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

[d4m10n]

In other words, they aren't actually exposed, but they are sufficiently vulnerable to view that generally a man would not be allowed into a woman's dressing room to try on clothes in most of them.

If you're all that paranoid, just keep your knickers on. (They may well cover more than a swimsuit.)

 

[LondonJohn]

Which restroom would you suggest for Seani (an untransitioned male who identifies as a woman)?

The women's restroom. With safeguards in place.

Which restroom do you suggest she should use?


(ETA: I'm wondering if you realised what my post was pointing out?)

 

[d4m10n]

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

Which restroom do you suggest she should use?

Since Seani looks like a random dude with a beard, I'd say Seani should use the room where we expect to see other folks who look like that.

 

[LondonJohn]

You're claiming the mundane process of developing muscle mass through diet and exercise.

Earthborn appears to be suggesting a process by which the development of biological sex can be influenced by social pressure.

Really?

Because, as you'd have seen, Earthborn's post talked - no more and no less in this regard - about "...how their bodies develop".

Not "...how their sex organs develop". Not "....how their genes develop". Not "...how their gametes develop".

 

[LondonJohn]

You know exactly what I mean. Don't be coy.

It'd be helpful then if you at least made an attempt to use the definitions of terms that have become generally accepted when talking in academic/policy terms of transgender identity.

i.e. "male" & "female" = biological sex;

and "man" & "woman" (and "boy" & "girl") = gender.

Otherwise things get confusing and imprecise very quickly.

 

[Belz...]

It'd be helpful then if you at least made an attempt to use the definitions of terms that have become generally accepted when talking in academic/policy terms of transgender identity.

i.e. "male" & "female" = biological sex;

and "man" & "woman" (and "boy" & "girl") = gender.

Otherwise things get confusing and imprecise very quickly.

You may claim that they have become "generally accepted" but given the confusion that already exists in these discussions, both here and in meatspace, they're not generally accepted at all. I get that when you're surrounded by like-minded individuals it seems like everyone thinks like you, but I assure you, it's not the case. "I can't believe Nixon won" and all that.

Are you going to now address my point, or are you going to keep evading it while simultaneously engaging me on it? If you didn't want to discuss why respond to me at all?

 

[Elaedith]

Since Seani looks like a random dude with a beard, I'd say Seani should use the room where we expect to see other folks who look like that.

Boudicca90 agrees with you
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=13241378#post13241378

So who gets to decide?

 

[LondonJohn]

You may claim that they have become "generally accepted" but given the confusion that already exists in these discussions, both here and in meatspace, they're not generally accepted at all. I get that when you're surrounded by like-minded individuals it seems like everyone thinks like you, but I assure you, it's not the case. "I can't believe Nixon won" and all that.

Are you going to now address my point, or are you going to keep evading it while simultaneously engaging me on it? If you didn't want to discuss why respond to me at all?

I already have addressed your point. In probably dozens of posts within these threads. Including one extremely recent one.

But if you require spoon-feeding, here you go (you can print this out and laminate it for future reference as my opinion, if you like):

Females should expect to have to share communal changing rooms with transgender males*. But they should also expect 1) all reasonable safeguards** to have been put in place beforehand, and 2) the authorities to monitor the situation very closely, and to be ready to act quickly and decisively if the safety of females was indeed being compromised.



* And males should expect to have to share communal changing rooms with transgender females.

** I will expect governments, legislatures, regulators and civil servants all to engage to a very significant degree in the conception, scoping, testing, focus-grouping, rolling-out and monitoring of safeguards. And I will expect governments and legislatures to be prepared to allocate significant and appropriate resources (personnel and cost) to it.

 

[Collin237]

Xjx's not the one I'm asking clarification from.

Fine. If I say I believe sexual orientation is innate, what do you believe I mean? Because to me it means it's something that precedes knowledge of the world, and therefore can't refer to the world. But apparently that doesn't make sense to anyone.

 

[Collin237]

Females should expect to have to share communal changing rooms with transgender males*. But they should also expect 1) all reasonable safeguards** to have been put in place beforehand, and 2) the authorities to monitor the situation very closely, and to be ready to act quickly and decisively if the safety of females was indeed being compromised.

YGTBFK! The presence of "authorities to monitor the situation very closely" is already compromising the safety of everyone there!

 

[d4m10n]

I will expect governments, legislatures, regulators and civil servants all to engage to a very significant degree in the conception, scoping, testing, focus-grouping, rolling-out and monitoring of safeguards. And I will expect governments and legislatures to be prepared to allocate significant and appropriate resources (personnel and cost) to it.

I expect it would be simpler and cheaper to renovate communal spaces into single user builds than to go through all that.

 

[theprestige]

Fine. If I say I believe sexual orientation is innate, what do you believe I mean? Because to me it means it's something that precedes knowledge of the world, and therefore can't refer to the world. But apparently that doesn't make sense to anyone.

If sexual orientation can't be refer to the world, then what exactly are you oriented towards? All your prospective sex partners exist in the world. If your orientation can't refer to them, you'll never get laid.

 

[Meadmaker]

If sexual orientation can't be refer to the world, then what exactly are you oriented towards? All your prospective sex partners exist in the world. If your orientation can't refer to them, you'll never get laid.

I think what he is saying is that it "precedes" knowledge of the world. I think what he means is that if sexual orientation is innate, that means it was determined prior to birth, i.e. before there was any knowledge of the world.


ETA" However, it would still "refer" to the world. My desire to eat is innate. It developed before I had any knowledge of eating. However, it refers to something in the real world. So, yeah, I'm confused on what "refer" means in this context.

 

[xjx388]

I think what he is saying is that it "precedes" knowledge of the world. I think what he means is that if sexual orientation is innate, that means it was determined prior to birth, i.e. before there was any knowledge of the world.


ETA" However, it would still "refer" to the world. My desire to eat is innate. It developed before I had any knowledge of eating. However, it refers to something in the real world. So, yeah, I'm confused on what "refer" means in this context.

Sex is a drive, just like hunger. It’s not something we learn. Males want to have sex with females, for the most part. That desire is hardwired. It’s not like we have a drive for sex but the world teaches us that we want sex with only the opposite sex. I think the evidence shows that orientation is pretty much inalterable.

Gender is purely socially determined, under this new definition of gender. It can only be learned. We don’t have an innate desire to wear pants or dresses. It’s purely cultural. There is no gender drive.

That’s what I mean.

 

[Meadmaker]

Gender is purely socially determined, under this new definition of gender. It can only be learned. We don’t have an innate desire to wear pants or dresses. It’s purely cultural. There is no gender drive.

That’s what I mean.

I didn't realize it originated with you. I didn't follow the chain all the way back.


As for what you said above, I'm not so sure. Obviously, there is no innate drive to wear pants instead of skirts, or wear makeup or earrings or particular hairstyles.


But could there be an innate drive to "look like a girl"? And then the specific aspects of your society dictate what that means? I don't think the science is at the state where it can answer that question definitively.

 

[Collin237]

I think what he is saying is that it "precedes" knowledge of the world. I think what he means is that if sexual orientation is innate, that means it was determined prior to birth, i.e. before there was any knowledge of the world.


ETA" However, it would still "refer" to the world. My desire to eat is innate. It developed before I had any knowledge of eating. However, it refers to something in the real world. So, yeah, I'm confused on what "refer" means in this context.

If sexual orientation is innate then (assuming you're either heterosexual or homosexual) before you were born, when the only person you know exists is yourself, you had a preference for whether, if another person exists and you wanted to be with it, you'd rather it be male or female. But the only way you'd know that a person is male or female is if you knew it about yourself.

And if you were mistaken about whether you're male or female, and you still remember that mistake after you're fully conscious of the world, then you have a gender issue.

 

[xjx388]

If sexual orientation is innate then (assuming you're either heterosexual or homosexual) before you were born, when the only person you know exists is yourself, you had a preference for whether, if another person exists and you wanted to be with it, you'd rather it be male or female. But the only way you'd know that a person is male or female is if you knew it about yourself.

And if you were mistaken about whether you're male or female, and you still remember that mistake after you're fully conscious of the world, then you have a gender issue.

Sex drive is instinctual, part of the “animal” part of our brain. We have an inner drive to reproduce. This means most males want to have sex with females; we don’t need to be socialized into wanting to have sexual with females. It’s just what we want. It’s hardwired.

In homosexuality, something happens in fetal development. According to the best evidence we have, some of which was posted in the thread, it seems that a homosexual’s developing brain doesn’t get exposed to the “right” hormones at a crucial time. This results in hardwiring to a same sex sexual attraction.

Whatever the case, it’s clear that sexual orientation is not changeable because it’s fixed before birth. You can’t “therapy out”sexual orientation. Because it’s not learned or socialized into us.

There’s no evidence that the same is true of “gender.” Gender is purely social. I can find no evidence that a gender identity is something hardwired into us. In fact, it would be impossible because a gender identity is not biological; by definition it’s a self-perception as to whether or not one fits into the gender roles/stereotypes created by society. Gender is learned and socialized into us. As such, I think it could be subject to a therapeutic approach instead of jumping into a medical/surgical approach. Especially in kids.

Now, I’m open to the idea that I have this all wrong; but, I won’t be convinced by unfounded rationalizations such as what you’ve presented here. You’ll have to show that gender identities are indeed hardwired in the same way orientation is. The problem is that there isn’t much actual research on the biological basis of gender identity.

 

[Collin237]

Sex drive is instinctual, part of the “animal” part of our brain. We have an inner drive to reproduce. This means most males want to have sex with females; we don’t need to be socialized into wanting to have sexual with females. It’s just what we want. It’s hardwired.

In homosexuality, something happens in fetal development. According to the best evidence we have, some of which was posted in the thread, it seems that a homosexual’s developing brain doesn’t get exposed to the “right” hormones at a crucial time. This results in hardwiring to a same sex sexual attraction.

Whatever the case, it’s clear that sexual orientation is not changeable because it’s fixed before birth. You can’t “therapy out”sexual orientation. Because it’s not learned or socialized into us.

There’s no evidence that the same is true of “gender.” Gender is purely social. I can find no evidence that a gender identity is something hardwired into us. In fact, it would be impossible because a gender identity is not biological; by definition it’s a self-perception as to whether or not one fits into the gender roles/stereotypes created by society. Gender is learned and socialized into us. As such, I think it could be subject to a therapeutic approach instead of jumping into a medical/surgical approach. Especially in kids.

Now, I’m open to the idea that I have this all wrong; but, I won’t be convinced by unfounded rationalizations such as what you’ve presented here. You’ll have to show that gender identities are indeed hardwired in the same way orientation is. The problem is that there isn’t much actual research on the biological basis of gender identity.

There isn't much research because of the problems with researching people. However, gender is even more evident in other species with much simpler lives, so why isn't anyone researching them? Chickens, for example. I find it hard to believe that a chicken is socially conditioned whether to crow or to cluck!

 

[TomB]

The women's restroom. With safeguards in place.

Which restroom do you suggest she should use?


(ETA: I'm wondering if you realised what my post was pointing out?)

And why should women (cis or trans) in those spaces feel any more comfortable when Seani walks in than they would when you or I walk in, given the only source of information available is appearance?

And yes, I know, the government will have magical "safeguards" in place. Which of course is utterly unmanageable in the real world.

What you are arguing for is effectively unisex facilities.

 

[Roboramma]

Really?

Because, as you'd have seen, Earthborn's post talked - no more and no less in this regard - about "...how their bodies develop".

Not "...how their sex organs develop". Not "....how their genes develop". Not "...how their gametes develop".

Yes, really. Because Earthborn's post was written in the context of a discussion about the development of sexually dimorphic characteristics, and particularly in the context of a claim that these things are dependent on socialization.