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

[Emily's Cat]

Seems to me the rape that is occurring in prisons has a lot more to do with our society's willingness to tolerate barbaric treatment of "bad people" than it has to do with trans policy.

Frankly, I find the implied premise that unchecked sexual abuse is just fine as-is, so long as it remains contained to men's facilities, pretty disgusting. The solution isn't to contain human right violations to men's jails and throw trans women to the wolves.

I find your willingness to put females at risk and see them get raped, by placing male-bodied people in with them without their consent to be misogynistic.

You've repeatedly made it clear that the feelings of transwomen are far more important to you than the actual safety and rights of females.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Of course not! That's a deduction from past behavior. That's not what I meant by fear itself.

Obviously a sexual predator, or someone who objectively shows signs of becoming a sexual predator, should be kept away from women or children inasmuch as society can.

Alright.

What's your take on a woman walking alone at night down a dark alley, who notices a male stranger walking behind her. Is it acceptable for her to keep a hand on her pepper spray, by your reasoning?

What if an unknown adult is hanging around a preschool, watching the children, and is unrelated to any of them? Should the teachers there pretend they don't exist, or is it acceptable for them to

But that has nothing to do with whether they're transgender.

You're right. It has nothing to do with whether they're transgender. It has to do with 1) whether they are male and 2) whether or not other males can or will take advantage of the situation in order to do harm.

At the end of the day, fear risk of sexual assault and violence is a very good reason to separate males and females in many situations, just as it's a very good reason to separate children and adults in many situations.

No matter how much I might wish it otherwise, the truth is that even though a small number of males are violent sexual predators... nearly all violent sexual predators are male.

 

[Boudicca90]

Emily is willing to work toward consensus. Boudicca appears to have taken the "my way is the only way" approach to negotiation.

My rights and my equality as a woman are not up for negotiation or compromise, this is true.

It's like a Black person finally convincing a racist during Jim Crow that Black and white people should not be segregated, but the racist still does not support interracial relationships.

There should be no halfway tolerance and acceptance for our existence.

Sent from my moto g(7) using Tapatalk

 

[theprestige]

Seems to me the rape that is occurring in prisons has a lot more to do with our society's willingness to tolerate barbaric treatment of "bad people" than it has to do with trans policy.

Frankly, I find the implied premise that unchecked sexual abuse is just fine as-is, so long as it remains contained to men's facilities, pretty disgusting. The solution isn't to contain human right violations to men's jails and throw trans women to the wolves.

Women's shelters, by and large, aren't asking for this "protection", and I defer to their expertise. The anti-trans people are white knighting for crisis shelters in a way that the people running them say is detrimental to their mission and are often the most vocal critics of such policies.

Everything you say here is reasonable to me. None of it answers my questions.

Prison rape is a terrible scourge and a national disgrace.

It turns out that rape in women's prisons goes up significantly when transwomen are incarcerated with women.

It seems like an easy and obvious way to avoid driving up the number of rapes is to not incarcerate transwomen with women.

We should be looking for ways to drive that number down. In the mean time, we probably should avoid doing things that drive the number up.

So.

Why is it medically necessary to drive up the number of prison rapes right now?

 

[Emily's Cat]

My rights and my equality as a woman are not up for negotiation or compromise, this is true.

It's like a Black person finally convincing a racist during Jim Crow that Black and white people should not be segregated, but the racist still does not support interracial relationships.

There should be no halfway tolerance and acceptance for our existence.

My rights and equality also shouldn't be up for negotiation, but that doesn't seem to slow you down any.

Beyond that, your equality as a woman is absolutely up for discussion, especially when your desires and feelings with respect to your singular internal gender identity are in conflict with the rights, safety, and dignity of females.

Why do you believe that your desires to enter sex-segregated spaces is MORE IMPORTANT than my right to those spaces?

Why do you think that your feelings of affirmation are MORE IMPORTANT than my safety?

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

I asked you yesterday: How do you propose that you and I keep men out of our spaces? What method or policy do you think will work?

Also... are we obligated to let Eddie Izzard in or not?

 

[theprestige]

Is it medically necessary to let Eddie Izzard in?

 

[deadrose]

It's been said that Boudicca is the only transwoman willing to come into the thread. May I remind you that Luchog did too, and was treated so foully they left the forum entirely? How many other people are avoiding the thread for the same reason?

I can't even stomach reading the hatred in here most days. I'm amazed that Boudicca has managed to hang on this long, and I give them huge props and support for doing so.

 

[d4m10n]

It's one group thinking if they use stereotypes in non-traditional ways they are somehow doing something noble.

If a young trans man is driven (at least in part) by the stereotype of heroic masculinity to dive into a lake and rescue a drowning child, I'm not about to complain. When it comes to stereotypes and identity, I'm mostly concerned with whether they serve to drive good behavior or not.

 

[Myriad]

Seems to me the rape that is occurring in prisons has a lot more to do with our society's willingness to tolerate barbaric treatment of "bad people" than it has to do with trans policy.

Frankly, I find the implied premise that unchecked sexual abuse is just fine as-is, so long as it remains contained to men's facilities, pretty disgusting. The solution isn't to contain human right violations to men's jails and throw trans women to the wolves.

Women's shelters, by and large, aren't asking for this "protection", and I defer to their expertise. The anti-trans people are white knighting for crisis shelters in a way that the people running them say is detrimental to their mission and are often the most vocal critics of such policies.

There's an obvious solution to this. Repeated surveys have shown that even though all prisoners have been assigned guilty, the vast majority of them identify as innocent. So shouldn't we let the innocent ones all go? Guilt and innocence are social constructs, after all. I bet you can't even define them without resorting to stereotypes of "lawful" and "unlawful" behavioral expectations.

The few prisoners identifying as guilty will then have plenty of space and supervision to be safe from one another.

 

[cullennz]

My rights and my equality as a woman are not up for negotiation or compromise, this is true.

It's like a Black person finally convincing a racist during Jim Crow that Black and white people should not be segregated, but the racist still does not support interracial relationships.

There should be no halfway tolerance and acceptance for our existence.

Sent from my moto g(7) using Tapatalk

What about heterosexual transwomen who want to stay in male prisons as for instance, their boyfriend might be in there?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Everything you say here is reasonable to me. None of it answers my questions.

Prison rape is a terrible scourge and a national disgrace.

It turns out that rape in women's prisons goes up significantly when transwomen are incarcerated with women.

It seems like an easy and obvious way to avoid driving up the number of rapes is to not incarcerate transwomen with women.

We should be looking for ways to drive that number down. In the mean time, we probably should avoid doing things that drive the number up.

So.

Why is it medically necessary to drive up the number of prison rapes right now?

This begs the question that there are no other ways to prevent prison rape that don't require denying trans women their gender identity. It also begs the question that trans status is causative, rather than a correlation.

I recall the case of the UK trans woman that committed sexual assaults while in prison. She was in prison for committing sex offenses and continued committing sexual offenses while incarcerated. Seems that taking preventative action against known sexual predators is a more justifiable position to take rather than automatic discrimination towards trans women.

A more obvious category to give special attention is known sex offenders, which would have the benefit of also preventing sexual offences by people who aren't trans.

 

[Collin237]

What's your take on a woman walking alone at night down a dark alley, who notices a male stranger walking behind her. Is it acceptable for her to keep a hand on her pepper spray, by your reasoning?

Yes it's acceptable. She made the personal choice to protect herself.

What if an unknown adult is hanging around a preschool, watching the children, and is unrelated to any of them? Should the teachers there pretend they don't exist, or is it acceptable for them to

Yes it's acceptable. He made the personal choice to harass the school.

Both of these already follow from a common understanding of rights and responsibilities. It's not acceptable for either side to supplant that common understanding with a set-in-stone command.

 

[Emily's Cat]

It's been said that Boudicca is the only transwoman willing to come into the thread. May I remind you that Luchog did too, and was treated so foully they left the forum entirely? How many other people are avoiding the thread for the same reason?

I've re-read this thread a few times, and I just went back and checked again. I can't see that luchog was mistreated in any way, certainly nothing that qualifies as "foul". Additionally, luchog still posts on occassion.

I did, however, see luchog drop into calling other posters bigots and denigrating them for not sharing her view... so... If you'd like to provide some evidence of how luchog was treated "foully" I'd love to see it.

Luchog is a sweetheart, by the way. I'm just not seeing that she was at all mistreated.

I can't even stomach reading the hatred in here most days. I'm amazed that Boudicca has managed to hang on this long, and I give them huge props and support for doing so.

Hmm. What hate is it that you're referring to? Can you be specific?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yes it's acceptable. She made the personal choice to protect herself.



Yes it's acceptable. He made the personal choice to harass the school.

Both of these already follow from a common understanding of rights and responsibilities. It's not acceptable for either side to supplant that common understanding with a set-in-stone command.

Is there a reason that you ignored the second half of my post?

 

[Emily's Cat]

This is an interesting read.

Identity Crisis: Why is Everyone Going Along With Gender Ideology?
Understanding human conformity biases and preference falsification

A few quotes:

The most famous example of conformity in perceptual judgment is the 1950s experiment by Solomon Asch on how a person would conform to a group majority in denying his own perception.
...
This study demonstrates how, at least some of the time, people will deny their own senses to conform with the majority. This provides a pretty direct parallel to groups of people agreeing “trans women are women” when they can see with their own eyes that the person in question is clearly a man.

Conformity of attitudes and opinions is also clearly at play in the gender debate. Many people are not simply going along with the apparent majority in order to avoid standing out, but seem to genuinely adopt the opinions put forth by gender ideology such as “human sex is not binary,” “there is no harm to women’s rights by allowing men who identify as women in women’s spaces,” or “children with gender identity issues should be given cross-sex hormones.” What’s especially alarming to many feminists is how many women seem to be adopting these opinions.
...
In essence, this study demonstrates that while both men and women may conform to group opinions when they are afraid, women are more likely to conform to remain attractive to men. This likely provides some explanation for why so many young women seem more willing to go along with opinions that are ultimately detrimental to women’s rights.

We have good evidence that preference falsification is happening in the United States today in the debate around “gender identity” policies, leading many to perceive a majority in favor of these policies while, secretly, the majority actually disapproves of these policies.

Polling sponsored by WoLF in October of 2020 found that a majority of voters disagree with a range of “gender identity” policies such as those recently enacted by the Biden administration:
...
Considering that preference falsification may be happening in the polling itself as well, these are pretty strong numbers indicating that we have a “silent majority” of people opposed to gender identity policies in the United States. On the other hand, we also have a culture where people are fired for speaking this opinion out loud—the perfect storm for preference falsification to occur and a false majority to emerge.

Some research on conformity has found that when one person breaks a pattern of providing incorrect answers, the subject is more likely to also follow suit and break conformity. Every person speaking out makes it easier for the next person.

It’s inevitable that all of this will come to an end. Like the other great moral panics and societal delusions of history, one day, people will look back on this era and wonder, “How could so many people have gone along with this for so long? And could it happen to us today?”

The answer is obvious: so long as human psychology is biased towards conformity, society will be prone to outbreaks of seemingly smart, logical, and kind people going along with something that makes no sense at all. But these patterns always break eventually—ironically, once people realize that they are not alone in their secret nonconformity.

 

[Collin237]

Is there a reason that you ignored the second half of my post?

It's a matter of precedent. Between 2001 and roughly 2015, almost all terrorists were Muslim. And please don't call that a non sequitur.

 

[theprestige]

It's been said that Boudicca is the only transwoman willing to come into the thread. May I remind you that Luchog did too, and was treated so foully they left the forum entirely? How many other people are avoiding the thread for the same reason?

I can't even stomach reading the hatred in here most days. I'm amazed that Boudicca has managed to hang on this long, and I give them huge props and support for doing so.

About the foulest thing that's happened to Boudicca so far is Rolfe's hardline stance that transwomen are not women.

I'm taking a look back through the earlier installments to refresh my memory of what happened to luchog. So far, it starts out pretty tame. But by their third post, they're dismissing competitive sports as unimportant. By their sixth post, they're dismissing members who try to debate the points they've raised as "clueless".

By their ninth post, they're calling all the dissenters in the thread bigots. Seemingly with no provocation. By their tenth post, they've declared the entire debate pointless, since people's minds can't be changed anyway.

That's it.

The last few references to luchog by other posters in Part 1 are discussions of their skill levels proposal for sports. Arguments that it's not a good solution, and some speculation that luchog's position is informed by their lack of concern about the sports question.

Nothing particularly hateful. Unless disputing the premise and debating the implications is now considered intolerable hatred. They could probably have just put Rolfe on ignore* and carried on the discussion. Assuming they were okay with being asked hard questions and getting vigorous debate about their answers.

In my entirely cursory inspection, I didn't see anything particularly hateful. If I had to guess, I wouldn't say they left because they were getting too much hate. I'd say they left because they didn't have good answers to the hard questions, and no longer felt safe on a forum where some people refuse to accept the trans premise without question.

Is there a particular exchange between luchog and another member (or members), that you think really exemplifies the kind of intolerable hate that drove her off this forum?

I've gotten a lot worse hate here, for being a conservative, than anything I saw being directed at luchog. And yet here I remain. And nobody's leaping to my defense, either. Hell, the majority of the "transwomen are women" contingent in this thread have made it abundantly clear that they think I'm a horrible person and I should just be gone from their reality. Luchog hasn't received a fraction of that kind of hate. Not in this thread, nor anywhere else on the forum. Even Rolfe's anti-luchog invective boils down to "you are wrong."

So when are you gonna start white knighting for me?

---
*Since Rolfe is pretty obviously a committed hardliner who's not going to change her mind anwyay.

 

[Collin237]

This is an interesting read.

Identity Crisis: Why is Everyone Going Along With Gender Ideology?
Understanding human conformity biases and preference falsification

A few quotes:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-m...l-feminists-conservatives-transgender-rights/

 

[JoeMorgue]

That's the problem with "identity" being sacrosanct.

It defines disagreement as a personal attack.

 

[deadrose]

I've re-read this thread a few times, and I just went back and checked again. I can't see that luchog was mistreated in any way, certainly nothing that qualifies as "foul". Additionally, luchog still posts on occassion.

Not since December 2019. It was their opinion that they were treated foully and that is their stated reason for no longer posting on the forum. I don't presume to speak for them in any but those general terms. I simply wanted to point out that Boudicca is not the only transgender person involved here.