The First RadFem Social Network

[Mister D]

The ambiguity is properly highlighted below:

"Either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female."

Not that long ago you argued the blue, now you argue the red.

Re my comment to Eth, the red is just an extension of biological sex. That was all my point was about. But now we're at it, it, the red, is not a social construct but natural. The blue is constructed, it's artificial. When the trans extended the blue to themselves, you switched definitions to the red. To argue you haven't is just arguing from ambiguity.

There is one reason and one reason only why radical feminists have insisted that gender is a social construct. It was to deny that there are significant differences between the sexes that influence human behavior and leave their inevitable footprint on human social organization. Whatever differences exist have little to no significance beyond reproduction. This is a profoundly unscientific conception of our species. The logical consequences of allowing the "social construct" position to become intellectually legitimate are there for us all to see. We can be whoever we want to be and any society that denies you that right is...well pick your pejorative.

[Ethereal]

Sort of. I would argue elements of gender are biological while others are social. In short, gender overlaps with sex. The part of gender that is social is mostly not connected to sex.

Where there is a lot of room for debate is how much of gender is biological. Personally, I think most feminists make the mistake of viewing things through a lens of oppression without considering what the tradeoffs are.

For example, women 100 years ago had less autonomy in the US, but they also were more socially protected by society. The sexual revolution removed most of those protections without giving much in return. The autonomy came at a pretty high price -- especially when looking at things like the breakdown of the family structure and sexual violence.

Sex and gender overlap, but they are still distinct concepts. As an analogy, odd numbers and prime numbers often overlap, but they are not the same concept. Probably the biggest problem with transgender ideology is its conflation of gender with sex.

[Mister D]

I could be wrong here, but I think she was using "conservative" in a figurative sense, not a political one.

I assume she meant traditional. I'm not sure what else she could possibly mean by that.

In any case, my point is that one of the tenets of feminism (again, defined much more strictly) was that there is no connection between "womanhood" and biology. Womanhood is learned and has no material reality. Transgenderism is a logical consequence of this position because it makes it theoretically possible to identify as a woman without being a biological female.

[Chris]

She still supports gender as a social construct. She said so repeatedly. There is no contradiction. Just your obsession with attacking Polly.

As I demonstrated, she has said both here. And while she supported in the past, she no longer does.

[Chris]

Sex and gender overlap, but they are still distinct concepts. As an analogy, odd numbers and prime numbers often overlap, but they are not the same concept. Probably the biggest problem with transgender ideology is its conflation of gender with sex.

You keep arguing an ambiguity in the definition of gender.

Transgenders do the opposite. They take the social construct idea to extreme feminists like Polly reject what they once embraced.

[Chris]

I assume she meant traditional. I'm not sure what else she could possibly mean by that.

In any case, my point is that one of the tenets of feminism (again, defined much more strictly) was that there is no connection between "womanhood" and biology. Womanhood is learned and has no material reality. Transgenderism is a logical consequence of this position because it makes it theoretically possible to identify as a woman without being a biological female.

Exactly.

[Collateral Damage]

Sex and gender are not the same thing.

Dividing by physical attributes, ie what some person might 'hit on' is treating them as the same, and in an attempt to defend against it, define it by the physical characteristics.

[IMPress Polly]

It is somewhat amusing when considering that a lot of the same people who claim there are more than 2 genders also support the concept of gender dysphoria, which generally only manifests in the binary way you describe.

Basically, if there are more than 2 genders, then it doesn't make much sense that transgender people would conform to the stereotypes for females or males.

It's basically taking transvestitism too far.

"Non-binary" is considered to be part of the trans umbrella for a very important reason: because it serves as a transitional phase that about half of all trans-identified people go through before (usually anyway) deciding that they fully identify with the other sex. Without the inclusion of "non-binary" identities, the trans umbrella would be much smaller.

Anyway, for clarity, my position is that there are no genders, only sexes.

[IMPress Polly]

Sex and gender overlap, but they are still distinct concepts. As an analogy, odd numbers and prime numbers often overlap, but they are not the same concept. Probably the biggest problem with transgender ideology is its conflation of gender with sex.

The practical application of gender identity is the assumption that if someone is simply not a lazy stereotype of their sex, it's probably because they were "born in the wrong body". In reality, they're just not a stereotype and that should be okay with us.

[Rationalist]

The practical application of gender identity is the assumption that if someone is simply not a lazy stereotype of their sex, it's probably because they were "born in the wrong body". In reality, they're just not a stereotype and that should be okay with us.

I can agree with that. Granted, I would say some of the social aspects of what we refer to as gender are biological in origin. I would also argue that a lot of the traditions that feminists have condemned actually worked to the advantage of women more often than not.