• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Women have vaginas, ovaries, and a certain chromosome structure" and "Women need to stay barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen making me a sammich" are not the same thing. One is absolutely a B.S. societal expectation, the other is a simple working definition.

What's funny-because-it's-true is that we're debating which is which.

Boudicca's whole thesis is that "vaginas, ovaries, and a certain chromosome structure" just might be a B.S. societal expectation of what defines a woman.

And deconstructing Olmstead's thought experiment about social roles, we can ask, "if he's barefoot in the kitchen making me a sammich (pregnancy optional), why *not* call him a woman?"
 
But sadly, it would appear that some within this thread consider that all of your anguish - and the very root cause of your anguish - is the product of some form of mental disorder. Maybe you'll "grow out of it" or "learn to think conventionally and normally" or "respond to treatment and get cured"........:(

You're not even actually reading this thread, are you? That's not something any of us have suggested. Rolfe might have the most extreme position (which isn't even all that extreme) and even she hasn't suggested such a thing.

Even if people do think it's a mental illness, that doesn't mean it can be cured or that people grow out of it. Bi-polar disorder is a mental illness - it can be treated and managed, but it doesn't go away. Schizophrenia is a mental illness - it can be treated and managed, but it doesn't go away. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is useful for some people with some conditions, but it's about managing the condition, and altering one's reactions to the condition's effects. I get the impression that you don't really know much about mental illness overall, and you're falling foul of the same assumption of stigma that is such a problem for treatment and support already.
 
I get the impression there's at least one branch of trans-activism that holds, "mental illness is stigmatized; we don't want to be stigmatized; therefore we reject the attribution of mental illness".
 
Last edited:
Okay so let's look at it this way.

Without simply rewording some new variation on "I define the difference as the difference I'm now defining" what is the difference between transgenderism and simply wanting to be the other sex in any functional way that isn't pure semantics?

Again the more we argue this the smaller the actual point and distinction start to be.

Ted is 5'9 and wants to be 6 foot. We conceptualize that as a want and nobody has a problem with it. We all accept that Ted is 5'9". His wanting to be taller makes perfect sense but it ends at "he wants to be."

Ted is a biological male who wants to be a woman. Now we have to conceptualize it as "identity" and all of a sudden the fact that he wants to be biologically different is some new inherent form actual difference he already possess, not a desire for a potential difference.

Why? Without assuming its own conclusion why is wanting to be a different height and wanting to be a different sex different?
 
ETA: Hell look at it this way. Do people who want to be the other gender exist? Or is everyone their own preferred gender? Or do have to split the hair between "want" and "prefer" to square the circle this time?

This is no snark, this is not sarcasm, this is not a trap or a "gotcha."

What's the difference between having a preferred gender and wanting to be the other gender?
 
Last edited:
Okay so let's look at it this way.

Without simply rewording some new variation on "I define the difference as the difference I'm now defining" what is the difference between transgenderism and simply wanting to be the other sex in any functional way that isn't pure semantics?

Again the more we argue this the smaller the actual point and distinction start to be.

Ted is 5'9 and wants to be 6 foot. We conceptualize that as a want and nobody has a problem with it. We all accept that Ted is 5'9". His wanting to be taller makes perfect sense but it ends at "he wants to be."

Ted is a biological male who wants to be a woman. Now we have to conceptualize it as "identity" and all of a sudden the fact that he wants to be biologically different is some new inherent form actual difference he already possess, not a desire for a potential difference.

Why? Without assuming its own conclusion why is wanting to be a different height and wanting to be a different sex different?

I mean, I think I know the answer to this:

People want to be a different height because of certain external factors that have caused them to desire a different height.

Transwomen want to be women because they have an inherent feeling that they are actually women which has not been caused by anything external.
 
In general terms, I am very uneasy about any practice of offering young adolescents therapy which validates a trans lived identity. And I'm more than very uneasy about any practice of offering young adolescents medicinal/hormonal treatments and/or reassignment surgeries.

In my view, the prudent and sensible approach - while still trying to respect and show sensitivity to the person concerned - would be to engage young adolescents with gender dysphoria in "holding" therapy: therapy which acknowledges and respects their condition, but which countenances reaching full adulthood before more active/affirmative approaches are offered.

I realise that this might have the consequence of causing a further element of distress or confusion to those young adolescents with gender dysphoria, but I personally (though provisionally) believe that the risk of causing future harm tends to mitigate any benefits arising from early affirmative treatment.

I'm not, I fully support gender affirming therapy and treatment methods for kids and teens. I know if I had the choice back then, and knew more about myself and my dysphoria (wasn't much actual knowledge about transgenderism in the 90's), I would have definitely got myself on hormone blockers when I was young.

Much like Jazz Jennings, who I follow on Facebook and is very happy with her life and choices, I realized my dysphoria when I was a child. Unlike her, I didn't know what it was or how to deal with it. I've always been happy (and a little jealous) for her and she is not damaged at all. I could have saved myself a lot of problems in my life if I had that choice, and I support it for any trans kid or teen that feels it's their path.

A small percentage of people will naturally regret transitioning, but that is fine, as long as it is really how they feel and not religion or a transphobic family member, friend, or therapist influencing them. Too often people detransition not because of how they feel, but because of societal pressure and/or lack of resources to complete transition. And conversion therapy should rightfully be banned, as it increasingly is in many states here.
 
Okay so let's look at it this way.

Without simply rewording some new variation on "I define the difference as the difference I'm now defining" what is the difference between transgenderism and simply wanting to be the other sex in any functional way that isn't pure semantics?

Again the more we argue this the smaller the actual point and distinction start to be.

Ted is 5'9 and wants to be 6 foot. We conceptualize that as a want and nobody has a problem with it. We all accept that Ted is 5'9". His wanting to be taller makes perfect sense but it ends at "he wants to be."

Ted is a biological male who wants to be a woman. Now we have to conceptualize it as "identity" and all of a sudden the fact that he wants to be biologically different is some new inherent form actual difference he already possess, not a desire for a potential difference.

Why? Without assuming its own conclusion why is wanting to be a different height and wanting to be a different sex different?

I don't think it's just that Ted wants to be a woman (although that is part of it), but it seems to Ted that Ted *is* a woman as determined by gender, that is, what society says a woman should be. Society says A, B, C, etc., are things women do. Ted naturally (intuitively?) does A, B, C, etc.

Now, whether Ted should just do A, B, C, etc. without claiming the identity of a woman is a different issue.
 
I mean, I think I know the answer to this:

People want to be a different height because of certain external factors that have caused them to desire a different height.

Transwomen want to be women because they have an inherent feeling that they are actually women which has not been caused by anything external.

That's still "I want to be a woman, but that's not grandiose and special enough for me."

How is "I want to be X" and "I have an inherent feeling that I actually am X" different? Again in a way that doesn't just define them as being different by assuming they are different from the beginning.
 
Last edited:
Seriously if the argument here is going to land on "The distinction between 'Wanting to be something' and 'inherently feeling like you are something' is meaningful" this would have to add a thousand years of meaningful context in order to qualify to be a nothing-burger.
 
Last edited:
The safe approach is to assume that any man you interact with is probably thinking about your boobs or your butt or something similarly sexual. NOT ALL OF THEM ARE (before the men in this thread get upset), but a shockingly high proportion of men you meet out in the world will be thinking about sex. Hell, you don't even have to be a traditionally attractive woman - if you've got boobs, at least one man in the vicinity will be contemplating what it would be like to fondle them.

That's not a suggest to dislike men. On the contrary, I rather like men. But it is a recommendation that you bear in mind that if you make eye contact or smile at a man, there's a reasonable likelihood that he will perceive that as you being interested in him and open to overtures. It's a suggestion to be relatively hands-off and professional rather than casual whenever you meet a man for the first time. Once you get to know someone, you'll probably be better able to gauge their intentions... but even with all of that I've been surprised on more than one occasion when a man I thought was a friend, and who I thought understood completely that we were only friends, made a pass at me.

Your description of yourself leads me to think that you're rather slight of build? If that's the case, bear that in mind. Smaller women, in general, tend to get more determined interest. Many men will be pushier about trying to convince you that you really should want them if you're notably smaller than they are. Taller and stronger women still get the same approach, but men in general don't tend to be quite as insistent when the woman they're after could probably knock them out.

To the men in this conversation - this is a generalization. Obviously, not all men are like this. But it is a reality for most women, because there are far more men who are like that then most women would prefer.

I mean, I'm 5'8" and a little overweight, but even being 5'8" makes me smaller than many men. I've only lived as a woman for a couple years but I've already had my share of guys trying to grope me without my permission or making lewd comments out of nowhere or dismissing my concerns because i'm a woman. And yes, because I wasn't raised as a woman, this is all new to me even though I've been told this by my female friends for forever at this point, lol. It's different experiencing it for yourself.

And since I started dating, or trying to anyway, I have had to deal with men looking for only sex. I just stopped talking to a guy because he would not stop bringing up sex no matter what we talked about. When I told him I was a virgin and I needed to take things slow, he just kept bringing up sexual questions and comments. He didn't respect me enough to stop, so I ended things. There were also some red flags that suggested he might be a tranny chaser and only interested in sex from me because of that.
 
That's still "I want to be a woman, but that's not grandiose and special enough for me."

How is "I want to be X" and "I have an inherent feeling that I actually am X" different? Again in a way that doesn't just define them as being different by assuming they are different from the beginning.


Nature vs. nurture? I think part of the argument is that a transwoman would have felt "off" in her biological body even if she'd have been born and lived in complete social isolation. I could be wrong though, and I'm not saying it's accurate.
 
You're not even actually reading this thread, are you? That's not something any of us have suggested. Rolfe might have the most extreme position (which isn't even all that extreme) and even she hasn't suggested such a thing.

Even if people do think it's a mental illness, that doesn't mean it can be cured or that people grow out of it. Bi-polar disorder is a mental illness - it can be treated and managed, but it doesn't go away. Schizophrenia is a mental illness - it can be treated and managed, but it doesn't go away. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is useful for some people with some conditions, but it's about managing the condition, and altering one's reactions to the condition's effects. I get the impression that you don't really know much about mental illness overall, and you're falling foul of the same assumption of stigma that is such a problem for treatment and support already.

Yes it is. These are all positions and opinion Rolfe and a few others have put forward, that we are all delusional men trying to steal women's spaces and rights. She seems to be against any gender affirming therapy or treatments and think we should all just live with the gender that was chosen for us. She also seems to think there is some grand conspiracy in the medical and psychiatric fields that is driving all of this.

I would definitely call all that extreme, but she is a perfect example of TERF ideology and propaganda.
 
That's still "I want to be a woman, but that's not grandiose and special enough for me."

How is "I want to be X" and "I have an inherent feeling that I actually am X" different? Again in a way that doesn't just define them as being different by assuming they are different from the beginning.

I read "wanting to be X" as a conscious, maybe even deliberative, decision, whereas "feeling I'm actually X" is not conscious, is intuitive, something you don't have to think about. An intuitive, automatic feeling not mediated by anything conscious or rational is undeniably authentic. You can't fake it, whereas your rational thinking can go astray quite easily.
 
I don't think it's just that Ted wants to be a woman (although that is part of it), but it seems to Ted that Ted *is* a woman as determined by gender,

(Insert break!!)

that is, what society says a woman should be. Society says A, B, C, etc., are things women do. Ted naturally (intuitively?) does A, B, C, etc.

About the first half of this seems right. But I personally have not met any trans folks that go by the second half as their reason to be trans.
 
Seriously if the argument here is going to land on "The distinction between 'Wanting to be something' and 'inherently feeling like you are something' is meaningful" this would have to add a thousand years of meaningful context in order to qualify to be a nothing-burger.

I’m baffled by this sentiment. “Want to be something” and “inherently feel like you are something” read as miles apart to me. How can you want to become something you already feel like you are?

What reads as a meaningful pair of statements to me would be “inherently feel like you are something” and “want others to see you as something.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom