Transwomen are not women - X (XY?)

[theprestige]

Skirt, blouse, shoes, long hair. Classic lady.

Didn't say that.

Whatever floats your boat.

You're trying to solve a serious, difficult problem without thinking it through. As a result, you're forced to stall out in lazy deflections and inane cliches.

Start over, and don't try the easy way out this time. There is no easy way out.

There is a simple way out, but it's not an easy one.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Do trans people get to "use" gender roles to affirm their gender that would be a stereotype you expected it from someone in a traditional gender role?

Someone answer that question. Actually and directly answer it in human language using words as they are already defined and then be prepared to actually back if it contradicts all your other arguments.

People are arguing that a trans person wearing a dress makes them more a woman, but a biological woman NOT wearing a dress doesn't make them less of a woman and THAT IS NOT HOW REALITY WORKS.

Square the circle or stop using it as an argument.

 

[Hercules56]

You're trying to solve a serious, difficult problem without thinking it through. As a result, you're forced to stall out in lazy deflections and inane cliches.

Start over, and don't try the easy way out this time. There is no easy way out.

There is a simple way out, but it's not an easy one.

I respond appropriately to comments directed towards me.

 

[Rolfe]

You're trying to solve a serious, difficult problem without thinking it through. As a result, you're forced to stall out in lazy deflections and inane cliches.

Start over, and don't try the easy way out this time. There is no easy way out.

There is a simple way out, but it's not an easy one.

I've already suggested he should stop typing for a bit, actually read the posts people have taken the trouble to write which address his points, and follow up the suggested further education. Then maybe he'd stop bouncing the goalposts around as he types increasingly contradictory replies just coming out with whatever he thinks might answer the particular post he's just read and ignoring everything else.

So far, no joy.

 

[theprestige]

I respond appropriately to comments directed towards me.

Appropriate response, like gender identity, is in the eye of the beholder, not the mind of self-identifier.

 

[Hercules56]

I've already suggested he should stop typing for a bit, actually read the posts people have taken the trouble to write which address his points, and follow up the suggested further education. Then maybe he'd stop bouncing the goalposts around as he types increasingly contradictory replies just coming out with whatever he thinks might answer the particular post he's just read and ignoring everything else.

So far, no joy.

You won the debate. I'm out. Peace.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I have not yet watched this, but many of those who have have said they could only do so in short bursts as it's so disturbing. Worth a look I think.

https://odysee.com/@Skirt_Go_Spinny:7/Wrong-Ans-Only-1:b

That really captures WHY I object.

But the people who really should watch it, and attempt to understand what transgender identified male are saying about themselves and about females, are exactly the people who won't watch it at all, while simultaneously insisting that it's cherry picked propaganda.

 

[JoeMorgue]

You won the debate. I'm out. Peace.

You're not the victim here, get off the cross.

And you can't accuse me and Rolfe of being part of the same fandom as to this argument, so this isn't a team up job.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'm going to refer back to that film again, which I have now watched all the way through.

https://odysee.com/@Skirt_Go_Spinny:7/Wrong-Ans-Only-1:b

I can only take it in small doses, I don't know if I can make it all the way through. It's seriously painful to watch.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I disagree. Many Conservatives make the same argument about racial/religious/nationality anti discrimination laws and that is also false.

Protecting ALL people against discrimination doesn't afford anyone "special privileges".

Protecting males against the discrimination that males are expected to use male facilities?

Protecting males against the horrible discrimination that they have to have the consent of females in order to show off their twig and giggle berries? Protecting males against the horrible discrimination that they have to respect the boundaries of females who do not wish to have their breasts and bodies ogled by males?

 

[Rolfe]

You won the debate. I'm out. Peace.

This reminds me of the time, many years ago, when another member barrelled into the Lockerbie thread with a whole string of "but what if?"s, insisting that Megrahi must be guilty while at the same time knowing nothing at all about the evidence in the case.

I remember we had "but what if he confessed?" when the fact is that the man had protested his innocence from the start and was still protesting it to his dying day. We had "but if someone is the only person in a position to have committed the crime he must have done it!" when not only was he not the only person in that position (theoretically, anyone in the European airline system that day could have done it), he wasn't anywhere near where the crime took place, which was the main tenor of my argument. There was a lot more like that, all stemming from a position of knowing nothing about the facts but thinking he could just make up anything he liked to answer my posts.

Finally we got, "OK so you won a slap-fest on the internet, that means nothing in the real world." And he vanished.

So similar.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Banning discrimination against ALL races, ALL genders, ALL nationalities, ALL veterans status, ALL age groups, means NOBODY is being treated special.

Duh.

Do you support allowing adults to compete on little league teams?

Do you support allowing 10 year olds to buy and consume alcohol and tobacco products?

Do you support allowing 7 year olds to drive cars and buy houses?

What are your views on age of consent laws?

 

[Rolfe]

I can only take it in small doses, I don't know if I can make it all the way through. It's seriously painful to watch.

So said many people in the Twitter thread where I found it. Actually I watched it in sections because I found it quite boring. I'd seen it all and a lot more of the same already, this was just the concentrated version.

This is the sharp end of the trans agenda. Giving men like that the legal right to colonise women's intimate spaces to validate their fetish, and to use the women there as unwilling props in that exercise. To put women in the position where, if they object to the presence of any of these men, they will be the ones accused of transphobia and hate speech.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I will answer for Rolfe, since she has answered this before many times, and I am a man and therefore answering for a woman comes naturally to me.

This made me laugh.

 

[Rolfe]

Me too.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Society has decided that "discrimination" must include ill will and prejudice.

Separating adult and child athletic events, is not "discrimination" according to the modern understanding and usage.

Your contention seems to be that discrimination on the basis of age is acceptable, because there is no "ill will" involved in excluding one group of people from the activity or space in question.

Why do you think there is "ill will" involved in spaces that are separated on the basis of sex? Why do you think it's "prejudice" to have male-only intimate spaces and female-only intimate spaces?

 

[Nick Terry]

A targeted search for 'mansplaining TERF' got disappointingly few hits.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Since by definition the trans side isn't arguing for the end of gender segregation I don't get what an argument about it will accomplish.

Again this isn't Rosa Parks sitting at the front of the bus to get the buses desegregated. It's Rosa Parks sitting at the front of the bus by arguing "No I may look black, but I identify as white."

(And yes before anyone @s me I have argued against gender segregated spaces to a large degree, but always (or at least I've tried I'm human) to do it in the context of how it influences this argument. I'm fully aware as a solution it is windmill tipping at best.)

 

[Emily's Cat]

What percent of trans-women are sexual predators?

A higher percentage than for other groups. About 45% or so of transwomen who are incarcerated are there for sexual offenses, with rape being overrepresented. That's compared to about 5% of all incarcerated males being there for sexual offenses, and something like 1% of females.

So while not all transgender identified males are sexual predators, sexual predators are highly over-represented among transgender identified males.

This does raise the question: Are people who are transgender more likely to be sexual offenders? Or are sexual offender more likely to claim a transgender identity? If the latter... why do you think that might be the case? Have you given it some thought?

 

[Ziggurat]

I disagree. Many Conservatives make the same argument about racial/religious/nationality anti discrimination laws and that is also false.

Protecting ALL people against discrimination doesn't afford anyone "special privileges".

Trans activists don't want to protect everyone from discrimination. They don't want most males to be able to enter female spaces, they only want trans-identifying males to be able to enter female spaces. They aren't trying to end discrimination, only change where the boundaries are drawn. So you can't use an equality argument to argue in their favor, since they aren't actually making a legitimate claim to equality in that regard. You need to argue why the position of their boundary is better than the traditional position of the boundary. And you haven't done that.