1/ Look at how biological sex is depicted in this ridiculous figure. It doesn't refer to males or females, just "male-ness" and "female-ness." And what are some traits listed that determine how male or female you are?
Body shape, voice pitch, body hair, hormones, & chromosomes.
Body shape, voice pitch, body hair, hormones, & chromosomes.
2/ So they're presumably implying that males with high voices are less male than males with deep voices, and females with more body hair are less female than those with less body hair.
This is nothing but playground bully logic masquerading as legitimate science.
This is nothing but playground bully logic masquerading as legitimate science.
3/ All of these are SECONDARY sex characteristics (i.e. traits that are influenced by one's sex) and are not part of the definition of "male" & "female." In fact, the only way we can call these male- or female-related traits is by acknowledging that sex refers to something else.
4/ Let me illustrate this point using two different groups of people: bikers and cyclists.
Bikers ride motorcycles, and cyclists ride bicycles. The vehicles are similar in many ways, but also very different. Motorcycles are powered by engines and bicycles are powered by pedals.
Bikers ride motorcycles, and cyclists ride bicycles. The vehicles are similar in many ways, but also very different. Motorcycles are powered by engines and bicycles are powered by pedals.
5/ Motorcycles and bicycles are the PRIMARY characteristics of what it means to be a biker or a cyclist, respectively. But there are also SECONDARY traits *associated* with being either a biker or a cyclist.
6/ Bikers are more likely to wear leather jackets, have tattoos, and facial hair. Cyclists are more likely to wear spandex bodysuits, not have tattoos, and be clean-shaven.
7/ However, remember that wearing leather jackets, spandex suits, tattoos, and facial hair are not how we assign people to the groups "biker" or "cyclist." We assign them to those groups based on whether they are riding motorcycles or bicycles.
8/ A person on a motorcycle who dons a spandex bodysuit doesn't make them less of a biker or turn them into a cyclist. And likewise a person on a bicycle with a long beard, tattoos, and wearing a leather jacket doesn't magically turn them into a biker.
9/ We are able to classify leather jackets, tattoos, and beards as "biker-related traits" and spandex bodysuits and the lack of facial hair & tattoos as "cyclist-related traits" ONLY AFTER we fully understand that bikers by definition ride motorcycles and cyclists ride bicycles!
10/ Similarly, we are able to classify deeper voices, more body/facial hair, testosterone, etc. as "male-related traits" and higher voices, less body/facial hair, estrogen, etc. as "female-related traits" ONLY AFTER we understand that males and females are defined by gonad type.
11/ Sometimes an individual's sex may be ambiguous, but this does not negate the fact that sex is totally unambiguous for over 99.98% of humans.
Likewise, someone might roll up riding one of these, but this doesn't negate the reality of motorcycles & bicycles as real categories.
Likewise, someone might roll up riding one of these, but this doesn't negate the reality of motorcycles & bicycles as real categories.
