• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Trans women are not women (IX)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sure - but WHAT are you going to CALL individuals in your categories?

Male and female works just fine for me.

These are the terms that have been used for centuries, by laypeople and experts alike, to denote the structural distinctions between the two sexes. This is attested in the lexicons, and in the expert publications.

It's already a solved problem. The trans-activists are trying to unsolve it. You say you're opposed to that, but your efforts are playing right into it.
 
Human sexual development exists on a spectrum. We start as infants and children that are not reproductively active. We progress through puberty and our reproductive organs are “activated.” We progress through adulthood where our production of gametes waxes and wanes (or stops completely) based on a number of factors including toxins, medications, environmental factors, disease, age and genetics.

There are two paths you can go by and in the long run, no matter how much time there is, you can’t change the road you are on (don’t play that backwards!). Babies born with reproductive organs that can produce sperm are “male.” The one’s born with organs that can produce eggs are “female.” A male baby can never switch to female (as in, produce eggs) and vice-versa. Just because they “can” produce gametes doesn’t mean they will because of the aforementioned factors. “Man,” and “woman” are synonymous with “male” and “female,” respectively.

For all of human history, this is how we’ve understood the term “sex” and even “gender.” I can accept that “gender” has now come to mean something different. Fine. I don’t really get it, but fine. But “sex” remains a biological descriptor. A man who “experiences their gender” as a “woman,” does not become female. Transwomen are not women.

However, they are still human and I think they should be accommodated as much as is practical. What that ultimately means for society is going to be the result of debates like this one. That result will be made up of practical considerations, not biological ones, but the practical must be subordinate to the biological.

In sports, males hold advantages over females. That’s just a fact. In private spaces, males are more sexually aggressive and females feel uncomfortable around them when they are more vulnerable: another plain fact. Society must take those biological facts into account. To ignore these realities is to open up a Pandora’s box of problems that may be worse than the ones we were trying to solve.
 
However, they are still human and I think they should be accommodated as much as is practical.
Agreed. :D

There are a handful of situations where accommodation is impractical or unfair (such as women's rugby and weightlifting) but in most situations we can all just play along even if people don't quite pass for the opposite sex.
 
Gender, really, is a linguistics term. It refers to the grammatical form a noun takes in languages where nouns are gendered, which seems to be a whole lot of them. English, indeed, is the outlier here, where the gender the noun takes is synonymous with the sex of the object - masculine/male, feminine/female or neuter/no sex.

I don't know how it is to grow up speaking a gendered language and always to think of a table as feminine or a book as masculine or whatever. It isn't even remotely consistent between languages. How do you switch to the opposite gender for a noun in a language you're learning compared to your native tongue? Is it difficult?

There are always anomalies. Not all languages even have a neuter gender, every damn noun on the planet has to be masculine or feminine. Sometimes weird things happen, such as Mädchen in German (girl) taking the neuter gender (because it's a diminutive and for whatever reason diminutives take the neuter in German. A song I sing has the lines

Dort oben am Berg, in dem hohen Haus,
Da gucket ein fein's lieb's Mädel heraus,
Es ist nicht dort daheime,
Es ist des Wirts sein Töchterlein,
Es wohnt auf grüner Heide.

A sweet lovely girl - it isn't at home here, it is the innkeepers little daughter, it lives on the green meadow.

In Gaelic the word for woman - boireannach - takes the masculine gender. So if, for example, I wanted to say "a good woman" it would be "boireannach math", with the "math" being the masculine form of the adjective. (For a feminine noun it would be "mhath", for example, "a good wife" would be "bean mhath" because "bean" ("wife") does indeed take the feminine gender.) But then if I wanted to say "she is a good woman" it would be "'s e boireannach math a th' innte", with the "innte" part being "she" (in effect), because to say "he is a good woman" would be silly, wouldn't it?

So that's just a sample of how actual gender works, linguistically. The mad TRAs seem to a large extent to be English monoglots and not to understand how other languages work in this respect. I mean, how upset can you get over pronouns in French, given that they seem to agree with the object rather than the subject a lot of the time?

(A guy in a Gaelic class I went to did ask how the language dealt with trans people. I fixed him with a threatening glare and said "just don't go there." Maybe fortunately, covid closed the class down a week later.)
 
Fair point. However, have you ever stopped to wonder why the NHS (UK national health service) has started using non-specific pronouns? Is it really a hijack by rights activists? But wait! These are medical guys. Perhaps they know something about gender that we don't, hence the - on the face of it - 'very silly' (according to the right wing tabloids) - references to 'people who give birth' or 'chest feeding'.

Maybe the idea that 'man is man and woman is woman and n'e'er the twain shall meet' (like East and West) is not so clear cut as has been previously thought?

When was your last prostate exam?
 
Fair point. However, have you ever stopped to wonder why the NHS (UK national health service) has started using non-specific pronouns?

Pressure and threats from trans-rights activists.

Is it really a hijack by rights activists?

Yes

But wait! These are medical guys. Perhaps they know something about gender that we don't

Political correctness and pandering to noisy, violence-threatening minorities often trumps facts, evidence and reality.


Maybe the idea that 'man is man and woman is woman and n'e'er the twain shall meet' (like East and West) is not so clear cut as has been previously thought?

I repeat TheGoldcountry's question... "When was your last prostate exam? "
 
Male and female works just fine for me.
Conflicts rather badly with the biological definitions for the sexes. Let me know when y'all find some credible dictionaries, encyclopedias, and biological journals which explicitly endorse the structure-absent-function schlock of Hilton and Company ...

These are the terms that have been used for centuries, by laypeople and experts alike, to denote the structural distinctions between the two sexes. This is attested in the lexicons, and in the expert publications.
So WHAT?

You might just as well argue for going back to blood-letting and trepanning ...

It's already a solved problem. The trans-activists are trying to unsolve it. You say you're opposed to that, but your efforts are playing right into it.
Only "solved" because you insist on trying to sweep the problematic consequences under the carpet.

What plays into the hands of trans-activists is loosey-goosey anti-scientific definitions.
 
Conflicts rather badly with the biological definitions for the sexes. Let me know when y'all find some credible dictionaries, encyclopedias, and biological journals which explicitly endorse the structure-absent-function schlock of Hilton and Company ...


So WHAT?

You might just as well argue for going back to blood-letting and trepanning ...


Only "solved" because you insist on trying to sweep the problematic consequences under the carpet.

What plays into the hands of trans-activists is loosey-goosey anti-scientific definitions.

What? You have provided no scientific definitions only some online dictionary definitions and commentary from dubious sources.

Sorry, this is not going to change terminology used by normal people for just about ever. Trans activists and fellow travellers will not see common terms change. Transwomen are not women. Female babies are of the female sex. My post menopausal wife is a woman.
 
What? You have provided no scientific definitions only some online dictionary definitions and commentary from dubious sources.
"dubious sources" - :rolleyes:

You might try reading these, particularly the definitions for "male" and "female" in the Glossary of the article by Parker & Lehtonen:

https://academic.oup.com/molehr/article/20/12/1161/1062990
https://twitter.com/zaelefty/status/1459925709426728961
https://oxfordjournals.altmetric.com/details/2802153/twitter

Sorry, this is not going to change terminology used by normal people for just about ever. Trans activists and fellow travellers will not see common terms change. Transwomen are not women. Female babies are of the female sex. My post menopausal wife is a woman.
Took some time to get "normal people" to stop thinking the earth was only 6000 years old - though still quite a few hold-outs on that score.

I'm sure not arguing that transwomen are women - I've said repeatedly that they're either male transvestites if they still have their nuts, and sexless eunuchs if they don't.

But whether anyone is a female or not is very much a function of the definitions we choose to agree the words mean. And they change all the time to reflect new knowledge; the words and their meanings aren't cast in concrete, joined at the hip - until death do us part. Many people really do seem to think that Moses brought the first dictionary down from Mt. Sinai on tablets A through Z.
 
"dubious sources" - :rolleyes:

You might try reading these, particularly the definitions for "male" and "female" in the Glossary of the article by Parker & Lehtonen:

https://academic.oup.com/molehr/article/20/12/1161/1062990
https://twitter.com/zaelefty/status/1459925709426728961
https://oxfordjournals.altmetric.com/details/2802153/twitter


Took some time to get "normal people" to stop thinking the earth was only 6000 years old - though still quite a few hold-outs on that score.
I'm sure not arguing that transwomen are women - I've said repeatedly that they're either male transvestites if they still have their nuts, and sexless eunuchs if they don't.

But whether anyone is a female or not is very much a function of the definitions we choose to agree the words mean. And they change all the time to reflect new knowledge; the words and their meanings aren't cast in concrete, joined at the hip - until death do us part. Many people really do seem to think that Moses brought the first dictionary down from Mt. Sinai on tablets A through Z.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9iv8tdnndord98o/shatnerWTF.gif?raw=1

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited to remove animated gif which clearly contains a rule 10 breach.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, the problem that you can easily tell which people are male and female just by looking at them. Can't have that! It's essential that we only use the words in a way that requires a complete fertility exam before we speak them.
 
Last edited:
OMG you are using YEC to support your position. Words fail.
LoL. Cutting too close to the bone? ... ;)

But yes, words DO fail. Why it's rather important to be circumspect, to be careful in their application.

You might try reading and thinking about - another wan hope - the brilliantly insightful words of Francis Bacon:

These are "derived as if from the mutual agreement and association of the human race, which I call Idols of the Market on account of men's commerce and partnerships. For men associate through conversation, but words are applied according to the capacity of ordinary people. Therefore shoddy and inept application of words lays siege to the intellect in wondrous ways" (Aphorism 43).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novum_Organum
 
Well, the problem that you can easily tell which people are male and female just by looking at them. Can't have that! It's essential that we only use the words in a way that requires a complete fertility exam before we speak them.

Maybe you can, but what about women who "doesn’t look feminine enough"?

the association has looked into other complaints involving athletes who were suspected of being transgender in its efforts to comply with the Utah law, which went into effect in July. Some complaints include “when an athlete doesn’t look feminine enough”
 
Try searching for my comments on clownfish.
No luck. Any specific problematic consequences come to mind?

Well, the problem that you can easily tell which people are male and female just by looking at them.
Came across this clip while doomscrolling today, thought you might find it of some interest.

https://twitter.com/WomenReadWomen/status/1562101167093841921

Fun fact: Met the guy holding the mic at TAM 2013.

Sent from my Maibatsu Manchez using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom