Did you miss my entire comment?! Seriously, this is getting ridiculous. You're dodging almost everything I write, presumably because you can't refute the points I'm making, and then trying to insult my intelligence in lieu of an argument (pro-tip, I’m not insecure about my intelligence. Your attempts to attack it just make you seem petty).
Yes, while women are sometimes incorrectly referred to as “girls”, we’re still very clear on what the difference between an adult and a child is. We’ve already covered this point when we talked about an adoptive mother vs a biological mother. A little linguistic sloppiness is normal and unproblematic, as long as we don’t lose track of the conceptual moorings that keep us based in reality.
For example, there was a guy not so long ago (https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/pensioner-who-identifies-as-49-wants-age-legally-changed-to-improve-chances-on-tinder-a3984086.html) who wanted to have his date of birth changed on his birth certificate so that he could pretend to be 20 years younger and thereby attract younger women on Tinder. Now he’s allowed to say that he’s “young at heart” or “has a young soul” or even that he “feels like he’s still 49.” But saying he is 49 when he’s 69 is a lie. As I said what feels like a million years ago now, sometimes feelings have to give way to objective reality.
So instead of telling me I'm being "childish and unimaginative," (your imagination is presumably how you were duped by Mormonism) how about actually refuting my points? It should be easy given that I'm such a dullard, right? At least explain how, by your definition of woman, you would keep me out of a female space.
I"m talking about real world issues, and you counter with semiotics and insults. I've let you get away with ducking my points over and over again in this conversation, while actually addressing yours, but this is dumb. Either explain why you think I'm wrong, while addressing the points I’m making, or stop wasting both of our time.
And no. We designed our society (or at least the parts of it that are relevant to this discussion) around sex not gender. And for good reason.
In sport, gendered behaviour has nothing to do with athletic performance. There are plenty of "masculine" looking female athletes, and zero female athletes whose world record performances exceed their male counterparts. (actually I think there may be one exception to this in ultra long distance swimming but regardless, the point holds).
Gendered behaviour has nothing to do with sexual assault in prisons. Males, however effeminate, are still more sexually aggressive, stronger, and have penises with which they can have sex with an unwilling or even unconscious victim.
The penis and sexual aggression part is also why we have separate male and female changing rooms. Again, the links I referenced in my previous comment give examples of all this.
One space I can think of where we segregate by gender instead of sex is bathrooms. And I've even written an article in which I argue that trans people should use the bathroom of the gender they identify as. But bathrooms and changing rooms and rape crisis centres and prisons are different spaces where the people who use them have different needs and expectations of safety/privacy.
