Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[caveman1917]

She accepts your version of "transsexualism", where we are just men pretending to be women. And yes, she seems fine with it, probably due to her guilt over her autogynephilia driving her to not authentically think of herself as a woman.

She is not representative of us at all, but it must be nice to find a trans ally of your own. It's always possible to find people who will argue against their own interests. Look at Black Republicans for example.

Have you considered the alternative explanation? That her training as a physicist may have something to do with her ability to think rationally and reject ill-defined or incoherent claims and arguments?

 

[Boudicca90]

Have you considered the alternative explanation? That her training as a physicist may have something to do with her ability to think rationally and reject ill-defined or incoherent claims and arguments?

Her training as a physicist is not relevant to fields of biology and psychology (except on the most basic elementary level).

It's like years back there was a question on biology that Neil DeGrasse Tyson got incorrect and he was lambasted online for it. As people correctly pointed out at the time, just because he has experience with physics, astronomy, and cosmology, doesn't mean he is an expert in biology.

 

[Meadmaker]

And then it goes on to pretty much preach that Mother's Day should be about transgender mommies too. I just, I dunno.

Didn't read it, but I don't care if it's about transgender mommies, too. I don't like Mother's Day, and I absolutely despise Father's Day.

 

[Meadmaker]

I'm sure the world's experts on the relevant medical disciplines (neurology, psychology, psychiatry) and those who put together DSM-5 would be interested to hear your *authoritative* opinion.......

You won't find any statement that transwomen are women in the DSM-5.

 

[d4m10n]

Would that be a reasonably accurate understanding of the words you've written above here?

Sure thing. What would a "refusal to accept that...trans women are women" look like besides attempts to exclude trans women from women's spaces?

Again, the clue is in the term "gender dysphoria"

If you don't read past the headline, you won't know the story.

You won't find any statement that transwomen are women in the DSM-5.

Especially if you're just skimming.

 

[Rolfe]

... where we are just men pretending to be women.

See, that word "just". That's your problem right there. You seem to think there's something wrong with a man who wants to be seen as a woman, who wants to behave in sterotypically feminine ways. So you denigrate this with the word "just" so as to make it seem like an insult.

It's not. It's a statement of fact. You're the one who's putting the negative connotations on it.

A man is a male person. This is an immutable fact of reality. A man cannot be a woman and cannot become a woman. He can choose a lifestyle he perceives as being stereotypically feminine and encourage others to perceive him as a woman if he wants to, and if you want to call that "pretending" than that's your word not mine. As is "just".

Knock yourself out. Feel free. Right up to the moment when you demand inclusion as of right to women's single-sex spaces, I don't have the slightest problem with this.

But it's not enough for you, is it? You yourself are the one putting the negative connotations on the existence that's possible for you, in order to take offence when it's pointed out that this is your reality. But reality is reality and in this respect can't be changed. You're a man who wants to think of himself as a woman, and wants other people to do that too. And no amount of "how dare you say that!" is going to alter that one iota.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Anyway... down the internet rabbit hole and I ended up here:
Mothers Day 2017 Special: Should Trans Women Also Get to Celebrate "Mother's Day?" Trans 101, #3

I mean, just... seriously?

This is a video that explicitly encourages children whose parent's aren't supportive enough of their gender identity to run away and go join their "glitter queer" family? It encourages children to make contact with adult transgender people as a substitute that is "just as meaningful as our blood families". And then it goes on to pretty much preach that Mother's Day should be about transgender mommies too. I just, I dunno.

Boudicca - you need to campaign to get a higher quality of spokesperson for your movement.

From the video description:

Just so we're clear, my words of support to "children" is aimed at independent teenagers and *adult* 'children,' not adolescents. I am absolutely *not* advocating that anyone run away from home.

This level of bad faith in your description is pretty pathetic. The person in this video is explicit that they are not recommending children "run away", they are talking about adults deciding that it's not worth maintaining familial bonds with bigots that cause them emotional distress.

Adult children estranging their bigoted parents is nothing new, and not just advice for trans people who have transphobic parents. There are plenty of people in this world how have disowned their parents for a variety of bigotries, and their lives are improved by no longer having to deal with this source of anguish in their personal lives.

It remains somewhat common, and was much more so in the past, for homosexuals to keep their homophobic parents at a distance, if not outright estrangement, in order to insulate themselves from anti-gay animus.

How is this bad advice Emily's Cat?

 

[d4m10n]

I’m going to champion again the idea that you can approach gender like religion. Most people identify with the one they were raised in. People have a range of how big of a part of their identity they feel their religion makes up. Some people leave their religion and wish to join another one. Some people would say you aren’t a real (religious identity) unless you were raised experiencing how society treats you as a member of that religion, especially if it’s not the society’s dominant religion.

If an uncircumcised former Catholic atheist rocked up to Hillel without any intention to convert to Judaism, I doubt he'd receive the warmest welcome. If we decide to go forward with treating genders like religious groups, would we empower each distinct gender to set their own boundaries?

 

[Tippit]

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.

I have a lot of respect for your views, and ability to reason, but I have to admit that I disagree with your acceptance of a double standard with regard to transmen in male bathrooms, which is what I assume this post is referring to. The issue doesn’t just boil down to capacity for violence/sexual assault and physical superiority, it also has to do with decorum, privacy, and dignity as they apply to the genders. I don’t want a transman in a male bathroom not because I’m afraid they will beat me up or sexually assault me, but because I simply don’t accept them as male, and they don’t belong there.

I will give you another example that sort of relates to this double standard. When I lived in San Diego, I was at a crowded bar with some friends. One of my friends female co-workers, a blonde girl, decided to full on grope me. We had just met, so needless to say I was a little shocked. She was attractive, but even if she were not, my response would not have been to tattle on her or get the police involved and file sexual assault charges, because that’s just not my way. No real harm was done.

But if the shoe were on a different foot, perhaps with another woman, and I just wantonly groped her, I would be on the hook for possible sexual assault charges, and a life ruined.

My question is, is this sort of behavior only unacceptable when a man does it? Is this related to physical superiority somehow, or is it objectively a personal violation where harm was done?

I will be honest, I don’t object to being groped by hot girls, nor would I attempt to ruin the life of an ugly girl who saw fit to grope me. But at the same time, it still feels like a violation that is acceptable because of some unwritten double standard, just as you apparently would have no problem with a transman using male bathrooms, and perhaps oogling men.

What do you think?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Meadmaker]

You won't find any statement that transwomen are women in the DSM-5.

And I'll add....I would be surprised to find such a statement in any scientific literature, really.

Maybe sociology, but there's a lot of pseudoscience that gets published as sociology.

 

[Lithrael]

If an uncircumcised former Catholic atheist rocked up to Hillel without any intention to convert to Judaism, I doubt he'd receive the warmest welcome. If we decide to go forward with treating genders like religious groups, would we empower each distinct gender to set their own boundaries?

And yet it’s also true that some people will troll the whole thing and claim membership just to make the whole idea of doing that look stupid. And then complain when they get escorted out of the (religious building) for singing a different religion’s hymns real loud during service. And then pretend that that maps on to bigots wanting to kick out everybody but fundamentalists.

In general, I think disruptive behavior is a useful standard.

“Hillel is committed to creating a welcoming environment to all students, regardless of practice, knowledge, or affiliation. We welcome and encourage all students to experience and explore Hillel.”

 

[Boudicca90]

See, that word "just". That's your problem right there. You seem to think there's something wrong with a man who wants to be seen as a woman, who wants to behave in sterotypically feminine ways. So you denigrate this with the word "just" so as to make it seem like an insult.

It's not. It's a statement of fact. You're the one who's putting the negative connotations on it.

A man is a male person. This is an immutable fact of reality. A man cannot be a woman and cannot become a woman. He can choose a lifestyle he perceives as being stereotypically feminine and encourage others to perceive him as a woman if he wants to, and if you want to call that "pretending" than that's your word not mine. As is "just".

Knock yourself out. Feel free. Right up to the moment when you demand inclusion as of right to women's single-sex spaces, I don't have the slightest problem with this.

But it's not enough for you, is it? You yourself are the one putting the negative connotations on the existence that's possible for you, in order to take offence when it's pointed out that this is your reality. But reality is reality and in this respect can't be changed. You're a man who wants to think of himself as a woman, and wants other people to do that too. And no amount of "how dare you say that!" is going to alter that one iota.

I was using "pretend" to echo your views more. Since you don't view us as actual women, that must mean we are putting on an act, correct? And I don't have any problem with a man who wants to live as a woman, like the transgender TERF seems to view herself.

This is how society has seen us for many decades, as men who want to be women, and that has always been incorrect. Now we know better, that we have always been the gender we know ourselves to be, regardless of our biological sex. That's why we use assigned gender at birth now, because it is more accurate (and why I think this gender reveal party trend is ultimately pointless.) You can't tell a baby's gender solely from their biological sex, plus the fact that they haven't even developed a concept of gender yet in the first place, since that takes time to develop.

That's why I used "just", because we are far more than just "men who want to be women". I am a woman who was always female, I just needed to bring my body more in line with my gender. And I'm also not saying I am 100% the same as a ciswoman, since there are clear biological differences between us. But those differences don't mean much in the vast majority of situations.

So yes, I am a woman who is demanding inclusion in women's single-sex spaces. Which isn't much of a "demand" since we are in those areas anyway. We mostly want to keep the status quo as it is in many cases.

 

[d4m10n]

In general, I think disruptive behavior is a useful standard.

That sort of avoids the question as to whether religious movements, sects, or denominations should be permitted (or even encouraged) to set their own conditions for membership.

 

[ponderingturtle]

That sort of avoids the question as to whether religious movements of denominations should be allowed to set their own conditions for membership.

Unless they want tax exempt status, then they have to let the blacks in.

 

[d4m10n]

Unless they want tax exempt status, then they have to let the blacks in.

If they are running a religious school, yes. Otherwise, I'm not seeing a case on point.

 

[ponderingturtle]

If they are running a religious school, yes. Otherwise, I'm not seeing a case on point.

The post you were replying to was referencing schools though.

 

[Emily's Cat]

She accepts your version of "transsexualism", where we are just men pretending to be women.

Or, you know, she's content with who she is, and doesn't need constant validation of her identity from everyone else around her. Acknowledging that she is still male, and will always be male, because biology is real doesn't make her "pretending" to be a woman. She is actively living as a woman, and is accepted by herself and her friends and peers as a woman in all social situations.

And yes, she seems fine with it, probably due to her guilt over her autogynephilia driving her to not authentically think of herself as a woman.

She seems to view herself as a woman, and to live as a woman, while still acknowledging that she is not in actuality, a woman. She is intelligent and honest enough with herself to not be emotionally traumatized by the inescapable fact that her body is fundamentally male. She doesn't require the rest of the world to drastically alter basic definition in order to protect herself from mental distress. Reading her work, I can't see that there's any guilt involved at all, nor any clear indicator of AGP - which, I believe, you've previously suggested doesn't exist and was just made up by Blanchard in order to slander transgender people?

She is not representative of us at all, but it must be nice to find a trans ally of your own. It's always possible to find people who will argue against their own interests. Look at Black Republicans for example.

I don't expect her to be representative of all transgender people.

But are you seriously suggesting that J. Yaniv is a better representative of transgender people than Debbie Hayton? You've had less negative things to say about Yaniv than you're saying about Hayton.

 

[Emily's Cat]

From the video description:

This level of bad faith in your description is pretty pathetic.

McKinnon added that "clarification" after the video received a large number of down-votes. The images she uses throughout the video are not of teens and adults, they're of children.

 

[Emily's Cat]

If an uncircumcised former Catholic atheist rocked up to Hillel without any intention to convert to Judaism, I doubt he'd receive the warmest welcome. If we decide to go forward with treating genders like religious groups, would we empower each distinct gender to set their own boundaries?

It would be nice if females and lesbians were allowed to set their own boundaries.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think the "religious group" analogy didn't really work all that well, and has become a distraction.