Language doesn’t work that way.

Masculine gender is a real thing. Male gender is a fantastic chimera.

Well now you have a hot topic for your dissertation.

:+1: :rofl:

"The concept of gender, in the modern sense, is a recent invention in human history.[26] The ancient world had no basis of understanding gender as it has been understood in the humanities and social sciences for the past few decades.[26] The term gender had been associated with grammar for most of history and only started to move towards it being a malleable cultural construct in the 1950s and 1960s.[27]…

Before Sexologist John Money and colleagues introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories.[1][2] …

Analysis of more than 30 million academic article titles from 1945–2001 showed that the uses of the term “gender”, were much rarer than uses of “sex”, was often used as a grammatical category early in this period. By the end of this period, uses of “gender” outnumbered uses of “sex” in the social sciences, arts, and humanities.[2]"

Social sciences, arts and humanities are not true sciences. They are therefore sloppy with their application of terminology.

"
It was in the 1970s that feminist scholars adopted the term gender as way of distinguishing “socially constructed” aspects of male–female differences (gender) from “biologically determined” aspects (sex).[2]

In the last two decades of the 20th century, the use of gender in academia has increased greatly, outnumbering uses of sex in the social sciences. While the spread of the word in science publications can be attributed to the influence of feminism, its use as a synonym for sex is attributed to the failure to grasp the distinction made in feminist theory, and the distinction has sometimes become blurred with the theory itself; David Haig stated, “Among the reasons that working scientists have given me for choosing gender rather than sex in biological contexts are desires to signal sympathy with feminist goals, to use a more academic term, or to avoid the connotation of copulation.”[2]…

In J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote:

The word ‘gender’ has acquired the new and useful connotation of cultural or attitudinal characteristics (as opposed to physical characteristics) distinctive to the sexes. That is to say, gender is to sex as feminine is to female and masculine is to male ".[30]

In 1926, Henry Watson Fowler stated that the definition of the word pertained to this grammar-related meaning:
“Gender…is a grammatical term only. To talk of persons…of the masculine or feminine g[ender],
meaning of the male or female sex , is either a jocularity (permissible or not according to context) or a blunder.”[32]…

The popular use of gender simply as an alternative to sex (as a biological category) is also widespread, although attempts are still made to preserve the distinction . The American Heritage Dictionary (2000) uses the following two sentences to illustrate the difference, noting that the distinction "is useful in principle, but it is by no means widely observed , and considerable variation in usage occurs at all levels."[35]

The effectiveness of the medication appears to depend on the sex (not gender) of the patient.
In peasant societies, gender (not sex) roles are likely to be more clearly defined." WIKIPEDIA

You are not interested in preserving the distinction.

No. Some are blind or indifferent to social justice issues, some are woke (aware of and concerned about social justice issues) , and some are dyswoke (have an irrational psychotic gaslit awareness and concern about social justice issues).

Not at all questioning my sanity. I keep learning.

1 Like

Yes, I do. I am, after all, a scientist … at least that’s what my degree says.

Then why are you complaining that we© ruined the definition of woke?

1 Like

And that’s your problem because when someone uses “transgender man” or transgender woman" in a strictly scientific sense, the words man/woman refer to their biological sex, not their gender identity.

1 Like

It’s a bit like calling “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” a tweet.

No. Women have babies. No man ever had a baby. Ever.

1 Like

Correct. I should feel comfortable enough to just say a man and woman and posters would know what I mean. But when we have the word trans men and trans women flying around suddenly I feel like I have to distinguish exactly which group I am speaking of.

1 Like

What kind of scientist?

What was the point of that info dump? Language evolves.

I’ve been referring to sex and gender as distinct but related things in this whole thread.

Who decides which social justice issue are rational vs irrational? Doesn’t the side in opposition always think the other side is being irrational? “Allowing women to vote? That’s crazy!”

Who’s gaslighting the “dyswoke”?

Because you(c) did. Why do you think my complaints are in contradiction with the idea that words can have multiple meanings?

Except nobody but you does that. I took a look at a handful of research papers and none of them use “trangender man” or “woman” in the sense that you do. Some clarify what the terms mean, some don’t.

This analogy doesn’t work well. “Woke” is a mindset and we can identify similar mindsets predating its use. “Tweet” refers to a message sent from a specific piece of software. There was no Twitter before Twitter.

I’m curious as well, what is your scientific discipline?

And woke did not mean the advocacy for sexual confusion and perversion as well as racial activism.

A old radio speech and a new tweet, when abstracted up to a higher level -communication with the masses using techologies of their respective ages - are similar enough to compare with an old mindset and a new mindset that may be emerging in their respective ages.

In other words…your attempt to sanitize and widen the acceptance of “woke” by claiming that liberal thought of all ages constitutes “wokeness” … fails.

1 Like

Me, I have none. But I’m not the one claiming I know better than the researchers and doctors who contributed to all these papers.

I generally don’t use it as such anyway. If I do, its usually in response to someone who has weaponized it against the left.

Nah.

I’m not attempting to sanitize and widen the acceptance of it… I’m using it to apply to things in the past because other right wingers on these forums have. But its also just fun to remind y’all that it was your anti-social justice forebears who were opposed to ending chattel slavery, ending Jim Crow laws, giving women the vote, giving black people the vote, ending sodomy laws, allowing same-sex couples to legally marry each other… yet somehow y’all (c) believe you’re the anti-social justice generation that is finally morally in the right. Heck, you can see the transition in action as the older anti-social justice generation was anti-gay where as the current anti-social justice generation is largely okay with homosexuals.