Transgender people claim to be a man or woman despite having the biology of the opposite sex. Generally, the counter argument is that sex and gender are different, but if that is the case, how does one define their gender other than by their own subjective judgment?
I don't know.
Does gender need anything more than one's own subjective judgement?
I mean, gender is a social-laden term. It exists to describe something that exists solely in a social context, no?
There is a bit more to the reality than a blunt statement. If you are really interested, google Anne Fausto Sterling, "Five sexes revisited". Written I think around 1998. Probably the leading writer and maybe authoritarian on human sexuality. Gives one some good information that most people will not, can not and would never consider reading 'cause it fucks with gods word.
I'm hopelessly heterosexual.
I'm hopelessly homosapiens.
Gender is culturally dependent. If you dress, act, and can be easily identified as what your culture considers a woman, then you're a woman. Same goes for being a man. Same goes for whatever other gender identity you want to throw in there.
I throw in that "easily identified" part, because in my opinion if you're going to identify as something, you do need to make some kind of effort to look the part. You can't look and act like the manliest man who ever lived and tell me you're non-binary, or a woman. That's not how it works.
Quote from: Sargon The Grape on May 06, 2025, 01:32:35 AMGender is culturally dependent. If you dress, act, and can be easily identified as what your culture considers a woman, then you're a woman. Same goes for being a man. Same goes for whatever other gender identity you want to throw in there.
I throw in that "easily identified" part, because in my opinion if you're going to identify as something, you do need to make some kind of effort to look the part. You can't look and act like the manliest man who ever lived and tell me you're non-binary, or a woman. That's not how it works.
What does a "man" look like? What does a "woman" look like. Do appearances dictate how one conducts oneself?
AI speaketh thusly: A sweeping generalization is a statement that overextends a point, often making a broad conclusion based on limited or inadequate evidence. It's a type of fallacy where a general rule or assumption is applied too broadly or universally, often without considering exceptions or specific contexts.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on May 06, 2025, 07:59:29 AMWhat does a "man" look like? What does a "woman" look like. Do appearances dictate how one conducts oneself?
Literally the first sentence in my post was that it's culturally dependent. You may accuse me of making sweeping generalizations when you stop making strawman arguments.
Quote from: Sargon The Grape on May 06, 2025, 11:17:01 PMLiterally the first sentence in my post was that it's culturally dependent. You may accuse me of making sweeping generalizations when you stop making strawman arguments.
I was asking what your criteria for segregation was.
FYI: A straw man argument is a type of informal fallacy where someone misrepresents their opponent's position, often by oversimplifying or exaggerating it, then attacks this misrepresented version instead of the actual argument. It's like attacking a straw man figure instead of the actual person, making the attack easier and less damaging.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on May 07, 2025, 06:13:02 AMI was asking what your criteria for segregation was.
I already told you what it is. It's not my fault you didn't understand the first sentence of the post.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on May 07, 2025, 06:14:11 AMFYI: A straw man argument is a type of informal fallacy where someone misrepresents their opponent's position, often by oversimplifying or exaggerating it, then attacks this misrepresented version instead of the actual argument. It's like attacking a straw man figure instead of the actual person, making the attack easier and less damaging.
I know what a straw man is. You are making one. I will not engage further unless and until you stop.
Oh, good, no more silly. Your explanation of gender is utterly ambiguous.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on May 08, 2025, 08:01:42 AMOh, good, no more silly. Your explanation of gender is utterly ambiguous.
Because gender is ambiguous. A man from Saudi Arabia and a man from the United Kingdom are different enough in dress and behavior, that if both were produced by the same culture they would likely be considered different genders. Indeed, our language already distinguishes them by their nationality. If I wanted to be identified as an Arabian man, I would not dress and act like an Englishman.
Your first response is irrelevant to anything I said. It reads as though you think I'm making the classic conservative "there are only two genders" argument, which can't be farther from the truth.
Okay, so what exactly, does ethnicity, nationality and culture have to do with gender. A pretty specific word defining the variations between male and female and there are a lot. But I can't buy into the argument of e,n and c having anything to do with sexuality.
Quote from: Sargon The Grape on May 08, 2025, 03:22:36 PMIt reads as though you think ...
If we don't speak again I hope you have a nice life.
Quote from: aitm on May 08, 2025, 03:33:49 PMOkay, so what exactly, does ethnicity, nationality and culture have to do with gender. A pretty specific word defining the variations between male and female and there are a lot. But I can't buy into the argument of e,n and c having anything to do with sexuality.
Idunno aitm. Honestly, i would say culture influences both gender and sexuality, which i don't see as the same thing entirely.
What was it for example, fuedal japan had that 'third gender'?
Ancient greece. The romans. Prime examples of how sexuality were deemed different and lead to different (sexual) behaviours and normalization of certain sexual ... acts.
Hey, i'm not saying thzt if i'd been born in a different continent 400 years ago my sexual preferences and my perception of my gender and my personality would be completely different, but i would wager money on them not being 100% the same as they are now.
As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.
Quote from: aitm on May 08, 2025, 03:33:49 PMOkay, so what exactly, does ethnicity, nationality and culture have to do with gender. A pretty specific word defining the variations between male and female and there are a lot. But I can't buy into the argument of e,n and c having anything to do with sexuality.
Gender is a social construct that is related to (but not synonymous with) sex, and social constructs are a product of their society by definition; and any given society is a product of the ethnicity and culture of its people. You ask what gender has to do with any of these things, but the human concept of gender is inseparable from them.
Or not.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on May 13, 2025, 03:14:22 PMOr not.
Sorry, it's hard to respond to forum posts when you're driving from Washington to California and back to attend a funeral. Oddly enough, I do consider road safety to be slightly more important than responding to your non-arguments.
I don't argue with dangerous drivers, like those who text while driving.
:raspberry:
The chromosomes in your genes and the dangling bits between your legs.
If you want to use gender, then the words become meaningless... so I try to avoid that meaningless creation of the 1950s.
People just need things to fight about.
They should spay and neuter people.
their genitals
Yeah, but "what makes a man a man?"
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on May 14, 2025, 08:53:18 PMYeah, but "what makes a man a man?"
By fitting their society's definition of a man.
There genuinely is not a better answer to this question, that's just how social constructs work. A thing is a thing because a society says it's a thing. It's the same reason you wear black to a funeral or drag to a Pride parade.
Quote from: Sargon The Grape on May 06, 2025, 01:32:35 AMGender is culturally dependent. If you dress, act, and can be easily identified as what your culture considers a woman, then you're a woman. Same goes for being a man. Same goes for whatever other gender identity you want to throw in there.
Rubbish. Women playing contact sports doesn't make them men. Men doing ballet doesn't make them women. Gay people aren't the opposite sex just because they engage in sexual behavior associated with the opposite sex.
If we consider science at all, then we can assume that there is a link between one's genetic sex and the sex one mentally identifies with, given that men and women have different brain structures.
https://stanmed.stanford.edu/how-mens-and-womens-brains-are-different/
As for why transgender people exist, I would assume that, in some cases, there may be a conflict between one's brain structure and one's genitals. This may be why they are more likely to engage in behaviors which are statistically associated with the opposite sex. But again, it would be absurd to claim that if a girl takes up an interest in rugby, this makes her into a boy, or if a boy takes up an interest in ballet, this makes him a girl.
Quote from: Sargon The Grape on May 14, 2025, 10:55:12 PMBy fitting their society's definition of a man.
There genuinely is not a better answer to this question, that's just how social constructs work. A thing is a thing because a society says it's a thing. It's the same reason you wear black to a funeral or drag to a Pride parade.
The earth is flat because the Flat Earth Society says so.
Quote from: Mr.Obvious on May 05, 2025, 04:31:17 AMDoes gender need anything more than one's own subjective judgement?
It does if it refers to anything objectively. I could say, in my own subjective judgment, that I am sexy, but other people are free to disagree.
QuoteI mean, gender is a social-laden term. It exists to describe something that exists solely in a social context, no?
When people identify with a gender that is the opposite of their biological sex, there are reasons for doing it, such as them feeling that, mentally, they are the opposite sex.
Quote from: Sargon The Grape on May 08, 2025, 03:22:36 PMBecause gender is ambiguous. A man from Saudi Arabia and a man from the United Kingdom are different enough in dress and behavior, that if both were produced by the same culture they would likely be considered different genders.
No, a man who wears a dress wouldn't be considered a woman. They'd be considered a man who wears a dress, or a transvestite.
In what world do we consider people the opposite sex just for doing something stereotypically associated with the opposite sex? Can you provide any real world examples?
Quote from: FreethinkingSceptic on May 15, 2025, 01:28:04 AMIt does if it refers to anything objectively. I could say, in my own subjective judgment, that I am sexy, but other people are free to disagree.
When people identify with a gender that is the opposite of their biological sex, there are reasons for doing it, such as them feeling that, mentally, they are the opposite sex.
But who says it refers to anything 'objectively'? I mean, trans people, as far as i understand, aren't claiming to be born in an xy-chromosone body when they are born in an xx-one, or viceversa. Indeed, the reference to being a gender opposite to that of the biological sex you are born in is by definition saying their subjective experience, (which is embedded in a cultural context imho,) is DIFFERENT from the "objective" truth.
Gender thus is of the realm of the subjective. Not the objective.
And that is not bad. That is not the same as meaningless. In fact, i find the subjective realm to be the far more meaningful one.
And your example, frankly, is bad. Because one's sexyness is also subjective and culturaly defined.
If 75% of your peers find you sexy, does that make you objectively (or universaly) sexy? If you had been a woman in the dark ages and you had pale skin and a chubby bod, you would have generally been thought of as sexy. But nowadays hollywood has influenced what is considered 'traditionally' sexy.
Edit: i think i understand now that you mean sexyness is subjective. If so, i initally misread your point. But i would still argue your argument is bad, because it misses the point entirely. And the cultural understanding of what it means to be sexy, like what it means to be any specific gender, also differs from time and place to time and place.
Quote from: FreethinkingSceptic on May 15, 2025, 01:31:48 AMNo, a man who wears a dress wouldn't be considered a woman. They'd be considered a man who wears a dress, or a transvestite.
In what world do we consider people the opposite sex just for doing something stereotypically associated with the opposite sex? Can you provide any real world examples?
I literally addressed this in my first post, if you could be bothered to read it.
I admit to being hopelessly heterosexual.