Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

So there aren't any then? A man considered 'feminine' in 13th century China might be considered 'masculine' in Aztec central America?

You said women can be 'masculine' but if the standard for what masculinity means is nebulous and ever changing, no woman can ever be masculine. So likewise nobody can really identify as a woman because the thing they are identifying with is just a bunch of cultural stereotypes. They can't have the material reality, but can appropriate the stereotypes.

Sounds ok on a personal basis but a bit rubbish as a basis for legislation tbh.

 

[multitool]

So there aren't any then?

I'm surprised you think that little cheap tactic would wash.

Or maybe I'm not.

 

[monkers]

As you seem reluctant to list them, perhaps you could simply list the characteristics that make a female 'masculine' or a male 'feminine'.

Endless banging on about your interest is sport. I've been watching the Giro. I see what you've been doing.

For you the interest in sport is nothing but a battering ram against trans women. So tragic.

 

[monkers]

There's no such thing as a masculine woman or a feminine man.

You chattin' sh1t innit.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmo78rnOWqc

 

[multitool]

You said women can be 'masculine' but if the standard for what masculinity means is nebulous and ever changing, no woman can ever be masculine.

Jesus

The sheer stupidity.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I'm surprised you think that little cheap tactic would wash. Or maybe I'm not.

I'm unsurprised you think being a woman is related to stereotypes. There's no 'identifying as' without stereotypes.

(In response to: There's no such thing as a masculine woman or a feminine man.)

You chattin' sh1t innit.

So you think women with short hair are masculine? You're making the same mistake as the woman in the video. Seems a bit sexist and regressive of both of you.

 

[multitool]

I'm unsurprised you think being a woman is related to stereotypes.

And now you are twisting it round to your little hobby horse.

 

[monkers]

I'm unsurprised you think being a woman is related to stereotypes. There's no 'identifying as' without stereotypes.



So you think women with short hair are masculine? You're making the same mistake as the woman in the video. Seems a bit sexist and regressive of both of you.

No. I'm showing you that your friend Karen first mistakes a woman with short hair first as a trans woman and then as a boy.

Where did her perceptions come from?

Why do you think that there are such distinctions as 'lipstick lesbians' and 'diesel dykes'?

Do remember I'm a member of that community.

 

[multitool]

Your absolute blindness to heteronormative gender ideology, which has had much more impact on all of us than any transgender orthodoxy, is one of the reasons you are so exasperating on this topic

Aurora has managed to convince herself that the existence of trans women is the biggest threat to women that there is, and is willing ignore that trans hate is serving an entryist function to the very people behind the real, tangible, current and historical threats to women.

And she does this having never actually met a trans woman, never suffered at the hands of one, can't even say she has encountered one in a woman's space. Nor can she point to any statistically significant data that TW are actually offending in women's spaces.

What she does do is present an idealised view of women's spaces, and indeed the women in them, in order to try and bolster up a theoretical case that TW are disruptive, even though this is not borne out in reality.

 

[matticus]

Bridges has said the BC announcement is
A violent act
And
genocidal

I don't know how to discuss that 🤷

P.s. can she compete in men's races still? That's not clear in the press I've seen.
(She was a junior mens record holder in 2018!)

 

[Unkraut]

So likewise nobody can really identify as a woman because the thing they are identifying with is just a bunch of cultural stereotypes.

Quoted on Think Theology blog:

I noticed some students parroting the line that biological sex is “assigned” at birth by doctors and parents rather than identified or recognized. “Wait a second”, I said. “Is sexual orientation innate, something we are born with?” My students nodded readily. This is well-established dogma. “And you’re also saying that biological sex is a construct, a category arbitrarily ‘assigned’ at birth?” More vigorous nods. “How is that possible? Aren’t those claims contradictory? How is possible to have an innate attraction to something that is merely a social construct?” Aha. In that millisecond, I saw a brief glimmer of light cut through the postmodern haze. Even if they quickly turned away, they had at least recognised the contradiction.

https://thinktheology.co.uk/blog/article/the_basis_is_biology

If you cannot define what a woman is, you cannot by definition define what 'transitioning' means. What are you going from and where to? What is objective and what is subjective? I know I've already brought this up before, but it bears repeating: transgenderism is a fantasy world of make-believe.

I think you are right to defend women's sport. Sex is binary, always was always will be. Even if you make some differentiation between sex and gender, a man who thinks/decides he is a woman is still a physically male despite what is going on in his head. It is still a moot point whether this changes if enough poisons have been administered to destroy his physical masculinity, but self-ID without such treatment simply means men are competing in women's sports.

For those who don't want to read the above link in case they get contaminated, another quote is relevant to this discussion, not least because accusations of 'transphobia' can be used to shut dissenters up:

“What, pray, are you?” asks the caterpillar.
“I’m a woman.”
“Oh are you?”
“Yes, at least…” I pause, suddenly unsure. “I think so?”
“Do you feel like a woman?”
“I’m not sure” I say. “What does it mean to feel like a woman?”
“To feel like a woman is to be a woman”, pronounces the caterpillar, taking a long drag from his hookah.
“But what is a woman?”
“Someone who feels like a woman.”
“But…what does it mean to feel like a woman, if being a woman is defined as feeling like a woman?”
“Transphobe”, puffs the caterpillar.

 

[monkers]

Quoted on Think Theology blog:

I noticed some students parroting the line that biological sex is “assigned” at birth by doctors and parents rather than identified or recognized. “Wait a second”, I said. “Is sexual orientation innate, something we are born with?” My students nodded readily. This is well-established dogma. “And you’re also saying that biological sex is a construct, a category arbitrarily ‘assigned’ at birth?” More vigorous nods. “How is that possible? Aren’t those claims contradictory? How is possible to have an innate attraction to something that is merely a social construct?” Aha. In that millisecond, I saw a brief glimmer of light cut through the postmodern haze. Even if they quickly turned away, they had at least recognised the contradiction.

https://thinktheology.co.uk/blog/article/the_basis_is_biology

If you cannot define what a woman is, you cannot by definition define what 'transitioning' means. What are you going from and where to? What is objective and what is subjective? I know I've already brought this up before, but it bears repeating: transgenderism is a fantasy world of make-believe.

I think you are right to defend women's sport. Sex is binary, always was always will be. Even if you make some differentiation between sex and gender, a man who thinks/decides he is a woman is still a physically male despite what is going on in his head. It is still a moot point whether this changes if enough poisons have been administered to destroy his physical masculinity, but self-ID without such treatment simply means men are competing in women's sports.

For those who don't want to read the above link in case they get contaminated, another quote is relevant to this discussion, not least because accusations of 'transphobia' can be used to shut dissenters up:

“What, pray, are you?” asks the caterpillar.
“I’m a woman.”
“Oh are you?”
“Yes, at least…” I pause, suddenly unsure. “I think so?”
“Do you feel like a woman?”
“I’m not sure” I say. “What does it mean to feel like a woman?”
“To feel like a woman is to be a woman”, pronounces the caterpillar, taking a long drag from his hookah.
“But what is a woman?”
“Someone who feels like a woman.”
“But…what does it mean to feel like a woman, if being a woman is defined as feeling like a woman?”
“Transphobe”, puffs the caterpillar.

Has any one on person on this thread expressed the view that 'biological sex is a construct'. I don't think they have. I also think that if one person has you should have quoted them when posting this.

As you have said, you've posted this before. It didn't lead to enlightenment, so I have to ask, why you think there's value in repeating posting it?

I'm afraid that I'm not following anyone down the God rabbit hole, it's not as if religious beliefs and teachings are of one voice or free from contradiction is it?

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Here's some recent polling about attitudes towards one's children being gay, trans etc.

So, despite the hateful rhetoric being pumped out by right-wing press, populist politicians and useful idiots, the truth is only a tiny minority of people are bigots

View attachment 3941


Spain is particularly interesting. Only 5% would be unsupportive of trans child. Given that they have Self ID laws, you'd expect hostility...if you believe the transphobe narrative that self ID = the end of the world.

It's almost as if the Nazi apocalypse isn't imminent.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

As you have said, you've posted this before. It didn't lead to enlightenment, so I have to ask, why you think there's value in repeating posting it?

What page are we on?

 

[multitool]

Quoted on Think Theology blog:

I noticed some students parroting the line that biological sex is “assigned” at birth by doctors and parents rather than identified or recognized. “Wait a second”, I said. “Is sexual orientation innate, something we are born with?” My students nodded readily. This is well-established dogma. “And you’re also saying that biological sex is a construct, a category arbitrarily ‘assigned’ at birth?” More vigorous nods. “How is that possible? Aren’t those claims contradictory? How is possible to have an innate attraction to something that is merely a social construct?” Aha. In that millisecond, I saw a brief glimmer of light cut through the postmodern haze. Even if they quickly turned away, they had at least recognised the contradiction.

https://thinktheology.co.uk/blog/article/the_basis_is_biology

If you cannot define what a woman is, you cannot by definition define what 'transitioning' means. What are you going from and where to? What is objective and what is subjective? I know I've already brought this up before, but it bears repeating: transgenderism is a fantasy world of make-believe.

I think you are right to defend women's sport. Sex is binary, always was always will be. Even if you make some differentiation between sex and gender, a man who thinks/decides he is a woman is still a physically male despite what is going on in his head. It is still a moot point whether this changes if enough poisons have been administered to destroy his physical masculinity, but self-ID without such treatment simply means men are competing in women's sports.

For those who don't want to read the above link in case they get contaminated, another quote is relevant to this discussion, not least because accusations of 'transphobia' can be used to shut dissenters up:

“What, pray, are you?” asks the caterpillar.
“I’m a woman.”
“Oh are you?”
“Yes, at least…” I pause, suddenly unsure. “I think so?”
“Do you feel like a woman?”
“I’m not sure” I say. “What does it mean to feel like a woman?”
“To feel like a woman is to be a woman”, pronounces the caterpillar, taking a long drag from his hookah.
“But what is a woman?”
“Someone who feels like a woman.”
“But…what does it mean to feel like a woman, if being a woman is defined as feeling like a woman?”
“Transphobe”, puffs the caterpillar.

Firstly, you are still conflating sex with gender, and therefore transsexualism with transgenderism.

Secondly, and with the above in mind, how can you know what is going on in other people's heads?