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

[BobTheCoward]

It's your admitted lack of knowledge, combined with your desire to act on that lack of knowledge, that makes you arrogant, so no, it doesn't imply anything of the sort.



So when you said you will tell others what sports should be, "should" is defined as "what bob likes"? In that case, I really don't see any anyone should listen to you.

It's also interesting to note that this is the first time that you mention that you are giving us your consumer perspective on this issue when until now you seemed to be giving your perspective in general.

We are discussing what is mostly a recreational activity. My perspective is based on maximizing it's recreational value as a consumer.

 

[Stout]

We are discussing what is mostly a recreational activity. My perspective is based on maximizing it's recreational value as a consumer.

So you're going to go with the transwomwn are women, 100% and demand they be given access to all female only spaces and activities regardless of what cis women think.

Glad we cleared that up. See how easy that was.

 

[BobTheCoward]

So you're going to go with the transwomwn are women, 100% and demand they be given access to all female only spaces and activities regardless of what cis women think.

Glad we cleared that up. See how easy that was.

What? No, I have no opinion on how to treat transpeople. I was discussing getting rid of the distinction between men and women's sports.

 

[Stout]

What? No, I have no opinion on how to treat transpeople. I was discussing getting rid of the distinction between men and women's sports.

Well you're on a thread about transwomen, it's right up there in the title so maybe it's a good idea to have a sit and think before posting. Getting rid of that distinction would suck, for women and girls.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Well you're on a thread about transwomen, it's right up there in the title so maybe it's a good idea to have a sit and think before posting. Getting rid of that distinction would suck, for women and girls.

I didn't broach the issue. Sherkeu did and I responded.

 

[Ziggurat]

What? No, I have no opinion on how to treat transpeople.

Yes you do. You have stated that we should just accept their self-identification, apparently regardless of context.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Yes you do. You have stated that we should just accept their self-identification, apparently regardless of context.

You missed the post where I said Belz convinced me.

 

[Roboramma]

We are discussing what is mostly a recreational activity. My perspective is based on maximizing it's recreational value as a consumer.

For yourself alone. Not for other spectators. Nor are you interested in the perspective of the athletes, nor the athletic organisations or their owners or employees. I don't see how anyone was supposed to assume that you were speaking from that perspective when you were talking about what sports should be.

Anyway, you've cleared that up now.

 

[Rolfe]

But again, legally changing your gender is not the same as just saying 'I am a woman' and conflating all these things isn't helpful.

This needs addressing.

At the moment, in both Scotland and England, there is a particular process to go through to get a GRC. It takes time and requires psychological assessments and it can be refused. The purpose is two-fold. First to help the patient themselves, so that they can transition to living as if they were the opposite sex with as little trauma as possible. And second to safeguard the general public and in particular women and children from men who would abuse this process to gain access to women's protected spaces for their own predatory purposes. There was the expectation of at least some degree of commitment. If not full sex reassignment surgery then at least taking the hormones of the opposite sex.

Moreover, even after that transition, the person does not become indistinguishable from the opposite sex. They have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, but not the protected characteristic of being female (in the case of MtF transitioners). It is still legal to exclude them in circumstances where it is necessary and proportionate having regard to the needs of other people - for example from rape crisis centres where the presence of a male person may be extremely distressing to a woman who has been raped.

Now actually while I might quibble with some of the details here (for example I'm very much against falsifying the historical document that is a birth certificate), in principle it's not a bad arrangement. It takes into account not just the needs or desires of the transitioning person but the interests of the rest of society.

The trans rights activists want all that changed. They want all the gatekeeping removed. They describe it as demeaning and humiliating. (Older transsexuals on the other hand say it's essential and is the thing that kept them sane during transition and made them able to live in society as if they were the opposite sex. But nobody is listening to them.) The TRAs want no gatekeeping at all, and want a simple declaration in front of a JP (that's JP, not GP) and signing a form to be all that is required to get a GRC. (After the recent protests by women's rights groups the proposal to put a six-month waiting period in there has been added, but it still doesn't require counselling or psychotherapy and the TRAs are furious about even that.)

Not only is no alteration to the transitioning person's body required, it's becoming extremely unclear what "living as a woman" actually means. Now this has always been problematic, because it relies on the very stereotypes that women find so offensive. Is it only about how you dress? Many women spend their lives in jeans and sweatshirts and trainers. This was always a bone of contention. But now that men can transition without even shaving off their beards it's getting even less clear what transitioning even means. You don't change anything about yourself except you can now get undressed in the ladies changing room and sleep in the women's dormitory in the youth hostel and demand that a female beauty salon wax your balls?

But indeed, the proposals (which the Scottish government still seems determined to railroad through) do make getting a GRC not much more difficult than simply saying "I am a woman", and that is at the very heart of the objections coming from women. This is already law in Canada and some other countries and the rapidly-intensifying bin fires we can see there should be a wakeup call.

But then there's another point. You don't actually need a GRC to live your daily life as if you were the opposite sex, or even to claim that you are the opposite sex and have people treat you in that way. At present only a tiny number of people actually have GRCs. Partly this is beause they were only introduced in about 2009, specifically to allow transwomen to marry men in the days before same=sex marriage was legal. Arguably, what's the point now? But this means that people who transitioned more than ten years ago don't usually have one and often don't even know they exist.

But also, the modern, militant type of transwoman doesn't bother. Again, it's not necessary when challenging any man who claims to be a woman can be framed as transphobia and a hate crime. The people who are loudest in demanding their right to unfettered access to women's protected spaces don't have GRCs and nobody is telling them to shut up and behave like the men they are until they've got one. This is because legally they don't need a GRC to claim trans privilege.

So in practical terms, "changing your gender" absolutely is as simple as saying "I am a woman" even now.

But it goes further than that. People with a GRC do have more privileges than people who just adopt trans status, but then as I said even there the privileges are not absolute. Necessary and proportionate provisions for genuine single-sex services can be made.

The TRAs want all this ended. They are specifically lobbying for all these exceptions in the Equalities Act to be removed, so that there will be absolutely nowhere that a woman can go that a transwoman (now "self-declared", just a few words in front of a JP) can't go. Even more outrageously, while they are lobbying for the removal of the right of a woman to request that a female perform intimate care for her, they are simultaneously lobbying for the right of a trans person to request intimate care from another trans person!

So I think the most helpful thing is to understand what the present legal position is, and what current actual practice is (not the same thing), and what changes to the legal position are being proposed. In effect the TRAs have performed a policy capture exercise and have succeeded in getting many organisations and authorities to behave as if the legal changes they're lobbying for are actually current law. Current law isn't too bad. But the TRAs are driving a coach and horses through it already and want to make their version of reality the legal one. This is what the women's rights groups are opposing.

 

[Belz...]

So in practical terms, "changing your gender" absolutely is as simple as saying "I am a woman" even now.

The sad thing is that in the end transgender people will be the ones paying the price for this.

 

[Ziggurat]

You missed the post where I said Belz convinced me.

Nobody believes you.

 

[Ziggurat]

At the moment, in both Scotland and England, there is a particular process to go through to get a GRC. It takes time and requires psychological assessments and it can be refused.

But how good is that process? How are people evaluated? On what grounds are people refused that reclassification? Is the screening which in principle is supposed to keep out people who want to "transition" for the wrong reasons actually effective in doing so?

I have no confidence that the system can do that job effectively. Even discounting full-on predators like Yaniv, I've heard stories from people who detransitioned who said that they had other issues that doctors and psychologists should have helped them confront, instead of just rubber stamping their transition. So even some people who honestly think they are transgender end up regretting their transition. I'm not hearing stories of people who thought they were transgender but were talked out of it by professionals who knew they would regret transitioning, and are glad that they didn't transition. So it doesn't seem to me like the profession actually knows how to screen these people.

I guess the counterargument is that the legal system doesn't need to protect people from themselves, so they only need to screen the predator types. But even there I'm not confident in their abilities.

 

[Belz...]

Nobody believes you.

It's rare that we can say that a poster speaks for the rest of us, but yeah.

 

[Rolfe]

But how good is that process? How are people evaluated? On what grounds are people refused that reclassification? Is the screening which in principle is supposed to keep out people who want to "transition" for the wrong reasons actually effective in doing so?

I have no confidence that the system can do that job effectively. Even discounting full-on predators like Yaniv, I've heard stories from people who detransitioned who said that they had other issues that doctors and psychologists should have helped them confront, instead of just rubber stamping their transition. So even some people who honestly think they are transgender end up regretting their transition. I'm not hearing stories of people who thought they were transgender but were talked out of it by professionals who knew they would regret transitioning, and are glad that they didn't transition. So it doesn't seem to me like the profession actually knows how to screen these people.

I guess the counterargument is that the legal system doesn't need to protect people from themselves, so they only need to screen the predator types. But even there I'm not confident in their abilities.

I'm not saying the process is perfect. It has problems both for the patient in that some waiting times are too long for no benefit and (especially more recently) there has been a reluctance to refuse people GRCs either because it wasn't in their own best interests or because they were potentially predators, and for society as a whole because people were being let through who probably shouldn't have been. But I don't believe the answer is to tear the whole thing up and substitute a bit of form-signing with no gatekeeping instead.

In an ideal world the process would be tightened up, not relaxed, and nobody would be allowed to claim any privileges of being trans until they had a GRC. Unfortunately we seem to be moving in the opposite direction.

And I don't know about the legal system, but the medical profession definitely does have a duty to protect people from themselves and this is one they are failing at spectacularly, especially as regards "trans kids" and adolescent girls with ROGD.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'm not saying the process is perfect. It has problems both for the patient in that some waiting times are too long for no benefit and (especially more recently) there has been a reluctance to refuse people GRCs either because it wasn't in their own best interests or because they were potentially predators, and for society as a whole because people were being let through who probably shouldn't have been. But I don't believe the answer is to tear the whole thing up and substitute a bit of form-signing with no gatekeeping instead.

Sure. To the extent that my complaint is legitimate, eliminating gatekeeping completely would only make the problem worse. And I agree that that seems to be where we're headed, unfortunately.

And I don't know about the legal system, but the medical profession definitely does have a duty to protect people from themselves and this is one they are failing at spectacularly, especially as regards "trans kids" and adolescent girls with ROGD.

I'm not big on legal systems trying to protect people from themselves, but yeah, that's kind of the whole point of the profession of psychology.

 

[TomB]

But how good is that process? How are people evaluated? On what grounds are people refused that reclassification? Is the screening which in principle is supposed to keep out people who want to "transition" for the wrong reasons actually effective in doing so?

I have no confidence that the system can do that job effectively. Even discounting full-on predators like Yaniv, I've heard stories from people who detransitioned who said that they had other issues that doctors and psychologists should have helped them confront, instead of just rubber stamping their transition. So even some people who honestly think they are transgender end up regretting their transition. I'm not hearing stories of people who thought they were transgender but were talked out of it by professionals who knew they would regret transitioning, and are glad that they didn't transition. So it doesn't seem to me like the profession actually knows how to screen these people.

The fact that there are misdiagnoses is not evidence that the system is ineffective at weeding out those who should not transition. It just means that it is imperfect. Most conditions in medicine are subject to misdiagnosis. Especially those for which there is not a blood test or diagnostic imaging scan you can relay on.

Another condition which can be misdiagnosed is ADHD. Despite being a brain chemistry issue, it is initially diagnosed by behavioral or "feelings" described by the patient. From that initial diagnosis, medication is often tried on a trial and error basis. So the treatment is in a sense part of the diagnosis process. (This is based on my kids ADHD experience.)

My impression is that gender dysphoria is also initially diagnosed on a behavioral basis. There is not blood test. There is also not a medication that can be given to relieve the symptoms. And, given that identity is involved, I'm not sure that one would be desirable. A treatment that changes who a person's identity is not desirable and probably would not be adhered to. As evidence for this last, I've known kids with ADHD who discontinued medication that quite obviously helped (grades up, attention improved, etc.) because they (and sometimes their friends) felt it made them a different person with a different personality.

As far as I know, the only effective treatment for dysphoria is transition. If the treatment is tried and fails, then there is likely a misdiagnosis. Just like with ADHD. We should expect cases where misdiagnosis occurs and transition fails. That's why there is not a rush to surgery in most cases.

I guess the counterargument is that the legal system doesn't need to protect people from themselves, so they only need to screen the predator types. But even there I'm not confident in their abilities.

One of the things I think is frustrating is the association of FtM transition to predators or men who want to hurt women. Imagine going for treatment for, say, a sore throat and being screened for cannibalism because some cannibals may develop sore throats? (Sorry, I know it's a ridiculous analogy, but I needed something unrelated to illustrate the point.)

Transgenderism is rare. So are the chances of a particular male being a sexual predator, though less so. (That could merit a whole other discussion, I guess.) The number of sexual predators who will fake transgenderism to predate on women is even rarer. But when someone claiming to be trans is shown to be or strongly suspected to be (Yaniv), they make a splash which makes the danger seem greater than it actually is.

That said, rational people on both sides of the issue ought to be able to agree that there ought to be a system that will relatively reliably filter out those who are faking for ill gain without making those who need treatment jump through hoops or feel that they are suspected sex offenders. Hopefully a system that could be a safeguard without being overly difficult and painful.

 

[BobTheCoward]

It's rare that we can say that a poster speaks for the rest of us, but yeah.

You are doubting the efficacy of your own argument.

 

[Rolfe]

Transgenderism is rare.

Not nearly as rare as it used to be and I think that is a big part of the issue. And you can't ignore the link between presenting as trans and problematic fetishistic or other sexual behaviour. Almost 50% of the transwomen in the British prison system are in there for sexual assault or rape.

 

[Ziggurat]

The fact that there are misdiagnoses is not evidence that the system is ineffective at weeding out those who should not transition.

I've seen no real evidence that it weeds out basically anyone.

One of the things I think is frustrating is the association of FtM transition to predators or men who want to hurt women.

Jessica Yaniv is a predator.

Transgenderism is rare. So are the chances of a particular male being a sexual predator, though less so. (That could merit a whole other discussion, I guess.) The number of sexual predators who will fake transgenderism to predate on women is even rarer.

But that's not a fixed number. It will change in response to how much opportunity for predation being transgendered gives them. The more opportunity it provides, and the less accountability they have as transgender predators, the more predators will choose that avenue. So you can't just look at what happened in the past and project it into the future as if nothing will change. People respond to incentives. What incentives are we creating here?

That said, rational people on both sides of the issue ought to be able to agree that there ought to be a system that will relatively reliably filter out those who are faking for ill gain without making those who need treatment jump through hoops or feel that they are suspected sex offenders. Hopefully a system that could be a safeguard without being overly difficult and painful.

I get that there's a reason not to burden transgender people with too many barriers to transitioning. There aren't any easy solutions here. There isn't some reliable and easy test which could be used but which people just aren't using. But the activists don't want to even recognize the existence of the problem. Granted, that's a common problem with activists on any topic, but transgenderism is the topic of this thread, so in this thread it's the failure of transgender activists which is relevant.

 

[Belz...]

Jessica Yaniv is a predator.

I think you'll find people who'll abuse any system. It doesn't mean that the system doesn't basically work, or that the people it's meant to serve are all abusers of that system.

In other words, we'd need actual numbers about the abusers, and about those who degret transition, etc. before we can draw a conclusion.