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

[Collin237]

Yes. The police and the courts and the media have swallowed the trans mantra and they are the ones driving this. The Conservative party's realisation that kowtowing to the wokies isn't as clever a wheeze as they thought it would be is relatively recent, and there are people in the party who still want to toe the woke line, and they have had other things to think about recently, so this situation has developed and has not been addressed.

Really? Falsifying crime statistics is a very transparent ploy to discredit the trans rights movement. If Johnson gets away with this, the next step might be allowing native British felons to identify as Arabic. Just because something sounds Leftist doesn't mean it is.

 

[theprestige]

Really? Falsifying crime statistics is a very transparent ploy to discredit the trans rights movement. If Johnson gets away with this, the next step might be allowing native British felons to identify as Arabic. Just because something sounds Leftist doesn't mean it is.

You're begging the question that this counts as falsifying.

If you believe, ideologically, that transwomen are women, then of course the right thing for you to do is record their crimes as crimes by women.

 

[d4m10n]

If you want to use that definition to argue that transwomen are women you have to show that most people who expect people to perform the gender role associated with their sex (let's call them "genderists" - those who participate in the expectation of gender roles, the group whose beliefs your definition is based on) are also supportive of transwomens' gender expression. In other words, they make an exception for them whilst still expecting a gender role to be performed, just the other one.

It should be enough to say that if most people in a given society made the exception you describe here, in that society it wouldn't be particularly bizarre to say that trans women are fulfilling the same social role as cis women, a role which we might call "womanhood" in that cultural context.

Basically your definition boils down to: a person is a woman if some specific group of people thinks so.

This is literally how language works; words mean what people generally take them to mean.

That said, I do think there is a place for stipulative definition^WP in discussions like this one.

Normalizing gender stereotypes and using them as a legal basis for segregation seems like all kinds of a bad idea.

Good thing no one is suggesting this.

 

[TomB]

Women's prisons are significantly less dangerous than men's prisons. Not a vague sort of "statistically significant but not meaningful" sort of thing, but MASSIVELY less violent and dangerous.

Much as I might wish it otherwise, as long as testosterone is the hormone that drives sex-differentiation... I think there's going to need to be some areas of life that segregate females from males. It's unfortunate, and it's not very nice, but testosterone genuinely produces higher levels of aggression.

LOL, I think you might be misunderstanding my point. I'm not arguing that there should be coed prisons.

I'm arguing that, while women face danger from males in prison, so do trans-women. Both issues are legitimate and deserve not to be dismissed.

By the way:

Some very distinct differences were found in the patterns of victimization among male and female inmates. Male inmates, relative to their female counterparts, reported significantly higher percentages of physical victimization perpetrated by staff, although percentages of inmate-on-inmate physical victimization were equal for male and female inmates. This suggests gender-patterned interactions between inmate and staff in which (a) male inmates, compared to female inmates, are more aggressive against authority figures, resulting in physical altercations with staff; (b) staff is more willing to use physical force against male inmates than female inmates; or (c) some combination of both. This warrants further investigation. In contrast, sexual victimization between inmates was more common among female than male inmates, but their percentages of sexual victimization perpetrated by staff were roughly equal. This gender difference in inmate-on-inmate victimization percentages is explained by differences in inappropriate touching, not sexual assault (i.e., rape). Compared to male inmates, female inmates were significantly more likely to report that other inmates touched, felt, or grabbed them in sexually threatening ways.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3793850/

Table 1 from that document is interesting.

Now, I find these results to be counter-intuitive, and I wouldn't draw any definitive conclusions from a single study. But it doesn't sound like women's prisons are wonderful places where the prisoners are nice to each other.

 

[TomB]

Thanks. That's where I'm going to push back on this idea. The traits of humility and gentleness and sensitivity are all assumed traits that have repeatedly been used to deny women participation in the fullness of society. It's the social expectation that women are humble (and thus subservient to the desires of men) that is a barrier. It's the presumption of sensitivity and gentleness that have justified excluding women from political and executive roles because "they're just not suited to making hard decisions".

Have they met any teenage girls?

 

[theprestige]

Good thing no one is suggesting this.

Then what are you suggesting? Because you're definitely suggesting some kind of normalization of gender stereotypes, and the rest of us are debating criteria for segregating men and women in public policy.

Is this some sort of "socratic" thing, where you ask a bunch of abstract questions and wait for answers that play into whatever conclusion you're actually planning to argue for? If so, could you just skip to the end and argue for your conclusion already?

 

[theprestige]

LOL, I think you might be misunderstanding my point. I'm not arguing that there should be coed prisons.

I'm arguing that, while women face danger from males in prison, so do trans-women. Both issues are legitimate and deserve not to be dismissed.

I don't think anyone is dismissing the issue of males facing danger from other males in prison.

In fact, the risk that males pose to fellow prisoners, being so far beyond the risk that females pose to fellow prisoners, seems to be the main concern of those who wish to keep transwomen out of women's prisons.

 

[d4m10n]

Then what are you suggesting. Because you're definitely suggesting some kind of normalization of gender stereotypes, and the rest of us are debating criteria for segregating men and women in social policy.

I've said this several times above, but I'll say it once again.

NOTICING THAT PEOPLE OFTEN TREAT MALES AND FEMALES DIFFERENTLY IS NOT THE SAME THING AS NORMALIZING IT

If you've some reason to believe I've been doing the latter rather than the former, I'm happy to clear things up.

 

[Collin237]

You're begging the question that this counts as falsifying.

If you believe, ideologically, that transwomen are women, then of course the right thing for you to do is record their crimes as crimes by women.

You're begging the question that this was an act of ideology. Anyway, according to Rolfe, they didn't have gender recognition certificates.

 

[TomB]

I don't think anyone is dismissing the issue of males facing danger from other males in prison.

In fact, the risk that males pose to fellow prisoners, being so far beyond the risk that females pose to fellow prisoners, seems to be the main concern of those who wish to keep transwomen out of women's prisons.

Not my point. The point is that trans-women in men's prisons may be at higher risk than other male prisoners. That is a legitimate concern for trans-people.

Now, that doesn't mean the solution is to put them into women's prisons. Just that it's kind of a special case dilemma how to handle them.

There is a bigger problem in that prisons overall (yes, including women's prisons) are way too dangerous. But that could be a whole other thread. (And probably is, somewhere.)

 

[Rolfe]

Really? Falsifying crime statistics is a very transparent ploy to discredit the trans rights movement. If Johnson gets away with this, the next step might be allowing native British felons to identify as Arabic. Just because something sounds Leftist doesn't mean it is.

It's not something Johnson is doing. The police and the justice system have been captured by the trans lobby and I doubt if he even knows about it. He's not a details guy.

It wasn't me who said they didn't have GRCs, but the vast majority don't. Actually very few GRCs have been issued compared to the number simply calling themselves trans (and the ones who transitioned before GRCs were introduced). The police and the justice system have been told by the TRAs (Stonewall mainly) that transwomen are women and must be treated as such in every way, and they are going along with it. Even to the point of forcing female witnesses to refer to a defendant they perceive as male as "she".

Newspapers headline "Woman charged with possessing child porn" or whatever, and maybe in paragraph 10 once you've scrolled past the adverts there might be a quick reference to this woman having once been called Bert. It's been written into their code of practice. Again, by transactivist groups (mainly Stonewall) who farm themselves out as consultants and get paid for telling organisations to toe the trans line or else.

 

[Sherkeu]

Exposing oneself to someone who doesn't want to see your private bits actually is a crime, outside of a few very limited and specific locations where nudity is expected.

We discussed this one before about appropriate 'naked' spaces.
(There was even the example of the Korean spas where females of all ages who choose to go know that the therapeutic pools do not allow any clothing as it is considered 'unclean'.)

I am now in the position to tell my daughter that if a man is exposing himself to you at the park, please get out of there and do not speak to this person. It is a crime.

But if you see a naked male body asking if they could borrow shampoo in the space you undress and shower, well, this is ok, because that person is transgender. Be kind and considerate to this person as if they were another girl.

This is a very confusing message.

Most of the girls are modest but when a quick change in or out of a bathing suit is all they need, they will just do it at the lockers. Sometimes a shower item is needed and they might step out with a 'towel on front' and quickly go get it and then return to the shower. Of course the toddlers and very young girls don't care at all about covering. Women from certain cultures (usually the older women) don't care about modesty much at all either. Nor should they. This is all perfectly normal. The females in the thread all understand it and have explained it several times.

There is some suggestion in this thread that they should be required to go to a curtained area now so as not to 'expose' themselves to the other females and be covered at all times. As I recall, someone called it a 'human right'.

Thus everyone has complete privacy in these spaces. Maybe thats the new order of things.

The females will now need to alter their normal behavior to allow for the transwomen to feel a part of normal female behavior.

 

[Collin237]

It's not something Johnson is doing. The police and the justice system have been captured by the trans lobby and I doubt if he even knows about it. He's not a details guy.

Good luck with that.

 

[theprestige]

I've said this several times above, but I'll say it once again.

NOTICING THAT PEOPLE OFTEN TREAT MALES AND FEMALES DIFFERENTLY IS NOT THE SAME THING AS NORMALIZING IT

If you've some reason to believe I've been doing the latter rather than the former, I'm happy to clear things up.

What is your purpose in doing the former?

 

[theprestige]

You're begging the question that this was an act of ideology. Anyway, according to Rolfe, they didn't have gender recognition certificates.

No I am not. I am bringing up ideology as an alternative to your default assumption of fraud. Ideology is an alternative interpretation that you did not consider. Because you were begging the question. Now, if I were assuming ideology the way you're assuming fraud, then I'd be begging the question too.

 

[theprestige]

Not my point. The point is that trans-women in men's prisons may be at higher risk than other male prisoners. That is a legitimate concern for trans-people.

Now, that doesn't mean the solution is to put them into women's prisons. Just that it's kind of a special case dilemma how to handle them.

I'm sure we could enumerate dozens of male demographics that are at higher risk than other male demographics, in prison. Right? Most of the victims of violence in prisons aren't transsexuals. I don't see how transsexuality can possibly be a special case requiring special attention, compared to all these other at-risk men.

 

[d4m10n]

What is your purpose in doing the former?

Since we're doing the definitions thing...

 

[Collin237]

It's not something Johnson is doing. The police and the justice system have been captured by the trans lobby and I doubt if he even knows about it. He's not a details guy.

It wasn't me who said they didn't have GRCs, but the vast majority don't. Actually very few GRCs have been issued compared to the number simply calling themselves trans (and the ones who transitioned before GRCs were introduced). The police and the justice system have been told by the TRAs (Stonewall mainly) that transwomen are women and must be treated as such in every way, and they are going along with it. Even to the point of forcing female witnesses to refer to a defendant they perceive as male as "she".

Newspapers headline "Woman charged with possessing child porn" or whatever, and maybe in paragraph 10 once you've scrolled past the adverts there might be a quick reference to this woman having once been called Bert. It's been written into their code of practice. Again, by transactivist groups (mainly Stonewall) who farm themselves out as consultants and get paid for telling organisations to toe the trans line or else.

Then it's quite clear that Stonewall is transphobic. We have a similar problem in the U.S. with antisemitic groups posing as Jewish lobbies. (It's possible to be phobic of oneself.)

 

[TomB]

I'm sure we could enumerate dozens of male demographics that are at higher risk than other male demographics, in prison. Right? Most of the victims of violence in prisons aren't transsexuals. I don't see how transsexuality can possibly be a special case requiring special attention, compared to all these other at-risk men.

I didn't say they were. However this is a conversation that involves that one particular demographic. The fact that there are other demographics outside the scope of this conversation is not grounds for dismissing those concerns.

But as I said, the problems with prisons are a whole other topic.

ETA: I don't think it's a good idea to put trans-women in women's prison. But I also don't think it's a good idea to put them in men's prison. While it's easy to turn off empathy for a criminal, no one's punishment should be to place them in a dangerous living situation. The fact that being sent to prison deprives one not only of freedom, but also of safety indicates a problem in my mind.

 

[Matthew Best]

Then it's quite clear that Stonewall is transphobic.

It's not clear to me.