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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Another L for the transphobes in the US

Breaking: A judge says West Virginia can't block transgender girls from being on girls' sports teams.

The judge wrote: "I have been provided with scant evidence that this law addresses any problem at all, let alone an important problem"

The injunction issued today only prohibits West Virginia from discriminating against the plaintiff, an 11-year-old who, while assigned the sex of male at birth, knew from a young age that she's a girl.

But the judge made clear his view: WV's law is unconstitutional in general.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/JanNWolfe/status/1417957648071340034
 
Trans men fight back.

A different perspective.

'As many clinicians and community members such as ourselves have observed, most of the people at the forefront of trans activism are those heterosexual males with AGP - Which they don’t want anyone to know.
As trans men, we wish to step forward and expose this because those with AGP have abused and silenced us for years in order to control the narrative.'
 
In the same vein as Jesse Singal’s piece that offered a comprehensive view of the current state of medical care for dysphoric youth, here’s a rather chilling piece by Katie Herzog. This one addresses the current state of medical school training, and how in some schools politics and ideology are putting practical, evidence-based scientific training and research in peril.

This is actually the second in a series. I have yet to read the first article but it’s linked in the introduction at the top of the page.

Med Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex

Katie Herzog said:
During a recent endocrinology course at a top medical school in the University of California system, a professor stopped mid-lecture to apologize for something he’d said at the beginning of class.

“I don’t want you to think that I am in any way trying to imply anything, and if you can summon some generosity to forgive me, I would really appreciate it,” the physician says in a recording provided by a student in the class (whom I’ll call Lauren). “Again, I’m very sorry for that. It was certainly not my intention to offend anyone. The worst thing that I can do as a human being is be offensive.”*

His offense: using the term “pregnant women.”*

“I said ‘when a woman is pregnant,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant and I most sincerely apologize to all of you.”

It wasn’t the first time Lauren had heard an instructor apologize for using language that, to most Americans, would seem utterly inoffensive. Words like “male” and “female.”

Why would medical school professors apologize for referring to a patient’s biological sex? Because, Lauren explains, in the context of her medical school “acknowledging biological sex can be considered transphobic.”

[. . .]

Medicine is not impervious to trends.

“In the 90s, when I was training, everything was about controlling pain,” said a pediatrician in the Midwest who declined to be named for fear of repercussions. “We were taught that it was really hard to become addicted to narcotics. Look where that got us.”

Around the same time, she says, there was a rash of kids being diagnosed with bipolar disorder, something we now know is exceedingly rare in children. Before that, there was the recovered memory craze, multiple personality disorder, and rebirthing therapy, a bizarre treatment for attachment disorders that lead to the deaths of several children in the U.S.
Click to expand...
 
The first time I heard anyone say that 'Biological sex is a social construct' was around the time Jordan Peterson started becoming prominent. He was on a Canadian TV show and the (physically) male person he was up against used a line similar to that in their rebuttal to whatever it was that Peterson was saying, at the time I thought it was a bizarre thing to say.


Nowadays, well as this article on The Quackometer indicates, it's par for the course.


Prospect Magazine is an “intellectuals'” magazine in the UK covering arts, society, science and politics. Their Summer issue contains an essay by journalist Angela Saini called “What is a woman?”. I wrote a twitter thread detailing how this essay is a good example of a type of argument used to trick people into thinking sex is not a well established scientific concept. This is that (slightly edited) twitter thread…


This is a pretty dire article in @Prospect_uk where journalist Angela Saini falls headfirst into the postmodernist gender vat. I think we need to look at as many errors as we can stand here…


We start off by noting the ideological title – “What is a Woman?” – because make no mistake, the target of the ideology is the elimination of the concept of being a woman in objective terms. Men. Back to your business, no need to worry.
Click to expand...


https://www.quackometer.net/blog/2021/07/on-the-sex-deracination-gambit.html
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Another L for the transphobes in the US
Click to expand...
From the decision in B.P.J. v. West Virginia State Board of Education:
Plaintiff avers that this treatment, which prevents endogenous puberty and therefore any physiological changes caused by increased testosterone circulation, prevents her from developing any physiological advantage over other girl athletes.
Click to expand...
This strikes me as a highly plausible argument, but it's fairly easily distinguishable from the MtF weightlifter in the OP.
 
cullennz said:
Hubbard competes in the Olympic weight lifting tonight.

Should be interesting.


https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/olymp...t-engage-with-cyberbullying-of-laurel-hubbard
Click to expand...

"It would not be unreasonable for Hubbard to place anywhere from third on a very good day to 14th if she again bombs out."

Looks like Hubbard bombed out.

One of the odd things I've seen in discussions of this issue is Hubbard's mediocrity used as an excuse for why we shouldn't be concerned about biologically male athletes competing against biologically female athletes. After all, even Hubbard's best lifts would be well short of winning gold. But it's really not a good excuse. Looking at the male heavy weight lifters in the men's category for the finals, they range in age from 22 to 34. I couldn't find the ages for the equivalent women's category, but the gold medal winner (Li Wenwen) is 22. Hubbard is 43. That's over the hill for the sport, and Hubbard apparently spent many years not training at all. The fact that Hubbard made it to the Olympics at all at that age is likely because of the advantages of a male biology. If a younger male athlete transitions and competes, we may well see someone dominating the sport.

BTW, for comparison, Li Wenwen's lifts were 140 kg snatch and 180 kg clean & jerk, which was an Olympic record for the total of 320kg. The men's Olympic record for the total is 485 kg. 320 kg vs. 485 kg. And before anyone asks, both Li Wenwen and Laurel Hubbard would be in the heaviest weight category for male lifters as well.
 
Aber said:
There seems to be a major split in views in the Green Party.

The Young Greens have asked for him to be removed:

https://bright-green.org/2021/07/18/young-greens-pass-motion-calling-for-termination-of-shahrar-alis-role-as-green-party-spokesperson/
Click to expand...

Wow. Given that the person in charge of Gender GP is currently in the midst of a serious review of their professionalism and business practices with respect to patient safety... Ali's position seems to be a responsible one.
 
Elaedith said:
Trans men fight back.

A different perspective.

'As many clinicians and community members such as ourselves have observed, most of the people at the forefront of trans activism are those heterosexual males with AGP - Which they don’t want anyone to know.
As trans men, we wish to step forward and expose this because those with AGP have abused and silenced us for years in order to control the narrative.'
Click to expand...

And just that quickly, it's been removed. There are other references to it out there, but the letter is gone.

There is a pattern here. When females speak out, they get silenced. Even when those females are themselves transgender.
 
Ziggurat said:
"It would not be unreasonable for Hubbard to place anywhere from third on a very good day to 14th if she again bombs out."

Looks like Hubbard bombed out.

One of the odd things I've seen in discussions of this issue is Hubbard's mediocrity used as an excuse for why we shouldn't be concerned about biologically male athletes competing against biologically female athletes. After all, even Hubbard's best lifts would be well short of winning gold. But it's really not a good excuse. Looking at the male heavy weight lifters in the men's category for the finals, they range in age from 22 to 34. I couldn't find the ages for the equivalent women's category, but the gold medal winner (Li Wenwen) is 22. Hubbard is 43. That's over the hill for the sport, and Hubbard apparently spent many years not training at all. The fact that Hubbard made it to the Olympics at all at that age is likely because of the advantages of a male biology. If a younger male athlete transitions and competes, we may well see someone dominating the sport.

BTW, for comparison, Li Wenwen's lifts were 140 kg snatch and 180 kg clean & jerk, which was an Olympic record for the total of 320kg. The men's Olympic record for the total is 485 kg. 320 kg vs. 485 kg. And before anyone asks, both Li Wenwen and Laurel Hubbard would be in the heaviest weight category for male lifters as well.
Click to expand...

TL;DR: Another trans boogiewoman turned out to be nothing more than anti-trans panic-mongering.
 
Going to the Olympics is a huge deal for an athlete, regardless of medal status. Hubbard took a spot that a female earned.
 
Meadmaker said:
Going to the Olympics is a huge deal for an athlete, regardless of medal status. Hubbard took a spot that a female earned.
Click to expand...

That;s what I said way back at the start.

Emily's Cat said:
Regarding the Olympics, it looks like OIC is revising their guidelines for transgender participation, citing their current rules as outdated.
Click to expand...

That's something we can actually thank Hubbard for. Luckily, her age meant she couldn't dominate as she would have if she were much younger, and it showed the officials that the rules were open to being exploited.

Nice to see the testosterone rule preventing several women athletes from competing in the 800m, so we might have a fair race this year.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Hard to see this going anywhere considering California law makes discriminating against trans people in public accommodations illegal.

Perhaps the anti-trans crowd should stop violently assaulting people and protesting outside a spa, which is simply obeying the law, and take it up with their elected representatives.
Click to expand...

This highlights an issue that the trans-advocates keep pretending doesn't exist.

I mean, first off, it would be awfully nice if females with concerns about female safety and dignity weren't labeled and dehumanized as "anti-trans". Most of us aren't anti-trans in any meaningful way, we just don't think that gender identity should supplant biological sex under the law. At the end of the day, a transman is not actually male, they are female but wish to live their lives as males. Their wish shouldn't be taken to be more real than the reality of male biology. Similarly, a transwoman is not actually female, they are male but wish to live their lives as females... which shouldn't override protections and services that are designed to address female needs - including privacy.

This incident highlights that the desire of transwomen to affirm their gender identity does actually put them at odds with the dignity and rights of females. The transwoman in question desires to be treated as if they are an actual female person, and believes that their genitals are irrelevant. And perhaps to them they are irrelevant. But those genitals are NOT irrelevant to the other females who use that spa, and who use it based on the understanding that the areas are segregated by sex.

Those females did not consent to having a visible penis in their presence while they were nude. To them, this is indecent exposure. It's tantamount to flashing - being forced to view another person naked against their will, especially one of the opposite sex.

Those females did not consent to being viewed by penis-havers while naked. To them, that's voyeurism. It's tantamount to a peeping tom - being forced to allow other people to view them while naked against their will, especially by one of the opposite sex.

Doesn't consent mean anything any more?

Why are we expected to be complicit in destroying our own boundaries, and in relinquishing our right to consent because a male person's desire to be naked in our presence, and to view us while naked, is deemed more important than our right to refuse them?
 
Dismember said:
Good article here by Jesse Singal in response to a low key kerfuffle over Science Based Medicine removing a review of A. Shrier’s Irreversible Damage from their website. The review was written by none other than Dr. Harriet Hall, a regular contributor to the SBM website.
Click to expand...
Finally got around to reading the original book review. Not exactly obvious what Dr. Hall got wrong here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom