View Single Post
Old 05-10-2019, 12:37 AM
Kimstu is offline
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,755
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
If society is going to demand separate considerations, such as sports, for men and women at some point simply declaring one to be a man or a woman wonít be sufficient for acceptance in exclusive activities.
This problem is almost entirely confined to the area of sports competitions, though. In pretty much every aspect of life other than people engaging in heavily elaborated versions of playground games for the entertainment of spectators, whether or not a person is transgender or cisgender is simply irrelevant. (Of course, many people feel that the distinction between transgender and cisgender is important in their private romantic and sexual lives, but that's their personal preference and nobody else's business.)

Originally Posted by octopus
There are real biological differences between men and women that one cannot doublethink away.

And Iím not sure why people are attacking the recognition of biology as hate. Itís bizarre.
Nobody is "attacking the recognition of biology" or trying to "doublethink away" "real biological differences". As I have explained to you and others on these boards at least a dozen times, nobody is trying to pretend that transgender and cisgender (not to mention intersex) people don't have real biological differences in their genetic makeup, their genital anatomy at birth, and so forth. Trans rights are not about denying biological reality in any way.

What trans rights are about is the current category shift in the social definitions of the categories "men" and "women". There is no intrinsic reason, for example, why the social use of the label "man" has to be synonymous with the category of "people born with a penis", any more than it has to be synonymous with the category of "people who are sexually attracted to women".

Is it "denying biology" to refer to homosexual men as men, even though (most) homosexual men lack the traditionally essential male characteristic of being sexually attracted to women? If not, then there's nothing intrinsically "denying biology" in referring to transgender men as men, even if they lack the traditionally essential male characteristic of being born with a penis.