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

[Robin]

I guess that's a pretty fair question. She does define towards the latter part of the video.

I watched the whole thing, I don't recall that definition being given.

 

[d4m10n]

Her take is basically that if you function as a woman in the world, that's what matters most. It's around nine minutes into the video.

It's a fair bit tautological (and assumes a certain degree of background knowledge which would be unavailable to anyone acquiring language for the first time) but there it is.

 

[caveman1917]

Her take is basically that if you function as a woman in the world, that's what matters most. It's around nine minutes into the video.[qimg]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190801/69d95ffe9a7066048957fae485344c4b.jpg[/qimg]

That's circular. I suppose getting only 2 points on the Crackpot Index (number 3 on the list) instead of 10 is an improvement. Besides, she later outright contradicts herself by arguing that performing femininity is not what makes transwomen women, netting another 3 points by number 4 on the list. The entire thing is an incoherent mess.

 

[Puppycow]

She declared the question of defining "woman" as a "trollish question" and then never got back to it in the rest of the video, entirely ignoring it. But as you seem to claim otherwise, what definition of "woman" did she give in the video?

At about 8:45 or 8:50 in the video, she endorses a view given by Catherine McKinnon:

I always thought I don’t care how someone becomes a woman or a man; it does not matter to me. It is just part of their specificity, their uniqueness, like everyone else’s. Anybody who identifies as a woman, wants to be a woman, is going around being a woman, as far as I’m concerned, is a woman.

Not the definition I would choose, but that's how she defines it.

ETA: d4m10n beat me to it; I had to re-watch because I couldn't remember where in the video it was or the precise words.

 

[d4m10n]

That's circular.

It is indeed circular, but it isn't difficult to unpack.

There is a class of people who are treated differently than people like me in our society. They are more likely to be catcalled, sexually harassed, thought of as nurturing with children, diplomatic with peers, gossipy with friends, obsessed with personal appearance, [insert various feminine stereotypes here]. That's the "goes around being" part of MacKinnon's quote, and it's really not that difficult to notice unless you're attending an all-boys school.

 

[theprestige]

Socially, it's about the only definition that makes sense to me. It's certainly the most humane and tolerant one.

It relies heavily on the local norms of what it means to be a woman. Which is fine with me. It's not a complete or perfect or absolute answer, but no answer could be.

There are two big problems this answer doesn't solve, though: Women's sports and women's locker rooms.

 

[Robin]

It is indeed circular, but it isn't difficult to unpack.

There is a class of people who are treated differently than people like me in our society. They are more likely to be catcalled, sexually harassed, thought of as nurturing with children, diplomatic with peers, gossipy with friends, obsessed with personal appearance, [insert various feminine stereotypes here]. That's the "goes around being" part of MacKinnon's quote, and it's really not that difficult to notice unless you're attending an all-boys school.

I think that you are only demonstrating how difficult it is to unpack.

You have a list of, as you point out, stereotypes. Does that really capture what "going around being a woman" means?

 

[Robin]

The definition of a woman:

Anybody who identifies as a woman, wants to be a woman, is going around being a woman, as far as I’m concerned, is a woman.

The definition of a man:

Anybody who identifies as a man, wants to be a man, is going around being a man, as far as I’m concerned, is a man.

Yes?

And literally any action or behaviour could qualify both as "going around being a man" and "going around being a woman".

 

[d4m10n]

You have a list of, as you point out, stereotypes. Does that really capture what "going around being a woman" means?

If men and women weren't treated differently in (numerous & varied) social situations, the quoted bit wouldn't have any distinguishable meaning, beyond just going around in the world.

 

[Robin]

If men and women weren't treated differently in (numerous & varied) social situations, the quoted bit wouldn't have any distinguishable meaning, beyond just going around in the world.

So, to go around being a woman means to go around behaving as society expects a woman to behave?

To go around being a man means to go around behaving as society expects a man to behave?

 

[theprestige]

So, to go around being a woman means to go around behaving as society expects a woman to behave?

To go around being a man means to go around behaving as society expects a man to behave?

It depends.

The way I see it, gender (man, woman, other, etc.) is an intersection between biological sex and social norms. Being a man, in society, is some combination of being biologically male, and behaving the way society expects biological males to behave. Someone who isn't biologically male can still "be a man" by passing as a man according to society's expectations. In general, being able to pass as male should be sufficient to be treated and accepted as a male according to society's expectations, without regard to biological sex.

This is complicated by the feedback loop: Passing as a man depends on what society expects from biological men, which may not include biological women trying to pass as men.

I think your questions may be designed to oversimplify what is a complex and contentious issue. Why don't you tell us what you think the answers are, and why?

 

[d4m10n]

So, to go around being a woman means to go around behaving as society expects a woman to behave?



To go around being a man means to go around behaving as society expects a man to behave?

This is not what I wrote, nor does it follow therefrom.

Please revisit post #545 and see if you find anything about conforming to gendered expectations, as opposed to simply acknowledging their existence.

 

[Ziggurat]

Yes?

No. Obviously. These are circular definitions: a man is someone who is being a man, and a woman is someone who is being a woman. That does not suffice for any legitimate linguistic purpose whatsoever.

 

[Puppycow]

This is ContraPoints' most recent video, I think.

Wherein she inhabits 4 different personalities who argue with each other in an attempt to come up with a best definition of womanhood that could be trans inclusive and acceptable to "rational skeptics" (hey, that's us!! Or at least how we like to think of ourselves). Ultimately she fails but the exercise is worthwhile I think. Maybe this is just one of those human things where "pure reason" alone is not the most helpful guide? Maybe we just need to have a little human empathy here and not demand some sort of mathematical proof before accepting trans claims?

 

[caveman1917]

This is ContraPoints' most recent video, I think.

Wherein she inhabits 4 different personalities who argue with each other in an attempt to come up with a best definition of womanhood that could be trans inclusive and acceptable to "rational skeptics" (hey, that's us!! Or at least how we like to think of ourselves). Ultimately she fails but the exercise is worthwhile I think. Maybe this is just one of those human things where "pure reason" alone is not the most helpful guide? Maybe we just need to have a little human empathy here and not demand some sort of mathematical proof before accepting trans claims?

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.

 

[quadraginta]

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.

Pseudo-profundity in the service of stifling discussion.

Well done.

 

[Robin]

This is not what I wrote, nor does it follow therefrom.

Please revisit post #545 and see if you find anything about conforming to gendered expectations, as opposed to simply acknowledging their existence.

Maybe you should revisit it. We are talking about people "going around being", not "going around acknowledging".

If "going around being a woman" relates to societal expectations then how could that mean anything else than conforming to those of expectations?

 

[Robin]

l


I think your questions may be designed to oversimplify what is a complex and contentious issue. Why don't you tell us what you think the answers are, and why?

The question has to do with what other people mean by "man" and "woman", how can I tell other people what they mean by a word?

I don't think "going around being a woman" or "going around being a man" mean anything at all. Certainly I can't imagine how I would do either or why anyone would want to.

 

[caveman1917]

Pseudo-profundity in the service of stifling discussion.

Well done.

An undefined term in an argument, especially if the term is central to the argument, makes the argument informationally equivalent to a random string, to quite literally nonsense. Nothing pseudo about it, to the contrary.

Now, of course you could object to me objecting to nonsense, in which case you'll certainly allow me to participate in your discussion instead:

gooo ha ksk ks zdi ppp oooooo lala nuuuussq fjefs p fpdsjofdp! You bigots!

 

[caveman1917]

The question has to do with what other people mean by "man" and "woman", how can I tell other people what they mean by a word?

I don't think "going around being a woman" or "going around being a man" mean anything at all. Certainly I can't imagine how I would do either or why anyone would want to.

There would actually be a proper definition if we said something like "a woman is someone who performs femininity" which, combined with the claim that locker rooms are separated by gender rather than sex (hence defining "woman" in terms of gender, femininity, rather than sex, female) leads us to "masculine females should use the men's facilities" or "only feminine people are real woman" or "women must perform femininity" or ... I suppose it fits with the anti-feminism in "their" positions (women must perform femininity).