Berkeley Prof tangles with Sen Hawley, calls him trans phobic

That isn't a functional biological definition. Biologically we can define female as someone having XX chromosomes, or a vagina, or ovaries, or a uterus, or certain levels of estrogen, or an ability for hormone receptors to process certain levels of estrogen. But those don't always align with each other, let alone with sociological defitions of female. Defining woman is more complicated than we thought it was a hundred years ago. We can ignore the advances in knowledge, or we can change our definitions.

We used to think biological sex was binary. We were wrong. We can ignore the new knowledge and let reality pass us by, or we can figure out how to live with this new knowledge.

 

With you on that one. It's silly season in the hockey world. So much fun!

 

There are exceptional cases that are difficult to label male or female. Sometimes doctors get it wrong with people who are intersex. I know that's happened before.

That doesn't mean that the vast majority of cases aren't completely obvious.

If you have kids or are capable of bearing children, you're a female. If you can impregnate or have fathered children, you're a male. There is no human being capable of doing both. Many are capable of doing neither, but even the vast majority of those have features that generally align with male or female, so even most of those cases are easy.

Whether you are male or female has nothing to do with what you think, it has everything to do with your body. No cosmetic surgery can truly change that.

 

Just trying to inject humor into this, but would the MSDS help?

 

I think many do identify themselves as a trans man/woman. I would also agree that it's only fair that in contexts where biological sex might matter (e.g., sports, dating, etc.), trans folks should be upfront that they are trans.

Outside of those contexts, though, I would just be cognizant that using the trans qualifier to suggest that a person isn't "really" their preferred gender would likely be viewed as insulting. So it depends on how it's used IMO.

 

This isn't true.

 

Care to share any evidence of anybody who has done both?

 

Thanks for the reply. If it's an insult then in my opinion they are looking for the socially norm definition of man / woman rather than being accepted for who they are. Given the perspective of gay pride etc... one would think being identified as such would not be insulting let alone shameful. Just my opinion.

 

No one that has done both, that I'm aware of, but your original statement was capable of doing both. True hermaphrodites have both ovaries and testes, some have given birth, some have fathered children.

 

This need to define in binary terms reminds me of the 'one drop rule' in the past of defining whether a person was Black or White. One drop of Black blood meant you were Black.

 

But nobody has done both, and nobody has been capable of doing both.

If that statement is false, provide evidence explaining how it is false.

 

#bolts locked up 3 young core players for 8 years. Might take a hit for a season, but long term its huge!

 

Yeah, meanwhile my Panthers have to figure out how to keep the band together this year since it's cap purgatory. Know anyone that needs a slightly used Hornqvist at $5.3MM cap hit?

 

Were the 3 young core players trans men?

 

An extremely rare occurrence, known as a hermaphrodite, something like less than 0-05% of live births.
Certainly not the VAST majority of more gender fluid, trans gender person walking around.

 

Actually they don't say that anymore, haven't for about 25 years. I think it got changed with Star Trek the Undiscovered Country.

It was always "mankind' etc, because like most languages the masculine of the word takes priority when talking about groups of both sexes.

 

Agreed. There is a whole bunch of variation in biological sex, true hermaphrodites are very rare, but the claim wasn't that they were rare, it was that they didn't exist. Which kind of gets back to the whole point that far too many people are ignoring the existence of those who don't fit the false binary definition.

 

A lot of these guys seem to think X and Y chromosomes are the only factor. You'd think a PA would know better.

 

Still waiting on the person capable of getting pregnant and getting someone pregnant.

Also, nobody's saying "hermaphrodites don't exist." They're saying "only women can get pregnant." If you're saying "men can get pregnant," there was a category error somewhere.