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

[Matthew Best]

Possibly this:

 

[Emily's Cat]

What in the blue hell is she talking about?

Re pornography, does she think that the performers in those are conscripted slaves? What is she on about?

The porn part is the bit I'm least aligned with. A lot of feminists view pornography as continued objectification of women and a problem. But I rather like objectifying men in my porn, so I figure it's okay.

More the shift over the past decade that is eroding women's progress. There's the obvious stuff, like body autonomy issues with some states making it harder and harder to get abortions, excluding abortions from ACA coverage, etc. But there's also the whole incel thing. It's easy to laugh at it as ridiculous and sad... but it represents a similar threat to women that white supremacy represents to black people. I don't want to overplay it of course, and definitely don't get all outrage happy... but it also can't really just be ignored either. Then you get into politics, and you've got tons of men (and some women) judging female politicians based on their looks rather than their competency. When you add some of the trans activism that starts encroaching on things like women's sports and safe spaces, it feels a lot like women are slipping backwards. That's not even getting into the exaggerated feminization that many transwomen engage in, drag queens, and the very caricatured gay men who call each other "sister" and behave in very over-the-top feminine ways - all of that reinforces gender roles and gender biases that are a real barrier to women.

 

[Belz...]

The porn part is the bit I'm least aligned with. A lot of feminists view pornography as continued objectification of women and a problem.

Yeah, well a number of women seem to find it empowering. I'll call it a draw.

 

[The Atheist]

I have a hard time balancing my absolute sympathy and support for transwomen against the anger I feel when a person who was raised with male privilege comes in and tries to force their wants on me, to cast their desires as more important than mine, and to browbeat and threaten people with cervixes into giving them their way.

That should be the end of the discussion.

But it won't be.

 

[Roboramma]

Rowlings own position seems very unclear to me. She seems to oscillate between acceptance of trans people and a strong desire to treat them as dangerous men. It strikes me as incoherent.

I can't make heads or tails of it, other than coming to the conclusion that she has general animus against trans people.

I don't see how any reasonable person would conclude that designating trans people as some group of "miscellaneous other" would have good results for these people's civil rights.

I don't think it's that hard. One doesn't need to see men as the "miscellaneous other" to want to keep them out of women's shelters. One doesn't need to hate men to still want to have some women's only spaces. She simply thinks that, when it comes to women's only spaces, they should be classified based on sex, not gender.

That doesn't require hating anyone.

I think there are arguments to be made about at least some of those women's only spaces. It's not only one side or the other here that conflates sex with gender, and at least some cases the reason for the separation is probably one based more on gender than sex. But the reverse is also true (sport being the clearest example).

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I find it amusing you start with that, yet it's not what I said.

What I did say was:

Yes, I know. What an odd attempt at a rebuttal, to simply repeat your straw man as if I hadn't pointed out that it was a straw man.

It obviously includes women who have menstruated, or even will menstruate.

Does it? Why would an article focusing on menstrual health - and which specifically identified itself as addressing people who mensturate - be including women and girls who don't menstuate?

Rowling is a TERF in the same way Germaine Greer's a TERF.

Well, on that we agree.

Women in general have the same position as me - they're not women, and the further you go down the feminist path, the more strongly that view is held.

Argument from popularity. it's not even worth checking whether your statement is accurate, because it's simply a fallacy.

Don't believe me? Well, people in general have a certain position - one or more gods exist. Does that mean that you'll be changing your name to "The Theist"? No? Then you understand why an argument ad populum is bollocks.

I don't have any prejudices against trans women or trans men.

You just express prejudices you don't hold for fun?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Oh and if we're doing "science by opinion piece" anyway, have an opposing opinion piece by another group of experts as well. Heck, some of these even actually have a PhD.

I think that saying the signatories here are "a group of experts" on the subject is stretching it rather. Very few signatories are developmental biologists and it's padded out with people like archaeologists, anthropologists, physiotherapists, linguists, politics students, french students, lawyers, climatologists, ecologists, vets, dentists, mathematicians, and more besides. It seems like numbers are more important than relevance to or knowledge of the subject.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

And, maybe, Rowling was making a point about language and communication, which come to think of it, may very well be something that is actually within the realm of expertise of a writer.

She was. And that point was wrong. An article about menstruation talking about people who menstruate makes more sense than talking about women because, even if trans people didn't exist, not everybody who menstruates is a woman, and not every woman menstruates. She was insisting that more accurate and precise language be replaced with less accurate and precise language.

 

[Belz...]

Argument from popularity. it's not even worth checking whether your statement is accurate, because it's simply a fallacy.

Wait a minute. Language is determined by usage. If most people view a word as having a particular definition, then that's the definition, right?

 

[caveman1917]

I think that saying the signatories here are "a group of experts" on the subject is stretching it rather. Very few signatories are developmental biologists and it's padded out with people like archaeologists, anthropologists, physiotherapists, linguists, politics students, french students, lawyers, climatologists, ecologists, vets, dentists, mathematicians, and more besides. It seems like numbers are more important than relevance to or knowledge of the subject.

Just because they allow supporting signatures from other fields (which are clearly marked as such and indicated in the text) does not mean that there is not a group of experts which has signed it - there are plenty of relevant experts in there. More importantly, it surely beats an opinion piece by a single student in neuroscience, which is what it was posted in response to.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Well as I said I don't give much of a toss about her, and I don't know why people bother with each other's opinions so much, but from what I understand she supports trans people but not if it's going to, in her opinion, harm women in general. It might be just a matter of numbers: putting extra effort to help minority groups is one thing, but not to the detriment of 50% of the population.

I think that's a fair summary of her position. It's also one that LGBT people have generally not found acceptable. Much of the discrimination of LGBT people has been predicated on the fact that they are a small minority and their rights may come into conflict with the comfort and safety of heterosexual people and institutions that make up the large majority of society.

While Rowling does list certain specific examples, which may have merit (women's shelter who's victims primarily suffer at the hands of men), she also speaks broadly of Womanhood as an identity. This talk smacks of the "sanctity of marriage" nonsense we've all seen over the years to support denying homosexuals civil rights to marry. The accusations that trans women are just disguised, predatory men is a straight analogue to the "child-molesting homosexual" smear.

 

[zooterkin]

No, Rowling specifically talks about men who feel as though they are women - I'm talking about men who falsely claim to be trans for the sole reason of gaining access to women's personal spaces.
.

She said:

So I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman – and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.

When you open the door to any many who believes or feels he's a woman, ...then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.

Seems pretty clear to me that she says allowing mere self-identification means any man, not just those who honestly feel they are a woman, can claim to be a woman for whatever ulterior motive. She may not be spelling it out as clearly as you would like, but that's what she's saying.

 

[d4m10n]

Much of the discrimination of LGBT people has been predicated on the fact that they are a small minority and their rights may come into conflict with the comfort and safety of heterosexual people and institutions that make up the large majority of society.

I can sort of understand why (not all) men might not want to shower with men who look at them the way they look at women, but the comfort issue seems relatively minor outside of relatively unusual places such as locker rooms. As to safety, um, ???

 

[zooterkin]

What in the blue hell is she talking about?

Re pornography, does she think that the performers in those are conscripted slaves? What is she on about?

She said 'porn-saturated online culture'. I don't know her views on porn in general, but it is certainly the case that young people today have easy and free access to hard-core pornography which can set unrealistic expectations regarding sex, body image and interpersonal relationships, and I suspect that's what she's alluding to.

 

[zooterkin]

The accusations that trans women are just disguised, predatory men is a straight analogue to the "child-molesting homosexual" smear.

Who is making that accusation?

What is being said is that simple self identification is open to abuse. That is not the same as making the statement you did.

 

[BobTheCoward]

She said:

When you open the door to any many who believes or feels he's a woman, ...then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.

Seems pretty clear to me that she says allowing mere self-identification means any man, not just those who honestly feel they are a woman, can claim to be a woman for whatever ulterior motive. She may not be spelling it out as clearly as you would like, but that's what she's saying.

The current system allows any insincere non trans woman to use it now.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Who is making that accusation?

What is being said is that simple self identification is open to abuse. That is not the same as making the statement you did.

Any system is open to abuse. I don't find it a particularly compelling reason to deny trans people in dire need for services on the fear that some may take advantage.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Just because they allow supporting signatures from other fields (which are clearly marked as such and indicated in the text)[...]

Nope. To take one example from the "signatories": "Richard Seager. BSc Information Science and PGDipSci Climate Science, Otago University, NZ. 2019 Dunedin Mayoral candidate."

Here:

I have a Postgraduate Diploma in Science (PGDipSci) at the Geography Department at Otago, mostly on Climate Science. My mini thesis (GEOG470) was on the Arctic. My main interests are climate science & the impacts of Climate Change on all of us but with an emphasis on those who are less privileged. Sea Level Rise (SLR) its impacts & Polar regions are main foci as is urban transportation. Related interests include equity, capitalism, history, religion & how those have impacted on the present.

He was a mayoral candidate who ran on a platform that included de-funding research into gender dysphoria and on censoring "trans activists". His (seemingly since deleted) twitter bio included the line "Pro-LGB, drop the T".

He's a randomly-picked example. And, again, is part of the "signatories" list.

As I said, it seems like it's more about getting supportive numbers than it is people with expertise.

Even if that weren't true a list of people who agree with a particular POV is inherently less convincing than an article in a non-political journal which cites a number of scientific sources.

 

[Belz...]

I think that's a fair summary of her position. It's also one that LGBT people have generally not found acceptable. Much of the discrimination of LGBT people has been predicated on the fact that they are a small minority and their rights may come into conflict with the comfort and safety of heterosexual people and institutions that make up the large majority of society.

Well, it's not an unreasonable position. Where's the middle ground where things are acceptable? Surely there must be a point where you think it's going to far, in either direction.

 

[Belz...]

She said 'porn-saturated online culture'. I don't know her views on porn in general, but it is certainly the case that young people today have easy and free access to hard-core pornography which can set unrealistic expectations regarding sex, body image and interpersonal relationships, and I suspect that's what she's alluding to.

I keep hearing that claim but I'm yet to see anyone support it.