TERFs crash London Pride

[theprestige]

Essentially? The marketplace of ideas. Concepts which can only survive unopposed just... aren't worth factoring into the debate.

Is this some perfect exact science? No but it works more often than not.

Does it work, though? Universities are supposed to be the marketplace of ideas. Post-graduate life is about applying the ideas you've chosen in that marketplace.

The risk is that Universities become a safe haven for ideas that cannot survive unopposed, and that graduates carry forward into their community a need to make the community more like the University. Instead of discarding bad ideas on contact with the "real world", making that world more tolerant of those bad ideas. Academia isn't flooding society with open radfems, but it seems pretty clear that the Overton window is shifting in that direction.

 

[3point14]

I'm utterly bewildered that so many people get so hung up on the sexuality of others.

If you don't want to sleep with them, why do you care?

 

[Butter!]

My ultimate point was, some of the "post-fact" discussion popping up surrounding gender, extra genders, gender roles, gender fluidity, and all the rest are valid topics for conversation. Some of it is a bit silly, and people shouldn't be afraid to point that out or suggest it. Some anti-trans sites have rolled the two subjects together, however, making it difficult to have the conversation without also seeming to be criticizing transgender individuals.

I don't know what the solution is. Everyone being mad on the internet is not likely to be it, though.

 

[JoeMorgue]

The risk is that Universities become a safe haven for ideas that cannot survive unopposed, and that graduates carry forward into their community a need to make the community more like the University.

I guess I just see it as a self correcting problem. Even these days where tribalism and "get comfortable in your bubble"ism is easier than ever it's still functionally impossible to not have to deal with the real world.

 

[theprestige]

I'm utterly bewildered that so many people get so hung up on the sexuality of others.

If you don't want to sleep with them, why do you care?

There's more to it than that. Consider this scenario:

I'm a man that likes regular sessions of hetero sex. Missionary position preferred, but I don't mind experimenting. Strictly as a man-and-woman arrangement, though, okay?

Then a man propositions me for some hetero sex. I quite reasonably decline, on the grounds that sex between two men isn't actually hetero. The man says that he identifies as a woman, so what's the problem? I tell him the problem is that I don't identify him as a woman. He says I'm a transphobic bigot. And then he goes on to start a national advocacy campaign to make sure my attitude is shamed and shunned. Pretty soon, saying transwomen don't excite me becomes a hate crime. I say it out loud, my business gets boycotted, I get fired from my job, the police come around...

 

[zooterkin]

There's more to it than that. Consider this scenario:

I'm a man that likes regular sessions of hetero sex. Missionary position preferred, but I don't mind experimenting. Strictly as a man-and-woman arrangement, though, okay?

Then a man propositions me for some hetero sex. I quite reasonably decline, on the grounds that sex between two men isn't actually hetero.

Why do you need to give a reason, beyond, "I don't want to" ?

 

[3point14]

There's more to it than that. Consider this scenario:

I'm a man that likes regular sessions of hetero sex. Missionary position preferred, but I don't mind experimenting. Strictly as a man-and-woman arrangement, though, okay?

Then a man propositions me for some hetero sex. I quite reasonably decline, on the grounds that sex between two men isn't actually hetero. The man says that he identifies as a woman, so what's the problem? I tell him the problem is that I don't identify him as a woman. He says me I'm a transphobic bigot. And then he goes on to start a national advocacy campaign to make sure my attitude is shamed and shunned. Pretty soon, saying transwomen don't excite me becomes a hate crime. I say it out loud, my business gets boycotted, I get fired from my job, the police come around...

This just falls into the 'someone who doesn't want t sleep with you' category.

Nobody actually needs to give a reason for 'no'. "No, I don't want to sleep with you" is all that's required.


Anyone who goes off on a full on political campaign because someone told them 'no', needs to get over themselves, pronto.


I actually think my statement still stands. Within your scenario, it doesn't matter what your genitals and sexual orientation are. All that matters is that you don't want to sleep with the person asking. They just need to move on without being an arse about it. It's not your sexuality they're railing against, they're clearly just **** at dealing with rejection.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Why do you need to give a reason, beyond, "I don't want to" ?

Because we will reach a point in the future where some, maybe not a majority or even a huge minority but enough for it to not be dismissed as statistically meaningless, will consider such a view a form of bigotry.

Given the language and arguments being used I feel it very likely that the idea that not sleeping with someone because of their physical gender will be seen by some as akin to not sleeping with someone because they are a different race.

 

[3point14]

Because we will reach a point in the future where some, maybe not a majority or even a huge minority but enough for it to not be dismissed as statistically meaningless, will consider such a view a form of bigotry.

I really don't think so. I think there are a vanishingly small number of people who would have this attitude. They just make up a greater percentage of twitter (spit) twits than they do of the general public.

Essentially, they are empty vessels making a lot of noise. Most people of non-conventional sexuality are probably extremely embarrassed by them.

 

[Butter!]

When people graciously accept the "no," everything is peachy. A lot of people don't, though, especially drunk people. I've had to give "reasons" more times than I cared to in the past, in hopes of avoiding a tense scene. (I'm referring to responses to hetero men, however. I've never been hit on by a transperson, at least, not to my knowledge.)

The best reaction I ever got to a polite refusal was this guy at my friend's birthday party. We'd been chatting some, he got a bit drunker and more emboldened, came back over and started standing closer, saying he'd like to get to know me better, finally just flat-out propositioned me.

I sort of shuffled away and said something like, "Oh, I've really enjoyed our conversation, but I'm really not looking for anything like that right now. I'm sorry if I gave you the wrong idea, I didn't mean to." Mincing and hemming and hawwing.

And this guy, bless him, he just cheerfully said, "Okay! No problem. Dude's gotta try." And didn't act weird at all after that. Everyone should be more like that random drunk guy at my friend's birthday party.

 

[Horatius]

Then a man propositions me for some hetero sex. I quite reasonably decline, on the grounds that sex between two men isn't actually hetero. The man says that he identifies as a woman, so what's the problem? I tell him the problem is that I don't identify him as a woman. He says I'm a transphobic bigot. And then he goes on to start a national advocacy campaign to make sure my attitude is shamed and shunned. Pretty soon, saying transwomen don't excite me becomes a hate crime. I say it out loud, my business gets boycotted, I get fired from my job, the police come around...

Why do you need to give a reason, beyond, "I don't want to" ?

And while not just saying "No", but instead engaging in a complicated debate on the issue, he makes at least one unfounded generalization, and one actually bigoted comment.

Just because you don't consider this to be "heterosexual sex" doesn't mean that no one ever considers it to be so. By making this first point, you basically tell this person that they will never, ever have the type of sex they desire, whether it's with you or anyone else. Not only is this dismissive of the transwoman in question, it's dismissive of all the cismen who aren't you, who might consider having sex with them.

And of course, "I don't identify him as a woman" goes straight to the heart of transphobia, so maybe they should start a national campaign to shame you.

And you could have avoided it all by just saying "You're not my type". I've heard that my whole life, and haven't started a national shaming movement yet.

And these people aren't even just getting into a debate with individual transwomen on these issues, they're going out of their way to build websites and stage public protests just to make sure that absolutely everyone knows they don't want to have sex with transwomen. That goes so far beyond "just not my type" that it's simply ridiculous to try to defend them using that argument.

I mean, how are they fundamentally different from some frat bro wearing a "No Fat Chicks" shirt?

 

[pharphis]

disagreeing with someone's label != transphobia

 

[Horatius]

disagreeing with someone's label != transphobia

As I said, it goes to the heart of it. "You're not a woman/man" is the fundamental basis for all the anti-trans bigotry. Disagree with that all you like, but you're still wrong.

"Why are you in this bathroom? You're not a woman/man!"
"Why are you in girl/boy scouts? You're not a woman/man!"
"Why are you coaching girls/boys? You're not a woman/man!"
"Why are you attending this bridal shower/bachelor party? You're not a woman/man!"
"Why are you wearing a dress/suit and tie? You're not a woman/man!"

"Why am I beating the crap out of you? You're not a woman/man!"

 

[3point14]

As I said, it goes to the heart of it. "You're not a woman/man" is the fundamental basis for all the anti-trans bigotry. Disagree with that all you like, but you're still wrong.

"Why are you in this bathroom? You're not a woman/man!"

Don't care.

"Why are you in girl/boy scouts? You're not a woman/man!"

Don't care

"Why are you coaching girls/boys? You're not a woman/man!"

Don't care

"Why are you attending this bridal shower/bachelor party? You're not a woman/man!"

Don't care

"Why are you wearing a dress/suit and tie? You're not a woman/man!"

Don't care

"Why am I beating the crap out of you? You're not a woman/man!"

This one doesn't match the others. All of the previous ones really are matters of no or little note to me. People other than me are free to define their own sexuality as they like. It gives them no claim on my sexuality at all.

Someone else can define themselves as whatever they like, however, if they want me to sleep with them, then, in that one instance, I get to decide what sex/gender you are and, if it doesn't match mine then I don't care what you call yourself, you're not getting me into bed.

Every single other instance - Don't care.

 

[Horatius]

Someone else can define themselves as whatever they like, however, if they want me to sleep with them, then, in that one instance, I get to decide what sex/gender you are and, if it doesn't match mine then I don't care what you call yourself, you're not getting me into bed.

No, you get to decide if you have sex with them.

That's an important distinction.

Because it's also the choice you get to make for everyone else who asks you to have sex. No one will force you to have sex with transwomen, just like they won't force you to have sex with cismen, short people, tall people, Catholics, Methodists, gingers, Republicans, or people who hang their toilet paper the wrong way. You literally never have to have sex with anyone you don't want to, and we'll arrest anyone who tries to force you to do that.

So why make such a big issue out of this one time you don't want to have sex with someone? Why make it all about denying their gender identity? Because ultimately, that's what you do care about, it seems.

 

[The Norseman]

But why not have a shave? Wear a more "feminine" suit or something? I don't know. Anything.

FWIW, there's a great youtoober out there by the name ContraPoints and I almost linked a particularly good video she makes about being a transwoman and kind of what the experience is like. Not only does she dismantle the 'autogynephilia' nonsense but takes on other difficult topics such as fascism as well (which is how I ran across her channel actually).

My point here is she also makes a comment about the "hairy men with genitals flopping about" BS that inevitably makes the rounds. Now salt = grain and all that... she said that she and every transwoman she knows are way more into body-hair removal than even the cis-women she knows and considers the "hairy man" line to be nothing more than negative propaganda and scare-tactics.

I'm utterly bewildered that so many people get so hung up on the sexuality of others.

If you don't want to sleep with them, why do you care?

Don't care.
Don't care
Don't care
Don't care
Don't care
This one doesn't match the others. All of the previous ones really are matters of no or little note to me. People other than me are free to define their own sexuality as they like. It gives them no claim on my sexuality at all.

Someone else can define themselves as whatever they like, however, if they want me to sleep with them, then, in that one instance, I get to decide what sex/gender you are and, if it doesn't match mine then I don't care what you call yourself, you're not getting me into bed.

Every single other instance - Don't care.

Every single other instance deals with society in general and not you personally. So... great! You're completely and unashamedly selfish when it comes to transgender issues! Thanks for the input! We'll take it from here, okay? Those of us who do care about how society treats one another, that is.

 

[3point14]

No, you get to decide if you have sex with them.

That's an important distinction.

I really don't think it is. As I say, in every other area, I'll identify anyone as whatever gender they want to be identified as but, if someone wants to sleep with me and they're physically a man, then that's why I don't want to sleep with them. The bottom line is that I've not yet met a man I fancied. As I say, when the person concerned wants their sexuality to interact with mine then part of my assessment is what gender I consider them to be.

I suppose I could lie, but I prefer not to do that.

Because it's also the choice you get to make for everyone else who asks you to have sex. No one will force you to have sex with transwomen, just like they won't force you to have sex with cismen, short people, tall people, Catholics, Methodists, gingers, Republicans, or people who hang their toilet paper the wrong way. You literally never have to have sex with anyone you don't want to, and we'll arrest anyone who tries to force you to do that.

So why make such a big issue out of this one time you don't want to have sex with someone? Why make it all about denying their gender identity? Because ultimately, that's what you do care about, it seems.

Oh, well, if they didn't ask, I wouldn't tell them, I'd just say no. But if they ask then, in not unkind language, I'll tell them.

"Look, I'm sorry, Doris, I now you really like me and I know you identify as a woman but you have a cock bigger than mine, I just don't see you as a woman" is valid. It's only talking about my perception.

As I say, in any other area, that doesn't interact with my sexuality, I, rightly, don't get a say. In this one, single instance, I do.

 

[3point14]

FWIW, there's a great youtoober out there by the name ContraPoints and I almost linked a particularly good video she makes about being a transwoman and kind of what the experience is like. Not only does she dismantle the 'autogynephilia' nonsense but takes on other difficult topics such as fascism as well (which is how I ran across her channel actually).

My point here is she also makes a comment about the "hairy men with genitals flopping about" BS that inevitably makes the rounds. Now salt = grain and all that... she said that she and every transwoman she knows are way more into body-hair removal than even the cis-women she knows and considers the "hairy man" line to be nothing more than negative propaganda and scare-tactics.





Every single other instance deals with society in general and not you personally. So... great! You're completely and unashamedly selfish when it comes to transgender issues! Thanks for the input! We'll take it from here, okay? Those of us who do care about how society treats one another, that is.

I think you may have wildly misread my point. I thank you for your kind invitation not to contribute any further, but you don't get to make that decision for me, sorry.

 

[Butter!]

FWIW, there's a great youtoober out there by the name ContraPoints and I almost linked a particularly good video she makes about being a transwoman and kind of what the experience is like. Not only does she dismantle the 'autogynephilia' nonsense but takes on other difficult topics such as fascism as well (which is how I ran across her channel actually).

My point here is she also makes a comment about the "hairy men with genitals flopping about" BS that inevitably makes the rounds. Now salt = grain and all that... she said that she and every transwoman she knows are way more into body-hair removal than even the cis-women she knows and considers the "hairy man" line to be nothing more than negative propaganda and scare-tactics.

That's been my experience too, with talking to transwomen, and that's precisely what makes me wonder if Danielle Muskato is actually a deep-cover troll.

 

[Horatius]

Oh, well, if they didn't ask, I wouldn't tell them, I'd just say no. But if they ask then, in not unkind language, I'll tell them.

"Look, I'm sorry, Doris, I now you really like me and I know you identify as a woman but you have a cock bigger than mine, I just don't see you as a woman" is valid. It's only talking about my perception.

As I say, in any other area, that doesn't interact with my sexuality, I, rightly, don't get a say. In this one, single instance, I do.

So, why not just stick with that? Why get into the whole "you're not a woman" issue at all? There's literally no debating over the existence or not of the problematic cock, so why expand the discussion any further than that indisputable fact?

"Sorry babe, but I don't like cocks, not your fault!" Could be used by you, in both this case and if a gay man propositions you, and if a lesbian is propositioned by a transwoman. It gets you off the hook sexually, while not demeaning the transperson's whole existence. If you really "don't care" about it in any other case, why not just do it this way in this case?