QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nowhere does it say they weren't told it. Studies don't usually go out of their way to remind the reader that everything was done consensually.

Do you know what a meta-analysis is? The authors of that paper weren't the ones who performed those studies, they analyzed the results of a bunch of studies done by other people. Also, the authors didn't specified that patients must be fully aware of their medical history within the selection criteria of the studies. So, this is a big assumption that you're making.

As far as I know it's illegal to not disclose the purpose of a study to its participants. So it stands to reason that they knew, unless otherwise stated.

But scientists and doctors don't always act ethically. Bear in mind, the doctors who decided to assign these guys as "females" probably think they're making them a favour by doing so.

Also, I reread the paper I found this, bolding mine:

Even by adulthood, however, at least about half maintained their female gender, including patients who were fully aware of their medical history.

I think this implies that not all of them are aware.

According to you, you mean. A child's gender identity has already formed before they can start claiming to be transgender.

No, I don't believe in "gender identity" and certainly I don't think they have a "female gender identity". But you do think that males can adquire a "female gender identity" if they are socialized as such. So, what are really the differences between a boy who was subject to unnecessary medical procedures and raised as a "girl" because losed his penis, and a boy who was subject to unnecessary medical procedures (although at different times) and raised as a "girl" because he liked the wrong toys at, for instance, age 3? Why just one of them have a "female gender identity" when they are both living a lie imposed by sexists adults who think they are better off as "girls"?

How does the existence of sex & its consequences undermine the fact that gendered socialisation leads to gendered identity?

I think I've already explained this a length several times already. You just don't like my answers because you're set in thinking socialization being the only thing that matters. So, why would repeat myself again when I know you are going to keep asking the same question?

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If I were to write about my identity, I would say I'm a woman (as in my sex is female). However, I would not say I was socialized as a woman (or however you prefer to call it) because that doesn't feel like a natural way of talking about myself. I'm a woman because I have a female body and this is really the relevant part of my identity, not "gender identity". There is no doubt my sex has shaped my life both because of biology and because of society, but I'm not a walking stereotype despite having a female socialization. Really, I never even feel "feminine".

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They were told the truth before the study was conducted.

You're making things up again! First of all, that paper was about a meta-analysis of a bunch of studies done on males with certain genital abnormalities, some of which were raised as boys and some which were raised as "girls". I saw nowhere in the paper where it says that all of them were told the truth, but even if I'm remembering wrong and that is the case, so what? It doesn't change the fact they were sometime lied to.

Jazz was socialised as a boy, like all male transsexuals.

Why? His case is not that different from boys with penile ablation raised as "girls". The main difference being Jazz was more aware of the medical abuse done to him. Otherwise, he was raised as "(trans) girl" from a young age because he was deemed "inadequated" as male. If socialization = "gender identity", then he should have a "female gender identity" according to you. He may even be more "effeminate" than some of the males raised as "girls" described in that paper, some of which are described as having male-like behaviour. Here is a relevant quote:

By contrast, it seems that most, if not all, individuals with these conditions raised female showed marked masculinization of gender-role behavior where such data are available

My example is not a completely impossible scenario, though. As a woman, pregnacy is a real possibility for me (obligatory, not all female can get pregnant, but only female can get pregnant for the QT who may be still reading our discussion...). And abortion was legalized in my country just some months ago, and there is already a judge who has ruled to suspend the new law. That ridiculous part about being raised as "nonbinary allien" and identifying as a "man" was there to emphatize that is sex what matters there because I don't know how else explaining to you that biology is relevant besides in how someone is socialized. Ok, let's try this. Do you think women being more reluctant on average than men about casual sex is only about socialization and social expectations? Do you not think the fact that we can become pregnant (something men don't have to worry about) and that men, who are on average bigger and physically stronger, can easily overpower us may contribute on this as well?

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not bringing up my "gender identity" or my "sex identity", but my SEX. And I don't know what is so odd about bringing up our sexes in a discussion about sex. I could bring up other aspects of myself like my nationality, social class, education level, religion, hobbies, family, etcetera, but I don't think they're very relevant right now. And your sex is the only thing I know for sure about you.

I think you're overstimating how much I think in terms of identity, but if you insist... yeah, my sex is part of my identity. I think sex is really the relevant part.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What lie? 100% of the sample know the truth.

You cannot be serious... The whole point of subject these males to unnecesary medical procedures and raised them as "girls" is making them (and other people) believe they are actually 100% female. Except, sooner or later, they will find the truth because biology doesn't care about sexist and unscrupulous doctors.

Let me ask you this, do you think guys like Jazz Jennings, who were gaslighted from a very young age becuase they parents couldn't accept a (possibly) gay son, have a female "gender identity". If any of these guys decides they have enough of this bullshit and announces to the whole world he actually is male, would you stil insist that he has a female "gender identity" because he was raised as a "girl"?

The fact that female mathematician role models affect girls' performance in maths exams clearly demonstrates that gender identity exists. If it was called "sex identity" you'd probably accept it in a heartbeat. You've got to divorce the connotation of a term from its denotation.

I don't know why this is relevant. I never said, socialization doesn't play a role in the differences between men and women. However, you have made very clear that biology is completely irrelevant.

Replace "life" with 'identity'. The part of your identity shaped by your socialisation as a result of your sex is called a gender identity. How is that the least bit controversial?

That would completely change the meaning of what I said. My parents could have raised me as "non-binary allien" and I could identify as a "man", but if I got pregnant and were denied an abortion it would be because my sex is female. A male could never experience that regardless of how he was raised or how he identifies.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You keep ironically demonstrating a high gender identity salience.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? That I argue like a woman or what? Look, if you're going to play armchair psychologist with me, at least make it entertaining and justify that claim. Because, really, yes, you clearly show a female "gender identity", therefore I am right it's not the winning argument you seem to think it is...

You keep equating socialization with "gender identity" when even the people you quote undestand that those two need to be separated concepts. If you think anyone raised as a girl (whether or not they are female) has a female "gender identity" regardless of outcome because they were raised that way, then this theory becomes a tautology and, as such, unfalsifiable. In other words, it's circular logic.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That paper talked about males who were medically abused and lied to about their medical history just because they were deemed inadequate to be raised as boys. How successful their parents at raising them as “girls” were, I don’t know. The parents and the doctors knew the truth, and I would think that may affect how they treated them. And regardless of how they view themselves, their actual sex is still important for things like health care, for example. That is why I said it was interesting that re-identification with their sex increased with age: because the older they get, the harder is to keep the lie and the more likely they may rebel against their parents and doctors wishes, I think.

I don’t believe in the blank slate theory. I think differences between women and men are the result of the interaction between biology and the environment (women and men being socialized differently is part of that environment).

I explained in my other comment today why I don’t believe in “gender identity”. I am a woman. That is my reality, this has nothing to do about how my family raised me (although likely they would have raised me differently if I’d been born male). And the fact I am female has shaped and will keep shaping my life, either because of biology or because of society.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That’d depend on what you understand by identity politics. I’m not dismissing your opinions because you’re a man if that is what you think. That comment was more to do with your general attitude, i.e. you acting like you’re the only voice of reason here, your need of lecturing about how we need to accept the concept of “gender identity” and your comparison of TRA using this term with trans males appropriation of the word woman. And the fact that most GC people here and elsewhere are women because is women who are the most affected by TRA’s politics. Many men are too happy to use transgenderism to hide their misogyny. Other men don’t see what the big is deal or think this is what feminists deserve. The men who I see speaking out often against TRA usually have been affected by them in some way. I’ve no idea what you reason is, but it does feel like you enjoy “lecturing” “ignorant” women (I remind you, you were the one who said that GC are allergic to reading and often spread their ignorance). I may be wrong, but that is what it feels to me and why I said what I said.

“Gender identity” is an unfalsifiable concept because it can’t be externally determined. You depend on what other people say about their “gender identity”. That is why I compared it with the religious concept of souls in other threads. What there is plenty of evidence of, however, is sex. There is also evidence of the difference of expectations an treatment given to women and men by society. And sexism and misogyny and indeed based on sex.

GC: Why do you think it's not biologically essentialist and biologically deterministic to define sex on the basis of gametes and sex organs? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

First, one person is not all GC, you know? We're not a monolith. Second, pretty sure that user is thinking more about sex as sexual acts than sex as biological category. Third, as far as I know, desexed indeed means castrated.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You keep misrepresenting what I say and you wonder why I keep defending myself? Please. I NEVER said women and men are not socialized differently! I don't need to accept the concept of "gender identity" to recognize that sex roles and stereotypes exist.

So, first you present that paper like the definite proof and that has not been refuted, but you don't even understand what it talk about?

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What the hell are you talking about?! I NEVER said that women and men are not socialized differently. I just reject the concept of "gender identity". I don't care if how much you like it. Stop telling me what the hell I have to believe. You're just another man telling women what they need to do to fight against sexism and misogyny.

GC: Why do you think it's not biologically essentialist and biologically deterministic to define sex on the basis of gametes and sex organs? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If you agree with us, you could always debate with the QT side for once instead of keep asking us the same questions... Or you could write a blog...

GC: Why do you think it's not biologically essentialist and biologically deterministic to define sex on the basis of gametes and sex organs? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Is COVID-19 a social construct, too? Are vaccines a social construct, too?

GC: Why do you think it's not biologically essentialist and biologically deterministic to define sex on the basis of gametes and sex organs? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 14 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Why don't you ask QT how aren't terms like uterus haver, menstruators and other bioessentialists?

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

YOU WAS THE FIRST ONE IMPLYING I WAS LIAR WHEN YOU SAID THE PAPER I LINKED WAS THE SAME AS THE ONE YOU DID! AND THEN YOU DOUBLED DOWN WITH THE LIES BY TRYING TO MAKE ME BELIEVE YOU JUST CONFUSED THEM! IT'S ABSURD YOU GET MAD FOR BEING CALLED A LIAR YOURSELF.

As for the turning men into women, obviously I dind't meant it literally. It was a reference to your beloved concept of "gender identity". It's called context, ever heard about it?

By the way, how does 5 alfa reductase deficiency fits into the blank slate theory?

I take nothing back about what I said. You was the one who started with the condescending actitude and the lies.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Is that an admission that I took the third apart?

Oh, please. I meant the fact that supposely "confused" the paper you linked when the one I did. I still believe you lied. The title alone should had give you a clue it was a completely different paper.

Can't you read, dude? I never said Money and the others didn't think "gender identity" was the result of socialization. I explicitly said TRA were the ones who said it was innate. I said they both have the same definition of gender identity, they only differ in the origin. And I don't know what are you trying to acomplish "lecturing" me about intersex when I said from the beginning that I saw "gender identity" used in regards to them.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Give me a break, first you act like a know-it-all (despite the fact you apparently can’t take two different papers apart) and imply I’m a stupid who blindly trust what other people say, but somehow I’m the villain because I won’t call you on your behavior.

Here are some extracts from a 1994 paper by the infamous John Money himself, bolding mine:

The term “gender role” appeared in print first in 1955. The term “gender identity” was used in a press release, November 21, 1966, to announce the new clinic for transsexuals at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. It was disseminated in the media worldwide, and soon entered the vernacular. The definitions of gender and gender identity vary on a doctrinal basis. In popularized and scientifically debased usage, sex is what you are biologically; gender is what you become socially; gender identity is your own sense or conviction of maleness or femaleness; and gender role is the cultural stereotype of what is masculine and feminine.

G-I/R (gender-identity/role): gender identity is the private experience of gender role, and gender role is the public manifestation of gender identity. Both are like two side of the same coin, and constitute the unity of G-I/R. Gender identity is the sameness, unity, and persistence of one’s individuality as male, female, or androgynous, in greater or lesser degree, especially as it is experienced in self-awareness and behavior. Gender role is everything that a person says and does to indicate to others or to the self the degree that one is either male or female or androgynous; it includes but is not restricted to sexual and erotic arousal and response (which should not be excluded from the definition).

That was what I was trying to say all along. Money and others (like the scholars cited in that Wikipedia article) define “gender identity” not as how one was socialized, but how one perceives themselves. That is pretty much TRA’s definition of the term, with the difference being the latter think “gender identity” is innate (hence why I said TRA have adapted Money’s ideas). You’re “gender identity” is how one was socialized and mixing it up with feminist theories. That is why I said, you were the first person I’ve seen define the term that way.

I think the reason for the medical procedures was to help them pass as the opposite sex. Is it an an unaccounted variable? Yes & no. I think it'd be a variable either way (if they had had no medical procedures, then passing as their sex would also influence their self-id).

I get the rationale behind such procedures, but that doesn’t mean they are neutral. Furthermore, such experiments were completely unnecessary and unethical. The quack doctors who performed them deemed the boys too defective to be males and, therefore, decided they were better off being raised as lowly girls. That is a very sexist view, so why should I consider their ideas about sex and gender seriously? More so, when there is evidence against them.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you even understand they are completely different condition?!!! Whatever, I'm tired of arguing with you. Keep clinging to your ideas that you can turn men into women.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Give me a break, first you act like a know-it-all (despite the fact you apparently can’t take two different papers apart) and imply I’m a stupid who blindly trust what other people say, but somehow I’m the villain because I won’t call you on your behavior.

Here are some extracts from a 1994 paper by the infamous John Money himself, bolding mine:

The term “gender role” appeared in print first in 1955. The term “gender identity” was used in a press release, November 21, 1966, to announce the new clinic for transsexuals at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. It was disseminated in the media worldwide, and soon entered the vernacular. The definitions of gender and gender identity vary on a doctrinal basis. In popularized and scientifically debased usage, sex is what you are biologically; gender is what you become socially; gender identity is your own sense or conviction of maleness or femaleness; and gender role is the cultural stereotype of what is masculine and feminine.

G-I/R (gender-identity/role): gender identity is the private experience of gender role, and gender role is the public manifestation of gender identity. Both are like two side of the same coin, and constitute the unity of G-I/R. Gender identity is the sameness, unity, and persistence of one’s individuality as male, female, or androgynous, in greater or lesser degree, especially as it is experienced in self-awareness and behavior. Gender role is everything that a person says and does to indicate to others or to the self the degree that one is either male or female or androgynous; it includes but is not restricted to sexual and erotic arousal and response (which should not be excluded from the definition).

That was what I was trying to say all along. Money and others (like the scholars cited in that Wikipedia article) define “gender identity” not as how one was socialized, but how one perceives themselves. That is pretty much TRA’s definition of the term, with the difference being the latter think “gender identity” is innate (hence why I said TRA have adapted Money’s ideas). You’re “gender identity” is how one was socialized and mixing it up with feminist theories. That is why I said, you were the first person I’ve seen define the term that way.

I think the reason for the medical procedures was to help them pass as the opposite sex. Is it an an unaccounted variable? Yes & no. I think it'd be a variable either way (if they had had no medical procedures, then passing as their sex would also influence their self-id).

I get the rationale behind such procedures, but that doesn’t mean they are neutral. Furthermore, such experiments were completely unnecessary and unethical. The quack doctors who performed them deemed the boys too defective to be males and, therefore, decided they were better off being raised as lowly girls. That is a very sexist view, so why should I consider their ideas about sex and gender seriously? More so, when there is evidence against them.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I DIDN’T find an article on Wikipedia. YOU WAS who linked that article in your first comment who you told me to check in another comment, you big liar.

Yes, I’ll believe u/MarkTwainiac any day over you. She is not one who keeps lying about what I said or did in order to look good in the forum. Anyway, I already knew about Stoller and Money’s involvement in the making of transsexualism before this discussion. So, it’s not like I’m blindly trusting her.

So, you’re saying you’re not GC or TRA and think both are ignorant. Then why are you in this forum in the first place? To impress all the silly women with your “superior” male intellect and call them names?

So, all the laws in English say gender rather than sex? Then how is the Democratic Party in the US want to expand the definition of sex to include sexual orientation and “gender identity” in law? And how do you explain that sex (not gender) is one of the protected characteristics by British law? Yes, I know this because I’ve following closely the development of the transgender movement in the UK and US the past months, you know, by READING.

And did all the academics writings in English talk about gender, not sex? Really? Even the ones in the biological sciences?

I didn't lie, I just mistook your link for mine. It's not my theory, it's sociology, it's the only theory, since even the big bads: Stoller & Money confirm it.

Yeah, and I’m Santa Claus. The only way that you could have mistook it if not only you didn’t bother to open the link to read the abstract, but also didn’t even read the title that I’ve copied & pasted in the link. Seriously, the papers where about very different conditions. How could you have mistook it?

Anyway, are you ever going to address how these guys fit in the blank slate theory? By the way, there is a big problem with all the cruel experiments with the penis-less boys like Reimer that you are not considering. You think the fact that many penis-less boys raised as girls keep identifying that way is the result of their socialization. But these boys were not merely socialized as girls. No, they were also subjected to unnecessary medical procedures in order to keep the lie. Don’t you think that may influence how they see themselves? This is not unlike transactivists claiming GnRH agonists are a neutral option that gives the children time to think about their “gender identity”. Another thing about the paper you linked, I don’t think it’s possible to make any conclusion because the numbers are small (and the number of older patients even smaller), but I find interesting the number of males who re-adopt a male identity increase with age. The authors even mention a case of a patient who re-adopt a male identity at age 52 after his parents’ death. Here’s the relevant part:

Perhaps some children already harbor an internal gender identity different from the assigned gender, but because of parental pressure or incompliance with parental expectations, they do not let the interviewers in on it. This rationale may apply to Reiner and Gearhart’s two patients with cloacal exstrophy whose declaration of male gender was not accepted by their parents, and to the one patient each in Reiner and Gearhart (2004) and Reiner and Kropp (2004) who refused to discuss her (?) gender identity with the interviewer. It may also have applied to the patient with classical exstrophy who was raised female but underwent a gender change to male at age 52 years after both his parents had died (Feitz, van Grunsven, Froeling, & de Vries, 1994).

Edit: fixed some typos

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You can quit your condescending tone, dude. I insist, they can keep the term "gender identity", which was associated with transsexualism from the beginning. Why would I want to reclaim a term made up by sexist men like Robert Stoller and/or John Money?

This wikipedia article you linked talks about gendered socialization and it says that this socialization creates the "gender identity" of an individual. "Gender identity" is defined as this:

By the time children reach the age of three, many will have acquired a firm sense of themselves as male or female, a gender identity that remains throughout life. In addition, many pre-schoolers develop a firm awareness of gender stereotypes, insisting that certain activities or items of clothing are not for girls and others not for boys. Yet gender identity does not automatically follow from biological sex.

This sounds a lot like what TRAs say to me... The only difference being that these scholars don't think "gender identity" is innate.

As for my dislike of the word gender, it's not that I personally find the term confusing, but TRA are taking full advantage of the confusion caused by people meaning different things by it. For feminists gender is about the societal expectations of each sex, for TRA is "gender identity", for linguists and speakers of gendered languages is a grammar category, and for many other people is the biological category of sex. Moreover, I think talking about gender helps to hide the fact that sexism and misogyny are sex based. For that reaon, I prefer talking about sex roles or sex stereotypes. Also, I really don't understand English speakers's aversion to the word sex. In Spanish, sexo (sex) means both the biological category and the sexual act too and nobody have a problem with it.

By the way, are you going to say anything about the fact you lied about the paper about 5α-reductase-2 deficiency and 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-3 deficiency that I posted yesterday? Or are you going to pretend these guys don't exist because they challenge your theory?

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It seems like you're using "gender identity" as a shorthand for gendered socialization, but I've not seen anyone else calling such socialization as "gender identity". And it certainly this is not how TRA defines the term. They can keep the term for what I care. Honestly, I don't even like the word gender because it has only made things more confusing as everyone mean something different by it.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Can you be more specific? The first paper clearly says:

Gender role changes were reported in 56–63% of cases with 5α-RD-2 and 39–64% of cases with 17β-HSD-3 who were raised as girls. The changes were usually made in adolescence and early adulthood.

I guess you may be refering to this part:

In these two syndromes, the degree of external genital masculinization at birth does not seem to be related to gender role changes in a systematic way.

But I said nothing about the phenotype at birth of males with 5a-RD-2 raised as girls. I said many of them adopt a male identity after their bodies get virilized at puberty.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I already explained why. It's not technoligically possible to change someone's sex. Body changes caused by exogenous hormones and surgeries are merely cosmetic rather than an actual sex change. As such, children who are raised as the opposite sex will eventually wonder why they are diferent from other children or why they need to take hormones. I did included examples of genetical males whith DSDs that are often raised as girls. You focused on males with CAIS while ignoring males with 5 alfa reductase deficience. Here are some relevant links (disclaimer: I don't endorse the authors of the second link's suggestion of using "puberty blockers"):

Gender Change in 46,XY Persons with 5α-Reductase-2Deficiency and 17β-HydroxysteroidDehydrogenase-3 Deficiency

Gender identity, gender assignment and reassignment in individuals with disorders of sex development: a major of dilemma

Gender identity disorder (GID) in adolescents and adults with differences of sex development (DSD): A systematic review and meta-analysis

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I see. Thanks for the correction! Though, that means that "gender identity" was indeed associated with transsexualism from the beginning.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That sounds a lot like we can't talk about trans people or if we do it should be in TRA's terms. So, again, how are we supposed to get our point across? And why are transactivists allowed to use terms we disapprove of?

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Did Simone de Beauvoir ever used the term "gender identity"? I'll confess I'm not well-read in feminist theory or philosophy, which is why I usually stick to biology. However, to me in this paragraph she is talking about gender roles, not "gender identity". It's late here, so I'll watch the video later.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just because TRA have adapted the concept more to their liking, it doesn't change the fact that it was John Money who coined the term "gender identity". Tough, if you know of someone who used the term before him, I'd be interested to hear about it.

Even putting aside the medical and sexual abuse of David Reimer, Money's experiment was bound to fail. First of all, an experiment with a sample of just one person has very low statistic value even if you're using his twin as control. Also, he was bound to find the truth sooner or later. He should notice eventually that he was not like other girls. Like, for example, how would he explain his lack of menarch and his parent's lack of worry about it?

Boys who have been socialised as girls from birth almost always continue identifying as women even after the truth is known to them.

I'm not sure if that is the case. As far as I read about peopple with DSDs, it seems like their self-identification is usually consistent with their phenotype. For example, males with CAIS view themselves as women. Males with PAIS tend to report more unsatisfying experiences whether they are raised as girls or as boys. Males with 5 alfa reductase deficience tend to view temselves as men; even more, many of the males who are mistaken and raised as girls adopt a male identity at puberty when their bodies get virilized by the increase in testosterone.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Honestly, the more I read you, the more I think you're mixing up or maybe combining the TRA's concept of "gender identity" with the feminist's concept of gender.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Purely cosmetic. When I said having a penis was one of the only things worthwhile about being male, I wasn't taking about the way it looks.

I think it's not even that. Some time ago, there was a post in the GC sub that showed an picture of the "neopenis" of a "trans man". It didn't looked like a penis, like at all.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, appropriation is TRA's modus operandi, but I don't think that is the case for the term "gender identity". If I'm not mistaken it was the infamous John Money who coined this term to explain transsexualism and justify the "sex change" of babies with certain DSDs. And I've only seen the term "gender identity" in the contex of intersex and transgenderism/transsexualism. I think Money said that everyone have a "gender identity", but most people through the world and human history didn't/don't think about this stuff that much. We have known we have a sex for millennia and humans have prescribed certain roles for each sex, but it's only recently that some are saying that sex is a spectrum, that you can change sex or that "gender identity" should be prioritized over sex. Until some year ago, for me gender only belonged to grammar. "Gender identity" is a transgenderism specific concept that cannot be scientifically proved, so I've no desire to start using it.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How are GC suppused to get our point across if we are not allowed to talk about trans people?! (I assume you don't like we speak for "trans women" and people with other "gender identities", either, right?) You've said yourself: we have opposite goals, that is why we need to talk. Why are transactivists the only ones allowed to talk about women's rights?

Moreover, I also care about science and public health. That is why I talk (and share articles) about how transgenderism affects these areas.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're the only who I've seen defining "gender identity" this way. Usually, QT defines "gender identity" as how someone perceives themself or how well they align with societal expectations for their sex. That is why they really can't explain it without rely on sexist stereotypes.

I don't believe in this stuff, therefore I don't have a "gender identity". I don't identify as a woman, but I know I'm one. How much I live up (or not) to the feminine ideals in my culture doesn't change my sex.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The problem is that professionals who should know better caved to the trans lobby and started using gender identity rather than sex in medical records. Also, Whitley was so happy with all this "validation" that Whitley didn't think of challenging the doctors' misperceptions. But that is beside th point. If it were true that you can change everything but height through "transition", then why would "birth" sex matter at all in trans identified patients' health care?

I don't trust sources that purposefully misgender trans people.

Just in case you think this story is made up, they list this BBC article as their source.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The only thing you can't change via transition is your height. Trans men can have a penis via SRS.

It didn't work that way for this "trans man".

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 13 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

But what is a female to you? And what is a male? You've never told us that. The closest thing to a definition that you gave us was something about comfort with the sex related features of your body. And that because you're female you'd freak out if you had a penis, something that many "trans women" would find transphobic (because most of them aren't distressed by their penises and, in fact, most do keep them).

All: Is autogynephilia normal in natal women? by CRTmonitor in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't want to ban discussions or even users going off-topic. But he is quite monothematic and tries to insert the same topic in most conversations he participates in whether it's relevant or not. That is why I suggested he makes his own threads.

All: Is autogynephilia normal in natal women? by CRTmonitor in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's bold to suggest you have what all (or most) women want. You're a man. You can't extrapolate your sexual experiences with crossdresing and erotica to all (or any, really) women.

All: Is autogynephilia normal in natal women? by CRTmonitor in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know what Blanchard think of feminity and masculinity, but you don't seem to want to discuss wheter AGPs are feminine or masculine. You seem to want to discuss feminity and masculinity in general. And this is the third thread you've doing that in the past days. Other users think you're getting off-topic here, too.

All: Is autogynephilia normal in natal women? by CRTmonitor in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

No, this is pretty off-topic and going off-topic to focus on masculinity, feminity and essentialism seems to be a habit of yours. So, I suggest you create your own thread to discuss these topics there or I'm going to start deleting your off-topics comments.

All: Is autogynephilia normal in natal women? by CRTmonitor in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 12 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Nobody is trying to suck up to conservatives...

Every single comment comes up with a handy report button, you know? You could have used it to report him rather than insult us.

Also, and I'm saying this because of you comments habits in general, just because this is a debate sub, it doesn't mean you can insult anyone that you disagree with. So, I suggest you too try to follow the rules.

GC: Why is there more focus on trans women than trans men? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Stick to discussing other people's arguments and avoid personal attacks.

GC: What about male women, male men, female women and female men? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What does identifying as a man or a woman even mean? If I identify as a cake, am I really a cake? Please, define what is a woman and what is man without using circular definitions or relying on sexist stereotypes.

All: Is autogynephilia normal in natal women? by CRTmonitor in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Women can't be AGP by definition. AGPs are sexually attracted to the idea of themselves as women. Women don't need to imagine how things would be if we were women because that is already our reality. The female equivalent of autogynephillia would be autoandrophillia. However, AGPs often don't like to recognize they really aren't women, so they try to pass their sexual fantasies as normal women sexuality.

GC: Why is there more focus on trans women than trans men? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, I'm aware of that. I don't think the doctors from yesteyear put much effort in trying to find alternative methods. However, even today many trans people are fine with the "medical trasition" offered to them because it validates their identities. Not only that, transactivists aims to eliminate any kind of "gatekeeping". I can't say for certain there would more options available now for trans identified individuals if not were for transactivists, but they certainly aren't helping.

And it's hard for me to believe you when you say that you'd prefer children to be treated without a need for transition given your opinion on not given minors GnRH agonists and CSH. Before gender clinics started affirming the children's self-diagnostics, most of them used to desist in their cross-sex identification.

GC: Why is there more focus on trans women than trans men? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You can only blame transactivists for the lack of alternative treatments. After all, TRAs are the ones who keep suppresing any research that may go against the party line (1, 2, 3). They are the ones who are keen on label anything other than "affirmative treatement" as "conversion therapy" (4). And don't get me started on the sloppiness of pro-QT researchers... Like the people at the Tavistock who embarrased themselves before the High Court with their apparent lack of capability for keeping patient's data (5). By the way, when TRAs keep driving away any heath care proffessional who question the official narrative (6), is any wonder you're left with unscrupulous doctors who only care about profit and being able to perform human experimentation?

You could admit, at the very least, that a lack of alternatives for "transition" is exactly what QT wants.

GC: Why is there more focus on trans women than trans men? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not Greenquid... I've been very ouspoken about my opposition of transing minors and I agree with you about the selling drugs without rx issue.

I was just saying that GnRH agonists are technically hormonal therapy, not chemotherapy. That doesn't mean they are safe and reversible as TRA says, of course.

GC: Why is there more focus on trans women than trans men? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

GnRH agonists like Lupron are not chemo drugs, though. Chemotherapy aims to kill cancer cells. GnRH agonists shuts down the production of sex steroids in the body. That is why they are used to treat certain hormone dependent cancers like prostate and breast cancer.

QT: Even by your own beliefs, sexuality can't be based on "gender identity" by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm straight and I'm not attracted to feminized males, either. Humans didn't evolve to be attracted to men or women who take exogenous hormones and/or undergone surgeries in order to resemble the opposite sex. These "treatments" are very new in terms of human history, after all. Really, many people, including trans identified people, aren't open to date trans people.

I am attracted to passing trans men like Buck Angel.

Do you think genital surgeries are necessary for trans people to "pass"? Because as far as I read Buck Angel didn't undergone one.

QT: Even by your own beliefs, sexuality can't be based on "gender identity" by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So, do you think Jane and Helen are still heterosexual and homosexual respectively after their partners' coming out? Even if their partners insist they never were? If Stephanie and Brian were to "medically transition", do you think Jane and Helen would be transphobic if they break up with them?

QT: Even by your own beliefs, sexuality can't be based on "gender identity" by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't make a thread asking about feminine women coming out as butch lesbian in middle age. You're the one who brought this topic up. Yes, this is a debate sub, but I prefer to debate about what I know. Anyway, why are YOU not answering whether sexual orientation is based in sex or "gender identity", which is what this thread was about?

GC: Why is there more focus on trans women than trans men? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There is a thing called dysphoria and it's not caused by social contagion. I was born female. The thought of me having a penis grosses me out. If I was born male, I would feel great distress and want to transition via hormones and surgery so I wouldn't fee; distress in my body.

I think you need to listen more to what "trans women" themselves say. As we told you the other day, most of them don't feel distressed by their penises and most of them, in fact, do keep them. Also you can technically be diagnosed with gender dysphoria without experiencing distress about your body. The diagnostic criteria relies a lot in the same gender roles who you want to abolish, too.

https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gender-dysphoria/what-is-gender-dysphoria

QT: Even by your own beliefs, sexuality can't be based on "gender identity" by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But you essentialised masculinity to the man which is fine but that's a different argument.

I did not such thing, but I just described what is generally mean by masculine and feminine. Men and women who are break enough sex roles may be called as feminine and masculine respectively, but that doesn't change the fact the concepts are tied to what society expects from each sex.

How? People don't think of masculine people as masculine?

I'm saying that prior to her coming out, people didn't see Jessica as masculine.

You mean obviously trans would be Steve being feminine and Jessica being masculine?

I mean if Steve and Jessica were GNC, peope would not be as surprised by their coming out.

You mean feminine middle aged married women never become lesbians and never adopt a butch lifestyle?

The only possible reason would be accommodate a husband's new "identity" ?

I was talking about this particular example. Provided they don't live in a country where homosexuality is persecuted, coming out as a butch lesbian in middle age doesn't seem very likely to me. But I'm a straight woman, so I'm won't speculate any further about this.

QT: Even by your own beliefs, sexuality can't be based on "gender identity" by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Given the circunstances, the most likely explanation is that Jane is denying her heterosexuality because not doing so would "invalidate" Stephanie.

QT: Even by your own beliefs, sexuality can't be based on "gender identity" by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

A man is an adult human male and a woman is an adult human female, and male and female refer to someone's sex. Meanwhile masculinity and feminity refer to the roles and stereotypes that society expects from each sex, and may vary through time and culture. I don't think there are many people who align perfectly with all the stereotypes associated with their sex in their respective cultures. Even if you're a perfect match, you may not be so in another country or time.

I don't think you can be born in the wrong body because I don't believe in the mind-body dualism. Your brain is another part of your body. I don't believe in "true trans" (and neither in "trans trenders" for that matter). I think there are people who for a variety of reasons want to be the opposite sex, and may take a variety of steps to present as such. However, they don't really become the opposite sex because such thing is not possible for humans, neither naturally nor with technogical aid. I think that trans people, deep down, understand this impossibility, and that is why they often get very angry when other people don't validate their "identities".

People don't think of Jessica as "masculine". For my examples to work, both Steve and Jessica needed to be not obviously trans. So, both Jane and Helen are shocked by these turn of events. The only reason I can think for Jane "discovering" her "lesbianism" now would be to go along with Steve's new "identity".

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is right. There has been a discussion in Spanish speaking coutries for a while about sexism in the language. But, I think that is something that native speakers should decide, that is all.

By the way, I'm white too, as my skin is white, though wheter Americans would consider someone from Latin America like myself as white I don't know.

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, I know perfectly well that pronouns don't have a sex. I am not a savage idiot, you know?

And how the actual f*** having pronouns that indicate the sex of someone is sexist or misogynist?!!!!!

It's very unfortunate for me that I can't say all I'm thinking right now about you misconstructing everything I said while being a mod. So, bye.

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pronouns do not have sex (in fact, 5 out of 6 personal pronouns don't). "Women" and "men" do.

You know exactly what I meant...

The person was literally saying this should apply to languages in general. People constantly criticise the dehumanisation, exclusion, abuse etc. that women put up with in their own culture, and want women to enjoy equal rights everywhere, regardless of culture.

And yet it was only modern Western countries that have made any real strides in regards to pushing back against it, way beyond any other culture so far. So, miss me with that "cultural relativism" patriarchy apologia. I don't give a damn what repetitive misogynistic crap some group of people has arbitrarily decided is going to be their "heritage" or "tradition", I give a damn about ending the patriarchy.

And according to your cultural relativism, any dumb shit is equally valid as long as a culture forms around it. Yeah, no thanks.

Show me exactly where the f*** I advocated for moral relativism and excused the misogyny of any country. All I say was every culture, included the developed world is guilty of sexism and misogyny. And that is was the so called western countries who came up with "sex is a spectrum" and "sex work is work" and exported it everywhere they could. And I would add its often the developed countries who used their self-perceived "progressism" to justify their many wars. Perfect way to solve all other countries problems, right? Just kill all those foreign bigots! Women and girls included, because sex equality, you know?

If you think having pronouns that indicate the sex of a person (however you want to call them) is on pair with things like FGM or child marriage we're going to agree to absolutely disagree.

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You said "I'd prefer you leave us non-English speakers alone." Who is us? I am also a non-English speaker. I'm sure there are speakers of every language who want to get rid of gendered language, especially non-binary people, who are everywhere.

The us there was more to say I'm a non-native English speaker myself (and that is why I took issue with your comment) rather than to say I speak for every non-English speaker in the world. Also, although I didn't mentioned it before, I'm from and live in a non English speaking country, and that is another part why I disliked your idea of changing other languages as you'd like.

I don't doubt there are some pleople from non English speaking countries that would entertain your idea. The question is wheter are enough of them to make this change in their respectives language a reality. And my feeling is that very likely there aren't. At the end of the day, I think native speakers are the ones who should decide on any change on their languages.

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not the poster, but because pointless distinctions between the sexes such as third person pronouns are needlessly gendered and originate from the need to exclude women from normal life. I also want all cultures to stop pointlessly separating the sexes as well, and I really don't care how much they claim that misogyny is an integral part of their life and heritage.

People literally always make up a stink over ending sexism. Nothing to see here.

Way to completely miss my point... You make it sound like if we were talking about something like child marriage or FGM when, in fact, we were talking about sexed pronouns and words like aunt. You know, something that for most people is NOT a issue in the slightest.

This is not going to be a popular opinion, but sexism and misogyny exists in virtually every culture. Lots of people from developed countries like to see themselves as "progressive" and "more advanced" in social issues than the rest of the world. They can easily point out the sexism and misogyny of other countries, but they are oblivious about their own. It was the "enligthened" and "progressive" western countries who started with the ideas of "sex is a spectrum", "TWAW", and "sex work is work" after all. Yet many of those people have the need to act as white saviours who could solve all the social issues of foreign countries if not were for the "regressive" natives. The implicit idea is that the locals (all of them) are too stupid, incompetent, corrupt, sexist, racist, or whathever to make social progress on their own.

Gendered pronouns are not needed for this. Words like "man" and "woman" are. Moreover, you can tell how unnecessary gendered pronouns are from the fact that English speakers are still perfectly capable of differentiating and speaking of men and women even outside of third person.

Fine, you and u/Genderbender can have fun convincing the rest of English speakers of not using sexed pronouns. Meanwhile, I'll keep speaking Spanish as I always did. I'm not going to start using made-up pronouns, adjectives, nouns and articles just to please some native English speakers, who may or may not know a word in Spanish.

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That still don't tell me what you think being female is. What does make someone female, male, both or neither? By the way, you may be surprised to hear that many "trans women" doesn't feel distressed because of their penises. Quite the contrary, actually, many of the are very fond of their penises. Have you ever hear about "girldick" and simmilar terms? Most "trans women" don't undergone genital surgery, in fact. Also, many of them don't have any problem to make references to their penises when sending rape threaths to dissenting women.

Some other relevant links:

https://terfisaslur.com/

https://lesbian-rights-nz.org/shame-receipts/

J. K. Rowling and the trans activists: a story in screenshots

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

We're aware that you think "transwomen" are women based in their "gender identities". Maybe I missed it, but I think you have not explained what having a "gender identity" means yet. So, if "trans women" are women, what do they have in common with you and me? How do they know they are women? If their "identities" are based on gender roles, wouldn't this conflict with your goal of abolishing gender roles? Also, how can we differentiate between a "true trans woman" and a "cis" man pretending to be one for nefarious motives?

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm a non-English speaker myself. My parents are from another country and I speak another language. Я сетим согласна.

This of course will require changes in English as well as other languages. I find it offensive you think all non-English speakers should think the same.

No, I don't think all non-English speakers should think the same, but apparently you do think so given what you have said. You're the one who want to change every language, including all the ones you don't speak to. Don't you think many non-English speakers would have a problem with this idea of getting rid of sex based words? Especially if the person proposing it neither speak their language nor live in their country?

We don't use pronouns based on race or disability, so why use gendered pronouns.

We're a sexually dismorphic species and sex matters a lot in things like health care, safeguarding, dating, making a family, sports, etcetera. That is why we have words that indicate sex and why is important to recolect data segregated by sex.

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by lesbianbarbie in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I would also eliminate he and she, and replace them with gender neutral pronouns in every language.

I'd prefer you leave us non-English speakers alone. You keep saying you care about all social issues, not only feminism. If that is the case, then why do you think it's reasonable to expect we modify our own languages just because some native English speakers find unnecssary to distinguish between the sexes? Sorry, but this sound quite colonialist to me.

Besides, what would be the purpose of this change? How would this help to eliminate sex inequalities? Using only gender neutral language means invisibilizing women and women's issues because men are viewed as the default. You'd be only making more difficult to talk about sexism and misogyny.

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

The fact that you think individuals with CAIS have visible testes tells me that, at best, you only skimed the links I gave you. So, I've just baned you for 14 days. Use this time to actually read about what you have been talking about.

GC: Is sex determined by chromosomes or phenotype? Are people with CAIS male or female? Doesn't CAIS challenge binary sex? by IWoreWhat in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You posted this thread here before I deleted the other one in the debate sub. Also, I replied to your post and I leave the other thread, where CAIS was also being discussed, alone.

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Heimdekledi was who talked about the sex matrix, and Heim have yet to tell us how this matix looks like.

GC: Is sex determined by chromosomes or phenotype? Are people with CAIS male or female? Doesn't CAIS challenge binary sex? by IWoreWhat in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This question (or variations of it) has been asked and answered in this forum far too many times. And you have already another active thread on this topic, too. Go back to all your many threads on "why sex is binary": the answers haven't changed. You can read more about sex being binary here, too.

As for CAIS and AIS, here are some links:

https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/10597/complete-androgen-insensitivity-syndrome

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/androgen-insensitivity-syndrome/

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(12)60071-3/fulltext

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1429/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7865707/

Also, most trans identified people are unambiguosly 46, XY male or 46, XX female.

GC & QT: What are your views? by PeakingPeachEater in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Saying an idea (not people) is dumb is not being ableist...

GC & QT: What are your views? by PeakingPeachEater in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Don't start reporting everything again...

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If there were no gender roles, then what trans people would use as point of reference for their identities. If you reject both a biological based and gender roles based definition of woman and man, then what makes you a man or a woman?

How do we tell the difference? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Really? I could swear it was "cis" men who murdered and assaulted "trans women". If women are so dangerous, why do you all want to come to our spaces? Wouldn't it be better for you to campaign for third spaces instead?

GC & QT: What are your views? by PeakingPeachEater in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is your proof? You're being disingenous here. Nobody is preventing trans identified people to play sports. They are just being asked to compete according to their sex because is sex, not "gender identity", what matters in sports. If you don't think that males have an athletic advantage over females, then tell me where are all the females who identify as trans winning against males in sports?

For QT: Why is gender identity different than religion in social protocols? by divingrightintowork in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Fair enough, I admit I don't know much about religion, philosophy, or buddhism. Though, I view buddhism as a religion because it includes some supernatural elements like rebirth.

For QT: Why is gender identity different than religion in social protocols? by divingrightintowork in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gender is a psychological sense of being male, female, both or neither.

So, what makes you feel you're male, female, both or neither? I'm a woman and I've no idea what is feeling like a woman.

Religion is the belief and worship of a god.

Not all religions have a god to worship. Buddhism is one example.

https://www.history.com/topics/religion/buddhism

GC: Is there such a thing as "transgender"? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Google is pretty biased towards transgenderism. If you want to read alternative viewpoints, I'd suggest to use another search engine. Also, books are your friends. It's good to hear I've not been writing in vain (as I feared), but there is so much I or other users can explain in a forum post.

GC: What words should be used instead of "trans", "transition", "sex change", and "sex assignment"? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don’t really like those terms because I find them very misleading. “Trans woman” implies we’re talking about a kind of woman, and likewise for “trans man”. The terms “FtM”, “MtF”, “sex reassignment surgery” and “transition” imply that you can change your sex. And “gender affirming surgery” suggest that we should prioritize “gender identity” over sex.

“Sex assigned at birth” is just wrong. Sex is determined at conception and observed at birth. Though, nowadays thanks to medical technology, you can know the sex of the baby before they’re born. Talking about sex assignment only makes sense for a small portion of people with DSD (1, 2) some of which have been subjected to unnecessary surgeries and lied to about their medical history. Considering that most trans identified people are unambiguously 46, XX females or 46, XY males (3) I think it’s pretty insensitive that transactivists have appropriated this term.

As for “medical transition” related terms, I think medical terminology should reflect reality. So, I talk about exogenous hormones and surgeries. A few years ago, I’d not have minded the term cross-sex hormones that much, but given all the prevalent sex denialism, I avoid it. All sex steroids (i.e. androgens, estrogens, and progesterone) are present in both males and females, although in different levels; and you can’t change your sex by taking exogenous hormones. “Chest reconstructive surgery” is really a bilateral mastectomy. “HRT” is also, inaccurate because trans people are not taking hormones because any endocrinological problem. “Vaginoplasty” may be worst offender on the list of inaccurate terms because an inverted penis is not a vagina. Also, for “puberty blockers”, I prefer to use the name of the drug class, gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa), and to explain that they result in a chemical castration.

Lastly, although this is not a term only used by transactivists, I’ve come to dislike “gender” because, I think, it has only makes things more confusing as everyone mean something different by it. For that reason, I try to avoid it and talk about sex stereotypes or sex roles instead.

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why do you use the men's bathrooms and locker rooms if you don't identify as a "trans man"?

Also, by your comments, it seems like this is something you do often by your own volition and that you are easily recognized as female. So, I assume that you don't find this behaviour to be threatening to your identity or safety as a woman. So, how you reconcile this with the claims of males who identify as trans of men's bathrooms and locker rooms being dangerous and invalidating for them?

For QT: Why is gender identity different than religion in social protocols? by divingrightintowork in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, "gender identity" sounds too much like "gendered" souls. So, I'd also ask them, if you enshrine "gender identity" into law, doesn't this break the separation between Church and State?

All: Why do a lot of trans people insist that being non binary or trans has nothing to to with stereotyoes, and then suddenly it really is about stereotypes? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you mean the pink, white and blue flag? Honestly, literally my first thougth the first time I saw it was "How is this not about stereotypes?".

All: Why do a lot of trans people insist that being non binary or trans has nothing to to with stereotyoes, and then suddenly it really is about stereotypes? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

El Page, age 34, is a good example. When El first publicly declared El's self to be a man, El said El had known since getting & liking a short haircut at age 9 that EL was actually a boy. More recently, El has started telling an entirely different version of what happened in El's childhood. Now the story is that El knew El was a boy when El was a toddler - in other words, when El was just learning to walk, which for most kids is around 12 months-old. In the new, more heavily retconned version of growing up trans, El at a year-old was even more precocious that Jazz Jennings supposedly was at two. Coz now El says that as a toddler boy, El not only had already learned to read and write, but El was actually writing love letters and signing them "Jason."

El Page's radically revised account of how El came to know El is really male makes sense given the political context. El's story of "knowing at 9" is politically "problematic" because age 9 is a little too old for El's story to be effective in advancing the notion that trans people are "born trans" and almost always "just know" who they are from the moment they first start developing consciousness and a sense of self. Moreover, if El didn't realize that El was a male until El was 9, then the tale of how El's transness came into being can't be used to debunk the theory put forward by Lisa Littmann, Abigail Shrier and many other "evil transphobes" - which posits that a lot of girls/women like El identifying as trans today are doing so partly in response to issues that came to the fore at or during puberty, or when puberty was fast approaching on the horizon, which most likely was the case for El at age 9. I'd bet good money that debunking the theory of sudden-onset "gender dysphoria" triggered by female puberty is part of the political agenda that El Page - with the assistance of the team of managers, lawyers, stylists, public relations specialists, image consultants and "LGBTQ" experts and advocates who are surely advising El - has set her sights on.

I can totally believe those changes about Page's "authentic self" discovery are politically motivated given the timing of Page's inflamatory coming out.

Suicide Facts and Myths - Transgender Trend by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nothing new here, but given the topic of suicide reappeared in recent threads...

All: Is physically transitioning ethical? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There is a lot ethical issues around "transition". Gender dysphoria seems to exist outside the usual practices of medicines. Criteria diagnostics rely on sexists stereotypes and, nowadays, you can't question a patient's "identity" without risking accusations of transphobia and conversion therapy. In other words, proffessionals have to accept trans people's self-diagnosis. Hormones and surgeries must be provided on demand, too. Many trans people seem not to have interest in research regarding what causes dysphoria or alternative treatements despite there is no evidence that "gender affirmement treatment" works as a cure or the many health complications that follow from exogenous hormones and/or surgeries. As result, research is very lacking and heavily politized.

Doctors often also minimize the risk and overstate the results. Many seem to care more about ideology and profit than science and ethics. Many don't seem to care much about all the other co-morbidities that trans identified patients present and "transition" is often sold as a panacea that may resolve all their problems.

Furthermore, I don't know of any other mental health issue that is treated like gender dysphoria. Nobody thinks anorexic people should be given liposuctions, for example.

Another important issue is that after "physical transition" many trans identified individuals become more entitled to be treated as the opposite sex in all aspects.

Finally, when in comes to minors, I don't think "transition" should be allowed at all. Most of them will desist if left alone. However, even if we could tell which children would persist in adulthood, as the judges in the Keira Bell's case said, they are too young to understand all the consequences.

GC: How problematic is accepting a man as a woman or a woman as a man if they pass well enough? And what problems does that bring? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm from Argentina. Sorry, I should have specified. Here in 2012, a law was passed legalizing both self-ID and "medical transition" (before then, "SRS" was only possible with a judicial order, something that didn't start happening until around mid 90's).