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

[Belz...]

Well... someone needs to be able to reach the top shelves at the grocery store!

Don't forget women's nemeses: pickle jars.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Part of the problem with this whole discussion is that it's unclear that those speaking on either side represent the views of the majority of the people they advocate for.

I'm not sure the majority is speaking.

Interestingly, the female humans who have voiced concerns and objections in this thread have been speaking as members of the class of people who are female. The trans activists seem to be largely speaking on behalf of transgender people. It's particularly weird when you observe how often the voices of females get dismissed and disregarded in this discussion.

It ends up sometimes seeming like we've got cis-males on one side and cis-males on the other side, both arguing about things that affect transwomen and females most of all. It's frankly frustrating to find the underlying message that I should just STFU and let people who will never be affected by the result decide my fate for me.

 

[Distracted1]

I'm not so sure.

I think I understand what trans identity means. I just don't see why it makes Nova Maday right and Julia Burca wrong.

As long as a significant number of women object to being seen naked by males, I will support the right of females to have male-free spaces.


(Nova Maday and Julia Burca were two students at Palatine High School. Nova Maday was a male girl who wished to use the girls' locker room. Julia Burca was a female girl who objected. The school board sided with Nova. It occurs to me that I have seen video taken at the school board meeting, but none of the actual vote. it would be interesting to sex the sex and/or gender of the school board members and how they voted.)

I am a bit unclear on what it is based upon some of the language I am seeing used in this thread alone.

Is "Trans Identity" the condition of identifying as a "trans" person?
A person who is between genders, so to speak? If so, it is nearly impossible to "deny" that identity, no?

Or is "Trans Identity" the condition of believing oneself to be a gender other than what one is?

The two seem to be used interchangably.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Ah, so on top of being a bigot and a transphobe I'm now a reactionary, in addition to being a left-wing extremist. Gee, I can't keep up with all these labels!

Intersectionality is a real thing, bucko. Might want to look it up.

You're a transphobic, pro-gay-rights, reactionary, left wing extremist, with right wing talking points, Belz...! How does it feel to be in the empty section of the venn diagram?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Penises don't rape people. People rape people!

Now I feel like I need to go get a concealed penis permit so I can protect myself...

 

[Belz...]

You're a transphobic, pro-gay-rights, reactionary, left wing extremist, with right wing talking points, Belz...! How does it feel to be in the empty section of the venn diagram?

Feels pretty great, now that you put it that way. I get endless entertainment out of ideologues and extremists from both sides trying to grasp how someone could possibly be not them and not their nemesis. Then when they finally understand that centrists exist, they imagine that they are this single shade of grey who always want to be in the center of every discussion, so they don't even get that right. They understand everything in an us-vs-them war of annihilation and nothing from the actual, real world makes sense to them.

Joe has a bit of a similar experience on this forum with his "oh, is this what I am today?" shtick.

Now I feel like I need to go get a concealed penis permit so I can protect myself...

 

[Emily's Cat]

Don't forget women's nemeses: pickle jars.

You know, I've never had a problem with a pickle jar. Granted, I only buy small jars of pickles, and I suppose if I bought a large one I'd have trouble because my hand-span isn't big enough. Anyway, it's the stupid jam jars that are my enemies. Those things end up super-gluing themselves shut.

I don't use jam anymore. I stick with honey these days.

 

[Belz...]

It ends up sometimes seeming like we've got cis-males on one side and cis-males on the other side, both arguing about things that affect transwomen and females most of all.

I'm very grateful for you and Rolfe's insights. As I said, being a male and having grown up and worked in a partiularily liberal and moderate environment, my experiences seem very different from what you and others describe, particularily in the US.

The above really hit me. I've often said that trans activists are rarely trans and that they are speaking for a group of people who may not even agree with their views. But I had not considered it from the female perspective. Now that you say that, it really does seem like two groups of men arguing over the fate of women while often ignoring them entirely.

 

[Belz...]

You know, I've never had a problem with a pickle jar.

I'm a damn jar solutioner! My mother back in the day and now my wife regularily ask me to open these things. They'll struggle forever while making no headway, and ask me, a weak man with serious wrist issues, to help out, and then I usually just pop the top off without any problem, much to their frustration. Sometimes I just muse that they actually did much of the work but gave up before they'd have succeeded.

 

[Meadmaker]

I am a bit unclear on what it is based upon some of the language I am seeing used in this thread alone.

Is "Trans Identity" the condition of identifying as a "trans" person?
A person who is between genders, so to speak? If so, it is nearly impossible to "deny" that identity, no?

Or is "Trans Identity" the condition of believing oneself to be a gender other than what one is?

The two seem to be used interchangably.

Well, first you have to make sure that you distinguish between gender and sex. I have adopted the official newspeak terminology, in which sex is about reproductive biology, and is described with the terms "male" and "female".

Gender, on the other hand, is a social construct related to masculine and feminine. I could look up the exact wording from a site LondonJohn posted some time back, but not everyone uses the exact same definition. However, it's a social construct, statistically correlated with biology, but not necessarily always matching in the same person.

"Gender identity" is an individuals own deeply held belief that that individual is of a specific gender. A "man" is an adult human that has a masculine gender identity.

That's why I could refer to a "male girl" and a "female girl". A "male girl" is a young person who has male reproductive biology, but has a feminine gender identity.

Or is "Trans Identity" the condition of believing oneself to be a gender other than what one is?

So, keeping in mind the previous definitions, a transgender identity is the identity of someone who has a feminine gender (i.e. is a girl or a woman), but has male reproductive biology, or who has a masculine gender (i.e. is a boy or a man), but has female reproductive biology.

 

[Distracted1]

Well, first you have to make sure that you distinguish between gender and sex. I have adopted the official newspeak terminology, in which sex is about reproductive biology, and is described with the terms "male" and "female".

Gender, on the other hand, is a social construct related to masculine and feminine. I could look up the exact wording from a site LondonJohn posted some time back, but not everyone uses the exact same definition. However, it's a social construct, statistically correlated with biology, but not necessarily always matching in the same person.

"Gender identity" is an individuals own deeply held belief that that individual is of a specific gender. A "man" is an adult human that has a masculine gender identity.

That's why I could refer to a "male girl" and a "female girl". A "male girl" is a young person who has male reproductive biology, but has a feminine gender identity.



So, keeping in mind the previous definitions, a transgender identity is the identity of someone who has a feminine gender (i.e. is a girl or a woman), but has male reproductive biology, or who has a masculine gender (i.e. is a boy or a man), but has female reproductive biology.

I reject that newspeak.
For the purposes of my question, A "Man" is an adult human male, and a "Woman" an adult human female. A "Transman" is an woman "identifying" as a man, and a "transwoman" is a man identifying as a woman.

These terms are accepted, codified, understandable, and proper. Changing terms does not change reality- and conceding to changes in definitions only leads to ridiculous contortions that go nowhere- as the person asserting the change of definition is often actually asserting that the reality is what is different in a bait-and-switch.

That said.
When on is accused of "denying trans identity" are they being accused of denying that a transwoman is a woman? Or are they being accused of denying that a transwoman actually believes himself to be one?

Or can it be either?

 

[Meadmaker]

I reject that newspeak.

Well then, you are on the wrong side of history, or something.

That said.
When on is accused of "denying trans identity" are they being accused of denying that a transwoman is a woman? Or are they being accused of denying that a transwoman actually believes himself to be one?

Or can it be either?

Whatever it means, it's a valid lived condition.

Since gender identity is about the person's internal perception of themselves, it has to mean saying that they don't really have the gender identity that they really have. i.e. If they say their gender identity is feminine, it means they don't actually have a deeply held sense of self that is similar to the deeply held sense of self of other women. That is different from saying anything about what they believe themselves to be. They have an actual gender identity and it can be masculine, feminine, or a some other variations. If their gender identity is masculine, they are a man.

If their gender identity is gender fluid, then they are a man during those times when their gender identity is masculine.

 

[Joe Random]

Well, first you have to make sure that you distinguish between gender and sex. I have adopted the official newspeak terminology, in which sex is about reproductive biology, and is described with the terms "male" and "female".

Gender, on the other hand, is a social construct related to masculine and feminine. I could look up the exact wording from a site LondonJohn posted some time back, but not everyone uses the exact same definition. However, it's a social construct, statistically correlated with biology, but not necessarily always matching in the same person.

"Gender identity" is an individuals own deeply held belief that that individual is of a specific gender. A "man" is an adult human that has a masculine gender identity.

That's why I could refer to a "male girl" and a "female girl". A "male girl" is a young person who has male reproductive biology, but has a feminine gender identity.



So, keeping in mind the previous definitions, a transgender identity is the identity of someone who has a feminine gender (i.e. is a girl or a woman), but has male reproductive biology, or who has a masculine gender (i.e. is a boy or a man), but has female reproductive biology.

As these discussions have plodded on I've come more and more to feel that the attempt to redefine 'man' and 'woman' along some nebulous gender-based lines needs to be resisted. Primarily because it actually makes discussion less precise and leaves far too much room for assumptions which may or may not match others' usages in the discussion.

If 'man' is kept to mean 'adult human male' then 'transman' would still adequately convey the notion of 'female body with male gendered leanings'. All combinations of biology and inner identity still have words we can use to invoke them, and we're not faced with the "well, how are you personally defining 'woman'?" uncertainty that mucks up discourse.

Of course, a big part of me thinks that uncertainty is part of the entire point to some ...

 

[Emily's Cat]

Meadmaker, you really need to add a couple of "/s" bits in there. I'm not sure that Distracted1 will catch that you're not serious. It's too close to the actual serious arguments that have been made in this thread.

 

[Distracted1]

Well then, you are on the wrong side of history, or something.



Whatever it means, it's a valid lived condition.

Since gender identity is about the person's internal perception of themselves, it has to mean saying that they don't really have the gender identity that they really have. i.e. If they say their gender identity is feminine, it means they don't actually have a deeply held sense of self that is similar to the deeply held sense of self of other women. That is different from saying anything about what they believe themselves to be. They have an actual gender identity and it can be masculine, feminine, or a some other variations. If their gender identity is masculine, they are a man.

If their gender identity is gender fluid, then they are a man during those times when their gender identity is masculine.

"masculine" and "feminine" are not identities, they are adjectives. If anything in this conversation is a "social construct" it is those. And they are, rightly, the terms that already exist to describe the characteristics typically associated associated with gender. however, using the adjective that is typically associated with a particular gender as the definition of the gender is a severe case of putting the cart before the horse.

I find it hard to believe that kind of deliberate and obvious obfuscation is not an attempt to cover an attempt to pull an Orwell.

 

[Emily's Cat]

"masculine" and "feminine" are not identities, they are adjectives. If anything in this conversation is a "social construct" it is those. And they are, rightly, the terms that already exist to describe the characteristics typically associated associated with gender. however, using the adjective that is typically associated with a particular gender as the definition of the gender is a severe case of putting the cart before the horse.

I find it hard to believe that kind of deliberate and obvious obfuscation is not an attempt to cover an attempt to pull an Orwell.

Some of us established back in Volume 1 that the entire concept is circular beyond all reason.

 

[Distracted1]

As these discussions have plodded on I've come more and more to feel that the attempt to redefine 'man' and 'woman' along some nebulous gender-based lines needs to be resisted. Primarily because it actually makes discussion less precise and leaves far too much room for assumptions which may or may not match others' usages in the discussion.

If 'man' is kept to mean 'adult human male' then 'transman' would still adequately convey the notion of 'female body with male gendered leanings'. All combinations of biology and inner identity still have words we can use to invoke them, and we're not faced with the "well, how are you personally defining 'woman'?" uncertainty that mucks up discourse.

Of course, a big part of me thinks that uncertainty is part of the entire point to some ...

More clear than I put it. Thank you.

 

[d4m10n]

And a person who never developed any gametes is of course still human . . .

Of course they are. Probably intersex, though, rather than male or female. (Assuming castrati remain relatively rare these days.)

Biological essentialism, not just for right wing freaks anymore!

It is essentialism to observe that the process sexual reproduction involves two distinct types of sex cells?

Is there a right for females transmen to compete in male-only men-only sports?

Can anyone think of a sports league which has a formally stated males-only policy? Manon Rhéaume^WP showed us that the NHL does not, and I'm pretty sure the NFL doesn't need one. Perhaps the NBA?

 

[Elaedith]

I am a bit unclear on what it is based upon some of the language I am seeing used in this thread alone.

Is "Trans Identity" the condition of identifying as a "trans" person?
A person who is between genders, so to speak? If so, it is nearly impossible to "deny" that identity, no?

Or is "Trans Identity" the condition of believing oneself to be a gender other than what one is?

The two seem to be used interchangably.

Basically, identifying as some gender other than the one 'assigned' to you on the basis of your sex.

It used to be that if you rejected gender roles associated with your sex and stereotypes of masculine or feminine traits, you were just gender nonconforming. If you had persistent gender dysphoria you might transition (socially and/or medically) to cope with it. Otherwise you were just gender nonconforming and expressing this helped to break down the rigidity of stereotypes and sex roles.

Now if you are female, describe yourself as a woman, and use female pronouns, you are stating that you identify as feminine (and since gender is often defined as socially constructed roles, that you accept the feminine role). This return to saying that women who are not feminine are not women and men who are not masculine are not men is apparently 'progressive'.

 

[Paul2]

Psychological development itself is a complex interplay of all that, too. Yet we label most beliefs that don’t comport with reality as “delusion.” I don’t think you’ve elucidated exactly what makes a belief that one is not the sex one was born as is not delusional.

A delusion would be thinking that one is actually a woman (in the case of having male genitals), or that one is actually a baby when one is far past age or 4 or whatever, pick a number. That situation is not necessary for gender dysphoria (which, I apologize for, was implicit in my earlier post to which you replied, but I didn't make that explicit, so I am now). One can merely have the feeling - inextricable though it may be - that one's internal sense of gender doens't match one's genitalia without claiming that one is a woman, including having female genitals. In fact, the lack of a delusion is nearly required for gender dysphoria, because it relies on the realistic and non-delusional appraisal of what one's genitals are. Then the mismatch to one's internal sense of gender is recognized.

If a trans person says, "I am a trans woman which means I *am* a woman" and means it literally, not rhetorically, then what I said above may not apply, but I'm not prepared to get into that argument.

Consider someone who believes that the arm they were born should not be there. Very clearly, the arm is normal and should be there. But their brain, for whatever developmental or brain-ial reason, tells them they need to cut that arm off.

Can you explain what exactly is the difference?

I'd say the crucial part of what you wrote is the word, "should." That's different from *is* (not there); that is, it's different from saying the arm is not there, which is clearly a delusion. Saying the arm shouldn't be there is a statement about preference.

Perhaps you could re-phrase your point about "the arm should not be there" to take care of this objection, but I'll wait and not put words in your mouth.