Tranwomen are women. Transmen are men. True or false?

Philosophim

I've been interested in this little philosophical puzzle that has popped up in regards to trans ideology and politics. I think its going to go down as a classic. I'm going to break it down here and see what people think.

A few definitions first:

Sex - A species expressed reproductive role.
Gender - A cultural expectation of non-biological behavior in regards to an individual's sex

With that in mind, what is a trans x? First we need to define man and woman.

Man - adult human male by sex
Woman- adult human female by sex

But sometimes people want to claim that man and woman are 'roles'. What's a role? A gendered label. Most of the world does not view man and woman by gender, but by sex, so the default goes to sex. However, we can modify the term to indicate 'male by gender' or 'female by gender'.

An addition to the term of 'cis' indicates 'x by gender'. So a cisman is a 'male who expresses with male gender' A ciswoman is a 'female who expresses with female gender'.

Now we get to trans. A transman is a 'male who expresses with female gender'. A transwoman is 'a male who expresses with male gender'.

So are transwomen women? Are transwomen men? No. The terms man and woman indicate a person's age and sex, not gender. Are transwomen men who act with a female gender? Yes. Are transmen women who act with a male gender? Yes.

Patterner

I have no doubt that Dr. Renee Richards and Caitlyn Marie Jenner are women. I can't imagine how such a thing happens, but I do not have any suspicion that they are:
-confused.
-joining in a fad.
-faking it in order to be in the spotlight, or any other gain.
-the product of minds warped by abuse, societal conditioning, or whatever other cause.

Philosophim

↪Patterner

I really appreciate you as a poster Patterner, but if you don't mind, I don't want to make this political or judgmental. This is about taking the terms as they are and seeing if the conclusion above is logical or illogical.

Harry Hindu

Sex - A species expressed reproductive role.
Gender - A cultural expectation of behavior in regards to an individual's sex — Philosophim

Sex as a species expressed reproductive role means that terms like "man" and "woman" are sexes, not genders.

"Man" and "woman" are like "bull" and "cow", "rooster" and "hen", "queen" and "drone" - sex as expressed by each species. So then what would be the labels we place on different genders?

Philosophim

Sex as a species expressed reproductive role means that terms like "man" and "woman" are sexes, not genders. — Harry Hindu

Correct.

So then what would be the labels we place on different genders? — Harry Hindu

We use the modifiers trans and cis to denote gender. You can be a man, and also be a cisman or transman. "Man" denotes your sex, the modifiers denote you are talking about male gender.

Michael

The terms man and woman indicate a person's age and sex, not gender. — Philosophim

Words can mean more than one thing. The word "man" can also mean "human", and as a verb it refers to a certain kind of behaviour, e.g. in the phrase "man up".

Philosophim

Words can mean more than one thing. — Michael

Of course, and this depends on context. I am noting that in the general context in regards to sex and gender, 'man' refers to a person's age and sex, not gender.

Harry Hindu

We use the modifiers trans and cis to denote gender. You can be a man, and also be a cisman or transman. "Man" denotes your sex, the modifiers denote you are talking about male gender. — Philosophim

But you defined gender as a cultural expectation. This means that for gender to change, the cultural expectation needs to change, not a person's personal feelings.

Patterner

↪Philosophim

No problem. I really wasn't sure what you were after. Sorry about that

Philosophim

But you defined gender as a cultural expectation. This means that for gender to change, the cultural expectation needs to change, not a person's personal feelings. — Harry Hindu

Correct, gender is a culturally subjective expectation of the behavior that a person should do in regards to their sex. This differentiates from objective behavior in regards to one sex such as bodily functions. The subjective notion may be within an individual, a small group, a city, a country, or world context if possible.

For example, wearing a skirt in America is expected to be worn by females, not males. If a male wears a skirt, they are acting in a transgendered way. They understand the culture views this as clothing that is expected to be worn only by females, and as a man they actively choose to wear a skirt despite knowing this.

Contrast this with Scottland where men are expected to wear kilts, which is basically a skirt. Wearing one fits the cultural expectation of a man, and if a woman actively wore a kilt prior to the 1800's where it was only men, this would be seen as trasngendered within Scottland.

Michael

I am noting that in the general context in regards to sex and gender, 'man' refers to a person's age and sex, not gender. — Philosophim

A word's meaning is determined by how its users use it. If a sufficient number of English speakers use the word "man" to refer to both trans men and cis men, fully recognising the biological differences between the two, then the word "man" refers to both sex and gender.

There's no divine dictionary that dictates what words mean.

Philosophim

No problem. I really wasn't sure what you were after. Sorry about that — Patterner

Not a problem,

A word's meaning is determined by how its users use it. If a sufficient number of English speakers use the word "man" to refer to both trans men and cis men, fully recognising biological differences between the two, then the word "man" refers to both sex and gender. — Michael

Correct. But does it make sense to do so? First, we would still need a term that denotes that a person is male and adult. It makes more sense to create a new word to indicate a gendered adult male then repurpose a term that is used without issue.

The modifiers for cis and trans take the familiar term that refers to sex, but modify it to refer to gender. And I don't think anyone has a problem with that. We have clear vocabulary that everyone understands, and we have terms that are useful.

My question to you then is, "Why should we change the term man to mean gender instead of sex by default?"

There's no divine dictionary that dictates what words mean. — Michael

Correct, but good vocabulary should be clear, unambiguous, and logical. It seems to me that changing the term man from a sex and age reference into a gender and age reference is not necessary as we have clear vocabulary that denotes gender and sex references already, and we would then need to come up with another word to reference the age and sex of a male.

Michael

Correct, but good vocabulary should be clear, unambiguous, and logical. — Philosophim

No natural language is clear, unambiguous, and logical. Certainly not English. Maybe check out Loglan if that's your interest.

My question to you then is, "Why should we change the term man to mean gender instead of sex by default?" — Philosophim

There's nothing about language that we should do; there's just what we actually do. And what we actually do is use the word "man" to refer also to transmen.

Philosophim

Correct, but good vocabulary should be clear, unambiguous, and logical.
— Philosophim

No natural language is clear, unambiguous, and logical. Certainly not English. Maybe check out Loglan. — Michael

I said 'good' language. Of course we can have poor and confusing language. Are you advocating that's a good thing? Might as well throw away the field of philosophy then, as one of its primary purposes is to reason through clear and logical terms and ideas.

There's nothing about language that we should do; there's just what we actually do. — Michael

We should have clear language if we want clear communication between people. If I say, "Hops congaro wit nonk tugor", that is what I spoke. But can you understand me? Did it convey the idea accurately? That's the point of language. If you cannot convey a clear idea to another person that they can logically see, your language is poor.

And what we actually[/i] do is use the word "man" to refer also to transmen. — Michael

This is a nonsense statement. This ignores the definitions I've given above and does not try to give a reason why your use of terms is logical or unambiguous. What does 'trans' refer to then? What does 'man' without the modifier refer to? A statement of insistence is not a statement of argument.

Copernicus

What is this question doing on a philosophy platform? It warrants a biological truth, not argumentative conclusions.

Philosophim

What is this question doing on a philosophy platform? It warrants a biological truth, not argumentative conclusions. — Copernicus

I disagree. Philosophy is often about unraveling statements and terms to get better clarity of definitions and what we can draw from them. "What is mind?" "What is good?" "What is knowledge?" "What is a man?" I do not see any reason why this is not a philosophical topic.

Copernicus

I do not see any reason why this is not a philosophical topic. — Philosophim

Because those questions have subjective answers and argumentative grounds. Biological issues are subject to experimental and empirical truths.

Michael

This ignores the definitions I've given above — Philosophim

It doesn't ignore it. I am simply explaining the empirical fact that your definition is inconsistent with how English speakers actually use the words.

You can argue that some word shouldn't mean something, but that's not the same as arguing that it doesn't mean that thing.

Whether you like it or not, the words "man" and "woman" are used to refer also to transmen and transwomen.

Philosophim

Because those questions have subjective answers and argumentative grounds. Biological issues are subject to experimental and empirical truths. — Copernicus

In regards to sex, yes. In regards to gender, no.

Copernicus

In regards to sex, yes. In regard to gender, no. — Philosophim

Oh boy... we're differentiating sex from gender. I see.

Well, apologies for wasting your time. I hope you find your answers.

Philosophim

I am simply explaining the empirical fact that your definition is inconsistent with how English speakers actually use the words. — Michael

No, it is not an empirical fact that when people generally use the word man, that they are thinking it is equally as likely that it is an adult human female behaving like a man. When you read about a man in the paper, do you think they are male, or do you think they could be male or female? You have also not given me your definition of what a man is and what a trans man is. Nor have you answered what word we would use to replace 'man' for 'adult human male'. You are not discussing, you are insisting. Meaning, you are wrong.

You can argue that one word or another shouldn't mean something, but that's not the same s arguing that it doesn't mean that thing. — Michael

I have argued both for why it is, and why it should be. All you have done is insist that it is without any reason. Maybe you do have one, but you have to bring it forward.

Philosophim

Oh boy... we're differentiating sex from gender. I see. — Copernicus

That is the modern day terminology in regards to transgender issues, yes. I note the definitions in the OP, do you disagree with them?

Copernicus

That is the modern day terminology, yes. I note the definitions in the OP, do you disagree with them? — Philosophim

Yes. To me,men and women are sex.

And what you designated as gender could be termed as hormonal traits.

180 Proof

A transman is a 'male who expresses with female gender'. A transwoman is 'a male who expresses with male gender'.

So are transwomen women? Are transwomen men? No. The terms man and woman indicate a person's age and sex, not gender. Are transwomen men who act with a female gender? Yes. Are transmen women who act with a male gender? Yes. — Philosophim

:100:

A related post from 2019 ...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/336888

Philosophim

Yes. To me,men and women are sex.

And what you designated as gender could be termed as hormonal traits. — Copernicus

Yes, they are sex differentials. I amended gender to be more clear:

Gender - A cultural expectation of non-biological behavior in regards to an individual's sex

In other words, physical and biological aspects of one's sex are not cultural expectations of behavior. They are biological realities. There is no 'hormonal trait' which leads a woman to wear a dress and a man not to. Those are cultural expectations of non-biological behavior in reference to one's sex.

Philosophim

A related post from 2019 ...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/336888 — 180 Proof

Much appreciated!

Copernicus

↪Philosophim

How is cultural expression "gender"? I think you coined the definition yourself.

If society can't force expectations on you, can you force definitions upon society?

Michael

No, it is not an empirical fact that when people generally use the word man, that they are thinking it is equally as likely that it is an adult human female behaving like a man. — Philosophim

I didn't say that.

Philosophim

How is cultural expression "gender"? I think you coined the definition yourself. — Copernicus

Good question for clarification. There is a difference between being male and female, and how one acts culturally in regards to one's sex. One simple aspect is clothing.

For example, wearing a skirt in America is expected to be worn by females, not males. If a male wears a skirt, they are acting in a transgendered way. They understand the culture views this as clothing that is expected to be worn only by females, and as a man they actively choose to wear a skirt despite knowing this.

Contrast this with Scottland where men are expected to wear kilts, which is basically a skirt. Wearing one fits the cultural expectation of a man, and if a woman actively wore a kilt prior to the 1800's where it was only men, this would be seen as transgendered within Scottland.

There is nothing inherent in being male or female that would drive a man not to wear a skirt and a woman to wear one. Why the culture went that way is not the question here, but that it can. Things that are not in reference to one's sex are public actions and things that a person can do without it being a reference to their sex. For example, "Supermarket cashier". It is non-biological actions, roles, clothing and any other non-biological action that a society judges in regards to one's sex that is gender.

Philosophim

No, it is not an empirical fact that when people generally use the word man, that they are thinking it is equally as likely that it is an adult human female behaving like a man.
— Philosophim

I didn't say that. — Michael

Yes, you logically said that. If 'man' was seen by the majority of people as purely a gendered term, not a reference to a person's sex, then logically a 'man' could be equally likely to be male or female. The fact that you imply that you don't do this, tells me that when you hear the term 'man', you normally think its a male. If you truly thought man was only gendered, you would not have protested my point.

Michael

Yes, you logically said that. — Philosophim

No, I didn't. I said that the word "man" is used to refer to cis men and used to refer to trans men.

Tranwomen are women. Transmen are men. True or false?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions