• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Ziggurat said:
I think Mathew's objection about gender being able to change is less important than the fact that it's not observable. As you say, you can find it out by asking them. But that's precisely the problem with using it for ID: you cannot determine it by observation, but ONLY by asking.
Click to expand...
I don't think "ONLY" is correct here, much less ALL CAPS level correct. Most people who identify as men or women (whether cisgender or transgender) tend to present themselves to the public wearing clothing obtained from either the men's or the women's department of their local clothier, at least most of the time. This allows us to make reasonable inferences from gender expression to gender identity.

Moreover, you seem to be arguing here that we determine sex by direct observation, but that's not really true. We observe secondary sex characteristics only and then make statistical inferences about probable sex at birth. We will come up with the wrong answer whenever someone has had enough cross-sex treatments (not to mention genetic luck) to pass as the opposite sex.

Since it is easy to mistake a passing trans (wo)man for a (wo)man, "gender" is helpful information to have in addition to birth sex, which would prove more confusing than helpful in such cases.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
That's a very circular and empty explanation - it provides no useful meaning whatsoever.
Click to expand...
It tells you whether someone sees themselves as a woman or as a man; you are welcome to find that useful or not as you see fit.

Emily's Cat said:
You're pretty much arguing that a woman is anyone who says they're a woman.
Click to expand...
No, I'm telling you what gender means, as you asked me to do. Please do not mischaracterize my statements here.
 
d4m10n said:
I don't think "ONLY" is correct here
Click to expand...

Under self-ID, it is. You can only determine someone's gender by asking them. There is no other method to determine gender, that's the entire point of self-ID. If someone else asked for you, and you're relying on that previous answer, that's still asking them.

Most people who identify as men or women (whether cisgender or transgender) tend to present themselves to the public wearing clothing obtained from either the men's or the women's department of their local clothier, at least most of the time. This allows us to make reasonable inferences from gender expression to gender identity.
Click to expand...

Which means that you can guess with a high percentage accuracy. But guessing correctly is different than knowing. If you accept self ID, you cannot know, even in principle, without asking.

Moreover, you seem to be arguing here that we determine sex by direct observation, but that's not really true.
Click to expand...

In practice we don't tend to bother, but it's possible. And that's my point. We don't tend to weigh people we meet either, but we could.

Since it is easy to mistake a passing trans (wo)man for a (wo)man, "gender" is helpful information to have in addition to birth sex, which would prove more confusing than helpful in such cases.
Click to expand...

That's the key bit, though. The TRA's don't want gender in addition to sex, they want it instead of sex.

But I'm struggling to see a realistic case where you can observe a person, note their sex from their ID, and then be confused about what they're trying to pass as. If they're presenting as a woman and you know that they're male, then it seems safe to assume that they're trans. How does noting their gender on the ID really help?
 
Ziggurat said:
If you accept self ID, you cannot know, even in principle, without asking.
Click to expand...
People lie about their own subjective mental states oftentimes, so you can never really know, much like when someone refuses to tell you they are in physical pain.

Ziggurat said:
The TRA's don't want gender in addition to sex, they want it instead of sex.
Click to expand...
Which would be made perfectly clear if some jurisdiction were to implement both sex and gender. I don't believe the majority of places that have already made this accommodation understand that the goal is to supersede the one with the other.

Ziggurat said:
But I'm struggling to see a realistic case where you can observe a person, note their sex from their ID, and then be confused about what they're trying to pass as.
Click to expand...
I've definitely been confused on occasion myself, but maybe those folks were deliberately performing androgeny. Anyhow, the identification information is on state-issued i.d.'s doesn't live only on the i.d. itself, it also lives in government databases and can be accessed by the sort of people who need to i.d. a suspect or a body.
 
d4m10n said:
People lie about their own subjective mental states oftentimes, so you can never really know, much like when someone refuses to tell you they are in physical pain.
Click to expand...

Under self-ID as the TRA's want it, you cannot lie about this. Whatever you say is axiomatically true. It is true because you said it.
 
Aber said:
To show how strange the discussion has got



https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2024/07/why-are-british-doctors-voting-to-reject-the-cass-report
Click to expand...

I was curious to see if anything had come of this. Googling 'BMA Cass' found this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2l7ze7m0o

British Medical Association (BMA) leaders have met to discuss the approach being taken to children and young people struggling with their gender identity.

The union’s senior doctors debated the Cass review on Wednesday at a meeting of its council – the BMA's top decision-making body.

Ahead of the meeting, a council member questioned the way the review was carried out and called the ban on puberty blockers "terrible".

Meanwhile, the New Statesman has reported that a motion proposing the BMA “publicly disavow” the review was to be debated.

The BMA described the magazine's claim as misleading but refused to release details of the motion voted on.

It did say that the Cass review was debated alongside the “woefully inadequate” provision of services for children and young people with gender dysphoria.
Click to expand...
 
Pixel42 said:
I was curious to see if anything had come of this. Googling 'BMA Cass' found this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2l7ze7m0o
Click to expand...

Apparently the BMA criticized Hannah Barnes for having written the New Statesman article and are refusing to say whether the vote was undertaken, and if so, what the outcome was.

I suspect they were hoping to push this through quietly and are upset at the exposure. There are committed activists in the governing body of the BMA.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I see myself as the emperor of the known universe. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Self-ID is a thing apparently. This is how my neighbour's dog sees himself when someone knocks on the door!

DogPerception2.jpg
 
Elaedith said:
What do the different versions say? I just looked up their definition online and it still says adult human female.
Click to expand...

I suggest you look up their definition of female

a: of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggs
b: having a gender identity that is the opposite of male
Click to expand...
 
That was my fault, implying that "woman" was directly in play at M-W. It is only indirectly in play by way of "female," at least for now.
 
d4m10n said:
I don't think "ONLY" is correct here, much less ALL CAPS level correct. Most people who identify as men or women (whether cisgender or transgender) tend to present themselves to the public wearing clothing obtained from either the men's or the women's department of their local clothier, at least most of the time. This allows us to make reasonable inferences from gender expression to gender identity.

Moreover, you seem to be arguing here that we determine sex by direct observation, but that's not really true. We observe secondary sex characteristics only and then make statistical inferences about probable sex at birth. We will come up with the wrong answer whenever someone has had enough cross-sex treatments (not to mention genetic luck) to pass as the opposite sex.

Since it is easy to mistake a passing trans (wo)man for a (wo)man, "gender" is helpful information to have in addition to birth sex, which would prove more confusing than helpful in such cases.
Click to expand...

d4m10n, what has occurred in your life that has shifted your view on this so substantially from what it was just a year ago? For a while, I thought you were playing Devil's Advocate, but now I'm not so sure of that.

You're now seem to be pretty well embracing gender identity and the notion that everyone "identifies" as a "man" or a "woman", as well as the language of "cisgender". Then you throw in arguments that are on the ragged edge of "you can't actually tell what someone's sex is, it's just an educated guess and you're likely to be wrong".

It's actually NOT easy to mistake a transwoman for an actual female human being. The overwhelming majority don't come anywhere near to passing, and those that do have had immense amounts of cosmetic surgery.
 
d4m10n said:
Which would be made perfectly clear if some jurisdiction were to implement both sex and gender. I don't believe the majority of places that have already made this accommodation understand that the goal is to supersede the one with the other.
Click to expand...

You seem to be working from the assumption that everyone has a gender identity. I don't accept that assumption. Putting both elements on ID cards is effectively forcing everyone in that society to play make-believe so that a minority of people can have euphoria about their ID cards.

It's about as useful and meaningful as requiring that everyone must put their religion on their ID Cards, and then to go that extra step and insist that atheism is a religion too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom