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

[Emily's Cat]

As an illustration - when sex between two men in private was decriminalised in England and Wales apparently the majority of the population was against it.

Darat - this is a bit of a derail from me, but it's a related topic. How do you personally feel about the TQ+ etc that has been tacked on to the LGB movement? Do you feel that gender identity and fetishes are synonymous with sexual orientation?

I have two lesbian aunts, a lesbian cousin, and two lesbian nieces. I have one gay cousin, one transgender nephew (who identifies as a woman), and a gay* nephew.

The gay* nephew gets an asterisk, because while it's true that he fancies men for sexual interactions, his entire identity and lifestyle aren't about sexual orientation, they're about dressing up as a horse complete with a bit, and being whipped, spurred, and ridden while clad in leather with a horse-tailed dildo stuck up his hind end.

As far as he's concerned, the pony play and BDSM stuff *is* being gay. That's what he views his homosexuality as. The two things are effectively inseparable for him. He claims that the pony-play and BDSM are "how his homosexuality expresses". He "identifies as" a horse.

I don't think that view makes sense. I think that sexual orientation is quite distinct form fetishes and kinks. I don't have any particular objection to kinks and fetishes, but I also think that such fetishes should be considered private bedroom behavior that doesn't really need to be forced into the public eye, No, people shouldn't be fired if their boss finds out that they get their rocks off wearing a diaper and crapping themselves in their own private interactions... But I kind of think it's okay for someone to get fired if they show up to work in a nappy with a pacifier.

Like I said, this is a bit of a derail, although it is a it related. I wouldn't object to it being split to a separate thread.

 

[Meadmaker]

Minor point of clarity - most women are okay with allowing surgically reassigned transwomen into their spaces. Most women, however, are NOT okay with allowing unaltered males into their spaces, nor are they okay with allowing males in general into their spaces if they utter the magic words.

I'm not sure what most women are ok with.

I get the feeling that most women would be tolerant of unaltered transwomen in public bathrooms, but not in changing rooms or locker rooms. I'm not sure how most women would feel about people who were physically altered through hormones, but not completely altered through surgery, and I'm not sure it would matter if the person intended to surgically transition in the near future, i.e. if the hormones were part of preparation for surguical transition.

One of the things that gets very little attention when it comes to bathrooms is that the discussion is often about public bathrooms, but the controversies are often focused on school bathrooms, which are not really the same situation. In a public bathroom at a theater, restaurant, or other public facility, you go in, and maybe you figure that the person in the bathroom looks kind of masculine, and you suspect she might be a transwoman, but whatever the reality of who she is or what her plumbing looks like, you will never see her again. That's not very comparable to a high school, where you know exactly who she is, and what sort of plumbing is available, and how they act in the real world, and there is a very good chance that you also went to the same grade school and know "her" back when she was a boy.

One of the complications in learning the answer to all this is that people seem to want to deliberately obfuscate what people are really talking about. I'm sure you remember, but others might not, the widely touted IK survey that said a majority of women were ok with transgenders in female bathrooms. As your post indicates, when it was made clear that this included people who had not undergone physical transformation, the opinion shifted. Nevertheless, TRAs cited the survey as evidence of strong support for transgender access to public bathrooms.

There is so much dishonesty in this topic. I find myself increasingly irritated with the phoniness. Maybe I'm just drinking too much caffeine.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I have been amazed at how different the under about 21s view this issue, which is that they don’t see a “big” issue or problem with access for trans folk. If the past is another country the future will be a whole new planet.

Sure, but generally speaking, under 21s have some odd views no matter which generation they're in. Think about the views you held when you were that age - especially views that you felt were progressive or radical compared to those of your parents. How many of those views do you still hold in the same way? How many of them did you temper or shift as you grew and gained more knowledge and experience?

 

[Meadmaker]

The gay* nephew gets an asterisk, because while it's true that he fancies men for sexual interactions, his entire identity and lifestyle aren't about sexual orientation, they're about dressing up as a horse complete with a bit, and being whipped, spurred, and ridden while clad in leather with a horse-tailed dildo stuck up his hind end.

You know way more about your family than I know about mine. Thanksgiving conversation at your place must be fascinating.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Do you mean cis-men or trans-women?

Which of those are biologically male? That's the answer to your question, right there.

ETA: not that it matters as EC made it clear she doesn't consider trans women to be women at all.

I consider transwomen to be males who adopt the stereotypical (and often offensive) trappings of socially-enforced femininity.

I'm of the opinion that I should have the right to allow Blair White into spaces where I'm vulnerable, but to refuse access to Jessica Yaniv.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Well, I somehow manage to just not look at other people's genital's through the gaps in bathroom stalls with extreme levels of consistancy, but maybe that's just me.

It's a beef stick or a taco, not the creatures from Bird Box. Just don't like... try to look at it and you'll be fine. What are people afraid they catch a glimpse of it in the mirror, through the gap in the stall...

I'm just going to point out again that the risk profile is significantly different whether you're viewing it from a male perspective or a female perspective.

 

[Emily's Cat]

The trans-men I know from band are men in all the ways that matter to me and my fellow band mates. The trans-girl I know is a girl in all the ways that matter to me and her classmates.

The "ways that matter to you" aren't necessarily the only ways that matter to other people. In the context of a band, it has zero relevance. For people who are already good friends and have trust, it has negligible meaning.

I don't know your friends, I don't know if they've had genital surgery. On the assumption that your transmen band friends have NOT had genital surgery, and are still in possession of a vulva, vagina, and uterus... do you think *they* would be as comfortable being completely naked around a group of male strangers as they are being fully clothed around you? If, for some strange reason, one of your transman friends who is still in possession of a vulva and vagina were to end up incarcerated... do you think they'd have no concerns at all being placed in the male prison?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I would think you’re wrong because of how prefixes work as modifiers and also how trans folks are referred to in daily interactions.

Time will tell which idea wins the process of linguistic natural selection. Or, I suppose, if neither do.

I'm gonna call BS on this. I've been extremely careful and considerate when referring to Boudicca in this thread, and have unerringly addressed and referred to her using female pronouns, as is her preference. I still get called a TERF, and "hysterical" and subjected to other insults.

Pronouns are a red-herring, as are bathrooms. They're an easy go to that serves as a distraction, while TRAs (many of whom are not trans at all) set about getting laws changed to remove references to sex and replace them with gender identity, get bills passed allowing self-identified transwomen to be placed in women's prisons, and argue that any male who feels like a woman inside should be allowed to compete against females.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Of course not. This is really about one’s identity, what does one base their identity on, and the fear of losing one’s identity if someone can have a similar identity for different reasons. We see similar things when guy folks wanted to be able to marry and during the civil rights movement in the 60s (and, arguably, continually up to now).

No, it's not about competing identities. I don't "identify" as a woman, I AM a woman, by accident of genetics. The male-bodied person who fathered me shot a load of semen (small motile gametes) into the vagina of the female-bodied person who mothered me. One of those sperm (small motile gametes) managed to latch on to my mother's egg (large non-motile gametes) and started the development of a fetus. That particular sperm (small motile gamete) carried an X chromosome, which contains the set of instructions for making a brand new female-bodied person. Once outside of the womb, that female-bodied person was referred to as a "girl", which is the term for a sexually immature female-bodied human. During childhood and through adolescence, I was subjected to the sex-based stereotypes and socially-enforced behavioral expectations that have been a constant hindrance to me and to other female-bodied humans throughout history, and which we've been struggling to overcome for ages. When I attained sexual maturity, people referred to me as a woman, which is the term for a sexually mature female-bodied human.

That objective reality - being a female human being - is a massively formative and inescapable element of my life. It creates barriers for me and other female humans. It constrains our interactions, it places requirements on our behavior, and it subjects us to judgement if we don't conform to those stereotypes well enough to pass muster. It subjects us to a significantly higher risk of sexual harassment, sexual assault, and rape. It places us at a material and very real disadvantage in any interaction that relies on physical strength, including sports and as victims of violence.

This isn't a disagreement between competing "identities". It's a conflict about whether or not someone's internal feeling and belief about their soul should be allowed to override the objective reality of a group of people who are (and continue to be) discriminated against and disadvantaged due the to fact of our sex.

 

[Emily's Cat]

My understanding is that gender dysphoria is not a choice, and by framing it in terms of “I think of myself . . .” you make it sound that way. Did you mean it like that?

And we're back to one of the main points of disagreement here.

No, I don't think that gender dysphoria is a "choice". But I also think that it's a diagnosable medical and mental health condition, that should be subjected to rigorous testing and counseling.

Which puts the concept of gender dysphoria rather at odds with the TRA push to have "gender identity" be something that is completely self-identifiable and binding on the rest of society.

 

[Emily's Cat]

That’s what some trans folk say but not all. In this thread we’ve read Boudicca frame it as “I am a woman” and I’ve listened to and read many others that say that.

And that’s got me trying to think of it from someone like our member Boudicca’s perspective.

(And I think this also touches on part of what JoeM says above.)

I can say “I am a man*” and have that accepted based on nothing at all but me saying it, I don’t have to prove that to anyone, I don’t have to negotiate with people to agree to call me he or sir or Mister. Indeed if someone called me “she” people would understand that I could find that upsetting or why I would not like to be called she.

No one expects me to do anything else then simply assert “I am a man”.

I suspect from Boudicca’s viewpoint she is thinking “Why do I have to do something more/other when I say “I am a woman” than you do when you say “I am a man””?

And - and this where I think it pulls in JoeM queries regarding “identifying” - I can’t tell you how it feels to be a man, I have no way of knowing if my “inner” experience of being a man is anything like yours or JoeM’s and no one expects me to have to be able to articulate and describe what that experience is before I say “I am a man” and for you accept it.

All of that is what I consider the “gender” part of this discussion. There is of course the biological side - my genetic makeup - but no one asks me to dive into that when I say to them “I am Mr Darat”.

On one hand, in an anonymous online forum, Boudicca could very well have simply said "I am a woman" and left it at that, and to some degree nobody would have challenged her. Boudicca volunteered that she is a transwoman, as well as that she has not had genital surgery. There's no way to verify or even to evaluate a person's claim in an anonymous venue. The only a person's claim to being one sex or the other gets questioned is if they persistently and consistently exhibit the social behaviors or the lived experiences of the opposite sex. Boudicca has frequently dismissed and disregarded the experiences of females, and has referred to them as unimportant and irrelevant - which is something that the overwhelming majority of females don't do. Even if she hadn't volunteered her biological sex in this thread, that would generate enough skepticism to warrant questioning.

On the other hand... if you walk up to a random stranger IRL and say "I am a man", they're probably going to assume it's true because you look like a male, and have typical male secondary sexual characteristics and phenotypes. Similarly, if Boudicca walks up to a random stranger and says "I am a woman", they're probably going to agree, because she is passing and will have the physical signals of the female sex.

On the gripping hand... if you walk into a male shower room and drop your pants, your claim of "I am a man" will be pretty quickly verifiable. If Boudicca walks into a female shower room and drops her pants, her claim of "I am a woman" will be pretty quickly falsifiable.

 

[Emily's Cat]

But we aren’t doing it with everything, we are doing it with gender/sex at the moment. How often do you need to articulate what your experience as a male is when you are being identified as a man? Of course the answer is never, so why do you think a trans man should be able to do so?

Because their internal identity is in direct opposition to observable reality.

 

[The Atheist]

I'm just about to go and put some lipstick on our pet pig, who will be marching to Parliament to demand human rights.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'm loving the fact that theprestige and I are on the same page here - I'm pretty sure that's never happened before.

When the argument is between belief and objectively observable reality, you're going to end up with allies that don't necessarily agree with your opinions on other matters

 

[Emily's Cat]

"Inner gender identity" and "typical feelings and reactions of the other gender" sure sound like "what a [woman] feels like" to me.

To me, however, it sounds more like "what society's restrictive and constraining sex-based stereotypes and behaviors insist we conform to".

 

[Emily's Cat]

Point taken, but I don't know how to get there without slipping into solipsism (how does anyone know what anyone else feels like)?

It's indistinguishable from solipsism when the speaker is transgender. If you're talking to non-trans people, however, it ends up being a combination of the physical experience of living in a sexed body and the lived experience of how people treat you and interact with you and expect you to behave and act in a given situation.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Exactly right. As I've said before, I am as much of a woman as the women hatefully misgendering me as a "man" or "male" constantly in this thread. Emily's Cat and I, for example, are simply different sub-categories of women.

What do you and I have in common as part of that meta-category of "woman", and which we do not share with the meta-category of "men"?

Observing the reality of you sex is not hateful. I have consistently used female pronouns when referring to you, and in interactions with you. If you are emotionally harmed by the actual fact of your male biology, that's not evidence of hate from me or anyone else.

And this is separate and directed towards everyone else, but as far as when I said I am a biological woman as well, it is because biology is more than chromosomes and reproductive organs, it is more about how the brain develops over time and it's effect on the overall person. We don't start out as "blank slates" at birth, but the biological cues we begin with don't ultimately determine the gender and sex we end up as.

Ahh... so you've got a "lady-brain". Does that mean that "women" are naturally compassionate, submissive caregivers, who place the whims of their menfolk above their own needs? Evolved to be subservient? Not mentally suited for leadership or decision-making? Just naturally quiet and in the background, ceding the spotlight and the center of focus to men?

The biological cues 100% determine the sex you end up with. That is out of your control from the moment of conception. As far as the gender that you're using here, that's no in your control either - it's imposed upon us by society and interactions with other people.

Gender identity, on the other hand, is neither sex nor gender. I sympathize with your suffering and challenges related to your gender dysphoria. It sounds like something truly difficult and stressful, that could cause significant emotional trauma to you. I don't think you should be subjected to violence or legal discrimination due to a medical condition outside of your control. And I support your steps to mitigate the effect that your condition has on you quality of life.

The only thing I don't accept is that your mental state should take precedence over my objective reality, and be centered as a higher priority throughout society. Furthermore, I don't accept that your experiences as someone with persistent dysphoria from early childhood are the only experiences and the only situations our there. I don't think that I should have to accept Karen White or Jessica Yaniv into my spaces because I would accept you into them.

 

[Emily's Cat]

And as far as JoeMorgue, everyone has a gender identity, both cis and trans and everyone in between. Just that when your gender identity lines up well with the gender you were assigned with at birth, you don't tend to think about it. Much like straight people often can't grasp how someone can be attracted to the same sex when they haven't had that experience of their sexual orientation not lining up with what "biology" says we should do to reproduce.

I don't think that sexual orientation is an "identity". And I think you're wrong about the ability to understand with respect to sexuality. One might not be attracted to a person of the opposite sex... but one generally understand what attraction is, what it feels like, and can speak to it. There's a shared understanding of what sexual attraction is, even if the objects of our attraction aren't shared. Sexual attraction is also observable and measurable. It is evident as objective reality.

I think nearly everyone grasps sexual attraction, even if they have some strange moral objection to it based on their unfalsifiable and subjective beliefs.

Gender identity, on the other hand, defies explanation. You identify as a woman, but you are unable (or unwilling) to explain what you mean by "woman". You use it in a way that does not align with any common understanding of the term. It is an ephemeral feeling to you, where it is a material and objective reality to me. They aren't the same things at all.

Consider: A straight woman and a gay man can sit down and talk about what they find attractive in a male. They may not share every single element of attraction - one might be really into hairy chests, the other might be much more into a strong jaw. But they both have a common understanding of what "male" is, and they are both going to be interested in sexual activity that involves a penis.

What shared understanding and meaning do a transman and a male have in common? What is their common ground?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Very few people who detransition do so because they truly feel they weren't transgender and had dysphoria in the first place.

I do not think this is a supportable assertion. There are many detransitioners (and a growing number at that).

Now, I might agree with you that they didn't have persistent genuine gender dysphoria in the first place and were misdiagnosed. But they still went on to take cross-sex hormones which irreversibly change their otherwise healthy bodies and in many cases cause permanent infertility. And many of them went on to have surgeries which permanently damage their bodies.

Which is exactly why I am opposed to self-id without a medical diagnosis and a couple of years of counseling and therapy, and why I am opposed to medicalizing children and young teens.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Females who can become pregnant are certainly women, so I don't know what you are talking about here. And yes, there is a difference, that is why we have designations like cisgender and transgender.

And here's a hint: Most transwomen who take HRT can't produce sperm either and our penises aren't very functional. I know I can't and mine isn't. That's why I just tend to refer to it as a clit at this point, because it's closer to that than a functional penis.

Your non-functional penis is not a clitoris. The penis of a male with erectile dysfunction is not a clitoris. They are not the same organs. It's not any closer to an actual clitoris than any fully-functional penis is.