Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

[Ziggurat]

That is where individual vetting comes in.

A women's shelter or prison for example would hopefully screen these people beforehand and make their own calls as to the safety of their residents.

When it comes to restrooms, locker rooms, spas, etc. I guess my policy is if you look like you belong there and you aren't causing a problem, then there is no problem.

This is actually a massive retreat from self ID. I actually find that encouraging, because I think common ground can be found.

 

[theprestige]

There has got to be some rational middle ground that allows people like you to flourish, without sacrificing the safety and wellbeing of females.

I think we're actually there already. Sure, the rational middle ground doesn't quite accommodate violent felons and athletes, but other than that Boudicca pretty much has all the public policy she needs, and public perception is slowly but surely catching up. The biggest risk at this point is the push to get public perception past the rational middle ground and into some pretty irrational extremes.

 

[Elaedith]

This is actually a massive retreat from self ID. I actually find that encouraging, because I think common ground can be found.

I'm not sure that this represents any shift in position, since Boudicca90 said some time ago that she would not be happy with anyone that didn't look female enough (e.g. a transwoman with a moustache) in a female space. Of course, this position excludes transgender people who have not transitioned from access to spaces based on gender identity rather than sex, even though it is often stressed that transitioning is not required to be trans. That's why the term 'trans exclusionary' is meaningless; people who use it often express exclusionary statements, but nobody notices as long as they otherwise profess the correct ideological beliefs.

What this doesn't address is what one does if somebody doesn't 'look like they belong there'. If you are not allowed to challenge anyone who appears to be a male in a female space without fear of being accused of a hate crime, then any such qualifications are meaningless.

Actually I think we have been at this point before: I have a feeling of deja vu.

 

[gnome]

Regardless of the fact that she previously identified as a cisman transvestite, Eddie Izzard now identifies as nonbinary transgender, and prefers the pronouns "she"/"her".

Just as Elliot Page previously identified as a ciswoman, but now identifies as a transman.

In both cases, all that matters is how they identify presently. And to afford them the same rights and privileges (and restrictions) within society as anyone else. Which includes allowing (with caveats) Izzard to use the women's changing rooms and Page to use the men's changing rooms.

No particular objection to anything you've said.

I do notice that I've made an error referring to Izzard as "he". A matter of habit rather than a disregard for her preference.

 

[lomiller]

I am seen as a woman and female by anybody when I'm out in public and am treated as such.

Do you think it's appropriate that men and women are treated differently? How should men be treated, and why should they be treated that way? How should women be treated and why should they be treated that way?

 

[Meadmaker]

You and Meadmaker can keep trying to redefine terms all you want to until you find the magic word that you believe can keep us out. Have fun with that.

Redefine?

I'd be happy to see the terms defined once.

 

[Boudicca90]

And that's essentially what I would like. I think it's entirely reasonable.

But it's also where Self-ID leaves us hanging out to dry. With self-id as a legal policy, the shelters and prisons do not have the ability to screen them out, because self-declaration makes them trans, and as trans they are entitled to be treated as the gender they declare.

Self-id robs both you and I of the right to consent to who we are surrounded with at our most vulnerable. It gives the right to those who fetishize us and wish to use us as objects in their fantasies. I don't want that for me, nor do I want that for you.

I disagree, Self ID never meant there is no additional consideration. It just means that we don't have to jump through all the hoops we currently do when transitioning. That we don't have to deal with gatekeepers who often have their own criteria that we have to try to conform ourselves to their view of masculinity or femininity.

If there is a separate factor that comes up that warrants additional consideration, then that takes priority. In the case of places like prisons and shelters, where you have to live in close proximity to each other for a long period of time, that's a situation where you have to look more closely into a person's past.

The laws here cover this, where the state can deny transgender transfer requests if there are "management or security concerns".

Is there a compromise available? How about if they have a general policy based on anatomy, but explicitly allow exceptions on the judgement of the owners?

What if, for example, all patrons were given a key-card or lanyard that specifies which side they're expected to be in? Then in cases like yours, and that of other true transwomen, you'd have explicit permission from the spa, and the other people in that side of the spa would also be assured that the owners have approved you. It would put a lot of female patrons at ease, it would allow broader use in keeping with a person's gender identity, but ti would also allow the spa to make discretionary exclusions if they don't believe the person in question is legitimate, or if they've received legitimate complaints (not religious fringe complaints, but actual complaints of inappropriate behavior). It would also allow the staff to remove those few bigots who are actually objecting to the existence of trans people altogether. Additionally, nobody would be singled out, since ALL patrons, regardless of their gender identity, would be expected to have a lanyard.

Would that be a reasonable compromise? Or at least a starting point that we could work from?

No, it wouldn't. Because that would require me to disclose my transgender status to the company, forcing me to out myself. All my personal documents refer to me as female, so the only way they would know is if I am forced to tell them.

In situations like shelters and prisons that would be necessary, but if I had to disclose that I'm trans to a spa before I'm allowed to use it, then I wouldn't go to that spa.

It would also run afoul of California law, which protects us from company policies like that. And I agree with the laws here.

What leads you to believe that Yaniv is genuinely transgender?


I don't want to punish people like you because of the existence of Yaniv or white either. But I also don't want to harm females in order to advance your cause. White raped females while imprisoned with them. White had a history of violence and crimes against females.

the reason that White was moved to the female ward was because their self-declared gender identity was considered to be more important than the safety of the female prisoners.

There has got to be some rational middle ground that allows people like you to flourish, without sacrificing the safety and wellbeing of females. What would you propose to keep the Whites out of female prisons while respecting the identity of transgender prisoners?

I can't say for certain of course, but when I look up what I can of Yaniv's past, it does seem like she dealt with gender dysphoria even when she was young. Ultimately I just see her as a distraction, a racist troll who people point to and see her as an example of all of us. I don't care about her.

Karen White on the other hand shouldn't have been put in general population with other prisoners at all. They didn't make a mistake in sending her to the female ward, but as an inmate with a history of sexual assault, she was certainly a risk factor for any inmates, male or female.

 

[Boudicca90]

This is actually a massive retreat from self ID. I actually find that encouraging, because I think common ground can be found.

I'm not sure that this represents any shift in position, since Boudicca90 said some time ago that she would not be happy with anyone that didn't look female enough (e.g. a transwoman with a moustache) in a female space. Of course, this position excludes transgender people who have not transitioned from access to spaces based on gender identity rather than sex, even though it is often stressed that transitioning is not required to be trans. That's why the term 'trans exclusionary' is meaningless; people who use it often express exclusionary statements, but nobody notices as long as they otherwise profess the correct ideological beliefs.

What this doesn't address is what one does if somebody doesn't 'look like they belong there'. If you are not allowed to challenge anyone who appears to be a male in a female space without fear of being accused of a hate crime, then any such qualifications are meaningless.

Actually I think we have been at this point before: I have a feeling of deja vu.

Maybe I wasn't as clear before, I wouldn't be okay with anyone who looks like they don't belong there, but that doesn't mean everybody has to fully conform to a male or female image to be accepted.

A trans woman with a moustache or beard but presenting as female in every other way would be perfectly fine. I have a number of friends like this, who pass perfectly as a woman, but choose to keep their facial hair. I also have a number of non-binary friends who don't easily fit into any category, since they have chosen a mix of male and female traits.

If someone comes into the women's restroom looking like the Brawny man, with no other indications that they might be female in any way, I think anyone would rightfully be concerned.

 

[Graham2001]

Courtesy of Spiked (usual warnings apply)...

Imagine if the leader of a mainstream political party went on TV and said, ‘The Earth is flat’. Or ‘Man didn’t walk on the Moon’. Or ‘Dinosaurs never existed’. You’d think him mad. You certainly wouldn’t feel inclined to vote for him. And yet Labour leader Keir Starmer did the equivalent of this on The Andrew Marr Show this morning. Marr asked Starmer, ‘Is it transphobic to say only women have a cervix?’. Starmer’s reply was positively bonkers. That is ‘something that shouldn’t be said’, he told Marr. ‘It is not right.’

https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/09/26/now-spineless-starmer-wont-even-defend-biological-reality/

 

[theprestige]

Hah! I knew my view of flat-Eartherism would have relevance sooner or later!

For almost everyone, almost all the time, the Earth is effectively flat. Even for those people for whom the Earth is round, it's only round in very limited circumstances, such as actually putting a satellite into orbit. Even airline pilots crossing the Pacific don't need to see the Earth as round, as long as they follow the guidance of their navigational aids. Sure, if they bother to think about it, or even just look out the window, they'll probably notice it's round, but that's not even necessary.

Same with sex and gender. The Earth is certainly round, and biological sex is certainly binary etc. But for almost everyone, almost all the time, gender suffices.

 

[Boudicca90]

Courtesy of Spiked (usual warnings apply)...





https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/09/26/now-spineless-starmer-wont-even-defend-biological-reality/

As much as I dislike Starmer (I was a Corbyn supporter), he is correct here.

Trans men who still have the reproductive system they were born with still have cervixes. So yes, some men have cervixes too.

 

[theprestige]

"Conceptually I'm a man, cervix-wise I'm a woman, glad that's cleared up!"

 

[d4m10n]

A trans woman with a moustache or beard but presenting as female in every other way would be perfectly fine. I have a number of friends like this, who pass perfectly as a woman, but choose to keep their facial hair.

If folks w/ moustaches and penises are supposed to use the women's locker/changing room, we're basically back to anyone can use any room at that point. Which is fine, as long as everyone has that expectation going in, rather than the expectations many of us were given to understand when we were enculturated into the socially constructed norm of separate spaces by sex or gender.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I disagree, Self ID never meant there is no additional consideration. It just means that we don't have to jump through all the hoops we currently do when transitioning. That we don't have to deal with gatekeepers who often have their own criteria that we have to try to conform ourselves to their view of masculinity or femininity.


It would also run afoul of California law, which protects us from company policies like that. And I agree with the laws here.

Self-ID DOES end up meaning no additional considerations. Self-ID means that any person can change their LEGAL sex, essentially at will, regardless of whether it's a true reflection of gender dysphoria or not. And once their LEGAL sex is changed, those services CANNOT deny access to a person whose LEGAL sex is appropriate for the venue.

AFTER they've behaved inappropriately, then MAYBE the venue can toss them out for bad behavior... but at that point the damage is already done. At that point, females and genuine transgender people like yourself have already been harmed.

Self-ID means that Shupe - and any other AGP male - can change their legal sex at will and gain access to all females spaces by default.

Karen White on the other hand shouldn't have been put in general population with other prisoners at all. They didn't make a mistake in sending her to the female ward, but as an inmate with a history of sexual assault, she was certainly a risk factor for any inmates, male or female.

I think it might be useful to think through this a little but more. I understand and appreciate that you want to be supportive, but the timing involved with White raises some questions. White didn't express any transgender feelings or concept of themself as a woman until AFTER the prison announced that it would house inmates on the basis of their gender identity. They only began referring to themselves as a "woman" after that. What makes you so certain that their new-found gender identity is genuine rather than a ruse to gain access to victims?

How would you make that distinction with other prisoners who have just recently "come out" as transgender, like the hundreds in California jails who have just discovered their true transwomanhood this year?

No, it wouldn't. Because that would require me to disclose my transgender status to the company, forcing me to out myself. All my personal documents refer to me as female, so the only way they would know is if I am forced to tell them.

As soon as any other person in that spa saw your penis, your transgender status would be outed anyway. Remember that this proposal wasn't just for you personally, it was for ALL people who use the spa, of both sexes and regardless of transgender status.

Females in the sex-segregated nude section of the spa are going to notice a penis in their midst. A pre/non-op transwoman will be outed the moment they step into the naked-females section of the spa.

At least a lanyard - which all of the females would also be wearing - would give let everyone know that that particular penis is allowed to be in there, so they don't need to freak out.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Maybe I wasn't as clear before, I wouldn't be okay with anyone who looks like they don't belong there, but that doesn't mean everybody has to fully conform to a male or female image to be accepted.

A trans woman with a moustache or beard but presenting as female in every other way would be perfectly fine. I have a number of friends like this, who pass perfectly as a woman, but choose to keep their facial hair. I also have a number of non-binary friends who don't easily fit into any category, since they have chosen a mix of male and female traits.

Can you expand on what you mean by "passing"? I don't think that any female would consider a person with facial hair to be "passing", so I really don't know what you think passing is.

If someone comes into the women's restroom looking like the Brawny man, with no other indications that they might be female in any way, I think anyone would rightfully be concerned.

What would indicate that the person who looks like the "Brawny man" might be female?

 

[theprestige]

Can you expand on what you mean by "passing"? I don't think that any female would consider a person with facial hair to be "passing", so I really don't know what you think passing is.

You know how when it's the early 1980s and you see a member of a traveling rock band in a bar, from behind, and you're all like, "she's kinda skinny for my taste, but dang if I don't love long hair on a woman", and then he turns around an you're all like, "hol' up, that's a dude!"? It's like that, except that the goal back then was to wear one's hair however one liked, without being stereotyped as one gender or the other. The goal today is to prolong the misidentification and misplaced sexual attraction as long as possible.

Boudicca has previously alluded to this phenomenon, of straight men being attracted to a transwoman's feminine characteristics, even if a true love connection never develops due to the other non-feminine characteristics that come to light even if they weren't readily apparent at first glance.

 

[p0lka]

"Conceptually I'm a man, cervix-wise I'm a woman, glad that's cleared up!"

They are gender labels, as long as no ones trying to argue about male and female biology then I'm ok with whatever labels they choose, I wish people wouldn't label themselves though.
Your mileage may vary.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Man who was charged for assaulting a journalist with a club at the Wi Spa fascist/anti-trans rally also under investigation for engaging in violence at other fascist rallies.

He is accused of laying in wait and attacking a prominent local activist outside a courthouse. Also participated in a local Jan6 rally in which he allegedly attacked a counter-protester.

Torrance Police Sgt. Mark Ponegalek said his agency is reviewing an allegation that Simmons attacked prominent left-leaning activist Chad Loder outside the Torrance Courthouse earlier this month. Loder is known for posting information online about right-wing figures at California protests, and has repeatedly accused Simmons of committing assaults against protesters.

Beverly Hills police also confirmed that they had received a report alleging Simmons was part of a group that beat up a counter-protester at a rally for former President Trump on Jan. 6 — one of several to occur in L.A. on the same day that a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol in a failed attempt to prevent Congress from certifying President Biden’s election victory.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-09-22/lapd-arrest-suspect-wi-spa-attack

Simmons had been identified in these prior attacks for some time now, but I guess it takes a lot for LAPD to care about right wing violence.

Anti-trans crusaders find themselves with some strange allies.

 

[Myriad]

Man who was charged for assaulting a journalist with a club at the Wi Spa fascist/anti-trans rally also under investigation for engaging in violence at other fascist rallies.

He is accused of laying in wait and attacking a prominent local activist outside a courthouse. Also participated in a local Jan6 rally in which he allegedly attacked a counter-protester.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-09-22/lapd-arrest-suspect-wi-spa-attack

Simmons had been identified in these prior attacks for some time now, but I guess it takes a lot for LAPD to care about right wing violence.

Anti-trans crusaders find themselves with some strange allies.

"I think Ronald Reagan's policies did long-term harm to the U.S."

"Your ally John Hinckley clearly agrees with you!"

 

[d4m10n]

https://twitter.com/SkylarJordan/status/1442857863769165836