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

[theprestige]

Boudicca’s clarification is exactly what I charitably expected she had meant by what she said and while I can understand the frustration of the Word Police, I just can’t begin to get worked up about the slippery slope end of days nothing-means-anything-pocalypse situation or why it is automatically more important to point out Facts About Biology using More Standard Words And Phrases than the more comfortably couched terms.

In principle, I agree with you.*

However, one of the central debates in this thread is the difference between sex and gender, and how to craft public policy that recognizes both transgender rights and biological realities.

A recurring theme among the "TRAs" - including Boudicca - is to insist that policy must ignore this distinction, and that it's a human rights violation to question it.

I sympathize with the use of imprecise language to try to convey a feeling or value that's difficult to put into words. And I hate the pseudoskeptical gamesmanship of bogging down a discussion in pointless quibbling about the definitions of words.

I am much less sympathetic towards the use of imprecise language in order to avoid unpleasant truths or to gain unearned privileges.

---
*Imagine a spherical principle on a frictionless plane with no gravity.

 

[d4m10n]

We shouldn't be excluded from places and opportunities reserved for women as we are women just the same, just a different type of woman.

Are there literally zero opportunities which ought to be reserved for people born female? Not even, say, a weekend clinic providing free cervical smears? (Not a hypothetical ad hoc example, I've long known clinicians who managed and worked at one.) Not even the WNBA? Not even a private club for gender-critical political lesbians^WP?

 

[Emily's Cat]

A question about this GRC stuff..

From what I understand if a transgender person gets this, they are able to permanently alter their past legal documents such as for a marriage or their own birth. (while other documents can be done without any grc)

But does that mean that my own record of being married or giving birth could be altered to say I gave birth to a different sex of child (including giving the child a different name than I did) or that I married a woman at the registrar when in fact I married a man in a church?

Interesting question.

I believe that the GRC one in the UK currently has a requirement for spousal approval prior to transition, and provides spouses the ability to annul the marriage if their partner transitions.

My understanding (which is spotty being on the other side of the pond) is that it is worded that way to acknowledge religious conventions that disallow gay marriage. Otherwise you'd end up with a person in a heterosexual marriage suddenly being forced to be gay.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Are there literally zero opportunities which ought to be reserved for people born female? Not even, say, a weekend clinic providing free cervical smears? (Not a hypothetical ad hoc example, I've long known clinicians who managed and worked at one.) Not even the WNBA? Not even a private club for gender-critical political lesbians^WP?

Private clubs are generally exempt from anti-discrimination laws. There are still many fine establishments in this country that limit their membership based on their personal prejudices, such as KKK chapters, Christian identity movements, Neo-Nazis, and so on. TERFs can still have their own discriminatory membership rules for their organizations, so long as they are private.

 

[theprestige]

And I know that isn’t really much of a contribution to the topic but plenty of posters feel like posting to say ‘why can’t I just call a spade a spade’ so I don’t see why I shouldn’t post to say ‘why do you have to jump up to point it out every single time though? Is it the end of the world if someone is happier to call it a flat shovel?’

"Spade" and "flat shovel" are synonymous, though. And while it wouldn't be the end of the world to call a screwdriver a chisel in a lot of contexts... It would probably result in a botched carpentry project if you ignored the difference. And it will probably result in botched public policy if we ignore the difference between males and females there, regardless of how inconsequential it probably is in casual conversation.

 

[Emily's Cat]

#BidenErasedWomen is a Republican smear campaign.

Honestly, do you just make stuff up and run with it, without even bothering to check whether or not whatever you imagined is actually true or not?

Your speculations are not facts.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Also - care to comment on the content of the video? Or is this part of a vast conspiracy of {republicans? women? reptilians? bigfeet?} dressing up and making inflammatory videos in order to make trans allies look bad?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Then it's hypocritical for a self-proclaimed free speech advocate to be complaining that this is a danger IRL.

That person is free to say whatever ridiculous hateful stuff they want to.

I would like to be able to take their behavior and their frankly misogynistic commentary into consideration and refuse them admittance to my presence when I am vulnerable.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Here's another one. How many "atypical exceptions" or "bad actors trying to discredit these poor lovely marginalised transwomen" does it take before their supporters will begin to understand why women do not want these guys within a hundred miles of their safe spaces.

https://twitter.com/WomenReadWomen/status/1358798633378795528

The amount of vitriol being spewed is insulting.

But seriously... they think they're a better woman than actual women because... they can have sex without consequences? As if being nothing more than a receptacle is the height of womanhood? It's disturbing and misogynistic... and well, just plain gross.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'd be worried if they said it in public. But this is an unknown person in an unknown place. Consider this hypothetical scenario:

A woman's son has recently become female. She punishes him by requiring him to eat dinner alone. Unbeknownst to him, she has placed a hidden webcam in the dining room. One day, he goes into the dining room and makes a hateful rant. His mother checks the webcam to see what the fuss is about, and posts the recording on Twitter.

 

[Lithrael]

To Prestige:

Sure, but I think those are two distinct things and that treating it like it’s a wedge issue that you must contradict at all times instead of just when it makes a difference, is unnecessary.

You can go ‘sure, woman is a perfectly cromulent word for what you are’ and then turn around and say ‘but you still can’t be a sexual assault recovery counselor for Beatrice who tends to have panic attacks around anyone but cisgender women’

(Of course, they probably wouldn’t want Jacqueline Samuda either)

 

[Emily's Cat]

My favourite line?

Lol, that's awesome!

 

[Meadmaker]

I am probably going to regret getting involved in this discussion again, but since I am frequently brought up again and again here, why not? But just to make some things clear: I will not put up with misgendering or insults in any way. If you refer to me as "a man" or "male" I will just ignore you (or report you if you continue to do it, not that I think anything will be done about it). And as I have stated many times before, I will not get bogged down in definitions of what a woman is or trying to prove I am a woman.

Ok. We'll try this. Without getting bogged down into a definition, let me see if you can provide an answer to a question. I'll try to avoid undefined terms by only talking about the cis/trans versions of the words. While some people don't like those words, I think we can at least agree on what they mean.



So, there is a cisgender woman. She wants to go swimming, but there is no private place to take off her clothes to change into a swimsuit, but she is willing to undress in front of other cisgender women. She is not willing to undress in front of cisgender men.

Now, suppose there is a physically untransitioned transgender woman. i.e. This person has functional male reproductive organs, but identifies as a woman. The cisgender woman says that she does not want to undress in front of that transgender woman, and believes that the transgender woman should be excluded from the locker room that the cisgender woman is using.

Can you provide a reason that the cisgender woman should be supported in her desire to exclude cisgender men from from the changing area she is using, but she should not be supported in her desire to exclude transgender women from that locker room.

Keep in mind that we don't want to get bogged down in definitions, here, so your answer shouldn't depend on how a certain word is defined, unless it is a word where everyone agrees on the definition.

ETA: I'm not sure if it really matters, but just for context I want to make sure people understand my personal stance on locker room access. Transwomen who have undergone full surgical transition ("bottom surgery") should be allowed to use women's locker rooms. Transwomen who have undergone no physical transition should not be allowed in women's only spaces, as a general rule. (i.e., individual businesses should be free to enact different policies. Planet Fitness can make its own rules.) People who have undergone some transition? I honestly don't know enough about the process, but at some point they should be allowed. I just don't know enough to say exactly when that point is. My own personal opinion isn't really necessary to answer the question I posed, but it might provide some context for the question I'm asking, so I decide to include it.

 

[theprestige]

: rolleyes : That person is free to say whatever ridiculous hateful stuff they want to.

I would like to be able to take their behavior and their frankly misogynistic commentary into consideration and refuse them admittance to my presence when I am vulnerable.

Literally misogynistic. Earlier in this thread I joked about men being better than women at everything, including womanhood. Here we have someone literally saying that their biological lack of female sex organs makes them a better woman than actual females.

 

[theprestige]

The amount of vitriol being spewed is insulting.

But seriously... they think they're a better woman than actual women because... they can have sex without consequences? As if being nothing more than a receptacle is the height of womanhood? It's disturbing and misogynistic... and well, just plain gross.

It makes sense in the context of the stereotypical male sex drive, though. I was watching the video and thinking, "this is a very manly way to approach the issue".

 

[theprestige]

To Prestige:

Sure, but I think those are two distinct things and that treating it like it’s a wedge issue that you must contradict at all times instead of just when it makes a difference, is unnecessary.

You can go ‘sure, woman is a perfectly cromulent word for what you are’ and then turn around and say ‘but you still can’t be a sexual assault recovery counselor for Beatrice who tends to have panic attacks around anyone but cisgender women’

(Of course, they probably wouldn’t want Jacqueline Samuda either)

I think that's pretty much where we're all at. The whole debate in this thread is about when it makes a difference, and how it makes a difference, and what we should do about the difference in public policy.

And it absolutely is a wedge issue. It's a wedge issue that we must contradict here precisely because Boudicca and others keep trying to equivocate on it in order to get their desired policy outcomes without having to define it or justify it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

There are differences between a transgender woman like me and cisgender women, but my point is that those differences are ultimately irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. We shouldn't be excluded from places and opportunities reserved for women as we are women just the same, just a different type of woman.

I will attempt to leave sex out of this post.

I will reiterate that those differences are irrelevant to you. Those differences are NOT irrelevant to ciswomen. Those differences are a substantial component of the experiences and lives of ciswomen. Those differences are an inextricable part of who we are, and of our identities... and an embedded element of how we are treated by society.

Those differences matter to a great many ciswomen.

I would like to be able to accept you as a woman. But in order to do so, I really need you to seek to understand the experiences of ciswomen, the sex-based bias we face, the sex-based conditioning that was imposed on us, the ever present risk that men present - even though it's a small number of men overall. I need to you understand the physical reality of ciswomen, the barriers we face.

I need you to understand why sex-segregated spaces are important to many women... and to help us find a way to assure that ciswomen are not placed at greater danger when we seek to support transwomen.

I really, really, really need you to NOT DISMISS the physical, biological, and social reality of ciswomen as "irrelevant".

 

[Emily's Cat]

It's chemtrails, get it right. The North Koreans are releasing chemicals during flyovers to turn all the men into trans-women because then no one will be eligible to enlist in the military.

Fortunately we will be saved by an epic team up of Austim Powers and Maxwell Smart.

I read that as "autism" powers, and was confused for a moment.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I will attempt to leave sex out of this post.

I will reiterate that those differences are irrelevant to you. Those differences are NOT irrelevant to ciswomen. Those differences are a substantial component of the experiences and lives of ciswomen. Those differences are an inextricable part of who we are, and of our identities... and an embedded element of how we are treated by society.

Those differences matter to a great many ciswomen.

I would like to be able to accept you as a woman. But in order to do so, I really need you to seek to understand the experiences of ciswomen, the sex-based bias we face, the sex-based conditioning that was imposed on us, the ever present risk that men present - even though it's a small number of men overall. I need to you understand the physical reality of ciswomen, the barriers we face.

I need you to understand why sex-segregated spaces are important to many women... and to help us find a way to assure that ciswomen are not placed at greater danger when we seek to support transwomen.

I really, really, really need you to NOT DISMISS the physical, biological, and social reality of ciswomen as "irrelevant".

I'm awed again and again how confident you feel speaking for all cis women.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Boudicca’s clarification is exactly what I charitably expected she had meant by what she said and while I can understand the frustration of the Word Police, I just can’t begin to get worked up about the slippery slope end of days nothing-means-anything-pocalypse situation or why it is automatically more important to point out Facts About Biology using More Standard Words And Phrases than the more comfortably couched terms.

And I know that isn’t really much of a contribution to the topic but plenty of posters feel like posting to say ‘why can’t I just call a spade a spade’ so I don’t see why I shouldn’t post to say ‘why do you have to jump up to point it out every single time though? Is it the end of the world if someone is happier to call it a flat shovel?’

It's the narrative bait and switch. I'm not saying that Boudicca herself does this, but that it happens quite a lot in this topic.

1) Sex and Gender are separate
2) I have the sex of male, but the gender of woman
3) I am a woman
4) Transwomen are women
5) Women's sports are for women, therefore they're for transwomen too
6) Women's short-list seats and honorifics are for women, therefore they're for transwomen too.
7) Women's prisons are for women, therefore they're for transwomen too.
8) People who insist on saying that those are sex-segregated spaces are biological essentialists
9) Biological essentialists are bigots
10) It's offensive to refer to transwomen as anything that is related to masculinity, manhood, or the male sex
11) It's hate-speech to refer to transwomen as anything that is related to masculinity, manhood, or the male sex
12) It's bigoted to exclude transwomen from any female space

...

And so on.

If it were reserved for purely social interactions, I'd have no worries. I'm perfectly happy to refer to Boudicca as a woman, and to interact with her as one socially.

The problem arises when that social gender construct of "woman" is being used to override the reality of the female sex, and to justify penis-havers taking over female spaces.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The problem arises when that social gender construct of "woman" is being used to override the reality of the female sex, and to justify penis-havers taking over female spaces.

Curious if you'd expand on "taking over female spaces", specifically how you think it's possible.

Trans people are an extremely small minority of the population. They can't "take over" anything without significant support from cis people.

Is it still "taking over" female spaces if trans women receive support from cis women, as is often the case in real examples? Do the cis-women supporting trans women and trans rights simply not count to your eye? Or are they self-hating women participating in their own oppression?

Or is it some plot by penis havers, trans women and cis men plotting together to infiltrate and dominate female spaces?

It seems pretty notable to me that many of the most strident voices opposing transphobes are feminist women. I imagine it irks them quite a bit for TERFs to paint trans rights and women's rights as being in irreconcilable opposition.

Pretty much every poll has shown that women are more likely than men to support trans rights, as did surveying showing women more likely to support gay and lesbian rights than men. A credit to their gender, this trend towards greater respect for individual rights.

The TERFs like to paint with a broad brush, but it is important to note that the idea that women's rights and trans rights are in opposition is not one universally, or evenly broadly, shared by women and feminists.