Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3

[Emily's Cat]

We were talking about how something feels, not how one is treated by external persons.

Describe how it feels to have a pancreas. Can you do that? Isolate how you feel in general, all your other feelings from every other experience of existing, to figure out just the feeling you have from having a pancreas?

Of course not. Only people who have a pancreas blow up or get removed can answer that. You may feel X, Y, and Z every moment of your life but you have no way of knowing that the feeling of Z is entirely due to having a pancreas.

I'm not really following you here.

I know what it feels like to grow boobs. I know how it feels to menstruate. I can describe PMS. I can vividly describe the embarassment and discomfort of getting my period unexpectedly in the middle of the school day and not being prepared for it. I can describe how i fell emotionally when faced with how society treats women in general. I can explain how I feel as a result of those gender roles and behavioral expectations.

I can identify the elements of my experience that are relevant and related to the concept of "woman" and I can describe them.

I'm assuming that you can do a similar thing when it comes to male puberty, the awkwardness of inappropriate hard-ons, and the expectations of "how a man should behave" that you have experienced in your life, can't you?

I don't expect that every other man on the planet is going to have exactly the same answer as you - we each have a different experience. But I would bet that for a whole lot of the things you might describe, from physical to emotional, most other men would recognize as being part of the general experience of being a man.

 

[TragicMonkey]

And it gets a bit stickier when I'm being asked to accept as fact something that is contradictory to everything I can observe... and when failure to accept it as fact leaves me open to being labeled as a bigot.

How would anybody know what you're accepting or not? Do you issue a press release announcing to the world what you think about every topic? If you don't act in a bigoted way you won't be considered a bigot, no matter what you think in the privacy of your mind.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I'm not really following you here.

I know what it feels like to grow boobs. I know how it feels to menstruate. I can describe PMS. I can vividly describe the embarassment and discomfort of getting my period unexpectedly in the middle of the school day and not being prepared for it. I can describe how i fell emotionally when faced with how society treats women in general. I can explain how I feel as a result of those gender roles and behavioral expectations.

I can identify the elements of my experience that are relevant and related to the concept of "woman" and I can describe them.

I'm assuming that you can do a similar thing when it comes to male puberty, the awkwardness of inappropriate hard-ons, and the expectations of "how a man should behave" that you have experienced in your life, can't you?

I don't expect that every other man on the planet is going to have exactly the same answer as you - we each have a different experience. But I would bet that for a whole lot of the things you might describe, from physical to emotional, most other men would recognize as being part of the general experience of being a man.

If everyone were blind how would it feel to have freckles?

 

[JoeMorgue]

And that's fine with me, because I don't care what anybody thinks in their own head about any subject at all. It's how they act that matters.

Okay that's fine, I even agree with you, but then when you are talking about is another topic, not this one.

"I want to be perceived as the gender I identity as, not just treated like it" (because as I've pointed out a hundred times now, doing that requires you to treat men and women differently in ways you can just change) is the argument that is being made now.

 

[Emily's Cat]

How would anybody know what you're accepting or not? Do you issue a press release announcing to the world what you think about every topic? If you don't act in a bigoted way you won't be considered a bigot, no matter what you think in the privacy of your mind.

Because some of it affects policy and social norms that I have opinions on.

For example... I don't think that transwomen who haven't undergone hormone therapy should be allowed to compete in women's divisions in sports. I don't think that intact transwomen should be housed in women's prisons. I don't think that transwomen who look 100% like men should be allowed to use women's locker rooms.

I don't give a crap about bathrooms. Use whatever bathroom other people are likely to think you look like you should be in.

 

[JoeMorgue]

And besides a vague "Oh why is it such a big deal, why does it matter, why do you care" is transitive and works both ways.

I'll never understand the liberal/progressive fascination with demanding people not care about things you're super-passionate about.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Okay that's fine, I even agree with you, but then when you are talking about is another topic, not this one.

"I want to be perceived as the gender I identity as, not just treated like it" (because as I've pointed out a hundred times now, doing that requires you to treat men and women differently in ways you can just change) is the argument that is being made now.

I don't see how anybody could know how anybody's perceiving anything, if they aren't behaving in a way that demonstrates it. I have no idea whether you perceive everyone on earth as blobs of grape jelly or not. Until you come at us with a piece of toast we'll never know.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Because some of it affects policy and social norms that I have opinions on.

Which is behavior and action, not mere thought. Of course people are going to argue about behavior directed towards (or against, rather) them. That seems perfectly reasonable.

 

[TragicMonkey]

And besides a vague "Oh why is it such a big deal, why does it matter, why do you care" is transitive and works both ways.

I'll never understand the liberal/progressive fascination with demanding people not care about things you're super-passionate about.

I'm not doing that. I don't care that you care or don't care. I only care about behavior and actions, not thoughts. I could have sworn you had repeatedly shared that same principle in the past, am I wrong about that?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Which is behavior and action, not mere thought. Of course people are going to argue about behavior directed towards (or against, rather) them. That seems perfectly reasonable.

A group of people want to <take action X> because they want other people to <treat them like Y> because they perceive themselves as <Y>. If those other people say <No, I don't think you should be allowed action X> because it <conflict of objective/rights/etc. with <Y> and you're not <Y>... Then that original group of people gets hurt and angry because they're being told that they're not perceived as <Y>.

Several of the things that transwomen* want are things that they can only have if everyone in the world either perceives them as women or pretends to perceive them as women. Even when they have a beard and a masculine build and intact gentlemen sausages.

*As far as I can tell, this is fairly specific to transwomen. I don't see the same kind of insistence coming from transmen. There are probably a lot of reasons for that, but at the moment all of my observations are only with respect to transwomen.

 

[Meadmaker]

Oh, I don't care whether sex is a spectrum or not. I don't care what makes women women, why some people are X, or how many angels can dance on the head of a penis. I don't think any of that matters when the question is "how should we treat each other?" Kindly is the answer to that.

I think all of the regular participants on this board would agree. I haven't heard anyone say that we should not be kind to cis people or to trans people or to people with or without penises.

So, what does it mean? They want to wear a dress. It is kind to allow them to wear a dress. They want you to refer to them as Julie, even though they used to be Fred. Ok....Fred. "He" instead of "She". Yes. Fine. It is kind to refer to them the way they want to be referred to. Kindness. Works for everyone, right?

Let's go to another example.

I want to take off my clothes. I don't want anyone of the opposite sex to see me when I do. So, it would be kind, if you are of the opposite sex, to not watch me undress. That's kindness.

So, now we have a problem. No matter what we do, someone will perceive it as unkind. The debates, at least the sensible ones, are all about where we compromise on kindness. We cannot be perfect, so we argue about how we ought to be imperfect.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'm not doing that.

No, you are not. Which is why I'm confused as to how we got to this point. I never said you cared.

You're fighting some weird parallel battle and keep drifting into this lane.

TM... if you're not a transexual person for whom it's super important that I think of you as your "identified gender" then... I'm not talking about you when I make those complaints.

Unless you want to try and make the argument that that kind of transexual person doesn't exist, I don't get what me and you are doing right now.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I think all of the regular participants on this board would agree. I haven't heard anyone say that we should not be kind to cis people or to trans people or to people with or without penises.

So, what does it mean? They want to wear a dress. It is kind to allow them to wear a dress. They want you to refer to them as Julie, even though they used to be Fred. Ok....Fred. "He" instead of "She". Yes. Fine. It is kind to refer to them the way they want to be referred to. Kindness. Works for everyone, right?

Let's go to another example.

I want to take off my clothes. I don't want anyone of the opposite sex to see me when I do. So, it would be kind, if you are of the opposite sex, to not watch me undress. That's kindness.

So, now we have a problem. No matter what we do, someone will perceive it as unkind. The debates, at least the sensible ones, are all about where we compromise on kindness. We cannot be perfect, so we argue about how we ought to be imperfect.

I don't think those three examples are the same. The first is about a person doing a thing and merely wanting other people not to prevent them from doing so. The second is asking other people to use different words, so it is a request for a behavior change from others, but it is purely lingual which seems an insignificant burden. The third, however, is demanding the power to expel other people from a location based on what you think they might feel about you. That seems rather an overrreach.

 

[Belz...]

Oh, I don't care whether sex is a spectrum or not. I don't care what makes women women, why some people are X, or how many angels can dance on the head of a penis. I don't think any of that matters when the question is "how should we treat each other?" Kindly is the answer to that.

We managed to give equal rights (finally!) to gay people without having figured out the complete origin story of homosexuality, its causes and manifestations and nature and aspects and theories. I don't know why people insist they have to "understand" transexuality before they can just be nice to the people who trans. It's rather creepy because it implies that, given a theory that sounds good enough, people would be fine with treating anybody badly just as fast as they can justify it.

You realise that this has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted, right?

We're talking about the binary nature of sex and gender. Could you kindly answer that?

 

[TragicMonkey]

No, you are not. Which is why I'm confused as to how we got to this point. I never said you cared.

You're fighting some weird parallel battle and keep drifting into this lane.

TM... if you're not a transexual person for whom it's super important that I think of you as your "identified gender" then... I'm not talking about you when I make those complaints.

Unless you want to try and make the argument that that kind of transexual person doesn't exist, I don't get what me and you are doing right now.

Sigh. It's the same thing that always happens with you: you quote a specific post, then rant about the overall topic in general, then wonder why people react as if you were talking specifically to them about the post you quoted. Context matters. If you're going to say things meant generally, not in specific response to a particular post, don't quote that post.

 

[TragicMonkey]

You realise that this has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted, right?

We're talking about the binary nature of sex and gender. Could you kindly answer that?

I did: I don't know, and I don't care. The premise is faulty so I'm certainly not going to take sides in a flawed argument between two incorrect positions. You wouldn't answer questions on how phlogiston flows through the aetheric medium, would you?

 

[TragicMonkey]

A group of people want to <take action X> because they want other people to <treat them like Y> because they perceive themselves as <Y>. If those other people say <No, I don't think you should be allowed action X> because it <conflict of objective/rights/etc. with <Y> and you're not <Y>... Then that original group of people gets hurt and angry because they're being told that they're not perceived as <Y>.

Several of the things that transwomen* want are things that they can only have if everyone in the world either perceives them as women or pretends to perceive them as women. Even when they have a beard and a masculine build and intact gentlemen sausages.

*As far as I can tell, this is fairly specific to transwomen. I don't see the same kind of insistence coming from transmen. There are probably a lot of reasons for that, but at the moment all of my observations are only with respect to transwomen.

What matters is still the behavior. Ms Zoltar wants to use the ladies bathroom. If you let her use the bathroom because you believe she's female, that's fine. If you let her use the bathroom because she's shrill and you just want her to shut up, that's fine. If you let her use the bathroom because you don't care, that's fine. What matters is use of the bathroom. She just needs to pee, not convert you to a philosophy.

 

[JoeMorgue]

The second is asking other people to use different words, so it is a request for a behavior change from others, but it is purely lingual which seems an insignificant burden.

Yeah but again that works both ways.

(Using this as a jumping off point, not a direct rebuttal so we don't have to that argument again)

Again I'll call anyone "Sir, Ma'm, Third Earl of Bosterwick" I don't care.

But

I have to have terms I can default to. This idea that I'm going to prompt everyone I meet or they are just going to volunteer their preferred pronouns to me before I'll ever been need to use them with 100% accuracy and time is... not realistic. If you're a X who identifies as a Y and just occasionally people just refer to you as an X because that's how it works for 99% of the population... calm down nobody is "misgendering" you, nobody wants you kill yourself, it's not a hate crime no matter what Tumblr says about.

And no gender neutral pronouns are not the solution to this because I don't want to hear it from the old fashioned jerkwads screaming about being called Xe or whatever.

"Male and Female" as binary default concepts are not going away. That simple acceptance of fact is not an attack on transgender people.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I did: I don't know, and I don't care. The premise is faulty so I'm certainly not going to take sides in a flawed argument between two incorrect positions. You wouldn't answer questions on how phlogiston flows through the aetheric medium, would you?

If not thinking the phlogiston flows counterclockwise gets me called a bigot who wants trans people to kill themselves and thinking it flows clockwise gets me called a rape enabler I would care very much.

This isn't some purely intellectual debate TM. We're not putting the two genders on the tracks of a trolley problem.

Being called a bigot can mean things in the real world.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Yeah but again that works both ways.

(Using this as a jumping off point, not a direct rebuttal so we don't have to that argument again)

Again I'll call anyone "Sir, Ma'm, Third Earl of Bosterwick" I don't care.

But

I have to have terms I can default to. This idea that I'm going to prompt everyone I meet or they are just going to volunteer their preferred pronouns to me before I'll ever been need to use them with 100% accuracy and time is... not realistic. If you're a X who identifies as a Y and just occasionally people just refer to you as an X because that's how it works for 99% of the population... calm down nobody is "misgendering" you, nobody wants you kill yourself, it's not a hate crime no matter what Tumblr says about.

And no gender neutral pronouns are not the solution to this because I don't want to hear it from the old fashioned jerkwads screaming about being called Xe or whatever.

"Male and Female" as binary default concepts are not going away. That simple acceptance of fact is not an attack on transgender people.

I think common sense and context are perfectly reasonable. If you have no particular reason or even a hint that a given person is not the sex they appear, it seems reasonable to default to the usual expected language use. If they wish otherwise they can politely correct you. As long as nobody's a jerk about it, on either side.