Gender again. Sorry!

[icowden]

It’s a thought provoking question though, and I will try to give it some thought. My first instinct is to compare it with feeling like a musician because I make sounds that are similar to those of other musicians. Is that regressive? Don’t shoot me, I’m merely thinking aloud at this point.

Fair enough but if that's your definition you definitely aren't a musician

It's a good thought though. I am a musician, I know this because I can play music without thinking, hear a multiplicity of instruments and layers when I listen to music, distinguish between instruments, hear the chords and can pick up and play any instrument (although it might take me 15 minutes to get a basic tune out of it for some of the trickier ones). I know I am a musician because I can feel and get lost in music. It's a very core part of my identity as a human being.

The next question is - does anyone else know I am a musician? If you hear me play or sing, or watch me write music, then there is a lot of evidence. If you discuss music with me I have musical knowledge, I can explain why I like or dislike different types of music.

If you are not a musician you cannot pretend to be one. You either have it within you or you don't. Most people are capable of enjoying music. The vast majority can enjoy playing music as well, if they choose to. For those that cannot (and they do exist), they can never be a musician. Whatever it is in out biology that allows us to be a musician remains foreign to them.

Translating that to the gender discussion, I would posit that I am a man. I feel like a man not because I drink beer (I don't) or like fast cars (I do but not to willy wave) or DIY (not great at that). I feel that I am man because I am attracted to women, I have the evidence of my genitals, my biology (strength etc) compared to women, my aggression (which is very well suppressed but I know it is there) etc. I would posit that women feel the same way about being women. They know they are women.

I also know that it is impossible for me to feel like a women as I am not one and can never know how a woman feels or thinks. I can study women and impersonate a woman but it would never be perfect only what my perception of a woman is. That, I think, is the problem with gender ideology. It's more about portraying a man or a woman than it is about being one. Those that are genuinely transgender can rarely actually pass as being a different gender.

Maybe one day we will be able to rewrite out DNA in a way that genuinely allows gender change. Iain M Banks world of the Culture allowed for vastly extended life spans and the ability to change gender completely using technology to alter biological DNA and regrow the body. Until then, I don't see the issue with helping those that genuinely have gender dysphoria, but I don't see it as being more important than those rules which safeguard women.

 

[Ian H]

...I feel that I am man because I am attracted to women..

Let me just run that past a couple of male friends of mine & their husbands.

 

[newfhouse]

Fair enough but if that's your definition you definitely aren't a musician

Don’t oppress me. I may not have the skills of Danny MacAskill or the speed of Tadej Pogačar but I’m still a cyclist.

If you are not a musician you cannot pretend to be one

Of course I can. There’s an enormously wide spectrum of ways to be a musician.

I feel that I am man because I am attracted to women

What an odd comment. Would you feel less of a man if you were same sex attracted?

 

[multitool]

What an odd comment. Would you feel less of a man if you were same sex attracted?

I'd imagine he'd feel more of a man that I would

fnaar

 

[AuroraSaab]

I would say it is part of personality, not independent from it. If you self identify as a cyclist is that real? Of course it is.

Well it's real in the sense that calling yourself anything is real. I could identify as a cyclist and not actually be one though. The feeling of 'identifying as' is real. The 'being' may not be. So it's a feeling in your head ..

My chromosomal configuration remains intact but my appearance, form and function has changed dramatically over the decades.

Cosmetic changes don't change material reality though. I could wear blue contact lenses but I'm still a brown eyed person.

As I’ve said, it may well be a social construct but it is no less real or meaningful for that. If your life and opportunities are limited because of your assumed gender that’s clearly as wrong as sex based oppression.

Prejudice is wrong, I'm sure we all agree. Some people obviously invest very heavily in what they regard as their identity. The issue is when they consider that identity supercedes rights that have been given to women because of the oppression they face, oppression which is a material reality. I honestly think very few people care about how people present or identify.

It’s a thought provoking question though, and I will try to give it some thought. My first instinct is to compare it with feeling like a musician because I make sounds that are similar to those of other musicians. Is that regressive? Don’t shoot me, I’m merely thinking aloud at this point.

Did you see the TED talk I posted? Is it only one aspect of biology that defines the speaker? Maybe it is more complicated than some would like it to be.

I did. Emily Quinn has a dsd called CAIS. Dsd's are rare medical conditions affecting about 0.02% of the population - they don't disprove the sex binary any more than the fact that babies are occasionally born with one leg means humans aren't bipeds. People with dsd's are still male or female. CAIS is unusual in that individuals appear as female at birth, have some aspects of a female puberty, and are often not diagnosed until teens or later. I think it would be unkind to treat these individuals as male because they have been socialised as female from birth.

This is very different from being male, appearing and being socialised as male from birth, and later identifying as female though.

They don't test for dsd's at gender clinics anymore because the vast majority of people who say they are transgender don't have dsd's. I think it's wrong to use a rare condition as some sort of evidence that sex is a spectrum or to suggest that it is relevant to people being transgender. They are 2 very different things.

Nobody should be defined by their sex but unfortunately women's oppression is based on their sexed bodies, not their gender identity, so to ignore the differences between men and women only furthers this oppression.

Bearing this in mind, the issue is not what you identify as but why some people think that what they identify as should give them special privileges that we don't give to others.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Translating that to the gender discussion, I would posit that I am a man. I feel like a man not because I drink beer (I don't) or like fast cars (I do but not to willy wave) or DIY (not great at that). I feel that I am man because I am attracted to women, I have the evidence of my genitals, my biology (strength etc) compared to women, my aggression (which is very well suppressed but I know it is there) etc. I would posit that women feel the same way about being women. They know they are women.

I don't think any of us can feel like anything other than ourselves. I can't feel like a woman because all I know is how I feel. I can't say if other women feel the same. Our feelings are subjective and we have no frame of reference for how others feel. I certainly have no frame of reference for how a man feels.

I also know that it is impossible for me to feel like a women as I am not one and can never know how a woman feels or thinks. I can study women and impersonate a woman but it would never be perfect only what my perception of a woman is. That, I think, is the problem with gender ideology. It's more about portraying a man or a woman than it is about being one. Those that are genuinely transgender can rarely actually pass as being a different gender.

This is why I find talk of gender identity to be regressive. When a man identifies as a woman what is he identifying with? He can't feel like a woman because there are 40 billion different women who all feel differently. There are shared experiences that only women have but there's no ladybrain. Instead, the idea of being transgender falls back on stereotypes of dress, haircuts, mannerisms. It relies on 'femininity' meaning 'woman' and I find that sexist and regressive.

 

[newfhouse]

I think it would be unkind to treat these individuals as male because they have been socialised as female from birth.

What does socialised as female mean if gender doesn’t actually exist?

Elsewhere you said, if I understood correctly, that biology matters more than kindness.

Not trying to catch you out here, just wondering if there are exceptions. Using Emily Quinn as an example, how would you know her sex, and presumably in your mind her chance of being a risk to other women, if she didn’t say?

 

[AuroraSaab]

By socialised I mean subject to the social conditioning and expectations that we face from society. These are based on our sex though. It starts from birth really so it has nothing to do with gender identity.

Girls should be kind; for boys adventure awaits, for example. Matalan's contribution to setting the expectations for babies and little kids here:

Some feminists don't feel the same but I personally think we should make exceptions for CAIS individuals. They may be genetically male but their body has developed partially along female lines. Many aren't diagnosed until teens or later so they've faced the same socialisation and oppression as females. We are talking about a tiny number of people though.

You wouldn't necessarily know Emily Quinn's sex but someone who had been socialised as female from birth is less likely to be a risk than other men.

I think the question is not really whether we should make an exception for the tiny number of CAIS individuals, in terms of access to women's spaces and services, but why a rare medical disorder should be relevant when considering access for people who don't have it.

Case study of CAIS individuals here. These can be serious medical conditions and the existence of dsd's shouldn't be appropriated to advance the cause of people who don't have them.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ar...s a rare form,because of the female phenotype.

 

[Deleted member 121]

The boys t-shirt is false advertising. Reported.

 

[multitool]

Didn't work on Aurora

 

[multitool]

You seem a little testy this evening. Maybe get some fresh air, perhaps at altitude, see if that cheers you up.

Let's see. A number of stories have appeared where parents have complained about what their kids are being taught in sex ed. Including one recently from the Isle of Man where kids were told there were 70 genders. This isn't new; people have been talking about stuff like the Gender Unicorn and Mermaids sliding scale of gender identity that goes from Barbie to GI Joe for years.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-64811129.amp

There's concern about what kids are being taught by external providers. Part of this is because the material they have on their websites could be considered to be ideological not fact based.

https://archive.is/B8ROn

The government are bringing forward their review to address these concerns. I'm sure we would all want our children's education to be fact based and not driven by ideology, so let's hope they crack on with it as we should have the utmost transparency where kids are concerned.

As I said previously, this issue has arisen because external providers are being used and their agender is not necessarily neutral. It's also very lucrative. If you look at the report you linked to, some of the materials were only made available after Freedom of Information requests. Let's have real transparency about what is being taught and take it from there.

"A number of stories have appeared" means that a number of stories have appeared. It does not mean that the "stories" bear any relationship to the truth, so stop citing it as evidence. It's meaningless, especially in the context of a vicious and mendacious culture war of which you are a fervent participant.

If there was any actual evidence of schools breaking SRE guidance the newspapers would have found it...but they have found none.

Testy? No. Sick of your harmful lies? Yes.

 

[winjim]

That BBC article, summarised:

There've been some inaccurate claims circulating on social media, please refrain from speculating until we get to the bottom of it.


I'm not sure that one report from the anonymous parent of a kid who supposedly got kicked out of class for being a gobshite to the teacher can be considered to be particularly reliable.

 

[multitool]

Looks like Kellie-Jay's friends have been busy...


View: https://twitter.com/FordFischer/status/1634647746811506689?s=20

 

[AuroraSaab]

Rule no 1 of misogyny is It's always the woman's fault. Men have no agency themselves.

The review will clear up the matter hopefully and might even recommend some clearer guidelines for schools.

 

[winjim]

I'm a bit loath to post this because it's not really related to what I hope to get out of this thread, but it is important to look beyond the outrage and examine the substance of controversial claims. Bear in mind that I haven't read all of the quotes and links myself yet, but here's a twitter thread talking about the recent 'extreme sex education' controversy and trying to clear up a few misunderstandings.


View: https://twitter.com/mikeysmith/status/1633531980733186048?t=2Z6bj51DE9F4FCyZn7qPiQ&s=19