[ED] Discussion: Trans Women Are not Women (Part 6)

[Boudicca90]

How do you, personally, distinguish between a transwoman who isn't passing and a cisman?

A trans woman who isn't passing is still a trans woman, that's the point I made before.

 

[Meadmaker]

A trans woman who isn't passing is still a trans woman, that's the point I made before.

I know that's the point you made there.

Instead of answering the question, you made a point.

How do you, personally, distinguish between a transwoman who isn't passing and a cisman?

 

[Boudicca90]

I know that's the point you made there.

Instead of answering the question, you made a point.

How do you, personally, distinguish between a transwoman who isn't passing and a cisman?

It depends.

 

[Ziggurat]

It depends.

Be honest. In general, you cannot.

 

[theprestige]

Hilarious. You clearly don't understand what transphobia is. And "transsexual" is an outdated term, fyi.

Feel free to correct my terminology while you answer my questions.

 

[Boudicca90]

Be honest. In general, you cannot.

I certainly can, I'm just not playing the games you people want to play.

 

[Meadmaker]

I certainly can, I'm just not playing the games you people want to play.

Games, like defining terms, answering questions, or getting to the actual issues that are required in order to make policy that actually works.

Well, that sort of thing isn't everyone's cup of tea.

 

[Elaedith]

Feel free to correct my terminology while you answer my questions.

Transphobia (in practice): Disagreement with tenets of gender identity ideology on logical, practical, philosophical or scientific grounds. See heresy, blasphemy, etc.

Surely being suspicious of somebody claiming to be a transwoman and not wanting them in a female single-sex space because they don't look female enough would not qualify.

For example, http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13241378&postcount=1663

In this case I'm guessing that having a moustache is not making enough effort.

 

[Ziggurat]

I certainly can, I'm just not playing the games you people want to play.

You keep claiming to be able to do things that you refuse to do.

I think you are lying.

 

[Sherkeu]

And also - just for information dontcha know (since anything more than this would be an improper appeal to authority ) - it's probably worth noting that within the understanding of DSM5, the WHO, the UN and many major World governments, trans women are women. The only issue to sort out is quite how that rather intangible and metaphysical concept is applied in practice.

Ok. But I will tell you that the more I read about 'trans women' the more I question using that term to describe those ALL born male, who desire to have or already have, gone through some process to develop female gender expression. Many are genuinely dysphoric, seek a level of social and medical transition they need to get on with their lives, and then they do just that as best they can. No issue with these persons being considered women, with some exceptions, like sports and statistics.

However, there is that other side that is so so prevalent now that I would not call 'women'. It is a more sexualized expression of a fetish. No issue with anyone having a fetish of dressing as a sexy woman and having certain fantasies about it, but they aren't 'women'. You could still call them transwomen, since they are often doing the same procedures, but I consider them now to be more of a sex impostor or female LARPer (and still, nothing wrong with it if that is your thing!). These are the ones who do not belong in female spaces. Trans women should not want them there either.

All the authoritative agencies and governments on the globe saying 'trans women ARE women' doesn't address how to tell the difference. There are no qualfiers left other than someone says it is true for them.

But I am not the grand poohbah of who gets through that female door. and I would not even want the job. But I can see huge gaping differences no matter how it has all been repackaged. The honest and sometimes long and difficult transition process to alleviate sincere dysphoria has simply broadened too wide.

 

[Emily's Cat]

And also - just for information dontcha know (since anything more than this would be an improper appeal to authority ) - it's probably worth noting that within the understanding of DSM5, the WHO, the UN and many major World governments, trans women are women. The only issue to sort out is quite how that rather intangible and metaphysical concept is applied in practice.

Nowhere at all within the DSM-V, WHO, or major world government is any such assertion supported.

You've "interpreted" this as being true, but it is not stated, nor even directly suggested as truth by any of those sources.

 

[Sherkeu]

You keep claiming to be able to do things that you refuse to do.

I think you are lying.

Well, to be fair, I think it is difficult to nail down and somewhat akin to that court ruling on what is obscene.
"I know it when I see it".
A sort of non-rational argument but one people sort of 'get' when they hear it because that is how we assess all kinds of things as individuals

(Justice Stewart) I shall not today
attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be
embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never
succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the
motion picture involved in this case is not that.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Issues like these have to do with the behavior of the perpetrators, what genitals they have is irrelevant. Actions like rape or invasion of privacy are wrong no matter who does it.

Go back and re-read my post.

This isn't a case of some random person "invading privacy" This is a bunch of minor females being told that they have no right to visual privacy from the opposite sex.

For this topic, I don't care how you want to define "sex". Imagine if you were in a changing room, naked, and a man came in - a cisman for argument's sake. Let's say you complained that you were not comfortable having a cisman in the room with you, you didn't want him looking at you while you're naked.

But the judge - the actual law - told you that you have no right to not be looked at while naked, that you have no right to expect visual privacy.

Do you think that you would feel harmed by the policy that allows cis-men to come into the changing room while you're naked and see you naked without your consent?

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

As far as female inmates being subjected to rape by transwomen with PENISES, I think the genitalia matters a whole ******* lot. This hand-waving away of the actual literal reduction in rights, the removal of protections, and the literal subjecting of females to harm directly caused by penises being forced in to their presence without their goddamned consent - with the law ******* backing it - is HARM.

So please, take your "oh these policies are good for transwomen and they don't hurt females at all *blink blink* BS and reconsider your position.

Because I for the life of me cannot figure out why the **** you think you have a right to OBLIGATE every ******* female in the US to bend to your wishes and your desires while simultaneously dismiss the actual harm occurring to them as a result of your positions...while claiming whit a straight face that your borderline misogyny makes you "just as much of a woman as any female"!

 

[d4m10n]

A trans woman who isn't passing is still a trans woman, that's the point I made before.

Going forward, is it ever okay to question whether someone belongs in a given restroom or changing room?

If Seani belongs in the ladies room, how dare we ask anyone to leave?

ETA: To be clear, I don't particularly mind if all restrooms are for everyone going forward, I just want to know what the general consensus is supposed to be.

ETA2: I still think the best rule is currently "Use the room where you'll raise the fewest eyebrows."

 

[Emily's Cat]

I would certainly view someone making no attempt at passing with skepticism (like the Jude Law example), it depends on the situation.

But "isn't passing" is different than making no attempt at it. I have many older trans female friends who don't pass because they waited too long to transition. They still make an attempt to pass, but it is still clear that they are transgender. They shouldn't be discriminated against just because HRT can only do so much and they are too poor to afford surgeries.

So... how do you tell the difference between one of your unfortunate friends in a tough position... and a random cisman who threw on a dress with intent to do harm?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Hilarious. You clearly don't understand what transphobia is. And "transsexual" is an outdated term, fyi.

You dodged the question, you didn't answer it at all.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I certainly can, I'm just not playing the games you people want to play.

That would be because it's not a game, and you very well know it.

You know very well that there is no way at all for anyone to tell the difference. But because you insist that all transwomen of every sort must be entitled to all female spaces and all female services, you can't admit that. It shines the light on the giant gaping hole in the entire premise.

By forcing females to allow any and all self-declared transwomen into their spaces with no questions and no criteria, you know goddamned good and well that this also lets in any cisman who wants to be there and there's not a ******* thing that females can do about it.

And you also know that this will absolutely increase the risk of harm to females. But you don't care. Let me say that again: You do not care if females are hurt.

The actual real harm and the actual real reduction in rights that females suffer is just not important to you. Females are disposable to you. As long as your feelings are affirmed and your desires are fulfilled, the harm that befalls females just doesn't ******* matter to you.

Which is misogynistic and remarkably inhumane.

 

[Boudicca90]

Go back and re-read my post.

This isn't a case of some random person "invading privacy" This is a bunch of minor females being told that they have no right to visual privacy from the opposite sex.

For this topic, I don't care how you want to define "sex". Imagine if you were in a changing room, naked, and a man came in - a cisman for argument's sake. Let's say you complained that you were not comfortable having a cisman in the room with you, you didn't want him looking at you while you're naked.

But the judge - the actual law - told you that you have no right to not be looked at while naked, that you have no right to expect visual privacy.

Do you think that you would feel harmed by the policy that allows cis-men to come into the changing room while you're naked and see you naked without your consent?

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

As far as female inmates being subjected to rape by transwomen with PENISES, I think the genitalia matters a whole ******* lot. This hand-waving away of the actual literal reduction in rights, the removal of protections, and the literal subjecting of females to harm directly caused by penises being forced in to their presence without their goddamned consent - with the law ******* backing it - is HARM.

So please, take your "oh these policies are good for transwomen and they don't hurt females at all *blink blink* BS and reconsider your position.

Because I for the life of me cannot figure out why the **** you think you have a right to OBLIGATE every ******* female in the US to bend to your wishes and your desires while simultaneously dismiss the actual harm occurring to them as a result of your positions...while claiming whit a straight face that your borderline misogyny makes you "just as much of a woman as any female"!

But we aren't talking about cis men here, we are talking about transgender women, who are female. So it's not "the opposite sex" as you claim.

There is no more harm than normal in these kinds of situations, these would be issues if a cisgender woman were guilty of them as well. Again the problem is the behavior, not the gender or sex of the perpetrators.

 

[Boudicca90]

That would be because it's not a game, and you very well know it.

You know very well that there is no way at all for anyone to tell the difference. But because you insist that all transwomen of every sort must be entitled to all female spaces and all female services, you can't admit that. It shines the light on the giant gaping hole in the entire premise.

By forcing females to allow any and all self-declared transwomen into their spaces with no questions and no criteria, you know goddamned good and well that this also lets in any cisman who wants to be there and there's not a ******* thing that females can do about it.

And you also know that this will absolutely increase the risk of harm to females. But you don't care. Let me say that again: You do not care if females are hurt.

The actual real harm and the actual real reduction in rights that females suffer is just not important to you. Females are disposable to you. As long as your feelings are affirmed and your desires are fulfilled, the harm that befalls females just doesn't ******* matter to you.

Which is misogynistic and remarkably inhumane.

Believe what you want, you and the others in this thread are so blinded by transphobic beliefs and TERF ideology that nothing I say will matter. Keep labelling people who support trans rights as "misogynistic" if you want. I don't care.

 

[d4m10n]

But we aren't talking about cis men here, we are talking about transgender women, who are female.

Hate to be pedantic (LOL) but what exactly should "female" be taken to mean herein the thread?

I thought females were born with ova and uteri and such like...?