The vast majority of people can identify other people's sex; so why the pretence that men are women?

[NewLightbulbs]

Just this, really.

The vast majority of people can identify other people's sex very quickly; it's bloody obvious. So why the pretence that men are women, and we will threaten you if you don't play along?

Is that really being kind? Or is it bludgeoning with threats of job loss, assault, doxing, rape, death?

For correctly observing that a man is a man?

Is there any sanity at all in this state of affairs?

I think children deal with it best.

My teen ds came home telling me how TWAW etc. One of his teachers had clearly swallowed a political correctness pill.

So I showed him a picture of the American male swimmer who claims to be a woman just to get on the podium, and asked DS if the picture was of a man or a woman.

He immediately said 'a man'. He used his eyes and his own common sense to reach a conclusion. It took about half a second. 🙂

"Every other month or so there’s a report of a natal woman confronted by someone mistaking her for a TW."

Really? Then you should genuinely keep a log of them on here, with credible evidence, otherwise I am inclined to scepticism on on your claims.

Women can recognise other women, however they may dress and present, in the same way that we recognise men. And yes, smell is an important one.

I think a major point, here, is this: why can't men, however they "identify", whatever they may feel about themselves - just stay out of women's single-sex spaces?

It's quite simple. Single-sex spaces for women and girls, separate from men, are there for a reason. They are not meant to be a challenge for men who enjoy and take pleasure in busting women's boundaries.

Yes I know. I didn’t quote the OP, I quoted 3 other posters. HTH.

“Do you not think women being able to recognise men and vice versa might have an evolutionary advantage?” Irrelevant as during most of human history, any strange human was a danger. That’s why even the earliest prehistoric human groups adopted distinct in group markings so you could spot friend from foe at a distance. They certainly didn’t close their eyes and sniff for a whiff of manliness.

Irrelevant as during most of human history, any strange human was a danger.

Load of old bollocks. When were strange women ever a danger?

I think a major point, here, is this: why can't men, however they "identify", whatever they may feel about themselves - just stay out of women's single-sex spaces? Then start the 1000th thread on that subject.

Always. Please tell me you don’t still believe that sexist, long debunked by modern archaeologists that men were hunters/warriors and women were gatherers bollocks?

Load of bollocks. Animals are able to distinguish between men and women. Of course humans can tell the difference.

@NewLightbulbs
Really? Then you should genuinely keep a log of them on here, with credible evidence, otherwise I am inclined to scepticism on on your claims.

Well, you can easily Google these reports if you like for verification.

Irrelevant as during most of human history, any strange human was a danger. That’s why even the earliest prehistoric human groups adopted distinct in group markings so you could spot friend from foe at a distance. They certainly didn’t close their eyes and sniff for a whiff of manliness.

It's probably true we still instinctively or subconsciously are more wary of strangers, but that does not remotely mean that women are not also warier of males. (And clearly your certainty re what prehistoric women did with their noses has no basis in evidence)

With 100% accuracy? No we cannot. And I’m not sure “animals” notice which sex we are as they’re not exactly high intelligence. Even an average human often cannot tell a male from a female within most animal species. We have experts for that.

Sure it does. In group markings were 100% visual, not scent. So, there’s your evidence that smell was not important.

And I’m not sure “animals” notice which sex we are as they’re not exactly high intelligence.

Do you own a dog? Many dogs know very clearly which sex other dogs and humans are.

For women, telling the difference between men and women is a rapid risk-assessment exercise, habitually carried out in the blink of an eye. Men rarely seem to get this, unless they are in a particularly bad area.

For further information, chapter and verse, this is a good read by Sex Matters:

sex-matters.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Single-sex-services-full-report.pdf

This is irrelevant unless you believe women are dogs. We are not dogs. We haven’t evolved anything near the sense of smell a dog has. In fact, human evolution has trended towards worse and worse sense of smell.

And how do you even know a dog actually understands sex differences in humans? Are you a dog whisperer? Do they talk to you?

Sure it does. In group markings were 100% visual, not scent. So, there’s your evidence that smell was not important.

No. The 'group markings' distinguishing between males and females aren't artefacts. They exist now, sure as heck they existed in prehistoric times. Completely separate issue to whether they used visual group markings.

No evidence, no logic and it would seem no dog.

The point is there were no scent based in group markings so smell was most likely not used by prehistoric women to sniff manliness. In fact, humans used to mask their scent as protection from predators (sabre tooth tiger anyone?). You said there is “no evidence” prehistoric women weren’t “using their noses” to tell a man from a woman. There is evidence.

Good description of yourself I’d say.

Predictable.
You're right I don't have a dog, but only because my old boy died this year. He could 100% tell men from women and dogs from bitches.

I'm talking about the present, and humans. And that the vast majority of people can identify other people's sex; so why the pretence that men are women?

And why can't men exercise sufficient respect towards women, and self-respect and dignity for themselves, to stay out of women's single-sex spaces, seeing as how they generally stand out as male?

And how do you even know a dog actually understands sex differences in humans?

My granddad's dog was very mistreated by men as a puppy. He was aggressive toward men regularly. The only woman he ever showed aggression towards was wearing her BF's pre-worn jumper.

But you just move the goalposts every time anyone argues anything.

It's obvious that knowing sex is innate and important. Some variation around the edges is normal. But the core is that we know. Not because of dress or gender performance but because of bone deep differences. Gait, body shape, voice, smell, hip to waist ratio, arm length and on and on and on. There are so so many differences. Just flat pictures of faces, macaques were 90% able to tell the sex of humans. Just 2D faces.

It's the emperors new clothes.

When such men lack all respect for women - then why on earth should we tolerate these men in women's supposedly single-sex spaces? Their very presence has now destroyed women's former single-sex spaces, and turned them mixed-sex due to presence of said men. And as I said, we can see them, plainly.

Oh dear! I think you need a good basic animal biology textbook. Some animals and birds have visually clearly sexually dimorphic features. Others don’t. They might not look like they do, especially to us, but they still have a sex.

That it’s hard for humans to sex a penguin, say, or a robin, or even a cat; does not mean that it’s hard to sex a chaffinch, or a deer, or a human.

Or that because it’s hard for even an expert to sex a penguin, therefore that humans, a visually sexually dimorphic species, can’t distinguish sex in each other.

Humans, of course, have evolved to display some secondary sexual characteristics as permanent, which in other mammals only appear at limited times in relation to reproduction. Women have breasts, where in other mammals milk glands only become visually evident during lactation. And just because cats don’t have breasts doesn’t mean we can’t tell that female humans do.

Or that animals can’t tell! You must not have any animals. Cats and dogs can clearly tell that women and men are different!

Interesting post, postcardpuffin!
I knew a mare (adult female equine!) who was easy-going with girls and women (female humans, juvenile and adult) but turned her heels on men.

And indeed, female humans are sufficiently evolved to recognise male humans, whatever their guise may be!

Of course one of the reasons biologists argue that we do have permanent secondary sexual characteristics is to compensate for diminished sense of smell compared to some other animal species. Presumably adult cats don’t need to have permanently visible mammary glands because they can sex each other in different ways. The gait of a male and female cat isn’t markedly different, because they can sex each other easily by scent a mile off. (Though female cats are in aggregate still smaller on average than males.) We find smell less easy to perceive - which isn’t to say that it isn’t important, as pp have pointed out above. But we have evolved evolutionarily to sex each other just as accurately by all the other visual and voice indicators that posters have mentioned. It’s why children don’t visibly acquire adult secondary sexual characteristics until sexual maturity. They indicate sex and potential fertility.

The “oh you can’t tell” brigade have a chronic case of inability to accept that we’re actually embodied animals, and we can’t just live only in our minds and fantasies and remake our bodies accordingly (or live in our presumably higher “intelligence” than the boring old dogs…?) It tends to be a delusion of teenagerhood for the most part, that denial of the body.

And what they don’t like about older adult women - especially those who have had children - is that we largely know that we can’t escape our embodied animal nature.
Anyone who’s been able to smell their baby’s stuff out of a nurseryload of clothes, or seen a primary school kid pick out a classnate’s jumper by smell, knows how animal we really are.