Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[theprestige]

Or perhaps have it when anyone joins a gym they have to provide ID that shows their official gender?

I've had to provide valid government ID anyway, whenever I joined a gym. Probably AGG's idea of gym owners having to "introduce a birth certificate check for every registered member" can be dismissed as a hyperbolic strawman.

For new members: "Let me see your ID, and we'll get you all signed up."

For existing members: "Please bring in your ID the next time you visit, and we'll update your registration card."

 

[Emily's Cat]

I think you should blame your adversarial political system for that. It seems a lot less common in consensus democracies. Quite possibly this toxicity is amplified by Russian troll farms trying deliberately stoking divisions pretty much everywhere.

How does that even make sense? Why would you think that the political system is what causes transwomen and their allies to make denigrating comments about females, to verbally abuse and slur lesbians, and to wish rape and death upon females?

It's certainly not rare in the UK either, so I don't think this is some uniquely US thing. There are a large number of cases of violent rhetoric, as well as actual real-life violence toward females perpetrated by transwomen and transallies in the UK.

Also, I'm a bit doubtful that Boudicca90 is a Russian troll...

 

[Emily's Cat]

Note that these posts are referring to fighting back against transphobes and TERFs, not necessarily "females" like you suggest. Of course most of the most hateful transphobes and TERFs are female, but that's because males seem to be more blasé about transpeople in general. They might hate and dislike us, but they typically don't seem to care enough to do much about it politically.

I also see nothing wrong with these statements. Just like if someone who deals with the effects of racism in society says they want to "Punch a racist.", I totally get it. And personally like the "TERFs are not women." mantra, since we can play the same game.

Wow. Okay. Not shy about embracing that male pattern of violence against women, I guess.

 

[Boudicca90]

I've had to provide valid government ID anyway, whenever I joined a gym. Probably AGG's idea of gym owners having to "introduce a birth certificate check for every registered member" can be dismissed as a hyperbolic strawman.

For new members: "Let me see your ID, and we'll get you all signed up."

For existing members: "Please bring in your ID the next time you visit, and we'll update your registration card."

Yep, when I joined Planet Fitness I had to sign up with my drivers license. Nothing wrong with that. When I transitioned while going there, they just had to update my info and I was good to go. A trans man actually helped me out with that because he recognized I was transitioning but still iffy about myself, so he asked me if I wanted to change my info.

I did have to update my gender marker on my license beforehand, and NV made it a lot easier to do that by not requiring medical documentation beforehand (Self ID essentially), but the change in the laws happened after I did everything already.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I have not looked into it, bu taking a wild stab in the dark, given the name, I am thinking there might be a slight bit of bias one way.

There is... but it's surprisingly NOT in favor of females and lesbians!

 

[TomB]

A few thoughts on this...

1. I'm not sure it's going to be practical for say a gym owner to introduce a birth certificate check for every registered member - so in effect the default has to be self-id/honour system anyway.

That’s a bit of straw. What do birth certificates have to do with anything?

I’m not sure about where you live, but my Illinois drivers license is my legal ID. People who don’t drive get a state ID card, which is identical to the drivers license. I have to present it to buy alcohol or tobacco, write a check, board an airplane, and several other things.

In fact, I had to present it to sign up for the gym. (Must be over 18 to sign the contract and also to use the tanning beds.

The idea of carrying birth certificates is silly. No one is proposing that.

2. Not sure how far back we are going in 'having a right to eject people' but you are going to have to tread very carefully around anti-discrimination laws to eject people or even ID check people as things stand currently.

Legally, you are allowed to eject someone, but you need to be able to show a reason. You can confront someone, but they aren’t required to show ID. (Of course, the gym already has my ID information to support their reasoning.)

What you are saying is that the segregation of locker rooms is already unenforceable. Which means a cis man, effectively can use the women’s locker room if he likes. Because the only thing stopping him is social pressure.

So all facilities are effectively unisex.

It seems like most people on both sides want segregated locker rooms and expressly want to keep cis men out. But any tool that would accomplish that is objectionable.

3. The laws against bad behaviour may be difficult to enforce in some respects but this is a general feature of laws against bad behaviour. If we are talking about a private gym though I would imagine that the owners have significant leeway to exclude people who appear to be creating issues provided they can show a justification if called on it. Like everything else though they leave themselves open to a lawsuit if they are careless.

And that’s the problem. Without a clear objective method of determining who has access, there is no way to enforce it. The ID cards most everyone carries has your legal sex/gender on them, so on its face it’s an easy way to resolve questions. Some women (both cis and trans) would be offended if asked to show it though. So I don’t see a solution.

Lack of a solution does not make the problem disappear, however.

 

[caveman1917]

You're the one who claimed to see no problem with these statements, and it wasn't all that cherry-picked, it was chosen from the top few posts. And just remaining within the top few posts, what about ******* someone with the business end of a barbed-wire wrapped baseball bat (presumably nonconsensual so also rape)? Or what about slitting someone's throat and severing their spinal cord? Do you think these are normal responses - just like anti-racist activism - for someone's great crime of not considering your pet proposition to be true?

I'd like an answer to this Boudicca. You've already stated that you consider me part of the group of people to whom this "fighting back" applies, on account of me refusing to give you special lower standards on what propositions I consider true.[*] Granted, you've also stated that raping someone to death, then cutting up their body and leaving it to the crows goes a bit too far for you in this "fighting back" thing. But where do you draw the line? Let's go with the mildest of these violent fantasies, punching someone. Do you think I should be punched for refusing to give you special lower standards? More importantly, do you think it would achieve anything? Like, I'd finally agree that you're entitled to special lower standards if only I was punched?

* You've had every opportunity in this thread to produce a sound argument for your claim, I've even helped by giving exactly the form of argument that needed to be presented and showing how the side arguing the opposite - transwomen are not women - had met that standard. That you chose to continuously hit the 40-point jackpot of item 33 instead of actually producing a sound argument for your claim is all on you. You can hardly accuse me of bias here, if you had managed to produce a sound argument for "transwomen are women" then I'd happily have accepted it as true - I'm not the one being ruled by fixed ideas here.

 

[Boudicca90]

Wow. Okay. Not shy about embracing that male pattern of violence against women, I guess.

Typical of TERF ideology, using your sexism against men against us transgender women. "You are all violent, perverted men!" Blah, blah, blah.

I've noticed it is a pattern and in my view the core of Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminism. Cisgender women using their hate and/or fear of men and transferring that onto us transgender women. Much like JK Rowling used her sexual assault experiences to paint us all as threats, I see the same thing among TERFs in general.

That is what is so insidious about your particular brand of transphobia, you can get more sympathy for your views versus a man who hates us just because we are "freaks".

 

[theprestige]

Yep, when I joined Planet Fitness I had to sign up with my drivers license. Nothing wrong with that. When I transitioned while going there, they just had to update my info and I was good to go. A trans man actually helped me out with that because he recognized I was transitioning but still iffy about myself, so he asked me if I wanted to change my info.

I did have to update my gender marker on my license beforehand, and NV made it a lot easier to do that by not requiring medical documentation beforehand (Self ID essentially), but the change in the laws happened after I did everything already.

Sounds reasonable to me. I'm glad it worked out for you. Having another trans person in the community sounds like it was very reassuring and helpful.

Do you think self-id without independent medical review should be the basis for public policy in these things? I.e., do you think gyms (for example) should be barred by law from asking for independent medical corroboration before allowing you access to gender-segregated spaces?

Also: Do you think cismales should be barred from the women's locker room at your gym? Why or why not?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Her, you, and the others here who have made it clear that you don't consider us to be the men and women we say we are and restrict our rights and privileges because of it.

I consider you to genuinely believe yourself to be a woman, and I consider you to genuinely experience anxiety and distress as a result of the discontinuity between your brain and your body. I am happy to fight for your right to not be fired, not be denied housing, not be denied necessary medical services on the basis of your dysphoria. I'm happy to march alongside you to end violence toward you and other transgender people. Hell, I'd be tickled to campaign with you to gain protections and privileges specific to transgender people.

I recognize the disadvantages that you and other transgender people face.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You do not recognize the disadvantages that females face. You consider the fears and concerns of females to be hysterical exaggerations or completely made up. You consider females to not be deserving of protection from males.

I'll ask again, since you seem to always avoid responding: Why should females be expected to surrender their rights and their privacy and their safety, and subjugate their dignity, to any male-born person who declares themselves to be a woman?

 

[Boudicca90]

I'd like an answer to this Boudicca. You've already stated that you consider me part of the group of people to whom this "fighting back" applies, on account of me refusing to give you special lower standards on what propositions I consider true.[*] Granted, you've also stated that raping someone to death, then cutting up their body and leaving it to the crows goes a bit too far for you in this "fighting back" thing. But where do you draw the line? Let's go with the mildest of these violent fantasies, punching someone. Do you think I should be punched for refusing to give you special lower standards? More importantly, do you think it would achieve anything? Like, I'd finally agree that you're entitled to special lower standards if only I was punched?

* You've had every opportunity in this thread to produce a sound argument for your claim, I've even helped by giving exactly the form of argument that needed to be presented and showing how the side arguing the opposite - transwomen are not women - had met that standard. That you chose to continuously hit the 40-point jackpot of item 33 instead of actually producing a sound argument for your claim is all on you. You can hardly accuse me of bias here, if you had managed to produce a sound argument for "transwomen are women" then I'd happily have accepted it as true - I'm not the one being ruled by fixed ideas here.

You asked a question and I clarified how I felt. You seem to have an issue with what I said and that's on you.

I don't really care enough about any of that nonsense to defend it or detract it. I personally am not a violent person in nature (in fact I'm too much of a pushover in real life), so I don't agree with many of the things said in those posts. The line is wherever you want it to be, I guess.

 

[Emily's Cat]

No, that's definitely way too extreme no matter who it's aimed at. But that is just one cherry-picked example from the others also shown.

So yes, it's absolutely disgusting. I don't know what else you want me to say.

It's "cherry picked" from thousands of very similar sentiments.

 

[Joe Random]

Typical of TERF ideology, <..>

When you disagree with someone it helps to have a go-to term to be able to dehumanize them and dismiss their positions without the hassle of addressing them logically.

And I still thought you were done with "you people" here ...

 

[Emily's Cat]

No she doesn't. Or to be more precise. She has expressed views which are not consistent with this being her position. She says people with penises shouldn't be in women's prisons for example.

Jesus H. Roosevelt Christ. Is it that hard to actually read what I post, rather than re-inventing it in your head?

Me:

Sports - only after hormones are consistently and testably within a normal female range, and in some sports even that may not be acceptable (fighting, for example), but some case-by-case may be okay.

Toilets - I don't care. Stalls for everyone.

Changing Rooms - have at it as long as you don't have a penis. I am willing to consider case-by-case exceptions at the discretion of the owner of the venue, and with the expectation of modesty and respect for the other women there.

Prisons - No natural penises in the female ward... but neuvopenises are okay by me. Even fully surgically altered transmen are female. If transgender people are at exceptionally higher risk in the male ward, then find a different solution.

Short-lists, scholarships, grants, recognition, etc - No. Just No. Females are ALREADY disadvantaged in society, we're already not equal, and we're already dismissed out of hand and our voices are ignored (or we're called hysterical and told it's all in our heads) by males. I'm happy to help create similar support structures for transgender people, but I do not think it is appropriate for female civil progress so be made subordinate.

 

[Boudicca90]

Sounds reasonable to me. I'm glad it worked out for you. Having another trans person in the community sounds like it was very reassuring and helpful.

Do you think self-id without independent medical review should be the basis for public policy in these things? I.e., do you think gyms (for example) should be barred by law from asking for independent medical corroboration before allowing you access to gender-segregated spaces?

Also: Do you think cismales should be barred from the women's locker room at your gym? Why or why not?

I think the standard should be how it is, you show your drivers license to sign up and they use the gender listed. But you shouldn't have to provide medical corroboration to the DMV to get the gender marker on your license changed. So you especially shouldn't have to for a gym.

And yes, I do think cismen should be barred from the women's room and ciswomen should be barred from the men's. Just like it has always been. I know I wouldn't feel comfortable with someone who looks 100% male in the women's restroom, regardless of what they have in their pants.

This idea that men are just going to say they are women to infiltrate women's restrooms is a fallacy. I'm not saying it wouldn't ever happen, but the risk is miniscule.

 

[Boudicca90]

I consider you to genuinely believe yourself to be a woman, and I consider you to genuinely experience anxiety and distress as a result of the discontinuity between your brain and your body. I am happy to fight for your right to not be fired, not be denied housing, not be denied necessary medical services on the basis of your dysphoria. I'm happy to march alongside you to end violence toward you and other transgender people. Hell, I'd be tickled to campaign with you to gain protections and privileges specific to transgender people.

I recognize the disadvantages that you and other transgender people face.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You do not recognize the disadvantages that females face. You consider the fears and concerns of females to be hysterical exaggerations or completely made up. You consider females to not be deserving of protection from males.

I'll ask again, since you seem to always avoid responding: Why should females be expected to surrender their rights and their privacy and their safety, and subjugate their dignity, to any male-born person who declares themselves to be a woman?

Again, because you are not surrendering any rights, privacy, safety, or dignity to us. I'm sorry you feel that way, but it is just not true.

Transpeople gaining rights doesn't take them away from you, no matter how much you think we are.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Which of those three policies do you prefer to see enacted?

Pure self-id? Self-id plus bureaucratic rubber stamp? Self-id plus independent medical verification?

For me, independent medical verification of an actual case of gender dysphoria, with proof of treatment and counseling prior to declaration.

 

[Ziggurat]

In my view there are two coherent positions on this.

1. The involvement of doctors in the gender change process is useful and important, and therefore must be maintained.

2. The involvement of doctors in the gender change process is not useful or important and therefore has no value and can be scrapped.

My first point is that it is incoherent to argue that the involvement of doctors is worthless while also insisting it is important to maintain that involvement. Can we agree on that point of logic?

Well, no, it's not necessarily incoherent because "involvement" can mean more than one thing, and in particular it can refer to different things in the two statements. Doctors with experience in gender change giving patients a thorough evaluation is fundamentally different than doctors with no experience in gender change rubber stamping a request. They are both "involvement", though.

 

[Emily's Cat]

It is now the law in California that prisoners are to be housed based on their self proclaimed gender identity. Their request to be housed based on their gender identity can only be denied for “management or security concerns.”

http://https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/518459-newsom-signs-law-allowing-transgender-inmates-to-be-placed-in-prison-by

WCGW?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I said on Facebook how California may be burning down all around us right now, but at least our state government is upholding our rights when the federal government refuses to.

This is a great thing and is exactly the kind of policy I support when it comes to us transpeople in prisons. Hopefully I will never have to benefit, but the way us BLM protesters are being arrested more and more lately, who knows?

Do you even understand why female prisoners might find this law to be a problem? Do you even care?