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

[Meadmaker]

You seem to be determined to look at it from one view point.

The trans person being a risk, without proof presumably, and I agree this is unfair.

But you seem to not understand some girls may just be uncomfortable sharing a space with a person with a dudes body, be it through personal harrowing experience or pure self lack of confidence in the chance of an awkward situation

I might add that some teenage girls might be extremely comfortable sharing space with a person with a dude's body, and yet we, the coaches and parents, do not allow it for the vast majority of people.

 

[Belz...]

You probably meant mutable.

Yes, obviously she could get her uterus removed to guard against the possibility.

But although we can alter our bodies quite a bit, we can't do it in a way that erases the differences between men and women, however some try.

Is it only trans people that need special permission to be treated the same as anyone else or are there other groups you want to single out too?

No, I'm pretty sure the same would apply to a boy. That's 50% of the population right there.

 

[cullennz]

What has that got to do with the psyche? Or anything actually? I was hoping for something a bit better than that to be honest.

I mean I am genuinely trying to parse your point.

One is based on biological differences that you say don't make a difference?
And the other is based on biological differences that you say do make a difference?
Because babies?

So anyone who is infertile for example would have no reason to complain or to be complained about? No reason to feel uncomfortable?

No I am really struggling here. It feels like you are just asserting that they are different because they are different.

Well they are

They claim to be a girl in a dudes body.

Tough luck

People have a lot worse things in life

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

You want me to provide stats to prove that race is looks and sex making babies?

Because if so that would highlight a bit

No I want you to make a coherent argument that 'making babies' is the criteria that matters and why that is the case.

 

[Meadmaker]

You probably meant mutable.

This is funny.

I say that because it's obvious that the point flew completely over Delphic Oracle's head. That she is totally oblivious to the issue.

The "immutable characteristic" that is of concern here is the ability to sire children. Technically, that characteristic isn't immutable. However, in the case presented over on the Robotics forum, that characteristic hadn't been muted, and indeed the person with the characteristic indicated she had no intention of ever muting that characteristic.

 

[cullennz]

No I want you to make a coherent argument that 'making babies' is the criteria that matters and why that is the case.

If you don't understand the difference between race and sex that is your problem

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I think you mistakingly posted several versions of your answer to me at the same time.

I think I've made a solid point against your claim that every individual is a burden. At this point I'm going to have to ask you to demonstrate that claim.

Every individual places demands on service provisions. That is how demand for service provisions are determined. If you have 1 more person you need one more person's worth of libraries, doctors, schools, council workers, bin collections etc. Or else you can 1 person less worth of availability of those services.

That's simply a statement of fact.

Can. So it may, or may not. Isn't that true of every statement? That's not very informative.

It's informative when people are claiming that they can't be.

I'll take your word for it, as I'm too lazy to check back.



I believe I've been clear about the fact that I don't agree, and why.

I believe you have been clear that you don't agree. The why not so much. Because the logic has been spelled out and you have not pointed to a fault with it other than that you don't agree.

In a broad way, maybe. However both of your premises are wrong so it's not very relevant to discuss the logic.

No, its absolutely relevant to discuss the logic because that is what we have spent the last 2 pages discussing. Had you said 'I don't think what Rolfe said was transphobic' then it would have been a very different discussion. But we went off on tangents about whether positive statements can be bigoted, whether it matters if you believe the statements are positive and whether facts can be problematic.

How about that specific example, now?

I'm slightly worried that you are still hedging on the logic because i can see where this is going to go. But I will give it a bash anyway. Hang on...

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

For the benefit of Belz... some selected transphobia

Also, a woman is an adult human female. A male cannot be a female or turn into a female. Being female is about being born in and growing up in and living in a female body, and nobody who hasn't done that can claim to know what it feels like. Hell, even those who have done that mainly say that they don't "feel like" women, they simply are women.

Being a woman is not a feeling in anybody's head. If your body is male you cannot possibly be a woman. Seek relief from dysphoria by all means. Call yourself a transwoman rather than a man. But it's absolutely delusional to think that someone born in a male body can in any possible way "be a woman mentally".

Transwomen are delusional and not women.

"Knowing" that you're a woman when you are objectively a man (or the other way around for that matter) is no less ludicrous than any of that. Why is it the only one that gets a free pass?

Being a transwoman is ludicrous.

It's when they demand the right to do things that directly take rights away from other people that the conflict arises.

And a man being convinced he's a woman is no less silly than a white person being convinced they're black - less silly, indeed, because race really is a spectrum and a lot of white people probably have some negro genes in there. No less silly than believing you're a different age, or a different height, or have a disability you don't actually have. All fly in the face of easily verifiable objective reality.

Transwomen are taking away rights from women and are 'silly' Being trans flies in the face of objective reality

People who get a GRC acquire the protected characteristic of gender ressignment. They do not, at present, actually become the opposite sex. The law recognises the difference between women and transwomen, quite specifically.

Transwomen are not women. They are different. Plus a mistatement of the law

Women have the right to certain spaces and protections and categories that are exclusive to the female sex. Trans-identifying males, who are not of the female sex and will never become the female sex, are demanding the right to be included in these spaces and protections and categories, without exception. That then destroys these spaces, protections and categories as being exclusive to the female sex, as male-bodied people are now permitted to enter.

That is the removal of women's rights, however much you like to dress it up in nasty language.

Allowing transwomen access to spaces destroys those spaces. Transpeople are trying to take away women's rights

This is entirely correct. Transwomen are biologically male and absolutely nothing can be done to change that fact of nature. Women have the right to spaces, provisions and categories which exclude biological males. I don't care if you call it bigotry or not, I am against these rights being taken away from us by allowing biological males free access to these spaces, provisions and categories. Whether that's a hostel dormitory or a scholarship programme or a bicycle race or indeed a prison.

Transwomen are taking away women's rights. Transwomen are not women.

Women's prisons should not be forced to become the asylum for men with identity issues.

'Asylum'? Meaning transwomen are dangerously mentally ill, and need to be excluded.

I'm talking for a pretty large number of women, a number which is growing daily as more and more women realise what is going on. You really need to stop believing that women's rights are within your gift to give away to problematic men.

Talking for a large number of women. Transwomen are problematic men.

I wouldn't underestimate how many wokemaidens there are out there, mind you.

Women who don't agree with Rolfe are derided as 'wokemaidens' a pejorative term.

Talking of numbers of transwomen violent or sex offenders, this just appeared on twitter. I wonder how long the twitter police will take to ban this one?

https://twitter.com/historywoman/status/1191453438825181186
I counted my way down and it has 45 cases on it, all serious enough offences to have attracted prison sentences. I don't know what time period that covers, and as I said before, we don't have a baseline number for "men who identify as women" to get a percentage. But how many does it have to be before it's too many?

A cherry picked list of anecdotal scare stories to demonstrate how dangerous transwomen are. Unverified as to whether the facts as presented are even true.

If you read what I wrote, I was expanding the problem demographic to include men who are sexually problematic, but not necessarily committing sexual assaults as such. The behaviour of many autogynaephilic men in women's spaces is deeply problematic because they are using their ability to enter these spaces as "gender affirmation therapy". The whole thing is sexual with them.

Women do not want to share their spaces with men who are getting off on the whole experience of being in a women's space, wanking in the loos, peeing all over the toilet seat, rifling through the bins for used sanitary products and fantasising about helping a young girl insert a tampon. Even the ones who are doing no more than LARPing womanhood make women deeply uncomfortable.

In bold the parts speaking for all women. This post is highly troublesome as it basically dismisses transwomen as perverts. The whole thing is sexual. They are tampon fetishists, they are LARPing womanhood. This is brazen transphobia.

I didn't claim anything different. I have already explained why we don't have these incidence figures. Because we don't have any reliable figures for the number of transwomen in the country. Also because the police now record these offenders simply as "female" which means there's no way of getting numbers from official statistics - one is reliant on other sources such as press reports to confirm the "woman's" trans status.

The figure of 48% of (non-GRC) transwomen who are in prison being in there for some sort of sexual crime is from a different source.

How many is too many? Why do you want women to make their lives the asylum for problematic men?

Again. Transwomen are problematic men. And again the use of asylume

Who are these "people", Kemo Sabe? It is a problem, and women are not particularly keen on minimising this. But this is going to develop into a derail so I suggest we park it.

'it' being mere possession of a penis. Which is transphobic and misandrist to boot.

You really need to stop talking for all women.

And this was my interaction which sparked all this.

 

[Ziggurat]

Transwomen are not women. They are different.

That's a simple fact. Your feelings about that fact cannot change it. Stating true facts is not transphobic.

 

[Belz...]

Every individual places demands on service provisions. That is how demand for service provisions are determined. If you have 1 more person you need one more person's worth of libraries, doctors, schools, council workers, bin collections etc. Or else you can 1 person less worth of availability of those services.

That's simply a statement of fact.

Yeah but where do you think those libraries come from? They come from the money and work the new person puts into the system. We're getting off-topic here, but the fact is that you are quite simply wrong.

It's informative when people are claiming that they can't be.

Right, give me a shout whenever someone does that. In the meanwhile it's irrelevant.

I believe you have been clear that you don't agree. The why not so much. Because the logic has been spelled out and you have not pointed to a fault with it other than that you don't agree.

That's completely false. See below.

No, its absolutely relevant to discuss the logic because that is what we have spent the last 2 pages discussing. Had you said 'I don't think what Rolfe said was transphobic' then it would have been a very different discussion. But we went off on tangents about whether positive statements can be bigoted, whether it matters if you believe the statements are positive and whether facts can be problematic.

The reason why we went on that tengent IS the demonstration of WHY I think what she said isn't transphobic AND why I think your logic is wrong.

 

[Belz...]

For the benefit of Belz... some selected transphobia

Ah, finally. Let's see.

Transwomen are delusional and not women.

That's not what she said.

Being a transwoman is ludicrous.

That's not what she said.

Transwomen are taking away rights from women and are 'silly' Being trans flies in the face of objective reality

I'm slightly worried that you cut the preceding part of her post deliberately to make the quote appear worse than it is. But even as presented, the first part of your conclusion is not supported by the quote. As for the latter part, it's not entirely wrong, but it's not exactly what she said.

Transwomen are not women. They are different.

Facts are not transphobic.

Allowing transwomen access to spaces destroys those spaces.

Ok so far so good. You do understand what Rolfe meant by that, though, right?

Transwomen are taking away women's rights.

Again, if you read the larger context, that's not what she said. I'm starting to see a pattern, here.

'Asylum'? Meaning transwomen are dangerously mentally ill, and need to be excluded.

I took it as hyperbole but I'll give you that one.

Talking for a large number of women.

Which directly contradicts your earlier claim that she pretended to speak for all women. And that, by the way, is not transphobic.

Transwomen are problematic men.

That's not what she said.

Women who don't agree with Rolfe are derided as 'wokemaidens' a pejorative term.

Has nothing to do with transphobia.

A cherry picked list of anecdotal scare stories to demonstrate how dangerous transwomen are. Unverified as to whether the facts as presented are even true.

Sure, ok. Plenty of people here use anecdotes to 'prove' their biases. I'll give you that one too.

In bold the parts speaking for all women.

I'm pretty sure you know enough about human language to know that we often don't make everything technically precise. Your interpretation here may be correct but could just as easily -- and in fact more probably, in light of other posts of hers -- refer to a majority or even a large minority of women.

This post is highly troublesome as it basically dismisses transwomen as perverts.

That's not what she said.

Again. Transwomen are problematic men. And again the use of asylume

See above.

'it' being mere possession of a penis. Which is transphobic and misandrist to boot.

How is it either of these? I see no misandry there, and to call it transphobic, in isolation, is to use a very broad meaning of the term, at best.

 

[Rolfe]

I took it as hyperbole but I'll give you that one.

Asylum in the sense of shelter, refuge. As in "political asylum".

 

[Lithrael]

Yeah, I basically agree with this:

We already have a situation where girls and boys are kept separate. I'm entirely happy to consider to possibility that that's not a good idea. It seems to me that there have been some valid reasons for that practice in the past, and they weren't based on fear of transpeople. (...)

However, I'm not entirely convinced either way. What doesn't make sense to me is continuing to segregate, but doing so based on gender rather than sex.

And I also have a feeling I can’t really articulate that the risk of someone accidentally getting full of baby is a special risk worth cutting out a lot of opportunities for quite likely totally not-going-to-do-that (but-technically-could) people. For example I don’t feel like it’s similar to the risk that someone, anyone could be out-of-the-blue violent and seriously injure someone enough to change their life, because I don’t think that’s something that happens often enough to really worry about. But teen pregnancy happens a lot and it has a sizable impact on a person’s life no matter what they do next.

Of course it’s also true that just standing there going “DONT” isn’t the best way to mitigate that risk. Although I don’t feel like separate sleeping accommodations is a made-up solution, it’s true that as Archie said:

segregation by sex isn't going to stop two kids banging if they want to do it

So I’m not settled on what the best thing to do is these days.

 

[Ziggurat]

And I also have a feeling I can’t really articulate that the risk of someone accidentally getting full of baby is a special risk worth cutting out a lot of opportunities for quite likely totally not-going-to-do-that (but-technically-could) people.

In the hypothetical school trip, the transgender person wouldn't be denied the opportunity to go on the trip. They would just get their own hotel room rather than share one. They might prefer to share a room, but I think that's an acceptable outcome. Just like if the trip had an odd number of girls and an odd number of boys, and one of the boys had to have a single room and one of the girls had to have a single room instead of a boy and a girl sharing a room, that's acceptable too.

 

[Lithrael]

Oh, yeah, I just meant the accommodations part. Still, that means a lot to some people sometimes. But yeah if it was me I would not sweat it. So I am not sure how far to carry my argument there.

Also I would like to un-recommend getting any teenagers their own room by themselves. In my experience that is a serious spike in the shenanigans of all kinds risk department. When the little gremlins are corralled in a group, the worst ones can’t self-select together and cover each other’s butts. If you get a shenanigan-inclined one a solo room it will invite its most easily corrupted friend/s in and that couch will have caught fire completely on its own.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

All of those concerns apply equally to people of both sexes so segregation according to sex wouldn't help to avoid them.

If we knew of one of the girls who had a transmissible disease, it would make sense to keep her separate from the others, for instance. But not knowing that any of them do, I'm not sure what steps could be taken to avoid that particular harm, except perhaps all members of the group having their own separate rooms.

Ok, but we're not talking about a transmittable disease and making that your analogy is deeply troubling.

 

[Strawberry]

For the benefit of Belz... some selected transphobia



Transwomen are delusional and not women.



Being a transwoman is ludicrous.



Transwomen are taking away rights from women and are 'silly' Being trans flies in the face of objective reality



Transwomen are not women. They are different. Plus a mistatement of the law



Allowing transwomen access to spaces destroys those spaces. Transpeople are trying to take away women's rights



Transwomen are taking away women's rights. Transwomen are not women.



'Asylum'? Meaning transwomen are dangerously mentally ill, and need to be excluded.




Talking for a large number of women. Transwomen are problematic men.



Women who don't agree with Rolfe are derided as 'wokemaidens' a pejorative term.



A cherry picked list of anecdotal scare stories to demonstrate how dangerous transwomen are. Unverified as to whether the facts as presented are even true.


[/B]

In bold the parts speaking for all women. This post is highly troublesome as it basically dismisses transwomen as perverts. The whole thing is sexual. They are tampon fetishists, they are LARPing womanhood. This is brazen transphobia.



Again. Transwomen are problematic men. And again the use of asylume



'it' being mere possession of a penis. Which is transphobic and misandrist to boot.



And this was my interaction which sparked all this.

None of that is transphobic.

Or if it is then reality is transphobic.

 

[Ziggurat]

And segregation by sex isn't going to stop two kids banging if they want to do it either.

Two problems. First off, yes, sometimes it will keep them from banging. When you make an action harder to do, fewer people will do it. The fact that some people may still do it doesn't mean it won't dissuade anyone, or that it's not worth doing if that behavior is undesirable. Sex can be an "in the moment" sort of thing, and if that particular moment won't work, then yes, it may well not happen.

Second, it's not the school's responsibility to make sure teens never have sex. The school's responsibility is to keep them from having sex while under the school's care. If it's harder for them to have sex while under the school's care, but they still really want to have sex, then they may simply wait until they aren't under the school's care. And while parents may still find that outcome just as bad, it's not as bad for the school.

 

[Lithrael]

None of that is transphobic.

Or if it is then reality is transphobic.

For the way some of you guys think of things, I can understand seeing most of this as not transphobic with only a little bending and hem-haw required. But stuff like post #941? I don’t see how y’all can say that’s fine unless you think Rolfe is talking exclusively about some tiny minority of people who she thinks have snuck under the trans umbrella. And I don’t get the impression she thinks that way at all.

 

[Strawberry]

If you read what I wrote, I was expanding the problem demographic to include men who are sexually problematic, but not necessarily committing sexual assaults as such. The behaviour of many autogynaephilic men in women's spaces is deeply problematic because they are using their ability to enter these spaces as "gender affirmation therapy". The whole thing is sexual with them.

Women do not want to share their spaces with men who are getting off on the whole experience of being in a women's space, wanking in the loos, peeing all over the toilet seat, rifling through the bins for used sanitary products and fantasising about helping a young girl insert a tampon. Even the ones who are doing no more than LARPing womanhood make women deeply uncomfortable.

This is the apparently oh so transphobic post #941. It's actually a fair assessment of men with AGP and the affect of allowing them to access female only spaces.

It's quite easy to tell the difference between the gender dysphoric transwomen and the AGP fetishists presenting as transwomen - offer them a bathroom/changing room separate from either the male or female spaces. The gender dysphoric transwomen will take it and the AGP ones will be raging that they don't get to strip off in front of a room full of women and girls.