I'm coming late to the party, and only read through the first page, and was compelled to respond. I read of gender being referred to as an "expression" and as "cultural" - but insofar as transgender persons are concerned it is more accurately referred to as their identity.

And what determines identity? The mind/brain.

So - we need to consider fetal development. During the first trimester of pregnancy, the body differentiates (testes or ovaries) under the influence of genes. And then, in a completely different process, under the influence of genes and hormones, during the 3rd trimester, the brain differentiates to a male or a female brain.

In most cases, the two processes are coincident, and a cisgender person is born. The development of their brain and their body are in the same sex.

But, sometimes, the two processes do not result in the same sex. So, a male body + female brain develops, or a female body + a male brain develops, and a transgender person is born.

Philosophim has given you his reasoning for preferring his meaning — AmadeusD

Has he? He claimed that one interpretation was more rational. His reasoning was questionable, and questioned.

He claimed Woman/man unmodified is most rationally interpreted as sex.But he had previously , over the course of days and pages, agreed that there is no one “true” or privileged unmodified meaning for woman/man. Oddly, Philosophim can't bring himself to say he is privileging one sense.

He claimed normal English makes sex the default meaning. But English does not have a single “default” meaning independent of context. Claiming one is simply choosing a preferred meaning for ideological reasons.

He arguers that different uses are marked by modifiers such as cis/trans, and these mark gender, while the unmodified term marks sex. But again, words and sentences are never without context; we do as an issue of fact use "woman" to include both cis- and trans- folk.

He claimed that “trans women are women” is ambiguous without external context, but again, there are no cases that are not in a context. And addition, polysemous is not ambiguous.

I think this represents his position accurately. He can explain if that is incorrect.

When he claims that one interpretation is more rational than the others, he is doing no more than saying that he prefers one interpretation over the others. But his preferences are not a consideration here.

What I have done is to show that there clearly is a sense in which "trans women are women" is true. That undermines his OP.

You seem to be advocating an argument by majority vote. Issues of usage are not decided democratically. If a community uses a word in a particular way, then that usage exists.

Has he? He claimed that one interpretation was more rational. His reasoning was questionable, and questioned. — Banno

You may think so. That seems counter to the exchange. A feeling he seems to be getting to. Perhaps pause a second a rethink in light of this - its extremely unlikely you have it right.

He claimed Woman/man unmodified is most rationally interpreted as sex.But he had previously , over the course of days and pages, agreed that there is no one “true” or privileged unmodified meaning for woman/man. Oddly, Philosophim can't bring himself to say he is privileging one sense. — Banno

I, and He, has explained why that is not in any way a contradiction. If you don't take that, so be it.

He claimed normal English makes sex the default meaning. But English does not have a single “default” meaning independent of context. Claiming one is simply choosing a preferred meaning for ideological reasons. — Banno

Generally, yes it does. That's why polysemy can get so interesting. He hasn't 'claimed' one. He's reasoned to a particular use, explicitly not jettisoning others in their reasonable contexts. There is, clearly a 'standard use' for almost all words that are used by the majority. To deny this is folly. He is arguing that the standard use ought be clear, defined and useful. He has done a very good job at supporting that.

He arguers that different uses are marked by modifiers such as cis/trans, and these mark gender, while the unmodified term marks sex. But again, words and sentences are never without context; we do as an issue of fact use "woman" to include both cis- and trans- folk. — Banno

You might. Most people do not, and at any rate thats an extremely lazy, almost silly argument. The entirely point of his reasoning is to avoid such utterly unhelpful bleeding of meanings. I also intimated this issue with the 'eight year' period I referred to. There was a time when the word 'woman' was useless (nearly) for exactly the position you are putting forward. It's just... silly. The reasons are elsewhere in the thread.

He claimed that “trans women are women” is ambiguous without external context, but again, there are no cases that are not in a context. And addition, polysemous is not ambiguous. — Banno

It's ambiguous even with most contexts. If you, personally, import a certain meaning when yo uhear that phrase to make sense of it - well, that's an exactly, precise event for which Phil is trying to give a better accounting. Yours is not a good one - it's just what you think when you hear it. Nothing to do with standard, or wide-spread usage. I think you're in a bit of a bubble here.

Polysemous does not mean ambiguous. But polysemous words are patently ambiguous in most cases. I even gave a directly link between the use of 'literally' and 'woman'. Its a rinse-and-repeat where no one knows what the fuck is going on. We should not have to ask "what do you mean by that?" every time someone uses the term woman. Currently, we do, unless its already known. I suggest you are referring to talking to people who already agree with you. That is precisely not hte situation we're concerned with.

When he claims that one interpretation is more rational than the others, he is doing no more than saying that he prefers one interpretation over the others. — Banno

This is very close to putting your fingers in your ears and repeating yourself. He's given rational reasoning. You have ignored (or rejected it). That isn't on him. His reasons are sound. As your example above shows quite obviously. However, if you reject it - that's fine. Your position is your position. I think its badly supported, and mostly just a reaction to your distaste for questioning identity.

What I have done is to show that there clearly is a sense in which "trans women are women" is true. That undermines his OP. — Banno

You have not. As an observer, you have not. Showing that there is such a sense does nothing to undermine the OP. The words the OP discusses are still as ambiguous as they were when we started. In the wider world, the problems of the OP are big, glaring neon ones. The fact that some communities (i suggest they are far more amorphous and internally inconsistent than you let on) use it in X way (as the default, lets say) and others use it in Y way (as the default) betrays this claim.

You seem to be advocating an argument by majority vote. Issues of usage are not decided democratically. If a community uses a word in a particular way, then that usage exists. — Banno

This is self-contradictory. The final sentence is exactly what your objection defies in the prior sentence.

I am advocating for the fact that you haven't grasped what Phil is saying, or made a reasonable attempt address it - and yet are still wholly convinced no one but you in the exchange gets it. So be it. I could be wrong; but given we're on page 19 and none of your contributions seem to have understood the problem clearly I'm not uncomfortable with this position.

My position on language, enlarging the discussion a bit so you have a better idea, is that uses are only as good as their ability to communicate to disparate groups. I don't care if your family has a series of grunts that work for you. I don't care if you use the word "wrench" to mean "apple". That's dumb and unhelpful for communication. We are talking about global use. Not in-group use. That's hte point I take it you are missing.

You haven't followed the argument, missing the main point about privileging a sense. I addressed the reasons he gave, you fumbled around. I don't see anything in your post not already addressed.

I read of gender being referred to as an "expression" and as "cultural" - but insofar as transgender persons are concerned it is more accurately referred to as their identity. — Questioner

I have not addressed identity. A personal identity is simply an opinion of yourself. I have opinions of myself, but that doesn't mean people have to agree with it. My own sense of identity can also be objectively wrong. If I identify as Elvis Presley it doesn't actually make me Elvis Presley.

But, sometimes, the two processes do not result in the same sex. So, a male body + female brain develops, or a female body + a male brain develops, and a transgender person is born. — Questioner

The real answer is that the science is still in flux. As of today, there is no identifiable brain difference between a transgender person and a normal person. At one point they thought there might be, but they didn't consider sexuality. Male homosexual brains have structures that resemble female brains in some way (though this is not completely settled either). Once sexuality was taken into account, hetero and homosexual male brains are no different besides a very slight difference in one area of the corpus collosum that was observed. So no, as of today being transgender is not identifiable in the brain.

But I'm curious, what do you think of the OP? Personal identity is not needed to discuss it.

Thank you for the defense Amadeus. Even if you had disagreed with my end views, I believe you've captured the points well.

You haven't followed the argument, missing the main point about privileging a sense. — Banno

He clearly has followed the argument. You don't want to let this one go Banno. May I suggest you might be a little ideologically captured here? You keep trying to use the word privilege when you know I had no rights based arguments for the conclusion. You are acting just like a religious person does when they can't quite prove that God is real. I don't know your religious outlook yourself Banno, but any person can be easily captured by ideologies that make them behave in ways they normally wouldn't.

You're generally an intelligent person who I believe has a genuine desire to do the right thing Banno. Take a step back and look at it again. Have we not both made our points? Have we not both come to areas of the discussion in which there is nothing further to be said? You keep coming back to this thread as if its some crusade, but just like the real crusades Banno, there's nothing worth the fight.

We're people who both love philosophy Banno. Isn't it a good time now to shake each other's hands, appreciate a good discussion, and move on? You don't have to agree with my conclusion. You don't ever have to state that I'm right. You are allowed to hold your own outlook of the debate, as am I. Lets let others judge for now.

Part of doing philosophy is following an argument to where it leads. You did that, then reneged.

Part of doing philosophy is following an argument to where it leads. You did that, then reneged. — Banno

I don’t think you “do” philosophy.

A personal identity is simply an opinion of yourself. — Philosophim

No, it's the reality of who you are.

My own sense of identity can also be objectively wrong. If I identify as Elvis Presley it doesn't actually make me Elvis Presley. — Philosophim

using this as a corollary of transgenderism is unsound reasoning - a logical fallacy - since thinking you are one particular person rather than who you are is a delusion. Transgender persons do not think they are someone who they are not - their brains truly are in reality male or female - and this is their reality, not a delusion.

there is no identifiable brain difference between a transgender person and a normal person. — Philosophim

In the way that they are both properly functioning brains, yes, this is correct. But there is ample evidence of the differences between a male and a female brain.

BTW, transgender brains are normal. They just developed with a different sex than the body.

But I'm curious, what do you think of the OP? Personal identity is not needed to discuss it. — Philosophim

I do take exception to the mention of "trans ideology and politics" - being transgender is not an ideology - but a recognition of a biological reality. And as far as "politics" go - do you mean the expectation that basic human rights are respected?

I would say instead that the anti-transgender movement is based on ideology and politics

It's ambiguous even with most contexts. — AmadeusD

It's really not.

No person who says "trans men are men" is saying "biological women who identify as men are biological men".

That the sentence starts with the term "trans men" is all the context any rational person needs to understand that the ending phrase "are men" is referring to gender and not biological sex.

It's quite absurd that this needs to be repeated and that this discussion has reached 19 pages.

@Philosophim would have a much stronger position if he were to just claim that without further context the sentence "John is a man" is ordinarily understood to mean "John is a biological man", but he's opted not to take this approach.

using this as a corollary of transgenderism is unsound reasoning - a logical fallacy - since thinking you are one particular person rather than who you are is a delusion. — Questioner

Which logical fallacy?

Transgender persons do not think they are someone who they are not - their brains truly are in reality male or female - and this is their reality, not a delusion. — Questioner

No, brain scans on transgender people prior to any medical intervention have brains that are no different than non-transgender brains. Currently the science implies that male homosexual brains do have some similarities between female brains. Does that mean we call a gay man a woman? No.

But there is ample evidence of the differences between a male and a female brain. — Questioner

No, there is none to my knowledge. Make sure you're looking at pre-medical trans gender studies and not post. The medications can change the brain.

BTW, transgender brains are normal. They just developed with a different sex than the body. — Questioner

If they are normal, and there's no evidence of any difference between a trans gender brain and a cis gender brain, then no, they don't have a sex different from the body.

I do take exception to the mention of "trans ideology and politics" - being transgender is not an ideology - but a recognition of a biological reality. And as far as "politics" go - do you mean the expectation that basic human rights are respected? — Questioner

Ah, that was just an intro paragraph line to explain where my interest in the subject came from. No, this conversation has no concern with rights, just language and phrasing.

I would say instead that the anti-transgender movement is based on ideology and politics — Questioner

Just as much as the pro-transgender movement is based on ideology and politics. To be clear, I am not anti-transgender. I am pro clear thinking, clear language, and avoiding ideology where possible.

No, brain scans on transgender people prior to any medical intervention have brains that are no different than non-transgender brains. — Philosophim

The first three studies in a Google search disagree.

Brain Sex in Transgender Women Is Shifted towards Gender Identity

Transgender individuals (TIs) show brain-structural alterations that differ from their biological sex as well as their perceived gender

Rather than being merely shifted towards either end of the male-female spectrum, transgender persons seem to present with their own unique brain phenotype

No person who says "trans men are men" is saying "biological women who identify as men are biological men". — Michael

Already pointed out that I've encountered people who intend this. There are some trans gender individuals who do use the word 'men' to indicate they have changed sex, not merely gender. You cannot know from the phrase alone what they intend without further clarification, therefore it is ambiguous.

It's quite absurd that this needs to be repeated and that this discussion has reached 19 pages. — Michael

Its quite absurd that you started calling people idiots who disagreed with you, and refused to answer my question as to why we shouldn't just clarify the phrase to "Trans gender men are adult human females who take on the gendered roles of men." Its also quite absurd that you come in and insult the discussion because the conclusion isn't what you want it to be. Obviously the results of 19 pages demonstrate this is something worth talking about unlike your desire to tell everyone they're stupid.

Philosophim would have a much stronger position if he were to just claim that without further context the sentence "John is a man" is ordinarily interpreted as "John is a biological man", but he's opted not to take this approach. — Michael

This is one of my many points that I've put forward in this discussion. You haven't even followed and make criticisms of things you don't know about.

The first three results in Google disagree. — Michael

Congrats on a quick google search. I've studied this issue for a while and have made comments that the brain science is still ongoing. Have you ensured that those studies separate homo and heterosexual brains? Because homosexual brains do appear to have features that are more associated with female brains. If your studies don't separate them, this skews the end results.

Already pointed out that I've encountered people who intend this. There are some trans gender individuals who do use the word 'men' to indicate they have changed sex, not merely gender. You cannot know from the phrase alone what they intend without further clarification, therefore it is ambiguous. — Philosophim

So let's take an incredibly reductive approach and say that a biological man is a human with a penis and a biological woman is a human with a vagina.

You've encountered people who believe that humans with a vagina who identify as men are humans with a penis?

I don't believe you have.

Which logical fallacy? — Philosophim

As I explained - mistaking a reality for a delusion

brain scans on transgender people prior to any medical intervention have brains that are no different than non-transgender brains. — Philosophim

I'm not sure what differences you might expect to see?

Could you please provide your source?

No, there is none to my knowledge. — Philosophim

Male and female brains differ in size, matter ratios (e.g. processing vs. connections), regional volumes, connectivity patterns, circuitry organization, processing styles, neurochemistry and hormonal influence.
Google “differences male and female brains” for a list of sources to find out more

If they are normal, and there's no evidence of any difference between a trans gender brain and a cis gender brain, then no, they don't have a sex different from the body. — Philosophim

Sorry, these three statements are not logically linked.

Would you call a properly functioning male brain and a properly functioning female brain both "normal?"

Being in a body of the opposite sex does not affect proper brain function.

You've encountered people who believe that humans with a vagina who identify as men are humans with a penis?

I don't believe you have. — Michael

This is not an argument. You need to go talk to more people. Lets make this logical to remove the obvious emotional block you have. You are stating, "All people who ever use this phrase everywhere mean this one strict interpretation." I am stating "At least one person who has used this phrase has used a different interpretation."

It should be obvious now.

Which logical fallacy?
— Philosophim

As I explained - mistaking a reality for a delusion — Questioner

Sure, but that that's the claim I'm making. Thinking you're a man when in reality you're a woman is a delusional.

Questioner, your post is a bit disorganized. I a couple of points that contrast with themselves. I feel it just needs a second pass to organize what you're trying to say a bit more please. This does not mean your wrong or imply any lack of capability on your part. I too sometimes don't organize my posts correctly and it confuses other people. Would you mind spending a little more time specifying your thoughts a bit? I'll answer then so that way I'm fairly addressing your points.

I am stating "At least one person who has used this phrase has used a different interpretation." — Philosophim

I suspect that for all phrases there is at least one person who has used a different interpretation to what is ordinary, but that doesn't mean that all phrases are ambiguous. The existence of schizophrenics, the illiterate, and those otherwise unfamiliar with English is not a good reason to avoid a little common sense to understanding widespread language-use.

A rational person should understand that people who say "trans men are men" are not saying "humans with a vagina who identify as men are humans with a penis" or "humans with XX chromosomes who identify as men are humans with XY chromosomes". You ought stop stubbornly insisting on this straw man.

I suspect that for all English phrases there is at least one person who has used a different interpretation to what is ordinary, but that doesn't mean that all English phrases are ambiguous. — Michael

Fantastic. We agree on a basic point that not everyone who uses the phrase means to indicate that the second 'man' in the sentence is only referring to gender.

A rational person should understand that people who say "trans men are men" are not saying "humans with a vagina who identify as men are humans with a penis" or "humans with XX chromosomes who identify as men are humans with XY chromosomes". You ought stop stubbornly insisting on this straw man. — Michael

You ought to stop using the implicit claim that anyone who doesn't use the phrase exactly as you say it is , is an idiot. You basically said, "Its used this way, and anyone who uses it the wrong way is incorrect. Therefore the phrase is not ambiguous." Considering an ambiguous phrase is one that can easily be interpreted incorrectly because its intention is not clear, you're not helping your case. You have not addressed the arguments I've given in this discussion as to why its ambiguous and demonstrated why they are false. You dodged the last point of discussion even after I gave you a day to calm down and think about it because you were too emotionally invested. And now you're just repeating the same points that didn't work. Please come up with a new approach Michael, or once again, please leave the thread.

Thinking you're a man when in reality you're a woman is a delusional. — Philosophim

This presents as a misunderstanding of the information I have shared.

Questioner, your post is a bit disorganized. I a couple of points that contrast with themselves. I feel it just needs a second pass to organize what you're trying to say a bit more please. This does not mean your wrong or imply any lack of capability on your part. I too sometimes don't organize my posts correctly and it confuses other people. Would you mind spending a little more time specifying your thoughts a bit? I'll answer then so that way I'm fairly addressing your points. — Philosophim

This presents as passive-aggressive. My posts are well enough organized.

You ought to stop using the implicit claim that anyone who doesn't use the phrase exactly as you say it is , is an idiot. — Philosophim

That's not what I've said.

What I've said is that if I say "trans men are men" and you think to yourself "Michael believes that humans with XX chromosomes who identify as men are humans with XY chromosomes" then either you're an idiot or you're being intentionally dishonest.

Thinking you're a man when in reality you're a woman is a delusional.
— Philosophim

This presents as a misunderstanding of the information I have shared. — Questioner

I don't doubt it. As I was reading your thread a few times I wasn't sure I understood your full intention.

This presents as passive-aggressive. My posts are well enough organized. — Questioner

Not at all. I even went out of my way to indicate that in no way is this a poor reflection on you. You even noted in your quote of me above that I misunderstood what you were saying. Genuinely, I'm having a difficult time understanding what you were trying to convey in that particular post.

That's not what I've said.

What I've said is that if I say "trans men are men" and you think to yourself "Michael believes that humans with XX chromosomes who identify as men are humans with XY chromosomes" then either you're an idiot or you're being intentionally dishonest. — Michael

Oh, its EITHER you're an idiot or dishonest. My mistake. So basically people can't interpret the phrase wrong, because when they use it wrong, it due to stupidity or maliciousness. And yet that doesn't address my point that it could also be because its ambiguous. If you demonstrated that the phrase was always used correctly, that would be a counter to ambiguity. But you haven't even attempted that.

You see, I'm not denying those are possibilities, but those are possibilities for any phrase. That doesn't address the claims I've made about why it is ambiguous in terms of the arguments I've laid forth which you keep avoiding, something I've already mentioned twice and am tired of saying again. Either address the points in the thread, or be the straw man guy who's claiming that everyone who uses the phrase incorrectly must be an idiot or dishonest. Come on Michael. If you read a poster in another thread using that type of argument would you think they were coming to the discussion in good faith or a calm mind?

their brains truly are in reality male or female - and this is their reality, not a delusion. — Questioner

How is a male’s brain truly in reality female?

Is there a non binary brain?

I wasn't sure I understood you full intention. — Philosophim

Genuinely, I'm having a difficult time understanding what you were trying to convey in that particular post. — Philosophim

All I can suggest is to read it again and feel free to ask me questions about it.

And yet that doesn't address my point that it could also be because its ambiguous. — Philosophim

If a phrase could possibly mean one of two things, but one of those things is utterly absurd, then unless you believe that the person who said it is suffering from psychosis then you ought use a little common sense and understand that they mean the non-absurd thing, and so this polysemic phrase isn't actually ambiguous.

So if I say "trans men are men" then you ought recognize that I'm not saying "humans with XX chromosomes who identify as men are humans with XY chromosomes".

It's really simple. I don't know how you ever manage to communicate with other people if you don't understand this. You don't need to be a mind-reader to figure out what people are trying to say.

or be the straw man guy who's claiming that everyone who uses the phrase incorrectly must be an idiot or dishonest. — Philosophim

Again, this is not what I said. Try re-reading that post again.

How is a male’s brain truly in reality female? — Malcolm Parry

I've never said this. If you go to the top of this page you will see my post:

I'm coming late to the party, and only read through the first page, and was compelled to respond. I read of gender being referred to as an "expression" and as "cultural" - but insofar as transgender persons are concerned it is more accurately referred to as their identity.

And what determines identity? The mind/brain.

So - we need to consider fetal development. During the first trimester of pregnancy, the body differentiates (testes or ovaries) under the influence of genes. And then, in a completely different process, under the influence of genes and hormones, during the 3rd trimester, the brain differentiates to a male or a female brain.

In most cases, the two processes are coincident, and a cisgender person is born. The development of their brain and their body are in the same sex.

But, sometimes, the two processes do not result in the same sex. So, a male body + female brain develops, or a female body + a male brain develops, and a transgender person is born. — Questioner

I've never said this. — Questioner

It was a direct quote

It was a direct quote — Malcolm Parry

That quote says no more than that there are male and female brains