Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[Emily's Cat]

We see it with the guff that 'women just don't want to do STEM' because lady-brains are different.

Sure... but on the other hand, we also see the guff of 'transwomen are women because they have lady-brains which are different from buy-brains'.

Why is it a reasonable justification for one and not the other?

 

[Emily's Cat]

It's great to see the anti trans lobby adopting such well thought out arguments.

Lol, okay there. I suppose it's nice that you acknowledge that intimidation and threats aren't a well thought out argument... given the propensity for trans activists to use that approach against females. It's at least a step in the right direction.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Because she wasn't good enough to win? I don't know the case but that's how sport works.

Oh FFS! Yes, she wasn't good enough to win against a male-bodied person with male hormones flowing through their veins, and the physical advantages of a male puberty, but who wants everyone else to perceive them as the girl they are on the inside and pretend that their sexed body isn't real!

 

[Emily's Cat]

If say, 2 thirds of the men running the big corporations came out as trans tomorrow, presumably some here would think equality and the pay-gap etc etc had been settled?

Even better! It would give the MRA groups ammunition to support their argument that women are the real oppressors, and that it's totally unfair to have so many women in leadership positions, and then campaign to get quotas in place so that men are better represented!

 

[Emily's Cat]

I believe you will find ample justification in these threads of why a woman might not want to take her clothes off in presence of a man, or whatever appellation you might provide for that sperm-producing individual in the locker room, but that justification is usually ignored, often with the words "bigotry" or "discrimination" substituted for a counterargument.

In all ways except the actual words selected, the message has been that females should be silent and know their place. Females should be accommodating when it comes to the desires of males, and should center males in their goals. Females shouldn't expect to have a right to privacy and dignity, but are granted these things as boons when males feel like allowing them to have them. Females shouldn't seek equal representation in leadership and politics, their needs can be seen to by males, who know what females really need.

All done in the name of "equality" for a subset of males who aren't content with having all the privilege and power already, and feel "unsafe" when a recently raped female wants to have a female examiner rather than them.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Holy ****. I started out as generally supporting, looking for some reasonable common ground that will support the continuing fight for women's equality and also allow transgender people to be free from discrimination and persecution.

Transactivists have made me LESS inclusive than I started out as.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Holy ****. I started out as generally supporting, looking for some reasonable common ground that will support the continuing fight for women's equality and also allow transgender people to be free from discrimination and persecution.

Transactivists have made me LESS inclusive than I started out as.

 

[Emily's Cat]

It'd be helpful to any form of meaningful debate here if more people understood what transgender identity actually is, and what it is not. And it would also be helpful if they understood that the near-totality of transgender people not only do not lighty make the decision to identify as transgender: in fact, they agonise over choosing to identify as such. It seems to me that there are still people within this thread who appear to believe that identifying as transgender is either a) something which is frequently done on a whim or according to "woke" fashionability, or b) something which (eg) evil men might do nefariously in order to access women-only spaces, with the purpose of satisfying male heterosexual desires.

I invite you to provide information that is more useful than "transgender people are whatever they say they are". I would welcome something coherent and meaningful.

I doubt very many of these people actually believe this, it's just a useful strawman that makes transphobic policies more palatable.

Yeah, but it's YOUR strawman. The overwhelming majority of the people in this thread that you've labeled, attacked, and dismissed out of hand believe NEITHER of those things that you and LJ have imagineered into existence.

Rather, I (as well as several others) believe that:
a) gender dysphoria is a real medical and psychiatric condition that causes acute stress and anxiety to people who have significant distress regarding their sexed bodies
b) Self-identification with no medical diagnosis or treatment provides a loophole to aggressive and violent males to abuse females
c) claiming that one identifies as the opposite sex does not actually make that person the opposite sex in any rational or reasonable way

Furthermore, I'll add a couple of sub-bullets here

a1) Historically the prevalence of gender dysphoria has been very rare, but there has been a dramatic increase in people presenting with a claim of transgender identity, especially among teenaged girls, which comes on very suddenly and without prior indication of dysphoria - the affirmation only model of treatment represents a risk to children and teenagers and should be approached with caution

b1) Allowing self-identification of gender identity over biological sex screws up statistics and undermines efforts to promote equality for females around the world
b2) Self-identification of criminals distorts the rates of violence and sexual crimes that are being committed by males, but reported as having been committed by women, which draws attention away from existing and persistent victimization of females by males, and reduces support and focus to address that issue

c1) Self-identification alone should not be sufficient to override existing safeguards for safety and privacy in the realm of shelters and refuges, areas where females are particularly vulnerable, and sports

And just for fun, I'll add:

d) The incredibly frequent and common tendency of transwomen specifically (this behavior does not appear to come from transmen in any notable way) and transactivists supporting the ideology that "transwomen are women" to use threats of force, violence, and rape against females who do not agree with their views absolutely does NOT further their agenda to be treated as women. Embracing slogans like "Kill all Terfs" or "Punch a Terf" or "suck my girldick" do NOT reduce the concerns that females have regarding access to their private spaces. The unwillingness of Transwomen and their allies to address those views and acknowledge them as misogynistic and inappropriate reduces your voice... and it makes females angry.

 

[Emily's Cat]

And an interesting - and perhaps illuminating - mental exercise is to pose the question of precisely how/why modern western society deems that, for example, males (of any sexuality or gender identity) should not wear skirts, dresses or makeup. Or how/why females (of any sexuality or gender identity) should not wear suits and ties.

Because, in the 21st Century in western societies, those "rules" are entirely arbitrary and they're the product of extensive social/cultural conditioning. There are, for example, no practical reasons why a heterosexual male man should not/cannot wear a dress.

And it's a racing certainty that prevailing reactionary attitudes to transgender identity (and to transvestism) are borne of blind, uncritical adherence to what society at large deems to be "normal" or "acceptable", coupled with constant reinforcement of these "normal" or "acceptable" traits in the media and other societal influencers. When you add that factor into the age-old "people who are not the same as me (and my friends & role models) are both wrong and abnormal" canard, it's a recipe for bigotry and dismissal.

Wow. That's an interesting windmill you're tilting at.

Nearly every poster in this thread fully supports any person of either sex wearing whatever they wish to wear, and presenting in whatever way they please. By all means, I 100% support the destruction of socially-defined and repressive gender stereotypes and gender roles!

That issue, of clothing choices, as well as the insinuated homophobic view that heterosexual men shouldn't wear dresses (implying that only gay guys like frills? Really, John?) is not an area of controversy in this thread.

If that is what you're picking up, then I semi-respectfully suggest that you learn how to read and comprehend the english language.

 

[Meadmaker]

Ciswomen and transwomen should be allowed into the women's changing room. And likewise for the men's changing rooms.

...


Below elite and sub-elite level: ciswomen and transwomen. At elite and sub-elite levels, my own opinion is that transwomen should be excluded from women's events, owing to the undeniable performance advantage that a large proportion of biological males hold over even top-decile-performance biological females.

....

If one looks at partially-comparable situations with black civil rights and gay rights, most legislatures and societies took 15-30 years to go from the start position (criminalisation, blanket discrimination, etc) through to what might be regarded as something close to truly equal rights.

Before I respond, I want to note that I had asked how your positions related to this:

And it's a racing certainty that prevailing reactionary attitudes to transgender identity (and to transvestism) are borne of blind, uncritical adherence to what society at large deems to be "normal" or "acceptable", coupled with constant reinforcement of these "normal" or "acceptable" traits in the media and other societal influencers. When you add that factor into the age-old "people who are not the same as me (and my friends & role models) are both wrong and abnormal" canard, it's a recipe for bigotry and dismissal.

And I note that no dots have been connected.

You state your positions, and that's fine.

As for my response, I doubt I could add anything to the 300 previous pages of commentary, so I'll be brief.

When I first stumbled across the fact that many people sincerely believed that men could have babies, and all the other elements that make up trans rights activism, I struggled with how to balance everyone's desires and wishes. I reached the conclusion that it was impossible to do so. Viewing various situations where the desires of the trans community conflicted with the desires of other elements of society, I reached the conclusion that if a teenage girl did not want to disrobe in the presence of a male, I would take the side of the teenage girl.

Likewise, recognizing the disruptive power of the "step change" you describe, I would take the side of young women who wanted their athletic competitions to remain all female.

It's impossible to make everyone happy. I have more sympathy for the biological females who want to retain modesty or compete meaningfully than I have for......anyone else regardless of what you call them.

You apparently have reached a different conclusion, and you make some sensible, practical, arguments above, but I can't help but notice that you end up concluding that this is somehow related to black people and civil rights. It's a silly comparison. In that case, there was a demand to end segregation. In this case, there is a demand to retain segregation, but change the criteria used to segregate. It's not comparable.

 

[Emily's Cat]

90 pages into the 4th continuation of just the most recent thread on the topic and what transgenderism is "not" has gotten clearer and clearer while what it "is" has gotten hazier and hazier.

The entire concept of sex and gender has been reduced nebulous nothing with no traits or meaning at an exact ratio of how important it is that we acknowledge people's personal, internal image of.

"It is vitally important that you agree with people as to their gender identity but their gender identity is an absolutely meaningless concept that has no defining characteristics" is just such a weird place to form this passionate of social movement.

I don't like this. I don't like being on the "side" as it were with the transphobes and the "Real men do this and real women do this" types.

You don't have to be. I'm certainly not on that side.

You can be on the "sex is actually a real thing, and please don't **** over females in your quest for self-realization" side of things.

 

[Emily's Cat]

There may be some contradictions around the edges, but the basic premise by which gender dysphoria and transgender identity is defined is pretty clear (and DSM had no trouble in codifying it satisfactorily).

Perfect! Then we agree that for a person to claim transgender status and gain access to private spaces for the opposite sex, they should have a well-documented and thorough medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria.

See, we're making gains toward common ground already!

 

[xjx388]

What about pregnant transmen? Are they counted as men or as women?

The pregnant transman thing is the real mind bender here. Are we just supposed to all think, "Yep, men can be pregnant these days, sure can." It's crazy and just too big a contradiction. I submit that they if they get pregnant, then they are women-in-fact, full stop. I don't care how they dress or what they want to be called. I don't begrudge them those things but I do strenuously object to the notion that they are men-in-fact, just like me.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Ciswomen and transwomen should be allowed into the women's changing room. And likewise for the men's changing rooms.

Okay. Females and transwomen who have a genuine and well-documented medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria can be allowed into the women's changing room.

After all, it perhaps helps to look at this from another angle: should transwomen be made to use the men's changing rooms?

Another way to look at it is: should female people be forced to allow male-bodied people into their naked spaces? Should males be forced to allow female-bodied people into their naked spaces?

Can you perhaps figure out the potential issues that might arise wrt the emotional wellbeing of the transwoman in that scenario?

Can you perhaps figure out the potential issues that might arise wrt the emotional wellbeing of females who are forced to have male-bodied people naked in their presence?

Or should transwomen be made to use the disabled changing rooms? Or should they be made to change in their cars?

Or should the entire middle-school swim team be expected to change in an outbuilding if they're not comfortable having an exposed 40yo penis in their midst while they're naked?

Or should they be forbidden from using any public facilities with gender-specific changing rooms?

Or maybe, just maybe, we can stop playing semantic games and acknowledge that the changing rooms aren't gender-specific at all, but are sex-specific? That would go a long ways toward a useful discussion.

 

[William Parcher]

True men don't get pregnant.

 

[Emily's Cat]

What's your quote from?

And remember, there may be plenty of other factors underpinning that proportional shift. It could, for example, have been that males with undiagnosed/unrecognised gender dysphoria had become frightened by the way in which "out" transwomen had been treated, and had shied away from counselling and diagnosis as a result. Or it could have been that females with gender dysphoria felt more comfortable by 2019 with the idea of diagnosis and trans-identification than females in 2011 had felt. There are other viable factors too.

It would be interesting and informative, incidentally, to see some form of rolling-average data in a region such as the USA on the proportion of males vs females identifying as transgender: perhaps broken down by age group, state, and clinical diagnosis vs self-identification, over the past 20 years or so

It's also possible, by the way, that trans-activist driven presentations to young kids in school that insist that "girls aren't real and boys aren't real" and that "if you're not comfortable about your body, you can be transgender and change it" and that "if you have a penis but you like pink and dolls then you might be transgender; if you have a vulva but you like cars and climbing trees, you might be transgender!" as well as "Oh, by the way, if you want to change your name and pronouns at school we will support you doing that and we won't tell your parents about it at all!" paired with "Oh, those transgender kids are so stunning and brave and wonderful and get special treatment and extra attention!"

But maybe I'm crazy. Maybe stuff like that doesn't have any affect on children at all.

 

[The Atheist]

What about pregnant transmen? Are they counted as men or as women?

Already been there - they are the medical marvel of a pregnant man.

Holy ****. I started out as generally supporting, looking for some reasonable common ground that will support the continuing fight for women's equality and also allow transgender people to be free from discrimination and persecution.

Transactivists have made me LESS inclusive than I started out as.

That's exactly where I am.

Classic example of giving someone an inch and them taking a mile.

From "Yes, you have the right not to be discriminated against."

To "I'm have a penis and demand that lezzos have sex with me or they're bigots!"

 

[Meadmaker]

You apparently have reached a different conclusion, and you make some sensible, practical, arguments above, but I can't help but notice that you end up concluding that this is somehow related to black people and civil rights. It's a silly comparison. In that case, there was a demand to end segregation. In this case, there is a demand to retain segregation, but change the criteria used to segregate. It's not comparable.

I thought about it and wanted to add that when it comes to employment discrimination, and probably a few similar things, there is a basis for comparison. In those cases, everyone here and I think the majority of people in society at large in the US, UK, and other countries with a similar heritage agree. Most people don't want sex based segregation in employment, and most people who don't want that also don't want discrimination against trans-people. In that case, there is a comparison to black civil rights.

Where I and most people in these threads have focused is in those areas where people want to maintain segregation of the sexes. There is nothing comparable in the world of race-related civil rights.

 

[Aber]

What's your quote from?

UK court judgement, link upthread.

 

[theprestige]

Already been there - they are the medical marvel of a pregnant man.



That's exactly where I am.

Classic example of giving someone an inch and them taking a mile.

From "Yes, you have the right not to be discriminated against."

To "I'm have a penis and demand that lezzos have sex with me or they're bigots!"

Kind of where I'm at too. Somewhere between Jessica Yaniv and the pregnant transman, I've pretty much lost all interest in taking trans-activism seriously.

---

It occurs to me that if we took gender dysphoria seriously as a medical condition and a disability, this would have a few implications under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_with_Disabilities_Act_of_1990s

For example, I think employers would have the right to refuse reasonable accommodation if the employee doesn't produce a medical diagnosis.

Also, it might well be the case that requiring all other employees to use the person's preferred pronouns might not count as a "reasonable accommodation". Same with letting them use their preferred gendered restrooms at the office.

At the very least, examining the condition under the rubric of the ADA would tend to force the discussion into a more narrow focus on dysphoria as a medical condition that requires treatment, and what accommodations are necessary for their medical value in treating the condition.