Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[Emily's Cat]

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?

Personally, I think the behavior is unacceptable no matter who does it. It's a personal violation if an objective bystander would view it as such. In my view, yes, it would be a personal violation - but it's up to you to determine whether or not that violation merits taking legal action.

Physical superiority comes into play when you consider the degree of agency involved. In the case of a typical male and female, with typical size and strength differences, both are equally capable of saying no and making their disagreement known. But they're not equally capable of fighting off a persistent person. If a typical female has malicious intent regarding the body of a typical male, there's a high likelihood that the male will be capable of physically stopping that female and preventing her from doing physical harm. On the other hand, if a typical male has malicious intent regarding the body of a typical female, there's a high likelihood that the female will NOT be capable of physically stopping that male and preventing him from doing physical harm. There's a power imbalance that needs to be considered.

Consider a significant age difference between a 16 year old student and a 32 year old teacher. Even if there's not a physical capability difference, there's still a power and authority aspect that needs to be considered. Even if the teacher is a female and the student is a male, the teacher still retains authority and power over the student. The effect of that power discrepancy is a limitation of the agency of the student - even if the student were able to physically dominate the teacher.

As an alternative analogy, consider two scenarios involving mugging. In the first scenario, the mugger approaches you with no weapons, and demands that you give them your wallet. In the second scenario, the mugger approaches you with a pistol pointed at your head and demands that you give them your wallet. In both cases, the demand from the mugger is the same, but the degree of agency you have in those two scenarios is different. In the first scenario, you have a meaningful choice between complying with the mugger's demand or deciding to fight them off. There's a non-negligible likelihood that you could fight the mugger off, or outrun them, or otherwise act in self-defense and retain your wallet. In the second scenario, however, the presence of a pistol pointed at your head effectively negates the possibility of successful acts of self-defense.

Even though the actions being taken by the transgressor are the same, the power dynamic between the two scenarios is not.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

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.

A 3 year old comment from the OP makes it clear she is talking about adults:

Dr. Rachel McKinnon
3 years ago
It occurs to me: you realize that I'm talking about teens and adults, right? Adults are still 'children' to their mom.

Images of children are of course relevant because these adult children still remember the mistreatment or outright abuse they received when younger. Adults don't just forget that their bigoted parents made their lives difficult when they were dependent children.

I find it telling that you seem very motivated to try to paint this rather uninteresting video as a call for young children to become runaways.

I would call this nutpicking, but the lady doesn't really strike me even as a nut, unless you view the video in a deliberately uncharitable way. Also, it's 3 years old and has like 10,000 views, How do you even come across this stuff? If you're searching out fringe weirdos to discredit the trans community, you'll have to do a bit better than this.

 

[d4m10n]

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

I was getting around to connecting the dots eventually, I swear.

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

Nvm.

 

[Boudicca90]

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 her identity is valid to her, but she does seem to want validation in staking out a "transwomen aren't women" position and trying to delegitimize our identities.

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?

If I recall, I said that there does seem to be some evidence for it, but not as a major cause of transgenderism.

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.

Well neither of them are. Jessica Yaniv is an attention whore who likes to get a rise out of people (and yes, she is female, despite both of us wishing she wasn't) People like that unfortunately exist and end up ruining things for the rest of us when our enemies use them against us. I think Rachel McKinnon is a pretty good spokesperson based on what I've seen so far.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Since you don't view us as actual women, that must mean we are putting on an act, correct?

I think your impression is wrong, as well as being a false dichotomy.

You're right in that I don't view you as being "an actual woman" in the same sense that I am an actual woman. But I don't think that your belief is insincere - I don't think you're "pretending". I think that your desire to be a woman is genuine, and I understand that it is a cause of great distress for you. And transitioning as much as possible is the best way to alleviate your distress.

Let me try an analogy, knowing that this isn't a perfect parallel. The objective is to demonstrate a nuance that I think you might be missing, and I'm hoping that an illustration in a less emotionally sensitive context will help to highlight that dynamic.

Imagine an American man, Richard, that moves to Japan. Rich loves Japanese culture, and sincerely and deeply want to fit in to Japanese culture. Rich strongly desires to assimilate, and it's important to him to not feel like he's an outside. He wants other Japanese people to view him as being just as Japanese as they are.

So Joe changes his name to Riku. He adopts stereotypical Japanese style of dress, and tries his best to adopt stereotypical Japanese male behaviors. Riku joins in several traditionally Japanese pastimes, and develops a deep love of the Tea Ceremony.

Most Japanese people who interact with Riku are willing to treat him as fully Japanese, because it's clear that he's trying very hard to assimilate, and it's clear that he sincerely wants to be taken as and treated as Japanese. But they won't let him hold any government positions. And there are some roles that he meets resistance on. And sometimes, people get a bit offended by Riku, because while he's trying very hard, all of his behaviors and comportment are built on stereotypes, and he doesn't really have a deep understanding of the tradition, history, and social forces that frame and define Japanese culture. So some people view it as if he's appropriating a caricature of Japanese culture.

At the end of the day, most people are going to be perfectly willing (and even happy) to accommodate Riku's genuine desire to be included in his new Japanese community, and will treat him as Japanese in most situations.

But at the end of the day, Riku isn't fully Japanese. He doesn't have the heritage and the cultural understanding of Japan that is an integral element of being Japanese. And no matter how hard he tries, he will still have the cultural conditioning that he received growing up in America.

The longer Riku lives in Japan, and the more he submerges himself into the real daily lives and dynamics of Japan, the better his understanding of Japanese culture will be, and the higher the likelihood that other people will accept him as Japanese. There will always be some people who look at him and correctly identify him as not being of Japanese descent in any way... but that difference will be overcome as Riku becomes more and more a part of Japan. There will probably still be some things that Riku isn't allowed to do, or places where he is unwelcome, because they are things that are reserved for ethnically Japanese people... and no matter how fully culturally Japanese Riku becomes, he will still not be ethnically Japanese.

 

[Emily's Cat]

A 3 year old comment from the OP makes it clear she is talking about adults

That comment was added by McKinnon after having been down-voted to oblivion and having received negative feedback. You might accept it as genuine, I think it's trying to cover her ass because she was initially suggesting that children should run away.

 

[Boudicca90]

I think your impression is wrong, as well as being a false dichotomy.

You're right in that I don't view you as being "an actual woman" in the same sense that I am an actual woman. But I don't think that your belief is insincere - I don't think you're "pretending". I think that your desire to be a woman is genuine, and I understand that it is a cause of great distress for you. And transitioning as much as possible is the best way to alleviate your distress.

Let me try an analogy, knowing that this isn't a perfect parallel. The objective is to demonstrate a nuance that I think you might be missing, and I'm hoping that an illustration in a less emotionally sensitive context will help to highlight that dynamic.

Imagine an American man, Richard, that moves to Japan. Rich loves Japanese culture, and sincerely and deeply want to fit in to Japanese culture. Rich strongly desires to assimilate, and it's important to him to not feel like he's an outside. He wants other Japanese people to view him as being just as Japanese as they are.

So Joe changes his name to Riku. He adopts stereotypical Japanese style of dress, and tries his best to adopt stereotypical Japanese male behaviors. Riku joins in several traditionally Japanese pastimes, and develops a deep love of the Tea Ceremony.

Most Japanese people who interact with Riku are willing to treat him as fully Japanese, because it's clear that he's trying very hard to assimilate, and it's clear that he sincerely wants to be taken as and treated as Japanese. But they won't let him hold any government positions. And there are some roles that he meets resistance on. And sometimes, people get a bit offended by Riku, because while he's trying very hard, all of his behaviors and comportment are built on stereotypes, and he doesn't really have a deep understanding of the tradition, history, and social forces that frame and define Japanese culture. So some people view it as if he's appropriating a caricature of Japanese culture.

At the end of the day, most people are going to be perfectly willing (and even happy) to accommodate Riku's genuine desire to be included in his new Japanese community, and will treat him as Japanese in most situations.

But at the end of the day, Riku isn't fully Japanese. He doesn't have the heritage and the cultural understanding of Japan that is an integral element of being Japanese. And no matter how hard he tries, he will still have the cultural conditioning that he received growing up in America.

The longer Riku lives in Japan, and the more he submerges himself into the real daily lives and dynamics of Japan, the better his understanding of Japanese culture will be, and the higher the likelihood that other people will accept him as Japanese. There will always be some people who look at him and correctly identify him as not being of Japanese descent in any way... but that difference will be overcome as Riku becomes more and more a part of Japan. There will probably still be some things that Riku isn't allowed to do, or places where he is unwelcome, because they are things that are reserved for ethnically Japanese people... and no matter how fully culturally Japanese Riku becomes, he will still not be ethnically Japanese.

Even though I know this is how that situation would go based on Japanese culture, the problem is that it is still wrong. Being Japanese (or any nationality) is about more than just being ethnically and/or racially Japanese.

This shows the regressive attitudes of the Japanese people more than anything, imo.

 

[Tippit]

Personally, I think the behavior is unacceptable no matter who does it. It's a personal violation if an objective bystander would view it as such. In my view, yes, it would be a personal violation - but it's up to you to determine whether or not that violation merits taking legal action.

Is harm an objective concept, and should it be? I maintain that when she groped me, I was a bit shocked, but I realize that there was no harm done. Yet if I had done the same thing to a woman, my life as I knew it may well have come to an end. How is one act more harmful than another, in context? Is this fair? You suggest that it should be up to victims to decide what merits legal action, but this kind of discretion doesn't seem healthy, and is far from objective.

Do you defend your double standard regarding transmen in male bathrooms, on the sole basis that they don't represent a physical threat, or are there other factors?

Physical superiority comes into play when you consider the degree of agency involved. In the case of a typical male and female, with typical size and strength differences, both are equally capable of saying no and making their disagreement known. But they're not equally capable of fighting off a persistent person. If a typical female has malicious intent regarding the body of a typical male, there's a high likelihood that the male will be capable of physically stopping that female and preventing her from doing physical harm. On the other hand, if a typical male has malicious intent regarding the body of a typical female, there's a high likelihood that the female will NOT be capable of physically stopping that male and preventing him from doing physical harm. There's a power imbalance that needs to be considered.

Consider a significant age difference between a 16 year old student and a 32 year old teacher. Even if there's not a physical capability difference, there's still a power and authority aspect that needs to be considered. Even if the teacher is a female and the student is a male, the teacher still retains authority and power over the student. The effect of that power discrepancy is a limitation of the agency of the student - even if the student were able to physically dominate the teacher.

Totally agree. The student may be a physically superior male, but the teacher can engage the full force of the state against the male after the fact, with complete credibility. A large portion of female power, rests not only on female persuasion, but on their credibility to retain state power against others.

<snip>

Even though the actions being taken by the transgressor are the same, the power dynamic between the two scenarios is not.

I guess the source of my disagreement, is that I don't think power and agency should be the sole determinant of who gets to use what bathroom. Having said all of this, I would much prefer that transmen use male bathrooms, than transwomen, if forced to make the choice.

 

[Boudicca90]

That comment was added by McKinnon after having been down-voted to oblivion and having received negative feedback. You might accept it as genuine, I think it's trying to cover her ass because she was initially suggesting that children should run away.

If an 11 year old comes out to their family as gay or trans and they are abused or they know they would be if they did come out, it would be in their best interest to get out of that situation. The reality is there are A LOT of gay and trans youth that are homeless because of this, because their parents bullied them or kicked them out when they found out.

I struggled for a few years with coming out to my dad due to his religious views. I finally got up the nerve to do so when I was 15, but I prepared for the worst and knew it could get bad based on what friends went through. Luckily it didn't and it just strengthened our relationship, but there was real fear that it would end badly somehow.

So I see what she is saying and agree with her.

 

[Lithrael]

Also to make this “I want to be Japanese” analogy map better, Richard grew up in a community half full of Japanese people and has always been in a position to observe and talk and hang out and try to understand the experiences of various Japanese people. So he’d understand the difference between inhabiting a stereotype and embracing a community’s traditions, as far as how others will relate to him. He probably didn’t just watch some Japanese tv and become a painful weaboo.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Even though I know this is how that situation would go based on Japanese culture, the problem is that it is still wrong. Being Japanese (or any nationality) is about more than just being ethnically and/or racially Japanese.

This shows the regressive attitudes of the Japanese people more than anything, imo.

You say that being Japanese is about more than being ethnically Japanese, right? But... does being ethnically Japanese play a part in it, in your view? Does having a real understanding of the history, the culture, the dynamics, and the day-to-day reality of being Japanese have a role in it? Do you think that having grown up in the culture, with a first-hand experience of it provide more insight and understanding, and more authenticity? Do you think that a deep understanding of the social dynamics experienced by Japanese people could be considered a vital element of being Japanese?

Or is having a surface level understanding of Japanese culture, gleaned from second-hand observation enough to justify a proclamation that Riku is just as Japanese as any other Japanese person?

 

[Lithrael]

Very few people grow up away from all girls and women these days. There’s of course a lot of stuff that you can be blissfully unaware of if you’re not living it, but it’s not like someone who is paying attention with an interested eye will have no idea.

I already feel like the gap between two girls raised in very different situations can be bigger than the gap between a girl and a guy. So while I agree there is a gap, I don’t see that gap as a reason to exclude anyone. The only caveat is that all trans women should remember to be considerate of the background anxiety around safety, the same way that really tough girls sometimes need to remember. If they don’t consider it at all, they’re being a jerk. If they consider it but can’t find a compromise that doesn’t make them sacrifice too much, that’s the stuff we need to figure out.

 

[Boudicca90]

You say that being Japanese is about more than being ethnically Japanese, right? But... does being ethnically Japanese play a part in it, in your view? Does having a real understanding of the history, the culture, the dynamics, and the day-to-day reality of being Japanese have a role in it? Do you think that having grown up in the culture, with a first-hand experience of it provide more insight and understanding, and more authenticity? Do you think that a deep understanding of the social dynamics experienced by Japanese people could be considered a vital element of being Japanese?

Or is having a surface level understanding of Japanese culture, gleaned from second-hand observation enough to justify a proclamation that Riku is just as Japanese as any other Japanese person?

You are right that he will never be ethnically Japanese due to his ancestry, but I do think he can become Japanese given enough experience and knowledge and as he integrates himself further. Ancestry is not as important as lived experience.

I don't have the socialization and experiences that a cisgender woman goes through during her life, that's true. But that's what I am experiencing right now through living as a woman. I am just behind schedule compared to cisgender women who have lived as female all your lives.

And with people realizing they are trans at younger ages and finding support, this will become less of an issue over time. They won't have to deal with unlearning 30 years of socialization in a gender that they never identified with in the first place.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Is harm an objective concept, and should it be? I maintain that when she groped me, I was a bit shocked, but I realize that there was no harm done. Yet if I had done the same thing to a woman, my life as I knew it may well have come to an end. How is one act more harmful than another, in context? Is this fair? You suggest that it should be up to victims to decide what merits legal action, but this kind of discretion doesn't seem healthy, and is far from objective.

I'm saying that if an objective bystander would view it as a violation (which I think they would in the scenario you described) then it is reasonably viewed as a violation and can be actionable. But if you, personally, decide that you, personally don't feel violated, that's your decision to make. You can make the decision that you personally don't feel the interaction merits additional action even if it would be justified. That doesn't mean, however, that because you felt it wasn't a big deal, nobody else should be allowed to either.

Consider an analogy, where the kid down the street takes your skateboard from your garage without your permission. An objective observer would say that the kid has committed theft, which is a crime, and that you are within your rights to press charges against the kid. You personally, however, might decide that you never liked that skateboard anyway, and you haven't used it in years, so it's no big deal, and you can decline to press charges. But your decision in this situation doesn't imply that if the kid stole your next door neighbor's skateboard, that your neighbor should not press charges.

Do you defend your double standard regarding transmen in male bathrooms, on the sole basis that they don't represent a physical threat, or are there other factors?

Partly, yes. Partly it's because they don't have real penises, and in many cases may not have a penis at all. So the amount of potential damage they can do is very limited - a transman would be unable to impregnate a female, for example. And given how pseudo-penises function, it's highly unlikely that a transman would be able to rape a female anyway. Beyond that, a transman will still have been socially conditioned as a female, will have an understanding of the inherent risk that female faces, and is unlikely to violate that social contract in the first place.

Totally agree. The student may be a physically superior male, but the teacher can engage the full force of the state against the male after the fact, with complete credibility. A large portion of female power, rests not only on female persuasion, but on their credibility to retain state power against others.

I don't know what that last sentence means. Can you elaborate?

 

[Emily's Cat]

You are right that he will never be ethnically Japanese due to his ancestry, but I do think he can become Japanese given enough experience and knowledge and as he integrates himself further. Ancestry is not as important as lived experience.

I don't have the socialization and experiences that a cisgender woman goes through during her life, that's true. But that's what I am experiencing right now through living as a woman. I am just behind schedule compared to cisgender women who have lived as female all your lives.

And with people realizing they are trans at younger ages and finding support, this will become less of an issue over time. They won't have to deal with unlearning 30 years of socialization in a gender that they never identified with in the first place.

I appreciate this response.

What I'm asking for in this conversation is that you remember the socialization element of the relationship between transwomen and ciswomen. And respect that difference in socialization, as well as the social barriers that females face - not because of socially defined gender roles, but as a result of our actual biology. I'd like you to try to understand those barriers, and sympathize with them instead of seeming to dismiss them.

You'll get exposed to many of the social factors as you become more integrated, some of which you're already experiencing with overly handsy, pushy men who feel that their entitled to your body for their own enjoyment. But there are going to be some elements that you won't experience, simply because biology is a real thing and it has real impacts for females.

One of the things that I feel like we are missing as a connection point is recognition that many of those social factors are negatives for females. Many of the behavioral expectations of females are things that most females would like to eliminate, or at least reduce.

This is an area of conflict in objectives. I don't see that extending the social concept of "woman" to include males, while still retaining those social constraints addresses the issues that females deal with. It also doesn't address issues for gender non-conforming people, including effeminate gay men and butch lesbians. On the other hand, loosening the concept of "male" to include more feminine behaviors and less strict boundaries would help all of us.

I think that the second approach, altering the socially acceptable behavior of males and females, would present greater gains than the the first approach. It would allow "socially gender dysphoric" people like Seani, to behave and present in ways they feel comfortable with, without any expectation of them having to reject their bodies and their biology. They could continue to be males, and behave in more effeminate "girly" ways, because that behavioral constraint would be lifted and would lose a lot of its meaning.

There would still be some people whose dysphoria is directly driven by their physical bodies, but I think it would be a smaller number. And I suspect that most of those would be happy to exist as transsexuals, with full surgical transitions.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

That comment was added by McKinnon after having been down-voted to oblivion and having received negative feedback. You might accept it as genuine, I think it's trying to cover her ass because she was initially suggesting that children should run away.

Care to share a quote that you think is clear that she is advocating minors becoming runaways? It's a youtube video, so it's hard to search for such things.

Given that she explicitly clarified at the time that she wasn't advocating this, I assume you have pretty strong quotes from the original video indicating that this is her true meaning and not just deliberate uncharitable interpretation.

I also don't see any like/dislike stats on my end. Can you see anything that indicates it was "downvoted to oblivion"?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Regarding Debbie Hayton, I think she makes some good points. In particular, I really agree with this excerpt:

When it comes to our own individual preferences, feelings and opinions are not a problem. You prefer coffee; I prefer tea. You prefer to wear a dress today; I prefer to wear trousers. But this isn’t a debate over what we choose to drink or wear. Nor is it a debate over our identities. Nobody’s identity is up for debate: we are who we are, and it’s nonsense to argue that we might be somebody else.

It also isn’t a debate over how we express our gender. And we should defend the right of everyone to express their gender however they please. Why do we still restrict men and women to different dress codes? Why does every bank need to define us by gender markers? Organisations do need to know our sex, because if they’re blind to sex they’re blind to sexism. Across society, we should also provide safe and secure unisex facilities for all who want them. Those are progressive steps that should be offered to everyone.

What is being debated is access to women’s rights and protections. Generations of women have fought to establish and maintain them, but if anyone can self-declare their Gender Identity to be female, then anyone who wants to be a woman is a woman. Women have every right to be concerned because biological sex ceases to be definitive, and womanhood is reduced to a collection of feelings. It is unclear how declarations based on feelings could be challenged. While attempts might be made to criminalise fraudulent self-declarations, how can they ever be falsified? It is dangerously naïve to assume that men would never self-declare as women with nefarious motives. Most men probably wouldn’t, but those who might are the ones that cause concern. Women’s boundaries are hardly secure if they have to rely on the assumption that men wouldn’t do that, would they?

We should absolutely be supporting people's right to their own preferences, and their own preferences. We should absolutely be seeking safe facilities and ensuring safety. But self-declaration is a problem that really does threaten female sex-based rights.

 

[Lithrael]

In what way are any of the rights that women have fought for, eroded by the inclusion of trans women? Am I missing something about women fighting for womens’-only spaces, as opposed to women fighting to be accommodated at all in places previously accomodating exclusively to men?

We fought for bathrooms because we weren’t allowed to go in the mens’ room and we couldn’t or didn’t want to go in the street. We opened womens’ shelters because there was a need but as far as I know we fought for funding and support, we didn’t have to fight for the right to do so. We started womens’ sport so that women would have some place to play competitively but as far as I know the fight was about being taken seriously, the right to book the same stadium as the guys maybe, but not about the right to do it.

Am I uninformed? What kinds of battles did we fight for the rights we are losing to trans inclusion?

 

[Elaedith]

Regarding Debbie Hayden, I think she makes some good points. In particular, I really agree with this excerpt:



We should absolutely be supporting people's right to their own preferences, and their own preferences. We should absolutely be seeking safe facilities and ensuring safety. But self-declaration is a problem that really does threaten female sex-based rights.

Hayton.

Hayden is the name of a different transgender woman who is frequently in the news for trying to sue people. You don't want to get them mixed up.

 

[Emily's Cat]

In what way are any of the rights that women have fought for, eroded by the inclusion of trans women? Am I missing something about women fighting for womens’-only spaces, as opposed to women fighting to be accommodated at all in places previously accomodating exclusively to men?

We fought for bathrooms because we weren’t allowed to go in the mens’ room and we couldn’t or didn’t want to go in the street. We opened womens’ shelters because there was a need but as far as I know we fought for funding and support, we didn’t have to fight for the right to do so. We started womens’ sport so that women would have some place to play competitively but as far as I know the fight was about being taken seriously, the right to book the same stadium as the guys maybe, but not about the right to do it.

Am I uninformed? What kinds of battles did we fight for the rights we are losing to trans inclusion?

Self-Declaration as the sole requirement is what threatens women's rights and progress here.

Secure spaces for women will not be secure if any person making a claim to be a "woman" can enter them on their claim alone. Women's sports are already being threatened, and places for females on women's sports are being jeopardized because male-bodied people are taking the highest places and setting records as a direct result of their biology, regardless of how they feel on the inside.

Boudicca has expressed that transwomen should be eligible for women's scholarships, grants, and short-list positions, and that transwoman should be honored as women for awards and similar... which pretty much brings us right back around to losing ground in terms of female equality in the world.

Statistics pertaining to salary and promotion discrepancies, gender bias in schools and workplaces, and statistics referencing sex-differentiated crime levels... all of those become meaningless when the statistics count male people as females.

So let's let's turn this around: What rights are transgender people fighting for? What rights do they not have?