I buy that gender and sex refer to two different things — tim wood

I do too. It's when the trans activist says biology should be ignored that the community balks.

The Scots would have apparently been willing to vote a dude into a woman's seat, but would they allow a woman into a man's? — tim wood

A transgender man could have taken a man's seat. Post UK Supreme Court ruling, those seats have to be divided by biology.

I only suggested that we not use the words "man" and "woman" because you are having so much trouble understanding what they mean when discussing gender. Presumably we both have a clear understanding of what "bathroom" and "penis" and "vagina" mean. — Michael

Sure, when someone uses words in a way that is contradictory people will have a difficult time understanding them.

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. — Michael

Yet you assert that a trans-woman has a vagina when what they actually have is an open wound that they have to use medical grade stents to keep open. Any misunderstanding I have is a result of your inability to define the terms you are using in a meaningful way.

Gender is the range of social, psychological, cultural, and behavioral aspects of being a man (or boy), woman (or girl), or third gender." — Michael

No wonder I couldn't find what I was looking for. I was asking about their feeling of what it means to be a man or woman. You're now talking about cultural norms which are the antithesis of personal feelings. This is exactly what I was trying to avoid in talking past each other. Can a woman still be a woman if they don't adopt the cultural expectations of the culture they are in?

How is this any different than being sexist? Isn't it sexist to claim that women should only dress in high heels and skirts?

Doesn't this mean that when someone travels to a different culture that has different aspects their gender changes?

Doesn't this mean that gender is determined by culture and not a personal feeling?

Presumably we both have a clear understanding of what "bathroom" and "penis" and "vagina" mean. — Michael

I do, but you were the one asserting that words have an unambiguous meaning, contradicting yourself again.

Yet you assert that a trans-woman has a vagina when what they actually have is an open wound that they have to use medical grade stents to keep open. Any misunderstanding I have is a result of your inability to define the terms you are using in a meaningful way. — Harry Hindu

Call it whatever you like. A random stranger in the same room isn’t going to be able to tell the difference between a natural and an artificial set of genitals.

A trans man who has had bottom surgery ought use the men’s changing room and a trans woman who has had bottom surgery ought use the women’s changing room.

Their chromosomes and the genitals they were born with are irrelevant.

No wonder I couldn't find what I was looking for. I was asking about their feeling of what it means to be a man or woman. You're now talking about cultural norms which are the antithesis of personal feelings. — Harry Hindu

Try reading it again. You’ll see that the word “psychological” was listed.

but you were the one asserting that words have an unambiguous meaning — Harry Hindu

No I wasn’t. Many words have ambiguous meanings. Many words have multiple meanings. I’m not the one asking for some singular definition of “male gender”, just as I’m not the one claiming that there’s some singular definition of “male sex”. Language and biology and psychology and society and culture are not that simple. The world is a complex place, and is precisely why any essentialist approach to the issue is doomed to fail.

woman" includes a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment [to female]

This is one of the reasons liberals have been having a tough time in elections and it's just wrong. Trans men aren't women. They're men pretending to be women.

This is one of the reasons liberals have been having a tough time in elections and it's just wrong. Trans men aren't women. They're men pretending to be women. — RogueAI

The UK Supreme Court overturned that Scottish law. Only biological women can fill the 50% quota for seats on the public boards.

They're men pretending to be women. — RogueAI

Or. they might actually think that. Still, I can think I'm a disabled person but if my legs work absolutely fine and I cut off an actual paraplegic and park at their one reserved handicapped spot, depending on the society, I might soon be needing that spot legitimately.

"Pretending", per se, requires conscious and willfully intended imagination that still cognitively understands the underlying nature of what is real and what is not and chooses to temporarily embrace the latter.

So. As it is, your critique could use a bit of, refinement, shall we say, before it becomes as accurate as it could be.

You could say they're men acting like women. But there are problems with that too. If someone thinks they're Napoleon and they dress and behave and insist on being referred to as Napoleon, from a rational person's point of view, aren't they pretending to be Napolean?

This thread is no longer interesting.

Edit: Ah, just saw that substativisms thread was merged here. I'll take another look.

further social engineering is required. — substantivalism

required? That's .... not a good position.

most bodies want gay and black people to be classified as biologically, or at least socially or morally, atypical not to mention inferior — T Clark

This seems patently untrue... Struck me as fully bizarre and almost made-up.

Otherwise, I agree with that comment entirely.

Might have been simpler if folk just butted out of other people's business, don't you think? — Banno

They don't. So we don't. Quite literally, in a physical sense. That, perhaps, you've not seen or experienced this is no argument.

So has anyone disambiguated the concept of gender?
My concept was never ambiguous. Sex of a person is immutable.
Gender was a word to describe the social and cultural characteristics of the two sexes.
It became ambiguous when people thought there was a magical way to cross this boundary of immutable sex and become a different gender. Now in 2025 when anyone can take on any role they wish (in western liberal democracies at least) then the concept of gender is becoming less and less important. The only issue is when the magical gender morphing men come up against current norms for sex based exclusive places. No one has an issue with women in men’s spaces. There is an issue of mutilation of women’s bodies and flooding them with synthetic hormones but that is for the butchers of the medical profession.
It all seems fairly simple and the ambiguity started with the assumption that men could become women and vice versa.
Muddled, deluded and (sometimes) politically motivated people took a perfectly unambiguous word and made a mess which thankfully is slowly unraveling.
The only reason that it is an issue is because females still have a way to go before the social imbalance of power and safety is levelled. That will not happen in anyone’s lifetime posting on here. Until then they need to have exclusive places.
People can be whoever they are, can present however they like but the red line for me is women having a right to compete in sport and to have spaces without men when they are vulnerable.

But how is that different than Bruce Jenner identifying as a woman? Why is that tolerated?" — RogueAI

I don't think it is different. What is tolerated depends on the culture of the time in relation to the social construct in each case.

What is tolerated depends on the culture of the time in relation to the social construct in each case. — unenlightened

Hence, slavery was perfectly acceptable until William Wilberforce wasn’t happy. (I know it wasn’t just him)

Of course! Whatever is considered acceptable is considered acceptable until it is considered unacceptable. Slavery was accepted and normalised. When I was at school, corporal punishment was accepted and normal; now it is not. So bite me!

This is one of the reasons liberals have been having a tough time in elections and it's just wrong. Trans men aren't women. They're men pretending to be women. — RogueAI

Even if that were true, that has nothing to do with how laws work.

They could have written the law in this way:

A1. At least 50% of the board must be X
A2. The term “X” in (1) means “cisgender women or transgender women”

But instead they wrote it this way:

B1. At least 50% of the board must be women
B2. The term “women” in (1) means “cisgender women or transgender women”

The only issue with B is that B2 is incompatible with the EA 2010. Had the law been written as A then the Supreme Court would have ruled differently.

You could say they're men acting like women. — RogueAI

What does that mean?

If “woman” means “biologically female” then to act like a woman is to act biologically female. But what does it mean to act biologically female?

Does it mean to act as if one has an XX karyotype? What does that mean?

Does it mean to act as if one has ovaries and a womb? What does that mean?

The fact that you even use a phrase like “act like a woman” shows at least a partial understanding of gender-as-distinct-from-sex.

Of course! Whatever is considered acceptable is considered acceptable until it is considered unacceptable. Slavery was accepted and normalised. When I was at school, corporal punishment was accepted and normal; now it is not. So bite me! — unenlightened

So bite me!:smile:

Proper debate on here.

Does it mean to act as if one has ovaries and a womb? — Michael

My wife does not have ovaries or a womb, but she does have breasts and a vagina. Should I be worried I am an unwitting homosexual? (She used to have them but transitioned surgically due to cancer.) Should I tell her to use the mens'

So bite me!:smile:

Proper debate on here. — Malcolm Parry

Stupid leading question leading nowhere, deserves a little ridicule.

The fact that you even use the phrase “act like a woman” shows at least a partial understanding of gender-as-distinct-from-sex. — Michael

Gender was a word to describe the social and cultural characteristics of the two sexes.

So a man (Adult Human male) is acting in the manner associated with the social and cultural characteristics of a woman (Adult Human Female).

Stupid leading question leading nowhere, deserves a little ridicule. — unenlightened

Leading nowhere with you. I agree.

So engage! Stop playing the cheap attorney, trying to catch me out with leading questions, and respond to what I am actually saying. You cannot even respond to my answers to your stupid leading questions except to find fault with my style. Pathetic!

So engage! Stop playing the cheap attorney, trying to catch me out with leading questions, and respond to what I am actually saying. You cannot even respond to my answers to your stupid leading questions except to find fault with my style. Pathetic! — unenlightened

I'm not trying to catch anyone out. I'm interested in the topic and why people think the way they do and why society is in such a muddle about it. It's fascinating.

Gender was a word to describe the social and cultural characteristics of the two sexes.

So a man (Adult Human male) is acting in the manner associated with the social and cultural characteristics of a woman (Adult Human Female). — Malcolm Parry

One can psychologically identify as belonging to the social and cultural group that is usually occupied by the opposite biological sex.

And words like “man” and “woman” can refer either to a person of a particular biological sex or to a person who belongs to the particular social and cultural group usually occupied by a particular biological sex. Usually these are congruent, but sometimes they’re not.

One can psychologically identify as belonging to the social and cultural group that is usually occupied by the opposite biological sex — Michael

I agree.

And words like “man” and “woman” can refer either to a person of a particular biological sex or to a person who belongs to a particular social and cultural group. Usually these are congruent, but sometimes they’re not. — Michael

I disagree.

I disagree — Malcolm Parry

Which goes back to what I said on page 8.

I think that many of these discussions tend to get caught up in pointless arguments about what the “real” meaning of a word is.

If you choose to use the words "man" and "woman" to refer to the general biological dichotomy found in humans, then fine. If you choose to the use the words to refer to some general psychological or social dichotomy, then fine. It simply doesn't matter.

The pertinent question is: should bathrooms, sports teams, prisons, etc. be divided by biological sex, by gender identity, by something else, or by nothing at all? — Michael

The pertinent question is: should bathrooms, sports teams, prisons, etc. be divided by biological sex, by gender identity, by something else, or by nothing at all? — Michael

Which we disagree on.

Which we disagree on. — Malcolm Parry

So why is that?

Prima facie there’s no good reason to treat people with an XX karyotype and people with an XY karyotype differently. Outside of any medical issues, what relevance is DNA to everyday life?

And prime facie there’s no good reason to treat people with ovaries and people with testes differently. Outside of any medical issues or sexual reproduction, what relevance are gonads to everyday life?

And prime facie there’s no good reason to treat people with a penis and people with a vagina differently. Outside of any medical issues or sexual reproduction, what relevance are genitals to everyday life? Perhaps it’s only relevant wherever nudity is a thing?

The question we have to then ask is why are there social and cultural differences between the sexes? Is it because of biological differences, or are biological differences merely incidental? Are there social and cultural differences between the sexes because of psychological differences between the sexes? If so, and if there are people who are biologically female but have a psychology closer to the typical biological male than to the typical biological female then it makes more sense for this individual to be treated like the typical biological male - precisely because in everyday life our psychology is much more important than our DNA, our gonads, and our genitals.

The pertinent question is: should bathrooms, sports teams, prisons, etc. be divided by biological sex, by gender identity, by something else, or by nothing at all? — Michael

Round here at least, because folks are not all great at reading, toilets are generally labelled with a cartoon of a person either in a dress or in trousers; these items of clothing are not genetically determined. The meaning of the pictures are thus unambiguously gender distinguished, not biologically distinguished.

Sports teams have their own tests - it used to be hormone based, but I don't know, these days.

Incidentally, speaking of changing rooms - what does one do if a man wants to take his young daughter, or a woman her young son, to the swimming bath? This is a genuine problem that arises from the separation, however our current question is resolved. Obviously a babe in arms has to go with the parent; obviously a teen has to go on their own. Where is the line between them? And for children with Downs' or other disability? Would you send your 4 yr old to get changed on their own? (This is a genuine social dilemma I have faced with my daughter)

Incidentally, speaking of changing rooms - what does one do if a man wants to take his young daughter, or a woman her young son, to the swimming bath? This is a genuine problem that arises from the separation, however our current question is resolved. Obviously a babe in arms has to go with the parent; obviously a teen has to go on their own. Where is the line between them? And for children with Downs' or other disability? Would you send your 4 yr old to get changed on their own? (This is a genuine social dilemma I have faced with my daughter) — unenlightened

I would have thought that anywhere that has children being undressed would have private cubicles.

That’s how it was the last time I went swimming (years ago). There weren’t separate men’s and women’s changing rooms, just individual cubicles that anyone could use.

I would have thought that anywhere that has children being undressed would have private cubicles. — Michael

Let me take you by the hand, and lead you to my local pool, I will show you something that will make you change your mind.

So why is that? — Michael

Because women cannot compete with men in sports and because many women feel threatened and uncomfortable when men are are around when they are undressing, changing sanitary products etc.