Originally a comment by Screechy Monkey at Maybe science.
because no one gets to choose what sex they’re assigned at birth.
I object on behalf of the English language.
There is no general rule that says that the statement “Person A is Category X” implies that Person A chose to be X. I didn’t choose to be white, or blue-eyed, or even human, but if I went around declaring that I was “assigned human at birth,” people would back away slowly and look for an escape route.
There are, of course, some types of X where there arguably is (or should be) an implication of choice. I’m thinking of Richard Dawkins’s complaint about referring to “Christian children” or “Muslim children” as being as ridiculous as a “monetarist child.”
But then, that’s just it, isn’t it? The underlying belief is that there is no biological sex at all, only gender, which is a choice. Except when it isn’t, of course. It’s a choice when protesting that “you can’t say I’m female, because I didn’t choose to be female.” but it’s not a choice when complaining that “I can’t just choose to be female, that’s not who I am.”
Comments
2 responses to “Guest post: It’s a choice except when it isn’t”
It’s agood thing they don’t have to meet the arbitrary and capricious burden of proof and standards of evidence they impose on their critics. I guess if you make and enforce the rules, you get to exempt yourself from them.
Choosing at birth makes perfect sense if there can be such a thing as a female penis, or a male vagina. It’s just that newborns haven’t had time to consider yet what gender they identify with. Perhaps we should institute a “gendering day” when a child has reached a certain age and can announce their gender. Think of all the presents! (I would suggest a gift certificate though, in case the child has chosen a different gender than you guessed.)