Cont: [ED] Discussion: Trans Women are not Women (Part 5)

[Emily's Cat]

I'm not challenging the idea here that gamete production defines biological sex. What I am asking is that if, as argued, we have to remove everything else BUT gamete production to define biological sex then why should I care about biological sex at all?

I'm going to attempt a ham-handed analogy here, to illustrate.

I'm not challenging the idea that melanin production defines race. What I am asking is that if, as argued, we have to remove everything else (slavery, jim crow, economic oppression, lack of political representation, and persistent discrimination) BUT melanin production to define race... then why should I care about race at all?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yes.

Is anyone here willing to speak against a therapist or doctor exploring the pros and cons of all potential therapies and approaches for a patient, and then helping the patient find the right approach for that particular patient, which would include identifying the potential pros and cons with transitioning and ensuring that an accurate and appropriate diagnosis is made, rather than accepting the WebMD self-diagnosis that the patient came in the door with?

Added a line

 

[Emily's Cat]

I should hope not. I don’t think it’s any mainstream groups’s opinion that it’s bad to have honest counseling to discuss a kid’s feelings and suss out details like, have you explored a couple of niches, it’s a big thing and you don’t want to fall into a transgender identity out of coincidence or convenience - and I know there’s nothing convenient about a trans identity but I DO know that a kid’s idea of conviction can have a lot to do with the first interesting box they see - so let’s explore how you feel about genders and gender expressions and orientations first, because for starters if you mostly feel ****** about how other people view your current gender, that’s a strong and easily misdirected peice of kid baggage.

But!

I can also see a mistrust there that ‘honest exploration’ isn’t what you’re going to get. That in practice sometimes what you get is the trans version of ‘so you want an abortion? Here’s your Mandatory Sonogram And Aren’t Babies Wonderful and Some People Say That’s Murder You Know, And That Would Kind Of Make You A Baby Murderer’ ********.

You don’t want people leaning on kids to get them to give up genuine convictions about their identity, but you also don’t want cis gay kids or low-esteem-tied-to-gender kids mistaking their quest for comfort in their corner of society for transgenderism. Or even just ‘Im not really dysphoric, I just don’t identify with my gender and I feel like life would be better for me as the other gender!’ kids not making thoroughly informed choices. And I know that’s not common or anything but there ARE kids like that.

But you don’t need to beat up on the psyche of kids who like, knew since age five that they really ought to be (gender).

So yeah, counseling good, but conversion therapy masquerading as counseling bad. Rubber-stamping probably also bad. How do we assure ourselves of which is going on?

Yep. yep, yep.

 

[theprestige]

I'm not challenging the idea here that gamete production defines biological sex. What I am asking is that if, as argued, we have to remove everything else BUT gamete production to define biological sex then why should I care about biological sex at all?

Biological sex is characterized by a lot more than just gamete production, but gamete production is an adequate proxy for all the other characteristics. So it's a sufficient definition of biological sex by itself.

As for why you should care about biological sex... Probably for the same reason you should care about biological facts in general. Biological sex tells you whether to consider pregnancy in a patient reporting abdominal pain. Biological sex tells you whether to be checking for prostate cancer or ovarian cysts.

Not only that, but biological sex has been the basis for the social construct of binary gender and gender roles for pretty much all of recorded human history. If you're going to ignore biological sex, then why have gender roles at all? Why is your answer to trans-activists, not simply "biological sex doesn't matter; gender roles aren't real; get over it"?

 

[cullennz]

What I am asking is that if, as argued, we have to remove everything else BUT gamete production to define biological sex then why should I care about biological sex at all?

Shouldn't the question be why do you?

As the answer to your question is you personally don't have to. no one does. It is a question based on presumption

 

[Emily's Cat]

Far out Emily. I agree with some stuff you say, but the man hate thing is a bit grating. Maybe you haven't noticed, but a lot of dudes here agree with you with female rights.

As for the highlighted, still a lot of dudes get breast cancer.

Women get free smear tests and breast exams for cancer here. Dudes have to pay for a doctor to thrust their finger up our **** for prostrate.

Yeah, it is all one sided to help men.

Edit: Not every dude is out to ruin your place in life.

I don't hate men, and I certainly didn't intend to come across that way. I very much appreciate your (and other men in this thread's) support.

Yes, I know that men can get breast cancer, although it's quite rare in males. I was speaking in terms of secondary sex characteristics. Males don't develop boobies unless they take cross-sex hormones (or have the misfortune of some particular testicular cancers, which arguably isn't "natural").

In the US, prostate exams and colonoscopies are considered preventive wellness benefits for males, and are covered free-of-charge to the patient.

Oddly, and here's some screwy US health care stuff... if a woman goes in for a "wellness checkup" and has no indication or suspicion of breast cancer, their mammogram is free to the patient. If, however, the doctor suspects cancer, the woman has to pay for the mammogram. That happened to me a couple of years ago. I mean, shouldn't it be free if there's a suspicion of cancer too?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I am not absolutely certain, but I think JihadJane is male, in every sense. If I'm wrong, she can correct me.

Oh. I suppose it's possible, but based on the content of posts, I was under the impression that JihadJane is female. Now I'm curious.

 

[theprestige]

The more I think about it, the more I think that transwomen can't be women (nor transmen, men). Not in terms of biological fact, and not in terms of lived experience. (In terms of lived experience, Rachel Dolezal probably has more claim to being black, than Boudicca has claim to being a woman.)

 

[cullennz]

I don't hate men, and I certainly didn't intend to come across that way.

Yes, I know that men can get breast cancer, although it's quite rare in males. I was speaking in terms of secondary sex characteristics. Males don't develop boobies unless they take cross-sex hormones (or have the misfortune of some particular testicular cancers, which arguably isn't "natural").

In the US, prostate exams and colonoscopies are considered preventive wellness benefits for males, and are covered free-of-charge to the patient.

Oddly, and here's some screwy US health care stuff... if a woman goes in for a "wellness checkup" and has no indication or suspicion of breast cancer, their mammogram is free to the patient. If, however, the doctor suspects cancer, the woman has to pay for the mammogram. That happened to me a couple of years ago. I mean, shouldn't it be free if there's a suspicion of cancer too?

That is pretty weird!

As an aside I am happy with women getting free screening here btw, in fact I support anything that helps. It isn't some nag, just pointing out in some places it isn't all one sided to the bloke.

 

[theprestige]

I am a woman as much as Emily's Cat, Rolfe, JihadJane, and the rest of the cisgender TERFs on this board.

Yeah, but are you a woman as much as Caster Semenya?

 

[Emily's Cat]

You do keep quoting gross explicit language from like literally a couple of Twitter posts from nobodies on the internet and speaking as though they represent mainstream TRAs. It would be really great if they didn’t say those things, and it would also be really great if you would stop quoting their explicit outbursts in here. I don’t go repeatedly quoting explicitly gross things people say about trans women and it’s not because nobody says anything explicitly gross about trans women on the internet.

I see your point. I will try to refrain.

I'd be a bit happier if some of the very dedicated TRAs here would acknowledge that these things do get said, by a surprisingly large number of netizens, and at least sympathize with females that they're gross and terrifying, and something females shouldn't have to tolerate. I'm very happy to say that the gross exaggerations of transpeople made by lunatics on the internet are disturbing and wrong, and that transpeople shouldn't be subjected to it. I just don't really feel that misgendering, deadnaming, and recognizing that biological sex is real and important is really comparable to some of the really abhorrent things directed at women.

The fringe people out there who are genuinely transphobic and hateful are just that - transphobic and hateful. I don't pretend they don't exist, and I very definitely disagree with their views.

The fringe transwomen and allies out there who are violently misogynistic shouldn't be allowed cover either.

 

[Emily's Cat]

A wee bit sexist Eric's Dog.

OMG, that made me laugh so hard!

 

[Paul2]

Added a line

That's a friendly amendment.

 

[Emily's Cat]

As per my previous post, I think the relative authorities are realising that puberty blockers are a big no no, it's causing more problems because as the puberty blocker kids are hitting adulthood, they are actually feeling as if they were conned, some feel they would have been better off without.

In the UK, yes. In the US, we're behind the ball. We're just now passing legislation that bans any kind of "conversion therapy", and they're including anything other than completely affirmation approaches for children who think they are transgender in that bucket. We're essentially outlawing anything other than puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

It's state by state though, so maybe we'll catch it before it gets too far down the rabbit hole.

 

[Emily's Cat]

That is pretty weird!

As an aside I am happy with women getting free screening here btw, in fact I support anything that helps. It isn't some nag, just pointing out in some places it isn't all one sided to the bloke.

I edited above to add appreciation. I've been remiss on that, and I very much appreciate the support of many of the men in this thread, including yourself.

 

[p0lka]

In the UK, yes. In the US, we're behind the ball. We're just now passing legislation that bans any kind of "conversion therapy", and they're including anything other than completely affirmation approaches for children who think they are transgender in that bucket. We're essentially outlawing anything other than puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

It's state by state though, so maybe we'll catch it before it gets too far down the rabbit hole.

Surely no one is old enough to choose to not go through puberty, it's like a contradiction in terms. Ask them about how they feel about gender after puberty, not before.
Puberty blockers etc were a wrong road to go down, they need to stop.

At one point one of my kids was attempting to pursue that just because they heard about it on the internet. One year later and they don't remember it at all.
If as a parent we had went with it then how the kid be feeling now.

 

[Ziggurat]

Surely no one is old enough to choose to not go through puberty, it's like a contradiction in terms.

I don't consent to getting old. Who do I complain to?

 

[p0lka]

I don't consent to getting old. Who do I complain to?

Well don't get old then, just get more wrinkly on the outside.

 

[Marcus]

I don't think continuations of this thread is going to change the minds of those entrenched in their views. On the other hand, however, these threads have shifted the views of some posters who are either on-the-fence or who haven't been exposed to the breadth of this topic.

I'm not willing to be silenced. If we stop fighting, this misogynistic agenda will win. I'm no more going to surrender and roll-over on this than I would expect a black man to stay silent in threads where a racist was insisting that their struggles aren't important, the disadvantages they face aren't a big deal, and they should reframe their values to center white people instead.

Quite right. Your posts on this thread and its progenitors have been very informative. While I wouldn't deny that a bit of misandry may appear occasionally, in general your logic is unassailable.

 

[d4m10n]

Unanswered questions (again)

Hopefully someone will have a go this time.

What do women have in common with transwomen that they don't have in common with the human race as a whole?

...what are the attributes or characteristics that ciswomen and transwomen have in common, that make them parts of the set of women, but which are not shared with either cismen or transmen (and vice versa).

Bearing in mind this is a skeptic forum, useful answer(s) should be observable and demonstrable in order to convince those who remain on the fence.