who cares

if someone asks to be called she/her/susan then just do it. it doesn't need to be so complicated

conservatives ranting about biology are attacking a straw man. nobody actually gives a shit

Biological sex (male, female, intersex) refers to the physical aspects of your body, such as primary sex characteristics (reproductive organs), secondary sex characteristics (body hair, breasts, fat distribution, etc), hormone levels (estrogen, testosterone), and chromosomes.

Gender (man, woman, nonbinary, other terms) is more about an internal sense of self, how you see yourself and how you want your body to be, as well as what social category you belong in.

A trans woman is a person who was biologically male at birth, but sees herself as a woman/wants her body to align with her gender (woman). Not all trans women medically transition, and that's ok, but for those who do, it can change various aspects of their biological sex, such as hormone levels and secondary sex characteristics, so it may not be entirely true to say that trans women (post transition) are biologically male either.

It’s extremely ~~hairy~~ messy to define biological sex. Whoever wants to argue has a middle school level understanding of biology, refuse to learn and completely ignores the science.

See

"You're biologically a loser lmao"

1: Yes.

2: Not really. It's more about self image and social presentation.

3: Best response I have is, "And?" Covers a lot of bases.

4: Same way you get any title like Doctor, or Fam, you need to be accepted into the community by peers, and not necessarily universally.

In addition to what others have said, I'd like to add a little more information.

Hormones work by changing your gene expression. Every one of us has all the DNA for both typically male and typically female traits. Hormones play a part in deciding what parts of your DNA are active within your cells and what parts aren't. There's a complicated set of interactions that decides what hormones you produce naturally and how your body responds to them. Sometimes something happens in an atypical way with that complex set of interactions and that's how intersex people exist.

(There are examples of people with XY chromosomes who have internal testes but are insensitive to testosterone and grow up female, and even examples of people with XY chromosomes who have functioning uteruses and have given birth naturally. It can get very complicated)

When you go on HRT as part of a medical transition, the instructions your cells are following in your DNA switch to the instructions tied to those hormones. That's how trans people's bodies change. Their cells are actually functioning differently.

A trans women on estrogen for a long enough time will eventually have their blood proteins go to a more typically female profile. They'll also see their risk factor for certain diseases switch. The risk of cardiovascular disease goes down (typically something that affects more males) and their risk for autoimmune disease go up (typically something that affects more females).

So are trans woman biologically men? Eh, not quite. Saying somebody is biologically male/female is a little reductive. It can be complicated.

Are eunuchs biologically agender?

Are intersex people with chimerism or cryptorchidism biologically two genders at once?

Are women who have had hysterectomies biologically male?

The answer to all of the above is, and I say this with all the respect in the world, a resounding 'no.'

Lot you are covering here but quick fire.

1. No it is not correct. Sex is a multifaceted thing split between chromosomal, phenotypic and hormonal aspects. Horomonal transition changes phenotypic (physical structural aspects of sex) structures and changes the way the body chemically responds to fit a physical presentation more in line with the group the person is transitioning to more than the group they transition from. If you wanted to be very pedantic about it in a way that is somewhat unkind post medical transition trans people are functionally intersex but for medical purposes like determining dosages of medications and how they respond to medical procedures they are consistent with membership of their post transition group. A trans woman treated as a man by a pharmacologist would be getting the wrong dosage. In this case they need to be medically treated as a woman to receive adequate care.

.

2. The assumption that there is inherent biological factors that do not change create logistical problems and errors in medical care. There is a widespread lack in the medical system of doctors who understand these principles which mean trans people can receive varying quality of care from people like EMTs or Emergency services based on the political whims of the place they are in. It also throws gasoline on bigoted rhetoric that trans people aren't "real" but are frauds "just pretending" as though their needs to be treated as their sex are just skin deep and not a complex mix of complex and fundamental biologic changes and a series of mental and social challenges of interfacing with a society that is unprepared to do the work to understand these differences.

.

3. Calling a trans woman "biologically male" is just calling her a man under a different format. That's really all it is. It affects a trans person mentally the same because it causes them to have their physical characteristics reported back to them the exact same way. It tells them "we don't care about your psychological needs" The term "biological" being used isn't scientifically consistent with what is actually going on. The terms are "trans" and "cis" women/men because that registers the difference of experience in a way that doesn't take one's greatest challenges of existing and shove their nose in it. It acknowledges that they have crossed a boundary and are what they say they are. "Biological male" is bigotry disguised behind a pseudo scientific veneer.

.

4. It contradicts. "Biologically male" places the EMPHASIS on MALE. When looking at any gender inclusive or gendered language the noun is key, the adjective is supplement. A femBOY is a man who is comfortable in his manhood with the gender expression that is feminine. A tomGIRL is the opposite. A trans WOMAN and a cis WOMAN are both in language affirmed as culturally feminine. A "Biological MALE" is medicalizing that persons experience and placing the emphasis not on their cultural experience or on their psychological needs, it's fronting the speakers desire to comment on that person's body and categorize the subject as a man with a masculine experience.

Don't debate with idiots. They drag you down at their level and beat you with experience. - Mark Twain

Seriously, complex question usually requires complex answers, the type that doesn't fit in a 10 words meme. If I learned anything, it's that you won't convinced people who don't care about the truth. People won't change their mind unless they are personally affected by something. They don't deserve the tolerance they refuse to others.

The only way that trans people make sense is if gender and sex are two separate things.

How is it that I, a straight man, am attracted to trans women if they're actually men? Does that mean that I'm bisexual? No, because I'm not attracted to cis men. (Or trans men, for that matter.) Think about the pretzel logic you have to get into if you have a worldview like JK Rowling. "Bisexual for femininity" isn't a thing. Straight men are attracted to women. Cis women, trans women. Women. Period.

Now, I know that it's about more than attraction, but this is what got me to start thinking about this. Another was this thought experiment somebody gave me: "If your dick got chopped off, would you instantly turn into a woman?" No, of course not.

At this point a gender essentialist would probably start talking about chromosomes. Chromosomes determine what your gender is! Nobody uses this as a definition for gender in any practical way, though. When you're looking at somebody from across the room, you don't know what their chromosomes are. How many of your friends do you have chromosomal data on? How about the people you've dated? Are they going to use chromosomes to determine which bathroom you can use? Or which team you can play on? This is incoherent. It's like basing gender upon whether you have an even or odd number of atoms in your body.

I had one person tell me that a trans woman would be unsuitable for marriage because she couldn't give birth. I'm not interested in having children, but setting that aside...would they say the same thing about a cis woman who's infertile? Every single one of these arguments is incoherent.

In general, please don’t ask loaded, third-rail questions on !asklemmy@lemmy.ml, because

1. it’s a PITA for mods, and
2. that’s not what the community is for:. It’s supposed to be a clone of r/askreddit.

Try responding with shut the fuck up, or i don't care

I wouldn't engage in discussion with people saying that. Nothing good can come from it, and they probably aren't people worth spending time with.

It's a statement. It needs no response.

1. Maybe.
2. No. Because biology is not a black/white science. There are shades of gray. If you define male as "XY" , then what is a person born "XXY"? What if that person is born with both a penis and vagina?
3. It's not a logical statement to begin with, it's a statement of taxonomy, a classification. It's like saying "How do you argue with someone who thinks red and pink are the same color?" You don't. They see what they see.
4. "woman" is a gender (a sociological term, not a biological classification).

And, of course, I have MUCH more to say on the subject. But, ya know, gotta start the conversation somewhere....

Good questions, keep 'em coming!

(My opinion)

1. Yes it is factually correct, but it's not an argument
2. maybe matters (what bathroom do they use I have no idea)
3. I would say they are correct but it doesn't prove anything about trans people being invalid (trans people are valid af, having the courage to change your gender is something I couldn't imagine)
4. There is a difference between gender and sex. Sex is your biology, gender is what you identify as. Your sex can be male while your gender being female.

I want to be clear I'm not queer this is just what I have learnt in school (crazy our school actually teaches us about this), I could be wrong.

Why respond to it. If someone's already recognised someone as a trans woman what's the problem

Aight, you asked multiple questions, so you're going to get some strange answers, possibly including this one.

To your title question, the only time I've heard anyone say that, they were being a douche. My response online is mostly of the "down vote, report if appropriate, and move on" variety.

In meat space, my response is usually either an eye roll and walking off, or a "fucking moron" and walking off.

I have big dude privilege in meat space, and roll well armed, so have no need to pretend to be nice to douche nozzles spewing bullshit.

The other questions are harder.

1: for a given value of factual, sure, I guess. But it's using imprecise language that's been weaponized, so I would be dubious of someone stating it until there was more context. "Biological" isn't as definitive and limited in usages as to be without question in that context.

2: don't matter. If a guy says he's a guy, he's a guy. If a gal says she's a gal, she's a gal. End of fucking story, and I will gladly tell anyone fucking with my trans homies that they're a fucking moron and be willing to either walk off, or fuck them up if they insist. IDGAF about sometimes XY or XX status, or any of the other possible combinations (remember when I said "Biological" isn't that useful or definitive? Yeah, biology ain't a binary). I care about the person's expressed self. It's about basic human decency and respect.

3: I wouldn't respond logically. It doesn't merit any effort on my part. I'm not in the business of convincing anyone that everyone has human rights, should have equal acces to all civil rights, or that someone else's gender is none of their fucking business. It isn't about logic. Anyone at this point trying to frame gender as some kind of science debate is a douche and can go fuck themselves. The debate at this point has nothing to do with "biology". It's about human rights. And yes, I will fight on that hill.

4: it would only contradict if the person trying to bring "biology" into a conversation is being a douche instead of just missing the point. I don't automatically assume a person trying to frame the subject in those terms is acting with malice. So they may not be contradicting the fact that trans women are women. They may just be exploring the language of transness in an attempt to better understand the matter. And that's okay. It isn't a built in part of language, so everyone has to absorb the concepts over time.

Alas, assholes and morons use that language to denigrate trans people. So I also can't assume someone isn't doing so. I have to wait for context, or be proactive in stating that I ain't putting up with bigotry, so if that's where they're going, it won't end well.

Me? The debate is over. What's still in play is people finding their path to internalizing the subject. We don't get to debate what is a fundamental human experience. Trans people exist. It isn't imaginary on their part, it isn't bad parenting, it isn't trauma. They're trans, and that's it.

Because this feels like a loaded statement, I'd respond like this: Biology makes mistakes. Biology is fallible. To frame this about biology is not sufficiently complex to address the issue.

1. Talk to experts.
2. The initial statement seems to me is that of a culture warrior, not a curious mind. Therefore it doesn't matter to me.
3. Compassion doesn't require logic. But if you want sonething slightly logical: I don't understand quantum physics either. I'm reliably informed it exists. Me being unable to grasp the uncertainty principle leaves me feeling uneasy and frustrated. Others may feel in a comparable way about gender identity. It's okay to admit that you don't get it. I don't fully understand it either. It's not okay to be an asshole about it.
4. Apples to rotten pears.

1. sex and gender are different things.

2. Trans women were biological males. But sex is determined by a lot of factors, including hormones. Trans folks often use man made chemicals to trigger sexual development into the sex they wanted.

Think of sex like a slider bar on a screen, with "male" on one side and "female" on the other. You start somewhere on the scale. With hormones you can put your finger on the slider and schwoop that lil sucker anywhere you want. It's not just for trans folks though! Straights use the slider too. Wanna be more butch than you already are as a guy? Add testosterone! Going through menopause? Add estrogen!

The impact of opposite sex hormones to a trans person's already developed sex organs is mostly to render them useless, but that's fine, straights do that too, mostly on purpose. That's what adoption is for. If a trans person wants to go all in on the change, they can get the reverse-that-thang surgery and turn that outie into an innie.

At that point, there's like... Zero difference between a "natural born" woman who had a hysterectomy for some reason, and a trans woman.

It's all very science fiction when you get into the details.

1. Typically, but not always. Some trans women are biologically intersex. (This also depends on how you define "biologically male" which is not totally straightforward.)
2. It matters in some contexts, not in others. Their physician should know, because various hormone treatments cause different effects in people's bodies, and certain health conditions effect biologically male or female people differently too. That's nobody else's business but the patient and their trusted medical providers. As far as their dignity, opportunities, and general acceptance, it doesn't matter. Trans folks deserve the exact same rights, opportunities, and acceptance as anybody else.
3. Usually people who bring this up aren't acting in good faith, so I don't engage with them. On the rare occasion where somebody is genuinely curious and wants to learn, I answer them in the same way as I am doing right now.
4. Because the word "woman" denotes multiple concepts, like the word "parent". If a child is adopted at birth and is raised by a couple, the child and their community will refer to those people as the child's parents. This is not a false statement, because the word "parent" doesn't only mean the direct biological progenitors of a person. Parent also is a social role, hence the verb form "to parent somebody." This is also why we have the terms, "biological parent" and "adoptive parent" to add additional information when it's necessary.

Trans women are women in the sense that they are filling their society's sociological role that surrounds the expected concept of a woman. That will be different depending on many factors, and will have many different aspects including their pronouns, fashion and clothing, voice, makeup, hair, activities, and so forth.

Just like any other woman, they will chose which social roles they desire to fit into, and which ones they don't, and all of that is completely acceptable.

My answer: if we're sat the point that you don't even understand the definitions of sex, gender and sexuality I don't think we have the time to discuss this. Ultimately, regardless of definitions, we should treat humans as humans and be kind to one another.

There are a lot of good points here, but one that I feel often gets overlooked at times like this is in the history of a person's experience.

Completely sidestepping the debate, let's assume a trans woman is a woman. What we're acknowledging here is that this person lived some of her life as a boy or man. This would include the various biases of that.

A (biological) woman would have lived with a single set of biases and challenges. In addition to the huge experiences around child birth, female reproductive health is seriously under provided for. I've met many women with ongoing health issues related to it that appear to be sidelined or completely ignored by medical science.

Trans women clearly have their own challenges, but their societal biases would be different as would their possible health issues.

This leads to me believe that we might view a person outwardly as being a woman, but being a biological woman or a trans woman leads to different sets of life experiences that would likely have significant influences on a person's worldview, modes of communication, hobbies, interests etc.

I'd say that a trans woman is a "woman" now, but in not having lived as a girl or young woman that she is a trans woman. In the same way that a (biological) woman is not and never will be a trans woman.

I don't care, trans women are hot.