• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Transwomen are not women - X (XY?)

Status
Not open for further replies.
theprestige said:
Sorry. I assumed everyone knew about the Kyrie/nazi thing already.
Click to expand...

I have never been able to wrap my head around antisemitism. While I disagree with bigotry across the board, I can at least usually understand where the impetus came from. Racial discrimination is abhorrent... but I at least understand the human tendency to categorize people as "us" and "them" based on physical identifiers, and I can understand how encountering a group of people with visibly different characteristics would make them even more foreign to a tribal mindset. Political and religious beliefs I can understand, even if I think they're stupid things to tie one's boat to. But at least I grasp the impact of ideological belief on tribalism.

But it seems like most antisemitic tropes have nothing to do with Judaism as a religion, and most jewish people don't show substantial visual variation from others in their same countries. I've really never been able to figure out why they're so hated on.

And this is entirely unrelated to this thread, but still. Why?
 
Maybe start another thread, it's an interesting topic. My late senior partner was an anti-semite and I never found out why.
 
LondonJohn said:
Erm.... it's not my "valid identity" mantra. It's mainstream medicine's "valid identity" mantra.

I remain surprised that so many people within this debate appear so ignorant of this extremely important fact. And I wonder why so many appear so ignorant of it. After all, mainstream medicine's current viewpoint - that transgender identity is a valid condition (ie it is not a mental health disorder) - is pretty much the entire reason why progressive legislatures throughout the world are now moving to enshrine & protect transgender rights.
Click to expand...

That would be because you keep making this vague appeal to imagined authority, and never providing any supporting evidence for your claim.

Aren't you a lawyer? Aren't you supposed to be good at presenting evidence to support your argument?
 
LondonJohn said:
Yeah. That all sounds perfectly possible. And not the product of ridiculous, untenable and unsupported conspiracy theory.

It's so wondrous to see anti-transgender activists stretch this ludicrous "policy capture" idea like an elastic band, as a means of rationalising the fact that legislatures, governing bodies, regulators and medics all over the world are endorsing transgender rights. Yeah: all those bodies have somehow become so mesmerised that a) they become incapable of doing anything but to hypnotically enact whatever transgender activists direct them to do, and b) they become incapable of applying their own intellects and judgement to the matter.

Seriously. This is the anti-transgender activists' actual position.
Click to expand...

WTF? Have you even bothered to LOOK at Scottish politicians gleefully standing directly in front of signs calling for noncompliant females to be decapitated?

Please actually look at what is going on in the world, for real, instead of just your imagined idealization of what you assume ought to be.
 
 
Emily's Cat said:
I have never been able to wrap my head around antisemitism. While I disagree with bigotry across the board, I can at least usually understand where the impetus came from. Racial discrimination is abhorrent... but I at least understand the human tendency to categorize people as "us" and "them" based on physical identifiers, and I can understand how encountering a group of people with visibly different characteristics would make them even more foreign to a tribal mindset. Political and religious beliefs I can understand, even if I think they're stupid things to tie one's boat to. But at least I grasp the impact of ideological belief on tribalism.

But it seems like most antisemitic tropes have nothing to do with Judaism as a religion, and most jewish people don't show substantial visual variation from others in their same countries. I've really never been able to figure out why they're so hated on.

And this is entirely unrelated to this thread, but still. Why?
Click to expand...
Off-thread, but real quickly:

It goes all the way back to the Babylonian captivity etc., which meant not having a homeland (under the rule of others), but then add in things like the blood libel and various other influences in Europe for 1000+ years.

ETA: The long history is relevant for how ingrained it is, which means it keeps on going.
 
Last edited:
Paul2 said:
Off-thread, but real quickly:

It goes all the way back to the Babylonian captivity etc., which meant not having a homeland (under the rule of others), but then add in things like the blood libel and various other influences in Europe for 1000+ years.

ETA: The long history is relevant for how ingrained it is, which means it keeps on going.
Click to expand...


Seriously, start a thread. It's a really interesting topic.

I remember asking a Jewish friend what was supposed to be antisemitic about Parsifal, and got an infodump of Jewish theology back refuting the allegations, but I didn't understand the half of it.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
:jaw-dropp What the holy hell? That's an unconscionably frightening account of jurisprudent negligence.
Click to expand...


I think it's the defence advocate, who is obviously going to milk anything he can find on his client's behalf. But saying that it should acquit him is way out of order. Plea in mitigation at most.
 
"Your honor, my client is not guilty by reason of being trans-lawful as a matter of valid lived identity, and also the prosecutor is a bigot for suggesting otherwise. The defense rests."
 
I really just want to know what supposedly follows from "_______ identity is a valid condition (not a mental health disorder)" if we take that as given.

I identify as Hispanic and Irish American, but I'm not asking anyone to change anything about how they behave, except maybe toning down the relevant ethnic slurs a bit.

I identify as a veteran, but I'm not asking for free **** except on Veterans' Day.

I identify as a husband and a father, and that provides me with countless marital and familial obligations.

If you identify as the opposite sex, what does that mean for the rest of us?

(Or, to put the question another way.)
 
Your midnight check-in on the petition reports 73,680 signatures, so 337 new signatures today. A wee bit down on yesterday but still ahead of target.

The new magic number is 302.5.
 
d4m10n said:
I really just want to know what supposedly follows from "_______ identity is a valid condition (not a mental health disorder)" if we take that as given.
Click to expand...

It's been a while since I got off that particular merry-go-round, but from what I recall, it was pretty straightforward once you figured out the central inference.

"Valid lived condition" is just LJ's shorthand for observing that transgender identity can be claimed, without necessarily being a symptom of a psychological disorder. This observation is taken from the most recent edition of the DSM.

What follows from this is an argument from analogy to homosexuality (because of course).

Someone who claims a transgender identity is entitled, as a matter of human rights, to have their claimed identity accepted without question. We should not call for psychological evaluation. We should not assume the claimant needs treatment for a condition of any kind. We should just accept and accede to their demands for recognition. Because those demands are expressions of a "valid" (i.e., non-delusional) identity, and having those demands met is a part of how they are entitled to live their life, same as every one else whose demands arise from their valid lived condition (whatever it may be).

I identify as a (largely) cishet dude. I should be entitled to have sex with ladies and use the men's restroom, without anyone questioning my sanity, sincerity, or standing to do these things. It suffices that I say "this is who I am".

Same with someone whose sex was observed to be male at birth, but now identifies as a cishet lady. He should be entitled to have sex with dudes, and use the women's restroom, without anyone questioning his sanity, sincerity, or standing to do these things. It suffices that he says, "this is who I am."

That's it. It's basically just a tag for "let them do what they want and stop questioning their sanity or dismissing their self-identification."
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
I have never been able to wrap my head around antisemitism. While I disagree with bigotry across the board, I can at least usually understand where the impetus came from. Racial discrimination is abhorrent... but I at least understand the human tendency to categorize people as "us" and "them" based on physical identifiers, and I can understand how encountering a group of people with visibly different characteristics would make them even more foreign to a tribal mindset. Political and religious beliefs I can understand, even if I think they're stupid things to tie one's boat to. But at least I grasp the impact of ideological belief on tribalism.

But it seems like most antisemitic tropes have nothing to do with Judaism as a religion, and most jewish people don't show substantial visual variation from others in their same countries. I've really never been able to figure out why they're so hated on.

And this is entirely unrelated to this thread, but still. Why?
Click to expand...

This is false. It absolutely does have religious origins. One of the main ones was the fact that certain types of work, particularly money-lending, was officially forbidden in Christianity and therefore non-Jews who wanted to borrow money would typically do so from Jews. Then if they made bad investments and had to repay the money with interest they could blame their hard luck on the "usurious" Jews. In addition, because Jewish communities typically lived apart from Christian ones, rumours and lies were made up about them including malicious interpretations of Jewish scripture resulting in the aformentioned blood libel where the deaths of children were assumed to have been carried out by Jews in ritual murder. There are churches even now in England which commemorate child "martyrs" such as William of Norwich and Little Saint Hugh.

Anyway, as mentioned, off-topic so we should get this and other posts moved to another thread.
 
LondonJohn said:
So why do you think governments all over the world are taking transgender rights seriously (and not taking "attack helicopter identity" rights seriously)?

Have you never stopped to think about that? Or are you another of those who rationalise it as "institutional capture" and other such ludicrous conspiracy theories?
Click to expand...

LJ - Why do you think many of the youth transgender affirming clinics in Europe have shut down? Why have many gov't's across the globe raised the age for care, after initially agreeing to it?

One by one by one, they are being shut down. Those precious experts and lawmakers, who you give so much godlike authority to, are whistling a different tune. The experts were WRONG. Sometimes it happens.
 
theprestige said:
I identify as a (largely) cishet dude. I should be entitled to have sex with ladies and use the men's restroom, without anyone questioning my sanity, sincerity, or standing to do these things. It suffices that I say "this is who I am".

Same with someone whose sex was observed to be male at birth, but now identifies as a cishet lady. He should be entitled to have sex with dudes, and use the women's restroom, without anyone questioning his sanity, sincerity, or standing to do these things. It suffices that he says, "this is who I am."

That's it. It's basically just a tag for "let them do what they want and stop questioning their sanity or dismissing their self-identification."
Click to expand...


Still not a full answer. You are identifying as things you actually are. It's an entirely different ball-game when someone identifies as something they manifestly are not. Even John, I think, concedes that nobody can actually become the opposite sex.

He seems to be running some sort of bait-and-switch where "valid lived condition" means "must be believed to be the thing they manifestly are not". I presume an invalid lived condition is one where we don't have to believe the person is something they manifestly are not. No actual reason is given for this distinction. In both cases someone is claiming to be, and demanding that we treat them as, something they most certainly aren't. It's a demand that we ignore reality.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
FYI - the ratio needs to be more like 75% sit to 25% stand.

It takes longer to sit - you have to remove more clothing, regardless of whether you're male or female. Defecation takes longer than urination, and is something both males and females do. Additionally, about 50% of the population CANNOT stand to pee. So if you do a 50/50 split, you're massively disadvantaging anyone who is not {male who only needs to pee}.
Click to expand...

I guessed that kind of missed the mark I was trying to avoid the whole men/woman, male/female terminology as part of a proposal that we really test this commitment to the whole gender is a social construct idea.

It's easy to say "I support the whole trans thing" but were that person actually offered the opportunity to live a life where gender/sex didn't matter, would they sign up for it?

I gotta say. If I was in the men's locker room and Lauren Southern walked in, I'd look. I'd try not to be obvious but, I look. Then I'd start wondering if Lauren Southern had made me gay, after all, I never looked at a man like that before.

Here's the link to the Paywalled NYT story. Once you figure out how to get that going going you'll never choke at a paywall again.

https://archive.is/vUwVX

Some forums suggest using archived links exclusively as what's free to a reader in one location might not be to a reader in another.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom