U.K. Supreme Court Rules Trans Women Can’t Be Defined as Women

[Master Debator]

Yes

It's my non-missanthropic recommendation

No need. If they don't recognize reality then that you shouldn't be regarded.

The reality is you're the uneducated by your own admission. You're in no position to describe reality to the educated. Feel free to pretend to though. That's always good for a laugh.

 

[The Mark]

Cross dressing mena rent women they are men with a mental illness enabling them is an act of abuse

I'm not sure you even believe that.

Why are you saying it?

 

[Master Debator]

Okay appeal to your authority.

I'm just making the case that you arent one and you've agreed with me. You have no education in medicine so no one is going to make believe with you like you know what you're talking about....

Because I'm not being bogged down and bullshit

Or formal education in medicine and health......

 

[CLAX1911]

I'm just making the case that you arent one

I made that case you're just squawking about it.

and you've agreed with me.

Yep I'm not an authority.

You have no education in medicine so no one is going to make believe with you like you know what you're talking about....

I'm not the one lying about sex.

Or formal education in medicine and health......

 

[Master Debator]

I made that case you're just squawking about it.

Squawking is simply your frail way of me contextualizing your healthcare observations and recommendations with the fact that you are entirely uneducated on the subject. There there.

Yep I'm not an authority.

I'm not. The people who actually have the education and do this for a living are. I refer you to them and they reasoning.

I'm not the one lying about sex.

Who's lying about what? Make a clear accusation rather than this frail one and then provide your evidence.

 

[Ouroboros]

I made that case you're just squawking about it.

Yep I'm not an authority.

I'm not the one lying about sex.

I think you may be using the term "authority" differently than your opponent. I don't think you are using it to agree that you have no education in medicine, but that you are not a medical professional. In that context, your opponent would have to be a medical professional to have more authority to speak on the subject than you have, IN THAT CONTEXT. Can you clarify?

 

[CLAX1911]

I think you may be using the term "authority" differently than your opponent. I don't think you are using it to agree that you have no education in medicine, but that you are not a medical professional. In that context, your opponent would have to be a medical professional to have more authority to speak on the subject than you have, IN THAT CONTEXT. Can you clarify?

But it's all just an appeal to authority which is a logical fallacy so there's no point in getting into the minutiae.

 

[CLAX1911]

Squawking is simply your frail way of me contextualizing your healthcare observations and recommendations with the fact that you are entirely uneducated on the subject. There there.

Why are you posting here if the only people that can talk about anything or people that have formal education on it?

I'm not. The people who actually have the education and do this for a living are. I refer you to them and they reasoning.

The reasoning is informed by wpath which isn't a medical organization it's an advocacy group.

Who's lying about what? Make a clear accusation rather than this frail one and then provide your evidence.

Anybody who says sex is a spectrum is lying. It is not. The evidence is there is a sperm and an egg there's not a sperg or a spegg. You can only produce one or the other not some in between version.

 

[Master Debator]

Why are you posting here if the only people that can talk about anything or people that have formal education on it?

I didn't say no one else could talk about it. You just don't get to come here and pretend that you know what you're talking about without me laughing and pointing out that you don't. That you're wholly uneducated when it comes diagnosing and prescribing Healthcare.

The reasoning is informed by wpath which isn't a medical organization it's an advocacy group.

No it's informed by the vast majority of American medical institutions as well as every Ivy league medical school. Why are you being this frail? It's endorsed by the:

American Academy of Physician Associates

American College of Obstrtricians and Gynecologists

American Academy of Pediatrics

American Medical Association

American Psychiatric Association

American College Health Association

American Counseling Association

American Hearth Association

Endocrine Society

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology

American Psychological Association

Harvard School of Medicine

Yale School of Medicine

Stanford School of Medicine

Anybody who says sex is a spectrum is lying.

Says the uneducated....

It is not. The evidence is there is a sperm and an egg there's not a sperg or a spegg.

That's strawman. There are the intersexed who are born with male and female reproductive parts to varying degrees.

You can only produce one or the other not some in between version.

You can also produce none. That's a third option. Olympian Caster Semenya's body doesn't do gamete production. If it did her body would be producing sperm thanks to her internal testes. She however has a vagina. If your argument is that she is whatever her gamete production would be then you must concede that males can have vaginas.

 

[CLAX1911]

I didn't say no one else could talk about it.

You're kind of are.

You just don't get to come here and pretend that you know what you're talking about without me laughing and pointing out that you don't.

I know for a fact you can never change your sex.

That you're wholly uneducated when it comes diagnosing and prescribing Healthcare.

I'm not talking about healthcare.

No it's informed by the vast majority of American medical institutions as well as every Ivy league medical school. Why are you being this frail? It's endorsed by the:

American Academy of Physician Associates

American College of Obstrtricians and Gynecologists

American Academy of Pediatrics

American Medical Association

American Psychiatric Association

American College Health Association

American Counseling Association

American Hearth Association

Endocrine Society

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology

American Psychological Association

Harvard School of Medicine

Yale School of Medicine

Stanford School of Medicine


Says the uneducated....

Appealing to authority is also uneducated.

That's strawman. There are the intersexed who are born with male and female reproductive parts to varying degrees.

So they either could produce a sperm or an egg they're not going to produce anything else.

So it still is looting intersex people 100% binary.

You can also produce none. That's a third option.

That's not in between us sperm and an egg that's just someone who has a defective reproductive system.

Olympian Caster Semenya's body doesn't do gamete production.

Such a person that has a defective reproductive system they're not producing some third type of gamete. That doesn't show that there is no binary.

If it did her body would be producing sperm thanks to her internal testes.

Then she would be male.

She however has a vagina.

So?

If your argument is that she is whatever her gamete production would be then you must concede that males can have vaginas.

In a very rare condition yes.

 

[Gatsby]

Great article from Louise Perry about the big win for objective reality in the UK:

It turns out water is wet

Why the TERF victory matters

www.louiseperry.co.uk

As I argued in a recent essay, transgenderism is now out of fashion – the hot girls no longer regard it as cool, and the Left increasingly regard it as a political liability. We are now in the midst of a process of unwinding that will no doubt be frustratingly slow. The true believers will cling on for a long while yet, not least – as Helen Joyce has always argued – the parents who pushed for the medical mutilation of their children, who will resist reality until the bitter end. Nonetheless, this chapter of British political history is coming to a close. And, with any luck, other countries will soon follow our example.
...
It was inevitable that the trans movement would eventually collapse: its leaders were too psychologically unstable, its demands too incoherent, and – above all – it asked far, far too much of the public. The ability to recognise the sex of another human being is hardwired into us. We clock cues like forearm length, hand size, and hairline shape without conscious thought. You can coerce people – just about – into saying what you want them to say. But you cannot coerce them into thinking as you want them to.

 

[Ouroboros]

Nobody is surprised by this ruling from TERF island.

BTW, biological sex isn't binary.

I thought the usual trans claim was that biological sex was binary, possibly with the exception of physical androgyny (having both sex organs), while it was gender that was a social construct and that therefore there were as many genders as stars in the sky.

 

[Master Debator]

You're kind of are.

I'm not at all. That's just you being frail about me laughing at the way you're talking about it. There there.

I know for a fact you can never change your sex.

Who is saying you can?

I'm not talking about healthcare.

Not anymore now that I made you meek.

Appealing to authority is also uneducated.

I'm not appealing to authority. Appealing to authority would me I'm telling you to listen to doctors just because they're doctors. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that you aren't an authority and what you're appealing to is abject ignorance. The Healthcare community has a stance, you don't have to agree with it but lying and pretending about it is what makes your argument frail.

So they either could produce a sperm or an egg they're not going to produce anything else.

So three options.

So it still is looting intersex people 100% binary.

What? Three options isn't binary. Binary means two. And who said sex classification must be based on gamete production?

That's not in between us sperm and an egg that's just someone who has a defective reproductive system.

And both male and female reproductive organs.

Such a person that has a defective reproductive system they're not producing some third type of gamete. That doesn't show that there is no binary.

It shows a third option.

Then she would be male.

With a vagina. Males can have vaginas then?

So?

In a very rare condition yes.

So she identifies as a woman because of her vagina. Why should she identify as man because of internal testes? Why do you feel you're the arbiter of that choice?

 

[Master Debator]

I thought the usual trans claim was that biological sex was binary, possibly with the exception of physical androgyny (having both sex organs), while it was gender that was a social construct and that therefore there were as many genders as stars in the sky.

All classifications are also social constructs. Nature isn't deciding that Caster Semenya with her internal testes and vagina be classified as male as @CLAX1911 would have. Biologists are starting to wonder if clarifying sex as binary doesn't fully acknowledge or appreciate the variation in human physiology that exists among the intersexed.

Sex Redefined

 

[CLAX1911]

.

So three options.

Not really no

What? Three options isn't binary. Binary means two. And who said sex classification must be based on gamete production?

Three options is fake you can either produce sperm or eggs you can't produce both and you can't produce something else.

And both male and female reproductive organs.

It shows a third option.

The third option is no reproductive ability at all and that doesn't factor into it so why mention it

With a vagina. Males can have vaginas then?

Again in very very circumstances yes was that young clear the first time?

So she identifies as a woman because of her vagina. Why should she identify as man because of internal testes? Why do you feel you're the arbiter of that choice?

People can identify his purple killer whales from outer space for all I care.

 

[Ouroboros]

All classifications are also social constructs. Nature isn't deciding that Caster Semenya with her internal testes and vagina be classified as male as @CLAX1911 would have. Biologists are starting to wonder if clarifying sex as binary doesn't fully acknowledge or appreciate the variation in human physiology that exists among the intersexed.

Sex Redefined

I see your citation and raise with another citation.

The terms gender and sex are often used interchangeably in everyday conversation, but they represent fundamentally different concepts in academic discourse and social science research. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, and attributes that a society considers appropriate for men and women, while sex pertains to the biological and physiological characteristics that define males and females. This distinction is crucial for understanding how identity, inequality, and social expectations operate in our communities.

Gender vs. Sex: Decoding the Differences in Social and Biological Roles - Socio.Health

The terms gender and sex are often used interchangeably in everyday conversation, but they represent fundamentally different concepts in academic discourse

socio.health

My question to Lisa was whether or not there was a prevalent dichotomy between the way many have defined sex and gender as respectively "physical and biological" vs. "socially constructed." Your answer, to the effect that both are socially constructed, is just your answer. Has the oppositional argument been made, and has it become prevalent in society?

 

[Master Debator]

I see your citation and raise with another citation.

Gender vs. Sex: Decoding the Differences in Social and Biological Roles - Socio.Health

The terms gender and sex are often used interchangeably in everyday conversation, but they represent fundamentally different concepts in academic discourse

socio.health

My question to Lisa was whether or not there was a prevalent dichotomy between the way many have defined sex and gender as respectively "physical and biological" vs. "socially constructed." Your answer, to the effect that both are socially constructed, is just your answer. Has the oppositional argument been made, and has it become prevalent in society?

That isn't my argument. That seems to be a habit of yours. I said categories are socially constructed but biological sex categories are based on biology. Biology isn't socially constructed its observed.

 

[Master Debator]

Not really no

Yes really. Let's do a simple exercise and count.....

Three options is fake you can either produce sperm

1.

or eggs

2.

you can't produce both and you can't produce something else.

The third option is no reproductive ability at all and that doesn't factor into it so why mention it

3.

Look how easy that was. Everyone on this board should be able to count to three. Now it may not factor into to you but again, who's you? Why do you like to imagine yourself the arbiter of these things? Is it the fragility?

Again in very very circumstances yes was that young clear the first time?

I just like hearing you argue that males have vaginas. I made you do that for shits and giggles.

People can identify his purple killer whales from outer space for all I care.

You seem to care quite a bit. If not why are you coming here pretending to be the arbiter of how people identify?

 

[CLAX1911]

Yes really. Let's do a simple exercise and count.....

1.

2.

3.

There is no third option the third option is a defective reproductive system that's not a third sex

Look how easy that was. Everyone on this board should be able to count to three. Now it may not factor into to you but again, who's you? Why do you like to imagine yourself the arbiter of these things? Is it the fragility?

I just like hearing you argue that males have vaginas. I made you do that for shits and giggles.

You seem to care quite a bit. If not why are you coming here pretending to be the arbiter of how people identify?

 

[Master Debator]

There is no third option the third option is a defective reproductive system that's not a third sex

Let's try counting again and again and again and as many times as you need.

1. There's the production of sperm.

2. There's the production of ova.

3. There's no production of any reproductive cells.

Try counting those for us.


And I ask again, who is even dictating that sex be determined by gamete production?

 

[Ouroboros]

That isn't my argument. That seems to be a habit of yours. I said categories are socially constructed but biological sex categories are based on biology. Biology isn't socially constructed its observed.

You made no exceptions for "biological sex categories," you said "ALL classifications are socially constructed" and then questioned even biological sex categories by saying, "Biologists are starting to wonder if clarifying sex as binary doesn't fully acknowledge or appreciate the variation in human physiology that exists among the intersexed." You may well have your own set of categories that you consider validated by the observations of whatever scientists you agree with. But since you misrepresent your own arguments and lose track of their implications, your validation doesn't count for much.

 

[Master Debator]

You made no exceptions for "biological sex categories," you said "ALL classifications are socially constructed" and then questioned even biological sex categories by saying, "Biologists are starting to wonder if clarifying sex as binary doesn't fully acknowledge or appreciate the variation in human physiology that exists among the intersexed."

I said all categories are socially constructed because they are. That doesn't mean observations about biological traits are socially constructed. That means we can observe that some people have testicles and penises and we classify them as male, others have ovaries and vaginas and we call them female, some like Caster Semenya have testes and vaginas and we classify them as intersex. Male, Female and Intersex aren't biological traits; testes, ovaries, vaginas and penises are, what they are are classifications. We don't observe male or female, we observe ovaries and vaginas and we label them significant features of a category we call Female.

You may well have your own set of categories that you consider validated by the observations of whatever scientists you agree with. But since you misrepresent your own arguments and lose track of their implications, your validation doesn't count for much.

I haven't lost track of anything. Im keeping track of my argument and your misunderstanding of my argument. Also if your argument is that some people's sentiments have more objective value than others where is this value being objectively derived?

 

[Ouroboros]

I said all categories are socially constructed because they are. That doesn't mean observations about biological traits are socially constructed. That means we can observe that some people have testicles and penises and we classify them as male, others have ovaries and vaginas and we call them female, some like Caster Semenya have testes and vaginas and we classify them as intersex. Male, Female and Intersex aren't biological traits; testes, ovaries, vaginas and penises are, what they are are classifications. We don't observe male or female, we observe ovaries and vaginas and we label them significant features of a category we call Female.

More hilarious hair-splitting from you. if the observations are objectively valid, then the categories are objectively valid, since you are claiming that they were based on objective knowledge. I didn't even bring up the objective nature of anything; you did that in your arguments here, trying to portray your three categories (so far) of sexuality to be valid based on objective knowledge. Now, it is true that different sections of society who interpret the biological evidence differently, but that's not proof that the categories are essentially "socially constructed," any more than scientific findings are socially constructed because scientists have to be able to communicate their findings to other scientists in their own society at the very least. Here's one source that disagrees with your conviction that intersex biology constitutes a valid biological category, when in truth (inserting my own opinion now) it's more a teratological category.

Conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female, occur in 0.018% of the population1.

The claim that 1.7% of the population is ‘intersex’2 includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex, and is often wrongly used to back up the ideological assertion that ‘sex is a spectrum’, or that biological sex is not dimorphic.

The philosopher Kathleen Stock points out that she would be considered as “intersex” under Fausto-Sterling’s “preposterously over-demanding conditions on sex category membership”, as she lost an ovary in early adulthood3, which would count as “intersex” according to Fausto-Sterling.

It is not true that 1.7% of the population is 'born between the sexes'. The proportion of people with DSDs ('intersex' conditions) is 0.018% - Stats for Gender

Conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female, occur in 0.018% of the population1. The claim that 1.7% of the population is ‘intersex’ includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as...

statsforgender.org

I haven't lost track of anything. Im keeping track of my argument and your misunderstanding of my argument. Also if your argument is that some people's sentiments have more objective value than others where is this value being objectively derived?

Your attempt to distort the argument of the OP is both meek and frail. Hah, beat you to using your favorite meaningless misclassifications.

 

[Master Debator]

More hilarious hair-splitting from you.

I'm not splitting any hairs, they're two different things, categories and observations.

if the observations are objectively valid, then the categories are objectively valid, since you are claiming that they were based on objective knowledge.

Explain what you think that means because its not clear to me. Say we observe Caster Semenya with testes and a vagina and her and her doctors classify her has a female or intersexed female and someone like @CLAX1911 says no, they're classifying her as male. How would either one of these be objective? The decision of which category to place Semenya in may be based on objective observations but they're still being filtered through subjective experience when being placed into some classification that is based on criteria subjectively significant to the classifier. For Semenya and her doctors the relevance was on her external genitalia and her internal sense of self, for @CLAX1911 its her testes. Both these things objectively exist but their relevance for determination into a particular class is subjective.

I didn't even bring up the objective nature of anything; you did that in your arguments here, trying to portray your three categories (so far) of sexuality to be valid based on objective knowledge.

I know. I base my arguments on sound reasoning and logic and Im happy to explain what that reasoning is. That must be a new experience for you. Congratulations.

Now, it is true that different sections of society who interpret the biological evidence differently, but that's not proof that the categories are essentially "socially constructed," any more than scientific findings are socially constructed because scientists have to be able to communicate their findings to other scientists in their own society at the very least.

What does having to communicate have to do with what they're communicating?

Here's one source that disagrees with your conviction that intersex biology constitutes a valid biological category, when in truth (inserting my own opinion now) it's more a teratological category.

It is not true that 1.7% of the population is 'born between the sexes'. The proportion of people with DSDs ('intersex' conditions) is 0.018% - Stats for Gender

Conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female, occur in 0.018% of the population1. The claim that 1.7% of the population is ‘intersex’ includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as...

statsforgender.org

That link is supportive of my argument. See how those people are disagreeing on how things should be classified? That's because it's opinion and subjective.

Your attempt to distort the argument of the OP is both meek and frail. Hah, beat you to using your favorite meaningless misclassifications.

Buddy, you lack so much self awareness that you just linked to a disagreement on classification to try to prove to me that classification isn't subjective but objective. Seriously, do you know what those words mean? This is like the forth thing you've said that gives me pause to whether you even understand these terms.

 

[CLAX1911]

Let's try counting again and again and again and as many times as you need.

1. There's the production of sperm.

2. There's the production of ova.

And that's all there is there's nothing else

3. There's no production of any reproductive cells.

Yes there is defective reproductive systems. That's not a third sex a woman who is fertile is not something other than a woman.

Try counting those for us.

I did people with defective reproductive systems that doesn't change their sex.

And I ask again, who is even dictating that sex be determined by gamete production?

Biologists.

Ever wonder why they say it's the male seahorse that carries the baby's why didn't they just call that the female it's because the one that produces the small gametes in this particular group of animals is the one that carries the babies.

That's how it's determined biologically.