Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

[Lplus]

I saw a pithy feminist quote on the 3 stages of reaction to the current strain of trans-activism we're debating.

1. Of course I support trans-rights, what monster wouldn't?
2. Wait, they're saying what? They're demanding what?
3. OMG this crazy (loose paraphrasing here).

Unfortunately, I think there are a lot of people that are going to get hurt by this ideology because a lot of us are unwilling to voice #3 (or don't know about #2)

For the avoidance of doubt, who is the "us" you are referring to?

 

[Louden Wilde]

Thank you--what this demonstrates to me is that you are not, as some posters seem to assert, denying that there is an empirical physiological reality affecting how your sex might be identified, but instead that you disagree with calling your particular combination of factors "male".

I think that's an important point that's been missed by others referring to your opinions here. There is indeed a common grounding in empirical fact.

Of course, the question of how to define sex is still a contentious one but it might be helpful if questions of "delusion" could be put to rest.

Unless you are creationist, it's really not a question at all. We know this is the same process as in other mammalian species (and beyond), so (yet again) we need a definition that works in that context.

We get it, but it's not a valid definition or one with explanatory power.

 

[Louden Wilde]

For the avoidance of doubt, who is the "us" you are referring to?

All of us who see problems with this ideology (e.g. that gender is generally more important than sex, that one can change sex, that children should be encouraged to transition, etc.). It should be feasible to raise these issues without being attacked or dismissed as being bigoted, but that's pretty much what we get.

 

[Emily's Cat]

What you are describing is better termed sexual mimicry. *

Neat link. I recall seeing something about sneaky mating in salmon, although I don't think it was sexual mimicry. I'll have to see if I can find something on google. I vaguely recall that the "sneaky" male salmon mated by looking like a trout instead of a salmon, so they didn't read as competition.


ETA: I think it might have been about Steelhead vs Rainbow male trout. Same species, but the Steelhead are male trout that made it to saltwater and grew larger, the Rainbow are male trout that stayed in freshwater and end up looking pretty much identical to the females.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Last time I checked, having an erection isn't "behavior".

I would hope that erections are not being criminalized.

A male person having an erection in the presence of unknown females and children is generally considered to be exhibiting sexual behavior, which would be either indecent or lewd in the scenario of a sex-segregated spa.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think that's an important point that's been missed by others referring to your opinions here. There is indeed a common grounding in empirical fact.

Of course, the question of how to define sex is still a contentious one but it might be helpful if questions of "delusion" could be put to rest.

I don't think it has been missed by anyone. We all agree on the empirical facts and no one has suggested delusion was involved.

It's just definitions. Boudica insists on using a definition of "female" that includes her. However, she will not actually provide that definition. She also says she won't talk to anyone using a different definition.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I saw a pithy feminist quote on the 3 stages of reaction to the current strain of trans-activism we're debating.

1. Of course I support trans-rights, what monster wouldn't?
2. Wait, they're saying what? They're demanding what?
3. OMG this crazy (loose paraphrasing here).

Unfortunately, I think there are a lot of people that are going to get hurt by this ideology because a lot of us are unwilling to voice #3 (or don't know about #2)

So far as I can tell, that's the normal path for about 95% of people who oppose this brand of trans-activism. The remaining 5% are the religious objectors who actually have a problem with transgender people existing. Most of the gender atheists I know fall at about two-and-a-half. It's sort of "No, this demand is not acceptable or reasonable... and by the way, that small collection of demands over there is outright looney."

The vast majority of the gender-atheist people I know, both male and female, don't have any objection to transgender people. We object to two things: 1) self-id and 2) male-bodied people having access to female-specific spaces/services as an entitlement. Most of us were copacetic with the way things were done previously, where individual transgender people were granted access on a case-by-case basis with the expectation of courtesy and respect among all of us.

 

[Lplus]

All of us who see problems with this ideology (e.g. that gender is generally more important than sex, that one can change sex, that children should be encouraged to transition, etc.). It should be feasible to raise these issues without being attacked or dismissed as being bigoted, but that's pretty much what we get.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[theprestige]

TBF, Boudicca hasn't referred to their genitals as a "female penis". Rather they have taken the approach that the organ has no innate sex of its own, it's just an organ. At worst, the organ inherits the sex with which the person its attached to identifies.

No offense, but this is jargon shenanigans. Jargnanigans? Shenanigon? Anyway, a penis attached to a self-identified female is no different for my argument than a self-defined female penis attached to a self-identified female.

There is no crafty wordplay or clever neologism or precision-engineered context-specific terminology that will prompt heterosexual excitement in someone who perceives a homosexual proposition.

---

And I actually agree that aside from the obvious biological reality responsible for the thing's existence, the organ has no innate sex of its own. After all, some gentlemen do enjoy a good pegging from time to time. The problem for Boudicca is the obvious biological reality responsible for the thing's existence. Even a gentleman who enjoys the occasional pegging from a sexy lady isn't going say that getting railed by a dude is effectively the same thing.

Sexual attraction has got to be the biggest elephant in the room, for the sex-self-identitarian cause.

 

[Louden Wilde]

Another issue with gender trumping sex/self-ID that we've discussed a little is representation. Here in NYC we have some reps called district leaders, that provide a way for folks to get into politics. There has been a longstanding rule that there be an equal number of males and females - initiated by Eleanor Roosevelt and the League of Women Voters.

However, the rule was recently changed to read equal numbers of men and women (i.e. gender, not sex), resulting in the election of a man and a TW, Émilia Decaudin

Decaudin has proclaimed himself a lesbian, and has said that TERFs and truscum can 'suck his girldick'

Note- I've mentioned this before in passing but I thought I'd provide the links

 

[theprestige]

Oh yeah, the representation thing is a whole other level of clown show.

 

[Ziggurat]

I saw a pithy feminist quote on the 3 stages of reaction to the current strain of trans-activism we're debating.

1. Of course I support trans-rights, what monster wouldn't?
2. Wait, they're saying what? They're demanding what?
3. OMG this crazy (loose paraphrasing here).

This happens with a lot of social causes. There's some core cause which has broad support from most people, attempting to address some genuine problem. That legitimate cause attracts crazy people, who see both a means to power and a tool to turn their private unhappiness into a public issue. Those crazies are among the most passionate promoters of the cause, and so can sometimes become unduly influential. But because they're crazy, they overstep and make irrational demands that the public at large is never going to support.

We saw that in feminism, where some of the radicals actually proposed stuff like sex-selective abortion to reduce the male population to a small fraction of the total, and eventually female-only reproduction through lab-assisted gamete fusion. Sure, the idea didn't gain traction, but neither was its proponent laughed out of the room. The environmentalists have their version too, with the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Black Lives Matter had it with the abolish police movement. Probably every cause goes through this to one degree or another.

 

[p0lka]

Thank you--what this demonstrates to me is that you are not, as some posters seem to assert, denying that there is an empirical physiological reality affecting how your sex might be identified, but instead that you disagree with calling your particular combination of factors "male".

I think that's an important point that's been missed by others referring to your opinions here. There is indeed a common grounding in empirical fact.

Of course, the question of how to define sex is still a contentious one but it might be helpful if questions of "delusion" could be put to rest.

I'm waiting for a reply re #449, also...

Wrong. I am female and attracted to males, making me heterosexual. I'm just not entirely the same as cis females.

Your strict anatomical classifications don't mean anything to me.

the highlighted seem to be a denial of reality, haven't had a reply yet so it's still up in the air, delusions have not been ruled out yet.

defining sex is not a contentious issue, it has been clearly defined for ages, being male or female is a biological fact.

Gender is the variable, I don't know why people focus on it so much but if it tickles your fancy be whatever you want.

 

[theprestige]

I saw a pithy feminist quote on the 3 stages of reaction to the current strain of trans-activism we're debating.

1. Of course I support trans-rights, what monster wouldn't?
2. Wait, they're saying what? They're demanding what?
3. OMG this crazy (loose paraphrasing here).

Unfortunately, I think there are a lot of people that are going to get hurt by this ideology because a lot of us are unwilling to voice #3 (or don't know about #2) : (

This actually describes my trajectory over the course of this thread. I started out very much trans-inclusionary. Was really looking forward to some interesting discussions about the hard problems of sex segregation and trans rights. Instead, trans-activism has ended up leaving a very bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Another issue with gender trumping sex/self-ID that we've discussed a little is representation. Here in NYC we have some reps called district leaders, that provide a way for folks to get into politics. There has been a longstanding rule that there be an equal number of males and females - initiated by Eleanor Roosevelt and the League of Women Voters.

However, the rule was recently changed to read equal numbers of men and women (i.e. gender, not sex), resulting in the election of a man and a TW, Émilia Decaudin

Decaudin has proclaimed himself a lesbian, and has said that TERFs and truscum can 'suck his girldick'

Note- I've mentioned this before in passing but I thought I'd provide the links

Yeah, that made me angry. Regardless of how Decaudin feels, they has done nothing to transition in any meaningful fashion. Them's penis is frequently visible printing against they's clothing, Them doesn't appear to have undertaken any HRT. They doesn't even appear feminine, aside from wearing a dress and some make-up. How exactly them is supposed to represent the views and perspectives of females is beside me.

Plus the regressive idea that gender is defined by clothing. <insert many expletives>

And now NYC could feasibly end up with a 100% male-raise and male-bodied set of representatives... and still consider itself to have "equal representation".

 

[Emily's Cat]

We saw that in feminism, where some of the radicals actually proposed stuff like sex-selective abortion to reduce the male population to a small fraction of the total...

Funny that in practice, we see the opposite: sex-selective abortion of female fetuses.

 

[Boudicca90]

The real question is whether strongly hetero males see in you a femininity they are sexually attracted to. Right? It doesn't really matter how strongly you identify as female, if your partner's sexual arousal is short-circuited by your male attributes. There's no point insisting that your penis is a female penis, if his penis simply refuses to get erect for it.

Again, I don't insist it's a female penis. And strongly hetero males are definitely attracted to me and my feminine attributes.

A good example is I recently quit my job as a security officer (my captain kept delaying the shift transfer she promised me and I got fed up) and on my last day, my coworker says that he's attracted to me and wants to take me out. I hesitated and said no, since I didn't know he had these feelings and it took me off guard, but later I reconsidered it after I spent some time with him after work.

Nobody at work knew or suspected I was trans, so when I told him he was definitely surprised (and kind of confused since he was an older guy and didn't know what 'transgender' was) and lost interest. But he was respectful about everything and we are still good friends today. Unfortunately many other guys are rarely kind or respectful.

I've also had other instances where guys didn't know I am trans and when I tell them, they are okay with it. But it's always a roll of the dice and I have to be careful when dealing with men for my own safety.

 

[d4m10n]

I very much doubt that anyone in the club management/staff approved of a patron engaging in lewd acts on their grounds. Being a naked trans woman in a changing area isn't what the alleged crime is here, it's lewd behavior.

The alleged crime is "indecent exposure" and is literally the act of being exposed in a place where you've no right to be exposed.

If your interpretation of CA law is correct, the charges will not stick.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

CHUD from the Wi Spa fascist rally has been belatedly charged with clubbing a journalist in the back of the head.

Prosecutors have charged a suspect with assault in an attack on a member of the media during a transgender rights protest outside a Los Angeles spa this summer, according to court records.

Aaron Kareem Simmons, 30, was charged last week with one count of assault with a deadly weapon other than a firearm, court records show.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-09-20/charges-filed-against-suspect-in-attack-on-filmmaker-at-wi-spa-protest

Fortunately the victim was wearing a helmet, otherwise he almost certainly would have been more seriously wounded in the unprovoked assault from behind.

The masked attacker fled the scene in the back of a car driven by Sarah Stephens, a fringe right wing candidate for governor.

Simmons is a well known local fascist brawler and has committed a variety of violent assaults at other similar rallies.

 

[theprestige]

CHUD from the Wi Spa fascist rally has been belatedly charged with clubbing a journalist in the back of the head.



https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-09-20/charges-filed-against-suspect-in-attack-on-filmmaker-at-wi-spa-protest

Fortunately the victim was wearing a helmet, otherwise he almost certainly would have been more seriously wounded in the unprovoked assault from behind.

The masked attacker fled the scene in the back of a car driven by Sarah Stephens, a fringe right wing candidate for governor.

Simmons is a well known local fascist brawler and has committed a variety of violent assaults at other similar rallies.

Enh. I can't get too worked up. Modern journalists in the west are all crypto-communist or communist-adjacent. Smacking them upside the head for their murderous ideology is probably a public service at this point. Hopefully this guy will get a slap on the wrist.