"Biological sex is a multidimensional variable with various components" - Thread 2

[MissScarletInTheBallroom]

The last thread ended with Tandora attempting to sidestep the question about what she would say if her daughter had been raped by a trans woman in a female only space and no longer believed that trans women should be in female only spaces as a consequence.

Her last reply was along the lines of, "The same thing I would say if she had been bullied by a green person at school and said she no longer wanted to go to school with green people."

@Tandora can we have a serious answer?

with the simplicity of the outcome: two sex categories

There is no simplicity in outcomes, it's a complex process that produces varied and complex outcomes.

There is no simplicity in outcomes, it's a complex process that produces varied and complex outcomes.

It is simple - there are only two sexes, there is no third, fourth, both or neither sex category.

If an obvious male person has intruded into a space that has been designated as being for female people only then he can expect to have that intrusion confronted at some point. I'm really not sure why you think that the pain and feelings of a male person with a trans identity person are any more important than those of a female person in a space which has been set aside for her?

If that person is in the women's changing room I most certainly will feel free to make a comment directly to that person their feelings be damned.

So sex is relevant.

And its reasonable to have single sex services?

But if a male person chooses to use the female single sex services, its wrong to challenge him?

Can you see any problems?

That does not entitle you to make comments about your observation/perception directly to that person, particularly where you know full well that will be humiliating and painful to the person. This is bigoted, yes, as its showing complete disregard for the minority difference of another person. It's also cruel, like it would be cruel to tell someone they are fat just because you observed/ perceived it.

You’re wrong.

within safeguarding contexts it absolutely does give someone the right to correctly sex a man identifying as trans. 100%

just as it allows anyone to challenge anyone else if the privacy and safety of another individual is at risk. Even if it “hurts feelings.” As the priority is the safety and dignity of another, often more vulnerable, individual.

The “fat” comment is a false comparison here. The risk is the determination that someone is male. Not obesity.

Sigh. We are talking about specific contexts where sex is relevant. Single sex spaces, single sex care. It is no more cruel to say “you are male, this is female only, you do not belong here” than it is cruel to say “this ride is for people over 140cm tall, you are 120cm tall, you cannot take part”.

I wish you’d just be honest and say you don’t believe in single-sex care and spaces, because sex is so difficult for each of us to recognise that in practice they are unworkable.

particularly where you know full well that will be humiliating and painful to the person. This is bigoted, yes, as its showing complete disregard for the minority difference of another person. It's also cruel, just in the same way as it would be cruel to tell someone they are fat just because you observed/ perceived it.

Removing the safety, privacy, boundaries, consent and dignity of females is cruel and indeed dangerous. Any male, whatever his personal perception of his identity, that seeks to do so is showing complete disregard for females.

posters are quite capable of comprehending the complexity of the natural world; people are diverse. Abnormalities exist. Does that mean they’re the opposite sex? Nope.

you’re not answering the non binary question because it proves your beliefs aren’t backed up by any science. They have a sex.

non binary people are either male or female.

Transgender is a belief.

and your argument that there’s a biological basis is not very good.

<a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/2024.11.03-091945/philosophersmag.com/the-transgender-rights-issue/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://archive.is/2024.11.03-091945/philosophersmag.com/the-transgender-rights-issue/

The parts that let trans-identified males access female single-sex spaces (physical and metaphorical).

It's a very simple outcome. Two sex categories, male and female, each essential for human reproduction.

Your argument is akin to saying the number of legs in humans is complex because the developmental process of limb formation is complex and occasionally goes awry, and because some people have legs that are longer than others or knock knees, or have legs that are thinner or more muscular.

particularly where you know full well that will be humiliating and painful to the person.

This is a really dangerous attitude. We have single sex spaces and services for safety and dignity.

The idea that no one should question anyone's presence because its humiliting is bonkers. We dont balance safeguarding and hurt feelings.

@Tandora I wonder if you realize how much harm you are doing for the trans cause by this argument that sex is not binary.

I am not gender critical. I believe our world is complex and is developing beyond the traditional binary social norms and that’s a good thing. My view is we should expand to meet an increasingly gender fluid world and continue to fight against gender based social stereotypes about men and women.

It’s not popular on this board but I’m totally fine with the use of cis as a description and will always try to respect people’s pronouns.

But at this point in time the science only points to sex being binary. Not saying that new evidence isn’t possible - that’s how science works. But at this point in time is doesn’t exist.

And unfortunately our society still needs single sex spaces to protect those born with female bodies. You seem to be arguing to take away those safe spaces. You would have allies if you were arguing for creating additional safe spaces for trans people where they are needed.

There are people whose bodies and identities do not fit neatly into either sex category, but combine different components across each.

I wonder if you realize how much harm you are doing for the trans cause by this argument

I'm not harming the trans community with my arguments. I'm sharing the true fact that sex is a multi-dimensional, complex, system of development, with varied and complex outcomes.

I am not gender critical. I believe our world is complex and is developing beyond the traditional binary social norms and that’s a good thing. My view is we should expand to meet an increasingly gender fluid world and continue to fight against gender based social stereotypes about men and women.
It’s not popular on this board but I’m totally fine with the use of cis as a description and will always try to respect people’s pronouns.

I'm really heartened to hear all of this and I agree with you obviously.

But at this point in time the science only points to sex being binary. Not saying that new evidence isn’t possible - that’s how science works. But at this point in time is doesn’t exist.

Science points to the fact that sex is a multi-dimensional, complex, system of development, with varied and complex outcomes.

And unfortunately our society still needs single sex spaces to protect those born with female bodies. You seem to be arguing to take away those safe spaces. You would have allies if you were arguing for creating additional safe spaces for trans people where they are needed.

I think that we should be able to have some services/ facilities for cis women where they are important and necessary, just as some are reserved for black women, disabled women etc.
However, we cannot have a situation where trans people are forbidden from ever being able to use basic facilities like toilets in accordance with their lived sex, and must be othered and outed every time they need the loo.

there’s no way you work in a scientific field with theosophical waffle like that.

It's not dangerous at all to say that you shouldn't misgender a trans person to their face. It's a principle of basic common decency.

And no you should not be confronting people using public facilities on the basis of your perceptions of their appearance and entitlement to be there.

This has nothing to do with safeguarding and everything to do with harassment of gender non conforming people.

we are all gender non conforming

It is a simple description of facts in relatively plain english.

Right, which is why your dogma, and insisting on your right to police it, harms all of us.

It's not feminist at all.

Identity doesn't matter in single sex spaces and services.

People with DSD and their place in SS places has nothing to do with gender identity.

I think that we should be able to have some services/ facilities for cis women where they are important and necessary

Your previous posts make it clear given that sex is not fixed, not objective, and lies, in the case of transpeople at least, within a person’s understanding of what their sex is, that it would be almost impossible in your world to have services for ‘cis women’. How could you ever define who they are? At least be honest.

What would you do if you saw a man following a young girl into an empty public toilet?

Make sure you do the most important thing and not offend the man?

that it would be almost impossible in your world to have services for ‘cis women’. How could you ever define who they are? At least be honest.

This isn't true at all. It's easy to identify a cisgender woman, they are women who are female since birth.