It is muddying the waters to use male and female for gender. Male and female are biological terms. Gender is masculine, feminine or neuter.
A biological male cannot be a biological female at the same time. Someone with the biological traits particular to both is hermaphrodite or almost always sexually neuter. (There are extremely rare cases of fertility in “truly hermaphroditic” humans. In 1994 a study on 283 cases found 21 pregnancies from 10 true hermaphrodites, while one allegedly fathered a child.)
A biological female can be neutered. She cannot be maled. A biological male can be neutered. He cannot be femaled. Treating males as genuine females, or females as genuine males is colluding in a pretense.
Progressives need to stop using biological terms to describe psychological or cultural traits. Doing so is disingenuous, and in doing so they are confusing both themselves and their audiences.
Since"male" and “female” are biological terms, you cannot truly have a male gender, where gender is being used as a psychological or social trait. That is the progressive bait and switch.
A biological male cannot be a biological female and vice versa, but a biological male could have a feminine gender identity and a biological female could have a masculine gender identity.
A male who identifies as a female is as mentally ill as a person who identifies as a horse. It is neither compassionate nor sane to treat them like a horse and medically manipulate their physiology and hormones to more closely approximate a horse’s, i.e. to transition them into a horse.
A male who identifies as feminine can learn to be comfortable with the fact that it is unusual for males, but not sex-cancelling, for them to enjoy wearing make-up and high heels. They can learn to cope with the fact that part of society will always be offended by and critical of the behaviour of people with different manners, just as we all need to learn to cope. They can learn to accept that there is a social cost to being a rebel that any rebel must be willing to bear, and that the majority is not obliged to approve of, encourage and facilitate rebel behaviour.
Generally speaking, yes, unless you classify yourself as “transgender” and make the claim you are a woman (or man) even if you possess all the biological and genetic features of the sex not generally associated with that gender. Does that clear things up for you?
Pet peeves with modern language usage is not an uncommon phenomenon.
Well that’s strange. Wouldn’t you rather everyone stopped doing it and not just progressives?
Doing so is disingenuous, and in doing so they are confusing both themselves and their audiences.
Its no more disingenuous then using “gay” for homosexual or “album” for a collection of songs. Language is always evolving.
Why do you keep claiming the other side is getting confused? They’ve been using these terms this way for decades now… they aren’t confused… you just don’t agree with them.
Sure you can. Words can have multiple definitions.
It has nothing to do with progressives and there’s no conspiracy going on… and even if there was, for what purpose?
You can scream that at the clouds until you are blue in the face, that’s not going to change the last 40+ years of academic and scientific writings. Arguing with nobodies like me on a political forum ain’t gonna change it either.
We’re talking about humans here, try to keep on topic and not fantastical tangents about horse people.
They use to say that about gay people and look where we are today.
I’m not trying to change society here. I am trying to understand issues by sharing and testing opinions. I have learned a lot from this particular thread. I have hit on a new clarity as to what progressives are saying on this issue, and why, and the rhetorical techniques you are using to weave your narratives.
The bait and switch from feminine gender (a logically valid term) to female gender (logically unnecessary and logically invalid); and from masculine gender ( logically valid) to male gender (logically unnecessary term and logically invalid) is key to the rhetorical sleight of tongue.
And your imaginesd quest to authenticate a transition from a male to a female human is as fantastical. You cannot change the genes from male to female any more than you can change their genes from human to horse.
But you can cure the psychological attitudes of someone who is gender dysphoric (is uncomfortable with their masculine traits) by changing attitudes to one’s that embrace their genetic truth.
And today we have some homosexuals who are growing out of their homosexuality by embracing the truth about themselves. And many who remain so by insisting on keeping the lies and who seek to validate their false narratives about themselves by insisting society validate those lies.
I won’t change those two dynamics occurring. We all have free will. But I can understand what is happening and speak the truth about that.
Therefore there can be no genuine trans-sexuals, since the genes remain the birth sex.
There can be feminine [gender] males and masculine [gender] females. If physiological changes are being attempted to add biological features of the opposite sex, they are producing hermaphrodising feminine males and hermaphrodising masculine females. The genetic sex is not changing
The people who coined and used these terms aren’t politicians. Also, don’t you think the people who would vote for someone who is pro-trans’ rights would most likely already vote for someone on the left?
I’m boggled by this conspiracy theory of yours. I see no evidence, motivation, or even any effect for or from it. I couldn’t even find anything supporting a long ago era where we used these terms to refer to a person’s gender separate from their biological sex. And even if we did, it would have no effect on today, we’d be having the exact same arguments using slightly different words.
No. People who “felt” they were sexually attracted to the same sex and so identified as gay, whose feelings are changed so they are no longer sexually attracted to the same sex, but are interested in intimacy with someone of the opposite sex.
When you use language that says transitioning from a male to a female, or from a man to a woman, you are speaking of an impossible, fantastical biological transformation, a transformation as fantastical as from human to horse.
