4 ms·

Some people are trying to restrict the word "gender" for political purposes, but it also continues to be used as a synonym of biological sex, a meaning that it

Some people are trying to restrict the word "gender" for political purposes, but it also continues to be used as a synonym of biological sex, a meaning that it has had for centuries. > In the 15th century gender expanded from its use as a term for a grammatical subclass to join sex in referring to either of the two primary biological forms of a species, a meaning sex has had since the 14th century https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender

hairofadog 4y ago
It changed in the 15th century, and it’s changing now. Language is like that.
- leereeves 4y ago
  I agree, it's not a new phenomenon, language changes all the time. But while some language changes rise from the people, others (like this one) are dictated by powerful institutions. Orwell described it well about 100 years ago. Change the meaning of words to make disagreement impossible. Newspeak "designed to diminish the range of thought".
  - hairofadog 4y ago
    eyeroll
    - leereeves 4y ago
      Nothing constructive to say? Are you here to discuss this topic, or to prevent discussion?
      - bitwize 4y ago
        It means "I can't fruitfully discuss this topic with someone who is stuck in an ideological local maximum". Transgender identity and acknowledgement of the fluid, multidimensional nature of gender IS NOT a conspiracy to take your precious bodily fluids. Don't believe me? Go to San Francisco and try meeting some of the "co-conspirators" -- transgender men and women on the skids, having to turn to professions like sex work, because they ran from their conservative families fearing for their FUCKING LIVES. Living on the edges of society and the law, having to develop their own biopunk parallel medical support because legitimate medicine won't treat them in the way that they need, all to survive in a society that simply wishes they didn't exist because them existing violates a false foundational premise of society: that gender is binary and corresponds to physical sex. But I've said too much. eyeroll is all the response you deserve.
        leereeves 4y ago
        Those aren't the co-conspirators. The co-conspirators are the people pushing this false idea for profit and political gain. The people you're describing are the victims of an ideology that falsely told them they could ignore biology and thereby ruined a lot of lives.[1] Obviously their families were also wrong to abandon them, and like everyone else on the streets, they deserve help to put their lives back together, but if they are still living on the streets they obviously aren't getting that help from the people who claim to represent them but are actually using them as political props instead of helping them find homes and professions they like. 1: I encourage you to read this other discussion that was on HN today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34753240 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34753240
        SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
        > I encourage you to read this other discussion yes, there's a lot of horrid crap on this topic on HN lately. It's been politicised already, no need to push this agenda further. Your encouragement is not needed, that nonsense is quite visible. eyeroll.
        leereeves 4y ago
        The author describers herself as a queer woman, married to a transman, to the left of Bernie Sanders, and a case manager at The Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children's Hospital. If you won't even listen to her, dismissing her experience as "horrid crap", then perhaps you're "stuck in an ideological local maximum". Is there anyone you would listen to?
        SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
        It's the commentary and the ends to which it is put, that are the horrid crap. Case in point, your comments above.
        leereeves 4y ago
- yucky 4y ago
  So then what constitutes a gender now, and how many are there?
krapp 4y ago
Both science and language evolve over time, that isn't a political conspiracy. The point is, only one of the two sides in this debate are denying current (not 14th century) science, and it isn't the side you or yucky seem to believe.
- leereeves 4y ago
  No one denies, as your source says, that "neither the health of women nor men is simply a product of biology but is also influenced by sociocultural and psychological experience". That's science. But trying to dictate that people only use a word in a new way and never use its traditional definition is not science, it's (Orwellian) politics. And pretending that biology doesn't matter is denying the very science you quoted. Finally, the major questions about trans rights aren't about science at all, they are about values and why institutions exist. Do we separate boys and girls in sports because of gender roles (sociocultural), or to give girls an opportunity to play sports without competing against people made stronger by high testosterone (biology)? Do we separate men's and women's prisons because of gender roles (sociocultural), or to prevent sex and pregnancy (biology)? Etc.
bitwize 4y ago
It's not political. Which programs to allocate the government budget to is political. This is a human rights issue. Extensive research has been done into the relationship between the physical, psychological, and social aspects of sex and gender, and the definitions we use today reflect our current understanding of how these interact, acknowledging that some people's psychological and social selves may not correspond with their physical biology. Refusal to acknowledge these people's lived experience is pigheaded ignorance and rank bigotry.
- leereeves 4y ago
  I agree it's a human rights issue, but it's a very complicated one, and trans rights conflict with other human rights. Sometimes biology matters. Allowing biological females to participate in separate sports without biological males, for example. Where do you stand on that? Don't you agree that biology (like testosterone level) matters sometimes? Or in dating, do you think people have the right to want to know the biological sex of someone they date? I acknowledge the lived experience of trans people but I don't think their desires outweigh the interests of all other people. And of course, balancing those competing interests is absolutely political. It's just dishonest to claim this isn't political.

hairofadog 4y ago

It changed in the 15th century, and it’s changing now. Language is like that.

leereeves 4y ago
I agree, it's not a new phenomenon, language changes all the time. But while some language changes rise from the people, others (like this one) are dictated by powerful institutions. Orwell described it well about 100 years ago. Change the meaning of words to make disagreement impossible. Newspeak "designed to diminish the range of thought".
- hairofadog 4y ago
  eyeroll
  - leereeves 4y ago
    Nothing constructive to say? Are you here to discuss this topic, or to prevent discussion?
    - bitwize 4y ago
      It means "I can't fruitfully discuss this topic with someone who is stuck in an ideological local maximum". Transgender identity and acknowledgement of the fluid, multidimensional nature of gender IS NOT a conspiracy to take your precious bodily fluids. Don't believe me? Go to San Francisco and try meeting some of the "co-conspirators" -- transgender men and women on the skids, having to turn to professions like sex work, because they ran from their conservative families fearing for their FUCKING LIVES. Living on the edges of society and the law, having to develop their own biopunk parallel medical support because legitimate medicine won't treat them in the way that they need, all to survive in a society that simply wishes they didn't exist because them existing violates a false foundational premise of society: that gender is binary and corresponds to physical sex. But I've said too much. eyeroll is all the response you deserve.
      - leereeves 4y ago
        Those aren't the co-conspirators. The co-conspirators are the people pushing this false idea for profit and political gain. The people you're describing are the victims of an ideology that falsely told them they could ignore biology and thereby ruined a lot of lives.[1] Obviously their families were also wrong to abandon them, and like everyone else on the streets, they deserve help to put their lives back together, but if they are still living on the streets they obviously aren't getting that help from the people who claim to represent them but are actually using them as political props instead of helping them find homes and professions they like. 1: I encourage you to read this other discussion that was on HN today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34753240 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34753240
        SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
        > I encourage you to read this other discussion yes, there's a lot of horrid crap on this topic on HN lately. It's been politicised already, no need to push this agenda further. Your encouragement is not needed, that nonsense is quite visible. eyeroll.
        leereeves 4y ago
        The author describers herself as a queer woman, married to a transman, to the left of Bernie Sanders, and a case manager at The Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children's Hospital. If you won't even listen to her, dismissing her experience as "horrid crap", then perhaps you're "stuck in an ideological local maximum". Is there anyone you would listen to?
        SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
        It's the commentary and the ends to which it is put, that are the horrid crap. Case in point, your comments above.
        leereeves 4y ago
yucky 4y ago
So then what constitutes a gender now, and how many are there?

krapp 4y ago

Both science and language evolve over time, that isn't a political conspiracy. The point is, only one of the two sides in this debate are denying current (not 14th century) science, and it isn't the side you or yucky seem to believe.

leereeves 4y ago
No one denies, as your source says, that "neither the health of women nor men is simply a product of biology but is also influenced by sociocultural and psychological experience". That's science. But trying to dictate that people only use a word in a new way and never use its traditional definition is not science, it's (Orwellian) politics. And pretending that biology doesn't matter is denying the very science you quoted. Finally, the major questions about trans rights aren't about science at all, they are about values and why institutions exist. Do we separate boys and girls in sports because of gender roles (sociocultural), or to give girls an opportunity to play sports without competing against people made stronger by high testosterone (biology)? Do we separate men's and women's prisons because of gender roles (sociocultural), or to prevent sex and pregnancy (biology)? Etc.

bitwize 4y ago

It's not political. Which programs to allocate the government budget to is political. This is a human rights issue. Extensive research has been done into the relationship between the physical, psychological, and social aspects of sex and gender, and the definitions we use today reflect our current understanding of how these interact, acknowledging that some people's psychological and social selves may not correspond with their physical biology. Refusal to acknowledge these people's lived experience is pigheaded ignorance and rank bigotry.

leereeves 4y ago
I agree it's a human rights issue, but it's a very complicated one, and trans rights conflict with other human rights. Sometimes biology matters. Allowing biological females to participate in separate sports without biological males, for example. Where do you stand on that? Don't you agree that biology (like testosterone level) matters sometimes? Or in dating, do you think people have the right to want to know the biological sex of someone they date? I acknowledge the lived experience of trans people but I don't think their desires outweigh the interests of all other people. And of course, balancing those competing interests is absolutely political. It's just dishonest to claim this isn't political.