[Manco]

Right so you make a point about assigning sex at birth conflates sex and gender. Except the concept of gender as peddled by trans people and their enablers only exists to justify why transwomen are actually real women. It otherwise has no usefulness.

The concept of gender as separate from sex is generally the currently accepted model, you act as though it’s just some crackpot conspiracy. It also exists to help us examine gender roles, societal expectations of gender, etc – it does more than just explain the existence of trans people, although that’s also useful.

Besides, the existence of trans people challenges our outdated concepts of gender; we shouldn't stick to old models just because we’re more familiar with them, we have a duty to re-examine and update where necessary.

If you were to ask Joe Bloggs on the street for a definition of gender it would almost certainly have something to do with biology. So asserting that assigning sex conflates sex and gender is wrong because a vast majority of the population has no concept of gender; the doctor is simply making a factual biological observation.

Firstly, Joe Bloggs on the street is not going to be an expert in psychology, biology or gender roles in society, so his definition on gender isn’t going to help us. Appealing to how the vast majority of the population defines gender as proof of how gender should be defined is unhelpful; this isn’t a topic that can be settled just by popular opinion.

Second, if Joe Bloggs’ idea of gender is based only on biology then that would indicate that our society does conflate gender with sex.

Yes, the doctor is simply making a factual observation, I wasn’t arguing that this wasn’t the case; but what happens after is that gender is assigned based on that doctor’s observation, and many decisions about a child’s life are made based on that. This isn’t any fault of the doctors’, this is just how societal expectations work. For most people, this is fine; but for the minority who go on to experience a mismatch between assigned and experienced gender, it can cause problems.

I’m not someone with strong opinions about this topic, and I’m not arguing for anything like ignoring a child’s sex or gender until they grow up or anything like that at all. I am just pointing out how conflating sex with gender can cause problems.

The idea that womanhood has a basis in anything other than biological reality is sexist and reactionary; the notion of gender implies that there is a proper and improper way for males and females to behave.

If something comes along to challenge our existing understanding of something then it is right to study and to adjust our understanding based on the new information; that is not reactionary, it is sensible adaptation.

The concept of gender as separate from sex does not imply what you say it does, it merely recognizes that our society typically assigns certain behaviors to different genders and there are expectations of conformity. It is not sexist to recognize those expectations.

Now, many trans people work to conform to those expectations; I’d argue that this is largely due to societal pressure, the need to be accepted by the Joe Bloggs of the world who will judge them by their conformity. It is not sexist for someone to want to conform to those expectations; however we can acknowledge that the expectations themselves may have sexist roots.

And, as I explained in my last post on the topic, the “biological reality” is far from clear-cut – pretty much all of the biological identifiers for sex (including genitals) can deviate from the “biological reality”.

People should be free to behave regardless of sexist cultural pressures, to say that a man acting in a way traditionally seen as feminine must therefore be a woman reduces womanhood to sexist stereotypes.

Yes, people should be free to live outside of sexist cultural pressures, I’m not arguing against this and you’ll find a lot of LGBTI+ people would also agree with you. But that does also include the freedom to identify as the appropriate gender.

Gender identity is not a categorization system in the way you describe it as, where people are arbitrarily assigned an identity based on how they act; it comes from the individuals’ decisions and how they choose to identify based on an internal understanding of their gender. No one is going around saying “this guy has watched too many chick-flicks and is therefore being reassigned”.

No one is arguing that a man acting in a way traditionally seen as feminine must therefore be a woman; the way a person acts is simply their personal expression of themselves. Gender identity can inform that expression – if someone identifies as a woman then they may be motivated to express that by acting in a traditionally feminine manner; but of course they should not be obligated to.

So yes, I do see transwomen as men pretending to be women.


You are going to say that's a mean and bigoted thing to say, and that is your right. But I feel many trans advocates are guilty of projecting their contradictory ideology onto others. It's almost like you believe that everyone has a concept of this magical gender identity and believe that males and females are simply people who identity as such, but there is some conspiracy wherein we must identify with whatever the birthing doctor chose for us.

Yes, I do believe everyone has an innate concept of gender, but that’s not a magical fairy story, it’s generally accepted theory. After all, the very existence of trans people is living proof that gender exists outside of physical anatomy.

Gender identity is determined by the brain – most people simply don’t notice because their identity matches their physical anatomy, and thus they conform to societal expectations. They never have to go through the gauntlet that trans people do; maybe they have some traits that don’t conform to traditional masculine or feminine roles, but nothing too far out of the ordinary.

It’s not “some conspiracy”, just societal expectations.

If I say a woman is an adult female human and therefore someone who is biologically male can not by definition be a woman, I fail to see how I am being bigoted; I'm just recognising the reality of sex.

You are being bigoted in two ways: first by using an outdated definition of gender to decide who qualifies to be a man or woman, and then by refusing to respect the gender identity of a person who has chosen to transition.

If someone wants to be identified by a certain gender, it is not difficult to respect that – using the right name, the right pronouns, etc is not difficult, and it doesn’t hurt anyone. To intentionally ignore that and use a person’s birth sex as justification to do so despite the advances in our understanding of gender identity is bigoted.

I'm not trying to force any particular behaviours onto him, he should live out his life as he wills. Yet no matter how much lipstick and dresses he wears he will never be a woman and that is alright because it doesn't change anything; it is only a word.

Of course you’re not trying to force any particular behaviors onto her, you’re just … asserting that her identity isn’t valid and that she is and will always be a man, no matter what?

It may just be a word to you, but it has deep connotations – especially to a trans person who is seeking acceptance in a society that often disrespects, marginalizes or attacks them.