Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3

[JihadJane]

Oh boy.

It would of course be remiss and unfair of me to reproduce that final paragraph of yours, but to substitute "white people" for "women and/or girls", "black people" for "someone with a penis", and "race" for "sex", and transfer the setting to (say) Alabama in the 1950s. But nevertheless.....

I don't think it would be unfair. Go ahead and see how much sense it makes.

Why do you think it is that black people have never campaigned for apartheid racial segregation while women have very energetically campaigned for sex segregation ?

 

[LondonJohn]

Incidentally, from that Harvard University link which I provided above, written in 2016 (my bolding):

"...the World Health Organization is actively working towards declassifying transgender identity as a mental disorder, a change partially prompted by a recent study uncoupling the mental and physical health problems experienced by transgender people from their gender identity."

 

[LondonJohn]

I don't think it would be unfair. Go ahead and see how much sense it makes.

Why do you think it is that think black people have never campaigned for apartheid racial segregation while women have very energetically campaigned for sex segregation ?

Like I said, it would be remiss and unfair of me to make that comparison

 

[Manger Douse]

Well, it might be of benefit to read these links, for example:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200205084203.htm

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160620-the-complex-circumstances-that-defined-your-gender

http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/gender-lines-science-transgender-identity/


And (though not from a primary medical perspective) this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/opinion/trans-women-feminism.html

A few preliminary studies is not mainstream science and all they actually seem say is Transwomen believe they are women - I don't think anyone has denied that

 

[LondonJohn]

... Why?

The only reason you think it fits more in the former category is because of some mental gymnastics that have changed the definition of "woman". I could perform the same mental gymnastics to change the definition of "reincarnation" and "Napoleon Bonaparte", but I still wouldn't consider Mr "Bonaparte" to be an authority on early 19th century French politics.

It's really nothing to do with what "I" think. It's what the evidence tells me.

If mainstream medicine ever decides - based on evidential factors - that "mis-ethnicity-ing" is a valid medical condition (rather than the product of a mental illness), then sure: I'll look at the evidence myself, and I'll probably also conclude (because if the evidence is sufficiently strong/reliable to convince the medical establishment, then it's likely to be sufficient for me too...) that there's validity to your claim to be the reincarnation of Napoleon Bonaparte.

Until then, though.................

 

[caveman1917]

As both Mycroft and I have now pointed out, any men who have a desire to rape women in the women's changing rooms do not need to pretend they're trans women in order to carry out their rape.

They can simply walk through the unlocked door, straight into the women's changing room, and go about their disgusting business. As men. As cis men. And they could have done so at literally any time in the last few hundred years (or whenever gender-segregated changing rooms were first introduced...).

And as Mycroft correctly also pointed out: in fact, any men with a desire to rape women in the women's locker room would - if they stopped for a moment to think it through - be far better off NOT attempting to deceptively pose as trans women, as they'd likely face a higher chance of identification and discovery if they did so. They'd be far better off (from their criminal perspective) just walking into the women's changing rooms as the cis men that they are.

Your bad faith strawman about "rape" even though I explicitly referred to "exhibitionist/voyeur" is noted.

 

[LondonJohn]

A few preliminary studies is not mainstream science and all they actually seem say is Transwomen believe they are women - I don't think anyone has denied that

Not sure you've read those links properly or sufficiently carefully.

 

[JihadJane]

Sex is to do with prevailing biology. Gender is to do with identity.

So, for example, even trans women who have undergone every possible surgical and hormonal/chemical procedure to remove the visible signs of "maleness" are still male by sex. But they're women by gender.


(And if you've gone this far in your participation in this debate without knowing or recognising this, then - as I said - it would seem to bring into question the very basis upon which you're constructing your arguments)

Please define the words "woman" and gender". And don't patronise me.

Sex-based laws, rights, protections and exemptions are based on sex, not gender. If we replace sex with gender as the marker that distinguishes between the sexes then all sex-based laws etc become meaningless. Women, as members of a sex class, are erased

So, once more: In what way am I confusing sex with gender?

 

[Manger Douse]

Not sure you've read those links properly or sufficiently carefully.

In what sense are they mainstream science and in what sense to they say transwomen are women?

 

[JihadJane]

Like I said, it would be remiss and unfair of me to make that comparison

Why?

Because the comparison (which you have already made) doesn't stand up to scrutiny. It's also morally repugnant.

 

[LondonJohn]

Your bad faith strawman about "rape" even though I explicitly referred to "exhibitionist/voyeur" is noted.

I was referring back to earlier claims which had specifically mentioned rape.

But no, you're right: in my response to you, I should solely have addressed your claims. I apologise.


So now I will, in good faith, rephrase my response to bring it into alignment with your claims:

Any men who have a desire to rape behave in an exhibitionist/voyeuristic manner towards women in the women's changing rooms do not need to pretend they're trans women in order to carry out their rape exhibitionist/voyeuristic behaviour.

They can simply walk through the unlocked door, straight into the women's changing room, and go about their disgusting business. As men. As cis men. And they could have done so at literally any time in the last few hundred years (or whenever gender-segregated changing rooms were first introduced...).

And as Mycroft correctly also pointed out: in fact, any men with a desire to rape behave in an exhibitionist/voyeuristic manner towards women in the women's locker room would - if they stopped for a moment to think it through - be far better off NOT attempting to deceptively pose as trans women, as they'd likely face a higher chance of identification and discovery if they did so. They'd be far better off (from their criminal perspective) just walking into the women's changing rooms as the cis men that they are.

 

[LondonJohn]

Why?

Because the comparison doesn't stand up to scrutiny. It's also morally repugnant.

Oh, I'm agreeing with you

 

[JihadJane]

Oh, I'm agreeing with you

Why did you propose something that you disagree with (with added "But nevertheless...."). What point were you trying to make in bringing it up?

 

[LondonJohn]

Please define the words "woman" and gender".

That's what I've just done.

And don't patronise me.

I can't see any (reasonable) interpretation of what I wrote as patronisation: I defined the difference between "sex" and "gender" to you - since you'd clearly asked me directly: "In what way am I confusing sex with gender?". And I then offered the observation that perhaps someone who did not understand/recognise the (important) difference between those two concepts was not well-equipped to be making an informed contribution to the debate.

Sex-based laws, rights, protections and exemptions are based on sex, not gender. If we replace sex with gender as the maker that distinguishes between the sexes then all sex-based laws etc become meaningless. Women, as members of a sex class, are erased

How on Earth do you arrive at that conclusion? Firstly, "sex"-based laws, as they pertain to the rights, protections and exemptions to which you refer, are actually based on legal gender rather than sex. And secondly (and as a direct consequence of what I just wrote), Women are not in any sense whatsoever "erased": all people who are legally considered women - including trans women - are present and correct, and are subject to all the rights/protections/exemptions to which you allude.

So, once more: In what way am I confusing sex with gender?

As I said...

 

[LondonJohn]

Why did you propose something that you disagree with (with added "But nevertheless...."). What point were you trying to make in bringing it up?

Because I thought - notwithstanding that any comparison in literal terms was remiss and unfair - that nevertheless the comparison might be thought-provoking in a way which served the debate. You have every right to disagree with that though, of course.

 

[Manger Douse]

Women are not in any sense whatsoever "erased": all people who are legally considered women - including trans women - are present and correct, and are subject to all the rights/protections/exemptions to which you allude.

It is illegal to misgender a transwoman in the UK - it is not illegal to misgender a woman

 

[JihadJane]

I was referring back to earlier claims which had specifically mentioned rape.

But no, you're right: in my response to you, I should solely have addressed your claims. I apologise.


So now I will, in good faith, rephrase my response to bring it into alignment with your claims:

Any men who have a desire to rape behave in an exhibitionist/voyeuristic manner towards women in the women's changing rooms do not need to pretend they're trans women in order to carry out their rape exhibitionist/voyeuristic behaviour.

They can simply walk through the unlocked door, straight into the women's changing room, and go about their disgusting business. As men. As cis men. And they could have done so at literally any time in the last few hundred years (or whenever gender-segregated changing rooms were first introduced...).

And as Mycroft correctly also pointed out: in fact, any men with a desire to rape behave in an exhibitionist/voyeuristic manner towards women in the women's locker room would - if they stopped for a moment to think it through - be far better off NOT attempting to deceptively pose as trans women, as they'd likely face a higher chance of identification and discovery if they did so. They'd be far better off (from their criminal perspective) just walking into the women's changing rooms as the cis men that they are.

Sleazy sophistry.

Self-ID gives permission to any man to enter a woman's locker room and makes challenging them much harder. Challenging them could even get you arrested.

Girls have been reprimanded for objecting to having boys in their spaces at school and told to go and change somewhere else themselves ... and undergo some sensitivity training. That's the kind of obnoxious crap you are supporting

 

[JihadJane]

Because I thought - notwithstanding that any comparison in literal terms was remiss and unfair - that nevertheless the comparison might be thought-provoking in a way which served the debate. You have every right to disagree with that though, of course.

What kind of thoughts did you think it might provoke?

 

[JihadJane]

That's what I've just done.

No you haven't. You simply asserted that "woman" is now a gender category, without any definition of what this new, now detached from "prevailing biology" "woman" , means. Your (non-) definition of gender was "Gender is to do with identity"! What does that mean?

How on Earth do you arrive at that conclusion? Firstly, "sex"-based laws, as they pertain to the rights, protections and exemptions to which you refer, are actually based on legal gender rather than sex. And secondly (and as a direct consequence of what I just wrote), Women are not in any sense whatsoever "erased": all people who are legally considered women - including trans women - are present and correct, and are subject to all the rights/protections/exemptions to which you allude.

If the sex class "women" includes people with male bodies (aka "men"), it no longer functions as a separate sex class.


Sex-based laws were written based on sex. Trans activists have tried, with varying degrees of success, to retrospectively insert gender into the equation. Hairy-balled Jessica 'Don't-call-me-Him-or-you'll-be-banned-from-Twitter' Yaniv is one such law-testing activist. Women are resisting this invasion.

As I said...

Where I have done that?

 

[zooterkin]

It is illegal to misgender a transwoman in the UK

Citation requested.