Talk:Material Girls: Why Reality Matters for Feminism

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Feminism Low‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBT studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles

"Transgenderism" is not a real thing[edit]

this is clear POV. "Transgenderism" is a term not used by philosophers or transgender persons in any operationalised way and the wird here links to a Page that is just called "transgender" 77.183.168.21 (talk) 06:32, 11 October 2023 (UTC)talonx[reply]

"Transgenderism" gets 24,300 hits on Google Scholar and is used widely in academic literature. However, Stock doesn't use the word in Material Girls, for what it's worth. JezGrove (talk) 10:10, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Biological sex" is an example of "science-woo"[edit]

that the phrase "biological sex" linked to an article "sex" and not "biological sex" is a good indication that this phrase is ideological and not scientifically related to "sex" where the phrase is not really mentioned. The philosophers "biological sex" has little to do with the biologists' "sex" and the former had often been cited/even written about as a good example of science-woo by most sexologists, biologists, and related scientists.Its unfortunate that non-scientist philosophers wish to redefine the biology and social factors of human sex/uality against the research. But it is akin to using fascist reasoning, terminology, and concepts to explain WWII on a WWII Page. 77.183.168.21 (talk) 06:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Biological sex" is a tautology, but because the law in this area conflates "gender" and "sex" some writers feel the need to use it for clarity. The Gender Recognition Act 9(1) says, "Where a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, the person’s gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender (so that, if the acquired gender is the male gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a man and, if it is the female gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a woman)." Since humans cannot literally change sex the Act should refer to "gender" throughout in the extract quoted, but since it doesn't there needs to be some way to distinguish between "sex" used in the proper biological sense and "sex" used incorrectly to refer to "gender". JezGrove (talk) 10:07, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, given the context of transgenderism, I was just being emphatic (i.e. this means Sex not Gender). The article itself uses the phrase "biological sex", but we can choose consistent language if the meaning is intact. Talpedia 12:05, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The articke states that the view of science is that biologicsl sex is part of a spectrum and not binary. Is that so? Don’t think that is the consensus view among scientists, quite the contrary.