Changing rooms? — Malcolm Parry

If there's full frontal public nudity then I don't think it matters whether your genitals are natural or artificial, and so a trans man with a penis should use the men's changing room and a trans woman with breasts and a vagina should use the women's changing room.

So it would be unreasonable for you to say that the UK, in general, focuses on gender to the exclusion of biology. It does not. — frank

I didn’t say that.

I said that I don’t know of any UK law that dictates which bathrooms people can use.

The recent UK Supreme Court ruling is only that the words “sex”, “man”, and “woman” as used in section 11 of the Equality Act 2010 are referring to biological sex, biological men, and biological women. The implications of that ruling are not entirely clear, and the interim guidance issued by the EHRC that you referenced is just that - interim guidance - and not statute.

So you would immediately take the male and female signs down and anyone can use them? — Malcolm Parry

Yes, much like a nightclub I used to frequent.

You're not making any sense.

I don't think anyone should be excluded from any bathrooms. I think bathrooms should be unisex.

But, if we do have bathrooms that we name "men's bathrooms" and bathrooms that we name "women's bathrooms", and if only certain types of people are allowed to use the bathrooms named "men's bathrooms" and only certain types of people are allowed to use the bathrooms named "women's bathrooms", it makes more sense for the division to be based on gender rather than sex.

We do and you excluded cisgender men. On what basis? — Malcolm Parry

On the basis that we have separate men’s and women’s bathrooms. If cis and trans men are allowed to use the women’s bathrooms and cis and trans women are allowed to use the women’s bathrooms then we don’t actually have separate men’s and women’s bathrooms. We have unisex bathrooms.

That was premised on the fact that we do have separate men's and women's bathrooms.

So, my position is:

1) bathrooms ought be unisex
2) but, if we have separate men's and women's bathrooms then they should be separated by gender, not sex

It's not quite clear. The closest thing in the ruling is:

There are other provisions whose proper functioning requires a biological interpretation of “sex”. These include separate spaces and single-sex services (including changing rooms, hostels and medical services), communal accommodation and others (paras 210-228).

Whether or not this includes bathrooms isn't obvious, given that cubicles are private and biology doesn't seem at all relevant when washing your hands in a public sink.

You tell me. You are excluding them. — Malcolm Parry

I'm not excluding anyone. I've said many times before that I think bathrooms should be unisex. You're the one who is saying that bathroom usage should be divided by biology. Why is that? If bathrooms are to be divided at all, why not instead by gender?

Personally, I think it's bizarre to argue that there should be separate men's and women's toilets and that any transgender man who has medically transitioned and had both top and bottom surgery should continue to use the women's toilets.

That just seems to be some minister's interpretation of the ruling. As far as I'm aware there's no law on bathroom usage at all.

The ruling is just that it is not illegal for a transgender man to be excluded from a space that is marketed as being for biological men. That's not the same as saying either a) that it is illegal for a transgender man to use a space marketed as being for biological men or b) that men's bathrooms are only for biological men.

The same reason that you yourself happily exclude cisgender males. All those reasons. — Malcolm Parry

Which are?

It's the law in the UK, isn't it? — frank

No. There's a nightclub that I sometimes go to where all the toilets are unisex. There's no law that dictates who can use which bathrooms.

The only issue I have is why people insist men have a right to access women's exclusive places. — Malcolm Parry

The argument is that some of these spaces shouldn't be exclusively for those who are biologically female or for those who are biologically female; that they should be exclusively for those whose gender identity is female or for those whose gender identity is male.

So what good reasons are there for saying that Bathroom A should only be for biological males and that Bathroom B should only be for biological females?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role

Michael being from the UK is a better person to engage you on that specific point. — Baden

I addressed that issue earlier, maybe to someone else.

The specific court case was regarding the Equality Act 2010, and in particular this section:

Sex
In relation to the protected characteristic of sex—
(a) a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a man or to a woman;

(b) a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons of the same sex.

The court ruled that for the purposes of this section of this Act, the words "sex", "man", and "woman" are referring to biology, not gender. The reasoning being that there's a separate section addressing gender, and so it would be redundant for this section to also be referring to gender.

Some people, like Malcolm Parry, clearly misunderstood both what laws are and how courts work. As if this ruling has any bearing on anything else.

Words can mean more than one thing but what man is female? — Malcolm Parry

Yes, words can mean more than one thing. So when you ask "what man is female?" what do you mean by the words "man" and "female"? Do you mean "what biological man is biologically female"? Because the answer to that question is "none", and everyone will agree.

But when someone else says "transgender men are men" they are not saying "transgender men are biologically male" because they mean something else by the word "men".

Your apparent inability to understand this is precisely why you are getting nowhere.

What is your point? — Malcolm Parry

That words can mean more than one thing and that the English word “man” doesn’t just mean “a biological male”.

The phrase “goodwill to all men” from the Bible does not mean “goodwill to all biological males”. It means “goodwill to all people”.

Some words mean more than one thing. The word “bat” can refer to a flying mammal or it can refer to a type of club used in baseball or cricket. The word “man” can refer to a biological male or it can refer to any human.

I'm still not sure what you are trying too prove. — Malcolm Parry

That the English word “man” has more than one meaning.

The fact that I have to keep repeating this clearly shows that you have reading or comprehension problems. I can’t help you any further.

“One giant leap for biological male kind.”

But a man is a biological male. — Malcolm Parry

Not everyone uses the word “man” to only refer to a biological male, and the meaning of a word is determined by how language users use words. See Wittgenstein.

And unlike a language like French, there’s no “official” English vocabulary. Even dictionaries are just an attempt to best describe how people use words; they don’t prescribe.

I’m still not sure what you are trying to prove. — Malcolm Parry

That the word “man” doesn’t just mean “a biological male”. How many times do I need to repeat this?

Many English words have more than one meaning. The word “man” is such a word. I can’t be any clearer. It’s a very simple thing.

Transgender man is a transgender man. Not a man. — Malcolm Parry

The word "man" in the phrase "transgender man" does not mean "biologically male".

A human is a human. He or she can be a man or woman. — Malcolm Parry

Yes, and the word "man" can mean "human". If you type "define: man" into Google then the second definition is "a human being of either sex; a person" and offers the saying "goodwill to all men" which isn't meant to exclude women.

I’m not sure what you are trying to prove. — Malcolm Parry

That the word "man" doesn't just mean "biologically male". I've been very clear on this.

1) English noun “man” does mean biologically male in the dictionary I use. — Malcolm Parry

It doesn't only mean that, hence the phrase "transgender man" being a meaningful phrase in the English language. And sometimes "man" means "human".

Words don't always have just one meaning.

I’m not saying anything about what words should mean.

I’m saying that:

1) the English noun “man” doesn’t just mean “biologically male”, and
2) transgender men ought be allowed to use men’s bathrooms

Do you understand that these are two completely independent claims and that (1) is simply a descriptive fact about how English speakers speak?

That is exactly what is being discussed because that is the only thing that matters — Malcolm Parry

We’re not discussing what is allowed. We’re discussing what ought be allowed.

One country might allow transgender men to use the men’s bathroom and one country might not. So referring to any individual country’s laws is a red herring.

Some think that bathrooms ought be divided by biological sex, some think by gender identity, and some think they shouldn’t be divided at all.

Your argument appears to be:

P1. The English noun “man” only means “biological man” and the English noun “woman” only means “biological woman”
C1. Therefore bathrooms ought be divided by biological sex

This conclusion is a non sequitur and P1 is false.

Neither UK law nor sporting organisations dictate what English language words mean.

They can dictate who is allowed to do what, but that’s not what’s being discussed.

You can repeat this mantra as much as you like. — Malcolm Parry

It’s not a mantra. It’s an accurate description of the English language. The nouns “man” and “woman” are not each just used in a single way.

I think no man is a woman. — Malcolm Parry

And by this you just mean that no biological man is a biological woman, which everyone accepts.

But as I mentioned before, the terms “man” and “woman” are not only used to refer to biological sex; they are also used to refer to gender identity.

Even if sex and gender identity are usually congruent, for some it isn’t: for some their sex is male and their gender is female and for some their sex is female and their gender is male.

But most should? — Malcolm Parry

Cisgender men, sure.

So for sport they aren’t women but they are women for other purposes? — Malcolm Parry

For sport we separate people according to biological sex, regardless of gender identity, but for some other things we separate people according to gender identity, regardless of biological sex.

Bathrooms, changing rooms and shelters for victims of male violence. Do you think men should be excluded from these places? — Malcolm Parry

I don’t think all biological men should be excluded from women’s bathrooms, changing rooms, or shelters. I think transgender women, especially those who have medically transitioned, should use the women’s bathrooms, changing rooms, and shelters, just as I think that transgender men, especially those who have medically transitioned, should be excluded from them.

Because men should be excluded from women’s sport because they have a competitive advantage. A huge competitive advantage. Shall we start there? — Malcolm Parry

And on that we agree, as I’ve mentioned before.

But you also mentioned other “women exclusive spaces”, which I assume you mean to be spaces exclusive to biological women.

What such spaces are these, and why do they exist? Perhaps some of these spaces ought be spaces exclusive to gendered women rather than just to biological women.

What is the mechanism for someone to gave the opposite psychology to their sex? I’m intrigued. — Malcolm Parry

That’s an open question. As the Wikipedia article I referenced earlier explains, it’s not clear how much of our psychology - whether concerning gender or other things - is determined by nature and how much by nurture.

And of anything determined by nature it’s not clear what the biological determinants are. Hormones likely play a large part in how the brain develops, which would explain the strong correlation between one set of chromosomes and one broad type of psychology. But the existence of transgender people, non-binary people, and gender non-conforming people (including effeminate men and masculine women) shows that other factors are at play.

There’s likely no single thing. Biology and society are very complex, and so neurological and psychological development also complex.

Even as a heterosexual man I’m sure I wouldn’t be sexually interested in the majority of cisgender women.

So I still don’t really get the point being made. Regardless of who I have - or want to have - sex with, there is such a thing as psychological/social/cultural gender, and despite its common congruence with biological sex they are distinct things.

I think you're probably rare. — frank

Okay, not really sure what the purpose of this line of questioning was supposed to be?

Could you see it just happening with a trans woman? — frank

If they’re attractive and have had bottom surgery, sure.

How do you get laid? — frank

Usually just spending time with friends and it just happens one night.

The point I'm making is that in 2025 people can be whatever they like. No sexist tropes are needed to define a person. — Malcolm Parry

Okay, but sex differences in psychology are still a real thing, and in a minority of cases someone can have the psychology typically associated with the opposite sex.

And for good or bad gender norms still exist in today’s society.

So in sports and women's exclusive spaces biology trumps feelings. — Malcolm Parry

Why?

I don’t ask anyone out on a date.

I don't think society and culture treats people like I treat my mates. There would be a lot of upset people. — Malcolm Parry

The point I am making is that you clearly understand that in many cases someone’s sex determines the way that they are treated, but that this treatment has nothing really to do with their sex at all - hence when you treat your female friends “like one of the blokes” you are not treating them as “having a penis”.

Obviously the wider society and culture is not identical to your friendship group, but the same principle is at play.

I have some female friends who are treated like one of the blokes.

…

How does society and culture treat a male? — Malcolm Parry

You’ve kind of answered your own question.

Surely that is a woman who wished to be treated as a man. Not a man. — Malcolm Parry

It’s a biological woman who is psychologically male, and wishes to be treated how society and culture usually treats those who are psychologically male.

I am aware that there are differences on average between the sexes but it is not clear cut at all. Men on average are more aggressive but not significantly and there are plenty of non aggressive men.
What kind of differences constitute a male v female? — Malcolm Parry

You could start with sex differences in psychology.

Biological men and biological women tend to have a different kind of psychology. The way they think and feel and behave is different. These differences are separate from any biological differences like chromosomes and genitals (even if they most often correlate), and these psychological differences factor into how society and culture is structured.

Sometimes someone who is biologically female develops the kind of psychology typically associated with biological men, and so they identify as a man in that psychological sense, and wish to be treated as a man. “Being treated as a man” is a social and cultural thing, not a biological thing, and doesn’t mean the same thing as “being treated as having XY chromosomes and a penis”.

And this is the problem with anti-trans policies. They don’t care about people as people; they don’t care about how people think and feel. They just think of people as being biological machines, and say that everyone with one set of chromosomes/genitals should be treated one way and everyone with another set of chromosomes/genitals should be treated another way. It’s dehumanising.

What are they saying? — Malcolm Parry

That their gender identity is male. Gender identity is psychological/social/cultural, not biological.