Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

[Meadmaker]

Joking aside, I respectfully request you get a grip. These anti-trans horror stories are incredibly pathetic.

At some point, it's just an attempt at gaslighting.

Darren Merager is a real person. So is Laurel Hubbard. So are the high school girls in Palatine. Karen White? Real rapist. That academic paper cited by EC? Real journal. (Well...an awful lot of those journals are pretty questionable...) That pregnant man in my last post? Real person. His baby? Really dead.


And talking about these things is "incredibly pathetic" and we need to "get a grip"?

I get it. You fall back to insults, because that's all you've got.

 

[Distracted1]

Recall the discussion from a couple of years ago about a man who checked into a maternity ward in order to give birth, and how the poorly educated staff failed to provide him proper care because they read his chart and just assumed that he could not be in labor.


(ETA: The above is written following the conventions I have adopted for use in this thread, but when I'm in the real world I will tell you that men can't have babies. As with sports leagues and such, if you really, really, want to insist that men can be pregnant, then whatever, but the solution to the problem is to insist that the maternity ward is a place for females, instead of women.)

That is the root of the problem you think you are "solving".
There are perfectly adequate terms (trans-man, trans-women) for people who feel their gender and sex are misaligned in some manner. Allowing the language to be co-opted out of meaning is the source of the problem-not the solution.
Out of sympathy for the people who are having a difficult time dealing with their reality, we allow the discourse to be twisted. The intentions are good, but the outcome is not.
The twisted, meaningless, language is then used to deny the reality it is designed to describe and any "solution" becomes impossible because the problem becomes something that can no longer be described.

 

[Meadmaker]

That is the root of the problem you think you are "solving".
There are perfectly adequate terms (trans-man, trans-women) for people who feel their gender and sex are misaligned in some manner. Allowing the language to be co-opted out of meaning is the source of the problem-not the solution.
Out of sympathy for the people who are having a difficult time dealing with their reality, we allow the discourse to be twisted. The intentions are good, but the outcome is not.
The twisted, meaningless, language is then used to deny the reality it is designed to describe and any "solution" becomes impossible because the problem becomes something that can no longer be described.

Indeed.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

At some point, it's just an attempt at gaslighting.

Darren Merager is a real person. So is Laurel Hubbard. So are the high school girls in Palatine. Karen White? Real rapist. That academic paper cited by EC? Real journal. (Well...an awful lot of those journals are pretty questionable...) That pregnant man in my last post? Real person. His baby? Really dead.


And talking about these things is "incredibly pathetic" and we need to "get a grip"?

I get it. You fall back to insults, because that's all you've got.

Is there any meaningful difference between cherry picking trans criminals and one of Bogative's "black crime" spam threads?

Nobody is claiming that sex crimes don't occur, or that trans people, like all people, are sometimes criminals.

The question is whether adopting trans inclusive policies will lead to an explosion of violence or other antisocial behavior, and whether there is sufficient data (not anecdotes of scandalous individuals) to show that the there is a significant enough threat to justify discriminating against an entire class of individuals.

That's why I keep asking about Canada. It's been years. Where's the evidence of a massive uptick of harm? Not individual anecdotes, but real data. How little evidence of widespread, systematic harm in adopting these policies is required before you would concede that recognizing the rights of trans people is a good policy choice?

There is very real, irrefutable data about the dangers and indignities that trans people face as a result of being unprotected by the law.

 

[dann]

And several of the examples I give are examples of the mainstream of trans-inclusionary advocacy. Pronouns are already a done deal. Equitable representation appears to be well-established, if not entirely normalized. Restrooms likewise. Locker rooms, shelters, prisons, and sports are well on their way. And to nobody's surprise (least of all Louden's), we're already hearing rumblings about the bedroom. Because once you start asserting that gender is more important than sex, you have to get to the bedroom sooner or later.

Amazing!
Apparently, I don't spend enough time in restrooms, locker rooms, shelters and prisons because I haven't noticed any of those things or even heard about them till now. I have heard that there is supposed to be some kind of problem with transexual athletes, but I have only read the headlines, and I personally wouldn't mind if trans athletes would ruin all competitive sports events forever. I don't participate in them and I don't watch them, and I tend to think that humanity would be better off without them.

But tell me more about the bedroom where I do spend time: What exactly is going to happen there, and what does it have to do with transwomen being or not being women?

 

[Meadmaker]

Massive? Explosion?

It only counts if it happens enough to be called an explosion?

And, you are only referring to sex crimes here. I also referred to violations of female modesty, sports results where males defeat females in a women's division, and at least one medical problem.

What would Bogative have to say about those? Hey wait a minute! Bogative isn't even participating here. You nearly tricked me into talking about something with absolutely no connection to the topic!

We get it. As long as the crime stats are low, it doesn't affect you, and those other things are not things you care about even if they were to happen a lot. Alana Smith and "Cubana Angel" are anecdotes. So, who cares?

 

[JoeMorgue]

I could ask why "No I must use this bathroom. No this one and only this one. No not that one" is such a big deal but I'll just be a transphobe "denying their gender identity."

The "Why it such a big deal?" seems to be a question people only ask when it is convenient.

Jesus just everyone do Kegels and learn to hold it until you get back home and get rid of public bathrooms entirely.

 

[Meadmaker]

I have heard that there is supposed to be some kind of problem with transexual athletes, but I have only read the headlines, and I personally wouldn't mind if trans athletes would ruin all competitive sports events forever. I don't participate in them and I don't watch them, and I tend to think that humanity would be better off without them.

It doesn't affect me, so who cares?

 

[Louden Wilde]

You can point out that some people inappropriately assert primacy of gender over sex in debatable context. However, my response was to Louden:



This seems to imply that if you EVER assert that gender is more important than sex in ANY context, then you must believe it is so for all contexts.

And it may be that Louden does not mean that. It is a useful distinction anyway. The fact that some people insist on an unreasonable standard does not make everyone else who advocates wrong. The examples you give are far from how everyone advocates.

theprestige captured what I was saying well. There are well known advocates who are pushing the idea that gender always triumphs sex - even that sex is a social construct. It's not a fringe movement at this point- we've done a fair amount of documentation of that in these threads (which I realize is a lot to take in).

Note - that's how I got into all this - my twitter at that point was mostly biologists - and I happened to see a grad student expressing outrage about someone saying that sex was binary in humans (& using disorders as evidence). I had no idea about the link to trans-activists. I quickly discovered that link and that that this ideology was widely taking hold. I also initially assumed JKR had said something really hateful, rather than (essentially) that sex matters.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I could ask why "No I must use this bathroom. No this one and only this one. No not that one" is such a big deal but I'll just be a transphobe "denying their gender identity."

The "Why it such a big deal?" seems to be a question people only ask when it is convenient.

Jesus just everyone do Kegels and learn to hold it until you get back home and get rid of public bathrooms entirely.

Why do you think trans people want to use restrooms according to their gender identity so badly?

 

[theprestige]

But tell me more about the bedroom where I do spend time: What exactly is going to happen there, and what does it have to do with transwomen being or not being women?

This is an easy one. I don't even have to tell you about the bedroom. You're about to tell me. Consider these propositions, and tell me whether you agree or disagree:

Your gender identity is determined not by how you perceive yourself, but by how others perceive you.

For example, sexual attraction ("in the bedroom"): If you are sexually attracted to women, it doesn't matter if your prospective partner tells you they're a woman. If you perceive them to be a man, and are therefore not sexually attracted to them, this is the determining factor.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Why do you think trans people want to use restrooms according to their gender identity so badly?

Safety and perception of same. The exact same reason EmilyCat doesn't want them to, using the exact same argument, citing the exact same kind of figures, presenting it as the exact same kind of "I'm obviously on the right side because it's a matter of civil rights" way while claiming the exact same unshakeable moral high ground.

Again why should I make you happy over her? Hell if you want to go straight pure utilitarian there's a lot more of "her" to keep happy.

My choices are between "Transphobe" and "Rape enabler" and let me tell you those are both just sooooooooo tempting.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Safety and perception of same. The exact same reason EmilyCat doesn't want them to, using the exact same argument, citing the exact same kind of figures, presenting it as the exact same kind of "I'm obviously on the right side because it's a matter of civil rights" way while claiming the exact same unshakeable moral high ground.

Again why should I make you happy over her? Hell if you want to go straight pure utilitarian there's a lot more of "her" to keep happy.

My choices are between "Transphobe" and "Rape enabler" and let me tell you those are both just sooooooooo tempting.

Are the figures the same? Are the rates of trans people committing violent or harassing behavior in bathrooms the same as the rates in which trans people face the such risks?

All available evidence shows that the trans bathroom panic was entirely spurious.

No link between trans-inclusive policies and bathroom safety, study finds
There is no evidence that letting transgender people use public facilities that align with their gender identity increases safety risks, a UCLA study finds.

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/no-link-between-trans-inclusive-policies-bathroom-safety-study-finds-n911106

How does this factor into a utilitarian analysis?

 

[Meadmaker]

Are the figures the same? Are the rates of trans people committing violent or harassing behavior in bathrooms the same as the rates in which trans people face the such risks?

All available evidence shows that the trans bathroom panic was entirely spurious.



https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/no-link-between-trans-inclusive-policies-bathroom-safety-study-finds-n911106

How does this factor into a utilitarian analysis?

Emily's Cat cited a 2016 study that said the opposite.

Eta:. Not taking a side on the quality of either study. Just noting that "all available evidence" might not include all the available evidence.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Are the figures the same? Are the rates of trans people committing violent or harassing behavior in bathrooms the same as the rates in which trans people face the same danger?

I don't care. I cannot stress how much I don't care.

Every racist has that "X make up Y percent of the population but commit Z percent of the crimes" stat memorized and I don't care about that either.

This isn't a numbers game on the level that makes a difference.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Emily's Cat cited a 2016 study that said the opposite.

I must have missed that, care to provide a link? There's a lot of posts here, I might never find it otherwise.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

This isn't a numbers game on the level that makes a difference.

What's the threshold for a small minority to matter to you? I do concede that there really aren't that many trans people, even compared to other historically oppressed minorities.

 

[JoeMorgue]

What's the threshold for a small minority to matter to you? I do concede that there really aren't that many trans people, even compared to other historically oppressed minorities.

Tell you what. It's exactly the same percent of black people who commit crimes for you to argue to give them separate bathrooms.

You can't play the "oppressed minority" card when the evil oppressing majority is "women."

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Tell you what. It's exactly the same percent of black people who commit crimes for you to argue to give them separate bathrooms.

You can't play the "oppressed minority" card when the evil oppressing majority is "women."

I don't see how the arguments for excluding trans people couldn't be used in the exact same way to argue for segregation by citing black crime rates.

hell, the crime and race statistics actually exist, which is more than the trans bathroom panic mongers ever had.

 

[Distracted1]

I don't see how the arguments for excluding trans people couldn't be used in the exact same way to argue for segregation by citing black crime rates.

hell, the crime and race statistics actually exist, which is more than the trans bathroom panic mongers ever had.

That is logically sound.
I reject the argument that segregating bathrooms is a "safety" issue.

It is a Privacy issue, based upon community standards.

A man who exposes his penis in the presence of a woman or girl outside of very specific sexual or medical circumstances is a pervert in any context. This has been and remains to be the community standard of indecent behavior throughout the lifetimes of every poster on this forum.

Changing the womens' name from Ellen to Ellis does not magically transform this behavior into something acceptable.