Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[Boudicca90]

Your entire existence in this thread is founded on arguing that is vitally important what other people think of you.

"I don't care what you think of the fact that it's super important you think I'm a woman" doesn't make any kind of sense. How in the Blue Blazes is "You not agreeing my gender identity is literally a hate crime that makes you a bigot" not caring what we think of you?

Do you care what we think or not?

Only when it comes to what you support and vote for. We need the force of law to protect us from intolerant bigots, but I don't support any kind of thought police.

You can think of me as a man all you want to, but we increasingly have laws in place to protect us in case you want to start treating us as men. And I don't care if even a majority did agree with each other that we were men, the law is designed (hypothetically anyway) to ensure that minorities are protected from the bigotry of majorities.

 

[Tomboy]

The differences between cis and trans women are quite small compared to the differences between either subset of women and men.

What are these differences? Or, alternately, what are the similarities? And does this mean we're back to defining women based on gender roles? Because that's a problem.

 

[Boudicca90]

the whole reason this is an issue is that you want to people to reflect your own self image back at you. you very much do care what people think of you

my goodness what do you think I want done to you ? I’m not some composite golem of your worst nightmares that you need protection from, let alone legal protection

I don't know what you want done to me, I can't read your mind.

But i'm done with you.

 

[Boudicca90]

Someone else laid it out neater, but I'll steal it as my own.

Trans and cis women are two distinct subsets of the larger category "women". There are differences between these two subsets, but those differences don't make either not members of the women category.

The differences between cis and trans women are quite small compared to the differences between either subset of women and men.

Trans women are women, but that doesn't mean they are identical to cis women, who are also women.

I've said this multiple times myself in this thread.

They aren't listening to us, and don't want to.

 

[theprestige]

And I have never had any desire to get rid of single-sex areas. As a woman I have come to realize just how important those spaces are to us, they provide a measure of safety and security when we feel we need it.

A measure of safety and security from men, when women feel they need a measure of safety and security from men. Wouldn't it make sense to open up such shelters to anyone - male or female, regardless of gender identification - who feels they need a measure of safety and security from men?

Many men are victimized by other men. Why should they have to claim to be women, in order to gain access to spaces set aside for safety from men?

 

[MisAndreG]

I don't know what you want done to me, I can't read your mind.

But i'm done with you.

same. Good luck in life

 

[MisAndreG]

Someone else laid it out neater, but I'll steal it as my own.

Trans and cis women are two distinct subsets of the larger category "women". There are differences between these two subsets, but those differences don't make either not members of the women category.

The differences between cis and trans women are quite small compared to the differences between either subset of women and men.

Trans women are women, but that doesn't mean they are identical to cis women, who are also women.

it was said to point out a straw man you made, not for you to make a dumb argument with

Trans women are a subset of men

 

[JoeMorgue]

You need to learn the distinction between personal thoughts, and speech and actions that affect other people.

I have the distinction clear, you're the one waffling on it.

I asked you, very clearly, very kindly, and without ulterior motive if you say a distinction between thoughts and actions. You said no, there was not.

Now you're arguing they aren't.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

What are these differences? Or, alternately, what are the similarities? And does this mean we're back to defining women based on gender roles? Because that's a problem.

Not one person has attempted to define women based on gender roles here. The whole point of the argument is to allow people to be and thrive in whatever identity they see fit for themselves.

As I tried to say before.... tread carefully on the women are defined by their biology line because the same narrow minded bigots who want to reject trans people will turn on women just as easily.

The same biology will be blamed for women's lack of representation in management, in STEM, and a whole host of other things.

I don't see what anyone woman or man gains from these exclusionary definitions.... surely better to be inclusive? 'women' and 'men' encompass a broad spectrum of people and experiences, physical and mental traits. I don't see who wins in arguing definitions while real people experience real harm caused by discrimination and bigotry against them

 

[d4m10n]

There is no reliability data as there is no reliability.

Have you had a look at the study I linked upthread?

These comparisons revealed that both methods yield strong relationships between penile response and self-report of sexual arousal and no consistent advantage was shown for the maximum amplitude or total response method of measuring penile response.

Perhaps you've seen a better study on point?

 

[d4m10n]

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights

The people white knighting on these issues in the name of women are literally in opposition to the majority view of these women they claim to represent.

I think we should take a closer look at the results of that poll. If I'm reading it correctly, a plurality of British women disagree with the proposition that pre-op MtF individuals ought be allowed to use women's changing rooms and toilets, and an outright majority of British women disagree with the proposition that subjective self-identification should replace a medicalized process for obtaining a gender change certificate.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Is the same true for transgender?
Do other primates also show clear signs of being gender dysphoric?
Other mammals?

Not that I'm aware of. It's not uncommon for other mammals to adopt the gender roles of the opposite sex when there aren't enough of that opposite sex to fulfill those needs, though. I would be extremely hesitant to consider that gender dysphoria though, since it seems to be short-term role filling, rather than a persistent behavioral aspect. Also, it doesn't appear to include any element of "presentation" or "expression"... just sexually dimorphic social roles.

 

[Emily's Cat]

For the sake of encouraging a good faith effort from all sides...

Where I live (in the American Midwest) transgender individuals may be denied the right to compete, excrete, or disrobe with people of the same gender as themselves. This is at least in part b/c these activities were originally segregated by sex rather than gender.

[/QUOTE]

Do cisgendered people have a right to do any of those things? Those are are social conventions, not rights, and they're based on sex differences, not gender differences.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I think we should take a closer look at the results of that poll. If I'm reading it correctly, a plurality of British women disagree with the proposition that pre-op MtF individuals ought be allowed to use women's changing rooms and toilets, and an outright majority of British women disagree with the proposition that subjective self-identification should replace a medicalized process for obtaining a gender change certificate.

Reasonable people can disagree on what constitutes sufficient "transition" when it comes to official recognition of gender.

The trans-excursionists that take an absolutist position should not be considered good-faith participants in such a conversation, as clearly the position is rooted in animus of trans people.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Isn't the treatment for the distress basically to treat the person of the gender that they say they identify as?

Currently, yes. An interesting observation here is that for all other conditions, the treatment is one undertaken by the patient themselves. For gender dysphoria, the treatment includes everyone who is not the patient also engaging in the treatment.

I'm a lot more willing to provide that support for someone with a diagnosis. I'm a bit less so when the person self-identifies without a diagnosis.

I believe that you identify as a woman and I doubt that you would a) appreciate anyone telling you that they don't agree with you b) reduce that identity to the mere presence of genitalia?

I think this reductionism potentially does women in general a disservice because if we reduce 'women' to biology then we open the door for a lot of the efforts made to help women reduce inequalities to be dismantled unless they have a biological basis. Or worse, the invention of spurious biological justifications for inequalities.

I'm sure we agree the experience of being a women is more than the experience of having female genitals and, if we do, then surely that also allows for an experience of being a woman absent female genitals? It may not be the same lived experience as you but that doesn't mean it's invalid. After all I'm sure there are all sorts of women who have all sorts of different lived experiences from you. All that is being asked is that the range of 'lived experiences of being a woman' includes transwomen.

Female identity doesn't reduce to only biology, but biology is an inherent part of that identity. The experience of being a female in society is the other part of that identity, which includes social norms and expectations of behavior, presentation, and roles. Most of those social norms are harmful to females in general, but we grow up with them as an unavoidable element of our development.

Yes, females will each have some variance in their experiences, but the general experiences are often very common across thematic concepts and expectations. Just as different females might have different sized feet... but in general female feet are smaller than male feet.

You are asking me to expand my lived experience of being a female to include transwomen. What is their lived experience that should be considered similar to that of females?

What experiences, attributes, and characteristics do ciswomen and transwomen have in common that are not shared by cismen and transmen?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Religious institutions are given wide latitude to conduct themselves in ways that would otherwise be considered discriminatory in other contexts. A discussion of religious privilege to violate equal protection laws seems like a derail from the topic thread.

I see no reason why this hyper-specific, very special case is really relevant to whatever point about how great trans people have it in the US is supposed you seem to be making.

Ordinary landlords renting out normal homes can discriminate against trans people in many states across the country. You asked what rights trans people don't have, there's one. I have no interest in quibbling about Catholic University communal dorms or whatever you're on about.

My public university had dormitories with both sexes in them, but housed in different wings of the building. It still does, 25 years later.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

My public university had dormitories with both sexes in them, but housed in different wings of the building. It still does, 25 years later.

Sure, as did mine. Like mine, I'm sure your public college was beholden to Title IX and other civil rights law, a burden not shared by private religious colleges.

 

[Emily's Cat]

There is no need to ban single-sex living quarters provided you allow trans people access to the quarters they wish to live in.

How would this work? If a person is male-bodied and identifies as a man, they are only allowed to live in the male quarters. If a person is female-bodied and identifies as a woman, they are only allowed to live in the female quarters. If a person identifies as trans, regardless of their physical sex and genitalia... they're allowed to live wherever they want to?

 

[Emily's Cat]

My reading of damion's post seems to be that he thinks trans protections will end the practice of sex segregated communal dorms, which doesn't really make sense for me.

Trans people would be assigned to the dorms of their gender identity, which can totally remain segregated into men/women as they are now.

Sex and Gender are not synonymous.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I don't see how affirming trans gender identity in law would lead to the end of gender segregated dorms. Trans women could live in all women dorms and still exclude men. Likewise for trans men and all men dorms.

Tanswomen who self-id with no medical diagnosis and no hormone treatment and no alterations to their presentation would, by your ideology, be allowed to live in the female dorms, despite being physically male, having intact male genitalia, and presenting as male... based solely on their claim to be a woman.

And just screw any of the females in that dorm who object to having a male in their sex-segregated dorms.

I'd be a lot more willing to accept this approach if were not paired with insistence that self-id with no treatment at all is sufficient for a male to be considered a woman.