No they aren’t. They are similar and inter-related things. And while more people have unambiguously binary sex than have unambiguously binary gender, both sex and gender exist on a continuum with many people clustering around two modes, and the rest scattered around.
They’ve already done the damage, more often than not. In most contexts, that is a harmful thing to say that doesn’t add anything useful to the conversation unless the goal is to minimize the relevance of gender.
Have you seen America lately?
I’ll tell you a secret. Almost all transpeople believe they were incorrectly assigned at birth, and that their external genitalia belie the rest of their experience, including aspects of their biological experience. This is controversial (unlike the notion that the fetal brain is influenced by sex hormones, which really isn’t controversial) but it’s something you should be aware of if you want to use language like that around trans people.
Heck, the extent of sexualization is controversial, but even adult human brains are known to be influenced by sex hormones. Have you ever heard of “roid rage”?
And, my point is that sex and gender are used interchangeably all the time. And, man or woman (or boy or girl) is usually sufficient in nearly all conversations. For those specific conversations where the hormone and biological status matters (such as transgirls playing with cisgirls in high school sports, where this spun out of), calling a transgirl “male” is wrong and insulting. I certainly wouldn’t call Buck Angel “female” to his face (or behind his back, of course).
Male and female have multiple meanings, spanning gender identity, biology, and in my previous example, in police announcements. As I mentioned earlier, if Buck Angel held up a bank, the cops wouldn’t tell their patrol cars to be on the lookout for “a white female, possibly armed.” But, you’re telling me that Mr. Angel has remained female throughout.
Claiming that male or female always refer to chromosomal status or whatever is very specific use of that word that can range from insulting to ambiguous, and is just not that useful for these types of conversations.
No, that is not true, dammit! If you happen to be intersex, and you’re trying to draw attention to intrusive destructive surgery often performed at birth without consent, you goddammed well have legitimate cause to distinguish between SEX and GENDER.
Jesus fucking hell, not everything pertaining to sex versus gender boils down to transaffirmative versus transphobic.
While it wouldn’t be helpful to identify non-parents such as myself (or pre-adults), you can be pretty certain that all parents who have inseminated their partner have at least one Y chromosome, either XY and more rarely XYY, and all parents who have carried a child have only X chromosomes, either XX or more rarely XXX.
As I said, non-parents are more difficult to sort because there are those who have no children by choice, no children due to lack of opportunity to partner with a suitable person, and those who have no children because extra Y and/or X chromosomes in incompatible assortments or hormonal issues (like androgen insensitivity) rendered them unable to sexually reproduce. Non-parent adults, however, particularly those in their mid-30s and older, are in the minority, out-numbered between 5 to 1 and 10+ to 1, depending on how much older than 35 you’re concerned with.
So, how certain do you need to be in order to say that “genetic” works as a term without literally subjecting people to a DNA test? Outside of qualifying for the Olympics, I can’t think of too many situations that has someone demanding verification.
So what? Does that mean they are used correctly? People use the word “literally” to mean exactly the opposite. People use a lot of words and phrases wrong.
From here definition 2 of Gender:
2a : SEX sense 1a the feminine gender
b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex
So, I’d say they are interchangeable. Gender reveal parties don’t reveal the gender identity of a newborn. So, I’m not sure what your point is.
“I am, and will forever be, a biological female. How is this so hard to understand? If I was not a biological female then I would not be transsexual. It’s dangerous to discount biology.”
So, based on your use of that quote, is it safe to assume that you would refer to Buck Angel, to his face, as a female, and not see any problem with that?
I cannot imagine why this would come up in casual conversation, but if for some weird reason he asked what I thought - is he trying to prove a weird point? - why would I lie to him?
Interesting quote, but I’ll also point out that he specifically says “biological female”, which brings it back to biology, rather than the more general word, female.
That’s true. If it’s okay to use just that term, fair enough.
It’s fine to just use female in lots of contexts! My only point was that it’s not that useful in conversations specifically about trans issues.
I still can’t figure out why y’all are so pressed to know exactly what’s in another person’s pants? It’s weird. Like I said, unless you are that person’s medical provider, or their sexual partner, why does it matter and why do you care?
The rule at this forum is don’t be a jerk. Apply that to real life. If someone identifies as a woman, they are a woman. If they identify as a man, they are a man. If they identify as non-binary, then they are non-binary. You don’t have to understand, or agree. You don’t get to discount their existence and experience. Just don’t be a jerk, it really isn’t that hard.
This.
Yes, that is another topic where is important to talk about people’s actual external genitalia. And quite possibly a lot of other biological details. I can think of a few more. But most of the time that’s not what’s relevant.
This discussion started with a discussion of sex segregation in sports. Biology is a significant issue there. Another discussion going on right now is in reference to an article that is in fact from a publication about medicine.
No one here has suggested just randomly walking around the street shouting at people “I don’t think you’re a man, I think you’re a woman!” That’s a straw man argument all the way.
Your position that asking what words distinguish between sex and gender is “bigoted” is absolute nonsense. If sex and gender are different, then they’re different, and we need words to clarify which we mean. How you use them, and how you behave, will determine if you’re a jerk.
In another thread there was a short discussion as to what the correct term is for an indigenous North American; possibilities include
Native
Indian
Aboriginal
Indigenous
First Nations
(Proper name of specific nation)
It is absolutely NOT bigoted to have that discussion, or to ask for clarification regarding the distinction between two of those terms, is it? It would be very bigoted to use any of those terms to assert a person is inherently inferior to other people.
It absolutely is relevant. But that’s also a situation where words like “AMAB”, “cisgirl”, and “transgirl” are explicit and clear.