Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[Emily's Cat]

Does anyone have a working definition of "female" close to hand? It feels like now that we've given up "woman" we need some (polite) way to refer to uterus-havers / menstruators / individuals with cervices.

ETA: URL

My spouse has suggested that females should rebrand ourselves to be "ovarians". At this point, I'm inclined to run with it, since the term "woman" and "female" are both being systematically stripped of any rational meaning. At least it has a nice ring to it.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I'm not at all sure that that is true. Many weren't, but it isn't difficult to find historical examples of people doing this.

Examples of anything can be found but if we are talking about general social change then drip drip dripping onto the rock of the most entrenched is not how it happens.

The goal is to shift the needle on the people who decide policy. The problem is that there are people who decide policy (and apparently some poor souls who don't) who look to 'public opinion' to decide what is right.

And if you are not looking carefully then a vocal minority can look like a majority and be regarded as mainstream opinion. Even on this very forum apparently! So it's important to counter their voices. Whether or not it changes their minds. For many reasons.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'm glad you finally realised. Be interesting to see if you stop using your prejudices as justification for discrimination going forward then. But I doubt it.

It would also be nice if you stopped using your prejudices for justification of discrimination too.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Oops

Need to slow down and read full lines.

Although it does raise the question whether legally changing your gender would result in your driving license number changing?

I don't know the answer to that. Possibly not.

ETA: Interestingly...it looks like the process is based on self-ID as it doesn't seem to require a GRC to change.

ETA Again: At least 1 person found it incredibly easy to change the code without any gender change docs. https://manfridayuk.org/2018/04/20/self-id-and-driving-licences/

 

[abaddon]

There's a fairly well established social convention here. If your daughters are too young to go in by themselves, you take them into the men's room until they are old enough to go to the ladies by themselves.

Ah yes. But my eldest is an adult now and uses the men's room because HE is transgender. And the rules are all upside down again.

Ain't life unexpected.

 

[theprestige]

Examples of anything can be found but if we are talking about general social change then drip drip dripping onto the rock of the most entrenched is not how it happens.

Of course it is. Universal suffrage came about without a civil war or mass violence. Most of the western world managed to abolish slavery without resorting to such measures. It seems pretty clear that slavery would have been deprecated and ultimately outlawed in the American south within the next few decades, without hundreds of thousands of people needing to die to make it happen.

 

[Emily's Cat]

12ish?

I know I wouldn't dream of taking a ten year old into the ladies' room. Well, I wouldn't go into the ladies' room, but that's not the point. I would think it very odd for a ten year old boy to be taken to the ladies' room.

Although the issue would be less of a sexuality related issue than a "helicopter mom" issue.

I think it would be odd for anyone over about the age of 9 to need a chaperone in the restroom, but like you said, that's more of a helicopter parent kind of oddness.

And there are going to be cases where an older child (even an adult child) actually needs assistance, due to a physical or mental disability. Usually, I think those situations are pretty obvious, and adults are happy to oblige.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Sometimes I wonder. However I think it's important that prejudice and bigotry is countered.

So do I.

 

[shuttlt]

Examples of anything can be found but if we are talking about general social change then drip drip dripping onto the rock of the most entrenched is not how it happens.

It seems like British society was won over this way?

The goal is to shift the needle on the people who decide policy. The problem is that there are people who decide policy (and apparently some poor souls who don't) who look to 'public opinion' to decide what is right.

Unless you are a very much more significant individual than I had assumed, you are not going to be shifting the needle of people who decide policy. You just have random bigots on the internet like myself and Emily's Cat who may or may not be convinced. In the UK it was several decades of persuading people that led to abolition.

And if you are not looking carefully then a vocal minority can look like a majority and be regarded as mainstream opinion. Even on this very forum apparently! So it's important to counter their voices. Whether or not it changes their minds. For many reasons.

I don't think the risk is very high that the progressive left is going to be drowned out on this forum. Sure one or two threads may from time to time go the wrong way for you, but honestly... the extent to which this forum is not representative of mainstream opinion is hugely to your benefit.

 

[LondonJohn]

Not very imaginative are you?

I'm as imaginative as pragmatism dictates. As is, for example, the England & Wales Department of Justice. Which is why they house trans women prisoners in women's prisons.

How about a separate wing for "at risk" prisoners?

How many such prisoners would there typically be within a typical prison? How would you categorise "at risk" prisoners? Would it be practical to create a separate wing for an extremely small (per prison) number of inmates?

(The answer to that last question is "no". Which is why it's not happening)

Rotate meal, shower, and yard times, so that those prisoners aren't put in with the rest of the male population. That wing could even be co-ed if feasible. And there could be more consideration put into who shares rooms with whom.

I'd be extremely concerned if a cis woman in a women's prison was being forced to share a cell with a trans woman. I've already stated this.

Or how about a case-by-case evaluation, looking at the types of crimes committed, the circumstances in which those crimes occurred, and the actual physicality of the prisoner involved? A small male, who has been jailed for a non-violent crime or for a defensive* crime, and who identifies as a woman... okay, maybe they get a pass. A large physically strong male who has been jailed for an aggressive violent crime and who identifies as a woman? Yeah, probably not.

The prison service simply can't operate on these sorts of qualitative appraisals. Which is why nothing like this is happening, nor will ever happen.

The large majority of women imprisoned for violent crimes are being punished for killing their abusers after years of being a victim of violence. There are very few that are imprisoned for being an aggressor in a violent crime.

I am not sure how this is relevant to a discussion of where trans women prisoners should be housed?

Why? Why do you feel that you should dismiss that suggestion out of hand? What is your reasoning for it? It's true that transwomen would be at less risk of assault if house in a juvenile detention center. Why would that be inappropriate?

The very fact that you've just doubled down on your claim that it would be appropriate to house adult trans women prisoners within juvenile detention centres....

.... well, I'm at a loss for words. It's a ridiculous suggestion. For a whole battery of reasons. And it will never, ever happen.

 

[LondonJohn]

Please stop making assumptions about items for which actual data has already been provided. IIRC, there are on the order of about 120 self-declared transgender prisoners in England and Wales, of which nearly all are transwomen. And that is ONLY counting the ones who are self-declared but without a gender-recognition certificate, AND are on long-term sentences.

Many thanks for your selective approach to responding to my posts. Now, what about the rest of that post of mine?

 

[Emily's Cat]

We have had (still have?) outright self-confessed racists on this forum. I'm not interested in having a conversation with them once it becomes clear that their arguments are based on prejudice and bigotry. I don't need to test my ideas on whether black people are equal to white people. That matter is settled.

We have had (still have?) outright Islamophobes on this forum. I'm not interested in having a conversation with them once it becomes clear that their arguments are based on prejudice and bigotry....

We also have a lot of sexism floating around, but I'm willing to keep arguing against it anyway.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Her concerns are dismissed because they are unsupported by evidence and ultimately unconvincing. They didn't make sense.

Oh, no, that's patently false. You've been given evidence. Real evidence. You just choose to ignore it. As if somehow you're pretending it doesn't exist actually makes it nonexistent.

 

[Emily's Cat]

If a transperson says black people are stupid then they are being bigoted, if a black man says all Muslims are terrorists then they are being bigoted, if a disabled lesbian native american says that women need to stay home and look after their husbands then they are being bigoted. And vice versa if you reverse all of those positions.

What about people who call lesbians "vagina fetishists"? Or tell lesbians that they are bigots for not wanting to have P-in-V sex?

What about people who call females "hysterical" and say that they're exaggerating and making things up?

 

[LondonJohn]

Ah yes. But my eldest is an adult now and uses the men's room because HE is transgender. And the rules are all upside down again.

Ain't life unexpected.

I wish your transgender son all happiness in a world free from prejudice or discrimination towards him.

But you really shouldn't have said this to Emily's Cat: expect a barrage back about how your son should actually be using the women's bathroom because he's "really" a woman.

(I assume your prejudice works equally for trans men as for trans women, EC?)

 

[Emily's Cat]

Ah yes. But my eldest is an adult now and uses the men's room because HE is transgender. And the rules are all upside down again.

Ain't life unexpected.

For the most part, I don't really care about bathrooms. And as long as your son is reasonably passable (which most transmen are), there's probably no trouble at all.

I do have a bias in this topic. I admit it, I own it. My bias is against male people in female spaces, and infringing on female rights, privacy, and progress. As far as I'm concerned, transmen do none of that. Transmen represent no risk to males in any way at all. The same isn't true with respect to transwomen and females - because the issue isn't gender identity, but physical and biological sex.

 

[Emily's Cat]

The very fact that you've just doubled down on your claim that it would be appropriate to house adult trans women prisoners within juvenile detention centres....

.... well, I'm at a loss for words. It's a ridiculous suggestion. For a whole battery of reasons. And it will never, ever happen.

I'm not doubling down on it. I don't think it would be appropriate. I want to know WHY you think it wouldn't be appropriate. You claim to have a battery of reasons. Please provide some of them.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Many thanks for your selective approach to responding to my posts. Now, what about the rest of that post of mine?

It seems pointless. You claim that the varying types of offenses committed by transwomen (from murder and sexual assault through non-violent crimes) makes it unreasonable to house all transwomen together... but you're perfectly happy to place all of those transwomen, regardless of their offense, with the females.

Once again, it seems to indicate that you're far, far more concerned about the potential risk to transwomen (including their mental well-being) than you are about the risk to females.

It reinforces my inference that you don't think females are important, and that you feel females should be expected to sacrifice their safety, privacy, and dignity in order for males who identify as women to feel affirmed in their identity.

You've said nothing at all throughout this thread that indicates otherwise.

Why should I not infer that you hold sexist views?

 

[Matthew Best]

ETA Again: At least 1 person found it incredibly easy to change the code without any gender change docs. https://manfridayuk.org/2018/04/20/self-id-and-driving-licences/

It seems you can't do it any more, but years ago I was able to change the surname on my driving licence simply by writing to DVLA and asking. Then, once I'd opened a bank account in that name using the new driving licence as proof of identity, I simply wrote to them again and changed it back.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I wish your transgender son all happiness in a world free from prejudice or discrimination towards him.

But you really shouldn't have said this to Emily's Cat: expect a barrage back about how your son should actually be using the women's bathroom because he's "really" a woman.

(I assume your prejudice works equally for trans men as for trans women, EC?)

You should really quit assuming things. Especially things that have actually been addressed elsewhere in this discussion.

Once again, you seem to feel that sex is irrelevant, and that sex-based discrimination and prejudices are socially acceptable. It's only gender identity that merits consideration.

It seems that females don't matter to you... only people who self-declare themselves to be women matter, and then they matter far more than females do.