Biological sex and gender are two different things
3 Likes
Exactly, this is a much bigger conundrum for them than anyone who is gender fluid
And they can pick he or she, not some made up bullshit.
WTF does âgender fluidâ mean?
2 Likes
It means what ever you want it to mean
So Iâve heard it said.
If found this extract from Amy Chuaâs âPolitical Tribesâ on US identity politics interesting.
Nothing to do with said.
I challenge you to find any authoritative source that refers to biology as a defining characteristic of gender.
Every major dictionary and even the WHO clearly distinguish the two terms.
Isnât it politically incorrect to slur Carlton supporters?
Thatâs why I said if they prove through their actionsâŚ
They made their choice
1 Like
Peterson has misconstrued C-16 because heâs either being deliberately obtuse or heâs a â â â â or both.
Iâm going for the latter.
Grand total of 0 arrests under C-16 (after amendment of inclusion of transgender) AFAIK
Well I have two dictionaries on my phone, the Macquarie and the Shorter Oxford, and both give several meanings to the word âgenderâ. The primary meaning is that itâs a grammatical term relating to nouns, which are classified in many languages as masculine, feminine or neuter.
The secondary meaning is âthe members of one or other sexâ (Shorter Oxford) or âa sexual identity, such as heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexualityâ (Macquarie).
The idea that a human being has a sex defined by biological factors and a gender that is some sort of state of maleness or femaleness that a person âidentifies withâ has existed only since the late 1970s and is by no means universally accepted.
2 Likes
Originally, gender did primarily refer to describing things as masculine, feminine or neutral.
Again had nothing to do with biology/sex.
Full Oxford ie not conveniently quoted to suit bias
âEither 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.â
World Health Organisation
â Gender refers to the socially constructed characteristics of women and men â such as norms, roles and relationships of and between groups of women and men. It varies from society to society and can be changed.â
Cambridge
âThe physical and/or social condition of being male or femaleâ
Collins
âGender is the state of being male or female in relation to the social and cultural roles that are considered appropriate for men and womenâ
*1950s
And itâs universally accepted by everyone in the scientific, academic and political world.
If anyone chooses not to accept it thatâs their problem; not everyone elseâs.
I didnât quote full Oxford because I donât have it (I do have an edition from the eighties which Iâll check, but Iâll bet it says nothing about social constructs, identification, etc.)
The Collins suits your view, as does the WHO (which has only been in that form since 2011). Cambridge is neutral.
1950s/1970s, whatâs the difference. The point is that âgender theoryâ is a very recent invention. And contrary to your assertion it is very far from being universally accepted.
If someone with a male body wants to âidentifyâ as female thatâs fine by me. He/she can wear what he/she likes and behave as he/she wants. And if Bill decides that he wants to wear dresses and makeup and be called Carmen Iâll go along with it in most situations at least. But if he/she claims a right to play in a womenâs tennis tournament or AFLW game then I do have a problem with it, as I think does anyone with a functioning brain. Similarly if a person with a male body wants to play in a menâs tournament. Or if they claim the ârightâ to have their birth certificate altered. And Iâm afraid that Iâm not going to be able to think of âCarmenâ as anything other than Bill dressing in womenâs clothing.
Fully concur.
If youâve got a problem with using recent theories, youâd best flush your computer, mobile, laptop and iPad down the â â â â â â â and go back to writing on slates.
Cos they werenât around before the 70s.
2 Likes
Oh please.
2 Likes
this legistration is completely about what you think, of course
I would argue beastie that legislation is never about what you think. It is about what you do.
2 Likes