GC: Can you debunk every one of the arguments Andrew Carter made in this long thread in response to JK Rowling?

submitted by [deleted] from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]emptiedriver 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

You need to start engaging in these threads or responding to people who put time into posting answers to you if you want to get thoughtful and detailed arguments. I am not going to go through every one of these when I expect you will just disappear, but yes, they can all be refuted.

What I will say is that his biggest confusion is 1d, where he says:

"1d. The distinction between the truth and JK's mischaracterisation is important - because no one is arguing that sex is not determined by biology.

This is a common transphobic attack to cast trans (and NB/intersex) rights in an absolutist light to make them seem absurd."

Yeah, no, they ARE absurd. They ARE arguing that sex is not determined by biology. Either absolutely blatantly and literally, or sometimes a little more confusedly by just saying that biology doesn't matter and everything which we have determined by biology in the past such as sports teams, private areas, medical treatments, statistics, sexual attraction and so on, should now be determined simply by someone's claim to identity. If you concede that sex is determined by biology but maintain it is not the difference between men and women then what are you even saying?

This is the key argument and really the issue which can make the rest of them clear. Trans women are biologically men. They may be welcome into women's circles in some contexts, but they cannot be expected to be categorized as women legally, medically, or automatically. That's just not the biological truth, and discussing that or how to handle that should not be a problem.

[–]SnowAssMan 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Yep, every time they argue for trans-women to be included in women's single-sex spaces, like sports & prisons they are indirectly saying that sex is not real.

Not only is sex real, but so is the gendered socialisation that accompanies it, which results in the gendered tendencies, behavioural patterns & overall social existence of a person. This is something nobody seems to acknowledge. This said thing is actually: gender. That's right, despite gender & sex being different, everyone's sex & gender are congruent, the only exceptions being some intersex people & people who were brought up female despite being male due to penile ablation or something similar.

Every trans person whose sex was unambiguous to their parents received the gendered socialisation associated with their sex, not their preferred sex, meaning a trans person's sex is congruent with their gender. Their gendered upbringing ensured that.

[–]emptiedriver 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Not only is sex real, but so is the gendered socialisation that accompanies it, which results in the gendered tendencies, behavioural patterns & overall social existence of a person. This is something nobody seems to acknowledge... despite gender & sex being different, everyone's sex & gender are congruent

Well, being GC, I'm not sure I can agree with you on that, and I'm not even sure what you mean. "gender" is too broad a concept to say everyone is congruent. There are men and women of all different sorts, and certainly many who do not conform to expectations or typical behaviors. Do they share certain underlying socialization? I would say so, but there is still a lot of variance. Do they behave outwardly according to expected norms? definitely not.

The one thing we can be sure is true is the biological distinction - that is not complicated at all, you're one or the other. Exactly how gender works is a minefield like asking about ethics or free will or beauty or any other abstract concept of the human experience. It can seem simple enough but you'll find people disagree on the boundaries and details and can fight over it all day. Sex is like asking if the planet is round or gravity exists. It's just an established fact. We shouldn't be having fights over that.

[–]SnowAssMan 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I'm talking about gender identity. Our gender identity is congruent with our sex, because we live in a gendered culture, our parents are from said culture, they gave us a gendered upbringing. That's why gender exists to begin with.

Studies show that parents give their male infants attention when they whine, scream, grunt etc, but only give female infants that attention if they use words or gentle touches. They also play rougher with male infants & talk more to female ones. This produces two separate cultures. Those cultures are called: gender.

Why do trans-men attend voice therapy? Don't the hormones take care of that? No, because even our voices are gendered. Why do trans-womxyn have to try their hardest to stop walking, talking, even gesturing like men & start doing so like women, while never 100% succeeding? Gender is conditioned based on sex.

Behavioural patterns:

More women than men attempt suicide, likewise more trans-men than trans-womxyn attempt suicide

More men than women commit crimes, likewise more trans-womxyn than trans-men commit crimes

Men are overrepresented in media & high positions compared to women, likewise trans-womxyn are overrepresented in those same areas compared to trans-men.

The same is true of gay men vs. lesbians. Trans people & homosexuals may be GNC superficially, but that doesn't mean they behave like the opposite sex. The trends in behaviour reveal that they are still gender conforming in every meaningful way. What we perceive as femininity in GNC men, or masculinity in GNC women is a very male version of femininity & female version of masculinity, respectively, that you don't actually see in their gender conforming counterparts.

Gender distinctions we can be sure are true. It's sociology. Science & business depend on people conforming to their demographics. It's a legitimate science that billion dollar industries can depend on, so so can feminism. It's one of the most integral parts of feminism. Simone de Beauvoir explained all this in a 1975 interview:

"that formula (One is not born but made a woman) is the basis of all my theories & it's meaning is very simple: that being a woman is not a natural fact. It's a result of a certain history. There is no biological or psychological destiny that defines a woman as such. She is the product of a history, of civilisation, first of all, which has resulted in her current status. And secondary for each individual woman of her personal history in particular, that of her childhood. This determines her as a woman, creates in her something which is not at all innate, or an essence, something which has been called the "eternal feminine", or femininity. The more we study the psychology of children the deeper we delve, the more evident it becomes that baby girls are manufactured to become women [...] Long before a child is conscious, the way it is breastfed, or held, or rocked etc. inscribes in its body what might later appear a destiny".

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We don't all fit norms though even if we are taught them. Like, I was raised as a boy, but it didn't take for me the same way it did for my older brothers and made me unhappy and upset. Even things like my mannerisms and speech marked me as different from other boys even if I didn't want to be. I'm not saying those things made me a girl, but saying we always have a gender identity that matched our sex just isn't true for way you are using that word.

[–]emptiedriver 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Behavioural patterns: More women than men...

Right, but that's not all women or men. If you're talking patterns, then there are still a percentage who don't fit the norms.

100% of women have female reproductive systems vs male reproductive systems. THat's not a pattern, that's just a fact. The gendered patterns that arise from sociological upbringing and culture treatment are far more complicated and exactly why some people can claim that they're some of that "less" percentage that are different.

Personally I would say they're connected and that the body you have leads to gendered tendencies which lead to social patterns and a feedback loop, but it's arguable, which is my point. There are different theories about how the genders work, and they're defendable. There are no rational theories of any other sexual system except male and female and the very clear physical distinction between them that we understand. In fact it really starts to become a kind of "nature vs nurture" discussion at some point, which is a pointless exercise. If gender is necessarily the same as the sex you are born with, why not just call it sex? Maybe it's hormones, maybe it's how you're treated, who really knows, but it's pretty abstract to say which is which at some point

To me, the important thing to clarify is just the two sexes because that's the part that is clear cut and that makes an actual difference in things like statistics, sports teams, locker rooms and the rest. Gender theory can be interesting but let's not get lost in the fog.

[–]SnowAssMan 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Right, but that's not all women or men

Wha? Where are the exceptions? Where are the trans-womxyn who don't need to train themselves hard not to conform to their gendered conditioning only to somewhat emulate women, superficially & in an androcentric way? The same trends can be found within the microcosm of GNC exceptions: homosexuals & trans people. You mean it's not a stark enough difference? As in, not all women attempt suicide, & not all men never attempt suicide?

If gender is necessarily the same as the sex you are born with, why not just call it sex?

Wha? Why would we re-name 'nurture' 'nature', why would we erase social determinism, by calling it biological determinism? How are we meant to talk about class then – it's not biologically determined? Culture is relevant. There are two distinct cultures passed down to the sexes. Sex is just biology, gender is culture. Discussions on gender were necessary & relevant before the idea that they could be mismatched came about. From a "trans-womxyn are women" perspective gender serves no other function apart from its ability to be mismatched. How can a GC feminist believe the same? Understanding genders as two separate cultures that the male & female sexes are inculcated with by our parents from an early age is integral to be able to engage in feminist discourse, I would have thought.

Understanding of gender separate from sex is important for many reasons, one use helps us understand intersex women with CAIS for instance. They are male, they have internal testes that produce non-viable sperm, but their bodies don't process androgens correctly, so they appear "female" outwardly (actually, nature reverts to default, which looks identical to female, since asexual reproduction requires birth & breast feeding). They are incorrectly identified as female & so receive our culture's designated gendered upbringing accordingly. They end up walking, talking, sounding, acting, moving like women, despite being male – now that's how you do transitioning. The "trans-womxyn are women" brigade pretend the same is possible for trans-womxyn via blockers & hormones & speech therapy, while failing miserably.

Sex is not the same as gender, the fact that they can't be mismatched (except in people with CAIS) does not undermine this fact. Sex is not the cause, sex is the catalyst, socialisation is the cause & socialisation-concordant gendered behaviour is the effect.

[–]emptiedriver 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

As in, not all women attempt suicide, & not all men never attempt suicide?

Right, an individual can claim not to meet the specific determinations of the gender. It's defined by general standards. Sex is not general, everyone has the same standard that anyone can tell as soon as the baby is born (or a doctor can tell even before, now).

Wha? Why would we re-name 'nurture' 'nature', why would we erase social determinism, by calling it biological determinism? How are we meant to talk about class then – it's not biologically determined? Culture is relevant.

Look, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, only saying that this is a whole gigantic complicated discussion rather than a simple fact, and what's important at the moment is getting the facts right.

They are incorrectly identified as female & so receive our culture's designated gendered upbringing accordingly. They end up walking, talking, sounding, acting, moving like women, despite being male – now that's how you do transitioning.

Mm, well maybe I am disagreeing with you... so if someone could be incorrectly identified as female early enough they could become the other sex?

I mean, in any case, I'm not arguing over whether something is determined by biology or culture. I'm only arguing over whether biology or culture is absolute. What it results in is not the point. Sure, maybe all people raised as female have certain things in common, maybe not, maybe all people with female hormones have things in common, maybe not: that isn't what I'm focused on here. All I am asking is that we categorize people correctly. People can have male or female reproductive systems, period. Those are physically distinct types of human beings who have different growth charts, puberty experiences, health risks, and bodily capacities. That is just a fact.

We can argue about whether some things should be co-ed but it makes no sense to argue whether some things should be gender-based instead of sex-based. "Gender" is too indeterminate a concept to base a category on. Either it is as you say, directly based on sex anyway, or it is some kind of vague notion of selfhood that we cannot agree to. So, let's use sex as the basis for the categories (like sports teams, prisons, changing rooms, crime statistics & so on)