Trans women are not women (Part 8)

[Emily's Cat]

They haven't jumped on the bandwagon, quite the opposite. At least in the US, it's been the reactionary's bandwagon all along.

No it bloody well hasn't! Feminists have been opposing this for well over a decade because it has easily foreseeable negative outcomes for females and for children.

Just because you can't be assed to actually listen to what females have to say does NOT mean we haven't been talking!

 

[Emily's Cat]

I like this short tweet from Aaron Kimberly on different types of trans activists.

Never ceases to amaze me that it is so easy to invent an ideology and not only convince people that it's based on 'science', but also that they themselves actually came up with most of it.

It reminds me of the hippies of the 60s and 70s being fed the lie that nuclear energy was a horrible thing and they should oppose it. Which they gleefully did because they were naïve and thought that they had come up with the idea... without realizing that it was being driven by the interests of oil companies.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yes, and making assumptions about how it will be implemented, just as I am.

The law has a private right to sue. Maybe the school feels a less insane way to approach this new law is appropriate, but if the person bringing the complaint disagrees, they can drag everyone to court. Even if the school prevails, litigation itself is a punishment. You don't have to be creative to see the perverse incentives here.

And not a single part of the law can be interpreted by an honest person as supporting the frequent "genital inspections" that you're so terrified of.

 

[Emily's Cat]

What a ridiculous non-sequitur. I repeat, if boys weren't trying to insert themselves into girls' events, there would be no need for all this. You think the girls should just accept being treated like that and not protest?

Girls have feelings and ambitions too you know. There are events for boys. Boys should compete where they belong.

Yes but, you know, those are just, like, personal anecdotes...

 

[Sideroxylon]

Awesome. So now you've downplayed mental health and the serious side effects of it, dismissed a great many people who have problems that need medical attention... AND you've put the cherry on top by calling me dumb because I didn't read your ******* mind. Great job!

Wow.

 

[Meadmaker]

Mental illness is a socially constructed concept with an interesting history and and used with, nuance, prudence and pragmatic definitions with aware compassionate utility in the field of mental health. We can ignore its unreflective weaponised use manifest here.

That is a pretty dense take on what it means for something to be socially constructed.

Wow.

The beautiful irony here is that you started out by complaining of "weaponised use", but you did it in a difficult to understand statement, where it was rather difficult to see what you were really saying. This appears to me to be a deliberate tactic. Hide what you're saying inside something likely to be misinterpreted, and then declare the people who don't see your interpretation to be "dense".

It's kind of a weaponised use of language you have going there.


I see what you mean by "socially constructed", but a much plainer meaning of the phrase would be exactly how people took it. I think you knew that would happen, and now you get to be all pompous and suggest that there's something wrong with people who interpreted your statement exactly how you knew it would be interpreted.

 

[Emily's Cat]

It's not a dodge to point out that the transphobes don't see to give a **** about the vast majority of sex abuse and general abuse in women's prisons that don't involve the anti-trans hobby horse.

The most dangerous people to women in prison are the guards, and it's not even close.

On the other hand, many of who are opposed to this ideology care very much about the abuse of females in prison, and we're well aware that there's a large risk from male guards. We just don't see how adding EVEN MORE MALES into the mix, and putting them in the same cells as the females imprisoned there, is going to help those females in any way at all. Rather, we understand that doing so INCREASES the risk to female inmates above and beyond what is already faced.

Your argument comes across as "Female inmates are already going to get raped and abused, so what a little more rape going to hurt?"

 

[Meadmaker]

And it still goes back to what I said last week.


There's never any substantive engagement.

Sneer. Make up things. That's the way it is.


The core position remains: Trans women are women. They must be treated as women everywhere. Anyone who disagrees is a bastard.

 

[Sideroxylon]

The beautiful irony here is that you started out by complaining of "weaponised use", but you did it in a difficult to understand statement, where it was rather difficult to see what you were really saying. This appears to me to be a deliberate tactic. Hide what you're saying inside something likely to be misinterpreted, and then declare the people who don't see your interpretation to be "dense".

It's kind of a weaponised use of language you have going there.


I see what you mean by "socially constructed", but a much plainer meaning of the phrase would be exactly how people took it. I think you knew that would happen, and now you get to be all pompous and suggest that there's something wrong with people who interpreted your statement exactly how you knew it would be interpreted.

That is some bull crap take right there.

 

[Meadmaker]

That is some bull crap take right there.

Well, maybe, but it sure seems like people misinterpreted your statement, and it sure seems to me that your statement is not an easy one to interpret. It's kind of prone to misinterpretation.

One option when people misinterpret your statements is clarify and explain your statements.

Another option is to call them "dense".

You chose option 2.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Well, maybe, but it sure seems like people misinterpreted your statement, and it sure seems to me that your statement is not an easy one to interpret. It's kind of prone to misinterpretation.

One option when people misinterpret your statements is clarify and explain your statements.

Another option is to call them "dense".

You chose option 2.

I said the interpretation was dense. It was a ludicrous unaware straw man of what the concept means. What I am going to say? Nothing would probably be the best but I could not help myself after such a frothing attack.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

And it still goes back to what I said last week.


There's never any substantive engagement.

Sneer. Make up things. That's the way it is.


The core position remains: Trans women are women. They must be treated as women everywhere. Anyone who disagrees is a bastard.

This is iteration 8 of the same topic. What more is there to say other than to periodically do news updates?

The number of people participating in this cursed thread is quite low and us regulars generally know where we all stand.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I said the interpretation was dense. It was a ludicrous unaware straw man of what the concept means. What I am going to say? Nothing would probably be the best but I could not help myself after such a frothing attack.

Oh I dunno, seems like "That's not what I meant, let me try to say this a different way..." would go far.

Instead of seeking understanding, you chose condescension.

 

[Ziggurat]

I said the interpretation was dense. It was a ludicrous unaware straw man of what the concept means. What I am going to say? Nothing would probably be the best but I could not help myself after such a frothing attack.

Nobody interpreted it to your satisfaction. Perhaps you should consider why.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Nobody interpreted it to your satisfaction. Perhaps you should consider why.

Because you are clueless of what the concept “socially constructed” entails? Fair.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Oh I dunno, seems like "That's not what I meant, let me try to say this a different way..." would go far.

Instead of seeking understanding, you chose condescension.

That’s accurate.

 

[Meadmaker]

I said the interpretation was dense. It was a ludicrous unaware straw man of what the concept means. What I am going to say? Nothing would probably be the best but I could not help myself after such a frothing attack.

It was not at all ludicrous. If you show that statement to 90% of English speakers they would interpret it exactly as she interpreted it.

I know when I first read it, I found your statement jaw-droppingly stupid. However, when in that situation, I examine whether that is possible. For you to say things that are jaw-droppingly stupid would be out of character. It didn't fit. So, I read it again. Slowly. I put it together. I see what you meant.

It wasn't easy, and frankly, most people wouldn't do it. Most people are perfectly willing to assume that if they see something that appears stupid, the person saying it said something stupid. I'm a little different that way, I guess.


Moreover, I think you were very content to have the opportunity to use the response as a basis to insult the reader.

 

[Sideroxylon]

It was not at all ludicrous. If you show that statement to 90% of English speakers they would interpret it exactly as she interpreted it.

I know when I first read it, I found your statement jaw-droppingly stupid. However, when in that situation, I examine whether that is possible. For you to say things that are jaw-droppingly stupid would be out of character. It didn't fit. So, I read it again. Slowly. I put it together. I see what you meant.

It wasn't easy, and frankly, most people wouldn't do it. Most people are perfectly willing to assume that if they see something that appears stupid, the person saying it said something stupid. I'm a little different that way, I guess.


Moreover, I think you were very content to have the opportunity to use the response as a basis to insult the reader.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_constructionism

The root of the concept of mental illness (and illness in general) seems to be “that which we ought to treat” and the ought part is no more than social agreement among health professionals in response to patient and wider thought. In that context consider how homosexuality has moved out of mental illness professional categories.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Transphobes vandalize a school, targeting a teacher:

Newbury Park elementary school sprayed with graffiti amid transgender controversy

A Ventura County elementary school was defaced with graffiti after a local newsletter criticized the school for affirming the gender of a transgender student and now local families and community leaders are fighting back.

The graffiti on Maple Elementary School in Newbury Park appeared early Friday morning. It read "Pervs Work Here." Many people believe it was in response to an article that was published the day prior in The Conejo Guardian with the headline "Third-grade Teacher Promotes Gender Confusion in Classroom."

https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/newbury-park-elementary-school-sprayed-with-graffiti-amid-transgender-controversy/

Groomer smear continues to deliver.

 

[Meadmaker]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_constructionism

The root of the concept of mental illness (and illness in general) seems to be “that which we ought to treat” and the ought part is no more than social agreement among health professionals in response to patient and wider thought. In that context consider how homosexuality has moved out of mental illness professional categories.

If people have to look up a wikipedia article to figure out what you are saying, then what you are saying isn't all that clear.

90% of English readers would have interpreted it exactly the same as EC did, and as I did initially.

You could have clarified and explained. You chose to insult. Your choice.