Trans Women are not Women

[ponderingturtle]

This smacks of 'they have gone too far, because i don't agree with them now'

Which is why a the only way to stop this is a reverse slippery slope, we need to take these so called rights away from the gays and the trans will learn to shut up.

 

[Meadmaker]

Yeah and homophobes said THE exact same thing when same-sex marriages were legally recognized. "Help help I'm being repressed! I'm a victim! My narrow, bigoted conception of what marriage is about isn't legally valid anymore! Our rights are being stolen!".

Did they actually say that?

I hesitate to risk a detail, but this gets brought up a lot, and not only do I think the situations are not comparable, but I think your description of the other situation isn't even accurate.

 

[Francesca R]

Do it isn't about [ . . . ]

I think whatever you use to respond to posts in threads kinda exploded or did something weird since I recognise none of this as very linked to what you quoted from me.

Bye

 

[Rolfe]

Anyone transitioning someone who wasnt trans would surely be struck off?

No. First there's no test to determine whether someone who says they feel like the opposite sex is "really trans" or not. Second, the mantra is that the person who says they feel like the opposite sex must not simply be believed without question or challenge, but must be positively "affirmed" and encouraged in that belief. Third, even the suggestion of counselling aimed at getting to the bottom of the gender dysphoria to try to figure out what's causing it and if there's any way the person (often a child) can be reconciled to the body they have has been labelled "conversion therapy" and outlawed as unethical. Medical professionals are being threatened with being struck off if they don't unquestioningly go along with hormones and surgery for gender-confused children for example.

I don't know if I suggested you watch this film, but watch this film. It could be your own daughter. It is the daughter of a friend of mine, and two more girls who live locally. Most people looking on see confused, unhappy girls, but no professional will dare try to put the brakes on

The Trans Train.

 

[Rolfe]

So the proper solution would be to have no segregation on bathrooms at all, right? and who is it that is going to oppose that?

Far more people than you realise. Most women, for a start, who need women-only spaces to deal with a lot of stuff like periods going wrong, even miscarriages. The ladies' room in the pub is the traditional refuge for the girl being importuned by a problematic male, where she can both get away and if necessary recruit assistance. Mothers with young babies often need to pee with the stall door open so they can still watch the baby if the pram won't fit inside the stall.

I was in a long conversation about this in a people carrier stuck behind a road closure on the A9 yesterday. After trying to figure out whether we could help the family with the ROGD daughter the subject got on to public lavatories. The only man in the car piped up that he really really didn't want to go to the bathroom with women present either. In particular many men recoil at the very idea of using a urinal with women in the room.

Pro tip. Don't give away other people's rights without talking to them about it. And then just don't do it.

 

[Rolfe]

Now let's look at the other scenario, bathrooms. Why do we separate bathrooms by gender? And that's not rhetorical. Why?

We don't separate bathrooms by gender. That is exactly what the trans lobby wants and what most people are strongly opposed to.

We separate bathrooms by sex.

 

[Rolfe]

Back on the sports issue.

 

[Lithrael]

There’s a mix in here (as always) of genuine issues, iffy issues, and nasty transphobic ****. Even from the same posters sometimes! For example, some of Rolfe’s posts are completely reasonable.

But then we have “People are wondering if their real agenda is to get the age of consent lowered for sexual acts,” “Did you hear they really want to grow breasts just so they can get a mastectomy,” “my god they’re mutilating little girls” (about young transmen’s donor tissue for those who want to try for something manly looking for their shorts), the folks who constantly use the coined term “autogynephile” as though it’s broadly interchangeable with transgender (I can see the argument for it with a few high profile early SRS cases), those who insist that therapists and doctors are telling people they can seamlessly switch sex organs and misrepresent the best and worst case scenarios of transition to their clients/patients...

The sports thing is going to be one place where I think we’re just going to have to figure out some rule that lets trans people play but not win. That’s going to seem unfair to some but it’s no hill to die on. Plenty of trans folks seem to agree that on balance transwomen really ought to opt out of top tier women’s competitions just out of being considerate. And yeah probably Michael Phelps should opt out of the men’s too for the same reasons.

But the stuff like “I was a rugged little girl and if I had lived in times like these I worry my valued femininity would have been conned away from me” like come on. Healthy rugged little girls don’t want to be boys. They just want to get the boy perks. As a little rugged girl I knew perfectly well I didn’t have to be a boy to use the camp ax, no matter how many people said so. Doing a gender transition to get to use the camp ax is like telling your parents you ate lye to get a free lollipop (you see, they’ll take you to the hospital and get your stomach pumped, and afterwards the staff will give you a lollipop for your trouble, like in Shel Silverstein’s ABZ). Proper, friendly, not-insane counseling sorts this stuff out pretty well IMO. Some people insist that this is not happening, that kids are being cajoled into it or rubber-stamped (like what happened with ADD meds) and I agree that if idiot practitioners are mis-serving these people in this way, it needs to be addressed (like what happened with ADD meds). But whenever I have looked into it it’s difficult to see how much of a problem we have, over the pearl clutching propaganda.

If you are confused about other people’s ideas about what gender and gender identity really are and what they’re for I don’t blame you, it is a mess, because before it was stupid and now we’re messing with it to see what shakes out. It’s only confusing because we’re trying to accommodate several paradigms at once, and we’re doing that because of all the people currently attached to them, each with x amount of flexibility they’re willing to put up with.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Far more people than you realise. Most women, for a start, who need women-only spaces to deal with a lot of stuff like periods going wrong, even miscarriages. The ladies' room in the pub is the traditional refuge for the girl being importuned by a problematic male, where she can both get away and if necessary recruit assistance. Mothers with young babies often need to pee with the stall door open so they can still watch the baby if the pram won't fit inside the stall.

I was in a long conversation about this in a people carrier stuck behind a road closure on the A9 yesterday. After trying to figure out whether we could help the family with the ROGD daughter the subject got on to public lavatories. The only man in the car piped up that he really really didn't want to go to the bathroom with women present either. In particular many men recoil at the very idea of using a urinal with women in the room.

Pro tip. Don't give away other people's rights without talking to them about it. And then just don't do it.

I think you have made my point for me, if somewhat unwittingly.

The reason for bathroom segregation is that people apparently want it, but not necessarily the same people who want unsegragated toys or trans access to bathrooms of their choice.

There is no contradiction there.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Sorta. It's more complicated then that. Let me explain, since you seem to be the only one from your POV who's interested in a dialogue more nuanced then screaming "BIGOT" at people.

I'm not demanding some sort of pure ideological purity across the board, Bob has pretty well immunized me against ever considering that a good thing.

But we can't take old, outmoded standards (which I think we're all on the same page as considering traditional gender roles being) and replace them with standards that simply don't work and "Just whatever the disenfranchised group in questions wants right now" is a standard that doesn't work.

And looking at the hows and whys for differing applications of standards is not a bad or evil thing.

Why is... telling a boy he has to play with actions figures and girl she has to play with dolls bad? Because it puts roles and expectations on them that don't serve a purpose.

Now why doesn't just going "It doesn't matter, you can still choose to play with whatever you want, I mean it's not like there is a law or something" not work in this case? Because we understand that expectations don't have to absolute and written in stone to have an effect. The standards has to be gone, not just there but only halfway enforced, for us to meet our goals.

Now let's look at the other scenario, bathrooms. Why do we separate bathrooms by gender? And that's not rhetorical. Why?

If you say it's because of tradition and because of personal comfort, that brings up.... so many problems I can't even address them all.

https://www.google.com/amp/time.com/4337761/history-sex-segregated-bathrooms/?amp=true

This article suggests that segregated bathrooms were first introduced because women were considered to need to be shielded from the big bad world of men. Its a throwback to a time when women were considered inferior and a vestige of sexism. Apparently.

 

[Belz...]

Yeah and homophobes said THE exact same thing when same-sex marriages were legally recognized.

Who cares? You're still dismissing the argument, not on its own merits but on whether someone you consider despicable used that argument.

You can keep crying about your victimhood until the cows come but it won't do you any good in the end.

You know who else used that argument? Homophobes.

 

[Belz...]

Isn't it a lovely day when TERF's and other types of bigots get together and just collectively stroke each-other's egos? Homophobes, racists, transphobes all sure do tend to come together in the end don't they?

Speaking of stroking one's ego, how superior to the rest of us do you feel after typing that?

 

[Meadmaker]

You know who else used that argument? Homophobes.

 

[JoeMorgue]

https://www.google.com/amp/time.com/4337761/history-sex-segregated-bathrooms/?amp=true

This article suggests that segregated bathrooms were first introduced because women were considered to need to be shielded from the big bad world of men. Its a throwback to a time when women were considered inferior and a vestige of sexism. Apparently.

Well let's unpack that then.

If "women" deserve a... gah (I don't want to say "Safe Space" because of how that term has evolved but something in that ballpark without the baggage, fair enough?) to do private bodily functions the hows and why of that can be looked at.

Is it about being around people who simply... perform the functions differently from you? That raises question.

Is it about being around people who might find you sexually attractive or arousing when you are in a state of privacy? That... raises the same questions.

If a woman doesn't want a penis around her when she's going to the bathroom, regardless of the whys, that.... raises questions.

Again I'm not demanding some Bob level of across the board "You're not ideologically pure enough until your personal philosophy is so far removed from reality it's self destructive" here, but... stuff still has to make sense.

 

[Francesca R]

This article suggests that segregated bathrooms were first introduced because women were considered to need to be shielded from the big bad world of men. Its a throwback to a time when women were considered inferior and a vestige of sexism. Apparently.

Oh so every biological male who gains access to female only toilets is just liberating us a little bit more each time?

Gee thanks / what on earth were we thinking.

 

[Belz...]

No this appears backwards. Transwomen are transwomen regardless of any transition. That's one of a number of possible approaches to dealing with being a transwoman.

You asked me a question, and I answered using the definitions I found and a reasoning that made sense to me.

If you want to define "trans woman" as someone who identifies as a woman, whatever that means, then the term "transition" ceases to mean anything. They don't "transition" to anything; they alter their bodies to match their identity.

 

[Belz...]

Are you serious? There is a whole host of services and treatments which physicians provide to ensure the treatments are appropriate. You dont just rock up at thre hospital say i am a woman three times and a surgeon lops your bits off.

Yeah but in the end the doctor relies on the patient's report. There's nothing they can examine with a microscope that'll tell them if you're trans, is there?

 

[Meadmaker]

Are you serious? There is a whole host of services and treatments which physicians provide to ensure the treatments are appropriate. You dont just rock up at thre hospital say i am a woman three times and a surgeon lops your bits off.

This kind of nonsense isn't helpful or useful if you want a proper discussion in the topic.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment/

You might be laboring under a very nimportant misconception. In modern parlance a transgender person need not alter themselves either chemically or physically. No hormones. No surgery. No medical evaluation. If a male states that he identifies as a woman, then "she" is a woman.

And anyone who disagrees is a bigot.

At least, that's the party line among trans rights activists.

 

[JoeMorgue]

If you want to define "trans woman" as someone who identifies as a woman, whatever that means, then the term "transition" ceases to mean anything. They don't "transition" to anything; they alter their bodies to match their identity.

And again as I keep pointing out this is the loop we're stuck in, can't get out of, and are called bigots for just noticing it exists.

I meet a person who is biologically X. Upon talking I learn that this person is biologically X but identifies as Y. Okay for this concept to mean anything I now have to treat or at the very least conceptualize this person differently. Something has to change of this entire thing is a charade, a gussied up distinction without difference.

So what changes? What? I meet this person who is biologically an X, I now know they are an X who identifies as a Y? What changes. Something has to change.

There has to be a variable here. Someone define that variable. I don't care what it is, just for the sake of argument we all have to agree there has to be one there.

Okay so now we have that variable. And here's the circles tries to square itself and fails.

That same variable, has to exist between biological X and biological Y to make any sense.

If a person who is biological X but identifies as a Y is a meaningful distinction that we can acknowledge at all from a biological X who identifies as an X... we have to, have to, have to, can't weasel out of it, can't "oh but it's complicated..." out of it, have to, have to, have to, applies that same meaningful distinction to the biological X and Y. Period. End of debate.

Let's look at it this way. Remember crossdressing? Used be a thing, probably still is in some fashion. It's when one sex dresses in clothing of the other sex. For that concept to mean anything you have think that certain clothing is only for one of the sexes. You have to have a standard for the idea of subverting the standard to make any sense.

Okay but what if you don't think that? What if you don't think certain clothing should only be worn by certain sexes? Does that mean you are "denying that crossdressers exist?" Does that mean you hate them or fear them? Of course not, that's silly.

That's all this is, just applied

I don't have a concept of "trans" gender because I don't apply any differences to the gender that aren't things that are pure base biology that you just can't change. Since I don't treat men and women different, I don't have anywhere to go when I'm told I have to, under threat of being called a bigot, treat a man with a penis and man with a penis who identifies as a woman differently.

I don't have unreasonable expectations for the sexes or genders, so I can't pat anyone on the back for subverting them. Telling me "I'm a man who identifies as a woman" hits me on the exact same level as "I'm a man who is sexually attracted to other men" or "I'm a man who wants to wear a dress." Since I don't think being attracted to men or wearing a dress "belong" to women as a group, I've got nothing to change about my mentality concerning you as a person.

Since I don't treat men and women differently (in the ways, on the level, and within the context we're talking here) when someone says "I'm a man who identifies as a woman" it's the same thing, I've got nothing to change about how I view the person.

All the people bending over backwards to play "More Progressive then Thou" about how accepting you are of Trans people are the one perpetuating gender stereotypes, even if purely conceptually. Everytime you change how you look at a person because they tell you they "identify as an X" you are putting a stereotype on X.

I'm not the one trying to create and sustain a paradox where a man and a man who identifies as a woman are different but... men and women aren't different. That's insane.

I'm not stupid. I know how this probably happened. The battle to get all these stupid, old, outmoded expectations that have been put on the sexes taken away has been stalled by the same old farts who have ruined everything since time immemorial as someone put it earlier in the thread we've adopted a "throw everything against the wall and see what sticks" tactic to the whole thing, which is understandable and "Literally identify as the other gender as a way to get out of the expectations on my gender" is one of the things we've thrown against the wall.

 

[ponderingturtle]

And anyone who disagrees is a bigot.

Yet anyone who disagrees with same sex marriage or the decriminalizing of homosexual sex is a bigot for some weird reason. I mean look at how they treated the Sultan of Burnei.

It is kind of hard to disagree with the existence of someone and not be seen as a bigot not matter how much that bugs you. But I guess medical privacy/autonomy is something only some people are entitled to.