GC: This article explains well that even if there are only two sexes, and not many sexes, or a continuum of sexes, "trans men are men, and trans women are women", do you have any arguments against the things said in this article? What are your arguments?

submitted by Not_a_celebrity from (aeon.co)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]SnowAssMan 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

or exclusive to, one sex or the other

You can say 'gender', it's a synonym for sex. It's clear you're not talking about femininity. We must stop allowing them to get away with using the word 'gender' as a shorthand for 'gender identity' (we must also stop allowing them using 'gender identity' to refer to their 'cross-gender self-identification').

[–]comradeconradical 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Good points, I try not to use gender at all because of how averse I am to gender ideology and to keep the meaning clear, but you're right to say the meaning here is obvious and we should reclaim the language they seek to redefine.

"cross-gender self-identification" now that is truthful language, and circumvents the 'sacred' word 'identity' lol

[–]SnowAssMan 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

"Cross-gender identification" was the term in the DSM-IV. They've since "updated" it to "felt gender" & the more ideologically-pandering "experienced gender". Either way, it's a separate term from 'gender identity', which is not something anyone is born with, it's a result of how we were socialisation. Basically, everyone's gender identity is "congruent with their sex", unless the parents go out of their way to condition you otherwise (in the case of penile ablation for instance).