Why conflate 'Gender Critical' and belief in immutable sex?

[Beancounter1]

I'm confused about why the term 'gender critical' is conflated with the belief in immutable biological sex. To me they are not necessarily the same thing.

I believe it is not possible for someone to change their sex. Would you say this is a 'gender critical' stance? My belief in immutable sex doesn't necessarily mean I don't believe gender exists. Maybe someone can change their gender, if not their sex.

Sex seems a really clear-cut biological characteristic, but I am on the fence about gender - I am inclined to think it does actually exist and that it is not 'all society's influence', that some of gender is nature not nurture.
But I don't have a definition of gender.

The situation is not helped by the fact there is, in common usage, only one set of words, 'woman' or 'female', to signify both gender and sex. Language does not help here.

Please could someone who has put a lot more thought into this help me out here?

I don't think GC is thinking it doesn't exist! Rather thinking it's mostly sexist drivel designed to keep women (and to a certain extent non-conforming men) in their place socially.

I believe it exists and people have preferences. But that ultimately it's sexist shite. Also capitalist.

You say that ‘some gender is nature not nurture’ - which aspects do you think are down to nature?

YY. To me gender critical means that the oppression of women stems from their sex, not their gender. Gender does it exist but is a system of beliefs, generally based on sexist stereotypes, that harms women (and men).

Really good point. I've always assumed GC to mean critical of gender stereotypes, so the fact you have long hair and wear a skirt does not make you a girl or woman.
As you say that's different from knowing that sex cannot change. And tbh that's not a belief any more than a belief in the earth orbiting the sun or that my ds is my ds, or that I live in the village I live in. Those things are usually called facts.

My understanding of gender critical is that gender critical asserts that gender is a social construct based on stereotypes of maleness and femaleness.
The GC position would be that these stereotypes are harmful to men, women, girls and boys. A GC position would say there is no reason why a girl/boy/woman/man can't have certain interests, dress a certain way, behave certain way, express themselves as they wish and the world would be a better place if we acknowledged gender stereotypes are limiting for all.

Facts aren't beliefs :-)

When pressed the genderists deny that they deny sex is immutable.

But lots on their side do spend all the time muddying the waters or saying that it isn't immutable, or that it isn't real.

But regardless of what they think about sex, their basic position is that sex doesn't matter, and we should keep all our sex-based laws and institutions, but turn them into gender identity-based ones. With self-id gender identity. So, choose-your-own. We think that's daft.

The gender critical stance can be summarised as:

• sex is immutable (in humans)
• sex matters
• gender identity (pink/blue souls) don't exist - that's a religious belief
• gender stereotypes are harmful

"Sex matters" is the big one - it's the name of the organisation Maya Forstater co-founded, and was the core of her case.

But the specific concept "gender critical" comes from the last two points, which build further on the first two.

Conservatives might believe the first two, but not be on-board with the last two.

But we still wouldn't say that men and women are the same, statistically. They're very much not. There are sex-correlated characteristics and behaviours, some of which are the grain of truth within gender stereotypes.

And we justify sex segregation to a large extent on the basis of those statistical differences (prisons, sports...)

But a statistical outlier within a sex is not a different sex. A tall woman is not a man. A homosexual woman is not a man. A masculine woman is not a man. A woman who does not conform to gender stereotypes is not a man.

Nor do any of these mean you've got a "male brain" - the very idea of a "male brain" is offensive. Women are women purely by virtue of being female. All females are valid women. Suggesting anything else would be exclusionary of those not meeting some stereotype.

What we need is genital inspectors at the entrance to every male and female sex segregated venue. Everyone has to flash their genitals to ensure they are right to enter. You can never be too sure when someone who looks CIS is actually not and who looks trans is actually CIS.

The only answer, is genital inspections. Just to be safe!

Gender does confuse me tbh so would be good to read other people's views. There is sex, socially constructed gender norms, and personality. But does our biological functions and hormone profiles not input into how we interact with the world? But I can't say how. I just feel my biology forms my identify. Maybe someone else can explain it?

And do pronouns refer to gender or sex?

actually ...scrap that.... what if they have had surgery? Then a chromosome test is the only way. Everyone needs a chromosome test before they can enter or some sort of licence or goverment ID....you know for safety etc..... It's the only way!

This helped me:

But I don't have a definition of gender.

This is my problem with gender. I don't question if or how other people experience it, I don't so it makes it difficult for me to relate to. If you plan to write something into law then it must have an agreed definition otherwise anything and everything which suits individual convenience can be claimed as part of gender identity. Given gender identity is such a nebulous concept it would be impossible to write workable law to protect it.

I think you can believe in immutable binary sex and gender identity but I rebel against the notion we all have a gender identity, I most certainly do not but I'm still female, hence gender critical.

Ooh, I thought I'd seen my first Armitage Shanks law in action there! Not quite.

@MishyJDI

actually ...scrap that.... what if they have had surgery? Then a chromosome test is the only way. Everyone needs a chromosome test before they can enter or some sort of licence or goverment ID....you know for safety etc..... It's the only way!

Or people could just ya know use the toilet of their sex as they were designed, it’s never needed policed before 🤷‍♀️

@MishyJDI

What we need is genital inspectors at the entrance to every male and female sex segregated venue. Everyone has to flash their genitals to ensure they are right to enter. You can never be too sure when someone who looks CIS is actually not and who looks trans is actually CIS.

The only answer, is genital inspections. Just to be safe!

Alternatively people could simply open their eyes! I know, right!

mishy I think you have posted on the wrong thread?

OP - have you read the Break It Down For Me thread?

It's pretty helpful for a number of questions you're likely to have.

Gender isn't man or woman. Those are the words used to describe male and female humans based on their sex.

Gender is masculine or feminine and sex role stereotypes. Some people seem to think these things matter more than our sex.

@Soontobe60

You say that ‘some gender is nature not nurture’ - which aspects do you think are down to nature?

Hi Soontobe, Maybe things related to hormones? Boys have more testosterone-fuelled agression/physicality, girls are better with language? Not sure really. But babies of different sexes are not identical, I think there is research into this.

@StealthPolarBear

Really good point. I've always assumed GC to mean critical of gender stereotypes, so the fact you have long hair and wear a skirt does not make you a girl or woman. As you say that's different from knowing that sex cannot change. And tbh that's not a belief any more than a belief in the earth orbiting the sun or that my ds is my ds, or that I live in the village I live in. Those things are usually called facts.

Hi polarbear, Yes I see it as a fact, though I said belief rather than fact because the fact is still contested - as was the earth's orbit in the time of Copernicus or Gallileo. It is probably correct to say ' I believe X is a fact' until science has utterly settled the point and it is no longer contested.

Lots of sensible discussion here of “gender” as a set of sex-based social stereotypes. Just to point out the obvious, “critical” means something along the lines of “an analysis of the merits and faults of a particular idea”. It does not mean expressing disapproval. Being a film critic does not involve hating films.

Something to help OP

twitter.com/menminlymen1/status/1403350328834150404?s=21

It is probably correct to say ' I believe X is a fact' until science has utterly settled the point and it is no longer contested.

Immutable, binary sex in humans is settled science and not contested. (Unless you would say the earth being an approximate oblate spheroid is a contested fact by flat earthers...)

Hi Necessary,

"The gender critical stance can be summarised as:

• sex is immutable (in humans)
• sex matters
• gender identity (pink/blue souls) don't exist - that's a religious belief
• gender stereotypes are harmful

But the specific concept "gender critical" comes from the last two points, which build further on the first two."

This is really helpful - the concepts are related but are distinct. So for example it is possible to believe that gender doesn't exist whilst simultaneously thinking that sex doesn't matter, or vice-versa, or that sex is immutable and also gender stereotypes are harmless.
There isn't a classic logical chain here.

"But we still wouldn't say that men and women are the same, statistically. They're very much not. There are sex-correlated characteristics and behaviours, some of which are the grain of truth within gender stereotypes."

This is probably what I mean by believing gender exists, but what I actually mean is that gender is rooted in, and a consequence of, real sex differences.
Thanks

Maybe things related to hormones? Boys have more testosterone-fuelled agression/physicality, girls are better with language?

But sex hormones are about sex, not gender . And girls are better with language? I'm female and a linguist and I don't believe that's true. Well, not as any kind of inherent trait. Girls are certainly socialised in ways which might make them better with language.

I am yet to hear of any gender identity attributes that aren't either a) stereotypes or b) nonsense.