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.

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

Leading nowhere with you. I agree.

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).

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.

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)

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.

What about women's rights? Nobody even wants to mention the issue that brought on the recent UK ruling. Aren't women's rights enough of a concern to even talk about it? — frank

I think it's just old fashioned misogyny.

How is a cisgender woman to know if the person naked next to them is a trans man with an artificial penis and not a cisgender man with a natural penis?

How is a cisgender woman to know if the person naked next to them is a cisgender woman with a natural vagina and not a transgender woman with an artificial vagina — Michael

It's fairly obvious in most cases.

And you would include some trans women (i.e. those who have had bottom surgery) and exclude some trans men (i.e. those who have had bottom surgery) from women's changing rooms where this is nudity? — Michael

So you think a penis or lack of penis is important criteria in changing rooms? Is that correct?

I would prefer women to decide and if they were all happy to include everyone, so be it. But they aren’t and I’m aligned with women who want women’s spaces exclusively for women.

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

So you would exclude most trans women from changing rooms where there is nudity?

It's a start, I suppose.

Yes, much like a nightclub I used to frequent. — Michael

Changing rooms?

But, if we do have bathrooms that we name "men's bathrooms" and bathrooms that we name "women's bathrooms", and if only certain types of people are allowed to use the bathrooms named "men's bathrooms" and only certain types of people are allowed to use the bathrooms names "women's bathrooms", it's makes more sense for the division to be based on gender rather than sex. — Michael

So you would immediately take the male and female signs down and anyone can use them?

On the basis that we have separate men’s and women’s bathrooms. If cis and trans men are allowed to use the women’s bathrooms and cis and trans women are allowed to use the women’s bathrooms then we don’t actually have separate men’s and women’s bathrooms. — Michael

But why would you exclude them? What reasons would you give?

That was premised on the fact that we do have separate men's and women's bathrooms.

So, my position is:

1) bathrooms ought be unisex
2) but, if we have separate men's and women's bathrooms then they should be separated by gender, not sex — Michael

We do and you excluded cisgender men. On what basis?

Cisgender men, sure. — Michael

Is your quote

I'm not excluding anyone. I've said many times before that I think bathrooms should be unisex. You're the one who is saying that bathroom usage should be divided by biology. Why is that? If bathrooms are to be divided at all, why not instead by gender? — Michael

see above.

That just seems to be some minister's interpretation of the ruling. As far as I'm aware there's no law on bathroom usage at all. — Michael

I don't think there ever was.

Which are? — Michael

You tell me. You are excluding them.

The argument is that some of these spaces shouldn't be exclusively for those who are biologically female or for those who are biologically female; that they should be exclusively for those whose gender identity is female or whose gender identity is male.

So what good reasons are there for saying that Bathroom A should only be for biological males and that Bathroom B should only be for biological females? — Michael

The same reason that you yourself happily exclude cisgender males. All those reasons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role — Michael

Wiki again.

What does it practically mean? People can wear what they like, have sex with who they like, have any job they like, enjoy any pastime they like.

What does living like a woman mean? I know many woman who would be affronted if they were deemed men because they eschewed gender roles.

Someone people, like Malcolm Parry, clearly misunderstood both what laws are and how courts work. — Michael

I didn't. I couldn't care less about anyone's identity apart from when it bumps up against women's rights to fair sport and exclusive places.

The only issue I have is why people insist men have a right to access women's exclusive places. What people think and how they act, I care not.

Yes, words can mean more than one thing. So when you ask "what man is female?" what do you mean by the words "man" and "female"? Do you mean "what biological man is biologically female"? Because the answer to that question is "none", and everyone will agree.

But when someone else says "transgender men are men" they are not saying "transgender men are biologically male" because they mean something else by the word "men".

Your apparent inability to understand this is precisely why you are getting nowhere. — Michael

So, if I go with this definition of men and women.

How does a biological male live like a woman in 2025?

What characteristics mark a male living as a woman?

How does a biological female live like a man in 2025?

What characteristics mark a female living as a man?

Apart from pronouns, infiltrating women's sport and toilets, what is now deemed as living as a woman/man?

Well, for example, I typed "Is a transgender man a man?" into Google and got the result:

"Yes, a transgender man is considered a man. The term "transgender man" refers to an individual who was assigned female at birth but identifies as a man. — Baden

Their gender identity is male, and they live as a man. — Baden

."

She isn't considered a man in UK law. The person is a female trangender man" not a man. They weren't assigned at birth, they are female. No one assigned the sex. It just is.

Their gender identity is male, and they live as a man." — Baden

What does this even mean in 2025? What does living like a man entail?

The reason I got this result is that the dominant current discourse of developed nations does indeed go against biological reality. — Baden

It is utter nonsense and UK law agrees.

That words can mean more than one thing and that the English word “man” doesn’t just mean “a biological male” — Michael

Words can mean more than one thing but what man is female?

A simple list would be sufficient.

My understanding of what you are doing is expressing a cultural value that was formerly implicit due to the absence of a trans discourse, but you would like to be explicitly accepted in opposition to this new discourse. It seems then that you and your interlocutors have different values that you would like to be discursively dominant. As it stands, the idea of gender being separate to biological sex is dominant in most developed countries. Everyone has a right to openly argue for their discursive preferences, but that dominance can be demonstrated as an institutional fact. E.g. Webster's and the Oxford dictionary, recognize gender as having a legitimate meaning that can oppose biological sex.

All I am saying here is that a focus on arguing for your values would seem more productive than denying an institutional social reality. — Baden

I have no issue with anyone one claiming to be whatever gender they like. It is meaningless in the modern world until it comes up against biological reality. When that happens, then biology matters. Sport and women's exclusive places are for women only.

I'm not sure what trans discourse there is that trumps biological reality.

It is a very simple issue people appear to wish to make complicated. I have no idea why.

It is also a fascinating subject. The most fascinating bit is the reactions to the subject.

The phrase “goodwill to all men” from the Bible does not mean “goodwill to all biological males”. It means “goodwill to all people”.

Some words mean more than one thing. The word “bat” can refer to a flying mammal or it can refer to a type of club used in baseball or cricket. The word “man” can refer to a biological male or it can refer to any human. — Michael

You still don't get it. What is your point? Just because mankind or human refers to all humans does not mean a woman is "a man".

The fact that I have to keep repeating this clearly shows that you have reading or comprehension problems. I can’t help you any further. — Michael

I'm fine I understand the subtleties of language well. I know when some people are shoehorning nonsense into a conversation to defend their feeble stance.

We agree on everything other than that some men can be women and vice versa.

That the word “man” doesn’t just mean “a biological male”. How many times do I need to repeat this? — Michael

It does. How many times do I have to repeat this.

Mankind is not a man. Transgender man is not a man. Human is not a man. A man is a biological male.

I'm still not sure what you are trying too prove.

You just desperate for men to infiltrate women's spaces?

That the word "man" doesn't just mean "biologically male". I've been very clear on this. — Michael

But a man is a biological male.

So not all lions are large tawny-coloured cats that live in prides, found in Africa and north-western India. A stuffed toy lion is toy made from fabric that is filled with a soft material, like cotton or synthetic fibres and not a large tawny cat.

I’m still not sure what you are trying to prove. It’s fun though.

"transgender man" being a meaningful phrase in the English language. And sometimes "man" means "human". — Michael

Transgender man is a transgender man. Not a man.

A human is a human. He or she can be a man or woman. The two words came from different sources.
I’m not sure what you are trying to prove.

I’m not saying anything about what words should mean.

I’m saying that:

1) the English noun “man” doesn’t just mean “biologically male”, and
2) transgender men ought be allowed to use men’s bathrooms

Do you understand that these are two completely independent claims and that (1) is simply a descriptive fact about how English speakers speak? — Michael

I’m saying that
1) English noun “man” does mean biologically male in the dictionary I use.
2) women should be allowed to use women’s bathrooms. I agree

The English noun “man” only means “biological man” and the English noun “woman” only means “biological woman” — Michael

That is exactly my argument and you have not convinced me why it should be different.

We’re not discussing what is allowed. We’re discussing what ought be allowed. — Michael

That is exactly what I’m doing.

They can dictate who is allowed to do what, but that’s not what’s being discussed — Michael

That is exactly what is being discussed because that is the only thing that matters. As long as men don’t access women’s spaces you can call them whatever you like.

It’s not a mantra. It’s an accurate description of the English language. The nouns “man” and “woman” are not each just used in a single way. — Michael

You believe whatever you like. I’m happy to exclude trans women from women’s spaces. Luckily the UK law and most sports bodies are catching up with me.

But as I mentioned before, the terms “man” and “woman” are not only used to refer to biological sex; they are also used to refer to gender identity. — Michael

You can repeat this mantra as much as you like.

Cisgender men, sure — Michael

So we disagree on virtually nothing. One small point. I think no man is a woman. Maybe trans women could do the decent thing and not invade women’s spaces.

I don’t think all biological men should be excluded from women’s bathrooms, changing rooms, or shelters. I — Michael

But most should?

effeminate men and masculine women — Michael

Exactly and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

And on that we agree, as I’ve mentioned before. — Michael

So for sport they aren’t women but they are women for other purposes?
So women already have exclusive places. Bathrooms, changing rooms and shelters for victims of male violence. Do you think men should be excluded from these places?

Okay, but sex differences in psychology are still a real thing, and in a minority of cases someone can have the psychology typically associated with the opposite sex. — Michael

What is the mechanism for someone to gave the opposite psychology to their sex? I’m intrigued.

Why? — Michael

Because men should be excluded from women’s sport because they have a competitive advantage. A huge competitive advantage. Shall we start there?

The point I am making is that you clearly understand that in many cases someone’s sex determines the way that they are treated, and that this treatment has nothing really to do with their sex at all - hence when you treat your female friends “like one of the blokes” you are not treating them as “having a penis”.

Obviously the wider society and culture is not identical to your friendship group, but the same principle is at play. — Michael

The point I'm making is that in 2025 people can be whatever they like. No sexist tropes are needed to define a person. So in sports and women's exclusive spaces biology trumps feelings. Everything else, people can be what they want. Like ladies being treated for who they are not what they are.