you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]LemurLemur 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I know this must feel like an exciting "gotcha" because GC all tell each other that trans people "literally don't understand what sex is", but I feel like this is more just a matter of agreeing or disagreeing with how things are categorized when they're referred to.

Humans use the word "rooster" to describe a chicken they identify as male. If there was a mutant female chicken that developed plumage and secondary sex traits that made it appear like a rooster, without an invasive inspection, people would probably identify it as a "rooster" and if someone said "look at that rooster", no one is going to say WHAT ROOSTER I DON'T SEE ANY ROOSTER. Essentially, I'm describing the "looks like a duck" phenomenon.

And I know, I know "but LEMUR, those people are WRONG tho even if it LOOKS like a rooster!" Sure. But if I wanted a picture of a rooster, and was given a picture of the mutant-chicken, that picture would serve all the purposes a picture of a (lol) "natal" rooster, because I don't plan on breeding the rooster, or eating its eggs, so functionally speaking, there's no difference.

This is sort of the issue I think a lot of people face around the trans issue. For people who are supportive of trans issues, it's not that everyone literally thinks "they're the textbook example of the sex they want to be, down to the chromosomal level". I think it's more that people don't care about what people have between their legs - they aren't doing the thing I see GC talk about on Ovarit where they scour the faces of people on the bus "looking for an adam's apple" or whatever weird "one cool trick to clock the transes" that's in vogue at the time. If they are sitting next to a natal woman, or a trans woman, it doesn't really change the bus ride or harm anyone to say "he sat next to some woman".

I have a friend whos a transman. He's said it better "I know I wasn't born a man. I'm genetically female. But because I pass, people see me as a man, so I am treated as a man. In that way, I socially occupy the role of "man" for the people I interact with. At this point, I just don't correct people." I'm paraphrasing, but it was kind of interesting. He wasn't the type to insist on pronouns or anything - he always maintained gender was a joke, and no one should take it seriously. When he was earlier in transition, he said people both confidently call him "he", and some people confidently call him "she", and then literally debate with each other over it. He never would tell them which was accurate because he thought it was funny how important people thought it was to KNOW what he had in his pants.

So... I think I'm fine with the distinction between "gender" and "sex", for medical reasons. Gender is a social construct, because it affects how we are referred to socially. Sex is your biological plumbing.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If you runned a farm, I bet you'll care more about your mutant chicken's actual sex rather than its outward appearance. And just you know, there are people whose job is correctly sexing chicks (i.e. when the sexual dimorphism is not that evident at first glance).

Based on previous discussions here and from what I heard from QT elsewhere, it's evident to me that, yes, many people on the QT side have a poor understanding of the human body in general and sex in particular. I've heard it all: how sex is a spectrum (or even a matrix...) becuase intersex or clown fish, or how sex is a social construct because of so called "third genders" in other cultures, or how "pausing" puberty is reversible, how trans identified people must be treated as the oposite sex in a medical setting, how men don't have an athletic advantage over women, how males who reduce their testosterone levels don't have an athletic advantage over women, how males who take estrogene can breastfeed babies, how not even ginecologysts can tell "neovaginas" and vaginas appart, how sex is completely irrelevant even in health care, how males who identify as trans have periods just like women, how males who identify as "women" will get uterus transplants and get pregnant some day, how the vagina is a front hole, how messing with your endocrinological system won't have major side effects, how a "neopenis" is like a penis, how "trans" is real becuase of "brain sex", among another jewels.

But whatever any particular individual who believes in "trans identities" understands about sex, it's clear by looking at the policies and laws they lobbby for that the goal of trans activists is the legal erasure of sex and its replacement for "gender identity". In other words, women won't have words to describle ourselves, neither we will have the ability to name the source of our oppression (i.e. sex), and neither we'll have reliable data to show the extent of sexism and misogyny; and, by identifying as trans, any male will be able to have access to any formerly women's space from public bathrooms to prisons.

The problem is people's sex is very relevant in many areas of life like health care, safeguarding, sports or dating, for instance. And "transition" doesn't undone the relevance of sex. For some easy examples, "transition" doesn't undone the athletic advantage that males have over women neither undones male patterns of criminality.