Sex is a compound attribute.

Chromosomal sex is not the entirety of sex. There’s also hormonal sex and anatomical sex. If anything, anatomical sex is the original referent of the word, from before we knew anything about hormones or chromosomes. And there are some people naturally born with a chromosomal sex that differs from their hormonal or anatomical sex (women AFAB but with XY chromosomes), and everyone has always referred to them by their anatomical sex (as we usually don’t know anything but anatomical sex about anyone).

Hormonal and genital sex can be changed already, and it’s only a matter of time before chromosomal sex can be changed too (hello CRISPR). — Pfhorrest

Biological sex is based on a combination of traits:

- chromosomes (in humans, XY is male, XX female)
- genitals (penis vs. vagina)
- gonads (testes vs. ovaries)
- hormones (males have higher relative levels of testosterone than women, while women have higher levels of estrogen)
- secondary sex characteristics that aren’t connected with the reproductive system but distinguish the sexes, and usually appear at puberty (breasts, facial hair, size of larynx, subcutaneous fat, etc.)

Using genitals and gonads alone, more than 99.9% of people fall into two non-overlapping classes—male and female—and the other traits almost always occur with these. If you did a principal components analysis using the combination of all five traits, you’d find two widely separated clusters with very few people in between. Those clusters are biological realities, just as horses and donkeys are biological realities, even though they can produce hybrids (sterile mules) that fall morphologically in between.

If sex were purely a social construct, sexual selection wouldn’t work: males would look identical to females. That difference itself suggests that there’s a biological reality to sex, and that this biological reality—the correlation of chromosomal constitution with reproductive traits and with secondary sexual traits—is what has caused both behavioral and morphological differences between the sexes. If sex were purely a social construct, then male deer wouldn’t have antlers, male peacocks wouldn’t have long tails, human females wouldn’t have breasts, etc.

"Woman" and "female" are words and can be redefined any time standard usage changes. If enough people accept people born as biological males who identify themselves as females as women, then they will be. — T Clark

When enough people defined the Earth as flat, did that make the Earth flat? When enough people use the word, "god", does that make god exist? The words you decide to use does not make it so. It just makes it the words you use. If not, then there would never be such things as lies and mass delusions.

To me the narrative that trans-people are changing their gender or sex doesn’t adequately describe the situation, and presents a false hope. It suggests that when people are not happy with their body they should disfigure it. And that’s what this is. When a trans-person enters the realm of surgery and drug therapy they are disfiguring their body, nothing besides. I suspect that farther down the road, perhaps when we discover the cause, we’ll look back on this time in medicine as barbaric and unethical.

there are perfect theories within psychology what does exactly explain this issue : Jung Anima Animus... and what happens when the human being is unable to integrate these into his/her psyche. As well as what happens when humans are unable to integrate the shadow into her/him self.

If sex were purely a social construct — Harry Hindu

Not sure if you think I was saying that, but I wasn’t.

I was saying, like you did even more thoroughly, that there are a bunch of different components to sex — and that some of those CAN be changed already, and for others the technology to do so is already under development.

Perhaps something like the integration you speak of would be a better and more humane goal than disfiguring the body. Therapists should move to disfigure the shadow rather than the self.

Absolutely Fabulous? — bert1

I try.

When enough people defined the Earth as flat, did that make the Earth flat? When enough people use the word, "god", does that make god exist? The words you decide to use does not make it so. It just makes it the words you use. If not, then there would never be such things as lies and mass delusions. — Harry Hindu

Words mean what people say they mean, what they act as if they mean. Calling the Earth flat doesn't change the meanings of the words "Earth" and "flat." A biological man who defines herself as a woman doesn't automatically lose her penis and testicles, but that probably isn't what she wants. She probably wants to be seen socially as a woman. Whether that's a good thing for society to allow that is open to debate, but it is something that can be accomplished by changing the dictionary.

I suspect that farther down the road, perhaps when we discover the cause, we’ll look back on this time in medicine as barbaric and unethical. — NOS4A2

Perhaps, but given our current knowledge it's considered the most effective treatment for gender dysphoria.

Gender Dysphoria in Adults: An Overview and Primer for Psychiatrists

Expert consensus regarding the treatment of adults has been arrived at after many years of clinical experience. Attempts to engage individuals in psychotherapy to change their gender identity or expression are currently not considered fruitful by the mental health professionals with the most experience working in this area...

Although treatment with exogenous estrogen or testosterone carries a risk for medical side effects, both have been associated with improvement with respect to anxiety, mood, and mood stability, as well as overall satisfaction and quality of life for both transgender women and transgender men. Similarly, review of the available literature demonstrates the benefits of surgery in alleviating GD and the rarity of postsurgical regret.

You've claimed before to be something of a right libertarian or anarcho-capitalist, and so presumably believe in the individual's right to bodily integrity? Are you also in favour of evidence-based treatment? If so, then given the above, how can sex reassignment surgery be considered barbaric and unethical?

And is your objection to sex reassignment surgery an objection on principle, or do you just believe that our currently technology isn't up to the task? If something like sex-reassignment via gene editing were possible in adult humans (similar to what has already been done in mice), would you be more accepting of it?

When enough people defined the Earth as flat, did that make the Earth flat? When enough people use the word, "god", does that make god exist? The words you decide to use does not make it so. It just makes it the words you use. If not, then there would never be such things as lies and mass delusions. — Harry Hindu

People didn't define the Earth as flat. The definitions of "Earth" and "flat" were what they are now; they just incorrectly predicated flatness of Earth. But there's a disagreement over the definition of "woman"; for some it refers to a human with XX chromosomes and born with a womb, a vagina, ovaries, etc., and for others it means something slightly different.

And talking about one or the other being the "correct" definition would somewhat misleading. It's more accurate to talk about what you mean when you use the word, or what I mean when I use the word, or what most English-speaking people mean when they use the word, etc. And as T Clark says, how we use words (and so their definition) changes over time, e.g. with "man" which was once a gender neutral term meaning “someone, one, human”, hence the word "mankind". Just as the meaning of "man" has changed, so too has the meaning of "woman".

You're welcome to live in the past if you want, but it seems strange to fight against the evolution of language. Why are you so opposed to us using the term "woman" to refer to people other than those with XX chromosomes and born with a womb, a vagina, ovaries, etc.?

Good, well thought-out post.

Why are you so opposed to us using the term "woman" to refer to people other than those with XX chromosomes and born with a womb, a vagina, ovaries, etc.? — Michael

Because I being one know they are males

Because I being one know they are males — Iris0

And by "males" you mean...?

the opposite sex to myself

the opposite sex to myself — Iris0

Which means what? What does it mean to be a man and what does it mean to be a woman, and in what way are they "opposites"?

I do know the difference between a bull and a cow when I see them and thus there is something in the physical appearance that is different - just as a lion and a lioness --. but you do not see that difference? Why?

You're welcome to live in the past if you want, but it seems strange to fight against the evolution of language. Why are you so opposed to us using the term "woman" to refer to people other than those with XX chromosomes and born with a womb, a vagina, ovaries, etc.? — Michael

The opposition is because it normalizes what he believes to be deviant behavior. Women are naturally occurring, whereas trans people are modified freakaoids according to that view.

Your desire to change the usage of the word is due to your desire to eliminate prejudices. There is an obvious difference between a biological female and a transsexual, but you wish to call them both women because those differences are irrelevant to you day to day (but not if you were a gynecologist or surfing a dating app for example).

Language does evolve, but different populations use words differently, and opposing groups don't have the right to prescribe word usage to the other. If I live among those who think transsexuals are deviants, I suppose correct word usage in my group would not allow them to be called women (because women are natural and normal).

None of this suggests calling trans people freaks is moral or to be encouraged, just as it would be similarly offensive to use racial slurs within a group so as to clarify your belief in their inferiority, but that sub-group would be linguistically correct in their word usage.

Of course how you speak and what you highlight with your word usage shows the sort of culture you have and what values you hold. So to those who insist a fully trans woman be called "he," I think it says only something of the speaker, but not of the woman he mocks, but I don't think the speaker has violated a language rule. He's just a dick.

So physical appearance determines whether or not one is a man or a woman? Notwithstanding individual differences, transgender men can look like cisgender men and transgender women can look like cisgender women. So these transgender men and cisgender men are both men, and these transgender women and cisgender women are both women?

men normally as do a lion and a bull have some equipment between their legs and they normally produce sperm - I have not that sort of equipment nor do I produce sperm - I ovulate and I can bare children as do lionesses and cows bare their offspring ... that is basic biology for me and the difference is due to producing offsprings thus nature has created us such - all except for hermaphroditis ---and other insects that differ from the norm of male and female. What is the point - I do not understand what you are trying to convey...

You're welcome to live in the past if you want, but it seems strange to fight against the evolution of language. Why are you so opposed to us using the term "woman" to refer to people other than those with XX chromosomes and born with a womb, a vagina, ovaries, etc.? — Michael

I agree with most of what you've written, but I can understand the resistance to redefining the word "woman." I think many people, including many women, feel that changing the definition of "woman" is disrespectful and risky. It's taken decades, centuries to start changing the political and social status of women. Then this comes along and muddies the waters. An extreme example is the controversy about transgender women competing in women's athletics.

I especially worry that making sex redefinition too easy will hurt vulnerable people, e.g. children and the mentally ill. Medical intervention can have, will probably have, serious and irreversible effects. Adolescents and some adults are not mature and knowledgeable enough to make those kinds of decisions.

men normally as do a lion and a bull have some equipment between their legs and they normally produce sperm - I have not that sort of equipment nor do I produce sperm - I ovulate and I can bare children as do lionesses and cows bare their offspring ... that is basic biology for me and the difference is due to producing offsprings thus nature has created us such - all except for hermaphroditis ---and other insects that differ from the norm of male and female. What is the point - I do not understand what you are trying to convey... — Iris0

Not every cisgender woman ovulates and can bare children. Some transgender women have breasts and a vagina. Some transgender men have a penis and testicles.

feel that changing the definition of "woman" is disrespectful and risky. — T Clark

you feel? Ask me what I feel when someone who is no woman is trying to annihilate me and who I am and tell me that I do not exist the way I have always seen myself and men - and I like men, because they have what I do lack and that is the entire ball game.
I do not only feel deeply offended by I do not understand what is there in this sort of --- strange discussions

There is an obvious difference between a biological female and a transsexual, but you wish to call them both women because those differences are irrelevant to you day to day (but not if you were a gynecologist or surfing a dating app for example). — Hanover

Maybe this is the heart of the matter - are the differences between a biological female and a transsexual irrelevant. As you point out, there are certainly situations where they are not. Are we ready to say that, except in a limited area related to biological function and medical practice, men and women should be treated exactly the same? I'm not sure how I'd answer that.

please do NOT offend me. A vagina is not a cavity like some whatnot made o resemble it - it is a deeply sensible part of my body that I was born with - the resemblance of a penis handmaid by some physician is not a penis in the real sens --- why do you say this?

A copy of an Omega is still not an Omega and that is only a watch not my body - you talk about my most intimate parts like they are nothing... but they are! They are part of who I am and was born to be.

I agree with most of what you've written, but I can understand the resistance to redefining the word "woman." I think many people, including many women, feel that changing the definition of "woman" is disrespectful and risky. It's taken decades, centuries to start changing the political and social status of women. Then this comes along and muddies the waters. An extreme example is the controversy about transgender women competing in women's athletics. — T Clark

I can sort of understand that objection, but I don't think that that's Harry's objection. His objection seems to be that his definition of "woman" is the correct one, and so people who use the word differently are incorrect and even delusional (almost as if he thinks that transgender men think themselves cisgender men, and see a penis where there is none).

I especially worry that making sex redefinition too easy will hurt vulnerable people, e.g. children and the mentally ill. Medical intervention can have, will probably have, serious and irreversible effects. Adolescents and some adults are not mature and knowledgeable enough to make those kinds of decisions. — T Clark

From the article I cited above:

Whether the initial evaluation for hormones is done by the hormone prescriber or by a mental health professional, criteria for starting hormones are the same: the presence of persistent GD, the ability to give informed consent, and relative mental health stability. Insurance carriers and surgeons require mental health evaluation before transition-related surgeries to assess and document eligibility, readiness, and medical necessity of the requested procedure.

are the differences between a biological female and a transsexual irrelevant — T Clark

no - they are at the very depth of who we are it is more than just an identity it is the entire being we are

It's taken decades, centuries to start changing the political and social status of women. Then this comes along and muddies the waters. — T Clark

Of course, this came along a while ago , with works like Butler’s Gender Trouble more than 30 years ago.

I do not only feel deeply offended by I do not understand what is there in this sort of --- strange discussions — Iris0

Seems like you are saying what I said, just more forcefully. As I said, I can understand your point. I think it's a good argument. I think I would be angry too.

no - they are at the very depth of who we are it is more than just an identity it is the entire being we are — Iris0

I agree, but I'm 69 years old. I don't know what comes next and my opinion will matter less and less the older I get. I won't be the one who has to deal with whatever changes are to come.

please do NOT offend me. A vagina is not a cavity like some whatnot made o resemble it - it is a deeply sensible part of my body that I was born with - the resemblance of a penis handmaid by some physician is not a penis in the real sens --- why do you say this?

A copy of an Omega is still not an Omega and that is only a watch not my body - you talk about my most intimate parts like they are nothing... but they are! They are part of who I am and was born to be. — Iris0

Then you're talking past the transgender person. When a transgender man claims to be a man he is not claiming to have been born with a natural penis. When a transgender woman claims to be a woman she is not claiming to have been both with a natural vagina. What they mean by "man" and "woman" isn't what you mean by "man" and "woman". So you haven't actually answered the question you responded to. Why are you opposed to transgender people using the words "man" and "woman" in a different way to you?

Of course, this came along a while ago , with works like Butler’s Gender Trouble more than 30 years ago. — Joshs

Women got the right to vote in the US 101 years ago. And that was not the beginning.

they are at the very depth of who we are it is more than just an identity it is the entire being we are — Iris0

Do you believe that your vagina makes you attracted to men rather than women , and makes you feel and act feminine? Or do you think this happens in the brain? I. other words, do you accept the concept of psychological gender , apart from physical gender?