It's not a deflection. It's an unwillingness on your part to be intellectually honest.

If the social construct states that bathrooms are generally divided by sex, then you use the bathroom that corresponds with your sex. To identify as the social construct is sexism. The bathroom does not affirm your sex. It only affirms you agree with the social construction.

If the social construct states that bathrooms are generally divided by sex, then you use the bathroom that corresponds with your sex. — Harry Hindu

So you are saying that a transgender man who has had genital surgery should continue to use the women's bathroom because his sex is female? Even though he has a surgically-constructed phallus?

So you are saying that a transgender man who has had genital surgery should continue to use the women's bathroom because his sex is female? Even though he has a surgically-constructed phallus? — Michael

That's what I've been asking. Does having genital, or a double mastectomy surgery change your sex, or your gender? Yes, or no?

That's what I've been asking. Does having genital, or a double mastectomy change your sex, or your gender? Yes, or no? — Harry Hindu

You tell me. You're the one demanding that bathrooms be separated by sex. Is the transgender man who has had genital surgery a biological woman? Should he continue to use the women's bathroom?

We went over this in our characteristics of sex. Artificial parts do not qualify as actual sex parts, just as a dildo does not qualify as a penis. A hole between one's legs that has be kept open with medical grade stents is not a vagina.

We went over this in our characteristics of sex. Artificial parts do not qualify as actual sex parts, just as a dildo does not qualify as a penis. A hole between one's legs that has be kept open with medical grade stents is not a vagina. — Harry Hindu

So you are saying that a transgender man who has had genital surgery should continue to the use the women's bathroom?

I'm tired of going in circles with you. I've already answered the question using your own definition of gender and you are still having a difficult time.

I'm tired of going in circles with you. I've already answered the question using your own definition of gender and you are still having a difficult time. — Harry Hindu

I've noticed there's some disconnect between the two arguments here.

So, what is your argument in one sentence. Or two. One as simple as possible, and one as thorough as possible.

From what I can tell, as it stands at the moment of writing, the disconnect or disagreement is as follows:

@Michael believes a "transgender man" is a proper title that accurately describes a human being who wishes to identify as a gender that he was not born as. Whether this is a will, whim, or some deep longing and extreme existential desire that we are horrible people for preventing, he has yet to answer.

You believe, no, wishing you were someone else (be they a different gender, race, wealth class, or what have you) is simply a wish and not part of reality. Nor is it a medical need or necessity that requires a "remedy".

Do you agree with that, or no? If not, why not? Please be specific.

A better question to ask is; are there any good reasons to object to trans men using men's spaces and trans women using women's spaces? When it comes to something like sports, I think there are. But when it comes to something like toilets? I've already addressed the fact that if safety is our main concern then it's better to let trans men use the men's bathroom and trans women using the women's bathroom. — Michael

So you don’t think there any good reasons to restrict access to female facilities to females only.
I

Michael believes a "transgender man" is a proper title that accurately describes a human being who wishes to identify as a gender that he was not born as. Whether this is a will, whim, or some deep longing and horrible desire that we are horrible people for preventing, he has yet to answer. — Outlander

Michael has defined gender is a social construct.

A social construct is defined as an agreement between members of a society.

Gender as a social construct would be the agreement between members of a society on how each sex behaves.

To identify as a one gender or the other would be identifying as an expectation society has of the sexes.

How is an expectation, or agreement among members of a society, an identity?

The expectation is not that using one bathroom or the other makes you, or affirms, you are a woman or a man. It is based on an understanding there are these biological realities of male and female a priori to the social construction and it is the social construction that is dependent upon these biological realities to exist.

Society is not saying that wearing a dress makes you a woman. Society is saying that you are a female and we expect you to behave this way because you are a female.

having a female gender. — Michael

So females have to accommodate women in female only spaces? Even if that makes them uncomfortable and fearful?

Whether this is a will, whim, or some deep longing and extreme existential desire that we are horrible people for preventing, he has yet to answer. — Outlander

I addressed that earlier:

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity

It is widely agreed that core gender identity is firmly formed by age 3. At this point, children can make firm statements about their gender and tend to choose activities and toys which are considered appropriate for their gender (such as dolls and painting for girls, and tools and rough-housing for boys), although they do not yet fully understand the implications of gender. After age three, it is extremely difficult to change gender identity.

Martin and Ruble conceptualize this process of development as three stages: (1) as toddlers and pre-schoolers, children learn about defined characteristics, which are socialized aspects of gender; (2) around the ages of five to seven years, identity is consolidated and becomes rigid; (3) after this "peak of rigidity", fluidity returns and socially defined gender roles relax somewhat. Barbara Newmann breaks it down into four parts: (1) understanding the concept of gender, (2) learning gender role standards and stereotypes, (3) identifying with parents, and (4) forming gender preference.

...

Although the formation of gender identity is not completely understood, many factors have been suggested as influencing its development. In particular, the extent to which gender identity is determined by nurture (social environmental factors) versus biological factors (which may include non-social environmental factors) is at the core of the ongoing debate in psychology known as "nature versus nurture". There is increasing evidence that the brain is affected by the organizational role of hormones in utero, circulating sex hormones and the expression of certain genes.

Social factors which may influence gender identity include ideas regarding gender roles conveyed by family, authority figures, mass media, and other influential people in a child's life. The social learning theory posits that children furthermore develop their gender identity through observing and imitating gender-linked behaviors, and then being rewarded or punished for behaving that way, thus being shaped by the people surrounding them through trying to imitate and follow them.

Large-scale twin studies suggest that the development of both transgender and cisgender gender identities is due to genetic factors, with a small potential influence of unique environmental factors.

...

Some studies have investigated whether there is a link between biological variables and transgender or transsexual identity. Several studies have shown that sexually dimorphic brain structures in transsexuals are shifted away from what is associated with their birth sex and towards what is associated with their preferred sex. The volume of the central subdivision of the bed nucleus of a stria terminalis or BSTc (a constituent of the basal ganglia of the brain which is affected by prenatal androgens) of transsexual women has been suggested to be similar to women's and unlike men's, but the relationship between BSTc volume and gender identity is still unclear. Similar brain structure differences have been noted between gay and heterosexual men, and between lesbian and heterosexual women. Transsexuality has a genetic component.

Research suggests that the same hormones that promote the differentiation of sex organs in utero also elicit puberty and influence the development of gender identity. Different amounts of these male or female sex hormones can result in behavior and external genitalia that do not match the norm of their sex assigned at birth, and in acting and looking like their identified gender.

A social construct is defined as an agreement between members of a society. — Harry Hindu

Not necessarily. Fear of a prolonged electricity outage could be considered a social construct, a wholly modern invention, while it is certainly not an "agreement" between anyone. It's outright undesired. But the intrinsic nature of losing something one desires, no matter how foolish and unnecessary, makes it widespread and common. Begrudgingly acknowledging what we do not wish to acknowledge is an agreement, but denial remains a true factor in society which invalidates any sort of conscious or willful agreement.

Gender as a social construct would be the agreement between members of a society on how each sex behaves. — Harry Hindu

This is where it gets weird. Fuzzy, if you will. I'll continue to your next sentence as to "expectation."

To identify as a one gender or the other would be identifying as an expectation society has of the sexes.

How is an expectation, or agreement among members of a society, an identity? — Harry Hindu

Expectation is fine. No one is forced to behave a certain way other than the basic codified laws. Don't murder people, don't park at Zone A after 6PM, etc., etc. ad infinitum.

Sure, people don't expect you to walk around in public cursing and grabbing one's genitals in front of mixed company, but legally, that's allowed. One might be socially ostracized, but as long as no codified law is broken (harassing, stalking, or assaulting said person) that's just nobodies concern.

To the point, an identity is what one holds as a fundamental core of their existence. For example, one might consider oneself a lover, another might consider themself a fighter, or an intellect, or a "blunt" person. That's their right (in most all countries) to pursue what they consider happiness, be it fulfilling or not, provided it doesn't break codified laws.

Parents often expect their children to be "good persons", and such might be considered one's identity. Don't you consider yourself a good person? That's one aspect of your identity sure. But, as I'm sure you agree, that doesn't cast an unchangeable mold as to who or what you are (or perhaps can be). Does it?

It is based on an understanding there are these biological realities of male and female a priori to the social construction and it is the social construction that is dependent upon these biological realities to exist. — Harry Hindu

This is what I would consider the key point of your argument. While I agree, surely plenty don't. And though I feel you've answered this quite succinctly, surely @Michael will address this quote specifically.

Society is not saying that wearing a dress makes you a woman. Society is saying that you are a female and we expect you to behave this way because you are a female. — Harry Hindu

Society can say whatever it wants. I mean, sure, in theory, society can pass a law saying people under 5' should be killed for their own well-being, or perhaps that certain people should be enslaved. It doesn't make it right. Naturally, one must adapt to survive. So even in unjust times and scenarios, one would be wise to, I suppose, "get with the program" and do what you must do to survive. This has been the one consistent reality since the beginning of time. But, that doesn't change the underlying deeper reality that just because something is how it is, doesn't mean it's how it should be or would be best for all. You can agree on that much, yes?

In short, social expectations don't conflate with modern legal systems that separate persons by sex during moments of vulnerability (using the bathroom, being seated for a prolonged period with one's pants down and around their ankles thus immobilizing the person). Men have a primal desire to mate (engage in intercourse) with women. Anyone who avoids that fact is simply ignorant of the larger discussion. And human persons born a male are liable to retain such desires regardless of artificial medical operation. Am I wrong?

I'm tired of going in circles with you. — Harry Hindu

And I'm tired of you refusing to answer the question.

You claim that one's sex parts dictate which bathroom one should use. So how does your rule account for those who have had genital surgery?

Should the transgender man who has had genital surgery continue to use the women's bathroom?

This only requires a single word response: either "yes" or "no". Why is it so difficult for you?

Fear of a prolonged electricity outage could be considered a social construct — Outlander

Provide a citation that defines a social construction as such. What you described could just as easily be categorized a delusion. Fear of the government and conspiracy theories would qualify as social constructs using this weird example of yours. What makes the construct a social one, if not an agreement between a (vast) majority of the members of a society?

If gender is not a social construct in the sense that society is saying, "you are a female so use the women's restroom" then why are trans-people trying to modify their biology in an effort to conform with the expectation?

Expectation is fine. No one is forced to behave a certain way other than the basic codified laws. — Outlander

Which is to say that using one bathroom or the other, or dressing one way or the other, does not affirm anything.

Sexual behaviors are limited to a particular scope based on one's physical characteristics. Men inseminate women and women bear children. Women breast-feed their children and menstruate. Men can urinate standing up without getting piss all over their legs and pants. That's pretty much it. Anything else would be a category error.

The delusion is that there is more to being a woman than having XX Chromosomes, ovaries and vagina, or that having XX Chromosomes, ovaries and vagina does not make one a woman (but then why would they be attempting to get artificial ones?). This is what I have been trying to get you to show for several pages now and you keep avoiding the question. What more is there to being a woman than having XX Chromosomes, ovaries and vagina that isn't some sexist trope? If it is a feeling, then what is the feeling? What does it feel like for you to be a man or woman? You can't even speak for yourself as to what you mean. — Harry Hindu

This is just biological reductivism that nukes all of culture, society, and personal senses of identity.

I'm sure if you went and asked these XX chromosome 'people' that they would have a lot to say about who they are and what they mentally take part in. You will find features statistically significant and present in splitting among male or female individuals. You will also find that groups of the same individuals of the same sex will create groups of their own.

People NEED a word and a CONCEPT that is meant to refer to the emergent behavior of creating groups or of group involvement out of individuals. Culture and society allow for not only the emergence of said groups but also the criteria, implicit or explicit, that many will use in assessing acceptance into said camps.

If you advocate for biologically objective features. . . then you also have to contend with the emergence of biologically split groupings and social/cultural classes. Whether you like it or not. Then. . . it only takes time for someone to ask whether they do in fact bend to meet enough of those criteria by virtue of what features they do possess.

If gender is to be dispensed with. . . then so do woman's groups because why are they meant to 'ban' together and under what core principles? That they merely have the same sex organs so they need to join the cause and there is no other reasons to do so?

Sexual behaviors are limited to a particular scope based on one's physical characteristics. Men inseminate women and women bear children. — Harry Hindu

Ergo. . . there are fundamental biological categories and this inevitably will lead to different social roles or cultural significance.

So when you indicate that transgenderism would just vanish if we just abandoned the notion of gender, period. Your literal biological determinism requires such distinctions continue to exist by DNA and statistically significant means.

If those fundamental biological roles and their accompanying life changes persist

. . . then so will some semblance of their social roles. . .

. . . which will also permeate our culture.

If gender is not a social construct in the sense that society is saying, "you are a female so use the women's restroom" then why are trans-people trying to modify their biology in an effort to conform with the expectation? — Harry Hindu

Why does anyone attempt to mirror those around them? Desire for group involvement? Personal sense of self image acceptance?

People have been slowly growing in the ability and desire to modify their bodies to fit their own senses of self-image acceptance for a while now.

This is just biological reductivism that nukes all of culture, society, and personal senses of identity. — substantivalism

No, it isn't. You're conflating human's social nature with their sexual nature.

I'm sure if you went and asked these XX chromosome 'people' that they would have a lot to say about who they are and what they mentally take part in. You will find features statistically significant and present in splitting among male or female individuals. You will also find that groups of the same individuals of the same sex will create groups of their own. — substantivalism

Right, which is to say that the group's membership is dependent upon one's sex, no different than saying that bathrooms are dependent upon one's sex. I am not saying that being a member of a group of all women makes you a woman, or that using the Women's bathroom makes you a woman. I am saying that being a woman or man is a biological reality and our cultural expectations are dependent upon this biological reality. It's not, "I am a woman because I use the Women's restroom". It is "I use the Women's bathroom because I am a woman". Do you see the difference? The expectation follows the biological reality, not the other way around because that would be sexist. The reality of being a woman or a man is not dependent upon which bathroom one uses, as I have already shown that men and women use each other's bathrooms in certain situations, and all of these situations are extraneous to affirming one's sex or gender.

Ergo. . . there are fundamental biological categories and this inevitably will lead to different social roles or cultural significance. — substantivalism

Sure, and every culture is different, which means that the social and cultural roles are dependent upon those biological realities. It does not shape those biological realties. Dependency is a type of relationship between two separate things where one depends on the a priori existence of the other - meaning you wouldn't have expectations of sex or gender if there was no such thing as sex and gender.

Why does anyone attempt to mirror those around them? Desire for group involvement? Personal sense of self image acceptance? — substantivalism

What are they attempting to mirror, another's sex or gender?

People have been slowly growing in the ability and desire to modify their bodies to fit their own senses of self-image acceptance for a while now. — substantivalism

Ok, so is wearing a nose-ring or having a tattoo an expression of one's gender or sex? What identity are they expressing by getting a nose-ring or a tattoo? Am I suppose to refer to someone differently because they have a nose-ring or tattoo?

No, it isn't. You're conflating human's social nature with their sexual nature. — Harry Hindu

It's easier to just assert its all biological because in principle it all lead from there so it makes the discussion go easier. However, remember that pointing out your chromosomes to someone isn't how we naturally do social business.

Right, which is to say that the group's membership is dependent upon one's sex, no different than saying that bathrooms are dependent upon one's sex. — Harry Hindu

Note, however, that we have created bathrooms which do not in fact depend on what sex you are and accommodate families, those with disabilities, larger statures, or intersex people. Further, the porcelain throne here does not in fact discriminate on any of that.

Do you want to know what I saw in the bathroom of my sex at the park yesterday? A single toilet and no urinal. . . because that is all that is needed even for us with sharp shooters. So if we are talking ability and biological ease then there is nothing much more or less needed for someone to do their business. Aside from a changing station for families, a tampon dispenser as was present at all mixed sex use bathrooms at my university, or a larger stall with bars to assist individuals.

I am saying that being a woman or man is a biological reality and our cultural expectations are dependent upon this biological reality. — Harry Hindu

As am I. . . but some of those features are more mutable than others which at present could be considered immutable. While a certain selection of even those malleable features generate normative disagreement or unrest to having them changed regardless of the reason. I.E. your complaints a while ago about people 'removing' their sex organs to be replaced by others.

So. . . yes. . . but:

1) Some or even most biological features at this point are extremely malleable in light of current technology, cultural acceptance, trends, or personal choice.
2) Only really a subset of those malleable traits are considered to possess some sense of desirable, normative, or appropriate appeal which people have voiced objections on considering them as such.

Sure, and every culture is different, which means that the social and cultural roles are dependent upon those biological realities. It does not shape those biological realties. Dependency is a type of relationship between two separate things where one depends on the a priori existence of the other - meaning you wouldn't have expectations of sex or gender if there was no such thing as sex and gender. — Harry Hindu

Exactly. . . so we didn't pull the vague family resemblance terms 'woman' or 'man' in common practice/language from our a*%.

However, that still doesn't in fact answer which of those and in what sense or manner are to be considered normative or appropriate. Saying, "I'll just be gender neutral on it." Sort of skirts the entire complex issue here and ignores from a fence sitting standpoint that most individuals in society at large will choose just those same traits/stereotypes to exhibit because they have the freedom to do so. It may even arise rather naturally in a statistical sense so what are you supposed to do now to achieve your gender neutrality project?

It seems your desire for personal freedom of choice, biological objectivity, and desire for gender neutrality seem to all conflict with each other.

What are they attempting to mirror, another's sex or gender? — Harry Hindu

Both. . . because you already agree to and so do I that they are extremely intertwined. Everything is biology. . . so a lot is on the table for one to want to mimic or modify.

Ok, so is wearing a nose-ring or having a tattoo an expression of one's gender or sex? — Harry Hindu

Yes.

What identity are they expressing by getting a nose-ring or a tattoo? — Harry Hindu

Am I suppose to refer to someone differently because they have a nose-ring or tattoo? — Harry Hindu

Why would they wear a nose ring and thereby socially flaunt it? You can ask them you know.

You could point it out and say, "Wow! That is an interesting nose ring you got there." Maybe this person will continue the conversation or they don't. . . that is the complexity of interacting with. . . people. You could shut your mouth and never do anything as regards it which is what they want. . . or don't want. Social interactions can be rolling the dice sometimes in trying to infer the inner private desires of an individual. You won't know until you open your mouth or act differently to indicate as such.

It also could serve as a social cue but again for what reason could be unknown and is really only known to that person. You can still play the social game of trying to infer what it is. What are you afraid of snowflake? I'm sure you and most people do this all the time even implicitly.

____________________________________________________________________________

Even though some or all features are biological in origin does not really answer whether we should be neutral or un-neutral on ANY OF THEM as regards their normative status.

You want biological women who have fully transitioned to men and look like men to have to use the women's restroom???

You want women who have fully transitioned to men and look like men to have to use the women's restroom??? — RogueAI

I'm sure it will be fine once we've patented the Smith and Wesson dick scanner and start placing them at all woman's bathrooms across the U.S.

However, remember that pointing out your chromosomes to someone isn't how we naturally do social business. — substantivalism

We typically don't have to because the other more obvious male and female sexual characteristics occur almost always with the male and female chromosomes.

Mating is a type of "social business" and in a culture where our bodies are covered with clothing, we have agreed that females and males dress in distinct ways to be able to find an appropriate mate in a way that allows us to express our sexual orientation. Is a man that has sex with a woman that thinks she's a man gay or straight?

Do you want to know what I saw in the bathroom of my sex at the park yesterday? A single toilet and no urinal. . . because that is all that is needed even for us with sharp shooters. So if we are talking ability and biological ease then there is nothing much more or less needed for someone to do their business. Aside from a changing station for families, a tampon dispenser as was present at all mixed sex use bathrooms at my university, or a larger stall with bars to assist individuals. — substantivalism

Sure, the toilet is the catch-all. But for men, using a urinal is typically more efficient (it takes less time). If it didn't then why were urinals invented in the first place?

1) Some or even most biological features at this point are extremely malleable in light of current technology, cultural acceptance, trends, or personal choice. — substantivalism

Sure, but the question is, does changing those features actually make you what you claim to identify as?

Did this man's modifications make him a tiger?


Is a hole between a man's legs, that he has to use medical grade stents to keep it from closing, a vagina?

Exactly. . . so we didn't pull the vague family resemblance terms 'woman' or 'man' in common practice/language from our a*%. — substantivalism

But that is what the trans-community is saying - that identifying as a man or a woman can come at a whim and is fluid - that a woman is a woman simply by deciding to be one.

It seems your desire for personal freedom of choice, biological objectivity, and desire for gender neutrality seem to all conflict with each other. — substantivalism

They don't. You can dress as you want, but that doesn't mean you can tell me what I can or can't say. Your freedom to do as you choose stops when it limits the choices that others have. Only an authoritarian would disagree.

It is sexist and racist to put people in socially constructed boxes based on their sex and race when one's sexual and racial characteristics are not naturally connected to the socially constructed characteristics, but are arbitrarily connected.

Both. . . because you already agree to and so do I that they are extremely intertwined. Everything is biology. . . so a lot is on the table for one to want to mimic or modify. — substantivalism

Why not just be yourself - the person you were born to be? It was naturally determined that you are either male or female. Isn't wisdom understanding the difference between the things you can change and the things you can't?

Ok, so is wearing a nose-ring or having a tattoo an expression of one's gender or sex?
— Harry Hindu

Yes. — substantivalism

Really, which gender or sex is one expressing by getting a nose-ring or tattoo? I don't have either, so which gender or sex does that make me?

You want biological women who have fully transitioned to men and look like men to have to use the women's restroom??? — RogueAI

What does that even mean, "fully transitioned?" Did they have their chromosomes changed?

What does that even mean, "fully transitioned?" Did they have their chromosomes changed? — Harry Hindu

A biological woman who looks very much like a man. Has had sex change operation, double mastectomy, hormone treatment, etc. What restroom do you want her to use?

We typically don't have to because the other more obvious male and female sexual characteristics occur almost always with the male and female chromosomes.

Mating is a type of "social business" and in a culture where our bodies are covered with clothing, we have agreed that females and males dress in distinct ways to be able to find an appropriate mate in a way that allows us to express our sexual orientation. Is a man that has sex with a woman that thinks she's a man gay or straight? — Harry Hindu

Social business as in. . . having a job interview. . . eating with someone. . . talking. . .

Are you obsessed on a daily basis with assessing is the person I'm talking to really XX/XY chromosome or are they faking it? If you say yes you are sexist. . . literally.

Sure, the toilet is the catch-all. But for men, using a urinal is typically more efficient (it takes less time). If it didn't then why were urinals invented in the first place? — Harry Hindu

It's actually therefore inefficient if a toilet can support multiple roles and most bathrooms I've gone into that are only for one sex. . . single person. . . only have had that in numerous businesses.

What about a toilet removes efficiency? Left up the lid and suddenly its a urinal.

With it is the increased sense of privacy that I do value.

Sure, but the question is, does changing those features actually make you what you claim to identify as? — Harry Hindu

Identify as what? We. . . as in the person you are chatting with which isn't a strawman. . .

But that is what the trans-community is saying - that identifying as a man or a woman can come at a whim and is fluid - that a woman is a woman simply by deciding to be one. — Harry Hindu

They don't. You can dress as you want, but that doesn't mean you can tell me what I can or can't say. — Harry Hindu

Yes they can. . . they get to tell you how they want themselves to be referred as. . . or talked to. Why do you think we ask people what THEIR name is and don't just make something up on the spot?

Basic Human communication demands this as such.

Your freedom to do as you choose stops when it limits the choices that others have. Only an authoritarian would disagree. — Harry Hindu

Are you trying to respond to something I said? Or is this just more irrelevant rapid rambling on your part.

It is sexist and racist to put people in socially constructed boxes based on their sex and race when one's sexual and racial characteristics are not naturally connected to the socially constructed characteristics, but are arbitrarily connected. — Harry Hindu

. . . except those 'socially constructed boxes' arose from Human beings. . . who talk, move, or interact because of the bodies and minds they have. . . which are a result of their biology. . .

It's all biology remember. It's all natural.

What is 'not natural' or 'arbitrary'?

I think you seem to not understand that if something is mutable or 'socially constructed' and that one has the freedom to entertain it or not that all of sudden there shouldn't be any normative guidelines. That statistical patterns won't emerge or that there will be strong cultural preferences that even the freedom loving populace will still prefer to entertain.

Why not just be yourself - the person you were born to be? It was naturally determined that you are either male or female. Isn't wisdom understanding the difference between the things you can change and the things you can't? — Harry Hindu

Wisdom also recognizes we need generalized categories or universals to designate characteristics and compare ourselves to others. Otherwise you wouldn't know what words or concepts to designate who you are. . . if you didn't contrast yourself with others.

It's just a useless tautology that I'd expect to see in a hippie circle. "We are people that people." It dulls the distinctions to a point that you can't even talk about what it is you are talking about or exemplify to others how you feel because you refuse to create generalized categories/comparisons.

You can still be who are born as AND adopt the language of the time or concepts there in to attempt to exemplify in a successful. . . or unsuccessful fashion. . . the qualia you have.

Adopting the biological characteristics of others is just another step in the same direction. We have been modifying our bodies for centuries. In fact, literally working out is doing just that as its putting your body through stress to achieve a physique associated with attractiveness as well as practical utility.

Really, which gender or sex is one expressing by getting a nose-ring or tattoo? I don't have either, so which gender or sex does that make me? — Harry Hindu

I guess you will have to do some research into how our current culture generally views the possession of said garments or ask the person in question why they in fact wear it at all.

The standard of this philosophical debate is shallow.
Not one contributor has addressed what it means to be a woman in 2025.
Biology is fundamental to a woman’s experience and existence. Not because of genitalia or menstruation or even physical disadvantages but how they are perceived by society. That is gender. How society looks at women. What it is to be a woman is built by society from the day a girl is born. How a woman is viewed and views herself is built minute by minute by society. Luckily, in 2025 most of society is fairly relaxed and doesn’t discriminate and laws have been put in place to prevent discrimination but there is still a fundamental difference between men and women.
In sports, excluding men is based on biology. I doubt anyone can argue against that now. Women’s spaces are based on biology because of how society looks at women and the social norms regarding ablutions and public nakedness.
There is a difference between men’s and women’s exclusive places because there is no cultural issue with men sharing spaces with trans men.
Has anyone of the "let all facilities be unisex" asked women what they think of that? Society's preferences seem to be sacrificed on the altar of making sure every minority view is included.
Some very contorted views on here trying to justify males encroaching on female spaces.

A biological woman who looks very much like a man. Has had sex change operation, double mastectomy, hormone treatment, etc. What restroom do you want her to use? — RogueAI

Using your own words, they are a biological woman, so use the women's bathroom. I've asked this before: Why the "biological" qualifier for woman and man? Is there another type of woman or man that is not biological? What about a woman that looks like a man (has short hair, wears pants, and does not wear make-up, had a double mastectomy as a result of cancer) but identifies as a woman? Which bathroom should she use?

Social business as in. . . having a job interview. . . eating with someone. . . talking. . .

Are you obsessed on a daily basis with assessing is the person I'm talking to really XX/XY chromosome or are they faking it? If you say yes you are sexist. . . literally. — substantivalism

No. I'm merely pointing out that there are cases where it is important to know what sex someone is (mating and medical contexts), and you seem to think that knowing another's sex is never relevant in any context. Answer this question: A woman masquerading as a man walks into a gay bar and fools a gay man into believing they are a man. Is that unethical?

It's actually therefore inefficient if a toilet can support multiple roles and most bathrooms I've gone into that are only for one sex. . . single person. . . only have had that in numerous businesses.

What about a toilet removes efficiency? Left up the lid and suddenly its a urinal.

With it is the increased sense of privacy that I do value. — substantivalism

I don't know. Why were urinals invented? I did ask that and you did not answer. Why are hands-free toilet flushing, sinks, soap dispensers and air dryers were invented - to limit the spread of germs. If you like touching a public toilet seat to lift it up, that is your prerogative, but something tells me that you were one of those people that insisted everyone get a vaccine and wear a mask during Covid, sooo....

Identify as what? — substantivalism

Does modifying your body make you the think you are trying to emulate? Does having a "sex-changing" operation make you the opposite sex? Is a hole between a man's legs, that he has to use medical grade stents to keep it from closing, a vagina? Yes, or no?

Yes they can. . . they get to tell you how they want themselves to be referred as. . . or talked to. Why do you think we ask people what THEIR name is and don't just make something up on the spot?

Basic Human communication demands this as such. — substantivalism

Not when they way they want me to speak does not reflect my own views, it reflects theirs. My view is that men and women are adult human males and females, not some psychological or social construct. We are free to disagree and go our separate ways. Neither has to submit to the will of the other. The problem is that delusional people always seek to affirm their delusions by trying to force others into participating in their delusion and will appear offended when others refuse to participate.

Wisdom also recognizes we need generalized categories or universals to designate characteristics and compare ourselves to others. Otherwise you wouldn't know what words or concepts to designate who you are. . . if you didn't contrast yourself with others. — substantivalism

Exactly my point in that "woman" and "man" need to be used consistently and not have open-ended meanings so that we know how to use the terms to refer to ourselves. You said that having a nose-ring and tattoos is an expression of one's sex/gender. I asked which sex/gender does having a nose-ring and tattoos make me? You didn't answer. You don't answer a lot of pertinent questions.

Not one contributor has addressed what it means to be a woman in 2025. — Malcolm Parry

I'm pretty sure I defined a woman as an adult human female somewhere in this thread.

I'm pretty sure I defined a woman as an adult human female somewhere in this thread — Harry Hindu

I think we are probably on the same page. You’ve just gone down rabbit holes of madness arguing minutiae with some of the more esoteric posters.
Adult human female is a definition I’ll agree with.

Not because of genitalia or menstruation or even physical disadvantages but how they are perceived by society. That is gender. — Malcolm Parry

Genitalia (presumably the underlying biological reality and innate chemical differences that produce the difference types) and menstruation is gender? Menstruation is a social construct? Really? Like women can just will the cycle a way? And conversely I can menstruate if I just really set my mind to it? I think that claim of yours needs a slight looking at and a fair amount of tinkering before it's "street legal", per se. While we're on the shtick of chastising arguments. :snicker:

Genitalia (presumably the underlying biological reality and innate chemical differences that produce the difference types) and menstruation is gender? Menstruation is a social construct? Really? Like women can just will the cycle a way? And conversely I can menstruate if I just really set my mind to it? I think that claim of yours needs a slight looking at and a fair amount of tinkering before it's "street legal", per se. While we're on the shtick of chastising arguments. — Outlander

Like I said, utterly shallow.

How society looks at women. What it is to be a woman is built by society from the day a girl is born. How a woman is viewed and views herself is built minute by minute by society. Luckily, in 2025 most of society is fairly relaxed and doesn’t discriminate and laws have been put in place to prevent discrimination but there is still a fundamental difference between men and women. — Malcolm Parry

Could the same sentence(s) be said accurately if the words "woman" and "women" were replaced with "man" and "men", respectively? Why or why not?

What would it be like in a world where men never existed and only women did? They would just simply be "human" assuredly? What about a world where there was always three biological genders (say with a third form of genitalia that may or may not allow reproduction with one or more genders, perhaps including one's own)?

I get your point. It may be shallow in the sense that what it means to be a conscious human being is just so deep and rich a topic of discussion that it transcends our biological differences entirely and makes said differences seem ridiculous to talk about in comparison, but, it's still a topic nonetheless that has far reaching social and psychological implications. Having a womb and being expected to literally house an entire human being inside you for 9 months vs. the idea being all but an alien concept to one who doesn't, etc., etc...

Could the same sentence(s) be said accurately if the words "woman" and "women" were replaced with "man" and "men", respectively? Why or why not? — Outlander

Absolutely but there is a power imbalance between the sexes. Physical and social and economic. It has improved dramatically in the last 60 years.
Things may change and women may be happy to share changing facilities in the future but until then female spaces need to be female only.

What would it be like in a world where men never existed and only women did? — Outlander

Then there would be no need for women’s exclusive places.

I get your point. It may be shallow in the sense that what it means to be a conscious human being is just so deep and rich a topic of discussion that it transcends our biological differences entirely and makes said differences seem ridiculous to talk about in comparison — Outlander

That isn’t my point. My point there is a biological difference and that affects the way your family, peers, neighbours etc etc react to you. A man does not get the same upbringing as a woman. Combined with child rearing and power imbalance, women and men are different and no man can jump the divide and become a woman. Imho.