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

[theprestige]

What is it a question of? And, why isn't is (also) a question of fairness?

As far as I can tell, it's mainly a question of safety and comfort and quality of life for women. It might be about fairness for women, but I'm not sure fairness is the right word. I am pretty sure, though, that fairness for men doesn't really enter into the equation. How the question of fairness for transsexuals fits into this system of segregation is kind of what we're debating - or trying to debate, anyway.

But the system of segregation itself isn't really about fairness.

 

[Paul2]

As far as I can tell, it's mainly a question of safety and comfort and quality of life for women. It might be about fairness for women, but I'm not sure fairness is the right word.

We can talk about a better word, but if we determine what is fair for ciswomen, trans women, etc. with regard to changing rooms, wouldn't that suffice for any fair (!) person?

I am pretty sure, though, that fairness for men doesn't really enter into the equation.

Isn't that because things are already fair for men (in this regard)?

How the question of fairness for transsexuals fits into this system of segregation is kind of what we're debating - or trying to debate, anyway.

But the system of segregation itself isn't really about fairness.

Some system may not be fair, but, in not being fair, it's about fairness.

What other value, besides fairness, are we talking about that wouldn't reduce to how we should be fair to all in regard to that value?

 

[Elaedith]

The general link between discrimination and suicide is not strong - at least in the US, whites have higher rate of suicide than African-Americans or Latinos. One factor that does correlate highly with ideation and attempts is mental illness.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_76139602fbe0560120.jpg[/qimg]

Zucker made the point that one needs to compare suicidality in those with gender dysphoria with a sample referred for another mental health diagnosis (rather than with a non-referred sample). The appropriate comparison for those without any referral is more complex.

It's also more complicated with the recent emergence of adolescents with sudden onset of gender dysphoria since many in that category have mental health issues. Cantor, for example, thinks that many adolescent girls with borderline personality disorder are being misdiagnosed (by others or themselves) as being transgender. BPD is associated with suicidality, disturbed mood, and disturbed body image.

 

[Boudicca90]

(emphasis added)



You are exactly correct, and that is precisely my point.



Dictionaries have multiple entries for the same word. We have two definitions being tossed about in this thread. I'll put the newer one first.



Woman 1. A person who performs the feminine gender role as defined by society.

2. An adult human female.



The nature of transwomen does not change if I use definition 1 or definition 2. Words do not create reality, If I say, "Transwomen are not women", that means I am using definition number 2. If I say, "Transmen are not women", that means I am using definition number 1.





By definition, transwomen either are or are not women, depending on which definition is in use.







(Note: My definition number 1 above is my best attempt to summarize the various contributions seen during discussions of definition. If you wish to object to it, feel free, but if I may, I would like to make a request. If you wish to say that the above definition is not actually a definition that is in use on this thread, please offer a substitute definition, and in doing so, please make it in the form similar to what might be found in a dictionary).









We have two definitions of "woman" being used in this thread

And I say I am a woman by either definition.

I am both 1. A person who performs the feminine gender role as defined by society and 2. An adult human female

And because I know you will object to satisfying the second definition, here is the definition of female:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/female

I may not satisfy definition A, but I do when it comes to B: Having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.

 

[Boudicca90]

Zucker made the point that one needs to compare suicidality in those with gender dysphoria with a sample referred for another mental health diagnosis (rather than with a non-referred sample). The appropriate comparison for those without any referral is more complex.



It's also more complicated with the recent emergence of adolescents with sudden onset of gender dysphoria since many in that category have mental health issues. Cantor, for example, thinks that many adolescent girls with borderline personality disorder are being misdiagnosed (by others or themselves) as being transgender. BPD is associated with suicidality, disturbed mood, and disturbed body image.

Please find better sources than Zucker and Cantor.

They are both notoriously anti-transgender and their research is heavily biased due to their opposition to us and our rights.

 

[Matthew Best]

Here is the new Lesbian and Gay News website, which describes itself as "an alternative source of news and opinion. Lesbian and Gay News picks up from an historic tradition of British lesbian and gay publications such as Gay News, which ran from 1972-1983, and The Pink Paper, which ran for 25 years from 1987."

It appears to be very gender critical.

 

[Elaedith]

Debbie Hayton has written a blog post on the upcoming UK census:

"It’s not right for a census to ignore people’s biological sex at birth simply to appease trans people like me"

 

[Meadmaker]

And I say I am a woman by either definition.

I am both 1. A person who performs the feminine gender role as defined by society and 2. An adult human female

And because I know you will object to satisfying the second definition, here is the definition of female:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/female

I may not satisfy definition A, but I do when it comes to B: Having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.

I looked up Boudiccan90s reference at Merriam-Webster.com. According to that dictionary, transwomen are women.

Even the definition number 1 which was referred to in the above post and which is somewhat biologically oriented, has some wiggle room.


I'm not sure I can find the words to express my opinion on that subject, and if I found those words, I'm not sure what Merriam-Webster would say that they mean.

 

[Matthew Best]

Debbie Hayton has written a blog post on the upcoming UK census:

"It’s not right for a census to ignore people’s biological sex at birth simply to appease trans people like me"

She also has a piece in the afore-mentioned Lesbian & Gay News:

https://lesbianandgaynews.com/2021/...e-consultation-on-the-gender-recognition-act/

 

[theprestige]

And I say I am a woman by either definition.

I am both 1. A person who performs the feminine gender role as defined by society and 2. An adult human female

And because I know you will object to satisfying the second definition, here is the definition of female:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/female

I may not satisfy definition A, but I do when it comes to B: Having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.

It's a question of observation, not definition. We observe that sex is binary. We observe that the genes are binary, and we observe that the genetic expression follows one of two binary paths*. In almost all cases, primary and secondary binary sex characteristics can be observed by visual inspection at birth. In cases where this is ambiguous, the binary sex can be conclusively observed through other means, such as genetic testing.

An Orwellian approach to definitions, no matter how successful, won't change the observations, and won't change the facts being observed. Redefine "male" and "female" however you want, the facts of your genetics and biology remain the same. The observation of those facts remains accurate.

All you accomplish by redefining the terms is to try to erase the facts and suppress discussion of the facts. This is very bad. It's bad science. It's bad sociology.

Unless you come up with new terms for the objective biological facts of biological sex, I propose we continue to use "male" and "female" to refer to those facts, along with "man" and "woman".

You can continue to argue for your right to perform stereotypes of femininity, and your right to transcend (transgress?) social conventions for sex-segregation, but let's be clear in our language about what you are talking about, and what are the facts.


---
*Aside from a couple exceptions, which are extremely rare and entirely outside the scope of this thread.

 

[caveman1917]

And I say I am a woman by either definition.

I am both 1. A person who performs the feminine gender role as defined by society and 2. An adult human female

And because I know you will object to satisfying the second definition, here is the definition of female:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/female

I may not satisfy definition A, but I do when it comes to B: Having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.

Let's expand. The term being expanded each step will be put in brackets and linked to the merriam-webster definition.

"Person X is {female}."
"Person X has a gender identity that is opposite to {male}."
"Person X has a gender identity that is opposite to having a gender identity that is opposite to {female}."

And off to infinity we go.

Alternatively:

"Person X is {female}."
"Person X has a {gender identity that is female}."
"Person X has an internal sense of being {female}."

And off to infinity we go.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I think it is kind of obvious from a few generations of the thread ago, it should probably be re-named "Transwomen are not females".

Because that is kind of what most of the agreers think and don't really care if someone wants to call themselves a woman.

I wish it were as easy as that.

I agree that most people in this thread (with a couple of notable exceptions that seem to take a very metaphysical approach to biology) agree that transwomen are not female.

Unfortunately, I think the issue is much more closely tied to the term "women"
itself.

Women's restrooms, locker rooms, and showers
Women's sports
Women's prisons
Women's representation in politics
Etc.

Historically, the English language has used 'women' for things that were understood to be sex-segregated. It was used as a more considerate term, because 'female' is used for all animals, whereas 'woman' is a female human - thus is stressed the human element.

The argument inherent in the trans advocate approach is that if transwomen are 'women', then they should by right have access to all 'women's' spaces. And that's the view that puts human females at risk.

 

[The Atheist]

Opposite-world has finally been discovered - US Republicans are proposing laws I agree with:

Republican state legislatures in more than a dozen states are advancing bills that would bar transgender women and girls from participating in women’s and girls sports at the youth, high school and collegiate levels.

Of course, being HuffPo, they continue with this line of utter nonsense that completely ignores actual women's rights:

It’s an aggressive effort to strip rights from LGBTQ people on the state level that runs counter to President Joe Biden’s attempts to advance equality from the White House.

"Equality"



Not for the women who have trained all their lives to be able to compete against women.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/republicans-anti-trans-athlete-legislation_n_6033bdebc5b66dfc10204305

 

[Collin237]

Opposite-world has finally been discovered - US Republicans are proposing laws I agree with:

It makes sense that trans girls should be on the boys' team in sports. It does not make sense for a government to require them to be. HuffPo is missing the point when it talks about LGBT rights, but it's correct that the Republicans are attacking something.

The problem with trans girls on a girls' team can be mitigated in many ways. The decision to ignore these complications does not pass Hume's Guillotine. It is therefore a philosophical decision that the school has a right to freely exercise. That's what the Republicans are attacking.

 

[Distracted1]

I wish it were as easy as that.

I agree that most people in this thread (with a couple of notable exceptions that seem to take a very metaphysical approach to biology) agree that transwomen are not female.

Unfortunately, I think the issue is much more closely tied to the term "women"
itself.

Women's restrooms, locker rooms, and showers
Women's sports
Women's prisons
Women's representation in politics
Etc.

Historically, the English language has used 'women' for things that were understood to be sex-segregated. It was used as a more considerate term, because 'female' is used for all animals, whereas 'woman' is a female human - thus is stressed the human element.

The argument inherent in the trans advocate approach is that if transwomen are 'women', then they should by right have access to all 'women's' spaces. And that's the view that puts human females at risk.

Also to denote maturity level.
"Woman" as opposed to "Girl" or "man" v "boy".

The terms are specific, and denote three characteristics. Sex, Species, and Maturity level.

 

[Meadmaker]

It's a question of observation, not definition. We observe that sex is binary. We observe that the genes are binary, and we observe that the genetic expression follows one of two binary paths*. In almost all cases, primary and secondary binary sex characteristics can be observed by visual inspection at birth. In cases where this is ambiguous, the binary sex can be conclusively observed through other means, such as genetic testing.

An Orwellian approach to definitions, no matter how successful, won't change the observations, and won't change the facts being observed. Redefine "male" and "female" however you want, the facts of your genetics and biology remain the same. The observation of those facts remains accurate.

All you accomplish by redefining the terms is to try to erase the facts and suppress discussion of the facts. This is very bad. It's bad science. It's bad sociology.

Unless you come up with new terms for the objective biological facts of biological sex, I propose we continue to use "male" and "female" to refer to those facts, along with "man" and "woman".

You can continue to argue for your right to perform stereotypes of femininity, and your right to transcend (transgress?) social conventions for sex-segregation, but let's be clear in our language about what you are talking about, and what are the facts.


---
*Aside from a couple exceptions, which are extremely rare and entirely outside the scope of this thread.

That's the thing.

Despite the complicity of the people of Merriam-Webster in the attempt to redefine how we communicate, words can influence thought, but they can't make reality. At the end of the day, the people with vaginas want to be rather selective about which people with penises see them naked, and that will be true no matter what word we use to describe the penis people and the vagina people.

When it comes right down to it, it's all about who we can ****, and how. That matters, and we need words to describe it, but in somewhat less blunt terms. If we accept the new-fangled definitions of man and woman, we would have to find a new word for what they used to mean.

For my part, I would prefer we just stick with the old definitions, but I don't write dictionaries.

I still tend to think that the seventeen year old in the locker room has all the information she needs to tell the difference between men and women, or whatever other term we eventually settle on to describe the reproductively male sorts that are seeing her undress. She doesn't have a PhD, but I don't think one is absolutely necessary for the task, and having one might actually be a hindrance.

 

[Meadmaker]

Opposite-world has finally been discovered - US Republicans are proposing laws I agree with:



Of course, being HuffPo, they continue with this line of utter nonsense that completely ignores actual women's rights:



"Equality"



Not for the women who have trained all their lives to be able to compete against women.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/republicans-anti-trans-athlete-legislation_n_6033bdebc5b66dfc10204305

I love this line:

"Currently, there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition"

That was originally from a 2016 published journal article.

None? No research? Huh. I would have sworn somewhere along the line I read that boys are stronger and faster and generally more athletic than girls, and that as soon as puberty hit, those difference became pretty dramatic. I'm sure I've read that somewhere.


Part of what goes on is equivocation. The HuffPo article merely says "any stage of their transition", which could include "social transition". The original journal article specified hormone replacement or surgery.

Even then the journal article would be wrong. Of course boys have an advantage that continues at least partly through transition. It's not like you take one dose of feminizing hormones and suddenly your abilities change. That journal article was a case of them saying, essentially, "We can't cite a journal article that says boys are better than girls." Of course you can't. No one would bother to publish it.

 

[sarge]

Whew. I did it. I read the entire thread. It is the most informative thread I’ve ever read. I found logical, reasonable arguments presented by participants on two almost diametrically opposed sides. Refreshing. After all that. I have a position on a subject I was previously almost completely uniformed about.

I no longer have doubts about the ‘realness’ of a trans persons gender identity. I am (newly) convinced that a portion of the population have a gender that does not match their sex.

I remain convinced that ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ are not synonymous.

I remain convinced that biological sex should be the sole factor in determining who uses facilities when the privacy of other users is important. The comfort and safety of biological females is more important than the desires of gender females in this regard. No woman should be required to be nude in front of a biological male against her will.

I remain convinced that biological post-puberty males have an unfair competitive advantage over biological females. In instances where a level competition is a desired condition of sport, biological males that identify as gender females should be prohibited from competing against biological females.

I reject the notion that holding these views makes a a bigot. I am open to evidence that I am being unfair .......but a simple assertion that I am being unfair isn’t evidence. I also reject the ‘I am female by any reasonable definition because I choose to live as a female’ argument.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

In today's episodes of "Transphobes having a normal experience online":

Graham Linehan is catfishing on a lesbian only dating app in protest of their inclusion of trans women.

The original blogpost was little more than an excuse to post the dating profiles of several trans women that Linehan finds insufficiently feminine or attractive in appearance and mocking them.

I'm not sure what this is meant to prove other than that TERFs are reactionary bullies and are not trustworthy in women's spaces.

https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/archive?sort=new

Her, the dating app, has responded by banning Linehan and re-affirming their stance as being a trans-inclusive dating app.

https://twitter.com/HerSocialApp/status/1362841372378734595

 

[Emily's Cat]

It's a question of observation, not definition. We observe that sex is binary. We observe that the genes are binary, and we observe that the genetic expression follows one of two binary paths*. In almost all cases, primary and secondary binary sex characteristics can be observed by visual inspection at birth. In cases where this is ambiguous, the binary sex can be conclusively observed through other means, such as genetic testing.

Just to keep us all honest, reproductive organs are primary sex characteristics, and are binarily dimorphic (except in cases of intersex disorders). This includes penis, testes, prostate, and vas deferens in males, and vulva, vagina, uterus, and ovaries in females. Of those, some are externally visible from before birth.

Secondary sex characteristics are those that develop along sex-differentiated paths at puberty, including widened hips and breast growth in females, facial hair, thick body hair, and increased muscle mass in males. These are characteristics prompted by sex-hormones.

Tertiary sex characteristics are those that tend to differ by sex and display either dimorphic or bimodal characteristics. These are also sex-linked, but are not hormonally triggered. Many of these are externally visible, and contribute to our ability as humans to recognize males and females pretty easily. This includes things like overall height, size of hands and feet, relationship of shoulder width to hip width, shape of orbital sockets, shape of brow ridges, shape of jaw and chin, shape of lips, etc.