I think these terms like sex and gender, male and female are deserving of analytical definitions, not loose handwaving that may be masking fallacies, errors and nonsense. Protections and rights surely depend on this.
-
-
Replying to @lecanardnoir @theedwardian81
And people make them. We just can't enforce them on everyone or agree on them and so the meaning generally remains a vague & fluffy "characteristics, identities & behaviours which are associated with sex but are not biological organs."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @theedwardian81
Is that another way of saying there are no stable meanings to these words? And if so, how are you not erasing the concept of ‘woman’ as having an objective, material meaning?
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @lecanardnoir @theedwardian81
The reality is that there is no stable meanings to these words, yes. If there were, you'd not be arguing to me that gender doesn't make sense because it would. I didn't make the reality and pretending it doesn't exist won't produce an objective, material meaning.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @theedwardian81
Until historically very recently, the word ‘woman’ has had a very stable and coherent meaning - adult human female. Some men have then declared “I am a woman” and suddenly everyone is in a mess. We can choose to a) say, “that is not true”, or b) abandon any meaning to the word.
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes -
Can you explain what it is that has led you to adopt position (b)?
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @lecanardnoir @theedwardian81
I mean the science of it is new. Obviously, you can advocate for only going by reproductive systems for ethical or political reasons but this won't make the reality that people who feel the opposite sex to their gonads exist or the science which is starting to show why go away.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
"This is what we've always believed so why stop now?' is a terrible reason for taking a position when there is now more to be known. If your fear is for women's rights if we acknowledge that trans identity is real & rooted in biology, this can addressed w/out denial of biology.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @theedwardian81
But why ‘stop believing’? Sex is by definition about reproductive capability. Suddenly, the ‘science is new’. What science? Again, what compelling reason do we have for not adopting my position (a) - just stating that someone has a false belief?
3 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
For example, if people started asserting that whales are actually insects, we would need a damn good reason to not simply dismiss such claims as nonsense. What is it in the claim that some males make the they are women is so compelling?
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likes
We're just going to pretend we haven't already been here and discussed the science then. I'll leave it here. You believe what you want. I'll go with the evidence as it comes in & support liberal values for the treatment & inclusion of trans people.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.