How is it "gender critical" to impose rigid binary social categories based on sex?

[CuriousPanda]

For most of history, the whole point of feminism was to oppse sex-based segregation and restrictions that were imposed by patriarchal society.

So I don't see how supporting strict gender categories, and simply calling them "sex-based" instead, in any way leans itself to "gender abolition".

One might get impression that "gender" is simply being used to mean trans people existing, and "gender abolition" simply means restricting trans people from being able to transition and use different gender labels. And basically nothing else.

With "sex-based rules and restrictions" being basically just gender roles but trans-proofed.

@merrymouse

The fight for women to get the vote, be able to own property, to have themselves and their children not be property, to have male people raping their female spouse illegal (early 90s in England).

If only women had realised that all they had to do was explain that they were actually men.

Indeed

But they still would have been burnt as witches

DSD are known, observable features known as disorders

They are not sex Is a spectrum or they wouldn't be disorders , they would just be other sexes

Snd they are observable by the outside agent unlike transgender

@Rocket1982

"What problem? That males and females are different physically but can express themselves however they like?"

No, that the current evidence suggests that sex is not binary and simple categorisation will not suffice for all individuals. Future evidence is likely to complicate the picture further.

As long as any women are still being oppressed for having female bodies I’ll still be here.

If people stop oppressing females because of evidence that people don’t fit neatly into sex categories then happy days!

"The second part of your post appears to be arguing for the existence of pink and blue brains. Throughout history women have been denied the privileges of men because of the argument that female brains weren't intelligent enough to be educated or be given the vote, and so on. Do you understand why feminists wouldn't agree with your argument here, or do I need to spell it out to you?"

I would also prefer that there are no brain differences correlated with chromosomal differences, but the evidence to date suggests this is unlikely to be the case. Wishing something to be the case does not make it so. However, the existence of differences does not suggest that the distribution of male brains is 'superior' to the distribution of female brains. Far from it! There are very many individual differences in all sorts of domains with no notion of superiority or inferiority attached.

@Rocket1982

"Oh yes it is. Everyone on the planet is here because a sperm-producing human (a man) impregnated an egg-producing person (a woman). Just like all the other mammals. If and when you decide you want a child you, just like Owen Jones, will need to seek out someone of the opposite sex to procreate with."

There are quite clearly (and as I guess you already know) exceptions to this where people with female anatomy and otherwise physically female have XY cells and can't produce eggs. As I said, a grey area, which is almost certainly larger than we currently appreciate.

Yes, there are exceptions. Just as we still say that human beings are bipedal and binocular while also acknowledging that some people are born with legs and eyes missing or non-functioning. That just means that something's gone awry in that particular individual's production process, not that suddenly we can no longer say that human beings are bipedal or binocular because someone, somewhere, was born blind or with only one leg.

The fact that a tiny, tiny proportion of women are born without ovaries or have a DSD is neither here nor there. And people with DSDs don't appreciate being drawn into this debate. It's nothing to do with them.

As others have said, when you can put me in touch with god, and when god explains themselves and can be seen, heard and analysed, I'll consider believing in them. Till then you're going to have to argue better, Rocket 1982.

No, that the current evidence suggests that sex is not binary and simple categorisation will not suffice for all individuals.

But simple categorisation does suffice for the vast majority of people who identify as trans. The clue is in the name. They feel the need to transition from one thing to another. By implying that there is an intrinsic overlap between people who identify as trans and people who have one of a wide variety of specific DSDs, you just suggest that you don’t understand what you are talking about.

Reproduction in humans is not that complicated. Hence 8 billion people on the planet.

Unfortunately with any brain differences it's hard to work out what's pure nature

@Rocket1982

"The second part of your post appears to be arguing for the existence of pink and blue brains. Throughout history women have been denied the privileges of men because of the argument that female brains weren't intelligent enough to be educated or be given the vote, and so on. Do you understand why feminists wouldn't agree with your argument here, or do I need to spell it out to you?"

I would also prefer that there are no brain differences correlated with chromosomal differences, but the evidence to date suggests this is unlikely to be the case. Wishing something to be the case does not make it so. However, the existence of differences does not suggest that the distribution of male brains is 'superior' to the distribution of female brains. Far from it! There are very many individual differences in all sorts of domains with no notion of superiority or inferiority attached.

Current evidence is that brains are a mosaic of features, not a spectrum from extreme masculine to extreme feminine. No scientist could currently look at a brain scan and tell you the sex of the person it belonged to. The "distribution" of features overlaps significantly, and it makes no sense to call a brain "male" or "female" based on them, in the same way that it makes calling 6ft 1in a "male" height, or size 5 shoes a "female" shoe size.

Even if it were conclusively proved that there were markers in brains that indicate sex in all cases, and that transgender people had the markers of the opposite sex (and non-binary people both? or neither?) all that means is that the marker no longer indicates sex!

There are quite clearly (and as I guess you already know) exceptions to this where people with female anatomy and otherwise physically female have XY cells and can't produce eggs. As I said, a grey area, which is almost certainly larger than we currently appreciate.

No, it’s really not. More than 80% of women who are over 45 have had children. Many who are involuntarily childless will have had their reproductive systems examined in great detail.

You seem to be imagining vast numbers of people who have a DSD but no other symptoms apart from opposite sex chromosomes and that just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

So what’s your argument? That women don’t need specific sex based rights because a very, very small number of people have DSDs that make clear classification of sex difficult? That a man who has had 6 children is the same as somebody with a specific DSD because they are gender non conforming?

Even if "pink brains" and "blue brains" exist I don't see why they would override the rest of physiology.

If someone had XY chromosomes, a male reproductive anatomy that produces sperm and had been through a male puberty but was found to have a "pink brain" why would that make them a woman and not simply a man with a "feminine" brain (whatever "feminine" may mean here)? Why would "brain sex" override chromosomal sex or reproductive sex?

@Rocket1982

"The second part of your post appears to be arguing for the existence of pink and blue brains. Throughout history women have been denied the privileges of men because of the argument that female brains weren't intelligent enough to be educated or be given the vote, and so on. Do you understand why feminists wouldn't agree with your argument here, or do I need to spell it out to you?"

I would also prefer that there are no brain differences correlated with chromosomal differences, but the evidence to date suggests this is unlikely to be the case. Wishing something to be the case does not make it so. However, the existence of differences does not suggest that the distribution of male brains is 'superior' to the distribution of female brains. Far from it! There are very many individual differences in all sorts of domains with no notion of superiority or inferiority attached.

You seem to be agreeing with me here. If there are differences, and these differences are only due to chromosomes, then the difference is purely biological and any brain in a male body is by definition a male brain, similarly for female brains and female bodies.

There may be differences in the biology, but these are yet to be proven to exist, and it's virtually impossible to separate nature from nurture because of the way people respond to babies and children depending on whether they perceive them as boys or girls.

@Rocket1982

FloralBunting I can see the arguments on both sides of this debate but I think GCFs are oversimplifying the problem.

You just sound confused. You have latched onto the existence of DSDs (specific and varied disorders of sexual development) and seem to believe that this has something to do with trans people.

Wishing something to be the case does not make it so.

Preaching to the wrong choir here.

Reproduction in humans is not that complicated. Hence 8 billion people on the planet.

Well done for not posting "It's not rocket science." I don't think I could've resisted.

Oh, is this thread no accepting that sex (a protected characteristic) and gender (a Social construct) are entirely separate??

DSD people, have their sex assigned at birth, like everyone else. In some cases parents need to choose which sex they will raise their child as. Sometimes they get it wrong.

It is a medical condition based in fact. Biology. Not made up.

Does this apply in surrogacy, or are lots of "G with the T" men sufficiently committed to the cause to look for an MTF trans person to gestate their child, as it's a "grey area" and no one can possibly know what sex anyone else or what that means?

Yes, we all know exactly which type of people are being exploited in places like Ukraine. ‘Grey area’ indeed.

[quote CuriousPanda]@GromblesofGrimbledon
The TRAs don't want the language set in stone.

There is language set in stone, there's literally the terms "cis men" and "cis women".

But of course, you hate that, because it normalizes trans people as being part of a larger group that you don't believe they "deserve" to be considered part of.[/quote]

We have many lovely visitors like yourself round these parts @CuriousPanda and none of you can agree on terminology. It's all waffle.

A man's inclusion into the class of "women" has nothing to do with whether or not he "deserves" to be seen as a woman. There's one criteria for joining the clubhouse: are you female? If the answer is "no", you don't get in I'm afraid.

Transwomen are transwomen and are entitled to the same human rights as everyone else. I have met transwomen who I refer to as she and her. But they are not women. They are transwomen. To call them woman has seriously negative ramifications in society.

See the attached photo as to where we inevitably end up if we don't define our world correctly with our language.

People with DSDs have their sex observed at birth, same as everyone else. Rarely it is observed incorrectly.

It is important for people with DSDs to have their sex observed correctly because of the health complications that many DSDs have.

"You seem to be agreeing with me here. If there are differences, and these differences are only due to chromosomes, then the difference is purely biological and any brain in a male body is by definition a male brain, similarly for female brains and female bodies."

I am arguing that there could be a very high correlation between biological brain differences and sex chromosomes in the same way there is a very high correlation between sex chromosomes and secondary sexual characteristics. However, in the same way that sex chromosomes don't always determine secondary sexual characteristics, they wouldn't always determine brain differences either. Someone could have a (biologically determined) typically female brain, male secondary sexual characteristics and female sex chromosomes or any other combination.

Sex is determined by primary sex characteristics.

Genetics determine a person's primary characteristics

XY male
XX female

I am arguing that there could be a very high correlation between biological brain differences and sex chromosomes in the same way there is a very high correlation between sex chromosomes and secondary sexual characteristics.

This is science fiction. There is currently no evidence for this, and I can't see any reason why there ever would be. Why are we wasting time discussing a hypothetical thought experiment as if it is relevant to women's rights today? Nevermind that it has been explained several times already that it is a red herring.

@Rocket1982

"You seem to be agreeing with me here. If there are differences, and these differences are only due to chromosomes, then the difference is purely biological and any brain in a male body is by definition a male brain, similarly for female brains and female bodies."

I am arguing that there could be a very high correlation between biological brain differences and sex chromosomes in the same way there is a very high correlation between sex chromosomes and secondary sexual characteristics. However, in the same way that sex chromosomes don't always determine secondary sexual characteristics, they wouldn't always determine brain differences either. Someone could have a (biologically determined) typically female brain, male secondary sexual characteristics and female sex chromosomes or any other combination.

But how would anyone work out what is a 'female brain' if the characteristics of a 'female brain' could be found in both males and females?

Before you can decide whether a male person has a 'female brain' you first have to define the characteristics of a 'female brain'. At the moment, a 'female brain' is simply a brain in a female body. What other definition could there be?

And if you found a 'female brain' (defined using your terms) in a male body, would this actually prove that this person had a female brain in a male body or that you had incorrectly defined the characteristics of what makes a brain male or female?

So back to the original question

Gender critical means we don't care about your gender

At the same time we can hold a second thought in our head . Sex matters in various places and women are disadvantaged when it's ignored or equated with gender

Is that evidence that men and women have different brains, in that we can hold 2 complementary thoughts at the same time? A type of multi tasking?

Rocket

Is it that you believe the average MTF trans person somehow has "female" brain characteristics? Is that why they are so often attracted to female-coded clothes, because they're just too "feminine" to be male?