Gender again. Sorry!

[Pale Rider]

Were I a lass, I wouldn't want me in the gym changing room, and I wouldn't want a trans me either.

 

[monkers]

@monkers is going to take issue with that. There are always 3 sexes in that you have genetically variant mammals which can't easily be classified as male or female - which in animals tend to be one off variations that do not reproduce. But generally speaking there are two sexes and still are.

There are three reproductive classes, those born with the potential to be mothers, those with the potential to be fathers, those with no potential for reproduction.

There are not two fixed points for 'sex', there are variations in anatomy, and variations in body chemistry. Some aspects of the sexed human body can be hidden, surgically removed, or surgically modified. If you make DNA the sole definer of sex then you run into ethical issues.

The brain is the most critical organ. Aurora has tried to explain how the relationships between women are different to the relationship between men, while at the same time in denial of gender identity, or the possibility of a gendered or gender adapted brain.

I'm no expert on any of these areas, but I recognise the difference between a cogent argument and one that is not.

 

[monkers]

Were I a lass, I wouldn't want me in the gym changing room, and I wouldn't want a trans me either.

If I was a man I'd be wary of those people said they wanted equality with men and inclusion, but now say men should not have their own spaces, and now say that men are predators not to be trusted around women.

For amusement I'll remind you of this ...


View: https://youtu.be/GcMd1F1acSo

 

[Deleted member 159]

There are three reproductive classes, those born with the potential to be mothers, those with the potential to be fathers, those with no potential for reproduction.

So there are two reproductive sexes.

Just because you can't reproduce, you aren't in a separate sex

 

[monkers]

How we met: ‘The women’s loo queue was endless. I popped into the men’s - and found my perfect match’​

Sheema, 47, and Alfred, 48, met in a Clapham pub in 2002. They now live together in Chingford, east London, with their three children

In 2002, Sheema was enjoying single life, working for the Royal Mail and living with her best friend in a flatshare in Camberwell in south London. One October day, she met a friend for a drink after the gym. “She told me she was meeting her boyfriend and one of his friends later, and said that if I came along they’d likely buy us loads of drinks.” Still in her gym kit, Sheema wasn’t sure she fancied it but “she was quite convincing, so we ended up at a pub near Clapham Common”.

After a few drinks, Sheema excused herself to go to the bathroom. “The queue for the women’s toilet was going on for ever,” she says. To save time, she nipped into the men’s loos next door. “A bouncer came and told me I couldn’t be in there. As he was rushing me out, I asked him to show me the rules.” That’s when she bumped into Alfred. “He came up to me and said ‘There are no rules!’” she says with a laugh. “Straight away I noticed he was very much my type.”

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...pped-into-the-mens-and-found-my-perfect-match

 

[monkers]

So there are two reproductive sexes.

Just because you can't reproduce, you aren't in a separate sex

That's not what I just said though is it.

 

[AndyRM]

Apologies for the diversion, I CBA wading through the last ten pages of this thread.

@Bromptonaut - that's fair enough, I have apologised for similar tit for tat nonsense with our esteemed Welsh contributor in the past.

Ronnie seems enamoured of the idea that they live rent free in my head or something. What I find truly bizarre is that generally I agree with things they've put on this thread, and also on others.

Ho hum!

 

[AuroraSaab]

There are three reproductive classes, those born with the potential to be mothers, those with the potential to be fathers, those with no potential for reproduction.

There are 2 reproductive pathways in mammals. Occasionally something goes awry but that doesn't mean those people are a different sex. There's no 3rd gamete. People with dsd's are not all infertile; it depends on the dsd and severity.

The brain is the most critical organ. Aurora has tried to explain how the relationships between women are different to the relationship between men, while at the same time in denial of gender identity, or the possibility of a gendered or gender adapted brain.

There's no ladybrain. There's no 'born in the wrong body'. Not even the odious Mermaids trot out these arguments anymore.

 

[Ian H]

I was using it as an example of an event where women and non binary people have chosen to have a gender exclusive event, which could (in theory) be disrupted by someone being an @rs and claiming to be a woman or non binary, when they're not.

There are many answers to making these safer spaces less necessary in the first place, but they require a good deal more effort on behalf of a lot more 'good' men.

The appetite for doing that work, making those changes, seems a lot less keen than the appetite for bashing women who (for good reason) wish to exclude men some of the time

I have no objection at all to men being excluded from women's spaces.

 

[AuroraSaab]

And the fact that you have redefined what a woman is renders that statement meaningless. Everybody can be a woman now so there are in effect no women's spaces.

 

[Deleted member 159]

That's not what I just said though is it.

I'm just quoting facts, not ideology

 

[Ian H]

And the fact that you have redefined what a woman is renders that statement meaningless. Everybody can be a woman now so there are in effect no women's spaces.

I was merely going along with Mudsticks' apparent definition.

 

[icowden]

Are you so willing to give up your right to the presumption of innocence and just be guilty of being one man among many.

That isn't what is being asked. But I do think there is an increased awareness for example, that if I am walking home late in the evening and happen to be behind a lone woman, that my presence might make that person anxious for example (although if they were to look at me I suspect I'm not that scary).

 

[monkers]

There are 2 reproductive pathways in mammals.

Quite so.

But those people with no reproductive pathway are still mammals, with other elements of sex intact. That is why there is no cogency in the argument that to have a sex you must have every element of sex. Not only are non-reproductive people mammals, but continue to live as mammals, and we recognise them as 'still mammals'. And more than that those mammals are humans with human rights. Human rights are not diminished, or removed because people don't make babies.

Other people who do have the potential to reproduce just don't reproduce. So in their case maybe 'not having sex' is conflated or confused with 'not having a sex' or 'having a third sex'.

Not reproducing is not having a sex, nor having a third sex. Reproductive potential is one facet of sex, and not the whole of sex.

I'm a now asexual non-reproductive though same-sex attracted female with the gender identity of woman. That doesn't change because of people's perception of what I look like, or who I say I am. I still have human rights. This class that women create for themselves otherwise is 'motherhood' which is not a biological class but a self-ascribing club. I'm guessing you are in the club.

I saw this perfectly played out in the Tory leadership election where two of the candidates were Andrea Loathsome and Theresa May. Loathsome tried the stunt of campaigning on the back of 'I'm the more qualified cos I made babies'. It didn't land well.

You tried to portray 'transiness' as a hierarchy too which is frankly just as rubbish.

 

[mudsticks]

I have no objection at all to men being excluded from women's spaces.

Well that's great, and you've probably got an idea why those (occasional and specific) exclusions are necessary, or even only perhaps are desirable for woman, and non binary kind..

In our groups case it's because our occupation still has a pretty heavy gender skew away from women, towards men, which disbenefits, and often disempowers women (however we are now defining them) so skill share, solidarity work, political activism, (and much cake consumption) in a woman only situation is very helpful in many ways.


Concious, and certainly unconscious gender bias doesn't go away just by wishing it so.

It takes effort, first to recognise it, then to tackle it.


But the bigger problems arise in other spheres where there are women in very vulnerable situations, who have hitherto enjoyed (?!?!) women only 'services'.

The threat to the those women from actual trans women is exceptionally low (I imagine)

But the threat to the mental well-being of women who are already living with trauma caused by male bodied people, if they're told there are no longer single sex services, is another order of magnitude.



It's 'interesting' how it seems that the more right wing folks on here are at least fairly clear, honest, and up front in their understanding of why some / many women have a desire for women only spaces, and an accompanying fear of being around male bodied people in certain circumstances.

It's because they know how a certain, not insignificant number of men* regard, and treat womankind.

The evidence is clear, that some men treat women appallingly, that fact has not gone away.

*Notallmen of course 🙄