• 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.
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.

And in some scenarios, it demands that we are unwitting or reluctant performers in someone's sexual fetish.
Not all, of course, but enough for it not to be compelled.
 
Well, the poor guy has to say something, I suppose.

*his lawyer

He committed rape. It's outrageous to use feminine pronouns for someone who is so full of toxic masculinity that he used his penis to penetrate an unconsenting, unwilling woman.
 
Well, the poor guy has to say something, I suppose.

*his lawyer

He committed rape. It's outrageous to use feminine pronouns for someone who is so full of toxic masculinity that he used his penis to penetrate an unconsenting, unwilling woman.
Fully agree. Even the lawyers own words betray that the client is a man by saying "path to becoming [the] female gender".

And using a biological term like 'female' is non-sensical.
 
And in some scenarios, it demands that we are unwitting or reluctant performers in someone's sexual fetish.
Not all, of course, but enough for it not to be compelled.


Probably more than we like to think. Estimates for western societies put AGP as somewhere around 70% of transwomen. Even the ones who aren't narcissistic or aggressive are still quietly getting their jollies from women either being forced to accept them or doing it willingly.

Consider Debbie Hayton. Lionised by certain sections of the gender critical feminist movement because he speaks and writes that transwomen are men and that women's boundaries should be respected. He has a nice little racket going, one that has got him not into a prison or a rape shelter, but into the hallowed company of the terfs themselves. Said terfs being so darn keen not to be accused of excluding trans people that they actually invite him in. He gets to stand on the podium and speak to terf meetings, while actual women don't. Imagine the validation he's getting! Meanwhile his wife is a classic trans widow and her life has been ruined by her husband's (self-confessed) fetish. And there is the bold Debbie teaching in a school every day wearing women's clothes. Work it out.

A friend of mine has a transwoman friend who calls himself Elaine. Given that Elaine is ex-military, there's no doubt what diagnosis we're dealing with there. He has ingratiated himself into a female friendship group, with all the little handmaidens (including my friend) showing their woke credentials by validating him. When my friend and I went on holiday together for 10 weeks, "Elaine" volunteered to sleep over in my friend's house as a security measure. I have found out so much about AGPs lately that I strongly suspect this was prompted by a fetishistic desire to occupy what is very much a single woman's living space. (My friend turned him down with thanks, as the insurance policy didn't require it. But wasn't that such a sweet gesture, she tells me. I bite my tongue and change the subject.)

The narcissistic ones are the obvious ones, the tip of the iceberg. They're all at it.
 
Last edited:
Fully agree. Even the lawyers own words betray that the client is a man by saying "path to becoming [the] female gender".

And using a biological term like 'female' is non-sensical.


I think a fair bit of this is fuelled by utter and complete ignorance of biology. I get the feeling that there are people who think sex can actually be changed by surgery and/or hormones. The legal fiction perpetrated in the (now redundant and should be repealled) GRA that somehow allowed people legal recognition as something nobody at that time thought they really were has wormed itself into society and poorly educated people don't have the intellectual defences to see what bullcrap it all is.

And I count lawyers in that, most definitely.
 
Well, the poor guy has to say something, I suppose.

*his lawyer

He committed rape. It's outrageous to use feminine pronouns for someone who is so full of toxic masculinity that he used his penis to penetrate an unconsenting, unwilling woman.

I think I actually meant to type "their."
Not sure how "her" got through.

I try to use neutral pronouns in these cases to avoid semantic derails from either side.
 
I have some sympathy for that approach when referring to a transwoman who hasn't done anything wrong. But fudging the sex of a rapist, no.
 
A friend of mine has a transwoman friend who calls himself Elaine. Given that Elaine is ex-military, there's no doubt what diagnosis we're dealing with there. He has ingratiated himself into a female friendship group, with all the little handmaidens (including my friend) showing their woke credentials by validating him. When my friend and I went on holiday together for 10 weeks, "Elaine" volunteered to sleep over in my friend's house as a security measure. I have found out so much about AGPs lately that I strongly suspect this was prompted by a fetishistic desire to occupy what is very much a single woman's living space. (My friend turned him down with thanks, as the insurance policy didn't require it. But wasn't that such a sweet gesture, she tells me. I bite my tongue and change the subject.)

The narcissistic ones are the obvious ones, the tip of the iceberg. They're all at it.
For the first hilighted section...explain the connection between ex-military and a particular diagnosis. I don't personally know any transgender people, but I do know gay ex-military people. And lesbian ex-military people. And straight ex military people. Not sure where you arrive at a connection between military and (presumably) AGP.

For the second, we call that "house-sitting." It's fairly common. I've seen both men and women offer to house-sit. Just saying you might be projecting a motive onto a fairly common activity. My daughter's (then) boyfriend house-sat for us during one of our vacations. I don't know them, but you might be defining an entire person by a single attribute.
 
I have some sympathy for that approach when referring to a transwoman who hasn't done anything wrong. But fudging the sex of a rapist, no.

I don't do it to fudge their sex. I do it to avoid the exact kind of distraction you are perpetrating.

If I said "his" someone on the opposite side could hone in on that little detail to ignore the rest of the issue. So using neutral pronouns (that have never been an abnormal usage anyway) best facilitates actual communication as opposed to posturing.

See, my goal is to actually talk to the parties in the discussion, not stake claim to a particular territory.
 
Fully agree. Even the lawyers own words betray that the client is a man by saying "path to becoming [the] female gender".

And using a biological term like 'female' is non-sensical.

I'm pretty sure the general public, including legal and medical specialists, haven't really thought things through yet, to the point of recognizing the social/biological divide.
 
I think I actually meant to type "their."
Not sure how "her" got through.

I try to use neutral pronouns in these cases to avoid semantic derails from either side.

I strongly recommend using the pronouns you believe in, and welcome dissent not as a derail but as the heart of the matter itself.
 
I strongly recommend using the pronouns you believe in, and welcome dissent not as a derail but as the heart of the matter itself.
But see, I don't think it is the heart of the matter. I just don't give a damn about pronouns and think it would all be much simpler if we just settles on one universal set of pronouns. What do we lose? How often is it necessary to convey the sex of the subject?

My vet uses "he" for all animals, male or female.

Also, I've never addressed anyone with pronouns other than the (neutral) "you" so it seems like a third party has to be involved to observe the "misuse" and pass it on to create drama.

I have only one friend who lists their pronouns on social media. She's a cis-female lesbian. But she also doesn't think trans-women should compete on female sport teams or be in women's locker rooms. (I'm not sure about bathrooms.) There is a ton of ground that can be occupied between the hills the two sides keep building to stake their territory.
 
For the first hilighted section...explain the connection between ex-military and a particular diagnosis. I don't personally know any transgender people, but I do know gay ex-military people. And lesbian ex-military people. And straight ex military people. Not sure where you arrive at a connection between military and (presumably) AGP.


It's an extremely common connection that has been described by a number of psychologists working in the field. The literature I read stated that the very effeminate youths who develop into HSTS transwomen have been effeminate all their lives and pretty much never choose a military career. Conversely it's very common for men who develop AGP at puberty to choose a military career, perhaps as an avoidance mechanism, showing their hypermasculinity, but then as the condition progresses (as it tends to do) to come out as trans.

For the second, we call that "house-sitting." It's fairly common. I've seen both men and women offer to house-sit. Just saying you might be projecting a motive onto a fairly common activity. My daughter's (then) boyfriend house-sat for us during one of our vacations. I don't know them, but you might be defining an entire person by a single attribute.


Yes, that's a possible interpretation, of course. Perhaps, as you say, I'm overinterpreting this. Except, it's usual for the person who owns the house to indicate that he or she is looking for a house-sitter, rather than for someone to volunteer for a post that hasn't been advertised and doesn't actually exist. Given what I have seen and read about AGP men over the past five years, the duplicity, the self-centredness, the manipulative behaviour, I'm not hugely inclined to give any of them the benefit of the doubt. Not that I'd say any of this, of course. I just think it, and wonder.
 
Also, I've never addressed anyone with pronouns other than the (neutral) "you" so it seems like a third party has to be involved to observe the "misuse" and pass it on to create drama.

That has always been the "heart of the matter" to me. I respect anyone's desire to be addressed in the manner of their choosing (if Peppermint Patty wants me to address her as "sir", I will play along). When she insists that she has the right to control which non-derogatory pronoun I use when referring to her, however, she crosses a line that I will not budge on.
 
My vet uses "he" for all animals, male or female.


That's very unusual. When I was in general practice I made a point of checking the next patient's notes to get the pronouns right when the owner brought the animal in. If it was a new patient I'd have to fill in some details anyway, and depending on the owner I'd say something like "are we a boy or a girl?" or I'd simply check for myself as part of the examination.

Many owners absolutely hate it when you call a male she or vice versa, and take against the vet, believing he or she doesn't relate to the animal as an individual. Also there's the suspicion that the vet doesn't actually know which sex the animal is, which is quite scary from a medical point of view.

Heck, even when I was in farm animal pathology latterly, it was normal among the vets and our staff to refer even to the corpses we were doing post mortems on as he or she accordingly.
 
That's very unusual. When I was in general practice I made a point of checking the next patient's notes to get the pronouns right when the owner brought the animal in. If it was a new patient I'd have to fill in some details anyway, and depending on the owner I'd say something like "are we a boy or a girl?" or I'd simply check for myself as part of the examination.

Many owners absolutely hate it when you call a male she or vice versa, and take against the vet, believing he or she doesn't relate to the animal as an individual. Also there's the suspicion that the vet doesn't actually know which sex the animal is, which is quite scary from a medical point of view.

Heck, even when I was in farm animal pathology latterly, it was normal among the vets and our staff to refer even to the corpses we were doing post mortems on as he or she accordingly.
"it" is the appropriate pronoun for an animal.
 
I strongly recommend using the pronouns you believe in, and welcome dissent not as a derail but as the heart of the matter itself.


That has always been the "heart of the matter" to me. I respect anyone's desire to be addressed in the manner of their choosing (if Peppermint Patty wants me to address her as "sir", I will play along). When she insists that she has the right to control which non-derogatory pronoun I use when referring to her, however, she crosses a line that I will not budge on.


I agree. I think language is of the utmost importance in this debate. As theprestige says, we may disagree, but it is not an unimportant disagreement.

I brought up the matter of the rapist's pronouns because I wanted to express how I felt about the language used. Tom may disagree, but now he knows my opinion on the matter. Knowing each other's opinions and the reasons for them may sometimes prompt a re-think on one side or the other.

I disagree violently with any fudging of language to obscure the sex of a man who has raped women. (I think that using the plural "they" for an individual whose sex is known is a nonsense anyway.) I also, like Distracted, object to anyone dictating which words I may use about them when they're not actually there.
 
"it" is the appropriate pronoun for an animal.


It's not inappropriate for an animal you have no personal connection to. But it's fairly fatal for a vet to telegraph that he or she has no personal connection to a client's animal.

Pet owners never refer to their pets as "it", and a smart vet won't do it either. I find that farmers - who are of course very aware of which sex their animals are - default very easily to "he" and "she" and again the smart vet will follow that lead.

An animal seen at a distance whom you don't "know" personally will be "it" of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom