"Trans women ARE biological women"

[TangenitalContrivance]

I see this argument and comment more and more the last few weeks and hugely over the last 3 days.

For example:

https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1k1tliv/trans_women_are_biological_women/

This statement, and the comments underneath it absolutely baffle me.

The approach, one that I am sure will only work with a minority of the people who said TWAW, is to undermine the definition of words, yet again, and deliberately cloud the water when it comes to speaking clearly and using terms that everyone agrees with

I have seen it said in more places than Reddit however, and by respected people

You are confusing gender stereotypes with biology.

Howoeople dress, are expected to look and act, it's harmful stereotyping and nothing to do with biology.

Well quite. Reality doesn't change because someone fervently doesn't believe in it.

The next time I watch the foxes of an evening, I must remember that vixens aren't really 20% smaller than dog foxes, but are just socially conditioned to present themselves that way.

If male and female sexes don't exist, it's amazing how people-of-gender know that they need to "change" sex.

And there would be no way to define the sexed spaces that people-of-gender are so determined that they belong in.

Well, there is the GRA for a start!

I am a woman and I am not petite or small. I am still female though. Being female is not something I am 'reduced' to. It is just a fact and there is nothing degrading or offensive about being female.
The idea that as a woman, my ideal body should be petite and small is what the social construct is.
A biological definition of woman includes all women, tall and short, masculine or feminine, any personality or opinion. It also doesn't require us to conform to any gender stereotype. We are simply female people.
The 'trans inclusive' definition of woman conversely requires a socially constructed and deeply sexist concept of womanhood. It demands that being a woman is to put on a display of femininity. It is regressive and sexist.
The concept of 'cis' is even worse. Not only does this shove women into a gender box based on stereotypes but it then insists that makes us privileged.

Actually meant to post on this thread, but there was the same identical obfuscatory nonsense on the other thread.

I wonder how many Righteous people genuinely live by the non-sex-specific-bollocks they espouse.

• Are they unsure which Gallus gallus cloaca they hope to get something edible out of?
• Do they feel puzzled which white fluid from Bos taurus to put in their tea?
• When planting a farm of papaya or hops or kiwifruit, do they shrug in confusion if no fruit appear?
• If at puberty they start bleeding from their genitals, do they seek medical attention, or conversely if at puberty they don't start bleeding from their genitals?

I was going for more Nazi Germany, racial segregation in the US.

This ruling plays into the US playbook completely - and results in this.

www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/us/politics/trans-student-arrest-bathroom-law-florida.html

Is anyone suggesting that single sex spaces should be segregated by race?

No. I was responding to the poster on morality and the rule of law.

So close to naming him for a bingo on my bingo card 🤐

@user1492538376 Well no because I don’t believe in binary male and female anyway.

So how do you think mammals reproduce?

Errrr. You may be socially conditioned but I am not.

Oooooo are we getting near to sexual racists on the bingo card????

😂

Weve covered this. Reproduction is only one aspect of sexual characteristics.

Assume I'm a slow learner. tell me again.

No one on this thread has yet to answer my question on how you determine someone’s sex by looking at them. Using a public toilet.

That’s because - you cant.

Their babies are dropped into cabbage patches by storks and then the doctor assigns each one a sex and the magic gender fairy assigns them a gender, which may or may not match the sex. Nobody knows why the gender fairy doesn't simply assign a gender which matches the sex, the gender fairy (they/them/zir) is clearly a horrid little arsehole who hates trans people.

Can our Righteous friend just walk me through how we get from

Sex is a complex constellation of ineffable indefinability

to

Therefore male people are entitled to access female spaces

??

I did mention this yesterday, but sadly no education on this logical link was forthcoming.

The issue isn’t about whether a trans woman looks like a woman. The point is that they shouldn’t be in women’s spaces because they are not women.

You are assuming that decent, law abiding, humans will purposely break the law by going into single sex spaces because..what ... they don't know what sex they are? If a person doesn't know their own biological sex then they need to see a doctor.

The ones who insist on going into the single sex spaces they are not legally allowed to use are the dangerous ones.

I mean, babies and children can do it, but maybe it’s a skill that is lost in adulthood:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6680589/#:~:text=Abstract,based%20upon%20differences%20in%20gender.

https://psychology.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Bui%2C%20Hong%20-%20Gender%20Categorization%20.pdf

(note both papers use the term “gender” however they specify that they mean the difference between men and women)

Are you saying trans people will break the law anyway?

So you understand that there is a Patriarchy. Great!

And so you accept that somehow, somehow, even though male and female are just constraucts and sex is far too complicated for anyone to understand, the Patriachy somehow still managed to oppress people who pretty much align to the simplistic, everyday version of female. It wasn't great for men who had traits the Patriachy deems female either of course, but that was kind of a backwash from the devaluing of female people, and those men were still in much better places than the women.

So the 100 dollar question - given that Patriarchy did manage to oppress people based on the simplistic, everyday version of sex, why is it suddenly so very very unthinkable to now support those exact same people with the challenges that has brought?

Because Patriachy ain't gonna say "oh gosh sex is really complicated, I guess if we can't know with 100% accuracy who to disempower, marginalise, abuse and discrimate against we just stop Patriaching then". Patriachy will just keep right on oppressing the same people.

All you are doing with your clever "well actually..." and genes dancing on the head of a pin is taking away the rights and power of the people who Patriachy is somehow managing perfectly well to identify as women anyway to fight back.

So please do go ahead and continue to push for a world with subtle gradiation between the social contructs of Male and Female, but do me a favour? Wait until that is also how the Patriachy sees things before you start taking away the rights and recognition that the women who are only women in that cringingly naive, sex based, simplistic biological sense need to protect themselves against how Patriachy wants to treat them.

We can tell by looking at you. Your gait, your size, your hands, your feet, your brow ridge, your Adam's apple, your smell, your voice, your hairline or wig — but most of all, we can spot your male entitlement.