Cont: Trans women are not women (IX)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Emily's Cat said:
I need a jargon-to-human translation of this. : confused :
Click to expand...

Well, "exo-libertarian" is a term I just coined, for my philosophical view that individual freedom and individual property are the moral default; and that generally people should be free to do whatever they want, whenever they want; and that this should be infringed upon only as much as absolutely necessary to establish and sustain a civil society of free individuals. Pure libertarianism is unworkable, but it should be the starting point for establishing a workable community. Thus, "from libertarianism". In the context of this thread, it marks my boundary between championing freedom of gender expression and wholeheartedly accepting people who choose genderqueer expressions, and demanding strict scrutiny the moment people insist those expressions should create obligations for everyone else.

And "Chesterton's fence conservative" refers to the principle that a fence across a road probably means someone wanted something fenced in or out, and that you shouldn't remove the fence to make the road more convenient, without understanding why the fence was erected in the first place. It's not very relevant to the context of this thread. However, I will note that gender norms have evolved in society over thousands (maybe tens of thousands) of years, and are almost certainly rooted in the physical disparities between males and females. Abolishing them wholesale, especially as a matter of blind faith that we must be better off without them, is something I am opposed to. At least as a matter of public policy. Obviously this perspective is in tension with my exo-libertarian perspective. So my boundary between welcoming individual freedom of gender expression, but strongly resisting changes in public policy relating to sex-segregation, is also a compromise between those two values.

"Nihilist", "humanist", and "laissez-faire" aren't really relevant at all here, and can be unpacked some other time and place (or not).
 
Vixen said:
You haven't really explained in which way is it 'natural' for a male to say, wear trousers and have short hair, or even strut down the street saying, 'Hello, darling,' at every woman he meets'. Surely this is learned, imitated, behaviour.
Click to expand...

My bad. I didn't realize it was an open question. Gender expression as a social construct, and queering that expression, isn't what the "fuss" is about, in this thread.

We're talking about whether gender self-expression should create obligations for anyone else. And, perhaps more importantly, we're talking about whether gender self-expression should create an entitlement to transcend sex segregation, especially in public policy.

That's what the fuss is about.
 
Vixen said:
Surely, most cross dressers just do it in private or at special parties. A man who simply dons a dress and high heels, with a dash of lipstick rarely looks female, so no-one would approve such a person, say, using a public female toilet (but there is nothing to stop them really). A genuine transgender person who is convinced they are of the sex opposite to that assigned at birth or by culture would have long adopted the mannerisms and personna of their assumed sex. My ex-sister-in-law who was a lesbian who dressed as a male, had all of the male mannerisms down to a T, including the way she walked, her hairstyle, the way she held a cigarette. It is nothing like a woman who dons a tuxedo for a charity ball as a chic fashion statement, as they usually make sure they dress 'male' comme les garcons but with stilettos.
Click to expand...
You really have no idea what you're talking about here.
 
Vixen said:
Surely, most cross dressers just do it in private or at special parties. A man who simply dons a dress and high heels, with a dash of lipstick rarely looks female, so no-one would approve such a person, say, using a public female toilet (but there is nothing to stop them really).
Click to expand...

That's exactly what's happening. People who declare themselves to be trans, but who still LOOK male, are trying to use female facilities, and demanding accommodation. And activists are demanding that they be accommodated. So you're wrong about "no-one would approve".

A genuine transgender person who is convinced they are of the sex opposite to that assigned at birth or by culture would have long adopted the mannerisms and personna of their assumed sex.
Click to expand...

And this brings us to one of the primary points of conflict: what even counts as a "genuine" transgender person? The activists want "self ID", which means anyone who says they are trans is trans. And a lot of the pushback is precisely that this doesn't suffice.

So how do you want to make that determination? And are males with autogynophilia "genuine" transgender people if they adopt the mannerisms and personna of their assumed sex? Should they be allowed to go into female locker rooms with their "lady dicks"? And aren't mannerisms and personna just social constructs anyways?

I don't think you've really thought much about this problem.
 
Vixen said:
A man who simply dons a dress and high heels, with a dash of lipstick rarely looks female, so no-one would approve such a person, say, using a public female toilet...
Click to expand...
I really think you should ponder some of the questions we've already dealt with upthread.

  1. Darren Merager would like access to a spa floor reserved for women in the nude. Should they be allowed to do so?
  2. Andraya Yearwood would like to compete against people who do lack the athletic advantages of male puberty. Should they be allowed to do so?
  3. Danielle Muscato wants access to women's restrooms. Should they be allowed to do so?
From a public policy and lawmaking perspective, the answer to all these questions has been yes, but as skeptics we're allowed to second guess.
 
Vixen said:
Male and female are indeed biological facts. However, the behaviours associated with them are to a large extent to do with nurture than nature.
Click to expand...
Glad to see your recognition of some "biological facts", and your "large extent" qualification; almost enough for me to see that as a couple of marks in your favour ... ;)

Though it does leave hanging a number of devils in the details - WHICH facts, and to WHAT extent?

Relative to the former, do you accept, or not, the standard biological definitions for the sexes? To wit:

male (adjective): Of or denoting the sex that produces gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.
Click to expand...

https://www.lexico.com/definition/male

female (adjective): Of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes
Click to expand...

https://www.lexico.com/definition/female

You "think" a transwoman can produce, can EVER produce ova? No tickee, no washee.

As for the latter, no doubt many behaviours are entirely socially constructed - like pink and blue clothes for babies. But many others - like breast feeding - are pretty solidly based on brute biological facts. Even if many transwomen try their hands at the latter, even if the ethics and the resulting "milk" are rather suspect at best.

Fairly decent article at Fourth Wave Now that argues there's really only a 30% overlap between traits typical of adult human females and those typical of adult human males. Moot exactly how much each of those traits are due to biological factors, and how much due to sociological ones - nature versus nurture. But some evidence - that the authors and links go into some detail on - that the contributions of the biological to behaviours, to our personalities (AKA, "gender") are significant and hardly trivial:

https://4thwavenow.com/2019/08/19/n...r-thoughts-on-the-concept-of-gender-identity/
 

Attachments

  • FourthWaveNow_BornInWrongBody1A.jpg
    FourthWaveNow_BornInWrongBody1A.jpg
    73.2 KB · Views: 8
d4m10n said:
[*]Darren Merager would like access to a spa floor reserved for women in the nude. Should they be allowed to do so?
Click to expand...

There is a quite simple answer to this; one that many sports clubs such a golf, croquet and lawn bowls use.

The Spa could become a club that requires membership to be allowed to enter the premises. Such membership could be free or could attract a nominal fee. In order to become a member, you have to apply, and your application must be supported by nomination from two (or more) existing club members. Then, a committee would then vote to approve or reject the application. No justification need be given for rejecting any application, and the committee's decision is final. Membership can be terminated without justification, by a majority at a member's meeting.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
There is a quite simple answer to this; one that many sports clubs such a golf, croquet and lawn bowls use.
Click to expand...

Nah. Merager will just sue that it's a transparent ploy to deprive him of his trans rights. The judge will grant a stay, prohibiting the spa from making any such changes until the suit is resolved. Trans rights activists will raise funds to contest the case and fight any appeal, while doxxing and canceling everyone they can find who's at all connected to the ownership or defense of the spa. Meanwhile BLM/antifa will make sure to vandalize the property repeatedly. There will be death threats, and threats of arson.

Ultimately the owners will opt to close the business and try to retire into obscurity somewhere far away from the whole mess. This will be hailed as a victory for trans rights, not only in the "classic" trophy-taking sense of gutting an institution and wearing its carcass as a skin suit while demanding respect, but also in the sense of its chilling effect on any other institution that might consider pushing back against "trans rights".

After that, the next goal will be to bring suits against all the institutions that have already adopted your simple answer, and are crossing their fingers that they'll be allowed to grandfather in their anti-trans policies, rather than being canceled themselves if they don't reform.
 
Ziggurat said:
I'm going to disagree with smartcooky and say that there's some truth to this. However, it's also irrelevant, and at the end of the day my disagreement with him is primarily a technicality. But let's get into that technicality.

Society is a social construct (obviously). Laws are a social construct. Schools are social constructs. But... so what? Why is that a bad thing? Social constructs are often very GOOD things. We need social constructs in order to have a society, to not live lives that are nasty, brutish, and short. So something not being "natural", or being a social construct, isn't actually any kind of mark against it.

Now, perhaps what you really mean is arbitrary. People chafe at arbitrary requirements and restrictions, because they're generally considered unnecessary or even harmful. But sex segregation, while perhaps not "natural", is absolutely not arbitrary. It is a response to something that IS natural, namely sex differences. Sex segregation in sleeping accommodations is a way to minimize certain problems that can arise from those natural sex differences. It has utility. It accomplishes a beneficial purpose. It is not, on balance, harmful. So calling it "unnatural" or "socially constructed", while perhaps accurate in some sense, is also completely irrelevant.



No, actually it's pretty easy. Sports are segregated on the basis of sex, not gender, because sex, not gender, is what provides males with physical advantages. Some of those advantages are lessened with hormone therapy/castration, but not all of them. Sports leagues should not be required to accommodate people who choose to reduce their own athletic capabilities. That would be like allowing a 30 year old to compete in a seniors league because he's a smoker.
Click to expand...

Which advantages inherent to males can not be lessened? I suppose something like height, but if height is an issue in a sport it can be regulated the same way weight is in many sports.
 
stanfr said:
Which advantages inherent to males can not be lessened? I suppose something like height, but if height is an issue in a sport it can be regulated the same way weight is in many sports.
Click to expand...

Muscle mass (reduced but not equalized by hormones), fast twitch muscle fibres, skeleton/bones (length, thickness, structure), heart and lung capacity.
 
d4m10n said:
What would it mean—for public policy or for your own take on trans issues—if neuroscientists someday discovered a hypothetical brain structure which is basically the same in cisgender women and transgender women, but hardly anyone else?

(I really don't expect this will happen, given what we've seen so far.)
Click to expand...

Interpreting brain research is complicated due to neuroplasticity. If a similarity was found in transwoman who had transitioned, it could be a consequence of transitioning. If a difference was found in children prior to the development of gender dysphoria or transgender identification, it would be more convincing as a biological basis for some type of feeling about identifying as one sex or the other. It still wouldn't answer how the identity comes about because identity is a form of self-perception that develops over time.

It's also complicated because this research is typically with those who have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, but this is not now treated the same as trans identity. However, the typical definition of 'being transgender' without dysphoria is difficult to separate from simply being gender non-conforming (not identifying with the gender 'assigned on the basis of sex'). Although activists will often deny this, they can't produce a coherent definition of 'not identifying with a gender' that is different from simply having a personality that doesn't match sex stereotypes, or explain why this means somebody needs to change their sex characteristics. So a person's feeling that they don't conform to sex stereotypes for example, may reflect the fact that they do actually have some type of gender atypical, biologically influenced traits (which could potentially be reflected in some subtle brain features). However, social factors might influence whether they interpret this as 'being another gender'. So you would really need to control for people who regard themselves as gender non-conforming but don't identify as trans.

I don't think it would have any direct implications for public policy. The most useful application might be if it helped to identify whether or not childhood dysphoria is likely to persist.
 
Last edited:
stanfr said:
hmm, that may be true in population studies, but I think there are nuances that might negate the advantage. For example, see this article:

muscle fiber in athletes
Click to expand...

Interesting but irrelevant. What matters in weightlifting is how much the competitor can lift not how they do it. For example, the women's Olympic record holder in the clean and jerk 64kg class lifted 134kg. This would not appear in the top 150 lifts for the mens Olympic clean and jerk in the 61kg class (the record is 172kg)
Its a simple fact of biology... Men are physically stronger than women. If any one of the top 150 male lifters were to decide he felt he was a woman and competed against women lifters, he'd win every competition he entered and set unbreakable records. Women would be shut out of any chance of winning in their own sport
 
Last edited:
... Until he started artificially downgrading his physical potential until he was only beating women at the politically correct rate.

Because that's what excellence in athletic competition is all about: Making sure to not try as hard as you can, so you can dominate an easier category, but not too much. /s
 
stanfr said:
Which advantages inherent to males can not be lessened? I suppose something like height, but if height is an issue in a sport it can be regulated the same way weight is in many sports.
Click to expand...

Lung capacity, heart size, and Q-angle of the knee, for example. Hormone treatment does nothing to alter these. I believe neuromuscular efficiency advantage remains as well, though I see much less attention paid to this in most discussions of such issues, so I'm not 100% certain.
 
Ziggurat said:
Lung capacity, heart size, and Q-angle of the knee, for example. Hormone treatment does nothing to alter these. I believe neuromuscular efficiency advantage remains as well, though I see much less attention paid to this in most discussions of such issues, so I'm not 100% certain.
Click to expand...

Plus bone structure, density and size which translates to height and reach - definite advantages in almost any...

Contact team sports
The Football codes (Soccer, American, Canadian, Gaelic, Australian rules, rugby) as well as ice hockey, lacrosse, hurling and water polo

Contact individual sports
Wrestling, boxing, Thai boxing, MMA

Non-contact sports
Basketball, Netball Volleyball, Team Handball and Track & field.
 
Last edited:
Interesting article by Dr Julia Mason on the suppression of dissent by the AAP on the issue of youth gender medicine, and their fondness for Jack Turban's work.

The American Academy of Pediatrics’ Dubious Transgender Science

"The AAP has been giving Dr. Turban a platform for years, despite the mistakes that plague his research. Pediatrics published his highly flawed 2020 study alleging that puberty blockers reduce suicide in teens. The journal even chose the article as its “Best of 2020” despite receiving rebuttals that pointed out the rate of attempted suicide rate was twice as high among the puberty-blocked group and Dr. Turban hadn’t controlled for the possibility that better mental-health outcomes might be the result of factors other than hormonal intervention. In his correspondence with physicians who asked how such a study could be named best of the year, Lewis First, editor in chief of Pediatrics, said that award is based on “website views and article downloads,” not “editorial choices.” In response to a rebuttal from one of us (Julia Mason), who warned that the AAP was encouraging the misleading idea that sex can literally be changed, a reviewer said that her statement shouldn’t be published as it could be “offensive to the pediatric readership of the journal.” Pediatrics seems to be basing its editing choices on political calculation and the sensibilities of trans-identified teens. One wonders how many pediatricians who rely on the journal for professional guidance are aware of these criteria."
 
smartcooky said:
Plus bone structure, density and size which translates to height and reach - definite advantages in almost any...

Contact team sports
The Football codes (Soccer, American, Canadian, Gaelic, Australian rules, rugby) as well as ice hockey, lacrosse, hurling and water polo

Contact individual sports
Wrestling, boxing, Thai boxing, MMA

Non-contact sports
Basketball, Netball Volleyball, Team Handball and Track & field.
Click to expand...

It looks like the German football league is not bothered by this:

BERLIN, June 23 (Reuters) - Transgender and non-binary footballers can now decide themselves whether to play for a men's or women's team instead of being bound by personal identification data, the German Football Association (DFB) said on Thursday.

It said the ruling was included in the DFB match regulation for amateurs, the junior regulation and the futsal rulebook.

"At its core this ruling says that players with a personal (gender) status that is 'diverse' or 'no reference' and players who change their gender can take their own decision whether the will be issued an eligibility to play for a men's or women's team," the DFB said.
Click to expand...
Reuters


Germany today, the UK and the Commonwealth close behind, tomorrow. FIFA are drawing up draft guidelines to do away with the need for distinguishing 'level of testosterone' and whether a would-be transgender football player has 'passed through puberty'. As the team manager gets to choose the players that person would just need to be good enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom