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

[Belz...]

It is part of a broader philosophical (and very, very poorly defined) movement against pretty much any intellectual bedrock. If you've ever had someone use the phrase "naïve realism" against for every stating a fact, you've encountered it.

That explains it. I haven't, except, in principle, on this forum.

Basically it's the Ivory Tower version of the "Facts don't exist, prove reality exists before you tell me anything" crowd.

Political solipsism?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Correct.

Although your post has made me curious about something - how do we define "really trans" ? How am I, as a woman, supposed to know the difference between a man in a dress coming into the women's toilets to perv on people and a transwoman who just wants to pee? Do I have to wait until he actually commits a sexual assault before I call bs?

According to some activists, yes. You have to wait until *after* you've been assaulted or raped before you're allowed to complain.

 

[d4m10n]

Fun fact... most clothing is gendered to the extend that society expects (and to a degree requires) different [modes] of dress to signal sex. High heels versus wing-tips, for example.

I'm not sure how much of it is sex-related signaling, although high heels certainly fit that bill. Some of it is basically frippery, which for whatever reason is encouraged in only one sex. Some of it is, as you say, sex-related tailoring. Other distinctions seem harder to explain, such as why (straight) women don't wear cargo shorts with loads of pockets. Are pockets masculine?

Anyhow, my point was that regardless of sex at birth, I'd expect both women and transwomen to want to shop in the same part of the store. Hence, it is gendered rather than sexed.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Normally I'd argue that "really trans" is someone with gender dysphoria, but even if I'm to agree that one's feelings of the moment suffice, "really trans" is someone who is really feeling at the moment that they are of a different gender...

...of course the issue with both of these is that, in the latter case, you have no access to their feelings or motives, and in the former, that the only way to know is to carry some sort of ID at all times, which has unfortunate implications.

Rather, as far as restrooms go, I'd say "wherever you can pass" seems like a good rule of thumb. As for sports, I'd go with sex, full stop, and with changing rooms and showers, I still don't know. As far as rape centers go, definitely females should not be forced to accept males. Maybe a center specifically for trans people would do, but due to the low number of trans people it might not be practical. Again, I don't know.

Maybe it will turn out that women's objections to such inclusivity are not reasonable, and that after a while no one will care anymore, and that the fears of abuse by pretenders were unfounded. But we don't know for sure at this point. Maybe some sort of tryouts of various solutions could be useful?

I stick by my positions:

Restrooms: go wherever people are probably going to assume you belong, but at the end of the day don't sweat it too much

Changing rooms and lockers: Go wherever your genitals fit in. If you're post op, use the one that aligns with your newly crafted nether region. If you're pre-op, don't mix it up.

Rape & DV shelters: Generally assumed to be single-sex, but allow for case by case admittance as needed, with consideration given to the other females present.

Prison: If you have a real biologically grown penis, you belong with the males. Post-op transwomen and transmen regardless of surgical status can be with females. If transwomen are at a big risk of being abused by other males, devote a separate ward for transwomen, and other transgender people who wish to be housed there.

Political and Economic representation: On the basis of sex, full stop.

 

[Emily's Cat]

And yet trans activists have a track record of using political power to strip funding from Vancouver Rape Refuge because it offers female only shelter space, and when that didn't succeed in closing them down, death threats were scrawled on the walls and a dead rat nailed to the door.

A handful of shelters in the UK have also lost funding because they don't have "enough" services for males, even though several of them already explicitly offered services for transgender people too.

 

[Emily's Cat]

My apologies, but could you post a link or stats for that? That would help a lot in future discussions.

A lot of them get captured by feminist organizations, like Women are Human. Unfortunately, activist allies have a tendency to dismiss them out of hand because the instances are being tracked by, well, females.

 

[Paul2]

...what exact definition of postmodernism are we discussing here? I'm a little fuzzy on the term.

That fuzziness is part of the point. Texts don't mean much by themselves, but are interpreted by people and groups with certain amounts of power.

 

[Collin237]

First, it's a visible costume. An outward performance of "womanhood". That's the whole point.

The whole point is people like you saying such things.

 

[Belz...]

I stick by my positions:

Restrooms: go wherever people are probably going to assume you belong, but at the end of the day don't sweat it too much

Changing rooms and lockers: Go wherever your genitals fit in. If you're post op, use the one that aligns with your newly crafted nether region. If you're pre-op, don't mix it up.

Rape & DV shelters: Generally assumed to be single-sex, but allow for case by case admittance as needed, with consideration given to the other females present.

Prison: If you have a real biologically grown penis, you belong with the males. Post-op transwomen and transmen regardless of surgical status can be with females. If transwomen are at a big risk of being abused by other males, devote a separate ward for transwomen, and other transgender people who wish to be housed there.

Political and Economic representation: On the basis of sex, full stop.

I'll only add to the point of post-transition: it's my understanding that most trans people who transition omit the last bit (changing the genitals). Does that make them less trans? I wouldn't think so, but they do otherwise pass for women.

 

[Collin237]

A lot of them get captured by feminist organizations, like Women are Human. Unfortunately, activist allies have a tendency to dismiss them out of hand because the instances are being tracked by, well, females.

An all-female investigative team? Like Charlie's Angels? I'd dismiss it out of hand also.

 

[Elaedith]

If it is going to cause serious complications in 30 years, we would have been seeing those complications right about now.

Puberty blockers have only been used that long for treatment of precocious puberty, which is very different. A child being treated for precocious puberty generally will be on blockers for a relatively short period of time then go on to progress through natural puberty.

Child who go straight from early use of puberty blockers to cross-sex hormones never go through natural puberty. CSHs bring on the secondary sexual characteristics of the desired sex and have effects on the brain, but there is currently no evidence that these neurological effects equate to going through natural puberty.

There are extensive neurological changes associated with adolescence that are influenced by sex hormones, which begin with puberty and are not complete until the mid 20s. It is increasingly thought that the timing of these changes is critical, and many adolescent behavioural and mental health issues may be related to the timing of the maturation of different brain regions.

There is a serious lack of evidence as to the neurological effects of avoiding natural puberty. Again, this seems to be another example of activists denying biological reality and seeing the brain as well as the body as unconditionally malleable. You cannot 'choose which puberty' to go through.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yes, of course. It's the rat that's important here not the traumatized rape victims inside.

SMH. It seems like that should be clearly satire... but it's not.

I'm still unsettled by the whole thing in Scotland where they passed a rape support bill that allowed victims of rape to specify the sex of their medical examiner, rather than the gender... and there was outcry from the trans activist community in Scotland that this was transphobic and made them feel 'unsafe'.

the fact that there even needed to be a discussion, and that the side insisting that the victim of rape should be forced to have male examiners against their will and consent... as long as those examiners 'feel like women'... is just insane to me.

 

[Collin237]

I stick by my positions:

Restrooms: go wherever people are probably going to assume you belong, but at the end of the day don't sweat it too much

Changing rooms and lockers: Go wherever your genitals fit in. If you're post op, use the one that aligns with your newly crafted nether region. If you're pre-op, don't mix it up.

Rape & DV shelters: Generally assumed to be single-sex, but allow for case by case admittance as needed, with consideration given to the other females present.

Prison: If you have a real biologically grown penis, you belong with the males. Post-op transwomen and transmen regardless of surgical status can be with females. If transwomen are at a big risk of being abused by other males, devote a separate ward for transwomen, and other transgender people who wish to be housed there.

Political and Economic representation: On the basis of sex, full stop.

So you are capable of speaking rationally after all! Why don't you post like that all the time?

(Hint: It's not about the opinions themselves.)

 

[Emily's Cat]

Okay but that's basically an argument for the illusion of safe spaces, not safe spaces.

Again how many rapes happen in a public bathroom and how many of those would actually be prevented by rearraigning the gender segregation?

There have been some. I don't have stats.

Stats have been posted previously in this thread, more than once, showing an increase in the number of sexual assaults and rapes that occur when sex-segregated restrooms and locker rooms were removed and unisex ones implemented.

Do you have a reason to believe that self id would function substantially different than unisex?

Oh... there's also this one.
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/transgender-bathroom-policy-investigated-georgia-school-assault-case-n916621

A 5-year old female human child claims to have been sexually assaulted by a male human child that identifies as gender fluid, and thus was granted the right to use whichever restroom they felt like using. It is being investigated, there are no hard facts available to my knowledge.

 

[d4m10n]

Political and Economic representation: On the basis of sex, full stop.

I don't think we have anything like sex-based political reps here in the U.S.

What is a good example elsewhere in the world?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Listen I don't know how far I can go down this road without getting shouted down hard. My cards as to how men being treated as inherently predatory have been on the table for a while now. I'm not going to make any effort to build a hand with them anymore, but those cards are still on the table. "Men are just the only demographic that we have to protect society from" is simply not a place I am comfortable with.

Being treated as a rapist in waiting to protect women from actual harm is one thing.

Being treated as a rapist in waiting to protect them from feelings is another.

I understand where you're coming from, and I wish you didn't take it so personally.

Nobody is treating you specifically like a rapist. The problem is that there is no way to know whether any random male human is you or not.

Consider an analogy (take a moment to groan).

Most dogs are good dogs. Most pugs are friendly, loving, affectionate little blobs. Most pitbulls are friendly, loving, affectionate big blobs.

Unfortunately, pitbulls have a statistically higher likelihood of being aggressive and dangerous than pugs do. That's not to say that no pugs are aggressive or dangerous - some certainly could be. And it's also not to say that all pitbulls are aggressive and dangerous - in fact most are not. But it is true that pitbulls are more likely to be aggressive and dangerous than pugs. In addition to that, pitbulls are quite simply larger and stronger than pugs.

So if a pug comes running at someone barking... many people might be cautious, but most people wouldn't be frightened. On the other hand, if a pitbull comes running at someone barking, many people will be frightened. Because if that particular pitbull does happen to be aggressive and dangerous, then they could do real serious harm. In the case of the pug, even if that particular pug is aggressive and dangerous, the pug is less likely to do serious harm simply because of their smaller size.

Male humans are pitbulls; female humans are pugs. Both have the capacity to be dangerous and aggressive... but the likelihoods aren't the same, nor is the magnitude of harm that can be done in general.

It is reasonable and rational to be cautious and frightened about an unfamiliar pitbull running at you barking. If you know that particular pitbull, and you know they are not a threat, then it is not rational to be frightened of them.

If you and I ever end up in each other's RL presence, and we have to pee at the same time, I'm not going to be at all concerned if you follow me into the ladies' room. I've interacted with you personally, and I don't consider you a potential threat. But I would fully expect that all of the other female humans in that restroom would be on guard against you as a potential threat. Because even though it's not fair to you personally... you're still a pitbull.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Is there a reason why you're limiting your question to public bathrooms? The implications of allowing men to self identify as women are far more chilling and wide ranging than who pees in which room, which is actually relatively trivial compared to such things as domestic violence shelters, prisons, sports, etc.

I've tried to bring up those other, much more impactful situations. Somehow the discussion can't seem to make it past bathrooms and sports.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Even if it were true, and some kids get misidentified, it would mean a very small number of confused gay boys who would grow up happy to be gay, would turn into girls happy to be straight.

Just... wow.

Even if it were true, and some kids get misidentified, it would mean a very small number of confused gay boys who would grow up happy to be gay, would turn into males that look like girls, but who have grown breasts that can't be removed without surgery, permanently altered their bone density and substantially increased their risk of certain illnesses, mutilated their natural bodies in ways that make them sterile and frequently unable to enjoy sexual pleasure... and don't have any measurable reduction in their distress and anxiety.

No big deal...

 

[Emily's Cat]

If that means the most rabid transphobes will stay out of the bathrooms and stop calling the cops every time a trans lady tries to take a piss, I'd call it a societal win.

I honestly can't figure out how to parse your rejoinder as anything other than sexist.

You are literally advocating for social policies that make females - and specifically females - less safe, and less able to participate in society. And you consider this, this social enforcement of females being relegated to the home, as "win"... so that a subset of male-bodied people get their emotions affirmed?

Would you care to try again, perhaps with a bit more seriousness and consideration for the effect that your approach would have on a vulnerable and already very sexually assaulted portion of the population?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Ok. Because whenever I look the damn thing up when it's brought up in a discussion I always find that it's a movement in art and somesuch, and it doesn't seem to mesh with the opinions expressed about it.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/

My personal take is that it is nihilism for the entire concept of concepts.