tautologies are necessarily true, but usually not useful. for instance, I am either a bot or I am not. strictly true, but not a helpful statement.

It’s a concern when we use it to discriminate against trans people.

…nope. Her body can’t produce either. And she has a uterus and fallopian tubes.

Get a fucking grip on fucking reality you stupid fucking idiot. Stop inventing things in your head to disagree with you putrid rotting dog cunt.

I see you’re not exactly into constructive conversation. Maybe chill out instead of getting so angry at comments online that it sends you into a fit of swearing rage?

justify it

Sure. Any time, any day. I doubt you’ll even read past the first sentence given how irrationally angry you seem to be, but maybe you’ll prove me wrong.

• The vast majority of people do not even know there are sexes that could be defined outside the binary of male and female. They don’t know that chromosome combinations outside XX and XY exist at all.
• When people are told this, many of them refuse to accept it, and simply cast it as "outliers" that in the end, don’t change their belief that “there are only 2 sexes”, sometimes because their religion simply states there’s only 2 against all currently known evidence, or even if they are just more broadly liberal and would still say gender is separate from sex. It is an uncomfortable thing for some to come to terms with to understand that something so deeply ingrained into our culture is much more complicated than it seems at a glance.
• This has been a known fact for centuries, and yet society broadly still assumes, by default, that it is “abnormal” and “undesirable”, so surgeries are often performed on intersex individuals as babies to “correct” their sex characteristics to match just the two binary options most people are familiar with, even if that individual later finds out and would otherwise have not wanted the surgery.
• To this day, people like you are continuing to call people like me a “putrid rotting dog cunt" for explaining this well-researched, broadly demonstrated topic with widespread occurrences across the globe, when the more reasonable answer to being told such a fact would be to spend even a minute on any search engine to find out you’re going against the whole of medical consensus and seemingly getting incredibly incensed over the fact that nobody agrees with you.

This just goes to show transphobes and bigots refuse to learn about the reality we live in and instead lash out because something doesn’t fit their worldview.

The word “assigned” is used exactly to describe a decision by a second party (the nurse) based on the limited information they have at the time.

Midwives relatively frequently incorrectly assign intersex people at birth.

Your actual sex isn’t assigned by anybody, and certainly isn’t decided at birth, but rather at conception.

Timeline:

1. Conception: chromosomes determined.
2. Womb: hormonal context influences gender characteristics.
3. Birth: nurse assigns male or female.

Agreed, the line is use the bathroom and don’t shit on the floor

It was working just fine before this law no?

I’m so sorry, I completely got the wrong end of the stick.

You should ignore that poster. They’re not right in the head.

So what do you want to call it then? It’s not like I’m attached to the term itself, but the point is that it’s a useful and necessary concept in some contexts so there needs to be a term that refers to it, and you can’t just assume anyone who uses the most common term to describe it is transphobic.

And I never said it’s a binary, but if a person is intersex then that’s probably important information for their doctors to know because there may be certain medical complications that they’re more at risk for as a result.

Sure it does, it’s the sex you have biologically. The second thing you’re talking about is called gender-affirming care and is distinct from biological sex. Both “sex” and “gender” are societal concepts, but sex is descriptive whereas gender is prescriptive. You can read that to mean sex is scientifically determinable, whereas gender is meaninglessly abstract. Sex says, “assuming all your bits work, here’s how you would contribute to the reproductive process.” Gender says, “regardless of what bits you were born with but dependent on what bits people think you were born with, here’s how society will treat you and expect you to behave.” “Biological gender” doesn’t exist, just like “sociological sex” doesn’t exist. So I guess in that sense, “biological sex” doesn’t make sense, because there’s no other kind.

I’m not commenting on the top-level post, I was replying to a comment that said:

Biological sex is a dogwhistle made digestible to appease the apathetic moderate

That’s not sealioning.

Besides, a lot of cis women can’t get pregnant either, and it covers the case of trans men who can.

You don’t realize that’s actually more reason to ask about biological sex? If a cis woman can’t get pregnant, but she still has ovaries, and all the form asks is “can you get pregnant,” then that leaves out important information, such as “I have ovaries and should be screened for ovarian cancer.”

A field for “sex” (whether “biological” or “birth” or “assigned” or anything else) very much does provide relevant information, and just because there’s additional information that may be relevant (such as hormones and surgeries) doesn’t negate that.

And I never said it should be binary. That’s an assumption you’re making about what point I’m trying to make. I’ve never denied the existence of intersex people, and in fact I even mentioned how a person being intersex is relevant information for their doctor to know that isn’t covered by gender or “can you get pregnant?”

I’ve heard it described as “trans broken arm syndrome”.

Medical professionals dismissing people’s concerns is a completely separate issue from needing to know basic information about their bodies.

And by the way, even as an ostensibly cis man, I’ve regularly had my concerns dismissed by doctors too. It’s almost like when you never stop to ask someone what kinds of issues they face, you don’t realize that some of the issues you face, they face too.

This assumption that “cis men just automatically get all the medical treatment they need” is based in the fact that nobody ever stopped to ask cis men if they ever feel dismissed by their doctors. (Oh, and by the way, the cultural stigma that cis men are supposed to avoid the doctor because they need to be manly and strong might also have something to do with it, since most men avoid going to the doctor until there’s no doubt that something is absolutely wrong. As someone who finds that to be bullshit, and has gone to the doctor with a variety of concerns that get dismissed, I can tell you that dismissive doctors is endemic to the medical profession, and that cis men aren’t just magically immune to it).

A single binary “biological sex”
…
If you want to argue that this can be packaged into a nice little binary

I never said anything about sex being binary, so your fixation on making this about binaries is a strawman.

Finally, your persistent sealioning only contributes to the problem that no one ever fucking listens to trans people.

I’m not sealioning. I’ve listened to what people are saying, but just because I’ve listened to something doesn’t mean I can’t disagree with it. And since nobody has actually come up with a response to what I’ve said and have chosen instead to rely on thought-stopping accusations of transphobia and strawman arguments such as misrepresenting this as being about binaries or about toilets, then it seems I’m the one not being listened to. Do you realize how difficult it is to maintain a good-faith discussion with someone who wilfully misses the point?

You have easily typed out more than any trans person in the conversation and have learned absolutely nothing from it.

Why should I have to learn from anyone who’s responding to points I didn’t make? People make assumptions about me and mischaracterize what I’m saying. What is there to learn from that?

I’ve asked what terminology you prefer. I’ve asked what a medical form should ask instead of “biological sex.” But nobody responds to that because they want to dismiss it all as transphobia. There’s not much to learn from that.

And just because I’m on the spectrum and don’t know how to be concise while still getting my point across doesn’t mean a thing.

Yeah, it just says “Sex” and the “biological” part is implied. That doesn’t change the fact that it’s a useful concept in some contexts to convey a relevant set of information.

Calling it “biological sex” might be redundant but that doesn’t make it inherently bigoted. Someone might simply be emphasizing the distinction between sex and gender. And besides, I’m not the one who started calling it that in this thread so don’t act like I’m just inserting it unnecessarily.

It’s funny how many seemingly innocuous words and phrases that I didn’t know were ostensibly dogwhistles end up being called dogwhistles. If there’s some secret right-wing code of words that mean specific things other than their apparent meaning, I assure you I don’t know it because I don’t follow those spaces or their jargon. And I can almost guarantee you that I’m not the only one like that.

So immediately jumping to “dogwhistle” every time you hear someone say something that’s supposedly in this list of secret right-wing code words is kind of a disingenuous argument and you’re just going to alienate people who then won’t take you seriously in the future.

No one has addressed the situation even though I’ve mentioned it twice in this thread now. That seems like ignoring it, no?

Is it transphobic for a doctor to ask a trans man if he might be pregnant, or no?

why would government recognition affect whether theyre trans

but yes, intersex people can be cis enbies

Oh! I thought you were suggesting a way to implement unitary WCs. As a way to handle the current bathroom issues, the current solution for my floor is one staff member has IBS and checks in on the restroom approximating their gender about once every 2 hours. The other floors and restrooms have their own idiosyncratic methods.

Urinals can be packed far more tightly than stalls, so no they are not just as efficient. Urinals are also optimal for high traffic/volume scenarios, so having one at home is not necessary. They’re also easier to clean and maintain.