Trans women are not women (Part 8)

[shuttlt]

I was replying to Darat, not you. The link in question supported Rolfe's point that the response of women depended on the question that was asked.

It's an old survey that has been pulled out many times over the course of this thread.

And misinterpreted over and over.

My interpretation is that is says that women in general support trans rights. Moreso than men. But it also says that women believe that some of those rights (or privileges?) are gained when certain milestones are met.

Further, opinions are not uniform across all demographics, including age. (This may be because younger people are less concerned with privacy in general, but that would take more research.)

Also, the issues presented are seen differently in the context of trans-men vs. trans-women.

Most of the time when it's brought up, the person who links to it only posts to one aspect of it and ignores the rest.

OK, but Darat was referring to links I posted. When I posted it, I was exclusively responding to the claim that women were coming round to a less trans-accepting position. I'm sure, as you say, much of this has been debated before.

 

[shuttlt]

I'm actually not sure the graphs you provided show that.

First, the poll I pointed out is not a time series, and can neither confirm nor contradict Rolfe's point.

That was just intended to make the uncontroversial point that trans-acceptance seemed to be a feminine thing.

Second, the other polls, the ones with the time series, are specifically about unisex toilets. And women are only seem to favor them if there non-unisex ones are available for as well.

I don't think they speaks one way or another on whether women are "coming around" to Rolfe's point of view.

OK. They were the best I could do in 2 minutes of looking. I haven't seen any data showing that women were coming around. I looked, found all the graphs I could find not turning against trans-acceptance and reported back. If there is some graph showing women turning away from trans-acceptance, I'm happy to take that onboard.

 

[Rolfe]

The polls I could link to aren't especially recent but they were very clear. If you ask a nice cuddly question about kindness and inclusivity lots of people are for it. If you spell out in grim detail what that inclusivity actually means in practice, everything changes. It was going to about 80% against as far as I remember. The poll commissioner had to fight hard to get the second questions in because the institutional screams of "transphobia" started coming. No you can't say that, it's hurtful to trans people. But it's true. Er um kind of yes, OK then, is the short form.

Then of course the TRAs rubbished the whole thing because of "leading questions" they said should never have been allowed. They know they can only get a positive result if people are left in the dark about the implications of their answers. I think since that site stopped commissioning polls, nobody has really pushed it in terms of explaining the actual implications and consequences of acceding to the "do you approve of being kind" question.

 

[shuttlt]

The polls I could link to aren't especially recent but they were very clear. If you ask a nice cuddly question about kindness and inclusivity lots of people are for it. If you spell out in grim detail what that inclusivity actually means in practice, everything changes. It was going to about 80% against as far as I remember. The poll commissioner had to fight hard to get the second questions in because the institutional screams of "transphobia" started coming. No you can't say that, it's hurtful to trans people. But it's true. Er um kind of yes, OK then, is the short form.

OK. I'm happy to take it on trust as to what the polls said. My issue was that saying the more explicitly you phrase the question to include penises the less keen women are on people being in women's changing rooms isn't the same as saying "women are coming around".

Then of course the TRAs rubbished the whole thing because of "leading questions" they said should never have been allowed. They know they can only get a positive result if people are left in the dark about the implications of their answers. I think since that site stopped commissioning polls, nobody has really pushed it in terms of explaining the actual implications and consequences of acceding to the "do you approve of being kind" question.

Yes, the power to decide what is and isn't polled is a powerful power.

 

[Meadmaker]

The polls I could link to aren't especially recent but they were very clear. If you ask a nice cuddly question about kindness and inclusivity lots of people are for it. If you spell out in grim detail what that inclusivity actually means in practice, everything changes. It was going to about 80% against as far as I remember. The poll commissioner had to fight hard to get the second questions in because the institutional screams of "transphobia" started coming. No you can't say that, it's hurtful to trans people. But it's true. Er um kind of yes, OK then, is the short form.

Then of course the TRAs rubbished the whole thing because of "leading questions" they said should never have been allowed. They know they can only get a positive result if people are left in the dark about the implications of their answers. I think since that site stopped commissioning polls, nobody has really pushed it in terms of explaining the actual implications and consequences of acceding to the "do you approve of being kind" question.

It's pure anecdote, but I've had a couple of social acquaintances who don't normally talk about politics suddenly jump into rants on transgender issues lately. One was talking about Lia Thomas. The other about Loudoun County.

My sense is that those incidents, especially the Thomas situation, are making enough headlines that people are starting to see what's going on and either asking questions, or saying, "Hell, no. That is not a woman!"

ETA: I'll add that I think of both of them as very liberal. One of them does occasionally make biting anti-Trump comments. The other was someone who, the last time we talked about a political issue, was defending "Drag Queen Story Hour" at the local library, specifically insulting the people protesting it.

 

[Rolfe]

I always thought it would be the prisons that would peak people en masse. The sheer, vindictive cruelty of forcing women who are already traumatised and often abused, and very seldom violent, to share living, sleeping and washing facilities with an intact male offender who is more often than not a rapist or a child molester without any chance to escape is just plain wicked. That incarcerated women have been raped compounds it. Women's prisons are now stocking up on contraceptives. Women prisoners who try to protest are silenced and shamed as bigots.

One particularly sad story concerned a regular fitness prize in one prison. It was well worth having, containing quite a lot of goodies, and the women would normally compete for it and improve their fitness as they did so. Winning it was a major boost to the self-esteem, even the chance of winning it bucked people up. Then a male was transferred to the prison, barely did any training and just rocked up and walked off with the goodies. The disappointed women stopped training at all. Not rape, not even exposure, but still a blow to the self-esteem of women who needed all the boosts they could get.

But apparently the public as a whole ain't that bothered by prison rapes because they don't happen live on prime-time TV. Sports do.

 

[shuttlt]

Rolfe, I think there is a desire to believe there is a solution to this where, if only trans-women and female-women are exposed to one another, they will both realise that more unites them than divides them etc.. and that they have common ground. My mother made a very similar statement recently about immigration. You see the same desire for the problem to turn out not to be a problem repeated over and over. While it is possible for people to maintain a belief that actually this isn't really a problem, I think people are going to want to be "nice", and believe it. I mean, you have one side saying "look, all we want is acceptance" and the other side saying "no".

From a niceness point of view, the ideal solution would be if the side that said "no" started saying "yes" and, like the resolution of a kids cartoon, it turned out that actually their fears had been groundless. If that solution isn't possible, then niceness is kind of not in the cards. Hard decisions have to be made, and winners and losers have to be chosen. People aren't going to want to accept they have to make that choice.

 

[Rolfe]

You can put it like that if you like. It's back to LondonJohn and his perennial argument of "but if you just replaced "trans people" with "coloured people" see how bad it sounds so you're in the wrong."

Transwomen are male and belong with males. We tried being kiind and accepting, and this is where it got us. Males punching down on females, and crying "I'm marginalised and oppressed, give me what I want!" From post-op transsexuals who had had a couple of years of psychotherapy including training on how to behave so as not to appear out of place in women's spaces (but men made that decision ans didn't ask women for permission) to intact males but still trying to present as female, to hairy-arsed blokes in porn gear taking selfies with their dicks out.

Maybe work a bit on kindness and acceptance so that all men can use the men's facilities without being bullied? (I'm not convinced that happens much, but it's the constant whine. We men are not safe with men so we want to come in with the women, oh and we want to bring any other men who want in with us.)

No. Go away.

 

[Rolfe]

This is good. https://twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1511476945371947010

How on earth can you turn such a self-righteous blind eye to the fact that we are medicalising GNC, gay, autistic and traumatised kids on the basis of, and in order to manufacture evidence for, a faith-based in gendered souls???

 

[p0lka]

Well in that case let's go with the legal definitions.




I realise that the trans lobby is trying to (mis)appropriate "female" as well as "woman" to get around this, but for the moment the definition would be what appears on your birth certificate. Since practically none of these men have had their birth certificates falsified, that should clarify matters.

The legal definitions a la that equality act 2010 also includes the ability to reassign ones sex.

Not under the sex protected characteristics section, but under the gender reassignment protected characteristics section.

Mixing the two protected characteristics was what that scottish court case was about, don't do it.

 

[acbytesla]

You can put it like that if you like. It's back to LondonJohn and his perennial argument of "but if you just replaced "trans people" with "coloured people" see how bad it sounds so you're in the wrong."

Transwomen are male and belong with males. We tried being kiind and accepting, and this is where it got us. Males punching down on females, and crying "I'm marginalised and oppressed, give me what I want!" From post-op transsexuals who had had a couple of years of psychotherapy including training on how to behave so as not to appear out of place in women's spaces (but men made that decision ans didn't ask women for permission) to intact males but still trying to present as female, to hairy-arsed blokes in porn gear taking selfies with their dicks out.

Maybe work a bit on kindness and acceptance so that all men can use the men's facilities without being bullied? (I'm not convinced that happens much, but it's the constant whine. We men are not safe with men so we want to come in with the women, oh and we want to bring any other men who want in with us.)

No. Go away.

I really don't care what bathroom facilities anyone uses. It's not that the bathroom becomes some kind of sexual experience other than a very minor few. If a male who has undergone surgical reassignment uses the women's bathroom, why should anyone care?

My only issue with transgendered individuals is the idea of a born male participating as a female in women's sports after reassignment. The physical advantage creates an unfair proposition.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I really don't care what bathroom facilities anyone uses. It's not that the bathroom becomes some kind of sexual experience other than a very minor few. If a male who has undergone surgical reassignment uses the women's bathroom, why should anyone care?
My only issue with transgendered individuals is the idea of a born male participating as a female in women's sports after reassignment. The physical advantage creates an unfair proposition.

Males who have had orchiectomies and vaginoplasties aren't really the problem, and really never have been.

And for a "minor few" there's a shocking amount of transgender identified male masturbating in the ladies' restroom porn out there. Like, terrifying. Those are some incredibly dedicated "minor few".

 

[theprestige]

I really don't care what bathroom facilities anyone uses. It's not that the bathroom becomes some kind of sexual experience other than a very minor few. If a male who has undergone surgical reassignment uses the women's bathroom, why should anyone care?

My only issue with transgendered individuals is the idea of a born male participating as a female in women's sports after reassignment. The physical advantage creates an unfair proposition.

The same physical advantage is what makes safe spaces for women less safe. Not only that it creates the perception of an increase of risk of less safety. Women can no longer be as comfortable or feel as safe as previously. This is obviously a bad thing for women.

I don't claim to speak for women, at all, but there are a few things that would make me more sanguine about giving transwomen access to women's safe spaces:

1. Mainstream medical consensus that transwomen suffer from a medical condition, for which access to women's safe spaces is an ethically-mandated* part of their treatment.

2. The condition must be diagnosed in, and the treatment prescribed to, the transwoman applying for access.

3. The problem of AGP carpetbaggers is acknowledged, and serious efforts are made to screen them out during the application process.

---
*I.e., the condition is so severe, and the treatment so uniquely effective, that it would be unethical to withhold it.

 

[Meadmaker]

And for a "minor few" there's a shocking amount of transgender identified male masturbating in the ladies' restroom porn out there. Like, terrifying. Those are some incredibly dedicated "minor few".

Really?

I mean, I'm not going to do the research to verify this, but I've only heard of a handful of cases (no pun intended). Yes, I know it happens, but I've heard of a few specific incidents, involving a few specific weirdos.

Is it more than that?

(I'm not sure I should ask. Someone might provide evidence, and I don't know that I want that.)

 

[acbytesla]

Males who have had orchiectomies and vaginoplasties aren't really the problem, and really never have been.

And for a "minor few" there's a shocking amount of transgender identified male masturbating in the ladies' restroom porn out there. Like, terrifying. Those are some incredibly dedicated "minor few".

I haven't known this to be true.

 

[acbytesla]

The same physical advantage is what makes safe spaces for women less safe. Not only that it creates the perception of an increase of risk of less safety. Women can no longer be as comfortable or feel as safe as previously. This is obviously a bad thing for women.

I don't believe this. I think that some individuals are making crap up to justify their own bigotry.

Specifically this.

 

[theprestige]

I don't believe this. I think that some individuals are making crap up to justify their own bigotry.

Coincidentally I think the same thing.

 

[p0lka]

Males who have had orchiectomies and vaginoplasties aren't really the problem, and really never have been.

And for a "minor few" there's a shocking amount of transgender identified male masturbating in the ladies' restroom porn out there. Like, terrifying. Those are some incredibly dedicated "minor few".

There's a shocking amount of females masturbating in the ladies restroom porn out there too if that's what you search for, and are easily shocked.

 

[acbytesla]

There's a shocking amount of females masturbating in the ladies restroom porn out there too if that's what you search for, and are easily shocked.

There's a shocking amount of porn covering almost every conceivable sexual act and a lot of acts you may not have ever thought about.

People seem to try just about anything.

 

[TomB]

There's a shocking amount of females masturbating in the ladies restroom porn out there too if that's what you search for, and are easily shocked.

There's literally porn for everything.

The existence of a quantity of some porn scenarios should not be taken as representative frequency of actual incidence.