6 ms·

> when you accept idea that sex is social construct I can’t accept something wrong though. Sex is not a social construct, gender is. Bearing a child is someth

by thiht 4y ago

> when you accept idea that sex is social construct I can’t accept something wrong though. Sex is not a social construct, gender is. Bearing a child is something exclusively reserved to the female sex, no matter what their preferred gender is. Articles related to pregnancy should not talk about « internal gonades » instead of « ovaries » to be more inclusive. You might identify as a a gender other than female, if your sex is female, you have ovaries, period. It doesn’t invalidate the gender in any way. And ironically it becomes a bit more exclusive of 99% of the female population which is not familiar with this newspeak.

Spivak 4y ago
- next_xibalba 4y ago
  What percentage of people experience these cases you describe? These seem like nits, not definition destroying counter-evidence.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    Infertile women? 1 in 10. Women who’ve had their ovaries removed? 200k per year. Women who’ve had their uteruses removed? 400k per year. Women born without a uterus? 1 in 4500 or about 900k women in the world. Women who are born without a uterus and ovaries? About 7% of those born without a uterus so 63k women worldwide. But you know what the definition destroying counter evidence is? That if current estimates are accurate that about 1 in 100 people are trans. If trans people were rarer it would be easier to argue that they should just be an asterisk. Edit: For my own curiosity I wanted to see if being trans would qualify as a rare disease and apparently the FDA’s threshold is 1 in 200k.
    - next_xibalba 4y ago
      You missed my point. Maybe I didn't make it clear. These are all things that happen to women (and can only happen to women). You have to be born with a uterus in order to have it removed. Somehow, individuals born without a uterus and/or ovaries are recognized as women/female in whatever source it is you're not citing. Let be very clear, I'm not advocating against trans people. On the contrary, I think all people who aren't hurting others are deserving of respect and dignity within the limits of reason and the law of "your reach ends where my nose begins." But that doesn't entitle them or anyone else to unilaterally (and with a strong authoritarian bent, I might add) change our language or to proclaim "Trans women are women." I would counter, "No. Trans women are trans women, and that's OK." 1% certainly doesn't strike me as definition destroying counter evidence. Again, not sure what your source is.
  - yosame 4y ago
    If you say "All apples are red" and I show you a green apple, would that just be nitpicking?
    - next_xibalba 4y ago
      Straw man. If I say "all apples are apples" and you show me a pear, I'm not wrong.
      - Spivak 4y ago
        > If your sex is female you have ovaries. Period. Here’s a woman who had her ovaries removed due to a medical complication and a woman who was born without them. How are these not counterexamples? Yes it’s true that all women have ovaries except the ones that don’t.
        snoozing 4y ago
        next_xibalba 4y ago
        > If your sex is female you have ovaries. Period. Who wrote that? Not me. That is a cynical attempt at zooming into a very specific feature as though it is defining. (Which the green apple vs. red apple fallacy actually helps demonstrate!) Basic common sense tells us that a woman is defined by many anatomical (and, consequently, behavioral) traits. Let's look at the Wikipedia definition, which matches the definition that the vast majority of humanity understands and agrees with: "...inherit a pair of X chromosomes.." "...are capable of pregnancy and giving birth from puberty until menopause..." "...lack of a present, or functioning, SRY-gene on either one of the respective sex chromosomes..." "...Female anatomy is distinguished from male anatomy by the female reproductive system, which includes the ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, and vulva..." "...a wider pelvis, broader hips, and larger breasts than an adult man..." "...Women have significantly less facial and other body hair, have a higher body fat composition, and are on average shorter and less muscular than men..." Conversely, we can say, quite clearly, that a person born with a penis, who then has the penis surgically refashioned into a "vagina", who has top surgery, and who undergoes significant hormone treatments clearly does not meet that definition. This is a transparent, motivated attempt to erase the definition of woman. Again, let me be CRYSTAL clear. Saying "trans woman != woman" is true and OK to say. It does NOT equate to saying trans women are bad and should be mistreated. To say, believe, or act on that is NOT OK. Trans women are trans women, and that's OK.
- thiht 4y ago
  > Also congrats to all the people with XX chromosomes who are infertile and are now men. You’ll notice I didn’t define the female sex as the ability to get pregnant, nor that all of them can or want, just that it’s reserved to the female sex. You guys always do the « reverse argument trick » where you try to put words in the mouth of your victim. It’s more obvious than you think it is. > Pour one out for all the women who’ve had oophorectomies due to medical complications or women born with vaginal agenesis and androgen insensitivity syndrome. If you want to think of all the exceptions you cannot ever say anything. I’ll stick to the 90+% of humanity. The fact is, having ovaries is reserved to people of the female sex, which once again doesn’t mean all females (sex) have ovaries because of all you say. Ok, except for that one rare syndrome where men can sometimes develop ovaries, but again, we can’t possibly consider all the cases every time we speak if it means we can’t properly talk about the vast majority of the world population.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    I don’t know who “you guys” refers to but I assure you whatever it is I’m not a member. Your trick is ignoring the stronger argument which is it’s very likely that a trans woman will get pregnant after a uterus transplant at some point during our lifetime. > If you want to think of all the exceptions you cannot ever say anything No you can’t say what you’re trying to force. I can say without worrying about any exceptions that the set of people who can get pregnant includes men, women, and non-binary people. > we can’t possibly consider all the cases every time we speak if it means we can’t… use silly biological arguments that aren’t even true for no purpose except to invalidate trans people who by current estimates are 1 in 100 people.
    - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
      > the stronger argument which is it’s very likely that a trans woman will get pregnant after a uterus transplant It seems that taking a uterus, a female organ, and putting it into a male and him "giving birth" would prove the difference between the sexes. Without that uterus he wasn't going anywhere. > silly biological arguments Yeah.
next_xibalba 4y ago
- PartiallyTyped 4y ago
  It is supported by the fact that the brain shows dimorphism which can go wrong in many ways due to stressors, environment or genetic factors and therefore alter neurotypical development .
  - t0bia_s 4y ago
    You can apply that basically on anything. Its a part of our life to deal with problems. I'm sure a lot of people well have damaged neurotypical development if someone, who is clearly "he" would eventually let everyone around call him "she" or whatever. If gender is social construct we are "it". Sorry, I'm not playing this game, it is quite boring actually.
    - PartiallyTyped 4y ago
      - next_xibalba 4y ago
        > To the person, what they perceive as their gender is a very real thing To a schizophrenic, their delusions are very real. At a what point, when reality does not match a person's perceptions, do we judge their perceptions to be delusion, hallucination, or some other mental illness? I don't know the answer to that question. There is probably not a clear dividing line, sort of like the heliopause at the edge of our solar system. But to declare these things as hard, clear facts is not correct. > transsexuals would still opt to transition We should be very clear about the results of transitioning. It does not result in female anatomy by an regular definition. It is a physical state that imitates the <female/male> anatomy, very superficially, with long term health consequences and perpetual maintenance. I suspect that this terminal state does not achieve the goals of trans folks, and is likely a major source of the ongoing emotional disturbance so commonly observed.
t0bia_s 4y ago
Is age a social construct? What about race?
- orand 4y ago
  In Mexico, age is now legally a social construct. Race is one of the last remaining universal taboos for self-ID.
  - t0bia_s 4y ago
    So your age depends on your feelings?

by thiht 4y ago

Spivak 4y ago

next_xibalba 4y ago
What percentage of people experience these cases you describe? These seem like nits, not definition destroying counter-evidence.
- Spivak 4y ago
  Infertile women? 1 in 10. Women who’ve had their ovaries removed? 200k per year. Women who’ve had their uteruses removed? 400k per year. Women born without a uterus? 1 in 4500 or about 900k women in the world. Women who are born without a uterus and ovaries? About 7% of those born without a uterus so 63k women worldwide. But you know what the definition destroying counter evidence is? That if current estimates are accurate that about 1 in 100 people are trans. If trans people were rarer it would be easier to argue that they should just be an asterisk. Edit: For my own curiosity I wanted to see if being trans would qualify as a rare disease and apparently the FDA’s threshold is 1 in 200k.
  - next_xibalba 4y ago
    You missed my point. Maybe I didn't make it clear. These are all things that happen to women (and can only happen to women). You have to be born with a uterus in order to have it removed. Somehow, individuals born without a uterus and/or ovaries are recognized as women/female in whatever source it is you're not citing. Let be very clear, I'm not advocating against trans people. On the contrary, I think all people who aren't hurting others are deserving of respect and dignity within the limits of reason and the law of "your reach ends where my nose begins." But that doesn't entitle them or anyone else to unilaterally (and with a strong authoritarian bent, I might add) change our language or to proclaim "Trans women are women." I would counter, "No. Trans women are trans women, and that's OK." 1% certainly doesn't strike me as definition destroying counter evidence. Again, not sure what your source is.
- yosame 4y ago
  If you say "All apples are red" and I show you a green apple, would that just be nitpicking?
  - next_xibalba 4y ago
    Straw man. If I say "all apples are apples" and you show me a pear, I'm not wrong.
    - Spivak 4y ago
      > If your sex is female you have ovaries. Period. Here’s a woman who had her ovaries removed due to a medical complication and a woman who was born without them. How are these not counterexamples? Yes it’s true that all women have ovaries except the ones that don’t.
      - snoozing 4y ago
      - next_xibalba 4y ago
        > If your sex is female you have ovaries. Period. Who wrote that? Not me. That is a cynical attempt at zooming into a very specific feature as though it is defining. (Which the green apple vs. red apple fallacy actually helps demonstrate!) Basic common sense tells us that a woman is defined by many anatomical (and, consequently, behavioral) traits. Let's look at the Wikipedia definition, which matches the definition that the vast majority of humanity understands and agrees with: "...inherit a pair of X chromosomes.." "...are capable of pregnancy and giving birth from puberty until menopause..." "...lack of a present, or functioning, SRY-gene on either one of the respective sex chromosomes..." "...Female anatomy is distinguished from male anatomy by the female reproductive system, which includes the ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, and vulva..." "...a wider pelvis, broader hips, and larger breasts than an adult man..." "...Women have significantly less facial and other body hair, have a higher body fat composition, and are on average shorter and less muscular than men..." Conversely, we can say, quite clearly, that a person born with a penis, who then has the penis surgically refashioned into a "vagina", who has top surgery, and who undergoes significant hormone treatments clearly does not meet that definition. This is a transparent, motivated attempt to erase the definition of woman. Again, let me be CRYSTAL clear. Saying "trans woman != woman" is true and OK to say. It does NOT equate to saying trans women are bad and should be mistreated. To say, believe, or act on that is NOT OK. Trans women are trans women, and that's OK.
thiht 4y ago
> Also congrats to all the people with XX chromosomes who are infertile and are now men. You’ll notice I didn’t define the female sex as the ability to get pregnant, nor that all of them can or want, just that it’s reserved to the female sex. You guys always do the « reverse argument trick » where you try to put words in the mouth of your victim. It’s more obvious than you think it is. > Pour one out for all the women who’ve had oophorectomies due to medical complications or women born with vaginal agenesis and androgen insensitivity syndrome. If you want to think of all the exceptions you cannot ever say anything. I’ll stick to the 90+% of humanity. The fact is, having ovaries is reserved to people of the female sex, which once again doesn’t mean all females (sex) have ovaries because of all you say. Ok, except for that one rare syndrome where men can sometimes develop ovaries, but again, we can’t possibly consider all the cases every time we speak if it means we can’t properly talk about the vast majority of the world population.
- Spivak 4y ago
  I don’t know who “you guys” refers to but I assure you whatever it is I’m not a member. Your trick is ignoring the stronger argument which is it’s very likely that a trans woman will get pregnant after a uterus transplant at some point during our lifetime. > If you want to think of all the exceptions you cannot ever say anything No you can’t say what you’re trying to force. I can say without worrying about any exceptions that the set of people who can get pregnant includes men, women, and non-binary people. > we can’t possibly consider all the cases every time we speak if it means we can’t… use silly biological arguments that aren’t even true for no purpose except to invalidate trans people who by current estimates are 1 in 100 people.
  - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
    > the stronger argument which is it’s very likely that a trans woman will get pregnant after a uterus transplant It seems that taking a uterus, a female organ, and putting it into a male and him "giving birth" would prove the difference between the sexes. Without that uterus he wasn't going anywhere. > silly biological arguments Yeah.

next_xibalba 4y ago

PartiallyTyped 4y ago
It is supported by the fact that the brain shows dimorphism which can go wrong in many ways due to stressors, environment or genetic factors and therefore alter neurotypical development .
- t0bia_s 4y ago
  You can apply that basically on anything. Its a part of our life to deal with problems. I'm sure a lot of people well have damaged neurotypical development if someone, who is clearly "he" would eventually let everyone around call him "she" or whatever. If gender is social construct we are "it". Sorry, I'm not playing this game, it is quite boring actually.
  - PartiallyTyped 4y ago
    - next_xibalba 4y ago
      > To the person, what they perceive as their gender is a very real thing To a schizophrenic, their delusions are very real. At a what point, when reality does not match a person's perceptions, do we judge their perceptions to be delusion, hallucination, or some other mental illness? I don't know the answer to that question. There is probably not a clear dividing line, sort of like the heliopause at the edge of our solar system. But to declare these things as hard, clear facts is not correct. > transsexuals would still opt to transition We should be very clear about the results of transitioning. It does not result in female anatomy by an regular definition. It is a physical state that imitates the <female/male> anatomy, very superficially, with long term health consequences and perpetual maintenance. I suspect that this terminal state does not achieve the goals of trans folks, and is likely a major source of the ongoing emotional disturbance so commonly observed.

t0bia_s 4y ago

Is age a social construct? What about race?

orand 4y ago
In Mexico, age is now legally a social construct. Race is one of the last remaining universal taboos for self-ID.
- t0bia_s 4y ago
  So your age depends on your feelings?