3 ms·

The differences in treatment effect are in relation to the recipient's biological sex, so it's unnecessary to take gender preference into account.

smegsicle 4y ago
is there any case where it does make sense to take gender "preference" into account? besides pronouns? seems to me that those who insist that gender and sex are distinct also heavily imply that biological sex is mostly meaningless, so its unclear what they actually expect anyone to care about
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > seems to me that those who insist that gender and sex are distinct also heavily imply that biological sex is mostly meaningless Gender (either socially ascribed or gender identity, though those two can differ from each other) and biological sex are objectively different things. Most people who value gender identity rather than the particular indicia of biological sex other people prefer as a basis of socially ascribed gender generally view biological sex as a multidimensional space which includes (among other things, some of which are mutable) gender identity, not a simple binary (even if the distribution may be strongly bimodal.) > its unclear what they actually expect anyone to care about Generally, gender identity rather than other factors to the extent that society divides people up by ascribed genders. But also generally a lot less gender segregation, and especially strict binary gender segregation, at all, and when distinctions need to be made to which particular sex- and/or gender-stereotyped traits are relevant, to make distinctions on the particular relevant trait rather than by stereotypical association.
- Latty 4y ago
  > also heavily imply that biological sex is mostly meaningless This is a puzzling statement to me. The whole concept of being trans requires that there is a distinction between gender identity and biological sex. If the latter didn't matter at all, being trans wouldn't exist. If anything, trans people would surely be the most aware of biological sex and it's impact on them, as they are not happy with it? To me, it's like saying an adoptive parent is trying to imply biological parenthood is meaningless. Surely those who wished to have biological children but could not and adopt instead are often the people most sharply aware of it?
connicpu 4y ago
Unfortunately "biological sex" becomes extremely nebulous when you take into account years of cross-sex hormone treatment. Many of the genes that control sexually dimorphic traits are activated by sex hormones. Someone who's been taking exogenous hormones for years will have a very different medical profile than someone who has not.

smegsicle 4y ago

is there any case where it does make sense to take gender "preference" into account? besides pronouns? seems to me that those who insist that gender and sex are distinct also heavily imply that biological sex is mostly meaningless, so its unclear what they actually expect anyone to care about

dragonwriter 4y ago
> seems to me that those who insist that gender and sex are distinct also heavily imply that biological sex is mostly meaningless Gender (either socially ascribed or gender identity, though those two can differ from each other) and biological sex are objectively different things. Most people who value gender identity rather than the particular indicia of biological sex other people prefer as a basis of socially ascribed gender generally view biological sex as a multidimensional space which includes (among other things, some of which are mutable) gender identity, not a simple binary (even if the distribution may be strongly bimodal.) > its unclear what they actually expect anyone to care about Generally, gender identity rather than other factors to the extent that society divides people up by ascribed genders. But also generally a lot less gender segregation, and especially strict binary gender segregation, at all, and when distinctions need to be made to which particular sex- and/or gender-stereotyped traits are relevant, to make distinctions on the particular relevant trait rather than by stereotypical association.
Latty 4y ago
> also heavily imply that biological sex is mostly meaningless This is a puzzling statement to me. The whole concept of being trans requires that there is a distinction between gender identity and biological sex. If the latter didn't matter at all, being trans wouldn't exist. If anything, trans people would surely be the most aware of biological sex and it's impact on them, as they are not happy with it? To me, it's like saying an adoptive parent is trying to imply biological parenthood is meaningless. Surely those who wished to have biological children but could not and adopt instead are often the people most sharply aware of it?

connicpu 4y ago

Unfortunately "biological sex" becomes extremely nebulous when you take into account years of cross-sex hormone treatment. Many of the genes that control sexually dimorphic traits are activated by sex hormones. Someone who's been taking exogenous hormones for years will have a very different medical profile than someone who has not.