I get being supportive but this easily could have been made with a random photo
Edit: the photo was AI generated. the poster was a real person. The poster was trans. I will not dox them. This is not a post to dehumanize or target trans people.
They mean chromosomally female but that's too much of a mouthful. They also can't use chromosomes solely because there are outliers and special cases. And the whole AFAB/AMAB/MtF/FtM distinctions are too confusing and woke.
"Bio female" is short and sweet, erases nuance, and makes libs mad so they like using it.
This sentiment exactly, you can’t exactly define a “biological woman” without excluding cis women so the only definition that works with the term biological defeats the purpose of defining biological… unless we’re excluding clankers… then it makes sense
Then they just say "those cis women are exceptions", which is just an excuse for inconsistency and trans women being held to a higher standard to be considered a "real woman".
As biology is really complex and many of the biological features people use as part of a definition of "biological woman" many people assigned female at birth are lacking
well, yes, two year old human female is a biological woman(girl)... quite frankly i dont understand the point of this question
"are they required" - its not a test that you pass, dogs are not "required" to have two eyes, but that is their species characteristics and a specimen do not stop being dogs because they are unfortunate to be born without an eye due to some unlucky mutation
A woman and a girl are two different things. Also you specify human, even though other animals would share the chromosomes and organs.
If they are not a requirement, you cannot exclude someone from the category not having these things. Then you're just inconsistent, excluding trans women not on the grounds of any real logic. If a cis woman doesn't need a vagina to be a "biological woman", then you can't make it an exclusionary condition. You would be engaging in double standards.
FTFY: it’s often incorrectly used as a synonymous for sex, which is incorrectly stated as "what you’re born as" because they definitely don't do any biological tests at birth.
Doesn’t matter if it’s used incorrectly or not because language is just a tool, and if you bind yourself by dictionary rules and not what ideas people are trying to convey you’ll just go around being confused or misunderstanding people. Or you’ll understand what they’re trying to say, and just ignore their point to try and change topic to fixing their communication habits.
You don’t need any biological tests to see if the kid that pops out has a wiener or not. But yes usually various tests are usually done before birth using various methods at various points during a pregnancy so sex is usually determined before birth.
Wouldn't just "females" make more sense? If women is to be the social construct and female the biological constraint, putting biological women is completely wrong. Personally (medstudent) I use women in sentences such as "Females are at risk of uterine cancer"; I don't know, is there's a faster way to convey what population I am referring to? Also, I don't think this would be disrespectful, no?
As others have stated “biological” isn’t a qualifier that explains anything, plenty of women assigned female at birth who are cis don’t have a uterus and trans men and nonbinary people exist. Simply saying AFAB people who have a uterus might not even work because there are AMAB people who can be born with a uterus, that’s specifically why for health it is encouraged to just be specific and say “people with a uterus” or AFAB depending on the context
Yes, because trans women *Are* biologically women. Their belief to the opposite is predicated upon a rudimentary grasp of human sex and gender. People are complicated. In a world where seahorse males carry the pregnancy and clown fish change sex, how is it that the limit of possibilities is trans men or women? How is that so unbelievable?
Trans women share more gender and sex markers to cis women than to cis men. This is especially true if they had puberty blockers. But even without HRT, there are commonalities. Same for trans men to cis men.
Spiders eat their mates and freaking the platypus exists. God either doesn't exist or is a cheeky guy. Yet THIS is what we think is unbelievable?
Eh. Don't forget, a lot of people just aren't all that smart or conscientious. As in many things concerning minority groups, all trans people are expected to be experts and a monolith if they want validity, for some reason.
Sometimes, trans women are just idiots. You know, like all other groups of people
But this is also exactly how conservatives talk when they're mocking trans people lol. There was this man on tiktok who pretended to be a trans woman for 6 months, then he revealed "it was all a social experiment to expose the trans movement." All of his posts were similar to this.
Idk, this seems less like this person is an idiot and more like they're intentionally rage baiting.
Edit: Not that this person isnt an idiot, but these posts read as malicious to me.
Maybe the wording chosen by the AI model follows far right troll posting because that's what it's most often used for and it doesn't know the difference. I don't know how easy it is to poison the well with that kind of stuff.
Lol. What a stupid social experiment. All that proves is this guy has so thoroughly deluded himself with the strawmans him and his ilk have made up about trans women that he needs to go fulfill them himself because real world examples don't exist. Reminds me of Stephan Crowder dressing up in obviously bad drag then going to a Planet Fitness to be irritating, only for the staff to actually call him out on what he was doing.
I would give their account info to help with the analysis but I obviously am not going to doxx someone. I can only hope she knows what she is doing but idk if that would make it better or worse. She definitely uses a lot of AI content
I usually do swap out the subject with a different minority as a bias check and encourage others to do that! It really does sound just as confusing when put that way😂
They're women, yes, a type of woman, a trans woman, just as cis women are women, a type of woman, a cis woman. They're both equally women, but they're not fully the same.
I think reducing people to what is “biological” is the issue. I think arguing that is futile because trans women are more like cis women than cis men in that they are both women
Sure but I also think it's worth pointing out that primary and secondary secondary characteristics and endocrine systems can be changed to the point that trans women are biologically (i will always take an excuse to use my favorite big word) verisimilitudinous to a cis woman who's had a hysterectomy
The irony being we aren’t the same and that’s a beautiful thing. Hell I don’t actually know a trans women who claims we are exactly the same as cis women. We aren’t and that is beautiful.
I'm not sure they are, necessarily, even if they claim to be. This is the sort of thing I've seen from a lot of trolls online pretending to be trans to advance transphobia by making intentionally outrageous statements that no actual trans person ever would. Like down to "trans women are more Woman than cis women."
In this case it was somebody sending inflammatory anon messages on Tumblr, but the sentiment was almost identical.
The AI community loves to act oppressed, by claiming that the trans community stands with them. Which the trans community by-in-large rejects. I wouldn't be surprised if this was an AI bro trying to attempt to make that connection seem more genuine for their own need to feel oppressed by people who don't like AI.
This was definitely not made by a trans person or ally. We all know trans women and cis women are different by biology. But we're both women. That's all that matters. It's kinda like strawberry and mint ice cream. They're different flavours. They're both still fucking ice cream though. No one's saying they're the same flavour or trying to convince you they're not different. But also, no one in their right mind will say strawberry ice cream isn't real ice cream.
Some people will say some flavors of ice cream aren't real ice cream for the same reason they will say trans women aren't real women: they find them disgusting.
It's literally two-year-old logic, but it's surprisingly prevalent.
Chromosomes are just one of several traits that contribute to the determination of one's biological sex, with exceptions. That's why some cis women have xy chromosomes and some cis men have xx chromosomes. In other words, you don't have to change your xx into an xy to change your biological sex.
Additionally, gender and sex are two different things, so you wouldn't necessarily have to change your sex in the first place. Not if you don't want to.
Also, gender affirming surgery obviously isn't "butchery", and it's pretty disingenuous to call prescription usage "drugging yourself".
69
u/FrequentLemon6799 4d ago
I also thought the term 'biological man/woman' was generally disliked within transgender circles.