Does the Transgender community have a problem with well evidenced science? Does the community only ever accept favourable reports, AKA confirmation bias, or is it something deeper?

Your sexuality is not defined by who you have sex with, do you think it is? How can it be anything OTHER than an internal feeling?

It is not wholly defined by who you have sex with. It's defined by who you have erotic feelings for, which correlates strongly with who you have sex with, given the choice.

How can it be anything OTHER than an internal feeling?

It's an embodied feeling. If you're only attracted to images of men and the instant the actual men who are the physical embodiment of those images walk into the room you're turned off, then your internal feeling isn't much of a sexuality at all.

you can't PROVE what those internal feelings are, you just listen to what the person says about themselves, or hopefully you do.

I will listen up to a point but if you say you're a lesbian but you only have sex with men even when you have a more or less free choice of partners, I'll think you're kidding someone (possibly yourself). And I'd advise any female friend who fancies you to steer clear because even if you do manage to have sex with her neither of you are likely to enjoy it much.

Your sexuality is not defined by who you have sex with, do you think it is? How can it be anything OTHER than an internal feeling? Gender identity is also an internal feeling.

That sounds like someone who talks about sex a lot more than they have sex. All theory.

I don't need to show my workings on that, it's fact. Your sexuality is not defined by who you have sex with, do you think it is? How can it be anything OTHER than an internal feeling? Gender identity is also an internal feeling. People choose to live their lives based on those internal feelings but you can't PROVE what those internal feelings are, you just listen to what the person says about themselves, or hopefully you do.

In fact, don't bother. It is pure whataboutery.

How about you show your workings here. Because frankly you are not logical.

A gender identity is only, and can only, ever be an identity based on the concept that one person has of how anyone of the 'gender' they identify as. It is not based on material reality but based on philosophical belief of their own interpretation.

No matter how hard you seek to destabilise sexual orientation based on sexed bodied, it involves materially definable sex categories. That is not something that is analogous to gender identity. Because a gender identity is only ever a self conceptualised replicating of the life experiences of what living as that 'gender'. ie. Yes. They have a gender identity. Sure. But they are NOT living their life as a person with the opposite sexed body. They are only ever living as their concept as that but with the sexed body that they were born with.

Therefore, it is not definable and it is not analogous in the way you seek to make it.

Are we allowed to eat cake gender people?

(Asking for a friend)

Someone having sex with people of a particular sex is not the same as sexuality though is it. They're just very strongly linked. A person's actual sexual orientation is in their head.

I can't see how anyone can define "gender" if they can't define "woman" or "man".

You are really missing the point that the act of a person who is having sex with one sex or both sexes is an observable fact. Gender is not comparable. However much you wish to destabilise the original definition of sexual orientation. It was always based on the sex categories of people, which is definable and observable.

Gender identity is only based on a philosophical fact and it cannot be defined.

By all means though, keep sparpling away.

How could you prove sexuality with a brain scan? If you did that kind of test on someone and told them "this brain scan says you're straight" to which they responded "actually I'm gay" would you believe them or the scan??

You're assuming WAY more layers to what I'm arguing than what I am. All I said about gender identity is that it's an internal feeling, which I don't think anyone is particularly contesting? And I'm saying that sexuality is also an internal feeling, which was the point of my argument and nobody has contested that either, really.

And actually, I think that's bollocks. Am I right in thinking sexuality is fairly visible in brain scans when tested against images and thoughts? Whereas gender identity is not, except where it correlates with sexuality, which proves nothing?

Well, yes, @Saltpepperpaprika I would say it has no effect on single sex spaces, BUT some sort of proof or evidence would be enormously useful for those thinking transitioning children is a reasonable idea. It doesn't exist, or they'd be singing it from the rooftops.

A particular internal feeling which is irrelevant to everyone else. Good. We can ignore it then.

What related behaviours are there for 'male gender' and 'female gender'?

If a 'female sex' person behaves in a certain way, should they have their breasts removed and a fake penis made out of their arm skin to match that behaviour?

That they have a particular internal feeling.

Ahhh but he's probably not "experting" in the right way

Whether or not something "needs" to be proven doesn't affect whether or not it CAN be proven! If it was possible to prove the existence of gender identity you could still argue that gender identity shouldn't determine what spaces a person is allowed into.

So gender identity is just an 'internal feeling'. What does that tell us about that person exactly?

Gender identity and its definition and the impact of gender identity is what this thread is about. That you 'don't really care about that' does not change the material reality of what this thread is about.

I echo others, if you wish to discuss sexual orientation and whether it is based on material reality of philosophical belief, start your own thread and fill your boots.

The point of my post remains (with a correction as it missed the 'not' previously) :

Laws and policies that protect women and girls are not requiring sexual orientation to be proven because sexual orientation isn’t in conflict with the protections for women and girls.

Hence my point about it being a weak comparator.

I can if you want! Here goes: there is no test to determine a person's sexual orientation. There are related behaviours but ultimately you have to trust what a person says about their internal feelings. You could say the same about gender identity. So they're comparable.

I just reread your post @Saltpepperpaprika and I see that you're not interested in discussing gender identity.

What people normally do if they want to discuss something completely different from the subject of a thread, and aren't interested in the subject of the thread, is to start their own thread. You could do that.

... or do believe the pope?

... is a comparison a 10 year old would throw

What does this have to do with gender identity?

I don't know if "philosophical belief" comes into sexual orientation at all. But anyway. If a woman who says she's a lesbian is actually sexually aroused by men also but identifies as a lesbian, how would you know whether or not she's "really" a lesbian? You don't know what other people are aroused by do you. So forget the gender identity angle/comparison because I don't really care about that. I'm just contesting the idea that sexuality can be observed/measured.

Also "One would hope that they are not having sex with people of the sex when they are not sexually attracted too to simply comply with their philosophical belief." Why do you care if they do this?