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

[Aber]

Let me re-word #4:

4 - Gender is a spectrum and not linked to sex, and there may be de-facto segregation based on sex, but it should not be enforced through the expedience of legal fiat - Neoliberals

That seems more like what I meant by 3?

 

[Collin237]

That seems more like what I meant by 3?

3 means that segregation by sex is wrong whenever it occurs.

My version of 4 means that segregation by sex is okay if it's merely an occurrence, but wrong if it's an explicitly stated legal imposition, because it requires exceptions that are too reasonable to be encoded into law.

 

[Aber]

3 means that segregation by sex is wrong whenever it occurs.

My version of 4 means that segregation by sex is okay if it's merely an occurrence, but wrong if it's an explicitly stated legal imposition, because it requires exceptions that are too reasonable to be encoded into law.

Then obviously you need a 5 - where segregation is supported by legislation.

 

[Collin237]

Then obviously you need a 5 - where segregation is supported by legislation.

No. Supported by the lack of relevant legislation. Gender should be protected, and legislation should prohibit discrimination against a protected category. For example, a trans girl who wants to use a girl's locker room could be prevented from doing so by claiming that if she did she would be discriminating against herself on the basis of gender.

 

[d4m10n]

Have I missed anything?

Which one of your categories is the following approach?

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

(Assuming it would be based in social convention rather than legal mandate.)

 

[Aber]

Which one of your categories is the following approach?
(Assuming it would be based in social convention rather than legal mandate.)

No legal mandate I think makes it mostly a 3; although you might want to argue it is a quantum combination of 1 and 2, where the end state is driven by the observer.

 

[LondonJohn]

But being black is a valid human condition. So why shouldn't someone identify as black even if they aren't actually black?

Identifying as black is a valid human condition, yes. For black people.

Identifying as HM The Queen is a valid human condition, for HM The Queen.


A non-black person identifying as black is not a valid human condition.

Me identifying as HM The Queen is not a valid human condition.

 

[LondonJohn]

Wouldn't all that make being trans-racial more valid than being trans-gender, not less? I don't know why, it's probably the same reason that black-face is considered offensive, while drag is still not. I'm not sure I can make much sense of it myself, though.

I've tried to help make a little more sense of it in my previous post.

Also, things like DSM-5 are a useful read in terms of gaining comprehension, especially in respect of how/why transgender identity is different from (say) identifying as Napoleon, or identifying as a paraplegic (when one is able-bodied).

 

[LondonJohn]

And those opinions are misogynistic.

No they're not.

If you were being objective (but still wrong), you'd say my opinions are also misandrist (which they are not, either).

But it's interesting that you focus solely and exclusively upon the female-oriented elements rather than the male-oriented ones. Oh no, I forgot! In your world, there's zero reason even to think about whether males would be entirely comfortable with transmen using their communal changing rooms!

 

[LondonJohn]

https://www.lawcareers.net/Explore/Features/08032021-International-Womens-Day-what-does-the-legal-profession-look-like-for

I asked Collin237 what they meant by

There has not yet been any trend toward equal female and male employment in any office.

But I'm sure they will thank you for presuming to answer on their behalf.


However.... if you'd actually looked at the post of mine to which Collin237 was responding there, you'd have found that Collin237 wasn't referring at all to any pay disparity. Because my post was a reminder that there would have been a healthy representation of both males and females on all the bodies involved in a) making scientific determinations and recommendations re transgender identity, and b) making governmental, legislative and judicial determinations related to the issue.

So Collin237 was very specifically claiming that in no office has there yet been any trend towards equality in numbers of males and females.


As I said, thanks for coming in on Collin237's behalf and answering the question. Incorrectly.

 

[LondonJohn]

A quick note - you may find CCTV in UK changing rooms or toilets, that is not against the law. There are some rules/guidelines that have to be followed as with all CCTVs not in the home, including signage that such cameras are present.

For a changing room or toilet they would be expected to be for a specific purpose and not for general surveillance and to be focussed on that specific purpose. For instance if there was a vending machine that kept being broken - CCTV could be used that monitored that location even if it meant that it also captured views of naked people. There are very strict laws about the retention and use of any footage from any CCTV and people are prosecuted and jailed for breaking such laws - for example: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-jailed-footballer-cardiff-city-a9117506.html

Indeed.

This is exactly why I floated it as an idea, together with a clear note of caution that many matters related to privacy and consent would have to be carefully considered.

As you say, there can be (and are) very strict laws in place governing how this sort of recorded footage can be viewed or passed on. There is also (I think) a person in each case who is ultimately responsible for the safeguarding of the footage: if the footage gets used illegally, it's that person who's prosecuted (whether or not it was he/she who actually misused the footage).

Nice to have a voice of reason against the blanket it-cannot-be-done-don't-be-so-ridiculous-no-woman-would-ever-use-a-communal-changing-room-ever-again crew

 

[theprestige]

If gender is a spectrum not linked to sex, then transgenderism is pointless.

The reality seems to be that transgender activism very much sees gender as linked to sex. The activism is in trying to make it a thing that you can unlink your gender from your sex, and then link it up to the opposite sex, as a human right.

 

[Louden Wilde]

Sex = biology; binary
Gender = something else

1 - Gender and sex are binary and the same, and there should be segregation in certain areas based on sex - Traditionalists

2 - Gender and sex are binary, but not always the same, and there should be segregation based on gender - Transrights activists

3 - Gender is a spectrum and not linked to sex, and there should not be segregation - Radicals

4 - Gender is a spectrum and not linked to sex, and there should be segregation based on sex - ?

Have I missed anything?

I'm not sure of which those work for me. As I've noted, I think it's inarguable that of the two sexes, one is subjugated/discriminated against because of their (reproductive-associated) biology. Therefore, I think that there should be protected spaces, activities and representation for that sex (i.e. females).

I'd probably prefer it if gender was used synonymously with sex, but that ship seems to have sailed. Distinguishing sex and gender has also had the positive effect of highlighting stereotypes associated with the sexes. What I don't like are the frequent conflation of the two and the apparent message that if you don't like stereotypes associated with your sex and/or like the stereotypes associates with the other sex than you should take medical action/declare your self trans. That is, I think it would be much healthier to work on diminishing these stereotypes (and benefit more people).

So I guess #4? What is gender again ? What does it mean if it's a spectrum?

To be clear, while I can't think of things offhand that should be segregated by gender, I don't think people who think they want to be the other sex should be discriminated against either. Note here - I agree that that "attack helicopter" comparison is overly snarky and unhelpful. Many of us would like would like to change things about ourselves that aren't feasible because of our genetics/development.

The big problem here in the US is that we have a right wing that is genuinely hostile to trans-people as a whole. They're pursuing the sports angle perhaps because it's a rare case where science/reality is on their side. Unfortunately, this fact is really hindering discussions here, because bringing up sex-segregated sports brings up the (IMO intellectually lazy) defense of lumping you with the folks who have been actively trying to overthrow our democracy (AKA Trump supporters, enablers) and are truly anti-trans (i.e. would exclude trans people from jobs, wish them physical harm).

 

[Louden Wilde]

If gender is a spectrum not linked to sex, then transgenderism is pointless.

The reality seems to be that transgender activism very much sees gender as linked to sex. The activism is in trying to make it a thing that you can unlink your gender from your sex, and then link it up to the opposite sex, as a human right.

Yeah, I agree there are bunch of seemingly contradictory things said by activists. They claim to be against sex-associated stereotypes, but at the same time double down on them - indeed that seems to be at the core of the "gender" definition. Also - it's not a medical condition, but at the same time requires medical care that's being denied

 

[Elaedith]

Wouldn't all that make being trans-racial more valid than being trans-gender, not less? I don't know why, it's probably the same reason that black-face is considered offensive, while drag is still not. I'm not sure I can make much sense of it myself, though.

Dr Ken Zucker recently reposted an earlier tweet from 2006 which compared 'ethnic identity disorder' with 'gender identity disorder' (as it was then).
The retweet was in response to Prof. Ibram Kendi posting a tweet denounced as transphobic, about being horrified that his daughter had said she wanted to be a boy. Of course, Kendi's statement had nothing to do with being transgender.

Zucker appears to draw a parallel between encouraging a child to accept their biological sex and encouraging a child to accept their skin colour.

 

[Aber]

But it's interesting that you focus solely and exclusively upon the female-oriented elements rather than the male-oriented ones.

No, I focus on how you participate in this thread.

Your dismissal of female concerns as hysterical sums it up.

 

[Aber]

I'm not sure of which those work for me.

They're imperfect, but do highlight that there are multiple similar but distinguishable discussions going on in the same space - see the non-binary thread.

In particular many of the transgender activists arguments fall apart if you accept that there are multiple genders and they don't easily map onto biological realities.

 

[LondonJohn]

No, I focus on how you participate in this thread.

Your dismissal of female concerns as hysterical sums it up.

No. I've dismissed radical-feminist hysteria as hysteria.

I have, many times, entirely accepted the validity of females' concerns. Which...... is one of the reasons why I am suggesting possible ways in which females might be protected.

So tell me: what sums what up, again?

 

[Elaedith]

Yeah, I agree there are bunch of seemingly contradictory things said by activists. They claim to be against sex-associated stereotypes, but at the same time double down on them - indeed that seems to be at the core of the "gender" definition. Also - it's not a medical condition, but at the same time requires medical care that's being denied

No to mention - gender is socially constructed and fluid (hence completely unlike sexual orientation), yet children know their gender from an early age, their 'trans' identity must be unconditionally affirmed, and they can begin social transition before puberty. Biological sex is irrelevant to gender; a male who identifies as a woman has a female penis, yet medical transition is 'gender affirming'.

 

[LondonJohn]

Oh and also (Aber), tell me whether you accept that males will have legitimate concerns about transmen using the men's changing rooms?

Because that's something that I've referred to before also. I entirely agree that females' concerns are going to be greater than males', owing to factors which I think anyone would understand. But nevertheless, the situation vis-a-vis transmen and men's spaces will need considering and addressing nevertheless.


Ah but no RAH RAH RAH MALES ORDERING FEMALES WHAT TO DO MALES NOT CARING ONE IOTA FOR THE WELFARE OF FEMALES EVIL MALES EVIL PATRIARCHY RAH RAH RAH!