Can someone please explain... (trans)

[WednesdayAllTheWay]

So I've been trying to follow this trans situation for a while but now having skin in the game in the form of a child (and also noting through work how more and more people are identifying as the opposite gender) I need to understand it better.
Feel slightly embarrassed asking but:

1. How exactly do the words sex and gender differ in this area?
2. What reasons do trans people give for wanting to change their physical bodies? As in what do people believe they will get from this that they couldn't get in the body they were born with?
3. What are children being taught at school about this?

Thanks!

And no is a complete sentence, not an invitation to a discussion.

Posi

I’ve never been to a gym that had enough changing cubicles for everyone to use (if they have any at all).

I see no reason why I should be undressed around undressed male bodies unless I’m going to have sex with that person (which I’m not at the gym). Also even if I choose to change in a cubicle (if there is one) can I expect anyone with a male body to do the same? And if they are not choosing to do that why do I have to put up with it? I’m guessing asking them to change in a cubicle is transphobic.

This is the very reason gym changing rooms are separated by sex. Do you understand that? Do you understand many women (if not most) don’t want to see a naked male body without their consent?

And as many gyms take kids from 13 (younger if they run toddler classes) why do young girls not get the same provision I had as a child?

”Trans race" and "trans age" are red herrings. Your race is defined by your ancestry, your age by chronology, but sex is much more complex and can be defined in various ways from gametes to gender identity and can vary by context.

I feel it’s important to point out that race is not defined by ancestry. Race is much more of a social construct than sex is. In many ways, race is to ancestry as gender is to sex. It is externally applied to people - often regardless of their actual ancestry. For example In the US for a long time if someone has even one great grandparent who was Black they were legally considered Black (one drop rule). This comes from the fact originally that slave owners wanted to be able to continue to enslave the children of rape on their plantations. We have since moved to self identity of race, which I think is appropriate given even ancestry - let alone race - truly can be a spectrum (unlike sex, see below).

All that to say - claims that “race” is more biologically real than sex are verging on race science / scientific racism. You should be more careful.

Biological Sex on the other hand really is defined by gamete production. Just to clarify:

In anisogamous, dioecious species like humans, two gametes must fuse to produce offspring. Two body plans exist in all such species to produce the two gametes and get them together and grow to produce a new individual. Individuals that produce neither gamete are not a cohesive third category because they include people with an array of simple and complex medical conditions, juveniles, and post menopausal females. None of this is controversial. However none of this in my opinion really helps us answer the question at hand so it’s a bit of a pointless exercise.

The question at hand is should the law recognize the category of people who are presumed to produce large gametes, or should they recognize the category of people who claim to be women? Should both be recognized? One or the other?

I’m open to the idea of both but that requires that distinctions be made to categorize people by BOTH biological sex and gender identity and trans activists in particular seem to be unwilling to accept this to any extent. Feminists in turn have become more hardened against this approach as well.

Going back to what catalogue said:

I also think based on the many things that have been said on this forum as a whole there are plenty of posters who wouldn’t want to be anywhere near a trans woman let alone employ one.

I can actually state that no, I don’t particularly want to be in close quarters with a certain type of biologically male trans person. But that’s not because they’re trans, but because they (the specific type of people I’m talking about, NATALT) are propagating and vigorously promoting an ideology which I see as fundamentally inimical to women’s rights, in fact as a form of male supremacism.

Why would I want to offer employment or friendship to someone who is actively trying to destroy my human rights, and who makes it clear by their actions that they see me as sub-human?

I rank those I see as male supremacists alongside white supremacists, personally. I find both to be morally repugnant and consider it perfectly sane and reasonable not to wish to associate too closely with either.

I think all biologically male people, whether trans or not, who make it clear that they are determined to ignore women’s wishes when it comes to issues of consent, some of whom seem even to revel in overriding women’s clearly stated boundaries
and take delight in not respecting that “no”, are people that women should rightfully be extremely wary of, in a general sense.

I do think that it’s telling that the fact of women protesting against our own abuse, trying to protect ourselves and our children, is framed as “bigotry” and “transphobia”.

And I very much agree with this from sanluca:

I am amazed as always that the poster posting here in glee that they now not only get to use the word woman for themselves but also get to claim female, does not see that their power in taking words from other groups very clearly shows they belong to the class in power and the people losing their words are the class told to shut up and be kind. If you ever want to see who is seen as male by society, see who is protected even when being nasty and entitled.

Changing rooms: eek, I can't imagine why anyone would want to change or shower in a public space, particularly if it's a place where people are just openly wandering around full-frontal naked. If you do that, you're going to see genitals, and as some women have penises, that's going to potentially include a penis on occasion. Your choice.

This says it all, really.

Also, 28 pages in and there is still no definition of 'woman', no definition of 'female' (beyond 'it's complicated'), no explanation as to how Positrans' femaleness manifests itself and no explanation as to which traits are shared by all women and transwomen but are not shared by any men or transmen.

I sincerely hope lurkers are reading and taking note of this.

I do think that it’s telling that the fact of women protesting against our own abuse, trying to protect ourselves and our children, is framed as “bigotry” and “transphobia”.

See also Mridul Wadhwa who has just jumped ship from the SNP to the Scottish Greens because the SNP voted for Johann Lamont's amendment to make sure that women can ask for a female examiner after rape, and the Scottish Greens were pressured not to, according to MSP Andy Wightman who resigned today.

“Look, luv, if you want to go out of the house and do things for yourself, you’ve got to expect a bit of cock.” (Pats head)

Most of your arguments are based on the notion that sex is a simple binary purely defined by gametes. It isn't - they are just one of thousands of sex characteristics

Sex IS a binary. Sexual characteristics aren’t what define Sex, so it’s irrelevant whether there are 5 sexual characteristics or 50. Sex is defined by the potential to produce eggs or sperm.

Can a human change sex? Well, I consider trans girls to be female, so they don't have to. Having said that, many of the thousands of sex characteristics are highly mutable, especially if you take cross-sex hormones at puberty, so there's that

Again, the sex characteristics. That is not what defines sex. There are probably men with bigger boobs than me, but that doesn’t make them women nor me a man.

Trans race" and "trans age" are red herrings. Your race is defined by your ancestry, your age by chronology, but sex is much more complex and can be defined in various ways from gametes to gender identity and can vary by context

No, it suits you to only muddy the waters about sex but you have no interest in redefining race or age personally so you dismiss them as ‘red herrings’. Your race is defined by your ancestry? So ‘feelings’ aren’t allowed for Race but they’re just fine and dandy for Sex, which is decided at conception and is immutable. Sex and race aren’t something you can opt into or redefine to include yourself if you’re not a member of that specific group.

@Deliriumoftheendless

“Look, luv, if you want to go out of the house and do things for yourself, you’ve got to expect a bit of cock.” (Pats head)

I sincerely hope lurkers are reading and taking note of this.

Its truly fascinating.

@EdgeOfACoin

Changing rooms: eek, I can't imagine why anyone would want to change or shower in a public space, particularly if it's a place where people are just openly wandering around full-frontal naked. If you do that, you're going to see genitals, and as some women have penises, that's going to potentially include a penis on occasion. Your choice.

This says it all, really.

Also, 28 pages in and there is still no definition of 'woman', no definition of 'female' (beyond 'it's complicated'), no explanation as to how Positrans' femaleness manifests itself and no explanation as to which traits are shared by all women and transwomen but are not shared by any men or transmen.

I sincerely hope lurkers are reading and taking note of this.

my thoughts exactly Edge and great post TalkingtoLangCleg (and a bazillion other amazing posts on this thread - another one struck me from 9toenails a while back.

28 pages, my questions have not been answered - obviously not a problem in itself as obviously I would never dream of demanding answers but they were fairly basic questions so I guess that our valiant poster doesn't have an answer that will stand up to any scrutiny.

I do massively appreciate threads like this as it always does tease out some new points/fresh angles/good facts - I can never help but wonder if Posit is a secret gc plant possibly like jj (who has been quiet for a while - has anyone seen Posit and jj on the same thread....??) who is doing some sterling legwork on giving everyone the opportunity to examine each angle and replay the key points for any new readers.

If someone plays 'devil's advocate' in a conversation it can push the pace along, tease out great new points and make for another informative thread. I've no idea if Posit really is genuine or not but your involvement is helpful.

@Deliriumoftheendless

“Look, luv, if you want to go out of the house and do things for yourself, you’ve got to expect a bit of cock.” (Pats head)

I was thinking that “suck it up (not literally!) or stay home” is basically the message

Comes across that way.

Imagine having the gall to appropriate 'female', as a male. Such entitlement, as if the material reality of half the planet is yours to grab.

Sex IS a binary. Sexual characteristics aren’t what define Sex, so it’s irrelevant whether there are 5 sexual characteristics or 50. Sex is defined by the potential to produce eggs or sperm.

Exactly. It's not whether you've got breasts, what size they are, whether or not they produce milk, the shape of your gonads, or where your fat distribution falls.

It's about how many different categories are required to reproduce.

And the answer two. Ter-wooo.

Binary.

Bi-na-ry.

Also, 28 pages in and there is still no definition of 'woman', no definition of 'female' (beyond 'it's complicated'), no explanation as to how Positrans' femaleness manifests itself and no explanation as to which traits are shared by all women and transwomen but are not shared by any men or transmen.

But, there is very definitely an assertion that says a certain cohort of people born male should be allowed to shower with teenage girls.

And, elderly women, disabled women, and female children.

Sorry, not just be allowed have the right.

The right!

Changing rooms: eek, I can't imagine why anyone would want to change or shower in a public space, particularly if it's a place where people are just openly wandering around full-frontal naked. If you do that, you're going to see genitals, and as some women have penises, that's going to potentially include a penis on occasion. Your choice

I don’t for one second believe that this post merits respectful engagement, but nonetheless, it has struck a chord in me since I saw it posted earlier today, and I’m going to bite.

The changing rooms I thought about when I read this were the communal rugby changing rooms from back in my playing days. Absolutely wonderful places, jam packed full of team spirit and camaraderie. Nerves and banter before the game, elation or glum faces after. It was one of the places where I finally truly accepted my body for all that it is, surrounded by other ordinary women of all shapes and sizes sizes doing the same. It was affirming, supportive and welcoming to a completely disparate group of women who would not otherwise be together.

The utter contempt shown to such places by the post that I’ve quoted is breathtaking. You don’t have the first idea what you’re so casually dismissing, positrans. Not the first idea. I won’t have the option for girls and women to have these spaces taken away on my watch. As Datun said above, the answer is no.

No. There is not an acceptable amount of penis to expect in these spaces. No.

I do find it odd how people who claim to be women can be so proud of their misogyny.

One of these days the sheer lack of self-awareness will stop surprising me, although this is particularly cringeworthy.

Yeah, that too

Imagine having the brass neck to pretend you think someone with a penis can be female.

And that a person with a penis should be around women and girls in a state of undress.

And then to pretend that this is fine because it's what you think that matters, not what sex your body is.

I bet said person with a penis would be very disappointed if all the women and girls in the changing room also had penises of their own.

Changing rooms: eek, I can't imagine why anyone would want to change or shower in a public space, particularly if it's a place where people are just openly wandering around full-frontal naked. If you do that, you're going to see genitals,

You are. Hence the word communal. 🙄

Fortunately women's spaces and the protocols therein, aren't something women have to 'imagine'. Nor does it make most women go, er, 'eek'.

I sincerely hope lurkers are reading and taking note of this.

Present and reporting for duty

This is genuinely fascinating. As someone who was uncomfortable with the trans movement but couldn't quite pinpoint why, and felt bigoted for feeling like that, it's refreshing to see well put together arguments that describe the concerns I couldn't put into words myself!

I also think Posi has done a grand job turning up and repeatedly returning to this thread, though I do think that unfortunately the thread itself has hit a stalemate.

Present and reporting for duty grin

Love it. 💪

Welcome, flipperdoda!