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

[gnome]

I have been in a band that includes several trans men and the occasional trans woman for nearly two decades now. I've only ever known some of them in their post-transition state. I've played on the same stage with them, sometimes closely (it's a large band). I've shared bathrooms with the trans men.

From the nature of this thread, I think some might be surprised how little the contents of one's pants effects daily interactions. Even in bathrooms, I can count on zero hands how many times other people's junk has been of my concern*.

If I had to guess, all the pearl clutching is being done by people who are not, themselves, familiar with trans people. When I see Lee, for example, I don't see short dude who used to be a girl. I see a short dude who is a great sax player, smokes too much, and takes good care of his wife's medical issues. In fact, when a former co-worker announced her transition recently, it took me a minute to remember that Lee helps people go through the transition process in order to make a recommendation.

I don't know, maybe try to be more concerned about treating people decently than concerned about what people have under the hood?



* with the exception of dealing with my infant kids and bathroom changing tables, but thankfully, those days are long behind me.

Yes--thank you that is a good point. The push to de-emphasize biological sex in policy making and informal rules is exactly that--a movement to realize how infrequently the nature of our usually covered bits is important.

 

[Ron Obvious]

From the nature of this thread, I think some might be surprised how little the contents of one's pants effects daily interactions. Even in bathrooms, I can count on zero hands how many times other people's junk has been of my concern*.

But I don't think there's much of a debate on that aspect here at all, really.

I think the only pushback is occurring when we're asked to accept that e.g. transwomen really ARE women in all respects and cannot be differentiated in any way, which obviously flies in the face of reality.

 

[gnome]

But I don't think there's much of a debate on that aspect here at all, really.

I think the only pushback is occurring when we're asked to accept that e.g. transwomen really ARE women in all respects and cannot be differentiated in any way, which obviously flies in the face of reality.

Are you genuinely being asked to accept that? Or to accept that such differences as exist usually don't require different treatment?

 

[Butter!]

Yes--thank you that is a good point. The push to de-emphasize biological sex in policy making and informal rules is exactly that--a movement to realize how infrequently the nature of our usually covered bits is important.

Sports and jail keep coming up, though, as well as medical settings. These are areas where it is much more likely to matter, and instead of trying to work out a compromise, everyone just gets upset. This makes everything worse. The general dialogue becomes unsalvageable.

 

[Paul2]

I think focusing on bathrooms is silly, personally. That's the issue of least concern here.

I'm hung up on all this "sex doesn't exist and isn't binary" business. That's the exact point at which I lose my ability to go along with the whole thing. And I disagree that it makes me transphobic, because I know at least two transpeople who have no desire to deny that sex is binary and actual.

I'm going to be really honest right now. I'm starting to see the denial of sex and the push to change words referring to it as just another segment of this scary anti-intellectual trend that's been growing around us for years. It's what brought me to this forum in the first place - most of the people around me in real life were reality-deniers. "I don't care what your study says, it's all been covered up, I know vaccines cause autism. I know 9/11 was an inside job." It all seemed like a big deal then, but I now long for those simpler days. Because things have gotten WAY worse. People just make up their own realities with impunity now, like the millions who think Trump really won the election. Reality doesn't matter in the slightest, because people seem to have stopped agreeing that it matters. Debunking is useless; we might as well all be living in separate little worlds.

Up until this point, the kind of stuff I'm referring to seemed like mostly a right-wing, conspiracy-oriented phenomenon (with a few REALLY far-left moonbats thrown in on the holistic healing end of things, perhaps). But now, the mainstream left is starting to take up this rallying cry, and I'm fine with it up to the point where I'm being screamed at for saying that men and women are real, definable things. Change your gender, call yourself a woman, I'm not bothered. Come in and get naked in front of me, wave whatever you've got around like a prize (to paraphrase cullennz's terms). I really don't care (though I'm not disregarding the feelings of women who do). But if you're going to tell me that there is no such thing as a woman, I'm going to start seeing you as crazy and disingenuous. I can't understand what the angle is there. How does that help anybody? If there's no such thing as sex, then what are trans-people changing to?

I thought it was gender they were changing, and sex was different, and that made sense to me - but the terms are being used interchangeably now, and it's making me feel like no one even cares about reality or making sense.

Another minor aspect of this anti-intellectual and anti-reality trend is the idea that people are blank slates with no inborn tendencies that might play out in cultural or mental or social arenas. This attitude denies that we are animals, and that we are bodies (as opposed to having a body), and that our biological reality, while not destiny, may well influence us. It's just that those influences can be so subtle to figure out, given that our behavior is run through our incredibly complex brains.

 

[gnome]

Sports and jail keep coming up, though, as well as medical settings. These are areas where it is much more likely to matter, and instead of trying to work out a compromise, everyone just gets upset. This makes everything worse. The general dialogue becomes unsalvageable.

I think it may help to stick to the specifics of the situation. For example, for jails we don't need to figure out "are trans women real women?" we need to figure out whether and when there is a problem sharing cell space and addressing the medical needs, and what to do about it.

 

[Meadmaker]

I have been in a band that includes several trans men and the occasional trans woman for nearly two decades now. I've only ever known some of them in their post-transition state. I've played on the same stage with them, sometimes closely (it's a large band). I've shared bathrooms with the trans men.

From the nature of this thread, I think some might be surprised how little the contents of one's pants effects daily interactions. Even in bathrooms, I can count on zero hands how many times other people's junk has been of my concern*.

If I had to guess, all the pearl clutching is being done by people who are not, themselves, familiar with trans people. When I see Lee, for example, I don't see short dude who used to be a girl. I see a short dude who is a great sax player, smokes too much, and takes good care of his wife's medical issues. In fact, when a former co-worker announced her transition recently, it took me a minute to remember that Lee helps people go through the transition process in order to make a recommendation.

I don't know, maybe try to be more concerned about treating people decently than concerned about what people have under the hood?



* with the exception of dealing with my infant kids and bathroom changing tables, but thankfully, those days are long behind me.

I don't think Andraya Yearwood, all time record holder and regional New England girls' track champion, is treating people decently. I'll forgive her because of her youth. She is getting bad advice and being encouraged by people who are old enough to know better, but the result is that people are not being treated decently.

I don't think Colleen Brenna was treating people decently.

I don't think Fallon Fox was treating people decently.

I don't think Jonathan Yaniv was treating people decently.

I think there is an awful lot of mistreatment going on in these situations.

Going back to Butter's point, the thing about all of those people above is that they are all male. Really. Sex is a real thing, and those people are all male, and pretending they aren't does have some intersection with the real world, and when that happens, other people end up mistreated.

And trans rights supporters really, really, want to talk about bathrooms whenever they possibly can, and never want to talk about the other issues, and what's up with that?

 

[Meadmaker]

I think it may help to stick to the specifics of the situation. For example, for jails we don't need to figure out "are trans women real women?" we need to figure out whether and when there is a problem sharing cell space and addressing the medical needs, and what to do about it.

I think this is exactly correct. The problem is that if people start with the assertion that trans women are really women, they feel that it trumps whatever problems might come up when sperm producers and egg producers are in close proximity under certain situations.

 

[Upchurch]

But I don't think there's much of a debate on that aspect here at all, really.

I think the only pushback is occurring when we're asked to accept that e.g. transwomen really ARE women in all respects and cannot be differentiated in any way, which obviously flies in the face of reality.

Woman is a category. Trans-woman is a sub-category of woman. Cis-woman is a sub-category of woman.

Are trans-women really women? Yes.
Are cis-women really women? Yes.
Are trans-women really cis-women? No.
Are cis-women really trans-women? No.

What's the problem?

 

[Ziggurat]

Are you genuinely being asked to accept that?

Yes.

As a transgender woman, I am just as much of a woman as you (yes, even with a dick) and I deserve the same access and use of women's restrooms, locker rooms, shelters, prisons, opportunities, etc. as you have, with no restrictions. The genitals I have are of no interest to you or anyone else, as I am a biological woman as much as you.

 

[Ron Obvious]

Woman is a category. Trans-woman is a sub-category of woman. Cis-woman is a sub-category of woman.
What's the problem?

Failed at the first hurdle. Trans-woman is a sub-category of MAN. Also, "cis" is a useless prefix.

 

[Upchurch]

Failed at the first hurdle. Trans-woman is a sub-category of MAN. Also, "cis" is a useless prefix.

Ah, I see your problem. You have a difficult road ahead of you if you choose to hold on to your mistakes instead of learning from them.

Tell me, do you have any close friends or family who are trans?

 

[Meadmaker]

Are trans-women really women? Yes.

At least one of the lines in your sig is very appropriate in relation to this statement.

But I suspect we would disagree about which one.

 

[Ziggurat]

Woman is a category. Trans-woman is a sub-category of woman.

That depends on what "woman" means. Under the traditional definition of "adult human female", that is not true. Under an alternative definition, it may well be true.

But what exactly is that alternate definition? I've never gotten a coherent answer from anyone on this. And assuming I get one, why is that definition preferable to the traditional one?

 

[rdwight]

From the nature of this thread, I think some might be surprised how little the contents of one's pants effects daily interactions. Even in bathrooms, I can count on zero hands how many times other people's junk has been of my concern*.

* with the exception of dealing with my infant kids and bathroom changing tables, but thankfully, those days are long behind me.

On that specific note, if/when you had a younger daughter out with you and they needed to use the bathroom, did you ever find yourself in a situation where you did the 'check to see if anyone was in the ladies room' and let them go in while standing at the door? I don't think that is an uncommon scenario from my experience. Now imagine a non-transitioned man was casually attempting to go in. Would you ask what he is doing? Would the answer of, "oh I am a woman" be sufficient to alleviate any concern? Would you follow in just to hurry her up or check in from the door?

If such a situation would cause a bit of anxiousness or concern on my/your part, I think it's obvious we should take seriously the feelings of women that this would impact most. While the bathroom/locker room situations can take a larger portion of conversation in these discussions, I don't see why that should minimize it entirely.

 

[The Atheist]

If there's no such thing as sex, then what are trans-people changing to?

Absolutely nailed.

Irony goes over a lot of heads these days.

 

[Meadmaker]

Ah, I see your problem. You have a difficult road ahead of you if you choose to hold on to your mistakes instead of learning from them.

Tell me, do you have any close friends or family who are trans?

I know for my part my son's best friend in school was trans. I also know Emily's Cat has a trans niece (previously nephew). A good friend of mine recently came out as trans, although I haven't seen them (to use their newly preferred pronoun) in person since the beginning of the pandemic. She came out since then. I don't actually know if she has declared herself to be a man, or gender-neutral, or non-binary. I know she cut her hair in a much more boyish look.

The idea that we are somehow unfamiliar with trans people and thus wallowing in ignorance is just nonsense.



(And I am not going to habitually use "them" when I actually do see her, or him, as the case may be. There may be some doubt about whether she's a man or a woman, but I'm absolutely certain there's only one of her.)

 

[Upchurch]

That depends on what "woman" means. Under the traditional definition of "adult human female", that is not true. Under an alternative definition, it may well be true.

But what exactly is that alternate definition? I've never gotten a coherent answer from anyone on this. And assuming I get one, why is that definition preferable to the traditional one?

Manhood and womanhood are cultural ideas. We can know this because the idea of what makes a good/strong man or a good/strong woman varies from culture to culture and from time to time. In our own culture, traditionally, gay men were not considered "real men", were they? And, yet, that has changed as the culture changed.

Do you agree or do you believe that there is something inherently intrinsic to what makes a "good man" or a "good woman"?

 

[Ron Obvious]

Ah, I see your problem. You have a difficult road ahead of you if you choose to hold on to your mistakes instead of learning from them.

Tell me, do you have any close friends or family who are trans?

Feelings don't enter into a discussion about factual reality. We'll see which of us sounds like an idiot in a few years.

 

[Darat]

I do not know what you are asking, and therefore cannot give a useful answer. If you actually want a useful answer, ask a useful question.

I was asking what your statement lead you to.