Your age is your age, your sex is your sex. Neither can be changed.

I think there is a paradox in feminism that both relies on biology and dismisses biology in different moments.

Head on desk moment.

I think you have just discovered direct and indirect discrimination. This has been recognised in law for a while.

Keep thinking. You might get somewhere eventually.

I don’t know what the answer is - can we only let go of biology at the final moment of liberation-or is it gradually let go as progress is made?

This is the kind of thing you say if you have never really thought what your life would be like without the 1974 Family Planning Act, and how easily services can be withdrawn and laws changed.

And of course it’s mostly notions of sex, sexual exploitation and power imbalance that interfere with non-biological narratives.

So.... you want to change laws in hopes that society will miraculously become more like the utopian ideal? And you think the current ideology that allows men to identify as women because of their feelings (which also might be driven by a sexual fetish) is progressive? And no need to safeguard.

Dadaist, instead of explaining feminism to people who teach it, would you care to expand on your comments about those who "live as women?"

What specifically did you mean when you said some people "lived as women?"

Can you describe a day "living as a woman?"

Feminism could clearly not be led by men

No shit - some of them don't even know the difference between sex and gender so they wouldn't get very far, would they?

There are biological differences between the sexes.

Females produce eggs and bear young, males sperm.

The only thing a male can do that a female cant, is produce sperm.

The rest is just sexist BS by angry little men.

Gosh these mansplainy types love to think they're so altruistic, edumacating the silly wims about their silly feminist notions.

Oh I see, you like talking bollocks.

I think there is a paradox in feminism that both relies on biology and dismisses biology in different moments.

Historically feminism was at pains to deny that women were to be discriminated against because of their biology - and that traits identified with biology were in fact social constructs. While there are clearly biological differences - they had been exaggerated to justify patriarchy. Women could be engineers, doctors, firefighters etc etc and had rights and agency and reason and autonomy- discrimination was fuelled by a circular arguments.

But in order to defend and promote equality there is a need to define who are the victims of patriarchy-(ie girls and women) so that they could autonomously define their oppression and determine their liberation. Women deserved autonomy to fight patriarchy. Feminism could clearly not be led by men.

I strongly support both these biological and anti-biological approaches incidentally - but it is contradictory.

I think the problem for radical feminism comes with an attempt to use the Marxist dialectic of class struggle to apply to the struggle of women (proletariat hero’s ) against men (bourgeoisie villains). But this dialectic fails to see that patriarchy harms everyone, and that there has to be a synthesis - a resolution- there is no final victory of a sexless society as there might be a classless society.

The same can be said for anti-racism - if it simplifies the struggle from one of struggle against institutionalised racism to black people versus white people. There has to be Black autonomy- but what does final victory look like? Unless ‘racial’ differences are biologically abolished- (and even though this is possible over time) how else is victory obtained?

The problem is systemic racism, patriarchy, environmental destruction - all maintained by capitalism. I think BLM get it. I think Socialist feminists get it.

But clinging to biological determinism offers no way out. We either abolish sex differences (preventing the birth of one sex to create a sexless society, by reducing racial differences in the world as common genetic characteristics in populations reduce as populations become less isolated)- or we discover equality regardless of biology!

My sense is the radicalism of the younger generation get this also - but are running up against an old guard, who fear that the autonomy they have nurtured and mobilised to win progress is under threat. And younger people react with evangelist passion to take away what is perceived as a road block.

And of course it’s mostly notions of sex, sexual exploitation and power imbalance that interfere with non-biological narratives. And there is as much social construction around sex and sexuality, consent and abuse, as there is around gender.

I don’t know what the answer is - can we only let go of biology at the final moment of liberation-or is it gradually let go as progress is made?

Either way - simplistic biological dialectic narratives of men v women, (or black v white, gay v straight, able v disabled) - offer no actual way out, just perpetual biological conflict.
But I have always listened to younger people’s perspectives because there is often wisdom in progress that is dreamt by less mature minds.
I don’t have any answers - and I’m not here to defend people with dicks in female toilets.

But I think these questions are not simple - and statements that women are women and men are men can harm people - including people born female - and it’s where patriarchy starts - not just feminist autonomy.

the point is it isn’t a simple fact like how long you’ve been on the earth - it’s complex with regard to what counts as ‘male’ or ‘female’ when people may be both or neither.

For the vast majority of individuals, whether they are male or female is scientific fact. There may be many who identify as a different gender but I do follow the original argument as to how this is similar to identifying as being a different age to that you are biologically.

Dadaist so you're saying that the way I act and express is what causes me to experience sexual discrimination?

I would say fuck off to that.

I don't have a gender identity, but funnily enough still experience sexism, am vulnerable to assault, am disadvantaged in physical sports against males, am pigeonholed by regressive gender stereotypes.
OP I do like your point. Ageing does cause people a lot of mental distress, some might call it age dysphoria. If we were allowed to identify as a different age, and access the benefits of that age class, it may well help a lot of vulnerable people.
The WASPI campaign would be declared over!

But using that logistic... a 25yo who has a learning disability which means they have the mental age of a 7yo. Should we then turn around and say.. but there 25 and therefore must act 25? Should be say they must go and get a full time job and remove all 24/7 support because they are BIOLOGICALLY 25?

This is an awful argument, not at all relevant or comparable to the op and I'm pretty sure it is offensive.

Now if you consider a adult with the mental capacity of a 7 year old cannot help the fact they have the capacity of a 7 year old, you could argue that for the majority of trans adults who spend their entire lives identifying as the opposite gender that they cannot help that they innately feel and identify with the gender opposite to that of their biological sex

I also find the disablist language used to describe the 25 year old deeply offensive.

But for argument's sake, that 25 year old would be protected by disability discrimination laws to ensure they aren't disadvantaged by being treated as an adult without learning disabilities. That protection would not extend to protecting them from the distress they might experience from not being able to share a tent with children by putting the children at risk.

If you're saying that being trans is a disability, then I would expect it to be treated in the same way. That disability should absolutely be protected in law, but no other vulnerable group should be sacrificed to accommodate it.

how do we , apologies for my typo

But is it not even more frightening than the worlds described by Orwell, that we are living in a world where reality (which to date was indisputable) has been replaced by opinion. Where biological females (XX) are hounded out of their jobs, hounded out of their friendship groups, hounded out of dinner party conversation by their families, in fear for their careers, simply for stating the truth. How have we come to this, and more importantly, how to we stop it?

Just like the idea that you can "live as a woman" is utter bollocks

Given no one has actually been able to give a definitive definition of woman/female I dont understand how you can live as anything which you cant define and doesn't exist.

By no means do I think that no one would take advantage if no safe guards were put in place, but the sad fact of the matter is predators will be predators regardless of how they attempt it. They will find a way. However we should not be arguing that every man/women has bad intentions

So because predators will predate we should just give up on safeguarding? Just how many people would be the right amount in your view to be collateral?

None of us say everyone has bad intentions. But enough people have bad intentions that we set up safeguarding eventually.

None of the arguments stand up to scrutiny, do they.

Theres no 25yr olds still at primary, or recieving their pensions, cos its bollocks. Just like the idea that you can "live as a woman" is utter bollocks.

But using that logistic... a 25yo who has a learning disability which means they have the mental age of a 7yo. Should we then turn around and say.. but there 25 and therefore must act 25? Should be say they must go and get a full time job and remove all 24/7 support because they are BIOLOGICALLY 25?

A 25 year old will always be a 25 year old. They have rights to additional protections if they have additional needs, and that will include having access to benefits.

And overarching that is that gender goes way beyond ‘sex’ - so that regardless of your genitals - if you live life as a man or as a woman you will experience life differently. You will be treated differently. But it’s not your genitalia-(most people won’t get to to see that) it’s how you are raised, and how you internalise and externalise your sexual identity - and that is gender. That will determine how you are treated.

I think you are confusing gender identity and sexual identity, but even then your argument doesn't make sense.

Nobody has ever escaped sexism - restrictions on the right to work/recieve an education/drive/own property - or escaped the consequences of having a female reproductive system - by externalising their identity.

I have to agree the "mental age" argument has become offensive, possibly through ignorance rather than intended.

People with learning disabilities are not diagnosed with a fixed mental age, and they certainly are not treated as if they are that age.

the point is it isn’t a simple fact like how long you’ve been on the earth - it’s complex with regard to what counts as ‘male’ or ‘female’ when people may be both or neither.

It's simple enough that I know which of my children would need to go to hospital if they started bleeding from their genitals.

It's simple enough that it could be inferred from my appearance that I was likely to become pregnant. (Statistics show that over 80% of women my age gave birth).

It's simple enough that it could be predicted that I would not go through male puberty.

It's simple enough that women can be oppressed simply by withdrawing services that men don't need, like access to contraception.

if you live life as a man or as a woman you will experience life differently.

I have no clue what this means. Most of the things I did today would have been regarded as 'living as man' at some point, from driving a car to earning my living to wearing trousers. I can't identify anything I did that was particularly female.

Ferventfox What you said is actually quite offensive and definitely ignorant. I've been lucky enough to work with many adults with significant learning difficulties and we never referred to their 'mental age' as it's not something that is generally used in my experience. These adults were just that, adults and their families and carers worked incredibly hard to support them in an adult life appropriate to their needs and, as much as possible, in line with their wishes. At no point were they treated as children - that would be patronising and wholly inappropriate.

But I don’t really care what the clinician put on the notes after looking at their genitalia for a few seconds when they were born.

People with the DSD you describe are phenotypically female. However this is a rare condition and in the vast majority of people chromosomes can be inferred from genitals.

You may think this unimportant, but sex has unavoidable consequences, the most obvious being that females do not go through male puberty and only females can become pregnant, will have periods and will go through menopause. None of this has anything to do with identity. Without data to monitor the impact of sex, and sex specific services and protections, the half of the population that have a female reproductive system cannot participate equally in society, regardless of their identity.

You accuse the OP of not having thought this through, but you really haven't thought through the consequences of being born with a particular set of genitalia.

In general there is no need to discriminate on the basis of sex, and it is actually illegal. However in some situation is necessary, and that is why there are exemptions in the EA that allow this. I can't think of any reason to discriminate on the basis of gender.

Indeed there birth certificate wouldnt be changed, however, they would be treated as someone with the mental capacity of a 7 year old and wouldn't be held to the standards and expectations of a 25yr old. Frankly I think the birth certificate is becoming a redherring as the argument is less about changing birth certificates, rather should someone who identifies as trans man/women be treated as the gender they identify.
Now if you consider a adult with the mental capacity of a 7 year old cannot help the fact they have the capacity of a 7 year old, you could argue that for the majority of trans adults who spend their entire lives identifying as the opposite gender that they cannot help that they innately feel and identify with the gender opposite to that of their biological sex.

By no means do I think that no one would take advantage if no safe guards were put in place, but the sad fact of the matter is predators will be predators regardless of how they attempt it. They will find a way. However we should not be arguing that every man/women has bad intentions. If that was the case I wouldn't have got married after being in numerous abusive relationships, as I would have concluded all men were abusive.