Belz...
Fiend God
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3
- Thread starter Squeegee Beckenheim
- Start date
- Status
A 2011 survey? Really?
Again, a 2011 survey is being cited. Give me one good reason I should take note of this in 2020.
Belz...
Fiend God
Give me one good reason to discount its numbers. Do you have any more recent data to contradict it?
Surveys about anything 10 years ago are virtually worthless, but particularly when it’s about an issue like gender identity which has become such a growing social and political issue in recent years.
RedStapler
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2020
- Messages
- 839
Belz...
Fiend God
But in this case, why would you expect transition to be significantly represented differently than 9 years ago?
Collin L, Reisner SL, Tangpricha V, Goodman M. Prevalence of Transgender Depends on the "Case" Definition: A Systematic Review. J Sex Med. 2016;13(4):613-626.
Across 27 studies, prevalence estimates per 100,000 were 355 for self-reported transgender identity, and 9.2 for surgical or hormonal transition.
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
More clearly defined, yes, but likely less useful. It elides the existence of non-gender conforming people. Unless the goal is to segregate solely on biological sex, which strikes me as intentionally cruel to transgender people. Biological sex may be simpler, but that doesn't make it a good tool for dealing with things nuanced subjects gender identity.
Heterosexuality is heavily implied in cultures with firm gender role expectations. Much of it is rooted in male vs female roles, most pronounced in the home. Male decision makers with female supporters. Pairings that aren't heteronormative throw this paradigm into chaos. Homosexual relationships are inherently violations of gender norms.
Perhaps, perhaps not. Depends on circumstances and individuals. Medical transition eliminates much of the difference except in niche areas. Again, this seems like an area where insisting on a strictly biological sex division would have obviously bad outcomes.
Realistically, there are only a few areas of life where body composition are relevant. Nobody cares about how thick your wrists are or how much Testosterone is in your blood outside of very specific circumstances like athletics.
There is a body of work here that is clearly interested in more than the edge cases and instead disputes the validity of trans people generally, and trans women specifically. That seems indisputable to me.
Belz...
Fiend God
Seems useful to determine if they can get pregnant, or need a pap test, or could have prostate cancer, or has too much or too little testosterone, etc.
Well no, because gender identity has no impact on sex and the considerations I named above.
Are you willing to consider the possibility that the utility to conforming people might be greater than the harm to nonconforming people? Or even that it could have utility to nonconforming people?
Do you have specific examples in mind?
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
No one here thinks that trans people are just mentally ill sex perverts. That's a useful way for you to dismiss the feelings of others as not legitimate.
The primary issue is that a lot of women don't want to take their clothes off in the vicinity of penis possessors, and you don't think their wishes are valid.
I'll elaborate a bit later.
Last edited:
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
i don't see how trans inclusivity is going to stop people from discussing the biological necessities of their individual bodies. I can't recall the last time someone inquired if my testes were intact before entering a men only space. I don't see how transwomen are a threat to discussions about pap smears.
The harm being done to trans people is pretty severe, as I'm sure you are aware. Trans people face extreme social consequences due to transphobia. Perpetuating such exclusion is endorsing a lot of suffering.
I'm not a utilitarian in this way. Individual rights should be respected, even if it inconveniences the unsympathetic minority.
Rolfe's body of work is quite clearly one of trans denialism. The framing of the issue as a plot by males to desecrate the sanctity of womanhood is a straight up TERF argument.
I won't be going into this with much more depth, as the MA requires a level of respect and civility that I am simply unwilling to extend to people advocating such positions. The posts are out there, and I suspect you are aware of them already.
Last edited:
Matthew Best
Penultimate Amazing
The link provided for the The 2011 National Transgender Discrimination Survey takes me to this page:
https://1map.com/endtransdiscriminationorg
which doesn't seem to contain any relevant information at all. I was hoping to find something about what definitions they used for "medically transitioned" and "surgically transitioned".
As it stands, there's no evidence that Rolfe's contention was incorrect. There's also no evidence that it was correct, but that's not what you were trying to prove with your link, and not what Belz took from it either.
Belz...
Fiend God
No, but the thing we were discussing was the E part of TERF, and I was mentioning that Rolfe's point is excluding males from female spaces, not specifically trans women. So to connect the two dots, males and females have different needs, requirements, wants, feels and capacities that affect how they interact. Specifically, the claim is that women in general do not want people with penises around them, regardless of how they identify, because of the physical harm that this may present. Regardless of whether you agree with that position, my point is that they are not trying to excluse trans women, but males.
I'm aware of the claim that it's severe. For instance it's been claimed that they face physical violence in restrooms, but whenever pressed for evidence the cliamants always admit that it is anecdotal. So I can't conclude that this risk is substantial.
Specifically?
I agree. The question is whether women's rights are respected by this solution.
I wouldn't go that far, though she has flirted with the idea at least.
As I opined yesterday I think it's sexism against males, myself.
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 64,284
Heterosexuality is heavily implied by biology. You don't need gender role expectations to produce it.
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
Wikipedia said:
Some snippets from Wikipedia. I didn't realize it was even a contested fact that trans people are an especially vulnerable group as a result of intense bigotry, but here's the link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia#Harassment_and_violence
Trans people face exceptionally high risk of pretty much all the worst things humanity has to offer.
Last edited:
Belz...
Fiend God
I don't doubt that they are the targets of bigotry. That is the unfortunate reality of minorities. I was questioning a specific claim about their experiences in restrooms.
How does this compare to other people? How many cis-people have been verbally harassed in public restrooms, for instance?
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
I don't think any quantitative data on this exists. Prior to bigots making this an issue, I don't think this is something that many people would think to measure. This isn't just trans people being attacked while they happened to be in a public bathroom, they are being attacked because they used the "wrong" bathroom.
It doesn't seem like a huge leap of faith to assume that trans people fearing bathroom confrontations is a mostly unique problem for trans people. I see no similar efforts by bigots to turn bathrooms into a political football in the same way.
Last edited:
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
So, to continue with "just mentally ill sex perverts."
I will repeat, I don't think anyone who participates in these threads has ever said that, and I think the claim exists solely to dismiss the legitimate concerns of the people who actually have expressed those concerns. However, as with any straw man, it has to at least resemble the real arguments at least a little, so let's go into this. I'll discuss two related issues, which are whether trans people are mentally ill sex perverts, and whether anyone in these threads have said they are.
Are trans people mentally ill?
Some forms of mental illness have an element of delusion, believing things that are obviously not true. There has been a lot of talk about delusions at various times in these threads. Most of it isn't really about trans people themselves. It's more about characterizations of trans people. It is sometimes said that transwomen are "men who think they are women". People may have said that in these threads. I may have said it at some point. If so, I was oversimplifying things.
I think trans people have no delusions about what they are. They know their own bodies, and they know the way they feel about their bodies. That's not delusional.
On the other hand, if they are suffering dysphoria about their bodies, i.e. if the actual, known, state of their bodies causes them anxiety, that's an anxiety disorder, isn't it? There's a stigma attached to the phrase "mental illness", but that's what we're dealing with, isn't it? There ought not be a moral judgement associated with that sort of thing, but there is a reality involved. People with gender dysphoria have dysphoria. Many of us have said that, and it's rather obviously true.
So, are trans people mentally ill? They have dysphoria, a condition which causes them anxiety and makes their life difficult. Whether or not you describe that with the emotionally laden term "mental illness" doesn't change the reality of their condition. So, I suppose I would say that they are, I guess, mentally ill.
The most important thing is that a claim of mental illness should not be used to dismiss their concerns or issues. There are people who would prefer to be treated as women, despite being male, or as men, despite being female. The people who have participated in this thread and its predecessors understand that, and are willing to go along with that, to differing extents. The question of whether or not transgenderism is a "mental illness" is a rather academic one. Whatever one says about it, they would be happier to be treated a certain way, and all of us here are willing to do so, to some extent.
How about "sex pervert"? Are trans people "sex perverts", and has anyone in these threads said that they were?
Once again, we have an undefined term. In the modern world, the description of "pervert" isn't one that is actually used by most people, and isn't a really recognized concept anymore by most of us. Once upon a time, it meant anyone who was sexually satisfied or aroused by anything other than heterosexual, monogamous, sexual intercourse. Then, people started researching things, and it turns out that describes almost no one. We're all perverts. With that realization, we've grown to accept almost anything.
So does the word have any meaning, and does it apply in the modern world, specifically to anything to do with transgenderism?
I think the only taboo in the modern world is anything non-consensual. Rape is the most obvious of those, but voyeurism and exhibitionism are also nonconsensual, or at least can be non-consensual. I'm going to add one more category, which is "creeps". That's also a pretty undefined term, but I'll give a shot at defining it. By "creep", I mean someone who introduces a sexual or erotic element into an interaction that is not sexual, in a way that causes discomfort to others.
The guy who leers at women is a creep. The guy who makes dirty jokes around people who don't appreciate it is a creep. The guy who describes his sexual exploits, desires, or attributes to people who aren't interested is a creep. The guy who continually asks a girl out or who makes unwanted sexual advances after she has made it clear she is not interested is a creep. I say "guys", but women can do this, too. They don't, very often, but they can. This sort of "creepiness" is a form of nonconsensual sexual interaction.
What has come up in this thread is that all four of those categories can be found among the transgender community. There are rapists, voyeurs, exhibitionists, and creeps. That has been a topic of discussion in this thread and its predecessors. No one has said that transgender people are perverts, but a lot of people have said that there are perverts among transgender people.
The problem with the transgender rights activist position, which is that transgender people should be treated in all ways as their adopted sex, including access by males (transwomen) to female only spaces, is that these "perversions", i.e. the tendency toward non-consensual activity, including "creepiness", is far more common among males than among females, and this doesn't change if those males identify as females. Simply put, there are a fair number of creeps, voyeurs, exhibitionists, and the occasional rapist among males, including among transwomen. Female only spaces can provide a refuge from creeps, but not if males are allowed inside of them.
In other words, no one has said trans-people are perverts, but several people have said that there are perverts among trans-people.
To summarize, the idea that people say that transgenders are "just mentally ill sex perverts" is a straw man. No one in these threads believes that or has expressed it. We all recognize that transgenderism exists and that the feelings of those people are valid. The actual, real, position that is being mimicked by the straw man position is that allowing male access to female only spaces erodes barriers that protect females from the sex perverts that do exist, both within and outside of the trans community.
I will repeat, I don't think anyone who participates in these threads has ever said that, and I think the claim exists solely to dismiss the legitimate concerns of the people who actually have expressed those concerns. However, as with any straw man, it has to at least resemble the real arguments at least a little, so let's go into this. I'll discuss two related issues, which are whether trans people are mentally ill sex perverts, and whether anyone in these threads have said they are.
Are trans people mentally ill?
Some forms of mental illness have an element of delusion, believing things that are obviously not true. There has been a lot of talk about delusions at various times in these threads. Most of it isn't really about trans people themselves. It's more about characterizations of trans people. It is sometimes said that transwomen are "men who think they are women". People may have said that in these threads. I may have said it at some point. If so, I was oversimplifying things.
I think trans people have no delusions about what they are. They know their own bodies, and they know the way they feel about their bodies. That's not delusional.
On the other hand, if they are suffering dysphoria about their bodies, i.e. if the actual, known, state of their bodies causes them anxiety, that's an anxiety disorder, isn't it? There's a stigma attached to the phrase "mental illness", but that's what we're dealing with, isn't it? There ought not be a moral judgement associated with that sort of thing, but there is a reality involved. People with gender dysphoria have dysphoria. Many of us have said that, and it's rather obviously true.
So, are trans people mentally ill? They have dysphoria, a condition which causes them anxiety and makes their life difficult. Whether or not you describe that with the emotionally laden term "mental illness" doesn't change the reality of their condition. So, I suppose I would say that they are, I guess, mentally ill.
The most important thing is that a claim of mental illness should not be used to dismiss their concerns or issues. There are people who would prefer to be treated as women, despite being male, or as men, despite being female. The people who have participated in this thread and its predecessors understand that, and are willing to go along with that, to differing extents. The question of whether or not transgenderism is a "mental illness" is a rather academic one. Whatever one says about it, they would be happier to be treated a certain way, and all of us here are willing to do so, to some extent.
How about "sex pervert"? Are trans people "sex perverts", and has anyone in these threads said that they were?
Once again, we have an undefined term. In the modern world, the description of "pervert" isn't one that is actually used by most people, and isn't a really recognized concept anymore by most of us. Once upon a time, it meant anyone who was sexually satisfied or aroused by anything other than heterosexual, monogamous, sexual intercourse. Then, people started researching things, and it turns out that describes almost no one. We're all perverts. With that realization, we've grown to accept almost anything.
So does the word have any meaning, and does it apply in the modern world, specifically to anything to do with transgenderism?
I think the only taboo in the modern world is anything non-consensual. Rape is the most obvious of those, but voyeurism and exhibitionism are also nonconsensual, or at least can be non-consensual. I'm going to add one more category, which is "creeps". That's also a pretty undefined term, but I'll give a shot at defining it. By "creep", I mean someone who introduces a sexual or erotic element into an interaction that is not sexual, in a way that causes discomfort to others.
The guy who leers at women is a creep. The guy who makes dirty jokes around people who don't appreciate it is a creep. The guy who describes his sexual exploits, desires, or attributes to people who aren't interested is a creep. The guy who continually asks a girl out or who makes unwanted sexual advances after she has made it clear she is not interested is a creep. I say "guys", but women can do this, too. They don't, very often, but they can. This sort of "creepiness" is a form of nonconsensual sexual interaction.
What has come up in this thread is that all four of those categories can be found among the transgender community. There are rapists, voyeurs, exhibitionists, and creeps. That has been a topic of discussion in this thread and its predecessors. No one has said that transgender people are perverts, but a lot of people have said that there are perverts among transgender people.
The problem with the transgender rights activist position, which is that transgender people should be treated in all ways as their adopted sex, including access by males (transwomen) to female only spaces, is that these "perversions", i.e. the tendency toward non-consensual activity, including "creepiness", is far more common among males than among females, and this doesn't change if those males identify as females. Simply put, there are a fair number of creeps, voyeurs, exhibitionists, and the occasional rapist among males, including among transwomen. Female only spaces can provide a refuge from creeps, but not if males are allowed inside of them.
In other words, no one has said trans-people are perverts, but several people have said that there are perverts among trans-people.
To summarize, the idea that people say that transgenders are "just mentally ill sex perverts" is a straw man. No one in these threads believes that or has expressed it. We all recognize that transgenderism exists and that the feelings of those people are valid. The actual, real, position that is being mimicked by the straw man position is that allowing male access to female only spaces erodes barriers that protect females from the sex perverts that do exist, both within and outside of the trans community.
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2010
- Messages
- 32,124
Feel free to provide a link with more contemporary data from a reputable source.
- Status