Cont: [ED] Discussion: Trans Women are not Women (Part 5)

[Meadmaker]

And here's where my thinking stalls out:

I really don't want to turn this into a "papers please" situation. Any more than I want to turn service animals into a "papers please" situation. But karens are already ruining the honor system for service animals. And they're already ruining the honor system for trans accommodations.

So I'm stumped.

Good analogy.

When it comes to employment discrimination, though, I'm ok with a "papers please" approach.

What would actually be occurring is that your boss says, "Jim, wearing a dress will freak out our customers. Show up in men's clothes tomorrow, or you will be fired."
"But I'm a woman."
"Hogwash. You have five o'clock shadow. I don't care what you think you are. You're a guy. Wear a suit and tie tomorrow, or don't bother showing up for work."
"Look, buddy. I have a paper right here that says I'm a woman, and I have a lawyer! Care to rethink your request?"
"Uh......ok.......Company dress code requires a skirt or dress.......ummm.....and....there's nothing in there about shaving, so that's up to you, but I think it would work better if you did.....I mean...if you want. Please don't sue me."


In other words, it's not a case that everyone has to show papers. It's a case that if your employer is trying to force you to do something you don't want to do, there's a way for you to prove you have a right to do it.

 

[Upchurch]

"Gender" is a total nonsensical concepts to me in current usage; a sad attempt to retcon a simple synonym (and yes that was gender always was no matter what we're pretending now) into a "sex soul" that people have at best, a way to Trojan Horse old sexual stereotypes back into society by letting them be used ironically at worst.

If you are ever truly interested in understand why this is important to "trans advocates", I'm sure someone would be willing to help you understand that gender has only ever been a cultural construct. It's predominately been synonymous with sex because most western cultures view it that way. Other cultures can be more gender fluid.

As with everything, context matters.

As for why it's important, I imagine its similar to asking a gay person if they've tried not being gay. As if it were a choice they made one day on a whim.

If you aren't interested, that's fine, too. Just try to understand that it is not nonsensical, it's just different than what you may be used to.

 

[Meadmaker]

If you are ever truly interested in understand why this is important to "trans advocates", I'm sure someone would be willing to help you understand that gender has only ever been a cultural construct. It's predominately been synonymous with sex because most western cultures view it that way. Other cultures can be more gender fluid.

I'm pretty sure Joe knows that.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that was his point. Tie those knees down and read what he wrote.

He's railing against the vocabulary a bit, because people are taking the cultural concepts and trying to insist that it is somehow real, and legitimizing it by appropriating a word that meant something else.

 

[theprestige]

I'm pretty sure Joe knows that.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that was his point. Tie those knees down and read what he wrote.

He's railing against the vocabulary a bit, because people are taking the cultural concepts and trying to insist that it is somehow real.

I'm pretty sure Upchurch already knows Joe already knows that.

He's just attempting a fringe reset.

 

[Upchurch]

He's railing against the vocabulary a bit, because people are taking the cultural concepts and trying to insist that it is somehow real, and legitimizing it by appropriating a word that meant something else.

Language changes all the time, as does cultural concepts. Such changes are hardly nonsensical and it doesn't mean they can't be in response to something that is real.

In my opinion, these are the sticking points: that gender is a cultural construct and that identification with a specific gender in a culture is often strongly correlated with anatomy, but is not determined by it.

 

[Meadmaker]

Language changes all the time, as does cultural concepts. Such changes are hardly nonsensical and it doesn't mean they can't be in response to something that is real.

In my opinion, these are the sticking points: that gender is a cultural construct and that identification with a specific gender in a culture is often strongly correlated with anatomy, but is not determined by it.

Of all the "regulars" in this thread, I think Joe has been the most consistent on the concept of gender as a social construct.

 

[Upchurch]

Of all the "regulars" in this thread, I think Joe has been the most consistent on the concept of gender as a social construct.

Oh. What does “sad attempt to retcon a simple synonym” mean?

 

[Meadmaker]

Oh. What does “sad attempt to retcon a simple synonym” mean?

I'll defer to his answers, but if he says anything this time it will be a repeat of things he has said before. He's pretty consistent about it.

 

[theprestige]

Language changes all the time, as does cultural concepts. Such changes are hardly nonsensical and it doesn't mean they can't be in response to something that is real.

In my opinion, these are the sticking points: that gender is a cultural construct and that identification with a specific gender in a culture is often strongly correlated with anatomy, but is not determined by it.

This was all agreed to in the very first installment of the thread. Contra Meadmaker, Joe has been no more and no less consistent on this point than everyone else.

What's your take on Boudicca's claim that transwomen are biologically female?

 

[Butter!]

Language changes all the time, as does cultural concepts. Such changes are hardly nonsensical and it doesn't mean they can't be in response to something that is real.

In my opinion, these are the sticking points: that gender is a cultural construct and that identification with a specific gender in a culture is often strongly correlated with anatomy, but is not determined by it.

I'm not sure that's a sticking point for anybody in this discussion. I certainly agree with those ideas you've stated about gender.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Oh. What does “sad attempt to retcon a simple synonym” mean?

Okay I will answer this in good faith, despite the fact that you've already declared me "not worth talking to" and have now dishonestly re-engaged me, conveniently side-stepping having to address any points I have made. Your response, with everyone as witness, will determine whether or not I continue to do so.

A large part of the trans movement is linguistically dependant on the distinction between sex and gender and the insistence that such a difference is both universally agreed upon and clear.

This, however, is false. Prior to the 1950s sex and gender were for all practical purposes interchangeable as words, with at best "sex" being seen as the slightly more clinical term but there was little to no illusion that there was anything objectively different in the concepts.

In 1955 Sexiologist John Money first proposed the (more or less) current usage; sex as biological, gender as cultural. And this, to be 100% clear here, is still the accepted distinction in a medical sense.

Sex is "Women have a vagina and XX chromosome."

Gender is "Women wear dresses, have long hair, wear makeup, do the cleaning, and raise the children."

What sex, gender, or some undefined 3rd term doesn't mean, and believe me I do not phrase or conceptualize it this way to be snarky or demanding but simply because it is literally the best way I can honestly describe it, a third category that describes of some kind of "gender soul."

Your biological sex is not negotiable (in 99% of cases, nobody is talking about extremely rare even single case actual legit intersex medical conditions here so don't even put that on the table to create confusion). You have a penis or vagina and no amount of wishing or wanted outside of trip to a surgery center is going to change that.

Gender is negotiable, but is not inherent to the person, it is societal expectations.

"A completely and totally internal gender sense of identity undetached from either sexual biological or cultural gender expectations" is not valid. It does not fit either category and nothing argued in this or any other discussion has convinced me a 3rd gender/sex distinction category is necessary.

Now I have answered clearly, in good faith, to the actual question you asked.

Let's see how you respond.

 

[Upchurch]

Just a few notes and then I'll address the post as a whole:

Prior to the 1950s sex and gender were for all practical purposes interchangeable as words, with at best "sex" being seen as the slightly more clinical term but there was little to no illusion that there was anything objectively different in the concepts.

This is a western culture perspective and is not universal, even before the 1950s.

Sex is "Women have a vagina and XX chromosome."

Gender is "Women wear dresses, have long hair, wear makeup, do the cleaning, and raise the children."

This is part of the ambiguity may be what is causing problems. Using the same word for both gender and sex conflates the two concepts and undermines the distinction. When the thread title is literally "Trans Women are not Women", are we referring to women (the gender) or women (the sex)?


On to the meat of the post:

"A completely and totally internal gender sense of identity" is not valid. It does not fit either category and nothing argued in this or any other discussion has convinced me a 3rd gender/sex distinction category is necessary.

This, here, is the crux. What makes you a man and what makes Boudicca, for example, a woman?

 

[cullennz]

This, here, is the crux. What makes you a man and what makes Boudicca, for example, a woman?

What makes a male is Boudicca's biology.

What makes a women is what Boudicca thinks they should have been/are

Obviously a split there, but personally ok with just rolling with it.

There has been no person in my entire life whose gender affected me.

One or two whose sex did, but not worth getting into. (basically dudes who got a bit beaty uppy)

 

[JoeMorgue]

This is part of the ambiguity may be what is causing problems. Using the same word for both gender and sex conflates the two concepts and undermines the distinction. When the thread title is literally "Trans Women are not Women", are we referring to women (the gender) or women (the sex)?

I'm not playing this game. Call it sex, call it gender, call it dancing the Charleston in a Tricornered Hat on the Corner of 5th and Main.

There are things that are biological and not changable via "just wanted it really hard." There are things forced (and influenced, and coerced and pressured and all that) on by society. Call them both gender, both sex, one gender, the other sex, I don't care.

I'm not arguing terminology. Trying to rearrange the definitions until they say what you want and treating that as proof is your game, not mine.

This, here, is the crux. What makes you a man and what makes Boudicca, for example, a woman?

Why the hell are you asking me? Ask her! I've been asking her what makes her a woman for pages now and been called a bigot and transphobe for even asking the question.

 

[Lithrael]

I’m generally pretty sympathetic to joemorgue in here because he’s coming very strictly from a ‘this doesn’t make literal sense to me, but I’m not going to be a dick out loud to anyone, but seriously, it doesn’t make sense to me and I can’t pretend it does’ kind of place. So.

Gender is negotiable, but is not inherent to the person, it is societal expectations.

"A completely and totally internal gender sense of identity undetached from either sexual biological or cultural gender expectations" is not valid. It does not fit either category and nothing argued in this or any other discussion has convinced me a 3rd gender/sex distinction category is necessary.

But this is exactly why I think there’s three things going on because what you describe with your ‘gender is negotiable’ line is the perception of a person’s gender by others. And the thing that keeps getting hilited and demanded a noncircular definition of is the perception of a person’s gender by their own self.

I think it simply is circular, is an assertion, and is fine that way. It’s why I’ve occasionally likened it to religious feelings. Everyone will have different ideas of what it means, others may say how can you be x if you don’t do y, but a person’s personal religious convictions (or lack thereof) are their own anyways. You can’t demand a way for them to prove it because no such thing exists.

 

[Upchurch]

What makes a women is what Boudicca thinks they should have been/are

I'm not going to assume you are speaking for Joe.

That's an odd wording. Is Boudicca a woman or does Boudicca only think she's a woman? Does Boudicca have a choice in the matter?

 

[theprestige]

This is part of the ambiguity may be what is causing problems. Using the same word for both gender and sex conflates the two concepts and undermines the distinction. When the thread title is literally "Trans Women are not Women", are we referring to women (the gender) or women (the sex)?

Try reading the thread. This has been discussed at length. The only people pushing for more ambiguity are the trans-activists.

Every attempt to establish clear terminology at least in order to further this discussion have been met with equivocation and bad faith - up to and including you ignoring all of that discussion so far and trying to do a fringe reset on the question of clear terminology.

When Boudicca says she's a biological female, I don't think she's confused about ambiguous terminology.

 

[theprestige]

I'm not going to assume you are speaking for Joe.

That's an odd wording. Is Boudicca a woman or does Boudicca only think she's a woman? Does Boudicca have a choice in the matter?

What do you think? Serious question. I'd like to know where you happen to stand on these questions.

 

[Upchurch]

I'm not playing this game. Call it sex, call it gender, call it dancing the Charleston in a Tricornered Hat on the Corner of 5th and Main.

There are things that are biological and not changable via "just wanted it really hard." There are things forced (and influenced, and coerced and pressured and all that) on by society. Call them both gender, both sex, one gender, the other sex, I don't care.

I'm not arguing terminology. Trying to rearrange the definitions until they say what you want and treating that as proof is your game, not mine.

Okay, despite what folks like theprestige have said, you are fundamentally disagreeing with my earlier statement:

In my opinion, these are the sticking points: that gender is a cultural construct and that identification with a specific gender in a culture is often strongly correlated with anatomy, but is not determined by it.

You are saying that gender roles are cultural constructs, not that genders, themselves, are cultural constructs.

Why the hell are you asking me? Ask her! I've been asking her what makes her a woman for pages now and been called a bigot and transphobe for even asking the question.

What I was really getting at is whether you think that gender is determinate based on sex. Are you a man because you are male or is there another reason?

 

[JoeMorgue]

That's an odd wording. Is Boudicca a woman or does Boudicca only think she's a woman? Does Boudicca have a choice in the matter?

Don't do that. Don't put us into a no-win situation.

If we say no we're transphobic bigots.

If we say yes then "ah gotcha" we don't really believe what we say, therefore this is just a smokescreen to cover our real feelings, therefore we're transphobic bigots.

I, me, myself, this person, does not internally label Boudicca "a woman" but as stated I'm not trying to be a jerk just for the sake of being a jerk and I respect the fact that as much as we disagree it obviously means a lot to her and I respect that and I'm trying to make allowance for it because that's the right thing to do.

Don't make that piece of common human decency into proof that I'm wrong either way.