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

[Belz...]

Like how gay activists totally corrupted the experts into saying it was not a disorder. Outrageous!

This is the "they laughed at Galileo" argument.

It's completely unrelated to this discussion.

 

[Elaedith]

Like how gay activists totally corrupted the experts into saying it was not a disorder. Outrageous!

No, pretty much the exact opposite actually. Those arguing for homosexuality to be retained as a disorder from within the field were basing their arguments on pseudoscience (chiefly, a lot of Freudian theorists had a very strong investment in this). From outside the field, the dislike of homosexuality came predominantly from religious conservatism, which of course is also non-scientific. Gay rights activists, on the other hand, had science on their side (form example, the evidence that sexual orientation is an innate, and immutable characteristic that naturally varies and is not associated with any form of psychopathology, nor is it empirically related to paraphilias). The civil rights movements such as gay rights were also based on enlightenment values (the idea of treating everyone equally and not discriminating based on immutable characteristics).
In the case of gender identity ideology, in contrast, the currently dominant activist position is derived from postmodernist theory (critical Queer Theory, which is under the general umbrella of grievance studies), with an epistemology that is inherently opposed to enlightenment values and scientific skepticism. It rejects the idea of objective truth that can be uncovered through reason, logic and debate, and sees everything as a constant power struggle between oppressor and marginalized identity groups. In this worldview, science, reason, logic and evidence are not means to uncover truth, but tools that are only of value if they support the narrative that must be considered ideologically correct.

 

[Belz...]

In the case of gender identity ideology, in contrast, the currently dominant activist position is derived from postmodernist theory (critical Queer Theory, which is under the general umbrella of grievance studies), with an epistemology that is inherently opposed to enlightenment values and scientific skepticism.

All the while claiming to have science on their side, almost as if while trying to overturn it they still admit to its usefulness.

It rejects the idea of objective truth that can be uncovered through reason, logic and debate

Right in the right-winger's playfield...

and sees everything as a constant power struggle between oppressor and marginalized groups.

...with some Marxism thrown in the mix.

 

[Belz...]

Where in this thread that has any persons pressed an ideological opposition to the concept of transgender dentition?

You have got to love typos and autocorrect, sometimes.

 

[LondonJohn]

This is the "they laughed at Galileo" argument.

It's completely unrelated to this discussion.

If you can't see how this relates to the (ill-informed and incorrect) claims that it's only transgender activism which has imposed some "policy capture" hoodoo on the world's experts, such that they decided to recognise transgender identity as a valid condition....

.... then there's not much that either of us can do to help, unfortunately.

 

[sarge]

You have got to love typos and autocorrect, sometimes.

Even worse because I’m fat finger gin an iphone

 

[Ziggurat]

Yep as the US soccer teams show it doesn't matter how much money you raise or how successful you are, a mediocre man will be better paid than an exceptional woman as it should be.

Yeah, no. You really don't have a clue about what you're talking about. The women were offered the same deal as the men had. They turned it down. And they turned it down for some pretty good reasons, actually, including they wanted a bunch of benefits that the men's team doesn't get, as well as guaranteed salaries that the men don't have. But now they want the upside of their contract PLUS the upside of the men's contract. In other words, they are now demanding substantially MORE than what the men get.

Here's a nice breakdown which shows just how bull **** their entire case was:

But they don't, the women's team earns more money. But they are still worth less as women of course. To get out of the equal rights ruling the court ruled that being a member of the women's team is not substantially similar to being a member of the men's team so compensation as a comparison to revenue is right out.

Well, no. Rather, the judge said that the women are being paid differently because that's what they wanted. They had different priorities than the men had. They cared less about maximum possible top-end pay, and more about guaranteed pay and benefits. And frankly, that was entirely logical. In their place, I would have wanted the same thing. But they don't get to go back now and unilaterally demand a contract where they get both the maximum top-end pay AND the guaranteed pay and benefits.

In other words, their claim was a joke from the start.

 

[Emily's Cat]

But we are not talking about a species but rather an individual, so you consider that person a biped?

Sex is a species-level categorization. All members of the human species are either male or female, depending on the type of gamete that they develop to produce. A person who developed to produce ova, but does not because of a DSD or a hysterectomy or menopause is still female. A person who developed to produce sperm, however, is not and cannot be male. A person whose gamete production has been interrupted, has ceased, or has been removed doesn't become a third sex... and there is no "in between" gamete. There are two, and only two gamete types. This is true for every single mammal on the planet. Indeed, it's true for nearly all vertebrates.

 

[Belz...]

If you can't see how this relates to the (ill-informed and incorrect) claims that it's only transgender activism which has imposed some "policy capture" hoodoo on the world's experts, such that they decided to recognise transgender identity as a valid condition....

.... then there's not much that either of us can do to help, unfortunately.

Why am I not surprised that you're completely missing the point? The point is that EVEN if X turned out to be true for situation A it does not mean Y will turn out to be true for situation B. This is trivial logic.

Well, trivial to non-ideologues, that is.

I think you meant to write something like

"Your arguments have completely lost touch with reality"

didn't you?

No, that would be nonsense, and I try to avoid that. Arguments cannot lose touch with reality because they are not people.

 

[LondonJohn]

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.

What you may be failing to notice is that if someone, for example, expresses opinions such as:

"I am all in favour of transgender rights. But I won't have transwomen in women's changing rooms"

or

"I am all in favour of transgender rights. But I won't have transgirls in high school competing in the girls' sporting events"

or

"I am all in favour of transgender rights. But I won't have transwomen being eligible for women's quotas"


..... then those opinions are, I'm afraid, effectively transphobic in nature (in spite of the overt declarations of support up front).


And, BTW, one cannot have "degrees of support" for transgender rights. One either supports transgender rights, or one does not.

That'd be like saying "I have a varying degree of support for black civil rights: I'm fine with most of it, but I'll be damned if black people will be allowed to eat in the same restaurants as me".

 

[Emily's Cat]

...with some Marxism thrown in the mix.

This is one (among many) things that seriously baffles me. There's been a strange thread of marxism thrown in to all sorts of social justice movements, where I just can't figure out what it's doing there. It's like people supporting marxism are just trying to throw it at everything and see if it sticks?

 

[Emily's Cat]

You have got to love typos and autocorrect, sometimes.

My teeth feel gender nonconforming today... ?

 

[Meadmaker]

\
And, BTW, one cannot have "degrees of support" for transgender rights. One either supports transgender rights, or one does not.

Well that's just silly.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Even worse because I’m fat finger gin an iphone

Can I get some tonic with that?

 

[Emily's Cat]

..... then those opinions are, I'm afraid, effectively transphobic in nature (in spite of the overt declarations of support up front).


And, BTW, one cannot have "degrees of support" for transgender rights. One either supports transgender rights, or one does not.

You yourself have said that you support sex-segregation and required hormone levels for elite sports. Therefore, by your own logic, you are a transphobe.

 

[LondonJohn]

Elite-level sport is primarily an entertainment business. As such, it has exemptions in the same way as, say, theatre: there could/would never be regulations governing the casting of transmen in men's roles, for example.

 

[xjx388]

But we are not talking about a species but rather an individual, so you consider that person a biped?

The individual is still fundamentally a biped because they are human, even if their legs didn't develop correctly. If not for whatever happened in development (chromosomal issue or whatever), they would have two legs. We wouldn't say that there is a new sub-species of human that isn't bipedal.

Just as we shouldn't say that there is a such thing as a human with a female penis.

 

[Collin237]

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.

In other words, you've developed a full-blown conspiracy theory.

 

[Belz...]

This is one (among many) things that seriously baffles me. There's been a strange thread of marxism thrown in to all sorts of social justice movements, where I just can't figure out what it's doing there. It's like people supporting marxism are just trying to throw it at everything and see if it sticks?

The more I read this thread the more I think I understand what "postmodernism" is.

 

[Belz...]

And, BTW, one cannot have "degrees of support" for transgender rights. One either supports transgender rights, or one does not.

Well I wanted a clear piece of evidence that you are an extremist, there it is.

Thanks.