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

[Belz...]

When it comes to people's civil rights, it's a high stakes matter. C'est la vie.

If you think what I described has anything to do with civil rights, you have a serious issue with your thinking process.

And this circles back to something I said a few days ago and with which you seemed to agree: that it's stupid to think that any deviation from one's position, no matter how small, makes the other person the enemy.

Do you seriously believe that doing what TomB describes, which is consider the position of both sides to try and find the best possible outcome, is actually a violation of someone's civil rights?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I think a large part of the problem is listening.

Biological women see some potential issues that could arise from self-ID policies.

Self-identification policies already exist and have done for some time in the arenas in which people are saying these potential problems will arise

So, women are concerned that self-ID creates a loophole that can be exploited to allow cis-men with ill-intent access to female safe spaces due to the inability to set tangible criteria to determine who is female.

Those spaces already operate on a policy of self-identification, and it doesn't appear to be a significant problem, either in terms of the safety of cis women, or in terms of cis women feeling threatened or otherwise not accepting the trans women as women.

That's why I'm asking people who oppose the law changing to be self-identification to explain why they oppose it. I'd prefer it if they could back it up with data, but I'll definitely settle for an explanation as to how they reached their conclusion.

Does anyone have a solution that actually addresses this concern that also allows legitimate trans-women access?

Individual assessment on a case-by-case basis, as has been going on for years.

 

[Meadmaker]

Those spaces already operate on a policy of self-identification, and it doesn't appear to be a significant problem,

Here's where I think your problem is.

I think most women would say that, actually, it is already a significant problem, even without introducing the issue of trans-people at all. It's a problem mostly under control, to be certain, but the possibilities of voyeurism, sexual harassment, and sexual assault are actually problems that women deal with pretty continuously. It's quite significant, but we do have barriers and social conventions that mitigate the problem to a large extent.

What self ID does is chip away at those barriers and social conventions.

At this point, the standard tactic is to focus very narrowly on the specific legislation proposed, so that one can dismiss the objection because it isn't specifically caused by the self ID laws or proposals, and that would be half right. "Self ID" is not, all by itself, the source of the problem.

 

[Chanakya]

I've not read all the posts here, so that it could be someone else has already said this: but as far as the situation of trans women in male prisons, the concerns of both sides to the issue seem entirely legitimate. And an obvious solution presents itself. Just set up a separate prison for trans women. One or more, depending on the numbers. And keep all trans women prisoners there. That way trans women prisoners will be safe from predatory male fellow inmates. And cis women prisoners will be safe from rogue trans women fellow inmates. Seems entirely obvious, this solution, and not too difficult to implement.

 

[Belz...]

I've not read all the posts here, so that it could be someone else has already said this: but as far as the situation of trans women in male prisons, the concerns of both sides to the issue seem entirely legitimate. And an obvious solution presents itself. Just set up a separate prison for trans women. One or more, depending on the numbers. And keep all trans women prisoners there. That way trans women prisoners will be safe from predatory male fellow inmates. And cis women prisoners will be safe from rogue trans women fellow inmates. Seems entirely obvious, this solution, and not too difficult to implement.

Yeah but that's such a TERF solution!!!!!111

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I've not read all the posts here, so that it could be someone else has already said this: but as far as the situation of trans women in male prisons, the concerns of both sides to the issue seem entirely legitimate. And an obvious solution presents itself. Just set up a separate prison for trans women. One or more, depending on the numbers. And keep all trans women prisoners there. That way trans women prisoners will be safe from predatory male fellow inmates. And cis women prisoners will be safe from rogue trans women fellow inmates. Seems entirely obvious, this solution, and not too difficult to implement.

Not sure locking up non-dangerous trans women with people like Karen White is a great idea.

Given the numbers we are talking, this solution may often turn out to be keeping trans women in social isolation, which is generally considered cruel. Perhaps this is less of an issue if the prisons do a better job of recognizing trans women in the system.

 

[TomB]

Self-identification policies already exist and have done for some time in the arenas in which people are saying these potential problems will arise

Informally, yes.

However, in school, boys who snuck into the girls bathrooms and locker rooms room could be, and were punished.

Men who entered the women's room at stores, malls, parks, etc. could be and were asked to leave.

(The same is true with women entering men's spaces, but is less likely to be complained about.)

In other words, the policies could be enforced even absent a specific law. The complaint that I've heard expressed here is that the segregation will now be unenforceable.

To alleviate that concern, instead of dismissing it as "not a problem," why not outline how a facility could enforce the bathroom/locker room segregation policies without putting themselves in serious legal risk with every complaint they investigate?

The answer is not "but cis-men won't do that" because some cis-men already do and are expelled or (if they refuse to leave) arrrested. What do you do when cis-men take advantage. How do you identify them? How do you enforce? Do the new laws make this easier or harder?

If self-identification has been the standard anyway, what are the advantages and disadvantages? (If you are going to propose changes, you should outline and address both.)

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I think most women would say that, actually, it is already a significant problem.

On what evidence do you base that? I posted earlier research in which women who run these shelters were interviewed, and they said that the cis women in those shelters were entirely welcoming of trans women.

Here is a YouGov poll that tackles the subject. This is one of the questions: "In the following questions a transgender woman is someone who was biologically male at birth, but now identifies as a woman. A transgender man is someone who was biologically female at birth, but now identifies as a man. Do you think transgender women should or should not be allowed to...Use women's refuges for victims of rape or assault (if they are a victim themselves)?"

The answers from women are:

Should be allowed: 51%
Should not be allowed: 24%
Don't know: 25%

Another question is "Do you believe that allowing transgender women to use spaces reserved for women, such as women's toilets or changing rooms, does or does not present any genuine risk of harm to women?"

The answers from women are:

Does not present any genuine risk of harm: 48%
Does present a genuine risk of harm: 26%
Don't know: 26%

On what are you basing your assertion that most women see it as a significant problem?

 

[TomB]

Not sure locking up non-dangerous trans women with people like Karen White is a great idea.

Given the numbers we are talking, this solution may often turn out to be keeping trans women in social isolation, which is generally considered cruel. Perhaps this is less of an issue if the prisons do a better job of recognizing trans women in the system.

Maybe the solution is to look at prisons overall and figure out what can be done different so that they are safer for everyone. Not that that's easy.

 

[Garb]

I would think any person who is convicted of a sexual crime shouldn't be around potential victims, cis or trans or otherwise.

 

[TomB]

On what evidence do you base that? I posted earlier research in which women who run these shelters were interviewed, and they said that the cis women in those shelters were entirely welcoming of trans women.

I think you've missed the point.

It's not the trans-women that are the problem for the most part, it's the cis-men. There are already problems with cis-men entering women's areas for voyeuristic purposes (or worse). It's these men they want to keep out. Rolfe has said in the past that trans-women have been welcome in the women's room on an informal basis.

What they are concerned about is that cis-men might piggyback on a formal standard of acceptance in order to more easily gain access for nefarious purposes, avoid consequences for doing so, or somehow turn the consequences back on women who try to keep them from doing so.

If you can find a filter that reliably allows trans-people through but keeps cis-men out, I think you would find less disagreement. At least for bathrooms.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

The complaint that I've heard expressed here is that the segregation will now be unenforceable.

And on what basis is that conclusion reached?

To alleviate that concern, instead of dismissing it as "not a problem," why not outline how a facility could enforce the bathroom/locker room segregation policies without putting themselves in serious legal risk with every complaint they investigate?

I think that first you'd need to explain how it would affect them at all.

If self-identification has been the standard anyway, what are the advantages and disadvantages?

I'm asking other people to say what they think are the disadvantages, and have yet to have anybody present any. The advantage is that it takes a long, humiliating, dehumanising, arduous, and expensive process, which has no possibility of being appealed against, and replaces it with one that is easy. Upthread I posted evidence that a significant number of trans people do not go through the process because it is as I described, and I posted evidence that not legally having their gender recognised has significant and serious negative impacts on the mental health of trans people.

 

[Meadmaker]

On what evidence do you base that?

Every woman I've ever talked to.

And, see what TomB said.

When attempting to understand this, start by understanding man-woman issues, quite independent of trans-anything. Once you get that part down, you can throw cis-trans-something on top of the mix and maybe make sense out of it, but if you don't have the basic man-woman thing down, you'll never get there.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Every woman I've ever talked to.

And, see what TomB said.

When attempting to understand this, start by understanding man-woman issues, quite independent of trans-anything. Once you get that part down, you can throw cis-trans-something on top of the mix and maybe make sense out of it, but if you don't have the basic man-woman thing down, you'll never get there.

Every woman I've ever talked to said those women are miserable TERFs.

 

[d4m10n]

That’s funny coming from someone who uses TERF to demean people who disagree with him.

Can you quote me doing so?

Challenge accepted.

Rowling was being stupid and, judging by her history of being a TERF, she was also being bigoted.

Maybe Rowling is indeed bigoted, but (AFAICT) she is bigoted against biological males as a group.

She seems to honestly believe human males are dangerous and that human females deserve safe spaces wherein we males are not permitted.

I'm not convinced that it's okay to stereotype males in this way, but the practice appears to be accepted by wider society.

 

[Meadmaker]

Every woman I've ever talked to said those women are miserable TERFs.

There you go again. (This time you, not squeegee, but it's the same thing.)

Never mind the trans part. Look at ordinary men and women. Is voyeurism a problem for ordinary women? Sexual harassment? Sexual assault? I think those are all problems. Those are all significant problems. Those are all everyday problems, that women deal with constantly. I don't mean that women are assaulted constantly, or constantly surrounded by peepers. I do mean that all the time, everywhere, women must be aware of the possibility There's no "trans" in the issue. There's no TERF. It's not a trans issue. It's a woman issue.


Now, once you acknowledge that, then you might be able to understand how the special cases related to trans-people relate to the problem.

 

[Belz...]

Every woman I've ever talked to said those women are miserable TERFs.

What is it with you and labeling those who disagree with you as bad people?

 

[Garb]

There you go again. (This time you, not squeegee, but it's the same thing.)

Never mind the trans part. Look at ordinary men and women. Is voyeurism a problem for ordinary women? Sexual harassment? Sexual assault? I think those are all problems. Those are all significant problems. Those are all everyday problems, that women deal with constantly. I don't mean that women are assaulted constantly, or constantly surrounded by peepers. I do mean that all the time, everywhere, women must be aware of the possibility There's no "trans" in the issue. There's no TERF. It's not a trans issue. It's a woman issue.


Now, once you acknowledge that, then you might be able to understand how the special cases related to trans-people relate to the problem.

To the bolded, trans women are victimized by what you mentioned as well, at a very high rate.

https://www.ovc.gov/pubs/forge/sexual_numbers.htmlg

I don't think we should dismiss the issues that women, trans and cis, deal with.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

What is it with you and labeling those who disagree with you as bad people?

I didn't, it's just the opinion of every woman I've ever talked to.

Since we're doing the skeptical thing here and refuting poll data with anecdotes about women's real fears, I'd thought I'd contribute.

 

[Emily's Cat]

No, you need to read it again. Here's the comparisons her post set up:

rich person > poor person
beauty queen > ugly duckling
genius > moron
Rolfe > men

Yes, she didn't say "rich man", but that's not relevant. It's better to be rich than poor. It's better to be beautiful than to be ugly. It's better to be a genius than a moron. And apparently, it's better to be Rolfe than a man.

I think you might have missed her point, Zig, In particular, her first line:

I spent most of my life declaring that I wasn't a feminist because that war had been won.

I believe she is saying that she didn't refer to herself as a feminist, because there was no need for it - she believed that equality had existed, that battle had been won. I am fairly cure that her examples were intended to be in the manner of "don't be a poor winner".