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

[theprestige]

Your side moved the goal posts. They didn't just move them a couple of feet, they moved them to a different planet.

TRAs really don't understand sports, do they?

 

[JoeMorgue]

Is it correct to deny transgender people a reasonable level of recognition and rights, on the basis that to do so would very probably result in less violence (and discomfort) towards female women?

For what it's worth, keep hating me if you must, this is probably the first time anyone in this thread has actually asked the question that matters this clearly.

I doubt you and Emily are going to agree on the answer, but this is the best possible way of asking the question and I think will get you the most honest response, even if it's not the one you want.

And that does matter.

 

[theprestige]

Is it correct to deny transgender people a reasonable level of recognition and rights, on the basis that to do so would very probably result in less violence (and discomfort) towards female women?

That is a very good question. I don't have a good answer, but I do think that the only way to get a good answer is to acknowledge that this is in fact the dilemma, and that violence and discomfort towards women is a real problem and a valid concern that the answer must address.

Do you at least acknowledge these things?

 

[Meadmaker]

Well, no. The problem is solved substantively addressed when it is understood and recognised that a small proportion of people genuinely can have an internalisation of gender identity which differs from that which has traditionally been (and for the vast majority of people, is) coupled to their biological sex.

Ok. So, that part is already substantively solved, because we already know that.

And then the problem is solved substantively addressed when society can learn to afford this small proportion of people something at least approaching the basic level of affirmation and protection against discrimination that they might deserve, through legislation where necessary.

Hmmm...I guess this part isnt substantively address yet, because I don't know what you mean by "approaching the basic level of affirmation and protection against discrimination". I recognize that person A might have a gender identity that is not coupled to their biological sex, but I'm not sure what to do to affirm that or protect them against discimination.

Does it have something to do with showering with teenage girls?

 

[Meadmaker]

You know I was referring to the breadth of their expertise and experience, not the length of time?

lightyears

 

[d4m10n]

Back when being transgender and having dysphoria was considered a "mental illness" it was considered a disorder, and was treated as such. Gender Identity Disorder in particular. Thankfully we are moving away from that kind of thinking, just like we stopped considering homosexuality a mental illness.

I really don't think that comparison works; there is no course of treatment recommended for homosexuals these days.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Yep. I continually make comparisons to homosexuality because it is accurate. Especially having been gay and having to also deal with all the same arguments before transitioning.

Luckily the DSM has been moving away from treating transgenderism as a mental illness and the medical community is seeing it for what it is: a valid lived experience.

Yep, and that is why I posted that article by Julia Serano regarding referring to us as biologically male and why it is incorrect. With her being not only trans, but also a biologist, she has insight into why we are female that a lot of us laypeople don't.

But of course when people didn't agree with her conclusions, they just dismissed her as a crackpot rather than refuting her data and conclusions.

Could you respond to my posts on these topics (they weren't directly towards you, but on these topics)?

To me, comparison to sexual orientation seems more of a critique of gender identity as simply self-id, or self-determination.

A man believed he was straight, identified as straight, and married a woman right out of college. Ten years later, he realized he was in fact gay, was gay all along, and identified as such. His sexual identity was referring to something, the sex that he was attracted to. It was not referring to his belief or self-identification that he was straight or gay (or how society expected him to behave, or how straight he acted). That is how he recognized that his previous identity was incorrect, and we all would agree it was after he explained himself, even though his attraction was an internal state.

What is the something that gender identity refers to?

Regarding brain sex, which has been brought up a few times, research does show cross-sex differences, however such differences in the past have been used to demonstrate the biological underpinnings of homosexuality. If having a "female brain" makes one female, then one would have to argue that gay men are female.

Instead, there is a distinct difference found after controlling for sexuality that isn't sex related at all:



Linky.



Linky.

The first study also noted that the aggregate sex-associated differences were largely due to the "homosexual transgender" group, that is transgender people attracted to their sex at birth. Previous research that looked specifically at a "heterosexual transgender" group also found:



Linky.

So the commonality in transgender people, at least from brain scans, is not cross-sex brain differences, but rather differences with the networks pertaining to self perception and body ownership.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Civil like comparing being transgender with mental illnesses time and time again? Please spare me your fake outrage.

Civil like being told that women are overreacting, hysterical, paranoid, and delusional when we take not of actual harms being caused to females right now as a result of the policies that the activists propose?

 

[Emily's Cat]

ETA: oh and within literal minutes of you pledging not to use a certain two-word term, you've used it here.

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

This is why we have people who actually have lightyears more collective expertise and experience in these kinds of things, upon whom society at large looks for guidance. I don't think I'd be going out on a limb by saying that this is the only viable societal approach to these sorts of matters.

Personally, I (and, I suspect, you) have zero formal education, comparatively minuscule levels of expertise, and comparatively minuscule levels of experience - compared with even one of the world's thousands of true experts in the field - when it comes to trying to derive an understanding from first principles of these sorts of conditions. And I certainly have no personal - or even one-step-removed - exposure to them. I can't know what it feels like to be, say, gay or transgender - because I am neither of those things myself.

And unless one does have personal (or maybe even one-step-removed) experience of these conditions, it's practically impossible - absent years of specialised education, expertise and experience - to come anywhere close to understanding them and judging their validity. In my opinion, it is entirely logical and correct to defer to the settled judgement of those who DO have the most education, expertise and experience.

After all, what other way could there be to approach these sorts of issues? It would, for example, be laughably easy - though, of course, laughably incorrect - to claim that conditions such as transidentity or homosexuality aren't valid, purely on the basis that one doesn't have those existential identity considerations oneself. And before medical and social sciences - particularly, of course, those which deal with intangible matters of the deep brain and human consciousness - came properly of age post-Freud, this was (sadly) precisely how society DID treat those with minority identities such as homosexuality and transgenderism.

Fortunately we know better now year-on-year: not only better in terms of a better understanding on the part of experts in the field, but also better in terms of first legislatures and then society at large (which, sadly, often has to be taught or legislated in order to confront its unfair prejudices).

Blanchard. Bailey. Lawrence. Cantor.

Wait, no. Not like that. But how do you know? How would one determine not to follow those experts with lightyears more experience and knowledge and degrees? It must be that we all are capable of understanding these issues and evaluating evidence for ourselves.

The APA taskforce that led to the removal of homosexuality from the DSM was lobbied by activists. There was research as well, but it wasn't just laypeople waiting for experts to grace us with their hidden knowledge.

ETA: For that matter, the gender affirmation approach for children was largely spread by advocates, not experts. The split attraction model, non-binary, agender, xenogender, neopronouns, asexual spectrum, sexuality as attraction to gender and not sex, dysphoria not being necessary for being trans, and a host of other LGBT ideas are all promoted by laypeople, and not "experts" at all.

 

[Manger Douse]

Civil like being told that women are overreacting, hysterical, paranoid, and delusional when we take not of actual harms being caused to females right now as a result of the policies that the activists propose?

You forgot sports women must lazy because Bodiccia can't admit that men are stronger

 

[Meadmaker]

Is it correct to deny transgender people a reasonable level of recognition and rights, on the basis that to do so would very probably result in less violence (and discomfort) towards female women?

Why is it always vagaries and generalities? Would it hurt you to talk very specific cases? Maybe you have. I get confused at times and can't remember who has said what, but here's my problem. I can agree with the above statement*, and yet, when I watch this video, from Palatine High School, I find that my sympathies are with Julia Burca.

She's a real person. A woman. (A young woman. Teenager.) She explains what she wanted. She didn't get it. So, what do you think of Julia.? TERF? Bigot? Transphobe? Throwback to an earlier time? Someone who hasn't had sufficient lightyears of experience to understand what's actually happening to her?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG-9IfXtRgY

The video is some news coverage of the school board meeting. It's one minute and forty seconds long.

I'm on Julia's side here. What do you think that says about me, or her?

*i.e. What I meant was that I would answer that it is right to accord trans people a reasonable level of recognition and rights, and that doing so might result in less violence toward women. Nevertheless, I say that, and I would still say that Julia Burca ought to be able to get into a swimsuit without being observed by anyone capable of making her pregnant.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Is it correct to deny transgender people a reasonable level of recognition and rights, on the basis that to do so would very probably result in less violence (and discomfort) towards female women?

Depends entirely on the rights in question, now doesn't it?

First though, let's level set this. Your framing presents this as if rights are being removed, in order to reduce harm and danger to females. That's not apt for this.

What is being asked for is that entitlements and privileges be afforded to a particular group, where those entitlements and privileges come at the cost of increasing violence and discomfort of females.

This really is a bit of a trolley problem.

Baseline trolley problem - one person on one track, five people on another track, out of control trolley on it's way toward the five people - do you throw the switch so that the trolley takes out the one person instead of the five?

That's always a tough ethical dilemma, but most people will choose to throw the switch and save five lives as the cost of one.

The follow-up to the baseline is one of actively interfering. The trolley is heading toward five people, and there is no switch, but there is one person who cold be pushed in front of the trolley and derail it so it doesn't hit the five.

This is where most people really get stuck, and the majority of people will not take the active step of pushing an innocent person into the path of the trolley.

Now here's my trolley problem for you:

Imagine a trolley running out of control down the line. At the end of the line is one person who will be run over by the trolley if it isn't stopped. Between the trolley and the person at the end of the line are five people standing there minding their own businesses. If you push all five of those people onto the track, it will derail the trolley and save the one at the end.

Do you actively push five innocent people into the path of the trolley in order to save one innocent person at the end of the line?

 

[Emily's Cat]

*i.e. What I meant was that I would answer that it is right to accord trans people a reasonable level of recognition and rights, and that doing so might result in less violence toward women. Nevertheless, I say that, and I would still say that Julia Burca ought to be able to get into a swimsuit without being observed by anyone capable of making her pregnant.

Re-read LondonJohn's post. It doesn't say what you read it to say. I had to read it multiple times myself, as it's worded rather unusually.

You read it as:
Is it right to accord transpeople recognition... and by doing so there would be less violence against women.

It actually reads:
Is it right to deny transpeople recognition... and by doing so there would be less violence against women.

 

[d4m10n]

Is it correct to deny transgender people a reasonable level of recognition and rights, on the basis that to do so would very probably result in less violence (and discomfort) towards female women?

The answer is clearly no, since you built "reasonable level" into the question.

If the level in question is indeed reasonable, then we've already weighed it against probable outcomes.

 

[LondonJohn]

The answer is clearly no, since you built "reasonable level" into the question.

If the level in question is indeed reasonable, then we've already weighed it against probable outcomes.

I'd say it's reasonable that, for example, transwomen should be able to use women's changing rooms in facilities where there are separately-gendered changing areas. Rather than a) being made to use the men's changing rooms, b) being made to use the disabled changing rooms, c) being made to change in their car or at home, or d) being prohibited in using these types of facility.

But I suspect that your definition of "reasonable", on a matter such as this, is probably different from mine.


And I'll mention once more: in any given jurisdiction, if (for example) self-ID transwomen are granted access to the women's changing areas, and if there is a clear rise in either extreme or lower-level offending against the female women in those facilities (whether such offending is being done by true transwomen, or by cismen who are masquerading as transwomen in order to carry out their offending behaviour).....

.... then it's a given that legislators and regulators will need to re-appraise the situation quickly. That might, just for example, take the form of tougher sentencing for these sorts of offences (and subsequent monitoring to see how effective this might be as a deterrent); more central- and local-level resources being allocated to effective monitoring and alarm systems (and subsequent monitoring to see how effective this might be, both as a deterrent in and of itself, and as a means to guaranteeing more convictions for the offenders, with its own deterrent effect); increased public education on the issue; or, if methods such as these fail to safeguard female women adequately, a modification or reversal of parts of legislation.

 

[LondonJohn]

Blanchard. Bailey. Lawrence. Cantor.

Wait, no. Not like that. But how do you know? How would one determine not to follow those experts with lightyears more experience and knowledge and degrees? It must be that we all are capable of understanding these issues and evaluating evidence for ourselves.

The APA taskforce that led to the removal of homosexuality from the DSM was lobbied by activists. There was research as well, but it wasn't just laypeople waiting for experts to grace us with their hidden knowledge.

ETA: For that matter, the gender affirmation approach for children was largely spread by advocates, not experts. The split attraction model, non-binary, agender, xenogender, neopronouns, asexual spectrum, sexuality as attraction to gender and not sex, dysphoria not being necessary for being trans, and a host of other LGBT ideas are all promoted by laypeople, and not "experts" at all.

So what, therefore, is the better method to at least try to ensure people who deserve to have their rights recognised do indeed have their rights recognised (and where undeserving people asking for rights do not gain those rights)?

 

[Meadmaker]

Re-read LondonJohn's post. It doesn't say what you read it to say. I had to read it multiple times myself, as it's worded rather unusually.

You read it as:
Is it right to accord transpeople recognition... and by doing so there would be less violence against women.

It actually reads:
Is it right to deny transpeople recognition... and by doing so there would be less violence against women.

Oh...well, too many negatives or questions for me to grasp. The point is that I would say that I support transgender rights. As for violence against women, it would all depend on what you actually allowed and what sort of restrictions would be in place. It's so hard to talk about at such a vague level.

One thing that I really don't like when it comes to the discussion of violence against women is that people say that unless you can prove some correlation to increased violence, it doesn't matter. I think that's wrong. I think Julia Burca is harmed by having to take her clothes off in the presence of a male, even if she doesn't get assault.

 

[cullennz]

.... then it's a given that legislators and regulators will need to re-appraise the situation quickly. That might, just for example, take the form of tougher sentencing for these sorts of offences (and subsequent monitoring to see how effective this might be as a deterrent); more central- and local-level resources being allocated to effective monitoring and alarm systems (and subsequent monitoring to see how effective this might be, both as a deterrent in and of itself, and as a means to guaranteeing more convictions for the offenders, with its own deterrent effect); increased public education on the issue; or, if methods such as these fail to safeguard female women adequately, a modification or reversal of parts of legislation.

How many female victims do you consider an acceptable number while they are carrying out this grand experiment.

 

[LondonJohn]

Why is it always vagaries and generalities? Would it hurt you to talk very specific cases? Maybe you have. I get confused at times and can't remember who has said what, but here's my problem. I can agree with the above statement*, and yet, when I watch this video, from Palatine High School, I find that my sympathies are with Julia Burca.

She's a real person. A woman. (A young woman. Teenager.) She explains what she wanted. She didn't get it. So, what do you think of Julia.? TERF? Bigot? Transphobe? Throwback to an earlier time? Someone who hasn't had sufficient lightyears of experience to understand what's actually happening to her?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG-9IfXtRgY

The video is some news coverage of the school board meeting. It's one minute and forty seconds long.

I'm on Julia's side here. What do you think that says about me, or her?

*i.e. What I meant was that I would answer that it is right to accord trans people a reasonable level of recognition and rights, and that doing so might result in less violence toward women. Nevertheless, I say that, and I would still say that Julia Burca ought to be able to get into a swimsuit without being observed by anyone capable of making her pregnant.

Because you need far more than a few documented cases in order to determine the best policy.

However, if you're still annoyed by my "vagaries and generalities" I'm sure it wouldn't take me too long to find for you many more than a few specific accounts of transgender people who have taken their own lives on account of feeling unprotected, marginalised, denied and/or mocked within society. Would that help you out?