticeable differences in the brain activity of a trans individual vs a cis individual. The disconnect, if you will, was literally tangible on our brain scanners. If that makes sense?
I’ll see if I can find the study, but this was years ago now. I’ll try though.

"Body dysmorphic disorder is a mental health condition in which you can't stop thinking about one or more perceived defects or flaws in your appearance". Seems about right to me.

That pertains to social/cultural expectations of physical beauty specifically though. Gender dysmorphia is specifically about the societal expectations of masculine or feminine presentation. Which does differ across cultures. Which may explain why the condition can be so “fluid” for lack of a better term

"Gender dysphoria" makes no sense to me. Can you define it? All the definitions for it I find are circular and make no sense at all and rely on other terms like "gender identity" that also make no sense. We are all either male or female. There is no other option. If one is uncomfortable with one's sexed body, feeling like it has "flaws" then that seems like body dysmorphia to me.

Gender dysmorphia. Where a person does not identify with their birth sex.

Basically a person has a great level of discomfort with identifying or living as their birth sex. Typically this is described as a person’s gender identity not matching their birth sex.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.

And this isn’t new. The phenomenon has been recorded by multiple ancient cultures around the world.

If I’m being honest, given the known biological outcomes of the distribution of sex characteristics in humans, a gender binary seems a bit restrictive overall. I understand why we have it in modern society, I’m just saying.
Humans are all sorts of…”interesting.”

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

Ahh fair enough

Honestly, it’s probably a bit more complicated.

Believing one is fat when one is thin, and believing one is the opposite sex from the sex one is are both delusions.

I’ll admit that I haven’t exactly brushed up on the scientific literature as of late (pertaining to this specifically.)
Plus I am but a layman, so forgive me if I appear to be presenting info in a sort of “dumb way.”

I vaguely recall, and someone can correct me if I’m wrong, that there was noticeable differences in the brain activity of a trans individual vs a cis individual. The disconnect, if you will, was literally tangible on our brain scanners. If that makes sense?
I’ll see if I can find the study, but this was years ago now. I’ll try though.

Once you control for same sex attraction this difference goes away, according to Helen Joyce (author of Trans). Which would make sense since the most highly "gender non-conforming" (i.e. sex-role stereotype non-conforming) kids often grow up to be gay.

And, you haven't defined your terms. What is "trans" (or "cis")? Since it is not possible for humans to change sex, then "trans" would perhaps be "someone pretending to be the opposite sex of what they actually are". Unless there is some other brain difference (i.e. someone is gay, perhaps) it seems unlikely an fMRI would pick up on a pretense.

That pertains to social/cultural expectations of physical beauty specifically though. Gender dysmorphia is specifically about the societal expectations of masculine or feminine presentation. Which does differ across cultures. Which may explain why the condition can be so “fluid” for lack of a better term

I think you're saying gender dysphoria is people feeling uncomfortable with social expectations? (Body dysmorphia is feeling uncomfortable with one's body). Is that correct? If so, who doesn't? Women are expected every day to look like Twiggy in one decade and Kim Kardashian or Barbie in another. By that definition we ALL have gender dysphoria. Or rather, discomfort with sex stereotypes, key word being stereotypes.

Gender dysmorphia. Where a person does not identify with their birth sex.

I think you mean gender dysphoria.
"Birth sex" - sex observed at birth, although these days it's usually observed in the womb at 18-24 weeks. This sex cannot change.
"Identify with" - meaning what? Discomfort with one's sexed body? Or a girl who likes climbing trees (stereotypically a boy's activity)? Or what? We all have discomfort with our bodies at times, particularly during adolescence. We all like doing things that might be more stereotypically associated with the opposite sex. That doesn't mean we are not the sex we are. We *are* our bodies. We can have feelings about that, but that doesn't change reality.

Basically a person has a great level of discomfort with identifying or living as their birth sex. Typically this is described as a person’s gender identity not matching their birth sex.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.

No, it's really not, because "gender identity" is nonsensical. We *are* our bodies, which means we *are* the sex we are. We can have feelings about it, but then we have feelings about a lot of things. I can feel like climbing trees today but that doesn't make me a boy, it just means I'd like to do something that society has decided is "boyish" which is ridiculous, because lots of people like climbing trees, boys, girls, men and women.

And this isn’t new. The phenomenon has been recorded by multiple ancient cultures around the world.

Yes, discomfort with one's body is common throughout recorded history. For example, in the late 19th century, there was a social contagion of "hysteria" among upper class women. Doctors at the time blamed it on a woman's "irritable uterus". Of course that wasn't it at all, and indeed once it become unfashionable--which is when lower class women started "catching" this social contagion--it ended, quickly. It was a fad.

Another "fad" related to discomfort with one's body, with real world consequences, is bulimia. This is well-known to be socially contagious. It wasn't until teachers started warning their students NOT to do it, that it spread like wildfire. Just the suggestion made young people susceptible.

Another recent fad is the "Tik Tok Tourettes". Tweenage girls who get on Tik Tok, watch videos of other tweenage girls pretending to have Tourettes and "catching" it. Humans are incredibly suggestible. Probably a benefit when we lived in small groups of hunter gatherers, and not being part of the tribe meant death. In the modern world, not so much.

Likewise with this "gender" fad, this is a social contagion among young people, with the very real consequences that some young people are being sterilized and mutilated, and becoming medical patients for life because of a delusion.

Of course, the beating heart of this fad is the autognephile men; they are the ones who started it. Autogynephiles may no longer be numerically the biggest part of this movement, but without this core group of men whose dearest and sole desire in life is to force everyone to pretend that they're women, this movement would not have got so far. The worst thing about this is that this erotic desire to be women is so central to these men's self-image and so central to their sexual fantasy that they really are women, that not only do they want to force us all to say they are women and make laws to compel us to do so, they also want us to believe that they were always women. And that means they must have been "trans" children. So these men are the ones who want push children onto sterilizing drugs and mutilating surgeries--to validate their own sexual fantasy. This is why they're so dangerous. The ones at the very top, pushing this hard, are the men like Jennifer Pritzker, who have a huge profit motive to make sure there are many "trans" children.

If I’m being honest, given the known biological outcomes of the distribution of sex characteristics in humans, a gender binary seems a bit restrictive overall. I understand why we have it in modern society, I’m just saying.
Humans are all sorts of…”interesting.”

I don't know what you mean by "gender binary". If you mean "sex binary"--it's too bad that you think it's restrictive, because male and female are the only options, and one none of us has any control over. If you mean sex stereotypes, i.e. you're a man who'd like to not be stereotypically domineering, go for it; or you're a woman who'd like to not be submissive, and not feel like she has to look like Kim Kardashian, go for it. Feminists have long said sex stereotypes are restrictive. But just because we don't conform to sex stereotypes doesn't mean we can change our sex, or that we should sterilize and mutilate people.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

To go back to the original question on the thread...

I know TERF means trans exclusionary radical feminist.

I understand "trans" to be people pretending they are the opposite sex of the sex they are, or some nonsensical non-existent sex such as "non-binary".

"Exclusionary" means to leave out.

"Radical feminist" is a feminist who supports the liberation of women as a sex class from male domination.

Speaking as a (mostly) radical feminist myself, I'd suggest that TERF should actually be MERF. Women need single sex spaces when we are most vulnerable (e.g. a changing room), or, perhaps just because we'd like to (e.g. a lesbian party), and that means excluding all men, including men who think they are women. This does not exclude women who are pretending to be men, or who are delusional or otherwise mentally ill.

But what exactly does a person have to believe to ACCURATELY be labeled a TERF?

From what I can tell people use it to label anyone who believes in the reality that human mammals come in two sexes only (and likewise for all other mammals on Earth) and that "gender identity" is nonsensical. I'm not sure it can ever be accurately used.

Office Max is printing "Punch a TERF" materials? Those TERFs must be some awful people ??

Office Max/Office Depot Prints 'PUNCH A TERF' Cards at Eight Locations and Counting

From what I've seen watching "trans rights" activists crash women-only events and shut down women-only services, and male rapists who've managed to get themselves into women's prisons and subsequently assault and/or rape women there, it seems it's mostly the men pretending to be women who are the violent ones (which isn't surprising; men are responsible for the vast majority of violent crimes).

So I'm not sure why people believe that people who believe in the reality of binary sex are awful, but it does seem to be the case. Why would believing in reality make people awful? I've no idea. Why would having concern for people who are delusional make people awful? Why would wanting the law to reflect reality about binary sex make people awful? Why would being concerned that we have a generation of young people who might otherwise grow up to be healthy gay adults who are instead being sterilized and mutilated because they do not conform to sex-stereotypical behaviors make people awful? Again, I've no idea.

Someone else responded that they think TERF is a "very online term" (or similar). I think that's true; at the same time, it is rather shocking that so few people are aware of what is the most homophobic, misogynistic, child abusive medical scandal of a generation. It does seem more people are waking up to this now, and hopefully it will be stopped before too many more young people are sterilized and mutilated for life. And hopefully the law will be changed so that we will no longer be compelled to lie about someone's sex, particularly when sex matters most (i.e. in places where women are extremely vulnerable, such as prisons, rape shelters, changing rooms, sports, and so on). And hopefully people will learn to be far more accepting of others so that young people who are lesbian or gay or autistic or just different can be themselves without feeling like they aren't good enough just as they are.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Believing one is fat when one is thin, and believing one is the opposite sex from the sex one is are both delusions.

Gender, not "sex". Basically everything else you have written can be dismissed as a result of your confusion between these two concepts.

 

[SomeRandom]

Believing one is fat when one is thin, and believing one is the opposite sex from the sex one is are both delusions.

Sorry I had quite a few notifications to sort through lol

I mean if that is your position, fine

But what are your qualifications pertaining to this subject? Specifically?

I’ll freely admit that I’m a layman. So I rely on the experts in the field.

Gender dysphoria is a known psychological phenomenon recorded and studied by folks in the relevant field. As are eating disorders.
These are seperate categories studied by folks with differing outcomes.
It’s like the difference between a person fearing the unknown and specific phobias. They may seem similar, but there’s more going on in terms of psychology and even human development.

Just because two things seem similar doesn’t mean they are. Necessarily.

That’s just a general rule one should follow, I find

Once you control for same sex attraction this difference goes away, according to Helen Joyce (author of Trans). Which would make sense since the most highly "gender non-conforming" (i.e. sex-role stereotype non-conforming) kids often grow up to be gay.

Not familiar with the work. Sorry

And, you haven't defined your terms. What is "trans" (or "cis")? Since it is not possible for humans to change sex, then "trans" would perhaps be "someone pretending to be the opposite sex of what they actually are". Unless there is some other brain difference (i.e. someone is gay, perhaps) it seems unlikely an fMRI would pick up on a pretense.

My apologies, I assumed you were familiar with the terms
Cis: a person who firmly identifies as their birth sex. This is in direct correlation with their gender identity. Basically meaning they were born with, say, male sex characteristics, outside and/or inside and their gender identify directly corresponds to this.
A trans person simply wouldn’t have their gender identity correspond to their sex characteristics (outside and/or inside.)
I’m not sure what the big confusion is here, since it seems fairly straightforward to me and I’m a colossal dumbass.
Like seriously, my friend. Keep up?

I think you're saying gender dysphoria is people feeling uncomfortable with social expectations? (Body dysmorphia is feeling uncomfortable with one's body). Is that correct? If so, who doesn't? Women are expected every day to look like Twiggy in one decade and Kim Kardashian or Barbie in another. By that definition we ALL have gender dysphoria. Or rather, discomfort with sex stereotypes, key word being stereotypes.

I think you mean gender dysphoria.
"Birth sex" - sex observed at birth, although these days it's usually observed in the womb at 18-24 weeks. This sex cannot change.
"Identify with" - meaning what? Discomfort with one's sexed body? Or a girl who likes climbing trees (stereotypically a boy's activity)? Or what? We all have discomfort with our bodies at times, particularly during adolescence. We all like doing things that might be more stereotypically associated with the opposite sex. That doesn't mean we are not the sex we are. We *are* our bodies. We can have feelings about that, but that doesn't change reality.

Perhaps.
I blame my phone for poor spelling lol
It’s awful in that sense

No, it's really not, because "gender identity" is nonsensical. We *are* our bodies, which means we *are* the sex we are. We can have feelings about it, but then we have feelings about a lot of things. I can feel like climbing trees today but that doesn't make me a boy, it just means I'd like to do something that society has decided is "boyish" which is ridiculous, because lots of people like climbing trees, boys, girls, men and women.

Yes, discomfort with one's body is common throughout recorded history. For example, in the late 19th century, there was a social contagion of "hysteria" among upper class women. Doctors at the time blamed it on a woman's "irritable uterus". Of course that wasn't it at all, and indeed once it become unfashionable--which is when lower class women started "catching" this social contagion--it ended, quickly. It was a fad.

Another "fad" related to discomfort with one's body, with real world consequences, is bulimia. This is well-known to be socially contagious. It wasn't until teachers started warning their students NOT to do it, that it spread like wildfire. Just the suggestion made young people susceptible.

Another recent fad is the "Tik Tok Tourettes". Tweenage girls who get on Tik Tok, watch videos of other tweenage girls pretending to have Tourettes and "catching" it. Humans are incredibly suggestible. Probably a benefit when we lived in small groups of hunter gatherers, and not being part of the tribe meant death. In the modern world, not so much.

Our bodies aren’t the be all and end all of everything like come on. We evolve. We develop.
Our bodies aren’t this static object that we can hold ourselves accountable to.
They’re fluid just by default. Sorry, that’s just basic biology.

Even ancient societies noticed this and we know this to be a fact since it’s in recorded World history. We would have died out otherwise. Again that’s biology
In biological observations of the human species, the sex characteristics are distributed through bimodal means
Meaning humans don’t actually exist in a sex binary. That was literally in my biology text books back in freaking high school. Like 10 years ago

Another "fad" related to discomfort with one's body, with real world consequences, is bulimia. This is well-known to be socially contagious. It wasn't until teachers started warning their students NOT to do it, that it spread like wildfire. Just the suggestion made young people susceptible.

Another recent fad is the "Tik Tok Tourettes". Tweenage girls who get on Tik Tok, watch videos of other tweenage girls pretending to have Tourettes and "catching" it. Humans are incredibly suggestible. Probably a benefit when we lived in small groups of hunter gatherers, and not being part of the tribe meant death. In the modern world, not so much.

I honestly will leave it up to those working with eating disorders to sort it all out properly, if I’m honest
I’ve long seen folks posting such accusations about eating disorders and was even warned against listening to them in my high school health class (no, seriously.)
That’s literally how worried experts working in this specific industry actually were, when it came to this topic.
I will side with them and leave it alone, just to be safe. Like I don’t want to get into this kettle of fish lol

I don't know what you mean by "gender binary". If you mean "sex binary"--it's too bad that you think it's restrictive, because male and female are the only options, and one none of us has any control over. If you mean sex stereotypes, i.e. you're a man who'd like to not be stereotypically domineering, go for it; or you're a woman who'd like to not be submissive, and not feel like she has to look like Kim Kardashian, go for it. Feminists have long said sex stereotypes are restrictive. But just because we don't conform to sex stereotypes doesn't mean we can change our sex, or that we should sterilize and mutilate people.

Male and female aren’t the only two options as far as human biology is concerned.
In the human species we do have hermaphroditism and pseudohermaphroditism as specific categories for the outcomes of human infants. Just as a matter of fact
Seriously, I learnt this in freaking high school.
Did you not choose to study this topic in school?
.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

Gender, not "sex". Basically everything else you have written can be dismissed as a result of your confusion between these two concepts.

Gender is stereotypes, right? Because if it's not that, then I don't know what it is and you'll have to explain.
Gender is, for instance, the stereotype that "a woman has long hair and wears makeup".
I have no problem with a man having long hair and wearing makeup. The problem arises when men claim to actually *be* women. And a bigger problem arises when the law compels us to then treat those men as if they were women. For example, when putting them in women's prisons, or when allowing them to provide intimate care to disabled or elderly women who have requested same sex care. In other words in situations where women are extremely vulnerable.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

My apologies, I assumed you were familiar with the terms
Cis: a person who firmly identifies as their birth sex. This is in direct correlation with their gender identity. Basically meaning they were born with, say, male sex characteristics, outside and/or inside and their gender identify directly corresponds to this.

If your sex is male, you are male.

A trans person simply wouldn’t have their gender identity correspond to their sex characteristics (outside and/or inside.)

What is "gender identity"? You can be a male who wants to have big breasts (a female sex characteristic) but that doesn't make you female. So can you explain what "gender identity" is?

I’m not sure what the big confusion is here, since it seems fairly straightforward to me and I’m a colossal dumbass.
Like seriously, my friend. Keep up?

Haha, I am trying, but these terms make no sense to me. "Cis" and "trans" make no sense because we *are* our bodies and while we might be unhappy about that, there is no escaping our bodies. No amount of cosmetic surgery or mutilating surgery, or drugs, or clothes, or makeup allow us to escape that we are all either men or women.

Most people with DSDs are easily identifiable as male or female. And having a medical disorder does not disprove the sex binary. People with Disorders of Sexual Development (DSDs) have asked specifically to be left out of the so-called "gender wars", which seems fair considering they are such a tiny minority of the population and many many more people are claiming to have a "gender identity" than have DSDs. So I direct my comments at those who do NOT have DSDs.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Gender is stereotypes, right?

No. Gender is a complex series of associations and expectations that varies throughout history and culture.

Because if it's not that, then I don't know what it is and you'll have to explain.

Perhaps you should understand what gender is before you voice lengthy opinions on transgender people or issues.

Just a thought.

Gender is, for instance, the stereotype that "a woman has long hair and wears makeup".

Gender expectation is a part of gender, yes. To call it a "stereotype" is overly simplistic.

I have no problem with a man having long hair and wearing makeup. The problem arises when men claim to actually *be* women. And a bigger problem arises when the law compels us to then treat those men as if they were women. For example, when putting them in women's prisons, or when allowing them to provide intimate care to disabled or elderly women who have requested same sex care. In other words in situations where women are extremely vulnerable.

I have no issue with assessing individual circumstances to determine the best course of action when it comes to protecting vulnerable people. My issue is the way you couch this issue is with the explicit implication that trans people aren't what they are, or pose an innate threat to women. They don't. Most trans people just want to be accepted for who they are. This is literally harmless and effortless. It takes nothing for you to do it and it costs nothing, either.

The science and sociological studies on this should allay your fears. It shows no increase in abuse of women when trans-inclusionary policies are enacted.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

If your sex is male, you are male.

What does that mean? Why should a biological trait mean I must identify with a very specific social label that dictates, among many other things, what I can be referred to?

What is "gender identity"? You can be a male who wants to have big breasts (a female sex characteristic) but that doesn't make you female. So can you explain what "gender identity" is?

The gender you associate with. As you rightly observe, just because a person associates with something that is not necessarily associated with the gender they are, they can still be that gender. A man can have boobs. A woman can have a penis. A man can have long hair and wear dresses. A woman can wear suits and smoke cigars. Nobody is defined by the traits they have, beyond the associations the individual ties themselves and their chosen association to.

Haha, I am trying, but these terms make no sense to me. "Cis" and "trans" make no sense because we *are* our bodies and while we might be unhappy about that, there is no escaping our bodies.

Those terms have nothing to do with our bodies. Just like gender, they're social terms that describe our relationship not with just our bodies but with broader social and cultural associations.

No amount of cosmetic surgery or mutilating surgery, or drugs, or clothes, or makeup allow us to escape that we are all either men or women.

False. Again, that's sex, not gender.

Also, some people are biologically neither male nor female. Some have biological traits of either or both sexes. What determines whether one is male or female, then, is not necessarily purely biological, but a matter of categorisation that is more complicated than a simple binary. Biologists have understand that sex is bimodal for decades.

Most people with DSDs are easily identifiable as male or female.

Are they? You think sex is "easily identifiable"? You yourself have claimed that associations we make about sex are stereotypes, and here you are saying it's easy to tell what category people should belong to. Seems a contradictory set of positions, no?

And having a medical disorder does not disprove the sex binary.

It's not a medical disorder. They're born that way. It's simply a consequence of biological processes, which are never as simple as to produce a clear, unambiguous set of categories, much less a simple binary. WE see it as binary for the sake of simplicity. Nature doesn't agree.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

What does that mean? Why should a biological trait mean I must identify with a very specific social label that dictates, among many other things, what I can be referred to?

The gender you associate with. As you rightly observe, just because a person associates with something that is not necessarily associated with the gender they are, they can still be that gender. A man can have boobs. A woman can have a penis. A man can have long hair and wear dresses. A woman can wear suits and smoke cigars. Nobody is defined by the traits they have, beyond the associations the individual ties themselves and their chosen association to.

Sex is determined by gamete size. Men have small mobile gametes (sperm); women have large immobile gametes (ova). In the paragraph above you are using the words men and women as if they have no meaning.

Those terms have nothing to do with our bodies. Just like gender, they're social terms that describe our relationship not with just our bodies but with broader social and cultural associations.

Actually words are very useful for describing reality. The way you use "men" and "women" is mostly nonsensical and doesn't allow for productive discussion.

Unfortunately none of what you've said here explains "gender" or "gender identity" in a way that makes sense.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Sex is determined by gamete size.

I was talking about gender, not sex. Once again, you have to understand the distinction before you can even start debating this topic.

Men have small mobile gametes (sperm); women have large immobile gametes (ova).

So if a person is born with a womb but is unable to produce ova, they aren't a woman?

In the paragraph above you are using the words men and women as if they have no meaning.

I've already given an explanation as to what gender is defined as.

Actually words are very useful for describing reality. The way you use "men" and "women" is mostly nonsensical and doesn't allow for productive discussion.

I have never had any issue with my use of "man" or "woman", whereas I bet you have never investigated the size of a person's gametes before referring to them as a man or a woman. Mine is consistent and practical, while yours is neither.

Unfortunately none of what you've said here explains "gender" or "gender identity" in a way that makes sense.

Then try harder. It's not that complicated.

Do you think a person born with a womb is somehow biologically stamped with the pronouns "she/her" in her genes? Or, is that a SOCIAL thing we did that we tied to her biology, but is nevertheless distinct from it? Do you understand that "women wear dresses" is a generally true expectation, but also understand that men can also wear dresses, and dresses are in no way a biological feature of women? Then you understand that there is a thing called sex and a seperate thing called gender. Sex is the biological systems you are born with, largely - though not necessarily entirely - related to your biological sexual development. Gender is a seperate layer of SOCIAL expectations that we put ON TOP OF that; i.e: the idea that, by being born biologically female, it SHOULD mean that you use she/her pronouns, have long hair, makeup, dresses, etc..

Like I said, it's not that complicated.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

It sounds to me like the people participating in this discussion (other than @icehorse) believe that words make reality, a central tenet of queer theory (and, see transubstantiation), and that men and women are interchangeable parts, what Mary Harrington calls "Meat Lego Gnosticism". And that there is some gendered soul that is separate from one's body that allows some people to have a "gender identity". These are extraordinary and religious claims. Perfect for Religious Forums. I wouldn't care, except that the state has embraced this religion wholeheartedly and is making laws to try to force us all to believe in it, to which I object. This religion is also responsible for slicing up the bodies of otherwise healthy young people. I will continue to object to this dangerous religion, and will continue to do so elsewhere. Thanks all for the discussion.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It sounds to me like the people participating in this discussion (other than @icehorse) believe that words make reality,

Strawman.

a central tenet of queer theory (and, see transubstantiation),

No, actually. It has nothing to do with queer theory.

and that men and women are interchangeable parts,

Not interchangeable, no. But largely socially defined in gender terms.

what Mary Harrington calls "Meat Lego Gnosticism". And that there is some gendered soul that is separate from one's body that allows some people to have a "gender identity".

Again, strawman. I have seen nobody claim it is a "soul" or anything like it. It's just an identity. Identities are psychological and sociological, not biological.

These are extraordinary and religious claims.

Nobody is making those claims.

Perfect for Religious Forums. I wouldn't care, except that the state has embraced this religion wholeheartedly and is making laws to try to force us all to believe in it, to which I object.

You have yet to demonstrate a basic grasp of the concepts involved. You are not qualified to comment holistically on this topic.

This religion is also responsible for slicing up the bodies of otherwise healthy young people.

Scaremongering nonsense.

I will continue to object to this dangerous religion, and will continue to do so elsewhere. Thanks all for the discussion.

Goodbye. Sorry you couldn't keep up and had to construct a bunch of strawmen because you are out of your depth and then had to run away.

 

[icehorse]

You have yet to demonstrate a basic grasp of the concepts involved. You are not qualified to comment holistically on this topic.

Back in post #112 @BlueIslandGirl asked everyone / anyone to define three terms. (There are probably more, but we can start with those.) You claim to understand "the concepts involved" so I'd like to hear your definitions for these terms:

trans
gender
gender identity

thanks!