Current Events > What are acceptable views of gender and sex?

(+) Yeah! (+)

It seems to be getting more tricky these days. It seems if someone identifies as a gender then they are that and biology isn't deemed a necessary component, but biology still creates differences. So we are to view biology as meaningless or....?

Like it seems like people are rushing to be supportive of trans people which is clearly well intentioned, but no one is stating what distinctions are even meaningful.

It seems weird to me to say trans women are women when they are trans women. Then cis women would be cis women. Women would then be an umbrella term? So trans women are women in a broader sense of the word, but not cis women?

---

TommyG663513 posted...

Biology is seen as less valid than it once was.

stopped reading here

please actually research what youre talking about

---

Biology made trans men and women

---

35mm

Bananana posted...

stopped reading here

please actually research what youre talking about

Then please elaborate. Perhaps I should restate it to say phenotypic biology?

Is there something observable in the brains of trans persons which identifies them as such?

It just seems like we are going by how the trans person identifies which I don't necessarily have a problem with, but I'm trying to figure out if that is all that is or if there is more.

---

tote_all posted...

Neurosciencie is biology.

Dumbass.

What can neuroscience tell us about biology and sex characteristics? No need to be insulting. I genuinely don't know some of these things. I get that some of my language can be more exact. Please point out where you take issue with my language and how it can be better.


---

TommyG663513 posted...

Biology is seen as less valid than it once was

Ahh, it's that kind of topic

---

tremain07 posted...

Ahh, it's that kind of topic

the "popcorn" kind?

tremain07 posted...

Ahh, it's that kind of topic

It seems like people can't get past this sentence and have completely disregarded everything else I've said. I will edit my original post as I think I could have worded that much better. It seems like people are really getting the wrong idea of what I'm trying to understand.

---

I don't know why people say "biology" when they only mean "sex chromosomes"

---

there are men and women imo

---

hockeybub89 posted...

I don't know why people say "biology" when they only mean "sex chromosomes"

Well that's about as deep as you go in grade school. So it makes sense it's all a lot of people know.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

I don't know why people say "biology" when they only mean "sex chromosomes"

Fair enough. I didn't mean to use incorrect terminology. I will pay attention to that more.

So sex chromosomes aren't the be all indicator that they were once considered? We weigh neurological factors more heavily when determining sex and/or gender?

---

iirc, sex isn't cut and dry, biologically speaking, where XY necessarily means male, and XX means female

---

TommyG663513 posted...

What can neuroscience tell us about biology and sex characteristics? No need to be insulting. I genuinely don't know some of these things. I get that some of my language can be more exact. Please point out where you take issue with my language and how it can be better.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony- science-to-justify-transphobia/ (remove the space)

Biology.

---

• What someone identifies as is their business and their business alone. You don't have to like it, you don't have to understand it, and you don't even have to attempt to understand it, but you should respect the person as you would anyone else nonetheless.
• Who someone is or is not attracted to is their business and their business alone, as long as everyone in the equation is a human consenting adult.
• Gender and sex are not the same thing. You don't check the genitalia of every person you meet to ensure that they're male or female, so you shouldn't arbitrarily change your standards for trans people.
• Gender is a social construct, it's not binary, and definitions of gender are not set in stone. While "male" and "female" gender roles are pretty universal in every culture, what constitutes masculinity and femininity (and their respective gender roles) changes over time, and plenty of cultures throughout history have had some sort of third gender (see two-spirited Native Americans).
• Being masculine does not make you male, and being feminine does not make you female; drag queens identify as male, but present as female. Neither masculinity nor femininity is inherently positive or negative. While most people fall on the masculine-feminine spectrum, some don't, and others actively reject it; they may choose to identify as non-binary, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

---

The23rdMagus posted...

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony- science-to-justify-transphobia/ (remove the space)

Biology.

Yeah so that is fairly complex lol. It seems to go over a long list of issues determining what determines an individual's sex and/or gender.

So there isn't any sort of real test for any of this or should I say we would never hold it to someone to prove this?

So we can only take trans individuals at their word and treat them in good faith that they know themselves more than anybody else would?

---

TommyG663513 posted...

So we can only take trans individuals at their word and treat them in good faith that they know themselves more than anybody else would?

I don't see why not.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

So we can only take trans individuals at their word and treat them in good faith that they know themselves more than anybody else would?

Sure, I don't have a problem with that level of respect.

---

Biological sex exists.

---

superXY posted...

Biological sex exists.

And is more complex than you assume.

---

I avoid the topic for the most part. Not my fight

---

It's kind of a weird topic because there are currently many different viewpoints, many that don't necessarily mesh even on inclusionary side of things.

The23rdMagus posted...

Sure, I don't have a problem with that level of respect.

I don't have a problem with taking others at their word and treating them with respect and acknowledging the reality of their experience.

I guess where my issue lies is that we as a society have a ton of areas in which people are divided into men and women and I'm not sure how you navigate that moving forward.

Like I want to be supportive and accepting of people of all types, but how do you navigate that?

Athletics seems to be a fairly important area for gender distinctions and those distinctions tend to manifest themselves in skeletal structure/density as well as muscle mass which provide competitive advantages/disadvantages.

---

nemu posted...

It's kind of a weird topic because there are currently many different viewpoints, many that don't necessarily mesh even on inclusionary side of things.

Yeah this is kind of my issue. Like, in theory if a 300 pound offensive lineman that appears to be male by phenotypic standards attempted to play in a women's football league I would think that many would take issue with that.

I get that this is theoretical and is often used as a kneejerk response by blatant transphobes, but I feel you still need to acknowledge the possibility of the scenario and how it could be addressed.

I would guess that the short answer to that question is "we will deal with that when it arises and it doesn't seem to have arised and it may never."

---

It is weird how upset people get when you ask the fundamental questions of what is believed. If the policy is that you are whatever gender you identify as regardless of anything else, then simply say that.

---

I have trouble taking these topics in good faith, because if you really wanted to know, there's plenty of research already done for you out there, and you know this board is a flaming hive when it comes to the subject matter.

---

joe40001 posted...

It is weird how upset people get when you ask the fundamental questions of what is believed. If the policy is that you are whatever gender you identify as regardless of anything else, then simply say that.

What do you have against nuance?

---

Born with a dick? Youre a dude
Born with meat curtains? Youre a chick

---

Garioshi posted...

What do you have against nuance?

I value nuance, but I also value clarity, and it seems like much of this topic is simply critical that the topic creator is even asking questions, rather than people providing nuanced and clear answers. " Biology is more complicated than you think. " Is not an answer.

TC is legitimately asking for the specific rules because they seem to be ambiguous. And I would think the more people who understood the rules the better, right?

---

2
---

Guide posted...

I have trouble taking these topics in good faith, because if you really wanted to know, there's plenty of research already done for you out there, and you know this board is a flaming hive when it comes to the subject matter.

I am a longtime user on this board. I have searched around and you can find a wide variety of answers. This is very much a good faith attempt and I've changed my language as people have pointed out the flaws. Please feel free to further contribute to the discussion.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

Yeah this is kind of my issue. Like, in theory if a 300 pound offensive lineman that appears to be male by phenotypic standards attempted to play in a women's football league I would think that many would take issue with that.

I get that this is theoretical and is often used as a kneejerk response by blatant transphobes, but I feel you still need to acknowledge the possibility of the scenario and how it could be addressed.

I would guess that the short answer to that question is "we will deal with that when it arises and it doesn't seem to have arised and it may never."

It has come up
https://abcnews.go.com/US/transgender-teens-outrun-track-field-competitors-critics-close/story?id=55856294

Not sure what the right answer is.

---

joe40001 posted...

It has come up
https://abcnews.go.com/US/transgender-teens-outrun-track-field-competitors-critics-close/story?id=55856294

Not sure what the right answer is.

joe40001 posted...

It has come up
https://abcnews.go.com/US/transgender-teens-outrun-track-field-competitors-critics-close/story?id=55856294

Not sure what the right answer is.

Yeah
joe40001 posted...

It has come up
https://abcnews.go.com/US/transgender-teens-outrun-track-field-competitors-critics-close/story?id=55856294

Not sure what the right answer is.

That is certainly a tough one. You need to acknowledge physiological differences between men and women when you bring up athletics. There is a very significant difference in terms of athletic performance between men and women. It is the reason why we separate the two.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

There is a very significant difference in terms of athletic performance between men and women

this is true.

men tend to be stronger and faster.
women are very good at other things men aren't.
---

So does no one really have a true answer to this? It just seems like if we are going to say that many biological aspects of what makes a man a man and a woman a woman don't matter then why is transition surgery and hormonal treatment necessary in order to properly treat trans individuals?

I'm just increasingly getting the idea that no one ever really thinks all of this through. Like people are just adopting the progressive stance without any sort of attention to detail.

---

TommyG663513 posted...

It just seems like if we are going to say that many biological aspects of what makes a man a man and a woman a woman don't matter

Because some do and some don't.

Things based on your appearance can often matter to trans people. Things like chromosomes don't.

---

I matched with a trans chick on Tinder the other week. I was drunk, but still.

---