They do tend to be aligned in most cases.
To echo what
@LeMansAid said, I suspect a lot of people here would agree with you on that. In fact they're so closely aligned to the point where there have been multiple pages in thread based on misunderstandings about what people are saying versus what they're indending to say.
Those 'trans activists' disagree with Matt Walsh's definition of a woman, but not because they are denying "biological reality". They disagree because they view the word 'woman' in the context of gender, and not sex.
If you use sex as the signifier for day-to-day life, for instance:
- Which bathroom do I use?
- Do I use Mr or Miss if I'm asking my teacher something?
- If I'm talking to someone else about Scott, do I say "he" or "she"?
Then you'll have a very difficult time trying to prove it and you might get it wrong sometimes.
Let's go back to those photos. I asked you 'what bathroom and pronouns would these people use', and you responded 'Male' to each of them.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding of your response is that you are saying these men are all biologically male, and if you were talking about one of them, you would use the term "he".
This is a rugby player named Ilona Maher.
She was born female, and her identiy is 'woman'.
This is a body builder named Shaun Stinson.
He was born female, but his gender identity is 'man'.
This is LaRae Perkins.
She was born female,
and her gender is a woman. She has a condition called PCOS (which can only happen in those born female) which can cause facial hair growth.
The point I hope you can get from that little exercise is understanding why many people will prioritise gender over sex when it comes to day-to-day interactions.
And unless you're a doctor, or about to (consentually) undress someone for some fun adult sleepovers, I would say sex is irelevant to the conversation.
---
@LeMansAid I wouldn’t say that traits or roles are gender-specific, but rather that certain traits can be
gendered (i.e. associated closely with a particular gender).
That’s not inherently a bad thing, in my opinion. The real issue arises when people are boxed into those traits or roles, or restricted from them, because of their gender.
One example would be facial hair -- it's almost universally a trait associated with masculinity. That doesn't mean that it's specific to men (see photo above.
It’s not sexist to point out that a mechanic is a typically masculine profession. It
would be sexist if someone refused to let a mechanic do her job because her name tag says "Lisa" on it, or if she was passed over for a promotion for the same reason.
Similarly, I wouldn’t call it problematic to say that wearing dresses and heels is often seen as a feminine presentation in many cultures. But if Brian harassed for wearing a fabulous dress with matching heels (💅) then that's bad (and while not necessarily sexist it, I hope my point still stands
).
Those associations are also cultural. I can't think of an example specifically for gender right now, but for Western cultures, men holding hands is often read as romantic or “gay,” but it's not seen as such in some parts of South Asia (and the Middle East, I think?). The issue isn't the action, or the fact that the issue might be interpreted in a certain way, but the issue is that
others judge it because of what that interpretation means.
Ultimately, I don't think that the distinction arose from specifically trying to counter conservative sexism, nor is it problematic to describe things we see in society as somewhat gendered.
I wanted to try and get somewhere without jumping to conclusions based on misunderstanding. There's a lot of that when it comes to anything sociocultural, especially when the definitions can be so muddled.
