Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[theprestige]

The people tasked with understanding such things say yes it is.

But we can just throw out the entire field of mental health if it suits you better?

Ask Olmstead.

If GD is a real condition, then it should be dealt with as a medical reality, not a personal opinion.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Well, no. First off, I don't think there's any competent psychologists who would say that Zuby is genuinely transgender. It's kinda obvious, he's not exactly hiding it, but if self-declaration is the only thing as you claim, then you can't say he's not.

The tweet you linked to demonstrated that he wasn't transgender and that a legal declaration that he was would be false. Even if it wasn't though what would be gained or loss by him having F in his passport instead of M?

Second, yes, even in the case of honest declarations, sometimes psychologists should say, hold on, maybe something else is going on. For example, have you heard of Walt Heyer? He medically transitioned from male to female, but later came to regret it. He says his transgenderism was driven by sexual abuse he suffered as a child, but which no psychologist treating his transgenderism ever delved into. I'm not claiming that untreated trauma is behind all transgenderism, but it's hard to seriously argue that it isn't behind some of it. And in those cases, no, a good psychologist shouldn't just sign off on a transition without trying to treat that trauma. Similar stuff also happens with some autistic kids. They don't fit in, they don't feel like their peers. Autistic girls may feel more comfortable with the simpler social dynamics of boys than girls, and autistic boys may feel more comfortable with the less aggressive style of girls. Changing genders is sold to them as a solution to their difficulties, but it usually isn't. And a good psychologist should be able to help them through those difficulties without having to resort to drastic and irreversible medical intervention.

So no, self-declaration should literally not be all that matters

Are you talking about transitioning or about legally changing gender? If you are talking about medically transitioning then I don't think it can be done without talking to a doctor. Self-ID has nothing to do with medically transitioning. We are talking about legally transitioning. A completely painless and 100% reversible process if necessary.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Not if you have legal entitlements based on your legally-recorded gender.

Such as? What specifically is your biggest objection here so we can deal with it?

What are these state-sanctioned gender-specific benefits I am missing out on? Let's see if it's worth me doing the paperwork to get my hands on the goodies...

 

[Emily's Cat]

'Harassment' is quite a strong term and I seriously doubt most of the things listed there come anywhere close to it. Being deplatformed is not harassment. Being complained about is not harassment.

Genuine harassment is always wrong but whining about being 'cancelled' is a completely different thing.

If people don't like what you are saying it is perfectly legitimate for them to raise the issue.

It might be worthwhile to look into what they experienced, rather than just "doubting" it because that's not what you imagine to have happened.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Most people who oppose Self-ID seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what it actually means.

Self-ID does not make it legal for a cisman to enter a women's changing room. Even if he says any sort of magic words.

Please educate us poor lady-folk, who just really can't grasp complex concepts like "a male person can legally change their gender, with zero supporting evidence, based solely on the claim of that male person, and by taking that legal step, is thereby entitled to access to female spaces and services, and given that such person has legally changed their sex, any challenge of their gender identity is consider misgendering, and may constitute a hate crime"

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I'm not saying it should. My point is:

If you want to be legally recognised as transgender, you will be (this obviously excludes trolls). A visit to the doctor is just an extra step, so it doesn't really make a difference.

I mean, I guess it could weed out really lazy perverts.

I think this underestimates the issues of getting certified.

If you want to be legally recognised as transgender but don't have the money to see one of the recognised medical professionals, or can't get an appointment in the next 2 years or don't live within 200 miles of one you might not get recognised either. But I take your broader point.

 

[Emily's Cat]

It's as much as fact as 'transwomen are not real women'

what is your non-tautological meaning of the term "woman" that leads you to believe this to be true?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Transgender people are asking for the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of their declared gender.

Do you agree with this basic principle?

What falls under the heading of "discrimination"? Can you elaborate on what you believe they are lacking, and what they are asking for?

 

[Ziggurat]

The tweet you linked to demonstrated that he wasn't transgender and that a legal declaration that he was would be false.

If the only standard is what you say you are, then no, a legal declaration that he was would not be false. Zuby is a demonstration that this standard is transparently farcical, because it demonstrates quite clearly that what you say isn't everything.

Even if it wasn't though what would be gained or loss by him having F in his passport instead of M?

Nobody cares what it says on your passport in and of itself. That is not what this whole controversy is about, at all. It never has been.

 

[theprestige]

Such as? What specifically is your biggest objection here so we can deal with it?

What are these state-sanctioned gender-specific benefits I am missing out on? Let's see if it's worth me doing the paperwork to get my hands on the goodies...

The one we're currently debating is whether transwomen should get access to women's safe spaces.

One way to manage that is to allow access to women who are identified as such on their legal paperwork. Do you think that should be the policy?

 

[Paul2]

Which raises the qustion: Is the medical condition of gender dysphoria even real? If there's no science- or observation-based diagnostic criteria that distinguish it from other conditions, does it actually exist in any meaningful way?

If self-declaration is the only standard, and there's no independent basis for thinking it indicates a problem that needs to be solved, then why should transsexuals be entitled to any concessions from the prevailing social norms?

"I'm a woman!"

"That's nice; the men's room is over there."

"No, seriously! I have gender dysphoria and I need accommodations as part of my treatment."

"Medical science has nothing meaningful to say on the subject of gender dysphoria. Unless you have a doctor's note... The men's room is over there."

My impression - I am not a medical professional - is that doctors have a way of finding out whether someone is sincere or not, imperfect though it may be. Off the top of my head, they might look for

• length of time the issue has been happening (self-reported, but, still . . . .)
• how long help has been sought for the issue
• whether anything about the issue can be verified by other people
• whether small, initial measures did anything, and why or why not
• there's probably an element of just reading someone who is talking to you (especially if you've had experience with people who have and have not been sincere)
• and more.

 

[Ziggurat]

Transgender people are asking for the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of their declared gender.

Do you agree with this basic principle?

I am currently subject to discrimination (I don't want to say against, that's not necessary here) based on my sex. I cannot enter the women's locker room at my gym. If I declare myself to be transgender, can I still be subject to that discrimination based on my sex? Or does being transgender somehow trump the discrimination that cis people are subject to?

Your basic principle isn't actually very basic.

 

[Ziggurat]

My impression - I am not a medical professional - is that doctors have a way of finding out whether someone is sincere or not, imperfect though it may be.

I agree. But that position only holds logically if self-declaration isn't the definition of the condition.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Please educate us poor lady-folk, who just really can't grasp complex concepts like "a male person can legally change their gender, with zero supporting evidence, based solely on the claim of that male person, and by taking that legal step, is thereby entitled to access to female spaces and services, and given that such person has legally changed their sex, any challenge of their gender identity is consider misgendering, and may constitute a hate crime"

I'm happy to educate anyone on a gender neutral basis. As you will see most of the people who don't know their backside from the elbow on the matter of Self-ID are male (I assume, I haven't checked their genitals and don't see a need to, you may disagree)

Access to female spaces and services is not based on legal gender change it's based on anti-discrimination law. As is hate-crime.

 

[Paul2]

I agree. But that position only holds logically if self-declaration isn't the definition of the condition.

Well, it's the foundation of the condition. What a doctor might do, that I listed above, is merely the confirmation of the condition, the objective confirmation, to a greater or lesser degree, of the internal, subjective feeling. If I say I have searing pain, 9 on a scale of 10, and yet I appear like someone who has no paid (not screaming, crying, hopping up and down, etc.), we doubt, based on objective indications, whether that pain is real. But pain is still a completely internal, subjective experience.

 

[Boudicca90]

"Why don't you belong [in male-segregated spaces]?"​

This question was in response to Boudicca, a transwoman, saying she should be barred from entering male spaces, as she doesn't belong there.

It seems to me there's a lot to unpack in her answer. I think there's an entire worldview that I can barely see, let alone comprehend. I would very much like to know more about the thought process and value system that leads to that conclusion. Why doesn't a self-ID'd transwoman get to use male spaces? Is this their own personal standard? Is this the standard they wish society to adopt? Is Boudicca wanting cismen to stop her at the door to the men's locker room, saying, "sorry, you present as a woman, you need to go down the way to the women's"?

Or is it moot, as Boudicca would never try to get into the men's room anyway? And anyone who does try obviously identifies as man enough to be entitled to go in? But that seems to render the entire concept of "belonging" entirely pointless. Boudicca won't go in because she doesn't think she belongs. But nobody else can decide for her whether she belongs. So why does she appeal to "belonging" at all?

It's a small question, but a deep one, I think.

This illustrates why I am ultimately done with this conversation, because nothing I have said in this thread seems to have been understood by anybody but the ones who actually WANT to understand.

Yes, I would never try to get into the men's room or any other male-only areas because I AM NOT A MAN. And yes, anybody who does identify as a man (even if only at the time) is entitled to go in, and that does not include me. Ultimately it comes down to WE decide where we belong. Not society, and not transphobic cisgender women who want to gatekeep who "women" are in the first place.

Self ID laws just make it so medical documentation isn't required. For example, in Nevada where I transitioned, in order to change my gender markers on my documentation I had to present a letter from my doctor stating I am who I say I am and that I want to live as a woman and all that. Not long after I went through all that, Nevada adopted some Self ID laws that made it so you can freely choose your gender marker on your drivers license to M, F, or X without any documentation.

I was somewhat annoyed that I was too late to benefit from that, as I was already living as a woman at the time and had to deal with my deadname on my license for a while which made me avoid putting myself in situations where I would have to identify myself. But it's awesome for everybody that follows, especially non-binary and genderqueer people who don't fit in a binary and may have a more fluid gender identity. Or for friends of mine who couldn't get medical documentation or begin transitioning in the first place because they didn't have insurance or had medical issues preventing them from transitioning (something that almost happened to me.)

I am transgender because I have dysphoria, but you don't need dysphoria to be transgender. And that's why Self ID is important, because medically and surgically transitioning isn't for everybody and this makes the process of transitioning easier for those who don't fit the traditional trans experience.

Or to put it another way ... if Boudicca says they don't feel that they belong in male spaces then i bet no amount of anyone saying 'yes you do, of course you do' is going to change it. There is then a societal decision on whether the reaction to that is to say 'tough, suck it up' or try to accommodate that.

Yep, I don't belong in male spaces, because I am not male. At least posters like you, LondonJohn, and SuburbanTurkey (and any others I am forgetting) understand this and unfortunately you are shouted down as misogynists and sexists when you aren't. I'm sorry for that and want to thank you for backing us transpeople up. I really appreciate it.

I'm pretty much done with this thread, or at least done attempting to make people see us as people and not monsters. I realized I am not getting through to anybody and all this is doing is making me wonder if I am a masochist for putting myself through the abuse directed at me and other transpeople from the TERFs and transphobes on this board. And now I see there is another anti-trans thread for them to spread their hate and bigotry.

I am a woman, just like any cisgender woman, and the scientific and medical communities know and support us on this. So I don't care if transphobic cisgender women think we are male or men and want to use that as an excuse to direct their sexism against men towards us. We are already among them and have been for many years now. And laws are increasingly going our way, to the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the bigots.

And anybody that tries to say that they respect and support me, but will always think of us as men and will block any attempts at equality, I say **** off with that crap. It's the same "Hate the sin, love the sinner." crap I've heard all my life and I'm done with it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

It's curious this. Is there any other area of medicine where it's legitimate for non-experts to just argue that they don't accept condition X is really a thing? Because quite a few of the arguments on this thread seem to come down to just exactly that.

Perhaps stop worrying about why people need to justify why they should be treated as X and turn it on it's head and consider what are the justifications for not treating people as they wish to be treated, and it what point it becomes justified to discriminate against people?

I wish to be treated as Empress of ISF.

As Empress, I am entitled to 10% of your income as taxes. You are also required to refer to me as "your majesty" in any conversation; failure to include the appropriate honorific is a grave transgression against my identity as Empress, and is punishable by banning. As Empress, I have the right to decide, at my discretion, when MA Rules apply to posters, and when they do not. MA Rules, of course, do not apply to me as Empress.

Why shouldn't you treat me as I wish to be treated?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

The one we're currently debating is whether transwomen should get access to women's safe spaces.

I thought we were talking about Self-ID?

One way to manage that is to allow access to women who are identified as such on their legal paperwork. Do you think that should be the policy?

No I don't think that should be policy. I think for example that if a women's refuge required women to be able to provide documentary evidence that they are women before allowing them in then that might be an unnecessary hurdle in women gaining access to that service. It would also seem if nothing else quite impolite to ask.

If you are going to allow transwomen access to women's safe spaces then requiring a legal gender change seems unnecessary, if you aren't wishing to allow them access then it's a moot point anyway.

 

[Boudicca90]

I wish to be treated as Empress of ISF.

As Empress, I am entitled to 10% of your income as taxes. You are also required to refer to me as "your majesty" in any conversation; failure to include the appropriate honorific is a grave transgression against my identity as Empress, and is punishable by banning. As Empress, I have the right to decide, at my discretion, when MA Rules apply to posters, and when they do not. MA Rules, of course, do not apply to me as Empress.

Why shouldn't you treat me as I wish to be treated?

And this illustrates why I'm done with you people.

You like to mock and make fun of us like this because you consider us delusional, like the other bigot who keeps trying to say we are like a person who thinks they are Napoleon. The fact that you can't see how insulting and demeaning that is to us says it all. Transphobia seems to be the last bastion of acceptable hate and discrimination anyway (even though you are just stealing your arguments from the homophobes.)

Have fun trying to prevent us from gaining equal rights, since you are rightfully losing that battle. You better get used to us around you in single-sex spaces, because we aren't leaving and you can't make us.

 

[Olmstead]

Which raises the qustion: Is the medical condition of gender dysphoria even real? If there's no science- or observation-based diagnostic criteria that distinguish it from other conditions, does it actually exist in any meaningful way?

If self-declaration is the only standard, and there's no independent basis for thinking it indicates a problem that needs to be solved, then why should transsexuals be entitled to any concessions from the prevailing social norms?

"I'm a woman!"

"That's nice; the men's room is over there."

"No, seriously! I have gender dysphoria and I need accommodations ashttp://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/images/smilies/frown.gif part of my treatment."

"Medical science has nothing meaningful to say on the subject of gender dysphoria. Unless you have a doctor's note... The men's room is over there."

Well, obviously it exists. Many people are experiencing real distress based on their sex, and many of them have measurably improved after transitioning or similarly changing their life.

A more pertinent question might be whether the current political climate actually allows doctors to do their job properly and provide a reliable diagnosis.