What is a woman? Part II

Electric Skeptic said:
This is simply dishonest. The question has been repeatedly answered.

A person with XY chromosomes and a penis who presents as a woman is biologically a male and has a gender of female. They are actually a (gender) woman while being a (sex) man.
Click to expand...
Gender is a linguistic thing (gendered words in languages like Spanish).

Gender as a social concept was invented out of whole cloth by the perverted psychologist known as John Money, who convinced parents to raise one of their sons as a girl after a botched circumcision, forced the young boy to simulate sex with his brother who hadn't had a botched circumcision, gave them 'genital inspections', and then later proclaimed it was the first successful sex reassignment (the boy lived a short life of psychological agony between the sexual abuse by the doctor and the 'reassignment' as a girl which he later found out about - both boys committed suicide).

Oh, and this is a thing he said:

"If I were to see the case of a boy aged ten or eleven who's intensely erotically attracted toward a man in his twenties or thirties, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the bonding is genuinely totally mutual [...] then I would not call it pathological in any way."

So yeah, that's where your 'gender' as a social concept came from. Real lovely.
 
Nedsk said:
As a reminder the question from the first thread was:

Do you think someone with XY chromosomes and a penis who presents as a woman is actually a woman?

His has been difficult for people to answer so I thought I'd try something different.

Let's say you are a plumber, or a doctor or a scientist, would you hire someone who presented as a plumber, or a doctor or a scientist? If Yes, why? If No, why not? Thank you
Click to expand...
are you referring to gender?
 
CrowCross said:
It's amazing how the libs here side with the sickness.
Click to expand...
I find it amazing how right-wingers are so obsessed with other people’s sexuality after so many examples of them secretly being attracted to the things they are so vocal against.

Every Republican accusation is a confession.
 
Backup said:
I find it amazing how right-wingers are so obsessed with other people’s sexuality after so many examples of them secretly being attracted to the things they are so vocal against.

Every Republican accusation is a confession.
Click to expand...
Thats because you dont know what you are talking about. Sexuality is the sexual desire, the OP is about the biological sex.
 
BMS said:
Chromosomes, penis and woman are all terms of biological sex.. So what do you mean by gender?
Click to expand...
feigned ignorance

Do we not all get the terminology, yet?

We’ve been through this countless times

It doesn’t matter if you don’t like it.
 
CrowCross said:
Well, first of all you have a young adult boy....possibly alone in a bathroom with a young women....why? You do the math.
Click to expand...
Mothers frequently take their young kids into the women's bathroom. I did the math on it, and as far as I can tell, nothing bad happens.

Nearly every domestic bathroom in this country is used by both men and women. Several of us have pointed out that men and women routinely use public / professional bathrooms together without incident.

The math doesn't support your claim that it'd be "sick" for a high school aged boy to use a women's bathroom.
 
mikeT said:
Mothers frequently take their young kids into the women's bathroom. I did the math on it, and as far as I can tell, nothing bad happens.

Nearly every domestic bathroom in this country is used by both men and women. Several of us have pointed out that men and women routinely use public / professional bathrooms together without incident.

The math doesn't support your claim that it'd be "sick" for a high school aged boy to use a women's bathroom.
Click to expand...
That is just naivety.
 
Nedsk said:
As a reminder the question from the first thread was:

Do you think someone with XY chromosomes and a penis who presents as a woman is actually a woman?
Click to expand...
When we say that they "present" as a woman, we're explicitly referring to their persona or identity rather than a biological fact. In other words, you've already adopted their narrative.
Nedsk said:
His has been difficult for people to answer so I thought I'd try something different.

Let's say you are a plumber, or a doctor or a scientist, would you hire someone who presented as a plumber, or a doctor or a scientist? If Yes, why? If No, why not? Thank you
Click to expand...
This reminds me of the difference between the verb to be in Spanish. There are two of them; "ser" and "estar".

Estar deals with the condition or the “how” aspect of an object or person. It is used to depict the mood or the condition of an object or person. Ser relates to the location of an item as well as a person or a group of people.

Ser is used to refer to the physical aspect and the “what” of an object or person. Ser is used to define physical characteristics such as colour, texture and so on if the verb is directed to an object. It also depicts personality and character as, gender, race and nationality. Ser is used to relate to the identity of an object or a human being. In referring to “what” an apple is, the verb ser is used.

The debate becomes much more convoluted when we ignore these distinctions because one side is presenting a gender using one idea while the other is using the other. Although, it also appears that those who "present" as a woman are conflating the two as well. They have a group identity, yet they also indulge in stereotypes, fixed mannerisms, etc. They insist not only that one must view them a certain way, but that these views must conform to a certain set of norms, customs, styles, etc.

With regards to your analogy, there isn't enough information to be of much use due to the fact that most people do accept and patronize those who present themselves as plumbers, doctors, and scientists without really going into any depth to ascertain if their credentials are legitimate.


We already have some states presenting documents that offer more than a few options for gender/sex to establish and legitimize them.

I've gone to see one doctor after another who had a wall of diplomas from reputable universities, and yet I will never go back to any of them ever again because they're clueless how to treat people who are sick with anything other than tests that are predominantly inconclusive, surgeries, and prescribing petrochemicals that they know almost nothing about.
 
shnarkle said:
When we say that they "present" as a woman, we're explicitly referring to their persona or identity rather than a biological fact. In other words, you've already adopted their narrative.

This reminds me of the difference between the verb to be in Spanish. There are two of them; "ser" and "estar".

Estar deals with the condition or the “how” aspect of an object or person. It is used to depict the mood or the condition of an object or person. Ser relates to the location of an item as well as a person or a group of people.

Ser is used to refer to the physical aspect and the “what” of an object or person. Ser is used to define physical characteristics such as colour, texture and so on if the verb is directed to an object. It also depicts personality and character as, gender, race and nationality. Ser is used to relate to the identity of an object or a human being. In referring to “what” an apple is, the verb ser is used.

The debate becomes much more convoluted when we ignore these distinctions because one side is presenting a gender using one idea while the other is using the other. Although, it also appears that those who "present" as a woman are conflating the two as well. They have a group identity, yet they also indulge in stereotypes, fixed mannerisms, etc. They insist not only that one must view them a certain way, but that these views must conform to a certain set of norms, customs, styles, etc.

With regards to your analogy, there isn't enough information to be of much use due to the fact that most people do accept and patronize those who present themselves as plumbers, doctors, and scientists without really going into any depth to ascertain if their credentials are legitimate.


We already have some states presenting documents that offer more than a few options for gender/sex to establish and legitimize them.

I've gone to see one doctor after another who had a wall of diplomas from reputable universities, and yet I will never go back to any of them ever again because they're clueless how to treat people who are sick with anything other than tests that are predominantly inconclusive, surgeries, and prescribing petrochemicals that they know almost nothing about.
Click to expand...
Good post. The crux of the matter however is one is based on observable reality that applies to all whereas the other is just what a few people feel
 
Last edited:
BMS said:
Thats what you guys say everytime. Its not been answered at all. Perhaps you can clear it up once and for all.
What is this gender you call male and female as opposed to the biological sex? We know what male/man and woman/female are in terms of biological sex but what are they in terms of gender as opposed to biological sex?
Click to expand...
Already repeatedly answered. It can't be cleared up "once and for all" because no matter what I say, tomorrow or next week in some other thread you or someone else will be falsely saying it's never been answered.

BMS said:
Clearly since so many keep are asking you, it is preventing communication.
Click to expand...
If it were preventing communication we wouldn't be communicating.

BMS said:
No they arent. What are you imagining this gender you call male and female is, as opposed to the biological sex? We know what male/man and woman/female are in terms of biological sex but what are they in terms of gender as opposed to biological sex?
Click to expand...
Already repeatedly answered.

BMS said:
I am not.
Click to expand...
Of course you are. All you do now is make excuses for it.

BMS said:
They arent always right. they get corrupted sometimes.
Click to expand...
Complete unsupported nonsense. They document popular usage. That you don't like what a word has come to mean doesn't mean that documenting that meaning is "corrupted.

BMS said:
here is a definition.
either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female.
Makes no sense. Who wrote that?
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense to anybody with a modicum of understanding of the English language.

BMS said:
either of the two sexes (male and female), So it is the sex then! You said it wasn't and referred to female gender with male sex. So you dont understand the definition.
Click to expand...
Just...give up. Really.

BMS said:
especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. Contradiction, either it is the two sexes or it isnt, sex is immutable.
Click to expand...
Your comment doesn't even make sense.

BMS said:
So that is a denial of the biological sex. QED
Click to expand...
No, it's not.

BMS said:
So no such thing as gender identity and its use as concept is to dent biological sex. Its a lie
Click to expand...
The dictionary says you are wrong. And no, it doesn't deny biological sex.

BMS said:
Not according to the dictionary definition which relates to biological sex. You dont understand what you are imagining chap!
Click to expand...
Still wrong.

BMS said:
No not done. What is this gender you call male and female as opposed to the biological sex? We know what male/man and woman/female are in terms of biological sex but what are they in terms of gender as opposed to biological sex?
Click to expand...
Already repeatedly answerd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top