[ExI] Men in Skirts

[Adrian Tymes]

On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 10:08 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> On 10/06/2023 17:18, Adrian Tymes wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2023, 7:34 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>> Someone who points out that everyone has XX or XY chromosomes (with the
>> occasional abnormalities, like XYY syndrome) are at odds with those who
>> want to ignore biology in favour of 'gender identity' (I know it sounds
>> bonkers, but look at the reactions against J K Rowling for simply stating a
>> fact). I have nothing against a man wearing a skirt, or people choosing to
>> have surger to alter their sex organs, but I realise that if you're born
>> with XY chromosomes, that makes you a man, and nothing can change that
>> (yet). This makes me an enemy of the "you're a girl if you say you're a
>> girl" crowd, who don't think chromosomes have a say in the matter.
>>
>
> The problem there is those who define "man" et al as anything more than
> just "an adult human with XY chromosomes" et al - and that would
> unfortunately appear to be the majority of people, regardless of the
> science, which makes their definition matter.  This isn't just the "you are
> what gender you think you are" crowd; indeed, that group arose as a
> reaction to the "women are defined as baby machines who are not supposed to
> earn a living"/"men are defined as mentally resilient enough that they
> should never seek mental health help"/et al crowd.  The chromosomes can't
> be changed but those other qualities can (to some extent: while no one with
> XY chromosomes has yet become pregnant that I know of outside of extreme
> surgical technicalities, most of the crowd is far more concerned with
> whether those with XX chromosomes may be forced to become pregnant and
> carry babies through birth against their will, which far too many say is
> part of being a woman by the definition of "woman").
>
> One theoretical solution could be to reduce those words to just their
> chromosomal meaning in popular usage.  We are so far away from that, that
> many view that solution as impossible in practice.
>
>
> Fine. So let's make a start. "Impossible" is a challenge, not a limitation!
>
> You can argue what 'man' and 'woman' (and maybe even 'male' and 'female',
> at a stretch) should mean, but not what 'XX' and 'XY' do mean.
>
> I am (as opposed to 'I identify as') an XY.
>
> Nobody can disagree with that, it's not an opinion or a cultural position.
> It's an unassailable fact, and I can prove it.
>
> Maybe I should start wearing skirts, with a T-shirt that says "XY" in big
> letters.
>

Sure, but what does it mean to be an XY?  People - seeing that this is an
attempt to dodge the definitions of "man" and "woman" - will attach
meanings beyond literally just having those chromosomes.  Many of those
meanings will not be universally applicable but people will wrongly treat
them as if they are, winding back up at more or less the current problem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20230610/33247680/attachment.htm>