Why do activists always say "sex and gender are different" in biology-based discussions? (and any other questions MNers have have about pro-trans talking points)

As promised, BonfireLady, a few cups of strong tea later😄
I think where we diverge is whether the net result of following or rejecting these limitations/expectations throughout our lives means we develop a sense of gender identity. On this point, you believe it does and I don't. Does that sound like a reasonable understanding of our different perspectives?

I agree that we both agree about pressure to conform to gender stereotypes.
I think I didn't like the use of the term 'soul' as in 'gendered soul' because I associate 'soul' with the religious sense of something immortal, outside the realm of material life.

So to me, 'gendered soul' implies something that is already there when a child is born, and which will direct their future identity .

This fuels the trans claim that boys can be born with female 'souls' and vice versa.

Why did I develop such a strong rejection of the gender stereotypes that other women may have rejected in part, but accepted others? That's a difficult question, I'm not sure why.

Background: I was lucky to be brought up in an era/society where gender stereotypes were less strictly enforced than they are today: for instance, women did not normally wear make-up, some did on special occasions but the idea of going out without your face on was the norm!
Women in the rural area I lived in were expected to be strong and do physical work. If a family had a daughter who was 'not feminine' and liked doing heavy work, the extra pair of hands and the willingness to get up on the roof and fix a leak was a bonus.
I was the youngest in a family of girls, and as I was also the last child, there was never going to be a son, and I think I received some of the free-floating 'boy-stuff' that my sisters weren't interested in.
So I was the one who helped my father with DIY etc.

Now the next bit depends on whether or not homosexuality is innate - I'm not sure what the current science is on that. But I certainly knew from a very early age that I was romantically interested in girls not boys.

How does a little child know that? There's a lot of that kind of thing in popular culture: the moon/june love songs, the 'Isn't that sweet she's got a little boyfriend!' etc etc. I always identified with the boy in the love songs, pursuing girls, getting your hear broken by girls, I wish they all could be California girls..

That was a powerful reason to reject all the other aspects of femininity that I already wasn't particularly attracted to - many posters on here also didn't buy into the pink fluffy sparkly vibe and were tomboys, but grew up straight.

I realise that I've now substituted a 'lesbian soul' for a 'gendered soul' - I'm not doing a very good job of this, am I?😒

I think I'm saying that my relationship with the social construct of gender was influenced by a number of factors, mostly external but IF homosexuality is innate, that was a powerful added ingredient which pushed my rejection of feminine stereotypes further than other women's.

I call the result a 'gender identity'. I wouldn't call it a 'gendered soul' because that implies a pre-existent non-material essence, whereas I see elements of decision-making and choice in the formation and expression of my identity.

But I accept that not everybody believes they have a gender identity, lots of posters say 'I'm just me'.

That's fine, that's who they are, whereas for me it feels significant to exteriorise the identity I have developed for a variety of reasons.

It in no way diminishes my woman-ness or my feminism, something I share with the proud butch lesbian Faika El-Nagashi who is one of the very rare gender critical voices defending women's rights in the EU.
Faika El-Nagashi “there is no human right to be a woman… it is just reality” | Mumsnet

Gender is a single word defining stereotypes based on sex, so 'gender stereotypes' is a bit confusing in itself and implies that there is gender separate from stereotypes.

I agree that gender is often used in place of sex to appear polite and genteel, such as 'gender reveals' 🤮

Too many people underestimate and downplay the importance of language. Many people also think that they are capable of thinking outside of language and see it as a tool to express their thoughts, rather than realising that anyone's thoughts are constrained by the limits of language.

We can see failure all around us where language has been incorrectly applied. Such as the 3 strikes rule in US justice. If the rules of baseball had been different, there would be a different number of chances.

The famous example is the 'War on Terror'. 'Terror' is not a nation state, there is no defined enemy, so how can you have a war on it. Until we can insist on a distinction between sex and gender, female humans can continue to be oppressed from all directions.

The interchanging of sex and gender (outside of gentility and prudishness) can only be to obfuscate.

No problem at all with your post, BonfireLady, thank you for checking that it's not 'accusing' - not at all
However, it's only 10.17 and I've only had one cup of tea and your post has made my brain go 😮, so I've saved your post, I'll put the kettle on, have some more caffeine, and get back to answering the really interesting points you make.

I don't think I'm used to people paying so much detailed attention to what I say-
I just hope I haven't somehow accidentally admitted to having a 'gendered soul' and have been -shock horror! - inconsistent😬
L8r😄

All you members of the fairer sex have the choice whether or not to conform to gender stereotypes,

... or ...

All you members of the fairer gender have the choice whether or not to conform to sex stereotypes.

The first of those sentences feels less jarring to me than the second (trying to ignore for a moment any inherent sexism of 'fairer sex'). The reason is that the words 'sex' and 'gender' are not only used in isolation, but also in common phrases. Language depends on associations and unconscious rules, for example adjective order is generally instinctive for a native speaker. Bright red not red bright, for example. So 'fairer sex' is an instinctive choice over 'fairer gender', and I am more familiar with 'gender stereotypes' than 'sex stereotypes'.

I believe queer theory manipulates our instinctive use of language, and plays games with it in order to 'queer' society. As a PP has said, there is often a 'bait and switch' by using the same word, often 'gender', in two senses in the same argument without clarifying the switch of meaning. This allows nonsense to sound plausible.

The use of well-defined words to mean something vaguer is also common. An example is 'spectrum'. A true spectrum is something that has a measurable variable – frequency (or wavelength) in the electromagnetic spectrum that includes the rainbow. Sex is not a spectrum at all; it does not have such a variable, though many different sex-affected characteristics, such as height, do. Gender, in its social meaning, is a pseudo-spectrum. Most of us have a concept of a gradation from feminine to masculine. But it is not measurable, and so it is not possible to precisely define anyone's place on it. A reason it is not measurable is that there are many factors, many gender stereotypes, which go to form an impression of someone's masculinity, but anyway each stereotype is usually unmeasurable. Even 'amount of makeup' has no simple variable to measure; and makeup is a good example of cultural dependency, as how 'feminine' it is to wear makeup depends on where one lives and whether we are thinking of the '80s or the '20s, and so on.

So whenever I am involved in a discussion on these matters, I try to spot the illogicalities. The genderbread person or the gender unicorn are great tools in understanding the obfuscation in gender identity and queer theory, as they imply that quite different concepts are directly comparable, and not-so-subtly imply that, for example, sexual orientation is just a matter of genital preference – and their advocates often have the cheek to berate us for 'lack of nuance'! They are all surface plausibility, which falls apart as soon as you look at it critically.

I'm really hoping my tone comes across as inquisitive and not accusing here. If it doesn't, please do know that I tried 😬❤️

On a previous thread, you and I were commenting on the subject of belief in "gendered souls":

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5501077-keira-bell-on-gmb-right-now?reply=151065404&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

From your comment in that thread:

I don't think the sense of self that rebelled against stereotyping was an 'inner soul'

And from above in this thread:

Unlike many posters, I believe I have a gender identity, it is strongly gender non-conforming and is a very distinctive element of who I am.

What you're describing in the second quoted text is (I think!) what I was referring to as a "gendered soul" in the other thread: a sense of self that has a "gender". That feeling of "gender" may match a person's sex or it may not. If it doesn't, their "gendered soul", their inner sense of gendered self, is "non-conforming".

I wonder if perhaps we were talking at cross purposes on the previous thread?

From other threads we've both been on, I'm pretty sure we both align on the idea that there is societal pressure to conform to sex-based stereotypes, where that pressure presents itself as a mix of limitations (e.g. girls can't do rugby at school in PE lessons, such as at my daughters' school) and expectations (e.g. parents of young girls tend to let their hair grow long from when they are babies and parents of boys tend to keep it short - any exceptions are generally seen as being out of the norm, particularly for a young girl to have short hair).

I think where we diverge is whether the net result of following or rejecting these limitations/expectations throughout our lives means we develop a sense of gender identity. On this point, you believe it does and I don't. Does that sound like a reasonable understanding of our different perspectives?

Yes but that is just a recent development.

And maybe is some very genteel families the word sex isn't use because they are embarrased by for centuries people have used the word sex when talking about men and women.

And only younger people who have come under the influence of of queer activism to think that sex and gender are the same, are confused.

All you are reporting is the sucess of the queer theorists to challenge the "estblishment" view of the world.

The fact that the establishment recognises the fact of biology doesn't mean that it isn't true.

Anymore than the fact that it is mainly right wing papers that report of sex based rights.

It isn't an accident that the phrase is sex based rights or that a campaign group is called sex matters.

I disagree with you about it “not wanting to use the word sex because it was embarrassing or something“. The fact that there is sex discrimination legislation is irrelevant. People really are squeamish about saying “sex”. They just don’t like saying it. “Gender” is regarded as a polite way of saying “sex”.

Apart from that, there is genuine confusion: many people think the words mean the same thing and are therefore interchangeable; given the choice, they’d rather use gender. I’ve said on here before that when I was booking in an animal for boarding, the form that I had to fill in asked what gender the animal was.

I think one of the reasons is that the whole point of "gender" studies which queer activists got universities to set up to replace women's studies, is because sex is a biological fact. But queer activists want and wanted to undermine the concept of it being fixed.

By moving the word sex out of the description and inserting gender you immediately create a concept that what was the rigidity of 2 sexes becomes any number of permutations of gender, and better still not something that is determined. And is of course a challenge to the establishment.

The problem is, like many political movement, it is permeated with sexism and mysogeny.

So unlike the earlier and in fact more radical gender bender movement where no one claimed to change sex but did refuse the gender norms that society imposed on them by accepting their biology but by dressing, behaving, having interests that challenged the straight jacket of gender conformity.

In fact this generation's trans activism is highly reactionary, as they are too frightened to be gender benders (eg clearly male but dressing in a "female" way and still using the men's toilets) and of course gives them the "right" (in their minds) to intrude into and take over women only spaces and services.

So the need to go on pretending that the word gender is the same as sex is part of the mind game that the current (queer) version of trans is all about ie nothing to do with those with gender dysphoria that the GRC was intended for.

The use of the word gender symbolises the infiltration of queer politics into daily life. And it has been spread by the students who were first taught "gender" studies and have taken with them into the work place and politics this concept.

(It was never about not wanting to use the word sex because it was embarrassing or something. If it was we would never have had the sex discrimination act (1975), nor even sex as a protected characteristic in the EA (2010). I'm not that well educated about literature but am pretty sure there are instances of the word sex coming up in Victorian novels etc.. So if they weren't embarrassed find it hard to think of a time when it was. Would be interesting is someone had the time and energy to go through old newspapers, and novels to see when the word "gender" started to be used as though it meant someone's biological sex.)

I'm guessing a bit here, but one thing that often becomes apparent is that the gender advocates either don't really get - or affect not to get - who it is they're arguing with when they come here. They conflate two different groups who both understand that sex is real, but differ in their attitudes to gender expression.

Gender critical feminists recognise sex difference as a physical fact, but regard much of the gendered assumptions and expectations about what men and women are/should be like, as social baggage dumped on the sexes, not something that inevitably belongs to them. They'd say "you are a woman if you are of the female sex, but you don't have to be "feminine".

The other type of sex realists are the social conservatives who not only recognise the physical reality of sex difference but think that it entails - and ought to entail - the "gendered" stuff too. That women are and should be "feminine" as well as female.

So perhaps some of the insistence that gender and sex are different is because they assume they are arguing with that second group of people, who think the two things march together.

Oddly, the genderists are more like the conservatives in their idea that if you are "feminine" you must be in some way a woman.

Thank you, Easytoconfuse, and there's not even a hint of offence perceived in what you said

I rejected very firmly right from the beginning were the stereotypes of what I should look like, play with, wear, aspire to, desire, etc etc.,as a girl. Dolls, dresses, boys.. no thanks.
I became a gender-non-conforming lesbian, short hair, sharp suits😎

That's my 'gender' expression.
I also have a personality, which ironically is more gender-stereotyped than my appearance - I never shook off the 'be nice, well-behaved and helpful little girl' message Mostly I don't mind - who wants to be not-nice and un-helpful?😏

I could still look like this and have a completely different personality.
Does that answer your question?

I hope you and your dear young adults navigate your way through the choppy waters of stereotyping, it sounds like you are doing a grand piloting job so far

I've just read your post too StellaAndCrow, thank you.

In answer to your question:
If a form only used the word 'gender' and not sex, I'd put 'female', because it was likely to be using the word 'gender' when it really meant 'sex'.

I've never been asked my 'gender identity' on a form but if I was, I'd just ignore it - as TheKeatingFive said, 'Gender is how you interact with stereotypes of gendered behaviour. Your 'gender' is largely irrelevant to other people.'

So unless it was a form relating to research into something like lesbian identities, my 'gender identity' isn't something I would expect official forms to ask about, and I'd ignore it.

'Gender' is important to me, but 'largely irrelevant' in the grand scheme of things, whereas being biologically female is very relevant.

Think your last comment nails it
There's no intellectual, scientific or factual substance to trans ideology. The language is ever changing, the meanings shift in line with the wind and every time the incoherence is pointed out, a different meaning or argument is tried.

The desperation is even more intense now after the clarity of the SC judgment, organisations for women and girls finally remembering who their target audience really is and the power of threats, abuse and cancelling is starting to ease.

Confusion, incoherence and being economical with the truth is all that's left.

it’s hacking me off epically that apparently sex is actually not a binary (and that’s not even getting into the whataboutery of intersex (never DSDs) )
Im not sure clownfish or hyenas are particularly good examples of human biology but it seems they carry a lot of weight
also the SRY thingummy seems to be doing a lot of obfuscation and apparently is some kind of trump card?

Gender was used by prudes as a euphemism for sex

It then became a religion

I think @DeanElderberry nails it. I heard it said a few times that gender identity is very complicated as if it’s something mere mortals like me can’t grasp but I haven’t heard this line trotted out for a couple of years now.

I wonder if it was because the people saying it were pressed further and realised they actually couldn’t define this very complicated gender identity?

They can say this because to them biological sex is an inconvenient irrelevance, nebulous and poorly defined, and gender identity is the inner reality that matters.
It’s a belief system and of course makes no sense at all to anyone grounded in reality.

I too, like Marie think that there is, for some or even many people, a psychological sense or awareness of the feminine or masculine that is an integral part of personality and might be a candidate for gender identity. But I know it’s not a popular take on here. I have an acute awareness of being female, but have always felt my thinking and interests are more typically masculine - have always been gender non-conforming (as it is called now, but it never gave anyone pause for thought when I was growing up in the 1950s/60s; I was just a tomboy).

Exactly. Sex & Gender are not the same thing. It’s people thinking they are that has got us into this ‘self ID’ mess

TRA have used a variety of theories to justify transgenderism allowing allies to pick whichever one they can understand.

The sex is different to gender is more feasible than most, but it does rely on stereotypes and on the idea that spaces and opportunities are best organised around gender, not sex.

Marie, I'm really interested in what having a gender identity means to you. I very much respect your views, and if you'd like to share more I'd love to hear it.

Do you specify it when forms ask about gender identity (in addition to sex)?

I would always tend to say that I haven't got a gender identity, but maybe it means something different to me.

Just to be clear I don't think that gender identity - however you define it matters in day to day life.

It's a I prefer my hair short, I don't want to have children, I'm ambitious, aggressive - and unapologetic about these aspects of me. For a boy/man it might be I hate sport, I love bright clothes, long hair, enjoy nurturing and really want to be main carer for my own children (or others).

None of that means you invade sex segregated spaces or categories.

I do accept that these choices can make you open to insult/challenge - in some countries will put you in physical danger, but so can many choices.

Neither your (non)adherence to gender stereotypes or the extent to which you have altered your body cosmetically change the reality of your sex.

Sex is which gametes you are set up to produce.

Gender is how you interact with stereotypes of gendered behaviour.

Your 'gender' is largely irrelevant to other people.

But the TRAs love to use these terms interchangeably, like a kind of bait and switch. They'll talk about gender identity and changing gender (whatever that means) and suddenly conclude that this means men should get access to women's single sex spaces

This.

I suppose it's one part of personality - adherence to gender stereotypes, but not all - there's also extro/introversion, agreeability/neuroticism etc.

I mostly agree with the WHO definitions between sex and gender.

It's the 'sex is why they oppress you (because you are smaller/weaker and make babies which we want to control) and gender is how they oppress you (gender are the rules we have made up that force you to accept your role as baby maker/carer/ person who does what we say)

As to gender identity, I suppose you could say it's a measure of how far you conform to your society's rules - @MarieDeGournay clearly does not conform to the stereotypes, neither do I - but some people will feel happier in accepting those stereotypes.

Treading very carefully here and truly not trying to cause offence, but can you explain the difference between gender and personality in this case? You're a tough lady and a good role model of the sort we need if we can get away from defining behaviours as masculine and feminine. You are a brilliant MarieDeGournay, and that to me is all that matters. I've had to discuss this with my two autistic young adults because stereotyping intrigues them. We decided that it was a control mechanism and anyone who uses it needs to be treated politely but not taken seriously. Hence the 'you are a brilliant whoever you are' being all that matters, along with your brain wirings different and there isn't a standard one. There are just a lot of people who feel a desire to fit in.