Legal definition of woman is based on biological sex, UK supreme court rules

[laughing dog]

No, its still a binary, male and female, just that some organisms can be both simultaneously or sequentially.

There is no third sex.

That is the logical equivalent of saying there is only one integer because every other integer is made up of the number one in different combinations.

 

[seanie]

It’s observed reality.

 

[seanie]

Sex is defined by the reproductive pathway an organism goes down to produce either large or small gametes; female and male.

Some organisms produce both, so are both male and female.

Some organisms can change from producing one to the other.

It’s all still binary.

 

[TomC]

No, its still a binary, male and female, just that some organisms can be both simultaneously or sequentially.

There is no third sex.

That is the logical equivalent of saying there is only one integer because every other integer is made up of the number one in different combinations.

Nonsense.
It's the equivalent of saying that there are only even and odd integers.

Our inability to say for sure which PI is doesn't change that basic reality.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

No, its still a binary, male and female, just that some organisms can be both simultaneously or sequentially.

There is no third sex.

That is the logical equivalent of saying there is only one integer because every other integer is made up of the number one in different combinations.

Nonsense.
It's the equivalent of saying that there are only even and odd integers.

Our inability to say for sure which PI is doesn't change that basic reality.
Tom

Nice try but nope. One is the base for all integers, just like male and female is the base for those combinations.

It is like saying every person is really the same because we all just different combinations of 4 nucleotide bases.

Or all computer code is the same because it is basically binary.

 

[seanie]

No, that’s just nonsense.

 

[Politesse]

It's the equivalent of saying that there are only even and odd integers.

An entirely arbitrary classification of numbers into two non-overlapping categories, imposed on the universe rather than found in it?

 

[seanie]

We have a new proposal.

Males should be allowed into female only spaces…

…because integers.

The intellectual basis for gender ideology has the depth of a puddle.

 

[laughing dog]

We have a new proposal.

Males should be allowed into female only spaces…

…because integers.

No one said or implied any such thing. Have you been kicked jn the head again?

 

[Bomb#20]

It makes them more dangerous, that’s what.

More dangerous than what?
More dangerous than using the boys restroom? More dangerous than the girls finding out that a boy is using the restroom labeled women?
Tom

Yes to the 2nd question and no to the 3rd.

But no response to the main question, which was the first.

No, that was a response to the main question too. "Yes to the 2nd question" means he's saying using a unisex restroom is more dangerous than using the boys' restroom. "No to the 3rd" means he's saying using a unisex restroom is at least as safe as using the girls' room, at least for boys who can't pass. I.e. Boys' room is safest; girls' room is most dangerous; unisex is in between. Sounds like ld is making a pretty good case for "transgirls" to use the boys' room.

 

[Emily Lake]

The difference between 16 and 27 is fairly significant. If your views didn't evolve in that span, I think it would be quite unusual.

At 27, I was in a straight marriage and thought postmodernism was nifty.

Are you divorced? Do you now reject postmodernism?

Not needling, actually curious.

 

[Emily Lake]

I don't understand how you are unable to understand that your perception that trees are all either male or female is incorrect

Seanie never made that claim

or what the sex of trees has to do with human beings.

The only thing it has to do with humans is all anisogamous species have two and only two sexes; humans are anisogamous, and so are many (not all) trees. So are the vast majority of vertebrates, by the way. Anisogamy evolved over a billion years ago, it's a highly successful evolutionary mechanism.

Some animal species actually do change sex.

So what? Those species that change sex are still male or female, there is no third sex involved. Additionally, humans are gonochoric and cannot change sex.

Male seahorses gestate and give birth to offspring.

So what? Male seahorses have the reproductive anatomy that produces small gametes - that's what makes them male. Male emperor penguins sit on eggs for months at a go, they're still male.

There are lots of exceptions to your dichotomy.

None of what you mentioned is an exception to the dichotomy of male and female being the only two sexes in anisogamous species.

You brought up trees. I have tried to explain to you that trees are not just male or just female. Some have both male and female reproductive parts. I agree that has nothing to do with humans.

Anisogamous species that are hermaphroditic (regardless of whether they're sequential or simultaneous) still have males and females. That the reproductive anatomy exists within the same individual in some species doesn't negate or alter the observation that male reproductive apparatus and female reproductive apparatus evolved in them, and that these two sets of organs are distinctly different.

Do you know how we can tell they're hermaphroditic trees? Because we know and understand what the male reproductive parts of a tree are, and we know what the female reproductive parts of a tree are, and we understand that the male parts are different from the female parts.

 

[Emily Lake]

Since trees can male, female or both, the sex is not binary. Clearly you have been kicked in the head multiple times.

Sex is still binary. True hermaphroditic species don't make sex anything other than binary in anisogamous species. Hell, we only know they're hermaphroditic *because* they have both a male reproductive system and a female reproductive system.

 

[Emily Lake]

It makes them more dangerous, that’s what.

More dangerous than what?
More dangerous than using the boys restroom? More dangerous than the girls finding out that a boy is using the restroom labeled women?
Tom

Yes to the 2nd question and no to the 3rd.

But no response to the main question, which was the first.

No, that was a response to the main question too. "Yes to the 2nd question" means he's saying using a unisex restroom is more dangerous than using the boys' restroom. "No to the 3rd" means he's saying using a unisex restroom is at least as safe as using the girls' room, at least for boys who can't pass. I.e. Boys' room is safest; girls' room is most dangerous; unisex is in between. Sounds like ld is making a pretty good case for "transgirls" to use the boys' room.

Yep.

Thus, gender non-conforming boys are safest in the boys restroom.

 

[Toni]

Since trees can male, female or both, the sex is not binary. Clearly you have been kicked in the head multiple times.

Sex is still binary. True hermaphroditic species don't make sex anything other than binary in anisogamous species. Hell, we only know they're hermaphroditic *because* they have both a male reproductive system and a female reproductive system.

Reproductive sex is binary.

Sex has multiple meanings and usages as discussed elsewhere in this thread.

 

[Toni]

Since trees can male, female or both, the sex is not binary. Clearly you have been kicked in the head multiple times.

Sex is still binary. True hermaphroditic species don't make sex anything other than binary in anisogamous species. Hell, we only know they're hermaphroditic *because* they have both a male reproductive system and a female reproductive system.

Thank you for explaining things this biologist already knew.

 

[TomC]

Since trees can male, female or both, the sex is not binary. Clearly you have been kicked in the head multiple times.

Sex is still binary. True hermaphroditic species don't make sex anything other than binary in anisogamous species. Hell, we only know they're hermaphroditic *because* they have both a male reproductive system and a female reproductive system.

Thank you for explaining things this biologist already knew.

Unfortunately, laughing dog doesn't. That's who Emily was responding to.
Tom

 

[Toni]

Since trees can male, female or both, the sex is not binary. Clearly you have been kicked in the head multiple times.

Sex is still binary. True hermaphroditic species don't make sex anything other than binary in anisogamous species. Hell, we only know they're hermaphroditic *because* they have both a male reproductive system and a female reproductive system.

Thank you for explaining things this biologist already knew.

Unfortunately, laughing dog doesn't. That's who Emily was responding to.
Tom

I’m pretty certain laughing dog has nothing to learn from Emily about reproduction, which is the narrow use of the word sex as reproduction—when it suits her.

 

[Emily Lake]

Since trees can male, female or both, the sex is not binary. Clearly you have been kicked in the head multiple times.

Sex is still binary. True hermaphroditic species don't make sex anything other than binary in anisogamous species. Hell, we only know they're hermaphroditic *because* they have both a male reproductive system and a female reproductive system.

Reproductive sex is binary.

Sex has multiple meanings and usages as discussed elsewhere in this thread.

Bats are wooden sticks for hitting balls. Bat has multiple meanings and usages, as discussed elsewhere. Thus it totally makes sense to say that you can get a home run using a small flying mammal.

We are not talking about the verb that means intercourse (the act by which reproduction occurs), nor are we talking about the adjective that means suggestive of the act by which reproduction occurs, nor any of the other various definition that you keep obfuscating the discussion with. We're talking about categories of human bodies as it relates to the evolutionary development of anisogamous reproduction.

 

[Emily Lake]

Since trees can male, female or both, the sex is not binary. Clearly you have been kicked in the head multiple times.

Sex is still binary. True hermaphroditic species don't make sex anything other than binary in anisogamous species. Hell, we only know they're hermaphroditic *because* they have both a male reproductive system and a female reproductive system.

Thank you for explaining things this biologist already knew.

If you already know this, then why are you arguing that sex is somehow not binary? And if you already know this, why do you keep swapping out the noun that refers to reproductive systems within anisogamous species with the verb that means engaging in the act by which reproduction occurs?