An inclusive way to be gender critical?

[pensivepigeon]

My thoughts on gender and sex are thus:

Gender is a social construct. It is how society and individuals view the presentation of the sexes - in fashion, interests and work roles. Whereas sex is biological, we cannot change it even though we might surgically change our appearance and take artificial hormones which affect our bodily functions.

However because gender is a social construct and we are part of society we can define it. I define gender as

Female = adhering or not adhering to traditional stereotypes regarding names, fashion, interests and work roles.
Male= adhering or not adhering to traditional stereotypes regarding names, fashion, interests and work roles.

If everyone took this on board it would mean safe single sex spaces could be preserved, as people could present themselves however they want, wear what they want but use the single sex space appropriate for their sex without conflict. Uniforms would offer everyone both traditional female and male options which either sex could wear. Ditto with sports, competing takes place within the appropriate sex classes but competitors can wear either the traditional male or female competition uniforms. There would be no confusion and need to agonise over language when providing medical care.

Taking this stance stance means I have no problem when it comes to saying I am of female sex with a female gender.

So am I gender critical? Is this inclusive?

We should set up a double act

And there isn't a consensus on sexuality, either.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologyanddsexualorientation

this thread does hone one's skills, if nothing else

Glad to be of use!

The psychological and medical consensus on gender identity is not "post-modernism," any more than the consensus on sexuality is. Denying it requires an ideological commitment against the evidence.

@DadJoke, correct me if I'm wrong, though, people's gender identity cannot biologically change their physical sex. DNA doesn't get changed because of it. Bodily parts don't lose blood supply and drop off because of it. The body doesn't start manufacturing hormones in vastly different quantities because of it. I mean, I know epigenetics is an emerging science but no one has discovered much of that happening yet.

So sex, as a biological feature of human beings, still remains.

Sorry bold fail. First paragraph in bold.

No one is forcing anyone to "believe" in something just because it's been established, accepted and researched by all reputable national and international psychological bodies. The analogy isn't people's private belief in God, but people's private belief that climate change isn't real. You be you.

This is a good place to start with the actual evidence. This is a good summary of the research, including a discussion on heretability.

research.vu.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/83595397/Polderman2018_Article_TheBiologicalContributionsToGe.pdf

But gender still doesn't affect biological sex?

I mean, if it did, people could choose their sex at will really...

@pensivepigeon *correct me if I'm wrong, though, people's gender identity cannot biologically change their physical sex. DNA doesn't get changed because of it. Bodily parts don't lose blood supply and drop off because of it. The body doesn't start manufacturing hormones in vastly different quantities because of it. I mean, I know epigenetics is an emerging science but no one has discovered much of that happening yet.

So sex, as a biological feature of human beings, still remains.*

Yes, absolutely. The whole distinction between the terms trans and cis wouldn't exist if humans weren't sexually dimorphic, even though sex is not perfectly binary.

So why are certain TRAs trying to erode protections and provisions for biological sex?

@pensivepigeon So why are certain TRAs trying to erode protections and provisions for biological sex?

Allowing the status quo to continue, that is, trans gender people being allowed to go to the bathroom of their choice does not erode protection for provisions for sex. Women are not statistically in danger from trans gender people.

This is a great place to start when considering this issue.

poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=852002002112006100074110029081120071121046022072028063018098028109095023067127116096001012057097017112026091005031073067123028021001010026044025021090014070083103029038073022104013088016020096067109113088096018126069084092102072067017027023088071106098&EXT=pdf&INDEX=TRUE

Sex is binary, there are only two gametes required for human reproduction. Two sexes, male and female. All variance occurs within the two sexes. Unless you've discovered a third gamete, DadJoke?

A helpful video:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=XN2-YEgUMg0&feature=youtu.be

Women are not statistically in danger from trans gender people.

Why is deemed acceptable that trans genders people's psychological well-being should be put before that of female survivors of male abuse?

Women are not statistically in danger from trans gender people.

Women are statistically in danger from male people. That's why they all need to respect the concerns and feelings of women and girls and stay out of our single sex spaces.

Last post @DadJoke

And I'm not clicking on your dodgy looking link DadJoke. Please either make your arguments yourself or use obviously reputable links.

Women are not statistically in danger from trans gender people

It is more about the natural dignity and privacy of one's sex. Safety is also an issue for many, though, and natural safeguards are why we have single sex provisions in the first place.

Women and girls are statistically in danger from males, the world over; plus many and increasing incidents of transwomen committing violent & sexual offences. Being used as a walk-on part in someone's sexual fantasy is also intrusive and contrary to dignity

Campaign for your own third spaces. No-one would have any issue with that; and you'd resolve a large part of the aggro over-night.

Ah, a man (biological male) has decided to come alone and tell all the women (biological female) that they’re wrong for not wanting a not biological female in single sex spaces. How apt

*along

@Ereshkigalangcleg And I'm not clicking on your dodgy looking link DadJoke. Please either make your arguments yourself or use obviously reputable links.

I linked direct to the PDF to save clicks. Here is a link to the yale site.

digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjlf/vol29/iss2/5/

@DadJoke do you have an answer to my question? Here:

"Why is deemed acceptable that trans genders people's psychological well-being should be put before that of female survivors of male abuse?"

It's paywalled, and looks like a load of US TRA question begging. Could you perhaps summarise the argument why women shouldn't have single sex toilets and changing rooms, DadJoke? I'm sure it's groundbreaking.

@Justhadathought Women and girls are statistically in danger from males, the world over; plus many and increasing incidents of transwomen committing violent & sexual offences. Being used as a walk-on part in someone's sexual fantasy is also intrusive and contrary to dignity

Trans women are not a statistical danger to women as a whole. This is just the bathroom panic narrative. There are some bad trans people, just as there are come bad disabled and BAME people, but pointing at unrepresenative samples is the essence of bigotry.

@ChancesWhatChances Ah, a man (biological male) has decided to come alone and tell all the women (biological female) that they’re wrong for not wanting a not biological female in single sex spaces. How apt

I am discussing this issue with gender critical feminists not women in general. Most women in the UK support trans gender rights. Currently trans gender people are not banned from using the bathrooms of their choice.

Most women in the UK support trans gender rights.

I support "trans gender rights" in that I believe everyone including trans people should be safe and free from discrimination. However I do not support MTF trans people in women's toilets and changing rooms, and unless they have had genital surgery, neither do most women in the U.K.

@DadJoke do you have an answer to my question? Here:

"Why is deemed acceptable that trans genders people's psychological well-being should be put before that of female survivors of male abuse?"