Gender as synonym for sex

[BCCoach]

Ok preparing to be flamed for this one and yes it’s probably a TAAT, but why do so many feminists use the recent (Psychological/Sociological/American according to OED) meaning of gender and deny the much older meaning as a synonym for biological sex, which is the one that the vast majority of people are using in the context of babies?

Gender as a synonym for sex is meaning 3a in OED and dates from 1474 while the new meaning (3b) is a US import first recorded in 1945.

What’s stopping us from reclaiming the older and, outside of academia and special interest groups, far more generally understood meaning?

Because it leads to circular discussions and because it also makes statements ambiguous. I have no desire to keeping having to clarify or ask for clarification.

And I rarely used 'gender' as a substitute myself anyway. I understand if you wish to use it, but I don't and I can only speak for myself.

That’s very understandable @Helleofabore

i just really don’t like it when people jump on the gender reveal threads to ‘correct’ posters who are using the word correctly in the first place.

I think the use of sex can lead to ambiguity too, because it has two very common meanings. I.e. your biological sex and the act of sex (which in itself covers one hell of a range of activities).

One poster on the other thread mentioned a neurofen advert talking about the "gender pain gap'" in medical treatment. And I think in this case that's actually much less unambiguous than "sex pain gap", because sex pain gap could refer to either the difference in approach to medical treatment or the pain experienced by some women during sex.

My copy of the OED is firm that the medieval usage is 'now only jocular' in contrast to the other usages: meaning kind or sort generally with no reference to sexual difference; the grammatical use we are all familiar with; and as a synonym of engender, the bear progeny.

All those uses are far better referenced, and remained in constant use for centuries, unlike the 'sex' version which the referencing makes clear remained rare, intermittent and generally used as a joke.

If we start using language according to obscure medieval slang definitions, words will lose all meaning. Which is of course what the genderists want, in their quest to eradicate women.

to bear progeny, obviously, not as a substitute for bear cubs.

I know why we don't have an edit button, but sometimes regret not having one.

The sex pain gap, or even the pain gap between the sexes if we need an extra few letters to make the point, has an exact biological meaning, and can be measured and quantified.

There can never be a gender pain gap because gender is made up, and as it only exists in the imagination it is as unmeasurable as the immortal soul.

My view is if we're talking about women's rights, it is very important that sex and gender are presented as distinct and separate things.

For example, in the UK, the Equality Act 2010 covers protects people from discrimination (and does other things too). A person's rights stem from having a protected characteristic. The protected characteristics include race, disability, sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership, sexual orientation, religion or philosophical belief, sex, gender reassignment and a few others.

When we're talking about rights stemming from the Equality Act, we should not use gender/gender reassignment and sex interchangeably (we shouldn't use gender at all, it's not recognised by the Equality Act!) no more than we should use sexual orientation and religion or philosophical belief interchangeably. They are not the same thing.

We should simply be accurate. In addition to this, in order for people to be aware of and to exercise their rights, we should use the correct definitions in the right context.

Sex pain gap can mean two things though, as I said in my post.

Either the difference in pain experienced by men and women during sex (and we all know women experience significantly more pain than men), or it means the difference in medical treatment given to men and women.

It's ambiguous. Pain gap between the sexes is much better, if not as snappy.

I don’t see gender as a synonym for sex as at all obscure and I firmly believe that outside of the gender debate (where both feminists and TRAs use the more recent meaning) it is in fact the more widely accepted meaning.

That the two words are used interchangeably in gender ideology discourse is important. A Gender Recognition Certificate enables its holder to change their birth certificate sex. A certificate that, we're told, recorded the gender assigned at birth.

There probably is a gender pain gap, very different from the sex pain gap. It would be nuanced and vary considerably between cultures and individuals so be hard to measure, but based on the differences in how different constructions of gender define and allow someone to express pain, which in turn affects how an individual might experience it.

Whereas I see it as a debasement of language that is deliberately obscure and pointless.

I remember when I first heard it, ca 1985 when it started to leak out of Judith Butler and into academia, and thought it risible, twee, and nonsensical. The only reason people started to use it then was because they thought sex was a rude word.

It was bad enough then, when it was genuinely used as synonym for sex by many early adopters, but now that it used to describe an imaginary feeling there is no justification for it except in writing poetry or fiction - certainly never in analysis of anything real, like pain, or pay, or political freedom.

I absolutely agree that sex and gender are not interchangeable in gender ideology discussions, where it is clear that the academic meaning of gender (meaning 3b in the OED) is meant.

However I believe that the meaning marked as ‘general’ in the OED (3a) is what most people mean in every day conversation, and certainly what they mean when talking about a gender reveal party, and calling out women for it is not constructive.

Is this some recent, short, version of the OED?

Unfortunately, the synonymous use has been hijacked by the people who believe in gender ideology, so where in the past a form might have had

Gender: M / F (so clearly using it synonymously)

I now often see

Gender: Male/Female/Nonbinary/Other

which is indicating that it is asking about gender identity rather than sex. I have no problem with having that IN ADDITION to a sex based question if relevant, for example on a medical form.

It brings me back to the fact that most of the time in general life, whether you are male or female is irrelevant. But when it matters, it REALLY matters

Nouns in most European languages have had "genders" (m, f, n) for a very long time, and as far as I know that's the word which has always been used to describe them? So the 'borrowing' to use the word to refer to something socially-constructed about humans doesn't feel like a stretch to me.

The issue is that the TRAs have hijacked the word "gender" for their own purpose and have tried to get it used in the place of "sex" for legal purposes.

A clear example is how they got it substituted into many public definitions of the protected characteristics, which are actually defined by law, and women had their work cut out to contact all those councils, schools, trainers, employers etc. and get it all switched back again.

From that step, they would have been able to claim discrimination rights that did not exist, while denying those rights to natal born women.

It isn't just medical forms, it's all the other places where women have had to fight for equality or safety. Once 'woman' can mean any male-bodied person who wants to use their imaginary feelings to distort the statistics, or compromise the system, gender means XX chromosome women are betrayed.

That is a feature of genderism, not a bug, and that is why I will not use the term gender myself, or let it be used in discussion without challenging it.

There's another example of it on the current "Anyone want to FOI a hospital?" thread. A hospital is talking about 'gender' in its policy and has left out 'sex'.

No it’s not. In fact older versions of the OED don’t have the recent meaning, they just have the grammatical meaning and the meaning as a synonym for sex. There are a bunch of technical meanings in engineering and electronics too of course.

The OED does note about the synonymous usage: “It is now often merged with or coloured by sense 3b.”

My OED is the 13 volume edition and it does have the medieval meaning in addition to the more recent ones I cited above.

It does not have the post mid-1980s meaning, any more than my mid-80s Chambers dictionary has. I'm all in favour of the evolution and development of language when that brings clarity (as see a lot of sceintific language), but not when in brings obfuscation and linguistic dishonesty.

Using the modern quasi-religious meaning of gender as a special imaginary feeling AND using the 'it's just the same as sex' meaning at the same time is designed to demean and endanger women.,

Are you saying that the concept of 'gender' as a way to describe someone's inner "feelings" is complete nonsense and therefore we should reclaim the word to be synonymous with the word 'sex' as it is very commonly used outside of the trans debate?

I am saying we should not use the word gender at all except as a grammatical term, as it has no honest or valid meaning in any other sense. It is unnecessary - we didn't need it before the mid 1980s, we don't need it now.

If people want to describe their feelings or personality, use the words feelings or personality.

If people need to state their sex, use the word sex..

The confusion caused and apparent acceptance of the word gender is an open door for trans radical activists to push at. Whilst I accett others using it like that I never would not do so more. If there is any confusion else were like the sex pain gap mention by a PP as another PP said a few more words int eh sentence and all is clear. So we can leave gender behind as a1960s Americanism / acronism quite safely. I think giving the word gender any legitimancy now were in a situation were the word and concept of woman is under such threat is giving them (the TRAs) a free shot on goal.

I remember people asking me when I was pregnant ‘do you know what sex it is?’ . But since the advent of all these ridiculous ‘gender reveal’ parties people might now ask ‘do you know what gender?’ Although that would invite a response these days along the lines of ‘that will be up to our child to decide and tell us’.

I hate that we’re told gender is the more ‘acceptable’ term for sex because ‘sex’ is a bit much for some people who prefer to be coy. I think that’s bollocks even for school children.

I never fixated on the sex of the baby I was carrying and never found out beforehand. I know some people like to know and I never understand why unless there’s some genetic issue. But each to their own I guess.