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

[Ouroboros]

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

The kind of categories we're discussing -- either male sex, female sex, or intersex-- are just as objective as the observations on which they are based.

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.

How does Semenya's "internal sense of self" have objective existence? Sounds like your usual argument where you define rules by their exceptions, except when you don't like someone else's exceptions.

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.

Your idea of sound reasoning and logic must also be based in your internal sense of self, because it's not showing up in your posts.

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

Scientists have to be able to communicate using the same set of terms. I cited one source that showed how some persons make fuzzy definitions of "intersex" to pad their results, while a correct application of relevant terms, as shown in that short essay, proves the superior discourse.

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.

And the argument that chooses the more objectively true terms is the more objective argument, and thus not purely subjective or socially constructed.

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.

I know, as I said, that you said all classifications/categories were subjective and then tried to walk it back with hair-splitting about the distinction between categories and observations. But observations are potentially subjective or objective depending on context. During the 20th century, few if any health insurance providers would pay any portion for a subscriber's acupuncture treatments for chronic pain. That was because Western science could not observe any reason why acupuncture should work, even temporarily, and the apparent absence of a recordable process was interpreted to mean that any relief was at best a placebo effect. In the 21st century, insurers began paying on acupuncture treatments, not all equally, but enough to indicate that patients' observations of relief-- and a preference for acupuncture as against the more typical doctors' recommendation, painkilling drugs-- trumped Western science's inability to observe a necessary link between cause and effect. So in that case the observations of those who expressed greater relief from pain were more objective than the scientists claiming, "if we can't see how it happens, it's not really happening."

 

[Master Debator]

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

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

Let's try counting again. Its okay, take as many times as you need.

1. The the production of sperm.

2. The production of ova.

3. No gamete production.

You can do it! All you have to do is believe in yourself.

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

You're the one who wants to base sex on gamete production guy, I'm just trying to explain the three options for gamete production.

Biologists.

Maybe some. The link I provided also detailed some biologists who view sex on a spectrum. I'm not arguing you're objectively wrong just subjectively bigoted.

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.

And? Are there seahorses who don't produce any gametes?

That's how it's determined biologically.

Subjectively.

 

[Master Debator]

The kind of categories we're discussing -- either male sex, female sex, or intersex-- are just as objective as the observations on which they are based.

What makes them objective?

How does Semenya's "internal sense of self" have objective existence?

Weren't we discussing in another thread how feelings can be both objective and subjective. How she feels is how she feels.

Sounds like your usual argument where you define rules by their exceptions, except when you don't like someone else's exceptions.

I'm not arguing rules. You're the first person to mention rules. Its your usual tactic to bring up your own shit and then try to paint me with it.

Your idea of sound reasoning and logic must also be based in your internal sense of self, because it's not showing up in your posts.

You haven't even tried to assail my logic or reasoning. You keep bringing up rules and exceptions instead of addressing what I'm talking about.

Scientists have to be able to communicate using the same set of terms.

Yep. Those are called words. Its not just scientists who use them, we all use them to communicate. You and I are using them right now.

I cited one source that showed how some persons make fuzzy definitions of "intersex" to pad their results, while a correct application of relevant terms, as shown in that short essay, proves the superior discourse.

Yeah "fuzzy definitions", "superior discourse" this is just your opinion of her opinion. These aren't objective determinations or observations. In your link, her and the other person don't disagree on the objective observations. They both acknowledge that she has objectively lost one ovary and now only has one. What they disagree on is how to classify her based on that observation. You are actually providing evidence for the subjective nature of classification and are too intellectually dim to notice.

And the argument that chooses the more objectively true terms is the more objective argument, and thus not purely subjective or socially constructed.

What are more objectively true terms? There isn't a scale. Something is either objective or it isn't and if it is it isn't more objective than other objective things.

I know, as I said, that you said all classifications/categories were subjective and then tried to walk it back with hair-splitting about the distinction between categories and observations.

Again, no hair splitting. They are different words and different things. How is this confusing you? Do you think they're similes?Do you need me to provide the definitions to you? Is that the problem? Is this a weird form of dyslexia? I'm not sure what's going on here....

But observations are potentially subjective or objective depending on context. During the 20th century, few if any health insurance providers would pay any portion for a subscriber's acupuncture treatments for chronic pain. That was because Western science could not observe any reason why acupuncture should work, even temporarily, and the apparent absence of a recordable process was interpreted to mean that any relief was at best a placebo effect. In the 21st century, insurers began paying on acupuncture treatments, not all equally, but enough to indicate that patients' observations of relief-- and a preference for acupuncture as against the more typical doctors' recommendation, painkilling drugs-- trumped Western science's inability to observe a necessary link between cause and effect. So in that case the observations of those who expressed greater relief from pain were more objective than the scientists claiming, "if we can't see how it happens, it's not really happening."

How does that story show how observations are subjective or objective? Observations are either accurate or innaccurate. You thought you saw one thing but in reality it was something else. I'm not sure basing am argument on what an insurance provider will or won't cover is a great example of objectivity....

 

[CLAX1911]

Let's try counting again. Its okay, take as many times as you need.

1. The the production of sperm.

2. The production of ova.

Yeah you can try the thousand more times to answer will be the same this is the binary

3. No gamete production.

Not a third sex.

You can do it! All you have to do is believe in yourself.

Tupac pretended people who have defective reproductive systems are some power third sex? Sure I could do it but it's insane.

You're the one who wants to base sex on gamete production guy, I'm just trying to explain the three options for gamete production.

No that's the biological definition.

Maybe some. The link I provided also detailed some biologists who view sex on a spectrum. I'm not arguing you're objectively wrong just subjectively bigoted.

There's no sex spectrum.

And? Are there seahorses who don't produce any gametes?

Possibly but they're not considered the third sex

Subjectively.

Descriptively.

 

[Aristaeus]

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?

Biologists. Sex determination is based on gamete production, which is why biologists determine that male seahorses give birth, not the females.

 

[Master Debator]

Biologists. Sex determination is based on gamete production, which is why biologists determine that male seahorses give birth, not the females.

Why do the frail love coming here to pretend on behalf of others? You don't need to pretend to speak for biologists my guy, they can speak for themselves.

Biological sex is more complex than just male or female

 

[Aristaeus]

Why do the frail love coming here to pretend on behalf of others? You don't need to pretend to speak for biologists my guy, they can speak for themselves.

Biological sex is more complex than just male or female

Cool. So what is the third sex called? What is the third gamete? And is a sterile male not actually male because they don't produce gametes?

 

[Master Debator]

Yeah you can try the thousand more times to answer will be the same this is the binary

Not a third sex.

The science of biological sex

Maybe you mean bimodal? This doctor tries to explain the distinction. I don't have high hopes for your ability to comprehend but I would enjoy to watch you try....

Tupac pretended people who have defective reproductive systems are some power third sex? Sure I could do it but it's insane.

What? Is Tupac your source of biological knowledge?

No that's the biological definition.

Not according the biologist I linked to.

There's no sex spectrum.

Possibly but they're not considered the third sex

Who said anything about a third sex? I said there were three options to gamete production but even then I was wrong. Upon reading and in that link I provided I discovered that there are actually intersex people who have both ovaries and testes and produce both gametes.

Descriptively.

?

 

[Master Debator]

Cool. So what is the third sex called? What is the third gamete? And is a sterile male not actually male because they don't produce gametes?

Who said there was a third sex? Or a third gamete? Did you read the article or just come here to frail about for my entertainment?

 

[Aristaeus]

Who said there was a third sex? Or a third gamete? Did you read the article or just come here to frail about for my entertainment?

If there's no third sex, then sex is binary.

adjective

1. 1.
   relating to, composed of, or involving two things.

 

[Ouroboros]

What makes them objective?

Same thing that you claim makes "the observations" objective.

Weren't we discussing in another thread how feelings can be both objective and subjective. How she feels is how she feels.

And her feelings would only be objective if society agreed that they represented something crucial to that society's survival.

I'm not arguing rules. You're the first person to mention rules. Its your usual tactic to bring up your own shit and then try to paint me with it.

You're arguing for defining things by the exceptions to the rules. Intersex biology is a fluke and does not define biological sexuality in human beings. That's why the citation I gave established the correct percentage of identified intersex births in society at that time

You haven't even tried to assail my logic or reasoning. You keep bringing up rules and exceptions instead of addressing what I'm talking about.

See above.

Yep. Those are called words. Its not just scientists who use them, we all use them to communicate. You and I are using them right now.

Scientists use many jargonistic words that are germane to their subculture and thus are not comparable to the demotic use of words.

Yeah "fuzzy definitions", "superior discourse" this is just your opinion of her opinion. These aren't objective determinations or observations. In your link, her and the other person don't disagree on the objective observations. They both acknowledge that she has objectively lost one ovary and now only has one. What they disagree on is how to classify her based on that observation. You are actually providing evidence for the subjective nature of classification and are too intellectually dim to notice.

No, I indicated why one view was more objective than the other.

What are more objectively true terms? There isn't a scale. Something is either objective or it isn't and if it is it isn't more objective than other objective things.

It's a far more accurate representation than your false narrative as to the equal subjectivity of both classificatory determinations.

Again, no hair splitting. They are different words and different things. How is this confusing you? Do you think they're similes?Do you need me to provide the definitions to you? Is that the problem? Is this a weird form of dyslexia? I'm not sure what's going on here....

That you don't know what's going on is one of your most honest admissions.

How does that story show how observations are subjective or objective? Observations are either accurate or innaccurate. You thought you saw one thing but in reality it was something else. I'm not sure basing am argument on what an insurance provider will or won't cover is a great example of objectivity....

The observations of doctors who could not validate acupuncture were, societally speaking, insufficient, while the observations of patients were directed toward better treatment. Better treatment has a social benefit irrespective of the motives of the insurance companies for eventually changing their policies, which originally privileged only the POV of medical experts. It's quite possible that insurance companies thought it might be cheaper to pay for acupuncture treatments rather than for painkilling drugs, though this is only a hypothetical scenario since I doubt any companies ever publicly justified any policy changes in terms of financial expeditiousness. But the relevant observations would be those of patients who stumped for a change in policies, because without that input the insurance companies have no motive for changing their policies, for any reason.

 

[Master Debator]

If there's no third sex, then sex is binary.

adjective

1. 1.
   relating to, composed of, or involving two things.

Because you imagine those to be the only two options?

 

[Aristaeus]

Because you imagine those to be the only two options?

Male and female are the only two sexes. Hence binary. Unless you're claiming there's a third sex.

 

[Lisa]

Male and female are the only two sexes. Hence binary. Unless you're claiming there's a third sex.

Intersex people also exist and there are some some non-intersex people who do not produce gametes either, so your binary argument fails. I assume there is somebody on the right that is pushing this moronic gametes argument because both you and CLAX have tried to use it. This still does not in any way discredit gender identity that is at the core of the discussion.

Just once I wish you would tell it to a Dr such as an Ob-Gyn or an endocrinologist and watch for either their embarrassment or their laughter and then they will educate you on just how wrong your ideas are.

 

[rjay]

To the exact same degree as how leftists hope for measures requiring the mandatory mutilation of all children's genitals, true.

This sounds like the same rigorous thought process that went into pronouncements like "there are litter boxes in school bathrooms", "They are doing post-term abortions", The borders are wide open, "They are eating cats and they are eating dogs".

 

[rjay]

Male and female are the only two sexes. Hence binary. Unless you're claiming there's a third sex.

 

[Master Debator]

Same thing that you claim makes "the observations" objective.

I can explain that and am happy to if someone is confused by it. Why can't you explain the rationale behind any of your arguments? Why are you only capable of claims?

And her feelings would only be objective if society agreed that they represented something crucial to that society's survival.

Why? What do the feelings of society have to do with objectivity?

You're arguing for defining things by the exceptions to the rules. Intersex biology is a fluke and does not define biological sexuality in human beings. That's why the citation I gave established the correct percentage of identified intersex births in society at that time

No I'm not. I'm not talking about rules or exceptions at all, you are. I'm talking about describing things accurately. Like I said in the other thread, if there are exceptions to your rules on gravity then your theory or understanding of gravity is incomplete. You're talking about rules made by people and I'm talking about describing nature and the natural world and how it actually works.

See above.

Scientists use many jargonistic words that are germane to their subculture and thus are not comparable to the demotic use of words.

And still the things they use to communicate are called words.

No, I indicated why one view was more objective than the other.

You claimed that the question is how. How does one thing become more objective than another. What the **** does that even mean. From my understanding of objectivity that sentence makes absolutely no sense. The moon isn't more objective than the sun. For something to be objective it just means it exists in reality without influence of your feelings. Laws exist but they are subjective in that they come from the sentiments of people. They exist subjectively. The moon exists but it doesn't matter how you feel about it or whether people are here to feel any way about it at all. Is existence isn't tied to human sentiment. It exists objectively. So how does one thing that exists objectively exist more objectively than any other?

It's a far more accurate representation than your false narrative as to the equal subjectivity of both classificatory determinations.

Why? What's the explanation guy? I just explained the difference between the objective and subjective to you. You just say shit and make a claim but never the thing that's supposed to support your claims.

That you don't know what's going on is one of your most honest admissions.

The observations of doctors who could not validate acupuncture were, societally speaking, insufficient, while the observations of patients were directed toward better treatment. Better treatment has a social benefit irrespective of the motives of the insurance companies for eventually changing their policies, which originally privileged only the POV of medical experts. It's quite possible that insurance companies thought it might be cheaper to pay for acupuncture treatments rather than for painkilling drugs, though this is only a hypothetical scenario since I doubt any companies ever publicly justified any policy changes in terms of financial expeditiousness. But the relevant observations would be those of patients who stumped for a change in policies, because without that input the insurance companies have no motive for changing their policies, for any reason.

Your explanation doesn't help your argument. Insurance companies are a poor bellwether of objectivity.

 

[Master Debator]

Male and female are the only two sexes. Hence binary. Unless you're claiming there's a third sex.

Because those are the only two options you can think of? What does your inability have to do with me? I even provided a link from a biologist that described sex as bimodal. Why don't you look that word up and come back to me?

 

[Aristaeus]

Because those are the only two options you can think of? What does your inability have to do with me? I even provided a link from a biologist that described sex as bimodal. Why don't you look that word up and come back to me?

What is the third option? What sex is someone who isn't male or female?

 

[Master Debator]

What is the third option? What sex is someone who isn't male or female?

You're the one going on about a third sex my guy, not me. Did you look up what bimodal means?

 

[Aristaeus]

You're the one going on about a third sex my guy, not me. Did you look up what bimodal means?

No one is arguing that all males are genetically or phenotypically identical. If you aren't claiming there's a third sex, then sex is binary.

Being bimodal doesn't exclude it from being binary.

 

[Master Debator]

No one is arguing that all males are genetically or phenotypically identical. If you aren't claiming there's a third sex, then sex is binary.

Being bimodal doesn't exclude it from being binary.

Being bimodal does exclude it from being binary. Binary means two. Period. That's it. Bimodal means there are two poles with variation inbetween.

Its your argument that's sus and isn't fully fleshed out. If sex is determined by gamete production there are people who produce no semen, that's one, people who produce ova, that's two, people who produce none, that's three and people who produce both, that's four. I'm telling you your argument is leaving out some biological realities.

 

[Aristaeus]

Being bimodal does exclude it from being binary. Binary means two. Period. That's it. Bimodal means there are two poles with variation inbetween.

Its your argument that's sus and isn't fully fleshed out. If sex is determined by gamete production there are people who produce no semen, that's one, people who produce ova, that's two, people who produce none, that's three and people who produce both, that's four. I'm telling you your argument is leaving out some biological realities.

No one is arguing that there is no variation within the sexes. There are two sexes, male and female, hence binary.
What is the sex of the people in-between the poles?

 

[Master Debator]

No one is arguing that there is no variation within the sexes. There are two sexes, male and female, hence binary.

Binary precludes variation. It means two. That's it. Bimodal is where you get variation between the two poles.

What is the sex of the people in-between the poles?

Intersex males and females depending on which of the poles they are closer to.

 

[CLAX1911]

The science of biological sex

Maybe you mean bimodal? This doctor tries to explain the distinction. I don't have high hopes for your ability to comprehend but I would enjoy to watch you try....

What? Is Tupac your source of biological knowledge?

Not according the biologist I linked to.

View attachment 67571492

Who said anything about a third sex? I said there were three options to gamete production but even then I was wrong. Upon reading and in that link I provided I discovered that there are actually intersex people who have both ovaries and testes and produce both gametes.

?

Sex is binary