Men, Women, Sex and Gender

[Nedsk]

You've already been told that, repeatedly. I created an entire thread outlining it.


No, that makes us look stupid to conservative so-called Christians, like yourself. As repeatedly stated, the rest of the western world is much more liberal than the US, and what makes us look stupid to the rest of the word is conservative things like being anti-trans, Trumpism and creaitonism.

so tell us again what is a woman? Im not inclined to search out anything you write

 

[Backup]

MSN

www.msn.com

Why not just a jar of pills and a little plastic surgery?

How do they 'know" she is a girl?

Pretty big screw up.

They deserve to be sued.

I understand you got all hot and bothered by this story because it involves gay people.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Nope, woman is the adult female which is biological sex. you are using the word gender to deny the biological sex.

I cant believe a person cannot see the reality. Must be a spirit blinding the reality

Mark Twain said that it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.

Romans 1 spells out those given over to a delusion.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Pretty big screw up.

They deserve to be sued.

I understand you got all hot and bothered by this story because it involves gay people.

You don't understand. The little girl has not yet chosen her "gender".

 

[Crazy Ivan]

Again, that's simply false. One small section of feminists are anti-trans. The movement overall is pro-trans.

And citing one person as evidence that the "core of trans ideology" runs completely (or even partially or obliquely) counter to the core of feminists idealogy" fails badly, sorry. There is no viewpoint so far out as to have nobody who will support it, as you know.

I laid out the logic. It's actually pretty compelling. I also laid out why some feminists support trans ideology. It all has to do with the "fellowship of the oppressed", but the underlying ideology of trans people is exactly opposite that of feminism. Sorry. It just is.

 

[Nedsk]

Pretty big screw up.

They deserve to be sued.

I understand you got all hot and bothered by this story because it involves gay people.

Why? Just tell them they are boys

 

[Crazy Ivan]

What you don’t seem to grasp is we really don’t care how adults dress and self-identify.

I don't either. I couldn't care less how Lia Thomas wants to dress and identify.

I *do* care that the rest of us aren't made somehow to pretend that Lia Thomas is actually a woman though.

We don’t get all hot and bothered about it.

I don't either. I do get a little hot and bothered when I'm told I have to agree with this delusion in order to truly be "accepting" someone, or that I am somehow compelled to go along with it. That's problematic. But how Lia Thomas wants to dress? Who cares? Not me.

 

[Nedsk]

I don't either. I couldn't care less how Lia Thomas wants to dress and identify.

I *do* care that the rest of us aren't made somehow to pretend that Lia Thomas is actually a woman though.



I don't either. I do get a little hot and bothered when I'm told I have to agree with this delusion in order to truly be "accepting" someone, or that I am somehow compelled to go along with it. That's problematic. But how Lia Thomas wants to dress? Who cares? Not me.

This is a favorite tactic of liberals to try and make people play along with their delusions. Like the press secretary telling us we didnt hear biden read from the teleprompter "Repeat that line". They want us to ignore our own ears

 

[Crazy Ivan]

I mean, @Electric Skeptic - what part of this is not true?

Society used to say, “you’re a real girl if you’re a female and you conform to our gender expectations. If you’re a female and you don’t conform, you’re a tomboy.”

This is true. Never until a relative handful of years ago did we as society ever consider that a person with XY chromosomes and a penis could *actually* be a girl. So a girl or woman was always a female. Gender was simply terminology to refer to one's biological sex. Thus a mother was a "female parent", a sister was a "female sibling", and a daughter was a "female offspring". Vice-versa for father, brother, and son.

But society also had expectations for what boys and girls "are like". Boys play with guns, girls play with dolls. Boys are doctors, girls are nurses. Etc.

So this point isn't false. Maybe society had it wrong, but what I'm saying about how society was is true.

Feminists came along and said, “you’re a real girl because you’re a female, whether or not you conform to society’s gender expectations. A tomboy is still a girl.”

This is also true. Feminists argued that you're a woman or girl if you're female, and you can be very "boy-like" in your appearance or your attitudes or your preferences, and you were no less a girl. You could enter fields normally restricted to, or dominated by, men, and you'd still be a woman. What made you a girl or woman was that you were FEMALE.

Maybe feminists were wrong about this, but this is precisely what feminist ideology says.

Trans ideologues came along and say, “you’re a real girl because you conform to society’s gender expectations, whether or not you’re a female. A tomboy is actually a boy.”

This is also true. This is exactly what trans ideology says. It says you're a girl if you think you're a girl, if you identify as a girl, regardless of whether you're male or female. It's what you and another poster have been arguing this whole time. You're a girl based on self-identification. But based on what? Based on what society says girls and boys (or women and men) ARE LIKE. Thus the claim that gender is a "social construct". So the determining factor of whether a person is a boy/man or girl/woman is their self-identification based on society's gender expectations.

Maybe trans ideologues are wrong, but I'm right about what their underlying philosophy IS. This is exactly what YOU have been arguing the whole time, so you can't possibly disagree with me on this.

I trust that people can see how and why gender ideology is contrary to feminist ideology, and why so many feminists who have fought against “a real girl is someone who confirms to society’s gender expectations” are soooooo against trans ideology. Trans ideology not only undoes everything the feminists fought for, but takes it even further back, so you now have actual MEN winning “Woman of the year” awards and Women’s NCAA championships.

But this is the logical conclusion: trans ideology is contrary to feminist ideology on what makes a person a boy/man or girl/woman. Again:

Society: A person's gender is a combination of their biological sex plus conforming to society's gender expectations.
Feminists: A person's gender is their biology regardless of conforming to society's gender expectations.
Trans ideologues: A person's gender is their self-identification based on conforming to society's gender expectations ("gender is a social construct") regardless of their biological sex.

I have not gotten any of this wrong. The conclusion is inescapable: feminist ideology and trans ideology are diametrically opposed to each other.

As to why feminists would link arms with trans people, politics makes for strange bedfellows. I mean, American democratic capitalism was at terrible odds against Soviet communism, yet the US and USSR were allies in WWII. Why? A common enemy: Hitler (and Japan too of course). That didn't mean that American democratic capitalism was of similar ideology to Soviet communism. Far from it. But they had a common enemy.

Same thing here. Both feminism and trans ideologues have a common enemy: traditional western Christianesque culture. Feminism wanted to overturn the social norms and gender expectations. Trans ideologues wanted to overturn society's linking of biological sex and gender. For both groups, pushing back against their "oppressors" meant that they are allies of sorts.

But like with the WWII example, this doesn't mean that their ideologies are similar. In fact, they're completely opposite. But...politics makes for strange bedfellows, so there you go.

It's just that feminists with their eyes open, wanting to stay true to their ideology, and also recognizing how offensive and self-defeating it is to see their gains wiped out by the trans movement, seeing men be "woman of the year" and "women's" NCAA champions, and women's spaces being invaded by men, have begun speaking out against it.

 

[Nedsk]

I mean, @Electric Skeptic - what part of this is not true?



This is true. Never until a relative handful of years ago did we as society ever consider that a person with XY chromosomes and a penis could *actually* be a girl. So a girl or woman was always a female. Gender was simply terminology to refer to one's biological sex. Thus a mother was a "female parent", a sister was a "female sibling", and a daughter was a "female offspring". Vice-versa for father, brother, and son.

But society also had expectations for what boys and girls "are like". Boys play with guns, girls play with dolls. Boys are doctors, girls are nurses. Etc.

So this point isn't false. Maybe society had it wrong, but what I'm saying about how society was is true.



This is also true. Feminists argued that you're a woman or girl if you're female, and you can be very "boy-like" in your appearance or your attitudes or your preferences, and you were no less a girl. You could enter fields normally restricted to, or dominated by, men, and you'd still be a woman. What made you a girl or woman was that you were FEMALE.

Maybe feminists were wrong about this, but this is precisely what feminist ideology says.



This is also true. This is exactly what trans ideology says. It says you're a girl if you think you're a girl, if you identify as a girl, regardless of whether you're male or female. It's what you and another poster have been arguing this whole time. You're a girl based on self-identification. But based on what? Based on what society says girls and boys (or women and men) ARE LIKE. Thus the claim that gender is a "social construct". So the determining factor of whether a person is a boy/man or girl/woman is their self-identification based on society's gender expectations.

Maybe trans ideologues are wrong, but I'm right about what their underlying philosophy IS. This is exactly what YOU have been arguing the whole time, so you can't possibly disagree with me on this.



But this is the logical conclusion: trans ideology is contrary to feminist ideology on what makes a person a boy/man or girl/woman. Again:

Society: A person's gender is a combination of their biological sex plus conforming to society's gender expectations.
Feminists: A person's gender is their biology regardless of conforming to society's gender expectations.
Trans ideologues: A person's gender is their self-identification based on conforming to society's gender expectations ("gender is a social construct") regardless of their biological sex.

I have not gotten any of this wrong. The conclusion is inescapable: feminist ideology and trans ideology are diametrically opposed to each other.

As to why feminists would link arms with trans people, politics makes for strange bedfellows. I mean, American democratic capitalism was at terrible odds against Soviet communism, yet the US and USSR were allies in WWII. Why? A common enemy: Hitler (and Japan too of course). That didn't mean that American democratic capitalism was of similar ideology to Soviet communism. Far from it. But they had a common enemy.

Same thing here. Both feminism and trans ideologues have a common enemy: traditional western Christianesque culture. Feminism wanted to overturn the social norms and gender expectations. Trans ideologues wanted to overturn society's linking of biological sex and gender. For both groups, pushing back against their "oppressors" meant that they are allies of sorts.

But like with the WWII example, this doesn't mean that their ideologies are similar. In fact, they're completely opposite. But...politics makes for strange bedfellows, so there you go.

It's just that feminists with their eyes open, wanting to stay true to their ideology, and also recognizing how offensive and self-defeating it is to see their gains wiped out by the trans movement, seeing men be "woman of the year" and "women's" NCAA champions, and women's spaces being invaded by men, have begun speaking out against it.

Its all circular "logic". A woman is someone who identifies as a woman. Whats a woman? Someone who identifies as woman. The 3 year old who uses a word they dont understand when defining the word. A door is a door.

 

[Crazy Ivan]

Its all circular "logic". A woman is someone who identifies as a woman. Whats a woman? Someone who identifies as woman. The 3 year old who uses a word they dont understand when defining the word. A door is a door.

Well whatever else trans ideology is, it is most certainly not "logical". Like....not remotely.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

I laid out the logic.

Well...you laid out an argument.

It's actually pretty compelling.

Actually, it's not. If it was, the majority of feminists would agree with it, instead of its being very much a minority positionas it is.

I also laid out why some feminists support trans ideology. It all has to do with the "fellowship of the oppressed",

No, you made an unsupported (and unsupportable) claim as to why the vast majority of feminists support trans.

but the underlying ideology of trans people is exactly opposite that of feminism. Sorry. It just is.

No, it's not. And the majority of feminists agree with me that it's not.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

I mean, @Electric Skeptic - what part of this is not true?

Lots of it.

This is true. Never until a relative handful of years ago did we as society ever consider that a person with XY chromosomes and a penis could *actually* be a girl. So a girl or woman was always a female. Gender was simply terminology to refer to one's biological sex. Thus a mother was a "female parent", a sister was a "female sibling", and a daughter was a "female offspring". Vice-versa for father, brother, and son.

But society also had expectations for what boys and girls "are like". Boys play with guns, girls play with dolls. Boys are doctors, girls are nurses. Etc.

So this point isn't false. Maybe society had it wrong, but what I'm saying about how society was is true.

That's true, to an extent.

This is also true. Feminists argued that you're a woman or girl if you're female, and you can be very "boy-like" in your appearance or your attitudes or your preferences, and you were no less a girl. You could enter fields normally restricted to, or dominated by, men, and you'd still be a woman. What made you a girl or woman was that you were FEMALE.

..and that's not true. At all. Transwomen can still be tomboys. Being trans is not about being what society expects or thinks either gender to be. You don't really think that transwomen are transwomen because they prefer pink over blue. Trans people are trans because they feel that they should be of the other sex, whatever they thing being that sex means, just as people who are biologically of that sex do whatever they think being that sex means.

Maybe feminists were wrong about this, but this is precisely what feminist ideology says.

No, it's not.

This is also true. This is exactly what trans ideology says. It says you're a girl if you think you're a girl, if you identify as a girl, regardless of whether you're male or female. It's what you and another poster have been arguing this whole time. You're a girl based on self-identification. But based on what? Based on what society says girls and boys (or women and men) ARE LIKE.

Nope. Wrong. Based on what you perceive as what that gender is like.

Thus the claim that gender is a "social construct". So the determining factor of whether a person is a boy/man or girl/woman is their self-identification based on society's gender expectations.

Same error.

Maybe trans ideologues are wrong, but I'm right about what their underlying philosophy IS. This is exactly what YOU have been arguing the whole time, so you can't possibly disagree with me on this.

I've already disagreed with you about this entire positio0n.

But this is the logical conclusion: trans ideology is contrary to feminist ideology on what makes a person a boy/man or girl/woman. Again:

There's nothing logical about it. It folllows only if you take the position that trans people become trans only to go along with some external thought of what their gender is or should be. That is not the case.

Society: A person's gender is a combination of their biological sex plus conforming to society's gender expectations.
Feminists: A person's gender is their biology regardless of conforming to society's gender expectations.
Trans ideologues: A person's gender is their self-identification based on conforming to society's gender expectations ("gender is a social construct") regardless of their biological sex.

Every one of those is false.

I have not gotten any ofhis wrong. The conclusion is inescapable: feminist ideology and trans ideology are diametrically opposed to each other.

You've gotten virtually all of it wrong. Your 'conclusion' is unsupported and feminist ideology and trans ideology are not opposed to each other. Which, surprise, surprise, is the opinion of the vast majority of the world's feminists.

As to why feminists would link arms with trans people, politics makes for strange bedfellows. I mean, American democratic capitalism was at terrible odds against Soviet communism, yet the US and USSR were allies in WWII. Why? A common enemy: Hitler (and Japan too of course). That didn't mean that American democratic capitalism was of similar ideology to Soviet communism. Far from it. But they had a common enemy.

Same thing here. Both feminism and trans ideologues have a common enemy: traditional western Christianesque culture. Feminism wanted to overturn the social norms and gender expectations. Trans ideologues wanted to overturn society's linking of biological sex and gender. For both groups, pushing back against their "oppressors" meant that they are allies of sorts.

But like with the WWII example, this doesn't mean that their ideologies are similar. In fact, they're completely opposite. But...politics makes for strange bedfellows, so there you go.

It's just that feminists with their eyes open, wanting to stay true to their ideology, and also recognizing how offensive and self-defeating it is to see their gains wiped out by the trans movement, seeing men be "woman of the year" and "women's" NCAA champions, and women's spaces being invaded by men, have begun speaking out against it.

This is just more of your unsupported (and unsupportable) explanation. A far more obvious explanation is that feminists support the trans ideology because they see its validity and justice and want to support transwomen just as they do biological women.

Your position boils down to "If only the world's feminists would see feminism as I (a male) do, becuase I know better than them what feminism is.". Sorry, but there's nothing compelling about that argument.

 

[Nedsk]

Well whatever else trans ideology is, it is most certainly not "logical". Like....not remotely.

Yeah I was using the word sarcastically.

 

[Nedsk]

Lots of it.

That's true, to an extent.


..and that's not true. At all. Transwomen can still be tomboys. Being trans is not about being what society expects or thinks either gender to be. You don't really think that transwomen are transwomen because they prefer pink over blue. Trans people are trans because they feel that they should be of the other sex, whatever they thing being that sex means, just as people who are biologically of that sex do whatever they think being that sex means.

No, it's not.

Nope. Wrong. Based on what you perceive as what that gender is like.

Same error.

I've already disagreed with you about this entire positio0n.

There's nothing logical about it. It folllows only if you take the position that trans people become trans only to go along with some external thought of what their gender is or should be. That is not the case.

Every one of those is false.

You've gotten virtually all of it wrong. Your 'conclusion' is unsupported and feminist ideology and trans ideology are not opposed to each other. Which, surprise, surprise, is the opinion of the vast majority of the world's feminists.

This is just more of your unsupported (and unsupportable) explanation. A far more obvious explanation is that feminists support the trans ideology because they see its validity and justice and want to support transwomen just as they do biological women.

Your position boils down to "If only the world's feminists would see feminism as I (a male) do, becuase I know better than them what feminism is.". Sorry, but there's nothing compelling about that argument.

The best part of your posts are the funny parts where you think declaring something makes it true. Kind of like your reply to what's a woman.

 

[Crazy Ivan]

Well...you laid out an argument.

It's perfectly logical. Each premise is true, and the conclusion logically follows from the premises. Thus, it's valid AND sound.

I.e., it's logical.

I'm sorry if you don't like it.

Actually, it's not. If it was, the majority of feminists would agree with it, instead of its being very much a minority positionas it is.

The majority of Americans supported allying with Stalin in WWII too. Why? Because politics makes strange bedfellows.

No, you made an unsupported (and unsupportable) claim as to why the vast majority of feminists support trans.

No, it's not. And the majority of feminists agree with me that it's not.

See above.

 

[BMS]

No, "he" not.


Strawman. Nobody suggests or implies it does.


No, it doesn't, nor can you or anybody else show it does.


That "biological sex is immutable" does not mean that "a person's gender cannot be the opposite of their biological sex".


Woman is also gender.

Nope. Biological sex is immutable and male/man, female/woman are the terms for biological sex.

 

[BMS]

What you don’t seem to grasp is we really don’t care how adults dress and self-identify.

We don’t get all hot and bothered about it.

What you cant grasp is that isnt the point. Our issue is that you dont get the lie of gender identity ideology

 

[BMS]

Yet the vast majority of feminists disagrees, and Dansky's is very much a minority view.

Yet what Dansky describes is the reality of biological sex, and that is not only a majority view but also the reality.

 

[BMS]

Again, that's simply false. One small section of feminists are anti-trans. The movement overall is pro-trans.

And citing one person as evidence that the "core of trans ideology" runs completely (or even partially or obliquely) counter to the core of feminists idealogy" fails badly, sorry. There is no viewpoint so far out as to have nobody who will support it, as you know.

EDITED--BORDERLINE RULE 12