As a nonbinary person and ardent trans ally, this is fucking laughable. 🙄

Listen, I've wasted enough of my evening on this.

Gender identity is a social construct, of course we can apply theories of gender on our history and finally, unless you're going to biologically screen people at the point of access, you're not segregating on biology.

👌

Yes I am very aware. But just like gravity existed before Einstein, gender existed as a phenomena before it's study.

Just because it was first discussed in the 50s doesn't mean that gender identities didn't exist before then?? This is getting very sad.

Say you don't know the difference between sex and gender without telling me you don't know the difference between sex and gender. 😂

How?

There has never been a point in history where access has been "biologically" segregated. Just because it was illegal to be trans, or use men's and women's spaces doesn't mean it didn't happen.

What??? No, I'm saying that trans people have always used these spaces. Always will use those spaces regardless of their biology. If you want to police solely on biology, you would have to introduce intrusive tests or you're not policing biology, you're policing gender expression. 🙄

Yes, but that doesn't mean that it didn't happen. Trans people have existed throughout history and have used spaces required for men and women throughout their time despite it being illegal.

It hasn't though because trans women and men have used men and women's spaces in accordance to their gender identity and not their assigned sex at birth.

It's not though. We currently rely on people to decide which services they use based on their gender. There is no biological test that you need to pass for access. It's literally just presentation and identity, as I believe it should be.

My opinion hasn't changed so maybe I messed up the presentation of it but my argument is: gender presentation and identity are more important than biology due to the fact that there is no practical way of implementing biological segregation without grossly invading people's privacy.

Right, but I'm not the one advocating for segregating trans people based on their assigned sex at birth??

Im saying that gender identity and presentation, the system that we have now is correct because it doesn't harm cis people or trans people.

? I'm not saying there isn't a definition of male and female. I understand that it's a bimodal distribution of sex characteristics. What I am saying is: you cannot practically police access to spaces on "biology" because you'd have to measure those, which is deeply intrusive and impractical.

The idea that we know people's biology just by looking at them is demonstrably false. So unless you want people to get a full suite of testing done in order to access spaces, we have to rely on either policing presentation (which harms women) or self-policing which is what we're already doing.

I'm not saying you can't define male and female. I am saying that in terms of practical implementation whatever line in the sand you try to draw there will be a person who was born a man or a woman that doesn't fit the definition you give.

Very interesting that a "win" for Ms. Peggie must be lauded and applauded as the rightful absolute slam dunk that it was (apparently). But also immediately appealed. 🤔

But sex isn't binary, it's bimodal. That's how intersex people exist.

You can't police on "biological sex" because it's not as simple as sperm and ova. Where do you draw the line? You can't. Because no matter by which characteristic you try and define by, you'll exclude some cis people too.