What strikes me is that there are certain presumptions built into saying this or that is or isn't art, which are easy to miss, and which often include knowledge of the artist's intention, and the apprehension or misapprehension of the artwork's viewers, and the validity or lack thereof of particular institutions of art. When it comes down to it, for anything beyond the obvious, only the hypothetical cultural "person", society personified, can and does validly make the judgement. — Baden

I’m more and more open minded as I get older, which isn’t usually the way! I’m confident enough to not care if I don’t “get” it or think someone is bullshitting. I’m happy to say it is a piece of work that does nothing for me but don’t dismiss it. The most artistic thing Hirst did was amass millions. I was quite impressed.
As for violence as art. Why not?

The social construct was created as a means of distinguishing between the sexes in a society that covers their bodies with clothing. — Harry Hindu

Never understood where the leap came for gender to describe societal differences between the sexes to people wanting society to validate their right to pick a gender. Very dismissive of women and their status in society. Women fought long and hard to get the rights and respect they now have.

Damien Hurst's cow is art has nothing to do with whether you, I or Vera Mont like it or consider people who go to see it, gullible etc — Baden

I 100% agree. I used it as something that I thought was of little merit but needed the slaughter of an animal to complete. I stopped replying because there was little point

It doesn’t. The 2% figure includes people with syndromes that only males or females have. A tiny percentage of people are ambiguous but that is because of developmental issues. It is not a spectrum. Do you believe it is and if so why?

This is a genuine question to try and understand why it is important for all the various labels for the various phenomena to be not based on sex?
I am interested in why in 2025 that anyone even had to label themselves. I’m a bloke because I am but I also read Jane Austen, I love cooking and I love some other stuff that be seen as traditionally female. I have no issue with how anyone dresses, who they have relationships with etc etc. However, in the society we are in today certain activities and certain spaces should exclude men. Imho. For participation in sport and for times when women have to go to bathroom or get undressed. Why is this so controversial and hateful to some people?
I do say that a trans woman is a man. I am happy to address them as the name they wish to be called but cannot and will not see them as women. Why is that wrong? If people think I am wrong , why?
I find the subject fascinating because I see it as simple but people make it complicated.

Well, what was said in reference to post surgical trans women was: "A man with his penis removed doesn't have a vagina". — LuckyR

Which is factually correct.

The prevalence of molestation and violent inter-sex tendencies among the male population. — substantivalism

What do you want society to do about it? If you have answers i’m in full support.

Thanks for your agreement I'm sure those rape survivors appreciate your. . . desire to. . . eventually. . . maybe. . . possibly. . . address it.

Just not. . . now. — substantivalism

I’m with you all the way. But until you’ve fixed the world maybe just allow women to go for a pee without men in the bathrooms. Seems fair

I’m not sure what you are going on about. What problem are you trying to solve?

Do you have a problem with mixed sex spaces?

Eventually those people walk out of their cubicles. . . and see each other. . . in the same space. — substantivalism

Yes. I think women need certain exclusive places for certain activities.

As for the rest I doubt we will ever agree. I’m not even sure what you think needs to be done.

The reality is that we are stuck with mixed sex spaces. — substantivalism

I don’t have an issue with unisex spaces with individual cubicles.

Are you going to remove all mixed sex spaces in all aspects of society? I — substantivalism

What mixed sex spaces need removing?

Trans people are really women according to definition 56 — substantivalism

They aren’t according to United Kingdom law. How are they women? In your view? What makes a trans woman a woman?

As Michael continues to show through his own links there is the still prevalent risk trans-people have as regards using the bathroom according to their sex — substantivalism

Then it is up to the authorities to provide a space for these vulnerable men. Not foist them on women.

Well yes and mostly no. True a minority of trans women have "bottom surgery", but of those who do, which was the subject matter being discussed, almost noone has their penis removed without the creation of a vagina. Which was the claim I was addressing. — LuckyR

It isn’t a vagina.

.
the muscular tube leading from the external genitals to the cervix of the uterus in women and most female mammals.

nteresting. So noting you have little understanding of a surgical procedure is now an "insult". Okay, I guess I apologize for "insulting" you. While you're right that few trans folks get surgery, that doesn't address my opinion on the status of those who do. — LuckyR

I have a perfectly adequate understanding thanks very much. I think your opinion is feeble and based upon nothing. That cover it?

Your declaration of what "most" trans women look like inspires no confidence considering creation of a neo vagina is standard transition surgery so you're clearly out of your depth. — LuckyR

Most trans women don’t have their penises removed. I’m not sure having a penis removed would ensure a man looks like a woman. What is it with the insult?

Where does my concept of a chair come from? Perhaps over a period of time I see many different concrete and particular sets of shapes, but each time this set of shapes has been labelled a "chair". Eventually, because of the nature of the brain, I will begin to understand the concept of "chair". IE, it is impossible to understand a new concept by seeing just one particular and concrete instantiation of it. — RussellA

Your concept of chair and recognising a chair comes from many aspects of how we interpret the world. The detail of all the aspects of how you end up looking at a chair and recognising it is a chair would fill a library. However, a child doesn't need to know the detail to know what a chair is.
The detail is fascinating and great for discussion but is mainly irrelevant.
I like detail and I am fascinated by why we think and how we have amassed such incredible understanding of the world but it isn't necessary for living. How different people view the modern world is incredible to me.

Your argument makes no sense. Who is likely to disrupt a women's exclusive place more, a person with breasts and a vagina who happens to be XY or a short person with a beard and a deep voice who happens to be XX? — LuckyR

A man with his penis removed does not have a vagina. A woman with a beard and a deep voice is still a woman.

There will be no gender inspection at the entrance to toilets etc so if a man passes for a woman because they have had extensive work then no one will be any the wiser. Most trans women look like men. If a trans man wishes to use the men’s facilities no man will object. If they wish to use the women’s facilities they have every right to do as they are a woman.

It's either sex segregation or not. We either allow them to mix while aware of the risks involved or we allow the government as well as social strong handed individuals to intervene and restrict this mixing. — substantivalism

Do you wish to eradicate single sex spaces?

Why is it less safe?

Is it because there is a rape/molestation issue. . . having to do with one particular sex statistically speaking. . . should we then be talking about that because its the reason why its unsafe?

Should we be. . . proposing social/cultural solutions for this difficult mental health crisis that a mere legal band aid isn't going to fix?

Really weird we are just. . . avoiding that. — substantivalism

I agree with all of that and male violence should be addressed. Until then maybe keep males out of places where women are vulnerable. Once tgat has been overcome then ask women if they feel socially comfortable in toilets and changing rooms with men even when there is no threat of violence. I would hazard a guess many would prefer to keep men out.

Well in my experience, outside of online pontificating, everyone I know uses external genital appearance as the final practical arbiter of an individual's gender, thus fully transitioned trans folks pass that test. Perhaps your experience is different. I'm not speaking of athletic competition, rather the "exclusive places" argument. — LuckyR

The “exclusive places” are for females. A man without a penis does not pass that test. Just because a man has no penis doesn’t mean he automatically looks like a woman. Do you think women should have places where men are excluded from?

No more than the microscope slides, organs and bones I worked on in Pathology. Those patients died, in some case and recovered in others. We preserved parts of them for diagnosis, scientific study and teaching. We didn't make a public spectacle of them. While not violent, hurtful or destructive, this isn't art, either,. — Vera Mont

Many people considered it art. I wasn’t a fan but I saw them in a very posh gallery in London.

So you agree there isn't much of a physical advantage in transwomen competing in darts?

If so then we're reverting to the "exclusive spaces" argument (which I've addressed, and you've not commented on in reply). — LuckyR

I said the male advantage in those sports comes from the social aspects. If women want to fully participate it makes sense to have women only competition. I disagree that fully transitioned trans women should have access to these spaces. A clean definition line needs drawing imho. I think we are on the same page apart from how fully transitioned people are treated.

To me, art is creative, rather than destructive. That's the line I draw. — Vera Mont

Is Damien Hurst’s cow in formaldehyde art?
I assume the cow didn’t die of natural causes.

This brings to mind something from the Tao Te Ching - from Verse 38, Gia-Fu Fengs translation.

When a truly kind man does something, he leaves nothing undone.
When a just man does something, he leaves a great deal to be done.
When a disciplinarian does something and no one responds,
He rolls up his sleeves in an attempt to enforce order. — T Clark

Why does it bring to mind that?

So you're unfamiliar with the height and muscle development advantage in sports that male-to-female transexuals possess? Okay, then let me introduce the issue to you (even though it was a hotly debated concept within this very thread). — LuckyR

I think we have our wires crossed. There is no debate because men have significant physical advantages over women.

Some people admire bullfighting as an art form, some serial killers include ritual mutilation of their victims and I've heard of the artistry of a very effective inquisitor. But having been forced to watch "the physicality" of hockey games so anticipated by their fans and boxing matches, I conclude that no matter how artfully violence is employed, I can't regard it as art. — Vera Mont

A clean left hook can be as admired as ballet by some. Ballet is art.

Art engenders a reaction, so can a brutal knockdown.

As someone said earlier, there is performance and an art in bullfighting.

Without knowing for certain, I’m guessing how you think it should be done is significantly different from how I think it should be done. — T Clark

Guess away. I’m a slightly left of centre liberal who expects people to step up in life. Do whatever they wish in private as long as it doesn’t affect the people around them too much.

You write as if there is not such a system in place already. There is, but perhaps it is not being done in accordance with your preferences. There is often no consensus on who is we and who is they. — T Clark

Yes that is correct. It definitely isn’t being done as I think it should.

I wasn’t speaking against social control, it’s needed. I was only making the distinction between that and morality. But when you take out the idea of morality, social control loses much of its authority. And that’s probably a good thing. They’re doing it because they want to control my behavior, not because I did anything wrong. — T Clark

I think society needs controlling without any need for recourse to morality. It shouldn’t be a “they” it should be a “we”
We need a framework for social interactions that don’t need to be linked with morality. A few social expectations of behaviour and dress would be a nice start.

The formal systems of so-called morality you discuss are more about how someone thinks other people should behave. As I see it, that's not morality at all, it's social control — T Clark

The older I get the and the more permissive society has become a little bit of agreed social control would be good thing.

I have thousands of unwritten rules for all occasions and these change as circumstances change. Are they morals? I don't think they are but I like when I recently thought about why I think and act how I do, it was quite amusing think of the actions consciously. We all do it but the structure of my thousands of rules come from a fairly consistent framework. Many people have a terrible framework for making decisions and how they act. Is that a lack of morals or just bad coping strategies for how they've been raised?

Thanks for saying nothing at all and pushing the can down the road. Proactive is the word for the day. — substantivalism

Why are people so keen to dismantle women’s exclusive places? Why do we need to re engineer bathrooms and changing rooms for a less safe inferior solution? There are social aspects of these places that aren’t factored in. I find the whole mindset dismissive of women.

I was responding to the physical prowess argument, so your reply misses my point. — LuckyR

What was your point? What argument is there about physical prowess? It’s a biological fact.

I don't disagree in strength and speed sports. Billiards, darts and poker, not so much. As to exclusive places, if someone has had surgery, IMO they're entitled. — LuckyR

There is the social aspect of competing in leagues with darts snooker etc. access to facilities etc that mean it makes sense to have female only pursuits. Darts is a very social and male dominated pursuit. If women want to pursue it then a women’s only league seems reasonable.
Imho, exclusive places are for females. We can agree to disagree but it’s for women to decide in the end.

The right to pee without any biological males around? — frank

Seems a reasonable request

There are social norms that needed to change. It's not illegal to point and laugh at a crossdresser [ETA I used this term, because I was going to make a point about how in the 70's and 80's people did exactly that when they saw crossdressers], but it's still wrong and polite society should not tolerate that behavior. — RogueAI

Manners can always improve and I think the world (well where I reside) is very tolerant of people and their life choices.

think society should be more tolerant of trans people — RogueAI

I’m very tolerant and trans people can do whatever they wish if it is within the law. What they cannot do is infringe the rights of women. Why should people be tolerant of that?

But why do we have this female space? You've said before that it's because cis women would be uncomfortable sharing a changing room with biological men. But they'll also be uncomfortable sharing a changing room with "passing" trans men. So if "making cis women uncomfortable" is a good reason to exclude biological men from these changing rooms it must also be a good reason to exclude "passing" trans men from these changing rooms. — Michael

I agree and I doubt that trans men would use the woman's bathroom BUT if they insisted then they have every right to do so. They are female.

Because of the anti-trans agenda. — Michael

I don't see it in real life in UK but there is always nutters that use issues for their own agenda.

You seem somewhat bothered by something. Not sure what it is.

Anyway, you can have the last word. Bye have fun — I like sushi

Bothered? I'm discussing a topic on a message board. The topic being males in female only spaces.

But thanks for letting me have the last word. Not sure what I've said that isn't logical and equitable.

The cisgender woman in the women's changing room isn't going to know that the muscular, bearded person changing next to them was actually born a woman, and is going to be as uncomfortable with them being there as they would be a cisgender man being there. — Michael

I agree.

If a trans man (after having surgery) is indistinguishable from a cis man, then what rationale is there for allowing trans men in women's changing rooms but not cis men? — Michael

Because they are a woman. They have every right to use a female space.

Well then now we get into murky territory. Who gets to decide whether or not a trans woman looks enough like a woman to use the women's changing room? Different people might have different opinions. And sometimes cisgender women are mistaken for men. — Michael

I think in 99.99% of the time it is obvious. There has been no issue. No murky territory.

Why would manly looking women now be an issue since it hasn't been before?