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

[Sherkeu]

I think many of the arguments in all these threads will have to be reconsidered with the large trend of the "Transgender Non-Binary" folks putting themselves under 'trans' category as well.

Take the entire grab bag of gender identity words and mix them with transgender and you get all possibilities. Lean male, lean female, androgynous, fluid, or 'not sure'. There are no rules for how to be transgender. It doesnt strictly mean "to transition to the opposite gender than assigned at birth" anymore. All things than lean to the female half of any spectrum can qualify as 'trans woman".
*MtF surgery can now get a vaginoplasty without disrupting a normal working phallus (The scrotum provides the materials to work with). Both... and!

So what to do now with all of the "Transgender non-binary feminine" women (aka transfem, non-binary fem) with or without surgery, hormones, a mix of things, microdosing, or nothing at all)?

They do not seem to have the same dysphoria nor 100% female identity like Boudicca has explained in her posts. And there are seemingly a lot of them out there!

 

[Meadmaker]

OK, clean your specs maybe



None of this is relevant to transwomen participating in womens chess tournaments other than to endorse that there is no reason to exclude them.

Which is fortunate, because transwomen aren't excluded from women's chess tournaments.

I mentioned that earlier, along with my endorsement of that policy.

ETA: That's the policy of USCF. I don't know about other national federations. The international federation has a policy to accept the reporting of the member states. i.e. if the USCF records say that an American is a woman, FIDE policy is to treat that person as a woman.

 

[d4m10n]

I think many of the arguments in all these threads will have to be reconsidered with the large trend of the "Transgender Non-Binary" folks putting themselves under 'trans' category as well.

There ought to be a thread about non-binary stuff, IMO.

 

[Meadmaker]

When cismen were perving on the women in the toilets i was ok with it but when trans people do it that has to be stopped!

Well here is another part of the problem.

No one in these threads have ever said, at least that I recall, that transwomen were going to perv on people in toilets. No one has ever said that it was ok for anyone to perv on people in toilets. Everyone who has ever talked about the issue has said that the problem has been and always will be cis-men.

Actually listen to people. They might still be wrong, but at least you will be arguing against the real arguments instead of just smearing people.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think the thread still exists.. go find it

And feel free to state your personal position on it here

People talk a lot about the "burden of proof" here at ISF. Except in courtrooms and formal debate situations, the burden of proof is on the person who wants other people to believe him.

I do not believe your claim. If you care about that, feel free to provide proof, but only if it is at least peripheral to the topic of the thread.

 

[cullennz]

Well here is another part of the problem.

No one in these threads have ever said, at least that I recall, that transwomen were going to perv on people in toilets. No one has ever said that it was ok for anyone to perv on people in toilets. Everyone who has ever talked about the issue has said that the problem has been and always will be cis-men.

Actually listen to people. They might still be wrong, but at least you will be arguing against the real arguments instead of just smearing people.

Because we are born evil tyrants with inbuilt toxic masculinity

If anyone can prove trans women born male don't have this affliction feel free to prove it

(Sorry that was a joke)

 

[Sherkeu]

There ought to be a thread about non-binary stuff, IMO.

I saw that one and it doesnt address what is trending (lots of talk about being bi- and pronoun usage though)

These non-binaries (Trans NB, Enby) are merging under the Transgender umbrella- which has top visibility currently in activism. There is much more overlap now in the language. They aren't a distinct separate category. Even traditional trans women have varying degrees of transition.
So if policies were put into place, then "Transgender rights" needs to be clearly defined as to just who it applies to. Gender fluid women? Feminine men who are socially women? Anything binary as a strictly 'male' or 'female' spaces will have issues.

As an aside, I am so saddened to read so many very young people today questioning their very identity with fairly innocuous teen fantasies (like being aroused at womens lingerie, trans comics or atypical porn- though access to the last 2 is fairly recent for the younger crowd), or triggered by things they read or see on the internet (thinking 'maybe THAT's why I am confused!'), or what their friends do/say, when they may just be going through an normal awkward time through puberty. Actually this applies to the adults too.

Suddenly they are in forums that feel more like recruiting groups 'helping' them through their gender issues and how to get on hormones for it.

 

[TomB]

Well here is another part of the problem.

No one in these threads have ever said, at least that I recall, that transwomen were going to perv on people in toilets. No one has ever said that it was ok for anyone to perv on people in toilets. Everyone who has ever talked about the issue has said that the problem has been and always will be cis-men. Actually listen to people. They might still be wrong, but at least you will be arguing against the real arguments instead of just smearing people.

RE: The highlighted: In fairness, it has been asserted that at least some trans-women display behavior patterns associated with men (disregarding women's opinions, aggressiveness, crime rates).

But in general, you are correct. And even the poster who made those points is willing to accept trans-women in female spaces and sports given certain conditions.

The key to the "women's space" issue is less about who gets to enter and more about how do we allow trans-women in while still discouraging cis-men from entering.


Men invading women's spaces for voyeuristic (or worse) purposes is already a problem. In fact, there are already men who will disguise themselves for that purpose. I believe I provided a link not too long ago. No one here has said that this was not a problem already, though I don't think there is a thread specific to it. Just as there is not a general: "murder is bad" thread.

The reason it is an issue on trans- threads is that there is concern self-ID may make an existing problem worse. Not because of legitimate trans-women, but because of opportunistic cis-men.

Now, are men "suddenly" concerned about this because it involves trans people? Not really. As a male, do I think about voyeurism or assualt in bathrooms a lot? No. It's not part of my daily life. But am I concerned with it when it comes up? Yes. It concerns me when there is a news story of two way mirror in a gas station bathroom. It concerns me when I hear of a man sneaking into women's bathrooms/locker rooms to plant cameras.

I would advocate for measures to safeguard against this if I could think of any that were practical. I can't think of a practical way to ensure that trans-women entering the spaces are not cis-men in disguise. But I think something along the lines of requiring some sort of gender certification might act as a deterrent to some. (It won't act as prevention because showing papers to enter the bathroomis anuntenable idea.)

There are a lot of nuanced positions in this thread, some of which get lost if you just look at individual posts. No one wants to write a dissertation explaining their full view for every post, so you kind of have to piece it together over time. I've pointed out a few times how close together some of the "extremists" (if there truly are any on this thread) are in their opinions.

It's almost like which "side" you are on is more important than the actual topic.

 

[Meadmaker]

RE: The highlighted: In fairness, it has been asserted that at least some trans-women display behavior patterns associated with men (disregarding women's opinions, aggressiveness, crime rates).

But in general, you are correct. And even the poster who made those points is willing to accept trans-women in female spaces and sports given certain conditions.

The key to the "women's space" issue is less about who gets to enter and more about how do we allow trans-women in while still discouraging cis-men from entering.

Indeed. When it comes to voyeurism, that is what it's about.

There is another issue, and perhaps that other issue is where people get confused, assuming it's confusion that causes them to misstate others' positions.

I think there is a certain amount of anxiety associated with wonen and girls undressing in front of men, and that anxiety is present for any male bodied person, even if she promises that she really is a woman, who just happens to have a penis. I have said over and over again that the girls don't want to be seen by guys when the girls are undressed, and that anxiety is triggered not by the person's self-identification, but by the identification made by the observer. That's where that phrase I use, "Can she put the towel over her eyes." comes from. The girl was trying to explain to the school board that in her view, that male bodied person in her locker room was really quite a lot like any other male bodied person in her locker room, and she didn't want to undress in front of him, or, being polite, in front of her.

Maybe some people think I, or others with similar feelings, am accusing the transwomen of "perving on" the girls.

 

[Wayward son2]

Sex segregation in chess is the weirdest one, for me. Are the top women grandmasters just not as ruthlessly aggressive as their male counterparts? Do they think about the the branching options differently and less efficiently? Is it just vestigial patriarchy?

Top women grandmasters are generally far more aggressive than their male counterparts. That is probably mostly to do with the lower level of competition among women as most male players were far more aggressive when they were younger but had to become more risk averse to succeed at the highest levels.

Hou Yifan is the top ranked woman right now. She is 86th in the world. If memory serves me right Susan Polgar was the first woman to crack the top 100 - that was around 40 years ago, but her sister Judit is probably the only woman to crack the top 60, reaching as high as #8 and was an amazingly aggressive player compared to her peers. Judit tried to always only played in men's or open tournaments (except for things like the olympiads) from the time she was 5. I think that the Polgar sisters go a long way to supporting the idea that the differences are mainly to do with opportunity and culture not sex. But, I am open to the idea that it could have to do with the likelihood to become obsessed or something like that.

 

[cullennz]

Top women grandmasters are generally far more aggressive than their male counterparts. That is probably mostly to do with the lower level of competition among women as most male players were far more aggressive when they were younger but had to become more risk averse to succeed at the highest levels.

Hou Yifan is the top ranked woman right now. She is 86th in the world. If memory serves me right Susan Polgar was the first woman to crack the top 100 - that was around 40 years ago, but her sister Judit is probably the only woman to crack the top 60, reaching as high as #8 and was an amazingly aggressive player compared to her peers. Judit tried to always only played in men's or open tournaments (except for things like the olympiads) from the time she was 5. I think that the Polgar sisters go a long way to supporting the idea that the differences are mainly to do with opportunity and culture not sex. But, I am open to the idea that it could have to do with the likelihood to become obsessed or something like that.

Edited by zooterkin: 

<SNIP>
Edited for rule 11.
If you have comments about forum moderation, raise them in the correct place.

With chess

https://phys.org/news/2009-01-men-higher-women-chess-biological.html

 

[Meadmaker]

But, I am open to the idea that it could have to do with the likelihood to become obsessed or something like that.

Welcome.

Have you seen "The Queen's Gambit?"

I think it's time for a topic on that show.

 

[Butter!]

Archie GG, I am working on a proper response to your last post directed toward me. I wanted to give it the thought it deserves, so I started composing my response last night, but I turn into a pumpkin well before midnight these days. And I'm on my work computer now. So I'll finish it up later today and post. I just didn't want you to think I was ignoring you, because I really appreciated you laying out your thoughts.

 

[Darat]

I saw that one and it doesnt address what is trending (lots of talk about being bi- and pronoun usage though)

These non-binaries (Trans NB, Enby) are merging under the Transgender umbrella- which has top visibility currently in activism. There is much more overlap now in the language. They aren't a distinct separate category. Even traditional trans women have varying degrees of transition.
So if policies were put into place, then "Transgender rights" needs to be clearly defined as to just who it applies to. Gender fluid women? Feminine men who are socially women? Anything binary as a strictly 'male' or 'female' spaces will have issues.

As an aside, I am so saddened to read so many very young people today questioning their very identity with fairly innocuous teen fantasies (like being aroused at womens lingerie, trans comics or atypical porn- though access to the last 2 is fairly recent for the younger crowd), or triggered by things they read or see on the internet (thinking 'maybe THAT's why I am confused!'), or what their friends do/say, when they may just be going through an normal awkward time through puberty. Actually this applies to the adults too.

Suddenly they are in forums that feel more like recruiting groups 'helping' them through their gender issues and how to get on hormones for it.

Perhaps what you went through at puberty wasn’t the “normal”? Why is what kids today apparently go through not the “normal” and what you went through was the “abnormal”?

Times change, what is considered “normal” will be different from generation to generation. In effect you are trying to impose and fix what you went through as “normal”. Kids today can explore their identities and try on different hats in a way I find enviable, when I was that age there was pretty much one socially acceptable identify for males, one for females and god help you if you didn’t conform to those.

I really do think this is something to celebrate.

 

[theprestige]

I'd say this is a bit of a low blow

Yeah, you're right. I'm sorry.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Okay so if we shelf* Boudicca's whole "No I'm a biological woman!" thing if the title of the thread was "Transwomen are women, not females" would that change the landscape of the discussion?

*Which I still say it's unreasonable to actually expect us to do since she's been the only active actual transperson in this discussion in the last few months, so just shelving her opinions for being too extreme is... off but I'd like this conversation to go somewhere.

 

[Meadmaker]

Okay so if we shelf* Boudicca's whole "No I'm a biological woman!" thing if the title of the thread was "Transwomen are women, not females" would that change the landscape of the discussion?

*Which I still say it's unreasonable to actually expect us to do since she's been the only active actual transperson in this discussion in the last few months, so just shelving her opinions for being too extreme is... off but I'd like this conversation to go somewhere.

In my opinion, only temporarily, and then it would pop right back to the same place.

The fundamental problem with trying to find the appropriate terms to use is that thet the goal of that exercise is to clarify and express precisely a concept, when that concept is fuzzy and nebulous, and people within the debate do not want it to be clarified or expressed precisely.

It occurs to me that if we use the terms transwoman, ciswoman, transman, and cisman, we all understand what those terms mean. Some people do not like the terms, but everyone understands them. The fundamental, underlying, problem of communication is that some people think there are very important features shared by cismen and transmen, while other people think that there are very important features shared by cismen and transwomen. Depending on which "side" you are on, you think that public policy should emphasize the common features shared by cismen and transwomen, or that public policy should emphasize the common features of cismen and transmen.

That isn't actually a language problem. The language games are all about shaping thought to move people's use of language toward one side or the other.

 

[JihadJane]

Well here is another part of the problem.

No one in these threads have ever said, at least that I recall, that transwomen were going to perv on people in toilets. No one has ever said that it was ok for anyone to perv on people in toilets. Everyone who has ever talked about the issue has said that the problem has been and always will be cis-men.

Actually listen to people. They might still be wrong, but at least you will be arguing against the real arguments instead of just smearing people.

Why would men identifying as women be any less likely to perv on people in toilets than men not identifying as women?

 

[Ziggurat]

Why would men identifying as women be any less likely to perv on people in toilets than men not identifying as women?

If we assume rates are the same (and low for both groups), the significantly larger population of the latter compared to the former still means there are simply many more pervs of the latter sort than the former sort.

 

[theprestige]

Why would men identifying as women be any less likely to perv on people in toilets than men not identifying as women?

Not sure about perving, but wouldn't a transwoman in a women's locker room for the first time be observing the other women pretty closely to see how other women actually behave in such situations?

I know that's what I tend to do when I'm in a new social situation.