Cont: Trans Women are not Women II: The Bath Of Khan

[d4m10n]

I was going off this (pdf)

I don't believe the Conway paper implies what you think it does.

In the United States there are varying estimates of the prevalence of crossdressing. Most conservative estimates are in the range of 2% to 5% of all adult males engage in routine crossdressing (1:50 to 1:20). These are people who crossdress part-time either privately at home, or in private CD clubs, and who find great satisfaction in this practice. In a majority of these cases there is mainly a male fetishistic motivation for the crossdressing. However, in a moderate fraction (1/3rd?) it mainly provides an outlet for mild to moderate to strong transgender feelings.

So far as I can tell, the author doesn't seem ready to draw a bright line between crossdressing behaviour and transgender identity, but let's put that aside for now. What I was half-joking about upthread was the process of "gender expression," which is how you present yourself to the world. The practice of crossdressing privately for the sake of fetishistic satisfaction doesn't really come into it.

 

[p0lka]

Well, there's the biological differences, which means that on average a man is going to have more size, mass, and strength with which to resist and drive off a bully. So that role of physical protector is going to end up being a male role, and the virtues of that role are going to be seen as masculine virtues. Not that women can't be big and strong, or small and strong, or small and fierce, etc. But we're talking about social norms and expectations evolving organically over (tens of) thousands of years, in feedback loops with biological differences on average.

---

But whatever. How about a much more modern gender role, p0lka? How do you feel about gender roles like "professional women's basketball player" or "women's world cup soccer forward"?

As I have said previously..

I'm perfectly ok with treating a transwoman as a woman and a transman as a man, (I don't treat males and females differently anyway, so makes no odds to me), I'll treat people how they wish to be treated as I like seeing smiles on peoples faces, define yourself and I will just go along with it to make you ok.

But I am suspending reality as I do so.

In terms of sporting events, I think the decision of who gets to compete should be based on reality. What's gender got to do with it.

 

[TomB]

So far as I can tell, the author doesn't seem ready to draw a bright line between crossdressing behaviour and transgender identity, but let's put that aside for now.

This line from your quote seems to indicate that they are not the same thing:

In a majority of these cases there is mainly a male fetishistic motivation for the crossdressing. However, in a moderate fraction (1/3rd?) it mainly provides an outlet for mild to moderate to strong transgender feelings.

It appears that crossdressing is, for lack of a better word, a symptom that can have multiple causes.

One cause is fetishistic. Another cause would be transgender feelings (which I associate with dysphoria).

 

[d4m10n]

One cause is fetishistic. Another cause would be transgender feelings (which I associate with dysphoria).

Right, but the author qualifies the distinction with "mainly" both times. Also, search upthread for Rolfe's posts on the prevalence of autogynephelia among those with transgender feelings. Maybe these two mechanisms really are distinct, but we'd need further evidence.

 

[JihadJane]

As I have said previously..

(I don't treat males and females differently anyway, so makes no odds to me)

.

To know whether this is really true would require objective study of your behaviour. It cannot be ascertained subjectively.

 

[caveman1917]

I don't believe the Conway paper implies what you think it does.



So far as I can tell, the author doesn't seem ready to draw a bright line between crossdressing behaviour and transgender identity, but let's put that aside for now. What I was half-joking about upthread was the process of "gender expression," which is how you present yourself to the world. The practice of crossdressing privately for the sake of fetishistic satisfaction doesn't really come into it.

Yeah I suppose that's fair if we're only talking about private cross-dressing. Still, there are categories which would publicly cross-dress without being transgender - drag queens come to mind, or butch lesbians who wear masculine clothing.

 

[Steve]

To know whether this is really true would require objective study of your behaviour. It cannot be ascertained subjectively.

So therefore......?

Seems a reasonable position to me. Treat everyone the same. Keeps life simple. Are you suggesting that it should be controversial?

 

[d4m10n]

Seems a reasonable position to me. Treat everyone the same. Keeps life simple. Are you suggesting that it should be controversial?

Of course it should, unless you're happy to do away with all women's leagues / spaces / conferences / clothiers / changing rooms / etc.

 

[Steve]

Of course it should, unless you're happy to do away with all women's leagues / spaces / conferences / clothiers / changing rooms / etc.

Oh my! Treating people as equals is now controversial? I think not. Spending time deciding on individual classifications for everyone I meet before I can decide how to interact with them is not going to happen.

For myself I will not treat anyone differently because of their choice of physical activities, interests, clothes, or anything else you listed. People get the same level of respect from me unless they show that it is not warranted. Women, men, and anyone in between are free to associate, or not, with whomever they please. That has no effect on how treat them. I do not wish to do away with any of the things you listed.

 

[d4m10n]

I do not wish to do away with any of the things you listed.

All of those things require making exceptions to your idea that we should "Treat everyone the same." The idea of any women's only spaces requires that we turn men away.

 

[p0lka]

Seems a reasonable position to me. Treat everyone the same. Keeps life simple. Are you suggesting that it should be controversial?

Of course it should, unless you're happy to do away with all women's leagues / spaces / conferences / clothiers / changing rooms / etc.

you seem to have a habit of putting words into the mouths of people you are quoting, when they never actually said it.

the highlighted is just a big false dichotomy.

 

[d4m10n]

the highlighted is just a big false dichotomy.

Not at all. If we're unwilling to treat women differently from men, then there will be no spaces just for women. This is entirely straightforward.

 

[Steve]

Not at all. If we're unwilling to treat women differently from men, then there will be no spaces just for women. This is entirely straightforward.

Why do you persist in reading things into posts that are not there? Neither p0lka nor myself used the word “we”.

I have had no personal involvement with segregating women by any of the examples that you gave. I do not care at all what rooms a woman (or man or ?) chooses to use, what sports organizations a woman (or man or ?) chooses to belong to, or what conferences or meetings a woman (or man or ?) chooses to attend. None of these things will influence me to treat any person differently than any other.

 

[d4m10n]

I have had no personal involvement with segregating women by any of the examples that you gave.

So what you're saying is that you aren't in a position to personally deal with the tricky questions when it comes to existing social segregation by sex and/or gender, and that your position is quite relaxing, but no one else need follow your example.

Cool. [emoji41]

I may have been entirely mistaken to believe that you wrote "Treat everyone the same" in an attempt to persuade other people to take your approach.

 

[theprestige]

So what you're saying is that you aren't in a position to personally deal with the tricky questions when it comes to existing social segregation by sex and/or gender, and that your position is quite relaxing, but no one else need follow your example.

Cool. [emoji41]

I can pass as a white male. If what they say about white male privilege is true, I'd be an idiot to give it up, and a fool to cede an inch of ground to anyone who tried to take it from me.

 

[p0lka]

Not at all. If we're unwilling to treat women differently from men, then there will be no spaces just for women. This is entirely straightforward.

Well you could equally be unwilling to treat men differently from women, then there will be no spaces just for men. This is equally entirely straightforward.

 

[p0lka]

So what you're saying is...snip

oops, you did it again..

 

[d4m10n]

Well you could equally be unwilling to treat men differently from women, then there will be no spaces just for men. This is equally entirely straightforward.

Morally speaking, do you think it's okay to have separate sports leagues/conferences/changing rooms/festivals/etc. just for women? This is a yes/no question, but you are welcome to hit these issues one-by-one.

 

[theprestige]

Well you could equally be unwilling to treat men differently from women, then there will be no spaces just for men. This is equally entirely straightforward.

This is all straightforward, but your point is too twisty for me to follow. Are you saying there should be no spaces just for women?

Yes or no?

 

[Ziggurat]

Well you could equally be unwilling to treat men differently from women, then there will be no spaces just for men. This is equally entirely straightforward.

Quite true.

But the consequences for women of not having any spaces of their own may be quite different than the consequences for men of not having any spaces of their own.