Belz...
Fiend God
Guess again. It's the poster I was replying to.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
[ED] Discussion: Trans Women Are not Women (Part 6)
- Thread starter Emily's Cat
- Start date
- Status
Guess again. It's the poster I was replying to.
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
This may be true for the U.S. national teams (citation needed) but it isn't true in general. Take my home city of Chicago, for example. The average attendance of the Chicago Red Stars was 7,744 persons per game in 2019, whereas the average attendance for the Chicago Fire FC was 11,969 during the same season. This is despite the fact that the Red Stars were having a much better season, in terms of league standing. Turns out "mediocre" males are still a larger draw, for whatever reasons.
Bit of an aside, but loads of goth boys were into black lipstick, black nail polish, and black skirts back in my day. Wonder if that made us cross-dressers or perhaps just genderqueer...?
Last edited:
Sherkeu
Illuminator
Ain't that the case.
I also enjoy hearing people state what they consider transgender identity to be (and what they consider it not to be). It's almost as if they know better than the community of psychiatrists, psychologists, sociologists and medics, who've actually got the vast amounts of experience and expertise to enable them to make a properly-informed decision about what they consider transgender identity and gender dysphoria to be. And what they consider those things not to be.
But maybe I'm wrong: maybe I should be more influenced on all of this by a small group of randoms on the interwebz... as I am by the vast numbers of vastly experienced experts, who've spent their careers working with - and aiming to understand - transgender people.
Yeah, maybe that makes sense......
You know I have specifically asked you to define what you mean by "transgender" as a group requiring certain legal protections, including access to female spaces. You did not respond to those earlier requests.
Do you agree with the current Transgender Umbrella as described by most activists? You do not seem to be as expansive or inclusive in your posts.
I would deem you to be fighting specifically for rights of a small number of medically diagnosed persons who switch 100% to the opposite in a binary gender model. Is that accurate? Some might call that 'truscum' or 'transmedical'...which is fine. But please clarify.
Last edited:
Belz...
Fiend God
...what does that even mean?
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,796
And if someone produces none they are clearly of neither sex.
Belz...
Fiend God
It was true for one year for one team, far as I can tell.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,796
Wrong.
"Overall, from fiscal 2016 to 2018, the women’s games generated about $900,000 more revenue than the men’s games. In the year following the 2015 World Cup win, women’s games generated $1.9 million more than the men’s games. And in recent years, the men’s revenue tally also includes the fees that opposing teams pay in order to play the United States."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/are-us-womens-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/
But just go with your alternate facts on this.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
ETA: Also possible that Canadians are just plain nicer than us rebellious southerners.
I think it's probably neither.
I'm generalizing of course, but males and females have different overton windows when it comes to sexual assault and uneasiness.
From the males I've talked to about this, they would consider the following actions taken toward them to be sexual assault:
- a stranger grabbing their butt or their crotch in a crowded venue and copping a feel
- a stranger pressing up against them in a sexual way, trying to kiss them
- someone trying to undo their clothing against their will, whether it's unbuttoning their shirt of undoing their belt
- anything worse than that
Those are things that do sometimes happen to males, but they tend to happen infrequently. On the other hand... those are things that happen to females with such regularity that most females don't even consider them to be sexual assault. It's not that they're not violations... it's that they're common, and when we all know someone who has been raped or sexually assaulted in a way that caused them physical harm, having our boobs groped in a club just doesn't even come to mind.
With respect to the uneasiness... again, it's so standard and so constant that most of us don't take a lot of note of it. It's only when we actually have conversations with males and the topic comes up that we recognize the difference. Generally, out in public with lots of other people around, I (and most females who haven't been traumatized) don't pay much mind to males, and we're certainly not 'frightened' of them. But if a male at a shop follows us out toward our car, I think almost all females will be aware of them and feel a sense of heightened concern. We're pretty well aware that the most likely situation is that they just happen to be parked near us, and it's purely coincidental. But we'll still keep on eye on them just in case. If we're out alone at night, I think most females are a lot more aware of the uneasiness and the vulnerability.
It's not like we walk around in a state of near-constant panic or anything. It doesn't generally even register as fear or concern... just awareness. But when I talk to males it becomes clear that it's not even a concern for most males. If someone else is walking behind them on their way to their car, they are only aware of them as a moving body, not as a potential threat.
It's a different in perspective resulting from different experiences. When you're a pitbull, all of the other dogs are either pitbulls (as big and scary as you) or they're pugs (smaller and no danger). When you're a pug, all of the other dogs are either pugs (as small as you) or they're pitbulls (bigger and scarier than you).
In a vast generalization, consider that in an altercation with a randomly chosen human... a male has a 50% chance of being equally matched and a 50% chance of being the clear victor. A female, on the other hand, has a 50% chance of being equally matched and a 50% chance of being the clear loser.
Paul2
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2004
- Messages
- 8,565
Correct. It's a trinary (is that a word?) and I stand corrected.
Belz...
Fiend God
No, as I said "as far as I can tell". If I'm wrong, fine. My knowledge of this is years out of date.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Sure sure, and if an infant is born without legs, we can no longer say that humans are a bipedal species...Belz...
Fiend God
At the very least, the person is still a tetrapod even without legs because that's not the definition.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,796
But we are not talking about a species but rather an individual, so you consider that person a biped?
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,458
I've stated this many many times.
What I mean by "transgender" is precisely what experts and governments mean by "transgender". Not what is shown in cartoons and book illustrations.
Are ya ready for my definition? Here it comes! I'll even light it up a bit for you!
Transgender person = a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their sex as assigned at birth.
It does not include, for example, cross-dressers (if cross-dressing is all they identify as).
If I, a male, identified (at a core consciousness level) as anything other than the "man" gender, I'd be transgender.
If I identified as nonbinary, I'd be transgender.
If I identified as "woman", I'd be transgender.
If I identified as something on the "man" spectrum but with certain "woman" attributes, I'd not be transgender (the word "trans" necessarily implies "cross" (or at least, reach the half-way point)).
If I identified as "man" but enjoyed wearing clothing that was typically associated with "woman" and adopting a "woman" voice, I'd not be transgender.
In any case, what I was talking about was not "who qualifies as transgender" so much as "what, at a psychological/sociological/medical level, is transgenderism and transgender identity"
From the extensive research I conducted into this area before forming an opinion, during which I identified the key experts in the field, along with the history and development of the theories of gender identity and gender dysphoria, the origins of gender identity ideology in postmodernist queer theory, the nature of the dispute between experts and activists, evidence of ideological interference in science (one of my main areas of academic interest), the techniques used by activists to intimidate scientists, capture policy and silence dissent, the cult-like nature of the movement etc.
He sounds like an expert who is aware of the nature of fundamentalist trans activism from first-hand experience.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,796
Which is why being assigned female at birth is clearly not enough to qualify as a woman. That was the whole issue Caster Semenya really there must be far more detailed classifications as to when someone is or is not a woman, as that case clearly indicated. She clearly was not a woman by your definitions no matter what her birth certificate said and as such she clearly should also be barred from women's bathrooms. Others like her do not belong.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,796
Like how gay activists totally corrupted the experts into saying it was not a disorder. Outrageous!
xjx388
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2010
- Messages
- 11,392
I'm not sure what you are talking about here, but it seems to be a red herring.
The point is that sex is not assigned. It is observed and recorded as a simple biological fact. If the kid is born with a penis and testicles, the sex is recorded as male; a vagina equals female -regardless of what else might be going on with an intersex condition or what later transpires as far as transitioning.
Unlike some people seem to think, recording the sex on a government form affects absolutely no part of reality. The kid is the sex they were born as; nobody "assigned" it.
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,458
Mm-hmm. True.
And off the top of my head, I know that (for example) the women's prize money at Wimbledon is nowadays the exact equal of the men's prize money. And all for playing best of three sets rather than best of five! Smash the patriarchy, sisters!!
sarge
Penultimate Amazing
You're entirely correct of course. But there's a curious dance going on within this thread, in which people who are ideologically opposed to the very concept of transgender identity as a valid condition.... contort themselves in attacks around the edges, while at the same time being afraid to admit their core belief in transphobia.
Logic and reason don't count for much round here, it appears. Neither does sarcasm: apparently the "rule" in this thread is that it signals one out to be someone who is not debating in good faith. So heaven help you for that last paragraph of yours
Where in this thread that has any persons pressed an ideological opposition to the concept of transgender dentition?
Every single poster to this thread that I recall reading has expressed varying degrees of support for transgender rights and one has expressed an opinion that could fairly be described as transphobic.
- Status