Trans women are not women (Part 8)

[p0lka]

I've shared my views at great length, over several years, in this thread. In fact, in answering your question I would just be reprising answers I've already given in this thread to similar questions. Even so, I'd be happy to share and share alike our views on transwomen competing in sports as women versus transmen competing as men.

Are you interested in such mutual sharing? If you are, say so. I'll take you at your word and give you my answer. And then you'll give me yours.

Well you asked me several questions which I gave honest answers to,

I asked you one, to which I got no reply.

 

[Rolfe]

Thomina is wandering around around the changing room with her vagina exposed. This is upsetting the boys.

If the reason to not like communal rooms is 'ooh sexual organs' then fair enough. if it's one type of sexual organ you have an issue with then that's your chip on your shoulder.

No.

Also, it is not possible for a woman to expose her vagina. It is a completely internal organ. You might as well suggest she expose her uterus, or her liver come to that. The sheer ignorance exemplified in that comment really makes me wonder how much you actually know about any of this, or alternatively how serious your participation in this thread is.

 

[p0lka]

No.

Also, it is not possible for a woman to expose her vagina. It is a completely internal organ. You might as well suggest she expose her uterus, or her liver come to that. The sheer ignorance exemplified in that comment really makes me wonder how much you actually know about any of this, or alternatively how serious your participation in this thread is.

my chip on the shoulder comment was not well thought out by me and I feel a bit daft, I apologise.
re your exposing comment, I hope you know what was meant, maybe I should have said 'outside vagina' for the pedantic?

 

[Meadmaker]

No.

Also, it is not possible for a woman to expose her vagina. It is a completely internal organ. You might as well suggest she expose her uterus, or her liver come to that. The sheer ignorance exemplified in that comment really makes me wonder how much you actually know about any of this, or alternatively how serious your participation in this thread is.

To be fair, I'll bet the most common word for people to use when talking about visible lady parts in somewhat polite company is "vagina", even though that word is not accurate. It is how people talk.

I think most people would say that "vulva" sounds kind of crude.

Which is...weird, but I think for a fair part of my young life, actually acknowledging the existence of lady parts was considered kind of crude. People still talked about "penis envy" as if it were a real thing, and said that men have penises, and women don't have penises.

I think that is going away, which is almost certainly a good thing.

So, anyway, I think it's ok to correct people who use inaccurate, though common, terminology, but it doesn't actually suggest ignorance of the topic. It reflects some strange linguistic history and a very common way of referring to female sexual organs.

 

[Rolfe]

my chip on the shoulder comment was not well thought out by me and I feel a bit daft, I apologise.
re your exposing comment, I hope you know what was meant, maybe I should have said 'outside vagina' for the pedantic?

There is no such thing as an outside vagina. The vagina does not have any outside part, it is an interior organ. The most you will see of a woman's genital organs when she's getting changed or even walking around naked is the front part of the outside of the exterior labia of the vulva. Which isn't much.

Women don't go around flaunting their genitals in public and one of the reasons is that they pretty much can't, without getting into contortionist territory. The idea that a man walking around in a women's changing room with his penis and testicles in full view is no different from a woman walking around without covering up is presposterous. First, it's a female changing room, we expect other women to be naked there and we do not expect men to be naked there. And second, women don't do exhibitionism and incedent exposure in changing rooms. Men who get into women's changing rooms are genenally there for precisely that purpose.

 

[Rolfe]

To be fair, I'll bet the most common word for people to use when talking about visible lady parts in somewhat polite company is "vagina", even though that word is not accurate. It is how people talk.

I think most people would say that "vulva" sounds kind of crude.

We need to use anatomical terms accurately, otherwise serious misunderstandings will inevitably ensue. If people don't like the word vulva (which is less crude than vagina, given the context) then find a suitable euphemism. Indeed, since you can't even see most of the vulva when a woman is walking around naked, then even that isn't entirely appropriate. In reality, a woman getting changed or walking around isn't flashing her vulva either. That would require some contortion with intent.

Anatomy being what it is, you simply can't see much of a woman's genitals when she's just walking around or getting changed. Nobody in a changing room will spread her legs to expose the vulva in its entirety. There's nothing a woman can realistically do that compares to what a man can do when he wants to expose himself to women and cause offence.

 

[sophia8]

Thomina is wandering around around the changing room with her vagina exposed.

Now that would be a neat trick!
I'm assuming you mean 'vulva'? The vulva is the porch, which can be admired from a distance; the vagina is the inner hallway where viewing is by invitation only.

 

[theprestige]

Well you asked me several questions which I gave honest answers to,

I asked you one, to which I got no reply.

I asked you the same question you asked me. To me, it seemed like you kept avoiding that question. Hence the impasse. If you don't want to answer the question you asked me, say so and I'll move on.

 

[Rolfe]

Now that would be a neat trick!
I'm assuming you mean 'vulva'? The vulva is the porch, which can be admired from a distance; the vagina is the inner hallway where viewing is by invitation only.

Even the vulva can't be seen as such in a woman just walking around. You can see about the anterior third of the outside of the labia majora, that's about it. No woman in a changing room will spread her legs in a way that allows even other women to see any more of it.

I get pretty narked about this constant attempt to paint women as having the same exhibitionist tendencies as men. And the same sexual aggression towards strangers as many men exhibit. There are posters here who counter every complaint about the bad behaviour of men with "well what about the women who do that too?"

How to tell us you don't know anything about women without actually saying you don't know anything about women.

 

[Ziggurat]

It's naïve to think that the risk and the dynamic is identical between males and females. You stick one male into a female changing space, and the male represents a danger and a risk to all of the females in that space. You stick one female into a male changing space, and the males all represent a danger and a risk to that single female.

In addition to the asymmetry of risk, it’s also worth pointing out that there is an asymmetry of consequences as well. Men cannot be impregnated, many women can. Furthermore, the risk of STD transmission is also lopsided: it is easier for a male to infect a female with an STD than for a female to infect a male.

 

[Emily's Cat]

my chip on the shoulder comment was not well thought out by me and I feel a bit daft, I apologise.
re your exposing comment, I hope you know what was meant, maybe I should have said 'outside vagina' for the pedantic?

Vulva. The term is Vulva.

Or be euphemistic and call it a coochie, a lady-garden, whatever.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I get pretty narked about this constant attempt to paint women as having the same exhibitionist tendencies as men. And the same sexual aggression towards strangers as many men exhibit. There are posters here who counter every complaint about the bad behaviour of men with "well what about the women who do that too?"

Agreed. Females simply do NOT exhibit anywhere near the same level of sexual deviancy and paraphilia, nor do we use or sex as a means to dominate or intimidate, and we have incredibly, infinitesimally lower levels of sexual aggression.

And while it would be very nice to be able to educate that tendency out of males, I doubt it's feasible. The male tendency toward aggression and sexual domination is pretty much the standard for mammals, with extremely few exceptions.

And I get thoroughly incensed at the " oh chicks do it too!" game that gets played when the topic of safety from sexual offending comes up.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

JK Rowling back in the news doing her TERF thing, this time in response to indications that the Scottish Parliament is about to move forward with the long delayed plans to reform their gender recognition process:

The existing gender recognition process means applicants have to be medically diagnosed as having gender dysphoria, go through a minimum two year process and be aged over 18.

The reforms mean trans people would no longer need to provide medical reports or evidence, and the process would be quicker and made available to those aged 16 and over.

In a tweet, Rowling said: "The law @NicolaSturgeon's trying to pass in Scotland will harm the most vulnerable women in society: those seeking help after male violence/rape and incarcerated women.

...



Ms Sturgeon added: "It doesn’t give trans people any more rights, nor does it take away from women any of the current existing rights under the Equality Act.

"There was a plea [in Parliament] to have a debate that was civilised, that was respectful of different opinions, but that didn’t give inadvertently sucker to those – and I’m not describing anybody like JK Rowling or anyone else in this way for the avoidance of doubt – to exploit this issue for purposes of prejudice and transphobia.”

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-fundamentally-disagrees-with-jk-rowling-gra-tweet-3600482

 

[Emily's Cat]

JK Rowling back in the news doing her TERF thing, this time in response to indications that the Scottish Parliament is about to move forward with the long delayed plans to reform their gender recognition process:



https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-fundamentally-disagrees-with-jk-rowling-gra-tweet-3600482

It's an absolutely horrible law, which invalidates existing laws which treat sex as a protected characteristic. It places females at risk and effectively dismantles all protections intended to prevent harm to females.

Nothing Rowling said is in any way offensive or bigoted.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

It's an absolutely horrible law, which invalidates existing laws which treat sex as a protected characteristic. It places females at risk and effectively dismantles all protections intended to prevent harm to females.

Nothing Rowling said is in any way offensive or bigoted.

I wonder if she'll sell off her Scottish mansions in protest. There's always England, the bastion of TERFdom, waiting to welcome her home.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Mostly advantage. A person born male will always have some degree of advantage over people born female at the elite level of sports. It’s just simple biology.

More broadly, it’s about fairness. Leagues, associations, etc don’t allow athletes to have a certain amount of hormones or other PIDs in their blood. Why do they make an exception specifically for transgender people? IOW, transwomen are allowed to have a higher level of testosterone than ciswomen. There’s one rule for a class of competitors and another rule for another class of competitors -but they are all competing against each other. One could even make the argument that it’s discriminatory against ciswomen.

He plans on dominating the WNBA

 

[Meadmaker]

Even the vulva can't be seen as such in a woman just walking around. You can see about the anterior third of the outside of the labia majora, that's about it. No woman in a changing room will spread her legs in a way that allows even other women to see any more of it.

I get pretty narked about this constant attempt to paint women as having the same exhibitionist tendencies as men. And the same sexual aggression towards strangers as many men exhibit. There are posters here who counter every complaint about the bad behaviour of men with "well what about the women who do that too?"

How to tell us you don't know anything about women without actually saying you don't know anything about women.

I see it as a symptom of some misapplication of women's rights demands, and the push for "equality" in general.

Since the dawn of civilization, people have said, "Women are different from men, so women shouldn't be allowed to......" It has only been about 50 or 60 years ago that most nations/cultures/governments really started questioning that. They rapidly recognized the statement was BS. Unfortunately, some people got the really awful idea that the problematic part of the statement was "women are different from men". So, any policy proposal or just statement of behavior patterns that assert a difference between typical men or typical women is met with some sort of "Aha! Sexism!" response.

Well, physically, women really are different from men, in ways that are at least in some circumstances incredibly important. Behaviorally, typical women are somewhat different from typical men.

The trans ideology of "trans women are women" has taken this to an extreme, but muddled, length. There are, apparently, no physical differences between women and men, and it is, apparently, wrong to claim that there are behavioral differences, and yet it incredibly important to recognize someone as being one or the other, despite not recognizing the elements that would make that recognition significant.

 

[Meadmaker]

We need to use anatomical terms accurately, otherwise serious misunderstandings will inevitably ensue. If people don't like the word vulva (which is less crude than vagina, given the context) then find a suitable euphemism. Indeed, since you can't even see most of the vulva when a woman is walking around naked, then even that isn't entirely appropriate. In reality, a woman getting changed or walking around isn't flashing her vulva either. That would require some contortion with intent.

Anatomy being what it is, you simply can't see much of a woman's genitals when she's just walking around or getting changed. Nobody in a changing room will spread her legs to expose the vulva in its entirety. There's nothing a woman can realistically do that compares to what a man can do when he wants to expose himself to women and cause offence.

In principle, I agree. I just don't think we should be overly harsh toward people who follow conventional societal language choices, despite being wrong. If someone is using the wrong terms, it doesn't really say very much about their knowledge or seriousness about the topic of trans rights.

 

[Rolfe]

We can still explain correct terminology and hope at least some people catch on. It's actually quite serious when the name of a part of the body becomes misappropriated and misused, as it can lead to medical misunderstandings. The difference between "stomach", "belly" and "abdomen" is quite important too, although often confused.

 

[Rolfe]

If a man wanders around naked in front of women, ostantatiously displaying his genitals, this is an act of aggression and intimidation, and women know it. Even if the man has grown his hair long and is calling himself Lia.

If a woman wanders around naked in front of women, she's looking for the soap or her left sock or something. She isn't in a position to ostentatiously display her genitals, because female anatomy doesn't allow it, and it's not something that would even occur to her to do anyway. And this doesn't change even if the woman in question is lesbian.

Men who assume that women's behavour patterns are the same as men's and that women somehow manage to ape men's sexual aggression and intimidating behaviour among themselves are merely displaying their ignorance.