Who determines the number of genders- and how?

[ponderingturtle]

It's not really the edge cases that bother me - it's really stuff like women's sports, women's health, etc that legitimately does seem to be being "encroached upon" in destructive ways which has been flying under the radar to some extent, because most feminists of all orientations really, truly don't want to be bigots.

Outside of sports where the advantages to transwomen vs ciswomen is debatable how is being inclusive hurting women's health and what ever is in the ect?

How is women's health being encroached upon?

 

[ponderingturtle]

If the whole gender identify thing was being presented as some sort of... transitional phase, a thing for people do while waiting on gender roles to go away you might have a point but that's certainly not what we have.

Nothing in any version of the gender identify movement has it ever been presented in any context as "temporary."

How did I claim being gender queer, gender fluid, or gender non conforming are transitional? Some people do change their identities and some do not. Are we back to bisexuals not existing because it has to be some kind of transitional phase, or is presented as a transitional phase sometimes?

I am really not sure what you are getting at here.

 

[Thermal]

No. Trans people really do understand what their bodies are. But they also know what they feel their bodies should be. Their mental idea of this is my body does not match their physical one. This is not something that in general is treated with disdain when someone tries to get their body to fit their body image. Like those "unnecessary" breast reconstruction after mastectomy for women? Why bother with those fake unnatural breasts? Who are they trying to fool? Why do women who have cancer deserve tits but women who did not naturally grow them do not?

That's what I mean. You feel like something that you physically are not. A small breasted woman does not feel she is a large breasted woman trapped in the wrong body, she is making cosmetic changes like grooming. A trans is not just dolling up their appearance.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'm not trying to be obtuse. Thinking you are a woman when you are physically a male is some sort of crossed wire. Yes, a dolphin is being hyperbolic, but all this talk of gender inclusivity seems to gloss over that. That's why I see the gender distinction as often really meaning sex; we don't have any evidence of being trapped in wrong bodies. Its a hardwiring problem regarding self identification.

Like being gay?

 

[ponderingturtle]

That's what I mean. You feel like something that you physically are not. A small breasted woman does not feel she is a large breasted woman trapped in the wrong body, she is making cosmetic changes like grooming. A trans is not just dolling up their appearance.

And a woman after a mastectomy has no breasts, why would she want to fool anyone with these fake ones? Get it certainly seems to be very important to many women to have breasts.

It is not because it has many connected issues involving self image, identity and society.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Back away slowly?

Yeah I flubbed it reversed what I was trying to say.

Hopefully everyone got what I mean.

It's not really the edge cases that bother me - it's really stuff like women's sports, women's health, etc that legitimately does seem to be being "encroached upon" in destructive ways which has been flying under the radar to some extent, because most feminists of all orientations really, truly don't want to be bigots.

And to me this is the current problem. Progressives are often so enamored with the idea of tolerance and so scared of not living up to some perfect ideal of tolerance that they embrace it at every chance without thinking if it makes any sense. Progressives have got, got to start looking a social problems through some lens other than "Find the victim and agree with whatever they are saying."

Just because a group is legitimately being marginalized, their preferred way to fix might not always be the best way to do it.

If our goal is to get rid of unnecessary imposed gender roles enshrining some special subcategory of people who get to subvert those roles is counter productive in the long run, outweighing the temporary catharsis of a short term fix for the problem only in this limited context.

 

[kellyb]

I'm not trying to be obtuse. Thinking you are a woman when you are physically a male is some sort of crossed wire. Yes, a dolphin is being hyperbolic, but all this talk of gender inclusivity seems to gloss over that. That's why I see the gender distinction as often really meaning sex; we don't have any evidence of being trapped in wrong bodies. Its a hardwiring problem regarding self identification.

I guess I think the gender wires are easily crossed because gender roles and gender specific norms are somewhat fluid in our species, because we're very adaptable like that. Like, a vast majority of what it's supposed to "mean" to "be" a man or a woman (beyond genitalia) is made-up nonsense.

 

[Belz...]

And to me this is the current problem. Progressives are often so enamored with the idea of tolerance and so scared of not living up to some perfect ideal of tolerance that they embrace it at every chance without thinking if it makes any sense

Not only that, but in order to show everyone how moral they are, they lash out at anyone who doesn't meet that ideal, and discussing these issues rationally becomes impossible.

 

[Thermal]

Like being gay?

Yes. I think that's a hardwiring problem too. Doesn't make it bad or anything, and God knows I have them too. We are not perfect critters.

And a woman after a mastectomy has no breasts, why would she want to fool anyone with these fake ones? Get it certainly seems to be very important to many women to have breasts.

It is not because it has many connected issues involving self image, identity and society.

A woman getting implants, whether for cosmetic or surgical reasons, does not feel like she has the entirely wrong genetic makeup, any more than someone getting a haircut feels like they are a shorthair trapped in a longhair head.

 

[kellyb]

Outside of sports where the advantages to transwomen vs ciswomen is debatable how is being inclusive hurting women's health and what ever is in the ect?

How is women's health being encroached upon?

Stuff like this:
https://www.thenation.com/article/who-has-abortions/

When the actress and feminist advocate Martha Plimpton organized an abortion-fund benefit lightheartedly named “Night of a Thousand Vaginas,” some activists were outraged, because some trans men don’t like that word (“birth canal” or “front hole” are favored alternatives to the V-word). Trans men should refer to their genitalia however they like, but it’s hard not to feel that there’s something seriously awry when women, who only got to call their genitals by the proper term in public a decade or so ago, are supposed to stop naming them in order to avoid offense.

 

[Thermal]

I guess I think the gender wires are easily crossed because gender roles and gender specific norms are somewhat fluid in our species, because we're very adaptable like that. Like, a vast majority of what it's supposed to "mean" to "be" a man or a woman (beyond genitalia) is made-up nonsense.

That's true. The role of what a man or woman does is societally defined and changes with the society. A transgender person normally isn't just exhibiting the behavior of the opposite sex, though. Its more of the wrong body thing.

 

[kellyb]

And to me this is the current problem. Progressives are often so enamored with the idea of tolerance and so scared of not living up to some perfect ideal of tolerance that they embrace it at every chance without thinking if it makes any sense. Progressives have got, got to start looking a social problems through some lens other than "Find the victim and agree with whatever they are saying."

Just because a group is legitimately being marginalized, their preferred way to fix might not always be the best way to do it.

If our goal is to get rid of unnecessary imposed gender roles enshrining some special subcategory of people who get to subvert those roles is counter productive in the long run, outweighing the temporary catharsis of a short term fix for the problem only in this limited context.

Agreed.

 

[kellyb]

A transgender person normally isn't just exhibiting the behavior of the opposite sex, though. Its more of the wrong body thing.

I think there's a lot of variation there. I think the category "transwomen" is akin to the saying about autism: if you've met one person with autism, you've met...exactly one person with autism. lol

 

[qayak]

What in the blue hell are you talking about? Children are not all females, and neither are foetuses at any point of their development. Children are already differentiated, and foetuses start halfway before a certain point.

Well, reams of genetic scientists disagree with you. Perhaps your beef is with them.

I didn't say anything about "handed". How are you missing my point so utterly? The point is that if you want to refer to right-handed people specifically, we have a term for that even though most people are right-handed. The English language could very easily have not had any term for right-handed people but one for left-handed people, but having one for both is useful when you want to know which hand you favour. This isn't rocket science.

But we already have a term for people who are born male . . . it's MALE. It's the same term we use for people who have transitioned to male. If they are on their journey they can call themselves transmales if they so choose.

 

[qayak]

Yes. I think that's a hardwiring problem too. Doesn't make it bad or anything, and God knows I have them too. We are not perfect critters.



A woman getting implants, whether for cosmetic or surgical reasons, does not feel like she has the entirely wrong genetic makeup, any more than someone getting a haircut feels like they are a shorthair trapped in a longhair head.

But it's a spectrum so how do you know they aren't just on the low end. "I'm female but not female enough withhout bigger breasts!"

 

[JoeMorgue]

Well, reams of genetic scientists disagree with you. Perhaps your beef is with them.

Okay where exactly do you think this is gonna go?

Yes technically all mammals (maybe I'll vertebrates I don't remember) start off as female early in embryonic development.

AND?

How does that make adult biological sex any different in any context?

What possible part of the actual discussion that we are having do you think this little "Well ackschually..." factoid changes?

 

[qayak]

That's what I mean. You feel like something that you physically are not.

If you have never been the other thing how do you know that's what you feel like? How do you even know that what you feel isn't completely normal for what you are because you have nothing else to compare it to?

 

[Belz...]

Well, reams of genetic scientists disagree with you. Perhaps your beef is with them.

I don't believe you.

But we already have a term for people who are born male . . . it's MALE. It's the same term we use for people who have transitioned to male.

Isn't the latter "trans-male"?

And again, you're missing the point, which seems to indicate that you're doing it deliberately.

 

[Belz...]

(maybe I'll vertebrates I don't remember)

Maybe I'll illiterate! HAAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!


Good times.

 

[JoeMorgue]

If you have never been the other thing how do you know that's what you feel like?

Because not everything is a matter of internal personal identity.

Some thing have external defining characteristics.

Like the saying goes... How many legs does a dog have if you call its tail a leg?

Answer. 4. Still 4. Because calling a tail a leg doesn't make it so.

Progressives have got to accept this. What someone "identifies" as is not the end all, be all of their person.