Why conflate 'Gender Critical' and belief in immutable sex?

But I don't have a definition of gender.

This is my problem with gender. I don't question if or how other people experience it, I don't so it makes it difficult for me to relate to. If you plan to write something into law then it must have an agreed definition otherwise anything and everything which suits individual convenience can be claimed as part of gender identity. Given gender identity is such a nebulous concept it would be impossible to write workable law to protect it.

I think you can believe in immutable binary sex and gender identity but I rebel against the notion we all have a gender identity, I most certainly do not but I'm still female, hence gender critical.

This helped me:

actually ...scrap that.... what if they have had surgery? Then a chromosome test is the only way. Everyone needs a chromosome test before they can enter or some sort of licence or goverment ID....you know for safety etc..... It's the only way!

Gender does confuse me tbh so would be good to read other people's views. There is sex, socially constructed gender norms, and personality. But does our biological functions and hormone profiles not input into how we interact with the world? But I can't say how. I just feel my biology forms my identify. Maybe someone else can explain it?

And do pronouns refer to gender or sex?

What we need is genital inspectors at the entrance to every male and female sex segregated venue. Everyone has to flash their genitals to ensure they are right to enter. You can never be too sure when someone who looks CIS is actually not and who looks trans is actually CIS.

The only answer, is genital inspections. Just to be safe!

When pressed the genderists deny that they deny sex is immutable.

But lots on their side do spend all the time muddying the waters or saying that it isn't immutable, or that it isn't real.

But regardless of what they think about sex, their basic position is that sex doesn't matter, and we should keep all our sex-based laws and institutions, but turn them into gender identity-based ones. With self-id gender identity. So, choose-your-own. We think that's daft.

The gender critical stance can be summarised as:

• sex is immutable (in humans)
• sex matters
• gender identity (pink/blue souls) don't exist - that's a religious belief
• gender stereotypes are harmful

"Sex matters" is the big one - it's the name of the organisation Maya Forstater co-founded, and was the core of her case.

But the specific concept "gender critical" comes from the last two points, which build further on the first two.

Conservatives might believe the first two, but not be on-board with the last two.

But we still wouldn't say that men and women are the same, statistically. They're very much not. There are sex-correlated characteristics and behaviours, some of which are the grain of truth within gender stereotypes.

And we justify sex segregation to a large extent on the basis of those statistical differences (prisons, sports...)

But a statistical outlier within a sex is not a different sex. A tall woman is not a man. A homosexual woman is not a man. A masculine woman is not a man. A woman who does not conform to gender stereotypes is not a man.

Nor do any of these mean you've got a "male brain" - the very idea of a "male brain" is offensive. Women are women purely by virtue of being female. All females are valid women. Suggesting anything else would be exclusionary of those not meeting some stereotype.

Facts aren't beliefs :-)

My understanding of gender critical is that gender critical asserts that gender is a social construct based on stereotypes of maleness and femaleness.
The GC position would be that these stereotypes are harmful to men, women, girls and boys. A GC position would say there is no reason why a girl/boy/woman/man can't have certain interests, dress a certain way, behave certain way, express themselves as they wish and the world would be a better place if we acknowledged gender stereotypes are limiting for all.

Really good point. I've always assumed GC to mean critical of gender stereotypes, so the fact you have long hair and wear a skirt does not make you a girl or woman.
As you say that's different from knowing that sex cannot change. And tbh that's not a belief any more than a belief in the earth orbiting the sun or that my ds is my ds, or that I live in the village I live in. Those things are usually called facts.

YY. To me gender critical means that the oppression of women stems from their sex, not their gender. Gender does it exist but is a system of beliefs, generally based on sexist stereotypes, that harms women (and men).

You say that ‘some gender is nature not nurture’ - which aspects do you think are down to nature?

I don't think GC is thinking it doesn't exist! Rather thinking it's mostly sexist drivel designed to keep women (and to a certain extent non-conforming men) in their place socially.

I believe it exists and people have preferences. But that ultimately it's sexist shite. Also capitalist.