Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
theprestige said:
"I want you to treat me like a woman, not like a man."

"That's sexist. I try to treat everyone the same."

"Well, I want you to treat me different."

"Different how?"

"Like a woman."

"What would treating you like a woman look like?"

"..."

Checkmate, transwomen.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'm still trying to figure out what a biological male means when they say they "feel like a woman". Almost all of the things about me that I think make me "feel like a woman" are massively related to biology. Those few that aren't related to biology are almost all the results of the lived experience of how society treats me as a woman. Since neither of those are something that a biological male would experience, I really don't understand what is meant.

But I also don't give a crap about pronouns or clothing or makeup.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Transperson: "Can I use the bathroom of my choice?"
Me: "Sure"
Transperson: "Will you use my preferred pronouns?"
Me: "Sure"
Transperson: "Will you support me in my competing in sports leagues that match my gender identity?"
Me: "Sure."
Transperson: "Will you literally think of me in your head as my preferred gender?"
Me: "No. I literally can't. The criteria you are using, while I respect, simply don't exist to me."
Click to expand...

I think it might be a lot easier for males to take this stance than for females. Males have nothing to lose.

In bathrooms, as I have been told, men already make a point of not making eye contact with or interacting with other males. A transman would likely use a stall if they're pre-op, or at least expect that other men aren't going to be staring at their shiny new penis. And men, in general, are very, very unlikely to get raped by genetic females in the toilet at a night club. In general, men are unlikely to be leered at by lecherous females in a changing room, or be intimidated by females who might sexually assault them while they're showering.

That doesn't hold true if you turn it around the other way though.

And when it comes to sports, men don't really have anything to lose, as I've already said. Transmen are unlikely to be competitive because biology is biology and doesn't care what we identify as. Genetic females however, end up with new records being set by male-bodied people that are pretty much unattainable and unmatchable by a female bodied person. They stand to lose out on scholarships for female athletes. They stand to get bumped out of competition by male-bodied people. Women have a lot more to lose in this negotiation than men do.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Honestly, I'm still trying to figure out what a biological male means when they say they "feel like a woman".
Click to expand...

I quite often say that.

But, I suspect with a completely different meaning.

Emily's Cat said:
Genetic females however, end up with new records being set by male-bodied people that are pretty much unattainable and unmatchable by a female bodied person. They stand to lose out on scholarships for female athletes. They stand to get bumped out of competition by male-bodied people. Women have a lot more to lose in this negotiation than men do.
Click to expand...

That's the one that pisses me off most.

I've mentioned a while back about a 20-year-old woman who trained for years to make #1 in NZ's womens' BMX squad, only to see that taken away by a bloke who, after being unable to break the top three in men's BMX, suddenly decided he was actually a girl and won easily.

d4m10n said:
Not to mention those of us cishet dudebros who enjoy women's sport as spectators.
Click to expand...

Yes, I always watch NZ's women's hockey!

https://www.givemesport.com/1503633-tokyo-2020-new-zealand-womens-hockey-team-secure-their-place
 
Emily's Cat said:
I think it might be a lot easier for males to take this stance than for females. Males have nothing to lose.
Click to expand...

You have no more right to be protected from a man then I do.

Again I'm sick of this insulting demarcation.

"Not wanting a gay man in my locker room because he might rape me" is homophobic.

"Not wanting transgender people because they might sneak into a shared private space as the other gender and molest/rape me" is transphobic.

"You have to protect me from the straight cis-men because they might rape me" is exactly the same thing. A random straight cis-male in your locker room is exactly the same threat to you as a random gay male in mine is to me. Or a random transgender person in somebody else's.

If the lines people really want drawn in the sand is "Straight Cis-Men" and "Everybody else," which always seems to be the actual goal bubbling under the surface in the discussion, then they need to own it.
 
Meadmaker said:
For whatever reasons, lots of people like sports, and lots of modern people like women's sports. Getting rid of women's sports isn't an answer that is going to satisfy people who like women's sports.
Click to expand...

Because I can't make everybody happy because I'm being given directly contradictory instructions and nobody is giving me a valid reason why I should pick them as the one to make happy.

Again either I'm a transphobe who wants trangender teens to commit suicide because I "misgender" them or an evil rape enabler who wants innocent widdle women to be raped in a locker room by an evil man.

I'm "intolerant" and "don't understand because I'm a straight cis-man" either way.

The way I'm being told that I have to square the circle; to just nod and agree that straight cis-men and only straight cis-men are such repressed balls of barely contained rape energy that they are the only part of the gender-spectrum we have to protect everyone else from, I do not accept.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
A random straight cis-male in your locker room is exactly the same threat to you as a random gay male in mine is to me.
Click to expand...

Assuming men are sexually assaulted by men at roughly the same rates women are...?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
 
d4m10n said:
Assuming men are sexually assaulted by men at roughly the same rates women are...?
Click to expand...

And 51.1% of murders in America are committed by African Americans even thought they only make up 13.4% of the population. That little factoid is parroted by every racists you'll ever come across. It's one of three facts they all know along with "Lincoln Was a Republican" and "But some Northerners owned slaves!"

Congratulations. You just re-justified segregation. Have to protect the innocent white women from those scrawy black men.

Cue "No you see that's difference because..."
 
JoeMorgue said:
You have no more right to be protected from a man then I do.
Click to expand...
We all have a right to be protected from rape. The risk to women of being raped by men is much greater than the risk to men of being raped by men, so as society it makes a lot of sense to find ways to mitigate that higher risk.

So yes, of course women have more right to be protected from men than you do.


"You have to protect me from the straight cis-men because they might rape me" is exactly the same thing. A random straight cis-male in your locker room is exactly the same threat to you as a random gay male in mine is to me. Or a random transgender person in somebody else's.
Click to expand...
No, they're actually not. For one thing, the chances that that random man will significantly outweigh and be able to overpower her are much higher than that the same would be true of a random man with respect to you.

The two situations are not the same, so of course we shouldn't treat them as though they were the same.
 
Roboramma said:
No, they're actually not. For one thing, the chances that that random man will significantly outweigh and be able to overpower her are much higher than that the same would be true of a random man with respect to you.
Click to expand...

I'm a doughy 42 year old computer tech. If I walk into Ronda Rousey's locker room she's not in danger from me.

Make weight class locker rooms then. If the gay or transgender person walking into the bathroom or locker room behind me is half my age with 1% body fat and 16 inch biceps and built like a brick (blank) house I don't get to ask them to wait outside because if they up and decide to try and rape me they could overpower me.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Congratulations. You just re-justified segregation.
Click to expand...
I suppose so, if we add the additional premise that people of color are more violent by nature rather than as a result of policies such as segregation, redlining, and the school-to-prison pipeline.

Are you willing to commit to the italicized premise?
 
d4m10n said:
I suppose so, if we add the additional premise that people of color are more violent by nature rather than as a result of policies such as segregation, redlining, and the school-to-prison pipeline.

Are you willing to commit to the italicized premise?
Click to expand...

I'm as willing to commit to as much I am to the premise that men are more violent by nature. Or straight men. Or straight cis-men.
 
JoeMorgue said:
"You have to protect me from the straight cis-men because they might rape me" is exactly the same thing. A random straight cis-male in your locker room is exactly the same threat to you as a random gay male in mine is to me.
Click to expand...

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited to remove breach of rule 12


ETA: In all seriousness, what you said is just a complete denial of reality.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JoeMorgue said:
I'm a doughy 42 year old computer tech. If I walk into Ronda Rousey's locker room she's not in danger from me.
Click to expand...
You specifically talked about "A random straight cis-male in your locker room is exactly the same threat to you as a random gay male in mine is to me."
Chances are even as a doughy 42 year old, you have more upper body strength than Emily's Cat, or a randomly selected woman.

Women are, on average, at much greater danger of sexual assault than men, having special considerations to mitigate that risk makes sense.

Make weight class locker rooms then. If the gay or transgender person walking into the bathroom or locker room behind me is half my age with 1% body fat and 16 inch biceps and built like a brick (blank) house I don't get to ask them to wait outside because if they up and decide to try and rape me they could overpower me.
Click to expand...

If you think that men being raped in locker rooms by other men is a large enough concern that we should be taking actions to mitigate it, then cool.

We already know that sexual assault in women is a serious enough concern to take special action to prevent it. Rolling back those protections seems like a bad idea. But that isn't an argument against adding new protections for men. If you want to add in locker rooms segregated by weight class, that could be reasonable.

It wouldn't solve the problem for women, though, as women aren't just at a height and weight disadvantage against men in terms of violence: men also have a large upper body strength advantage.
 
This article discusses the issue of trans people and gender stereotyping, and it also links to an article/video about a "trans tomboy", which may be relevant to a couple of current discussions.
 
Emily's Cat said:
What is it that you think "I have no desire to pass"means? Are you interpreting that as something different than being perfectly content looking like, behaving like, dressing like, and being perceived as cis-male?
Click to expand...

Yes, obviously. If passing is convincing as a cis woman, then not wanting to pass does not imply presenting entirely as a cis man.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Actually, Squeegee Beckenham and Suburban Turkey: Are you stridently arguing with all of the various organizations out there that they need to change how they're referring to men to be more inclusive? If not, why not? Why are you more concerned with things that affect women?
Click to expand...

I'm not stridently arguing with any organisation about anything. But if you'll link to someone complaining about, say, an article on healthy sperm using the term "people who produce sperm"* and insisting that instead the word "men" should be used, then I'll happily call them stupid and wrong and explain why I think so.

*For example, this page from a fertility clinic which has separate options for "people who produce sperm" and "people who have ovaries".
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
I don't think you read it at all. There was nothing in there that could be considered factually incorrect, and there was no fearmongering about transpeople. Seriously, if you're going to take such a hard stance, at least do it based on real information instead of... whatever it is that you're filtering reality through.
Click to expand...

There was a twitter thread posted a while back that dissected it with a fine tooth comb. Nobody offered any counter-arguments or support for Rowling in the face of that. You're welcome to do so, if you choose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom