Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you think it is okay for human females of childbearing age to advocate for their unique medical needs under the banner of "women's rights" or not?

Sure.

I don't think it's the optimal term, since it there are people with those same needs who aren't women, and there are women who don't have those same needs, but nobody is saying that they shouldn't be allowed to.

This whole kerfuffle started, if you remember, with the prohibition coming from the other side. With Rowling saying that the menstrual health experts who authored an article about menstrual health shouldn't use the term "people who menstruate", and when called out wrote a long, factually inaccurate anti-trans screed in order to try to justify it. Which, and I may have mentioned this before, was stupid and wrong.
 
I would have thought that the "trans women aren't women" crowd ought, in order to be consistent, also to be agreeing with the statement "there is no such thing as an effeminate boy or an effeminate man"

Shouldn't any way in which a male person behaves be, by definition, masculine?

No, because the words "man/woman" are defined as male/female humans (ie defined by sex) and the words "masculine/feminine/effeminate" are defined as behaviours stereotypically associated with men/women (ie defined by gender). And it is perfectly possible for a male human to display behaviour stereotypically associated with female humans (ie being an "effeminate man").

Of course, it is always possible to redefine words to make any proposition evaluate to true. For example "transwomen are women" can be made to evaluate to true by changing the definition of "women" or "the Earth is flat" can be made to evaluate to true by changing the definition of "flat" or "1 + 1 = 3" can be made to evaluate to true by changing the definition of "3". That's just empty sophistry though.
 
Last edited:
I don't think it's the optimal term, since it there are people with those same needs who aren't women, and there are women who don't have those same needs, but nobody is saying that they shouldn't be allowed to.
It doesn't sound like you believe there is actually an English word for female people of at least childbearing age, not even one which only denotes that meaning some of the time.

ETA: I suppose the plaintiff in Whole Woman's Health v. HellerstedtWP is going to need to focus group some new ideas. :p

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I am asking what the goal posts are.

I know that I got tired of people telling me I was not a man, but apparently if I say "OK, have it your way I am not a man" people will get angry and say "Oh yes you are".

I have never had any idea where the goal posts are and most of the time I don't care because I am probably playing a different game anyway.

I am interested to see if Rolfe will answer your question. She was the one who said trans girls are "effeminate youths".
 
No, because the words "man/woman" are defined as male/female humans (ie defined by sex) and the words "masculine/feminine/effeminate" are defined as behaviours stereotypically associated with men/women (ie defined by gender). And it is perfectly possible for a male human to display behaviour stereotypically associated with female humans (ie being an "effeminate man")
Well give me a concrete example of what you are talking about. Give me one or two behaviours that are stereotypically associated with being a girl that would make a boy "effeminate".
 
Well give me a concrete example of what you are talking about. Give me one or two behaviours that are stereotypically associated with being a girl that would make a boy "effeminate".

From Wikipedia:
Wikipedia said:
Traits traditionally cited as feminine include gentleness, empathy, humility, and sensitivity,[7][8][9] though traits associated with femininity vary across societies and individuals,[10] and are influenced by a variety of social and cultural factors.[11]

You didn't specify relative to which culture you wanted an answer, so I'm just assuming you mean our current culture. Either way, that's 4 there.
 
Last edited:
From Wikipedia:


You didn't specify relative to which culture you wanted an answer, so I'm just assuming you mean our current culture. Either way, that's 4 there.

So if you saw a boy who was gentle, empathetic, humble and sensitive you would call him effeminate?
 
So if you saw a boy who was gentle, empathetic, humble and sensitive you would call him effeminate?

No, because I have better things to do than categorize individuals' behaviour according to arbitrary socially-conventional "behaviour templates." It doesn't stop the description of "effeminate boy" from being true though, at least relative to our culture. If I saw a bald person I also wouldn't go tell him "dude, you're bald!" but that doesn't stop him being, in fact, bald.
 
Last edited:
So you think that gender is is, at least partly, a social construct, right?

If gender was entirely determined by biological sex then every biological male would, by definition, be masculine and every biological female would, by definition, be feminine.

What if gender is influenced by sex, and highly correlated with it, but a different thing?

Upper body strength is influenced by sex, and highly correlated with it, but it's a different thing.

But that doesn't mean it's a social construct.

I think gender is partly a social construct, but I'm not seeing anything in your argument that demonstrates that fact.
 
What if gender is influenced by sex, and highly correlated with it, but a different thing?

Upper body strength is influenced by sex, and highly correlated with it, but it's a different thing.

But that doesn't mean it's a social construct.

I think gender is partly a social construct, but I'm not seeing anything in your argument that demonstrates that fact.

Then that would be sexual dimorphism, not gender.
 
Last edited:
What if gender is influenced by sex, and highly correlated with it, but a different thing?

Upper body strength is influenced by sex, and highly correlated with it, but it's a different thing.

But that doesn't mean it's a social construct.

I think gender is partly a social construct, but I'm not seeing anything in your argument that demonstrates that fact.
I am not trying to demonstrate that fact, I don't know what led you to think I was. I am saying that people who think that phrases like "effeminate boy", or "unfeminine woman" don't see gender as being purely to do with biological sex.
 
I am not trying to demonstrate that fact, I don't know what led you to think I was. I am saying that people who think that phrases like "effeminate boy", or "unfeminine woman" don't see gender as being purely to do with biological sex.

Sorry, perhaps I misunderstood. Did you mean for there to be a logical connection between the question:
"So you think that gender is is, at least partly, a social construct, right?"
And the statement:

"If gender was entirely determined by biological sex then every biological male would, by definition, be masculine and every biological female would, by definition, be feminine."
 
No, because I have better things to do than categorize individuals' behaviour according to arbitrary socially-conventional "behaviour templates." It doesn't stop the description of "effeminate boy" from being true though, at least relative to our culture. If I saw a bald person I also wouldn't go tell him "dude, you're bald!" but that doesn't stop him being, in fact, bald.
If a boy who was gentle, empathetic, humble and sensitive would you think he was effeminate?
 
Then that would be sexual dimorphism, not gender.

I suspect that there is some sexual dimorphism in human behavior that is associated with gender roles, though certainly there are also many gender roles that don't fit that description and are really social constructs.

But my point really was just that there choice isn't between completely determined by biological sex and social construct. It's possible for sex to influence gendered behaviors without completely determining them. And while I have my opinion on that, I'm not attempting to argue for that view, only to say that it's not ruled by logically. But Robin may not actually have been making that argument anyway.
 
Personally I think the idea that gentleness, empathy, humility and sensitivity are effeminate or feminine traits is irredeemably daft.

Sorry to impugn the high intellectual authority of Wikipedia.
 
If a boy who was gentle, empathetic, humble and sensitive would you think he was effeminate?

No, because I have better things to do think about than categorize individuals' behaviour according to arbitrary socially-conventional "behaviour templates."
 
Personally I think the idea that gentleness, empathy, humility and sensitivity are effeminate or feminine traits is irredeemably daft.

Sorry to impugn the high intellectual authority of Wikipedia.

Of course it's irredeemably daft. Most things people think are irredeemably daft. It doesn't make the description of "effeminate boy" relative to our culture any less true, though.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't sound like you believe there is actually an English word for female people of at least childbearing age, not even one which only denotes that meaning some of the time.

You are, of course, free to make up whatever opinions for me you wish. By now I'm used to people in this thread doing that.
 
Of course it's irredeemably daft. Most things people think are irredeemably daft. It doesn't make the description of "effeminate boy" relative to our culture any less true, though.
I doubt that it is true, relative to our culture. Maybe things are different where you live.

I don't think that many in our culture who would consider gentleness, humility, empathy or sensitivity to be in any way unmasculine.

People generally ascribe effeminacy in terms of body language, manner of talking and so on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom