Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3

[Emily's Cat]

Or why Emily's Cat must set aside her discussion to accommodate your rhetoric.

I have no intention of doing so.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Because the OP was about women's sport in particular.

Not for this part of the discussion thread this started in a different one but it seems this is the universal thread to justify the existence of trans people now.

With the pulling of the conversation from ""So I hear you're a transphobe now!": Twitter closes Graham Linehan's account" thread it never referenced the OP from this thread.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Bollocks. Do I stop being male if I have a vasectomy (or double orchidectomy), despite having two children?

According to ponderingturtle, yes.

 

[ponderingturtle]

What are you even talking about? What vehemence with respect to what topic? What is it that I want to make mandatory?

And what the hell does it have to do with noting your logical fallacy? Saying "males cannot have babies" is not logically equivalent to saying "anyone who can't have babies is male".

If [A = person is male], then [B = person can't have babies] <> If [B = person can't have babies], then [A = person is male].

Just to make it even more clear, let me remove the potentially confusiong specificity out of it, and bring it back around to critical thinking:

If A then B is not equivalent to If B then A.

So then what are the traits that define women and men? Please be specific so we know everyone who qualifies and women or men or fail to meet either or meet both. But I know you will not actually come forward with some definition.

 

[Emily's Cat]

The question was about the two major dialects of Albanian. Pointing out the existence of languages other than Albanian doesn't create a third major Albanian dialect choice. Rejecting both major dialects doesn't create a third major dialect. There's still only two such dialects.

Anyway, the analogy breaks down pretty quick. Rather than quibble over it, let's go back to the debate about (non)binary gender as such.

Also, it's entirely possible for someone to grow up learning both dialects of Albanian, or even to grow up speaking a mix of those two dialects... and that STILL doesn't mean that there is any more than two dialects.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Does that mean a given behavior can be either male gender or female gender depending on location?

Very frequently, yes.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Do you agree with Belz's definition of gender, then? Because a few posts ago you didn't seem to! Does this last post mean you've decided to accept this definition out of convenience and because you're bored by discussion, and therefore willing to accept what he says as authoritative just to end it? That's not exactly intellectually integritous. If you're bored by these threads take a break from them.

I would really be grateful if you would offer your own view on this topic. I can't see that you've done so yet. Mostly, it appears that you're engaging in odd leading questions that appear to attack the views that others are expressing. I think it would be much easier to have a discussion with you if I had some idea of what your personal opinion is, so that we can start by finding common ground.

 

[theprestige]

Also, it's entirely possible for someone to grow up learning both dialects of Albanian, or even to grow up speaking a mix of those two dialects... and that STILL doesn't mean that there is any more than two dialects.

Heh. One of the ways that the analogy breaks down is that if the mixed dialect catches on, a third major dialect could actually emerge.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I thought we were actually getting along, but I guess not. Tone isn't always conveyed accurately through short text. I think I'm going to take a break myself from this, as I appear to be upsetting people.

Fair enough - tone doesn't come through well in text. I generally read your posts as being humorous, with a fairly silly bent. I'm having trouble in this thread reading them as such. It may not be your intention, but you are mostly coming across as angry and aggressive, at least to me.

Perhaps try sharing more of your own views and thoughts on the subject, rather than just questioning others? Or perhaps, in this particular case, it would be more effective to expand on your posts and provide more context, rather than the usually pithy short bits?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Nobody is doing that. You're arguing against a strawman of your own creation.

BS, lots of TERFS are happy to define intersex women as not women. For example notable feminists define people with androgen insensitivity syndrome not women. You simply can't lump intersex into the the easy gender binary.

Someone is born with a phalloclitorus are they male or female? With my definition it is clearly either male, female or neither depending on their ability to carry, or fertilize embryos not same vague morphological ideal to which their genitals fit.

Here is an article from someone who is intersex and does not identify with the sex they were assigned at birth.

https://www.transadvocate.com/an-intersex-perspective-on-the-trans-intersex-and-terf-communities_n_14539.htm

 

[ponderingturtle]

According to ponderingturtle, yes.

What is the big deal about not being a man after loosing ones manhood? It is just a biological definition.

 

[zooterkin]

What is the big deal about not being a man after loosing ones manhood? It is just a biological definition.

Yes, very clever, I think we get it, thank you.

 

[Emily's Cat]

So then what are the traits that define women and men? Please be specific so we know everyone who qualifies and women or men or fail to meet either or meet both. But I know you will not actually come forward with some definition.

While I appreciate the feeling of superiority that your last comment likely gives you, it might be worth a few moments of your time to realize that there have been a few potential definitions put forward, as well as an attempt to draw a distinction between sex and gender, as well as widespread acknowledgement that exceptions to any definition will exist.

It might even be worth your while to ponder, mr. turtle, the definition that I provided already, and which I used to illustrate your flawed logic:

Not all females can have babies, but only females can have babies. If a person has or previously had the majority of the biological apparatus associated with gestating babies, then that person is, for all reasonable intents, female.

Not all males can inseminate a female, but only males can inseminate a female. If a person has or previously had the majority of the biological apparatus associated with inseminating females, then that person is, for all reasonable intents, male.

In most situations, women are those adult humans who other humans would assume to be female, on the basis of their appearance and demeanor. Similarly, men are those humans who other humans would assume to be male, on the basis of their appearance and demeanor. Note that this appearance depends on situation, and what is apparent will vary. If the situation is random strangers walking down the sidewalk fully clothed, then gender will be based on what other people view the individual's carriage, clothing, size, and shape to suggest about their sex. If it's a locker room where people are naked, then the presence or absence of a penis or vagina or breasts is likely to be the element most used in determining gender.

Sex is what our bodies are.
Gender is what sex other people perceive us to be.
Gender identity is what sex we want other people to perceive us to be.

For the overwhelming majority of people, they know 100% what sex they are. Even for those who are technically intersex, they themselves, when looking at their own bodies, will see one sex or the other. Some intersex conditions are more complicated, and may have a mix of characteristics. Genetic reproduction is not perfect. Sometimes, our internal xerox machines make a mistake and put something together wrong, or they run out of cyan halfway through printing a page. Sometimes, a genetic process doesn't trigger correctly, or doesn't trigger completely. Those exceptions, however, don't mean that sex isn't binary. It's still binary, it's just not always exact. Similarly, if you send a picture of a red ball on a green background to your color printer, and it runs out of yellow... that doesn't mean that your picture was of a magenta ball on a cyan background.

For the extremely large majority of people, perceiving their gender is straightforward. We have a combination of physical characteristics and social cues. Even though those social cues can vary by culture as well as by time period, they're usually understood within their own culture. The physical characteristics are highly, highly correlated with sex. For the vast majority of people, if we see a person with a v-shaped torso, broad shoulders, an adam's apple, large hands and feet, and muscular chest, with predominantly angular facial features, thin straight eyebrows, a prominent brow ridge, and relatively flat cupid's bow... that person will very likely be perceived as male even if they're wearing high-heels, make-up, and have socially female body language and voice. Being perceived as male effectively makes them men in the eyes of other people.

For a relatively small number of people, how they want others to perceive them and how others actually perceive them differ. But it's not as simple as just declaring what you want and having everyone comply.

If I hold up a ball made of red rubber, and tell you that I don't want you to perceive it as red, I want you to perceive it as green, would you be able to do so? I don't think I could. You might be willing to go along with it, if it seemed very important to me, and you might consent to use the word "green" when referring to the ball, irrespective of how you actually perceive it. That would be compassionate and polite of you to do.

But if you had a bin for red balls, and a separate bin for green balls, you might not be inclined to put my ball into the green bin, just because I told you I wanted you to perceive it as green. There might be good reasons why you want those balls separated - perhaps you're recycling them, and the color of the rubber is preserved in that process, and a green ball in the mix will end up making the recycled balls all brown or gray.

If I painted the ball green, of course, it would be a lot easier for you to perceive it as green. If I did a good job painting it, you might have no idea that it was originally red. It could cause some confusion and some problems when it got recycled though, as you'd still end up with brown balls. But outside of those instances where the original color of the ball actually matters, having a ball that is painted green is sufficient for everyone to perceive it as green.

The questions that become important are:
When does it actually matter that the original ball is red, as opposed to the perceived green?
What do we do with a ball that is half red and half green, or a ball that is brown?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Heh. One of the ways that the analogy breaks down is that if the mixed dialect catches on, a third major dialect could actually emerge.

I'm not taking any bets... evolution produces surprising outcomes. I wouldn't expect that mixed dialect to catch on and become distinct within the space of a couple of weeks though. But it could happen given a long enough timeline.

 

[Emily's Cat]

With my definition it is clearly either male, female or neither depending on their ability to carry, or fertilize embryos not same vague morphological ideal to which their genitals fit.

I am now thoroughly confused. You've just spent several pages haranguing people for using essentially that same definition... because that means that men who've had testicular cancer don't qualify as men, and women who are sterile aren't actually women. Wouldn't your definition here end up in the exact same place? A man with no testicles wouldn't be able to fertilize embryos, and a woman without a uterus wouldn't be able to carry an embryo, would they?

 

[The Atheist]

People don't address other people the way other people want all the time, for a wide range of reasons.

Unfortunately, USA has a president who thinks he's a master at using derogatory names for people who aren't actively kissing his ass, so it's not a widespread problem.

I don't think it matters, compared to sex.

I was trying to think of anything that matters, compared to sex.

Failure so far - let me know if you can think of one.

No there's three threads where literally no clarification as to what any distinction is behind made still hasn't occurred.

I have admit to being somewhat bemused that this thread just keeps going.

As far as I can tell, one argument has been posted 236 times, and the opposite view 249 times.

And to think I started the thread 2 1/2 years ago, because...

Because the OP was about women's sport in particular.

(I don't usually catch flak for being too on topic, but hey there's always a first time.

Yellow card offence that, getting back on topic.

I wasn't even aware that top level cycling had a category set aside just for men.

Que?

Cycling is divided into men's & women's, or did I miss something?

 

[Belz...]

So then what are the traits that define women and men? Please be specific so we know everyone who qualifies and women or men or fail to meet either or meet both. But I know you will not actually come forward with some definition.

When does a vehicle stop being a car and starts being a plane? If I stick wings on a car does it magically become a plane? No? Well if you can't define strictly the threshold between one and the other, clearly there is no such thing as a car, and no such thing as a plane!

Get out of here, Turtle. You're just embarrassing yourself.

 

[Belz...]

Sex is what our bodies are.
Gender is what sex other people perceive us to be.
Gender identity is what sex we want other people to perceive us to be.

Finally someone with a ******* workable definition!

Good show, Cat.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Finally someone with a ******* workable definition!

Good show, Cat.

Thank you! I was pretty pleased with it.

 

[d4m10n]

Not for this part of the discussion thread this started in a different one but it seems this is the universal thread to justify the existence of trans people now.

Who here has argued that they shouldn't exist?

Good show, Cat.

Seconded. [emoji106]

Sent from my AGM-086B using Tapatalk