Any recommended genderist writers?

So, you are using the same phrase to mean two different things?

That's not confusing at all.

Sorry Em. Your argument is weak and unconvincing.

Pass With Care by Cooper Leigh Bombadier. It won't convince you that humans can change sex (but I've never met a post-op trans person "in real life" who believed that either). What it might illuminate is how someone who desperately wanted to and felt they should be able to "be male" when born female understood and experienced the context of "sex changes" in the 1980s through the 2020, when the book was published.

There's biologically female as in a reproductive female.
There's biologically female as bimodal. As in sex traits produce an ambiguous result or a result that reflects how society distinguishes females via secondary sex traits.

Dr Upton a reproductive male by birth as altered her secondary sex traits & presentation with the characteristics that society in everyday practice uses to distinguish males from females.

Julia Serrano is a poor choice IMO (unless you want to strengthen Terfy feelings).

Maybe Em is a double agent?

So Em, care to define the words 'biologically' and 'female' for us?

Your points are not clear to the class.

I think Julia Serrano's website is very impressive. She's also a scientist so her explanations are very rigorous.

But again I'm not sure the best writer in the world will help if false priors are applied.

So far, Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, I think

So, @EmilyinEverton , which books and authors do you recommend to cure us of our dreadful terfy ways?

Biologically female means that the individual produces large gametes (or will/ should/did produce them).

How are you defining biologically female, then?

I honestly don't see how this is vague unless this is a Humpty-Dumpty situation (words mean what I say they mean).

Once again, sex categories (male and female) are binary.

Thanks for proving my point. The term used by Dr Upton is "biologically female" which is a vague term that doesn't explain how. Again, she's probably referring to bi modal sex.

Of course, they haven't actually changed sex. That doesn't stop them from claiming that they have (i.e., making an untrue claim).

https://archive.ph/XrGGw

So these people allegedly claimed they changed their gametes? Again details matter so no you haven’t clarified anything.

And that's not something that I have seen before. Do you have any evidence of this?

I am specifically writing about the sex categories of male and female, as my comment was regarding people (including the Dr mentioned earlier) who have claimed to have moved from one category (male) to the other category (female).

I hope that clarifies the context for you.

The sex reproductive system is binary as in gamete design. Sex traits are not. Individuals may possess different combinations of chromosome type, gamete size, hormone level & morphology.

So context is important.

1. Sex is binary.
2. They are saying that they have actually changed sex.

Context matters though. Maybe they were discussing how sex isn't binary but bi modal which is a discussion not about disputing how the sex reproductive system distinguishes males from females but how sex trait distribution influences how society distinguishes males from females.

A fringe view... that was argued in court... by a Dr, no less*.

*I've read it more than once on here, a lot on Reddit and heard it IRL too. I would describe it as surprisingly common (considering how wrong it is), especially in males who identify as trans and have been on exogenous, cross-sex hormones (eg oestrogen).

When I was fairly new to this debate I read Trans by Helen Joyce. It was well researched, logical and interesting.

In order to be fully fair I also picked up a copy of... uhhh... something by Shon Faye. What a pile of piffle it was. Basically TWAW because they say so. No research, no facts. Basically a load of bollocks. Pun intended.

That's a fringe view amongst trans people. Technically, some sex traits can be altered but obviously not reproductive sex.

However, some people who identify as trans and have undergone body modification do actually assert that they have changed sex.

When I first became aware of the issue, I so badly didn’t want to be a terf. ‘I’m in a bubble’ I thought, ‘I’m being radicalised’. So I tried listening to a bunch of trans podcasts and every one of them was just so much self-obsession and nonsensical, whiny word salad.

Is 'understanding that mammals can't change sex' an example of what you consider to be a 'prior'?

Yes. And the problem is its irrelevant to the trans experience because it's about identifying with the opposite gender that their sex is associated with. Of course another priors limitation for gender critical feminists is their skepticism about gender.

I was writing about sex. This is why I used the word 'sex'.

Edit. You never answered my original question. Is 'understanding that mammals can't change sex' an example of what you consider to be a 'prior'?

Still not getting it? Sex is not gender. Again, priors matter.

Saying that 'mammals can change sex' is demonstrably wrong.

Why would I want to interpret something that is a flat-out lie as the truth?

Being untethered from reality is not a good thing.