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

[Emily's Cat]

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.

Sure, comparable to the terms colt and filly versus stallion and mare.

 

[Emily's Cat]

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

So what do you call the male-bodied, male-looking, be-penised testicle havers in dresses calling themselves "lesbians" and trying to foist themselves upon females seeking relationships with other females?

 

[Darat]

So what do you call the male-bodied, male-looking, be-penised testicle havers in dresses calling themselves "lesbians" and trying to foist themselves upon females seeking relationships with other females?

Wouldn’t it depend on their intent/motivation?

So some may be mentally ill, some might be sexual predators, some confused, some taking the piss and so on?

 

[Louden Wilde]

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.

Yep - worth mentioning this article again: Transgender Women in the Female Category of Sport: Perspectives on Testosterone Suppression and Performance Advantage

Abstract:
Males enjoy physical performance advantages over females within competitive sport. The sex-based segregation into male and female sporting categories does not account for transgender persons who experience incongruence between their biological sex and their experienced gender identity. Accordingly, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) determined criteria by which a transgender woman may be eligible to compete in the female category, requiring total serum testosterone levels to be suppressed below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to and during competition. Whether this regulation removes the male performance advantage has not been scrutinized. Here, we review how differences in biological characteristics between biological males and females affect sporting performance and assess whether evidence exists to support the assumption that testosterone suppression in transgender women removes the male performance advantage and thus delivers fair and safe competition. We report that the performance gap between males and females becomes significant at puberty and often amounts to 10–50% depending on sport. The performance gap is more pronounced in sporting activities relying on muscle mass and explosive strength, particularly in the upper body. Longitudinal studies examining the effects of testosterone suppression on muscle mass and strength in transgender women consistently show very modest changes, where the loss of lean body mass, muscle area and strength typically amounts to approximately 5% after 12 months of treatment. Thus, the muscular advantage enjoyed by transgender women is only minimally reduced when testosterone is suppressed. Sports organizations should consider this evidence when reassessing current policies regarding participation of transgender women in the female category of sport.

 

[Louden Wilde]

Wouldn’t it depend on their intent/motivation?

So some may be mentally ill, some might be sexual predators, some confused, some taking the piss and so on?

Yes, but there does seem to be a (non-fringe) movement to declare lesbians who who aren't interested in TW transphobic. Note there's a term to normalize this: 'breaking the cotton ceiling' - referring to getting past the lesbians underwear. There are a number of sites that document this push- the first one I saw that struck me was this one (also posted in one of the previous threads).

 

[TurkeysGhost]

So what do you call the male-bodied, male-looking, be-penised testicle havers in dresses calling themselves "lesbians" and trying to foist themselves upon females seeking relationships with other females?

Wouldn’t it depend on their intent/motivation?

So some may be mentally ill, some might be sexual predators, some confused, some taking the piss and so on?

Considering the app explicitly advertises itself as a place for non-binary people people (among others), I would assume they are people that would probably describe themselves as some variant of gender nonconforming. This isn't that unusual in LGBT+ circles.

Generally the way these apps work is that both people have to "match" with the other before any conversation is possible. It's a pretty nice way to quickly sort through who might be attracted to who, and it's low stakes unless some freak like Linehan shows up to screen-grab profiles and make a point out of gawking at and bullying strangers.

Honestly not seeing much practical difference between the TERF bullying employed here by Linehan and more common examples of misogyny. Graham went into a dating app for the sole purpose of naming and shaming women he felt don't meet his personal standards of beauty.

Seems like this TERF freak is going down a dark path, more commonly seen with incels lashing out at women that fail to meet their bigoted standards. Hope it doesn't end in some grand act of violence against women.

 

[LondonJohn]

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.

And if it actually turns out that there is a noticeable incremental incidence of criminal or otherwise unpleasant/undesirable behaviour towards human females, which has been caused by human males, then lawmakers will obviously have to revise legislation accordingly.

 

[Meadmaker]

Yes, but there does seem to be a (non-fringe) movement to declare lesbians who who aren't interested in TW transphobic. Note there's a term to normalize this: 'breaking the cotton ceiling' - referring to getting past the lesbians underwear. There are a number of sites that document this push- the first one I saw that struck me was this one (also posted in one of the previous threads).

I have to wonder about the "non-fringe" part.

Yes, I'm sure somebody somewhere takes the "cotton ceiling" seriously, but I can't believe it's a thing that anyone but a few people actually care about.

I have occasionally posted about it without skepticism in the past, and I certainly know that there are at least a few who fit the description of transwomen who call themselves lesbians who whine that cis-lesbians won't sleep with them, but, seriously?

Is it a real thing, or is this a handful of people posting on twitter, some of whom are probably authentic.

 

[LondonJohn]

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.

I couldn't disagree more with this opinion of yours.


And it's interesting to notice you describing the lexicographers at Merriam-Webster as "complicit", and complaining that they are "attempt(ing) to redefine how we communicate". And then you make the interesting observation that "words can influence thought, but they can't make reality".

Lots to unpack there. To address this "complicity" claim... well, I know a reasonable amount about lexicography, since one of my schoolfriends is now in a fairly senior position as a lexicographer at Oxford University Press (publisher of the OED*). And the thing is this: the grand dictionaries of record (in the English language, that's the OED and Merriam Webster) take a huge amount of care, time and effort in monitoring the (ever-shifting) English language. Their definitions are extremely careful to reflect the ways in which society defines and uses words. I would be very highly confident, for example, that when the large team of lexicographers at Merriam-Webster started to notice that the "gendered" nouns of girl/woman and boy/man were being defined and employed in new ways, they'd have spent a very long time indeed monitoring trends and gauging shifts in usage and meaning. And I can certainly virtually guarantee that there will have been no complicity - either explicit or unconscious - behind the revised definition of the word.

With regard to the other elements of your claim, perhaps an example might help shed some light on the process. So, at some point - prob in the late 19th or early 20th century, the word "fantastic" started to shift in meaning. It's original definition was "literally borne of fantasy". But the word started, possibly for reasons nobody can understand fully, to mean "extremely good". The likes of the OED and M-W would have monitored this change in usage, and once they satisfied themselves that it was appropriate to do so, they would have included the "new" definition of the word. I suspect there may have been quite a few people who, upon reading the new definition of "fantastic", might have complained that the dictionaries were attempting to redefine how we communicate, and pointing to the one true "reality" of the word "fantastic"...


* It may be of some interest to point out that, as of now, the OED's definition of words such as "man" or "woman" do not make any reference to their usage with reference to transgender identity. I am, however, in no doubt whatsoever that the large and expert team there will be closely monitoring any new definitions of those sorts of words, together with the incidence and adoption levels of those new definitions.

 

[LondonJohn]

So what do you call the male-bodied, male-looking, be-penised testicle havers in dresses calling themselves "lesbians" and trying to foist themselves upon females seeking relationships with other females?

We call them transwomen, of course.

And I'd say that your entire description of a transwoman here is unnecessarily pejorative and jaundiced.

 

[caveman1917]

I have to wonder about the "non-fringe" part.

Yes, I'm sure somebody somewhere takes the "cotton ceiling" seriously, but I can't believe it's a thing that anyone but a few people actually care about.

I have occasionally posted about it without skepticism in the past, and I certainly know that there are at least a few who fit the description of transwomen who call themselves lesbians who whine that cis-lesbians won't sleep with them, but, seriously?

Is it a real thing, or is this a handful of people posting on twitter, some of whom are probably authentic.

A non-random sample found 56% of lesbians having been pressured into sexual relations with transwomen. I don't know of any full research findings with better sample selection, but it does show that it's a real thing indeed.

 

[xjx388]

I have no problem with understanding that someone born into a male body, for whatever not-well-understood reason, has a "valid lived experience" that they should have been born into a female body. Or vice-versa. This is my understanding of what, at the core, being transgender is.

I have no problem understanding that a transgender person should have the same rights as everyone else. The only caveat I would put on that is that one person's absolute right to something (e.g., bathroom access) must necessarily yield to another person's absolute right to something (e.g., privacy).

I have no problem understanding that we should, for the sake of the transgendered person, refer to them by the pronouns (indeed do anything else in our power) that make them feel the most accepted in society.

What I have a problem with understanding is this: what magic is performed that transforms the male body into a female body? Like in actuality? Since there's no such thing as magic, this is the part I'm going to have a tough time being convinced of. Why is it so important that I believe in magic? Isn't it enough that I do everything I can do (within reason, as in: I'm don't support taking away other people's rights to do so) to make them feel a part of society?

I have to go through life understanding the limitations imposed by my physical body. I'm short and I gain fat much more easily than muscle, for example. I was never going to be an athlete even though I enjoy sports and tried very hard when I was a kid to be a baseball player. I just didn't have the physical (and mental discipline) characteristics necessary to be successful. Why can't transgendered people understand that their actual physical bodies impose limitations on what they can do, whether it be sports or access to female "safe spaces?"

 

[Emily's Cat]

Wouldn’t it depend on their intent/motivation?

So some may be mentally ill, some might be sexual predators, some confused, some taking the piss and so on?

How do you distinguish between them? Which should be allowed to join a lesbian dating app, and which should be disallowed?

On the off chance that people are going by the reporting about Linehan's profile on Her, it might be worth just a moment of your time to take a look at the "lesbian" profiles that he objected to in the first place.

 

[Emily's Cat]

And if it actually turns out that there is a noticeable incremental incidence of criminal or otherwise unpleasant/undesirable behaviour towards human females, which has been caused by human males, then lawmakers will obviously have to revise legislation accordingly.

As a member of the class of people who would experience that harm, I rather strongly object to be used as a guinea pig.

Why do you apparently support putting females at risk and reducing their rights in order to support the emotions of males?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I have to wonder about the "non-fringe" part.

Yes, I'm sure somebody somewhere takes the "cotton ceiling" seriously, but I can't believe it's a thing that anyone but a few people actually care about.

I have occasionally posted about it without skepticism in the past, and I certainly know that there are at least a few who fit the description of transwomen who call themselves lesbians who whine that cis-lesbians won't sleep with them, but, seriously?

Is it a real thing, or is this a handful of people posting on twitter, some of whom are probably authentic.

It's a real thing. Enough so that lesbian publications have put out articles giving tips to lesbians on how to have sex with penises, and suggesting that if they aren't open to the idea of having lesbian sex with a penis, they're probably transphobic bigots.

 

[Emily's Cat]

We call them transwomen, of course.

And I'd say that your entire description of a transwoman here is unnecessarily pejorative and jaundiced.

It was based on the profile pics that those individuals provided.

How does one distinguish between a transwoman and a bog-standard man?

 

[Matthew Best]

I'm not entirely clear on what the connection is between the people on a dating website called Her and Stonewall.

 

[Collin237]

Why can't transgendered people understand that their actual physical bodies impose limitations on what they can do, whether it be sports or access to female "safe spaces?"

Transgender people are less than 1% of the world, but that still amounts to millions. It's not possible to determine what millions of people think, not even with a survey.

What specific people have this misunderstanding? Where did they get it from?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

How do you distinguish between them? Which should be allowed to join a lesbian dating app, and which should be disallowed?

On the off chance that people are going by the reporting about Linehan's profile on Her, it might be worth just a moment of your time to take a look at the "lesbian" profiles that he objected to in the first place.

Not launching a harassment campaign against the app and its users is probably a pretty easy standard to enforce.

What Linehan is doing would probably result in getting thrown off any dating service, even generic ones that aren't specifically catering to LGBT+ women.

Only a TERF as deeply diseased as Linehan would think his actions reflect well on him here. Everyone else see him as some obsessed troll.

Trolling dating apps is a pretty common tactic of the incel community, when they aren't taking more direct action like committing mass shootings at women's dorms or gyms.

It's very concerning that someone of such prominence in the transphobic community seems to be escalating his tactics in this way.

 

[Meadmaker]

A non-random sample found 56% of lesbians having been pressured into sexual relations with transwomen. I don't know of any full research findings with better sample selection, but it does show that it's a real thing indeed.

That's pretty non-fringe.

The mind boggles.