Transwomen are not women - X (XY?)

[Ziggurat]

So if someone looks and talks and acts like a misogynist, we can draw conclusions from that?

If someone looks and talks and acts like a male, we can draw some conclusions from that.

 

[d4m10n]

Not allowing certain violent transwomen into women's prisons a) is justifiable and correct, b) has been happening for years now on a case-by-case risk assessment basis, and c) in no way means or implies that any transwoman denied a transfer to the women's prison estate somehow "isn't a woman".

Can you please explain what the highlighted phrase should be taken to mean (as you have used it here) without using the word woman to define itself? How can we identify the set of people who are something other than women?

ETA: I've seen this done before, but in a way that you'd most likely reject.

 

[Rolfe]

That's not true either. We've done debunking of the violence against trans claims already. It doesn't come up much in this thread because the claim isn't made very often. Seriously, note the pattern with LJ. He will go on and on about experts and "valid lived identity", but he doesn't actually spend any real time rationalizing the actual accommodations being demanded, on the basis of threats to trans people or anything else.

Second, as mentioned by others, there are lots of men pushing back. I think you see less of it because they are more often on the conservative side of the aisle, but they aren't a rare breed at all.

Lastly, there is no point in denying that men are in fact more violent than women. That is precisely why trans women should not be granted the right to women's spaces. I don't think you want to undermine that argument.

Yes, I totally take your point. However, my point was that actual reports of men dressed as women being offered violence in men's spaces are very rare indeed. Most men are not gratuitously violent, and it's a feature of all this that transwomen are victims of violence significantly less frequently than women. In practice, we simply don't see an epidemic of violence offered to transwomen in male spaces that would justify insisting that they be accommodated with women, regardless of women's feelings on the matter.

Conversely, while men who go about their business in male spaces are generally decent people, the men who want into female spaces are generally not. Inviting a subgroup of men into female spaces, supposedy for their protection, incurs two dangers for women. First, that when some men are allowed in, it becomes in practice impossible to keep any man out - especially when men are allowed to self-identify into the group that is allowed in. So straightforward predators now have an entry ticket. Decent men won't take advantage of this, indecent men will. Second, we have no guarantee at all that the men who are genuinely in the favoured subgroup are themselves all benign. They include Jonathan ("Jessica") Yaniv, Jack ("Beth") Douglas and "Danielle" Muscato. Among an enormous number of similar examples. Nobody claims they're not "genuinely" trans, in that they have feelings of gender incongruence (AGP, frankly), but they're still not people who should be anywhere near women and children's intimate spaces.

My initial point was simply to suggest that one helpful initiative would be for the decent men who understand what's going on to make more of an effort to debunk the "transwomen will be beaten up and killed if they go into the gents" myth by trying to make men's spaces more welcoming of all varieties of men.

 

[Francesca R]

I do NOT in any way view it as "transphobic" for a female to feel intimidated, or uncomfortable when an obviously male person is in a space that is expected to be female-only. And I do NOT think it is transphobic to expect that females have access to female-only spaces.

Neither do I, nor did I say otherwise.

I think it is extremely shortsighted for you, or for any other female, to feel that they have the RIGHT to give away MY rights, in order to assuage the feelings of a male with a gender identity issue.

Agreed, and I don't believe I have that right. And even if I had it, I wouldn't exercise it.

So I dunno where this came from:

on this topic, I profoundly disagree with you

 

[Francesca R]

I don't think that any male, regardless of their psychological state, should EVER be in a position to frighten females out of a female-only space.

If this is in relation to the 2019 case linked previously, my conclusion was quite firmly that the trans woman in question had no intention to do that.

They should not be in that space in the first place.

Again, in that case I would assume (but don't know) that the trans woman (Adrienne) was not doing anything illegal being there.

And that you insist that the people in the wrong are the females who were made uncomfortable by a male

Incorrect, I believe I said the exact opposite.

who then feel obliged to CROW about having frightened females out of a female-only spaces

I disagree that that happened. My conclusion is that Adrienne posted unhappiness about a woman being scared out and nothing more, as in "Oh, FML!". This was then manipulated by the transphobic twitterer who sought to create a narrative exactly as you have perceived it. Perhaps your preconceived notions about anyone who is trans are so set in stone that there really is not any other way you could ever see something like this.

And because I did not see it that way, you make a host of wrong interpretations and assumptions about what I think, and you convince yourself that we profoundly disagree on this topic (this topic being trans women are not women). This is in spite of several years of me posting in it that you have clearly lost all memory of.

 

[Francesca R]

given that transwomen are (correctly) prohibited from playing full-contact rugby in women's teams, does this magically make every transwoman-denied-participation-in-women's-rugby "not a woman"?

You have discriminated against them on the basis that they are trans, in a way you would not do if they were cis. Does this make you a transphobe? Yes, it means you do not see them as women. Congratulations.

The same applies to the trans woman rapist example.

I would point out en passant that you've concluded that I am providing disconcerting anti-transgender-identity bilge, whereas Emily's Cat (one of your opponents, I think we will agree) just posted that she profoundly disagrees with me on this topic.

Just fancy that!

 

[Rolfe]

Francesca, you make one particular interpretation of what this "Adrienne" person meant, which you have no personal knowledge to confirm, and you are really no more likely to be right than the many other people who interpreted it as "crowing". It's clear he did spook a woman sufficiently that she exited a space where her expectation of being free from male company had been betrayed. Whether he was crowing (which is how I interpreted it) or bemoaning the obvious fact that nobody was going to mistake him for a woman, is entirely subjective.

However, even if you happen to be right, your continual insistence that the twitter account who highlighted it did so maliciously, knowing or believing your interpretation to be the correct one but feigning to believe the "crowing" interpretation, is simply baseless. Lots of people thought Adrienne was crowing, and there is no evidence at all that "ripx4nutmeg" wasn't one of these people.

You then extend this unjustified assumption to label ripx4nutmeg "transphobic" overall. This again is entirely unjustified. It's not an account I follow, but if you're going to label every account which posts wholly or mainly on the gender critical side of this debate as "transphobic", then that's an awful lot of very good accounts you're dismissing. It seems a rather bigoted approach to me.

And back where we began, this had nothing to do with "Adrienne" at all. It had to do with you cavalierly dismissing another post from ripx4nutmeg that I had the temerity to link to last week - so sorry, I had no knowledge that Francesca had, three years ago, deemed this account to be "transphobic" and therefore illegitimate to link to. This time the subject wasn't the fragrant "Adrienne", whom I have never heard of again, but a particularly obnoxious character called Danielle Muscato, who was a current topic of discussion in the thread, which is why I posted the link.

Francesca, you swanned in from nowhere, apparently unaware that we were already discussing Muscato from, among other sources, his own twitter feed, you piled in on that link, insisting there was no validity to what was in it, because you personally, on grounds I consider to be wholly unjustified, had decided three and a half years earlier that the account linked to was "transphobic" and so inevitably lying. Presumably you think Muscato is another injured innocent?

Give it up already.

 

[Nessie]

....

My initial point was simply to suggest that one helpful initiative would be for the decent men who understand what's going on to make more of an effort to debunk the "transwomen will be beaten up and killed if they go into the gents" myth by trying to make men's spaces more welcoming of all varieties of men.

I like to think I am a decent man, but I cannot debunk that myth, as I do not think it is a myth and I suspect transwomen are at risk in many men only spaces.

 

[Rolfe]

What, every single time one of them goes into the men's room he'll be beaten up and killed?

It's not being presented as something which occasionally happens, as a risk - it's being presented as something which is pretty much a certainty. And yet, actual reports of such occurrences are very hard to find. In contrast, reports of women and girls being assaulted by males - sometimes trans-identifying males - in female spaces, are distressingly easy to find.

And yet the discourse is all about how men, with their physical and social advantages, must be allowed into women's spaces to protect them from other men, and not at all about how much more risk will be heaped on women (already the ones carrying by far the greater risk) by making it easier and easier for men to get into their spaces.

 

[Francesca R]

your continual insistence that the twitter account who highlighted it did so maliciously, knowing or believing your interpretation to be the correct one but feigning to believe the "crowing" interpretation, is simply baseless.

I don't agree, my reasons are already given ad nauseam.

You then extend this unjustified assumption to label ripx4nutmeg "transphobic" overall. This again is entirely unjustified.

If (as I conclude) ripx had no reason to think Adrienne was actually delighting in frightening a woman, but just invented that to propagate the idea with their followers, like they added the selfie with sword photo because that conjures imagery that the person was taking sword selfies in the bathroom at the time, then yes I call that out as transphobia--my conclusion is that ripx's hatred of trans women inspired their effort.

if you're going to label every account which posts wholly or mainly on the gender critical side of this debate as "transphobic"

Yeah, except that I haven't and don't.

 

[Rolfe]

You haven't given any coherent reason, except that you have decided for yourself that that account is "transphobic" and maliciously insincere. I have scrolled down the profile a few times and seen nothing but the usual spread of tweets and re-tweets you'd see in any gender critical account. And she seems to have an unusually large number of followers. Maybe I'll follow her and monitor her output a bit more closely.

The sword selfie was posted as an indication of the type of person "Adrienne" wants to be seen as. Armed. I think it was entirely relevant.

I don't think anyone claimed that Adrienne was deliberately frightening a woman, just that he was going into women's toilets knowing that he would be read as a man, and that he was quite gleeful when this behaviour resulted in a woman leaving in a hurry, apparently alarmed. That Adrienne's other online behaviour includes posting photos of himself carrying a weapon I think is fairly relevant.

Maybe ripx4nutmeg was mistaken on that occasion. I don't think so. I don't think men should be going into women's toilets when they are perfectly aware that they will be percieved as male and that this is likely to alarm a woman, perhaps there alone, perhaps with some history of prior assault. Furthermore, I think that if a man does this, perhaps without thinking it through, once he has realised that he has caused a woman alarm and distress, the proper reaction would be to reflect on what he has done, not post about it on twitter in a way which could be read as him gloating, but even on the best interpretation is annoyance that he wasn't accepted in the space where he had no right to be.

Adrienne isn't the victim here any which way you slice it, and I see absolutely no reason to criticise ripx4nutmeg even if she did misinterpret the post (which I don't really think she did). When a man causes a woman to retreat in distress and alarm from a woman's toilet, and his reaction is that it's all about him and his feelings, sorry, no sympathy.

 

[Brainster]

What, every single time one of them goes into the men's room he'll be beaten up and killed?

It's not being presented as something which occasionally happens, as a risk - it's being presented as something which is pretty much a certainty. And yet, actual reports of such occurrences are very hard to find. In contrast, reports of women and girls being assaulted by males - sometimes trans-identifying males - in female spaces, are distressingly easy to find.

And yet the discourse is all about how men, with their physical and social advantages, must be allowed into women's spaces to protect them from other men, and not at all about how much more risk will be heaped on women (already the ones carrying by far the greater risk) by making it easier and easier for men to get into their spaces.

Cismen being more accepting of transwomen in their private spaces is not going to be the solution. The risk to transwomen in those situations is not the main reason they want access, it's because they want to be fully treated as women by society (leaving the bad actors out of it for now).

 

[Rolfe]

I do understand that. However, the point is that the "the poor flowers will be beaten up and killed if you make them go into men's spaces!" is the hyperbole we see all the time, presented as the justification for them being accepted into women's spaces - by transwomen themselves, but perhaps even more frequently by their supporters.

My point is that actual examples of that happening (even just the beating up part) are very hard to find, whereas examples of girls and women being assaulted by males (some trans, some not) in women's spaces are not at all hard to find. It is surely inarguable that making it much much easier for men to get into women's spaces is only going to make this worse.

This is the debate that isn't happening. Everyone just assumes it's fine to go on claiming that transwomen are at unacceptable risk in male spaces, while ignoring the very real risk to women of allowing males into female spaces. Men defending themselves from this accusation and accepting that the place for male bodies is in the male spaces irrespective of how they dress is something that would be welcome.

 

[TomB]

Why don't women welcome trans-men into their restrooms?

transgender man who says a campground owner told him to use the women's restroom at the site says he was beaten up by a group of men and arrested after a dispute with other guests over his presence there.

Noah Ruiz had tried to use the women's restroom at the campground in Preble County, Ohio, but a woman using the bathroom became upset he was in there because he is a man.

The 20-year-old told local news channel Fox 19: "I was using the bathroom, and she just started shouting. She was like, 'Who the ******* is in here?' And I replied, 'I am.' My girlfriend replied, 'I am as well.' She was like, 'No man should be in this bathroom. If you're a man you need to use a man's bathroom.' And I was like, 'I'm transgender. I have woman body parts, and I was told to use this bathroom.'"

Ruiz told Newsweek that the owner of Cross's Campground in Camden is a family friend who was aware of his transition, and advised him to use the women's restroom because he has not yet undergone any surgeries and thought it "would be safer."

"So we respected his wishes and did as he asked," Ruiz added, noting the irony of the violence that later occurred as a result. After the woman accused him of being a man, people outside the bathroom became involved.

https://www.newsweek.com/trans-man-attacked-using-womens-restroom-ohio-1723432

 

[Rolfe]

They genuinely thought she was a man. Women are getting increasingly alarmed about the increasing incidence of men invading women's spaces, and if they think someone is a man, they will react. In this situation, mistakes can be made.

 

[Nessie]

What, every single time one of them goes into the men's room he'll be beaten up and killed?

Come on Rolfe, you are better than that pile of straw.

It's not being presented as something which occasionally happens, as a risk - it's being presented as something which is pretty much a certainty. And yet, actual reports of such occurrences are very hard to find. In contrast, reports of women and girls being assaulted by males - sometimes trans-identifying males - in female spaces, are distressingly easy to find.

And yet the discourse is all about how men, with their physical and social advantages, must be allowed into women's spaces to protect them from other men, and not at all about how much more risk will be heaped on women (already the ones carrying by far the greater risk) by making it easier and easier for men to get into their spaces.

Transwomen are at risk from men in many men's spaces, in particular men's spaces in places where alcohol is consumed, or at male orientated events such as football matches.

 

[TomB]

They genuinely thought she was a man. Women are getting increasingly alarmed about the increasing incidence of men invading women's spaces, and if they think someone is a man, they will react. In this situation, mistakes can be made.

But they continued after being corrected. I don't see how that excuses anything. Unless you think it's ok to harass women who appear mannish.

Anyway, that instance, along with your excuse, suggests that trans-men are not actually welcome in female spaces. But I keep hearing the opposite in this thread.

 

[Rolfe]

But they continued after being corrected. I don't see how that excuses anything. Unless you think it's ok to harass women who appear mannish.

Anyway, that instance, along with your excuse, suggests that trans-men are not actually welcome in female spaces. But I keep hearing the opposite in this thread.

No, I don't think they should have continued after they were corrected. I think transmen should be welcomed into female spaces if they want to be there. It is relatively unusual for a transman who really looks male (a lot of them don't) to want to be in the female place. This one was badly treated for trying to do the right thing.

I suspect the women who reacted in that way hadn't really thought the whole issue through. They should have apologised as soon as the real situation was explained to them, but it may be that their visceral reaction to perceiving the person as male overcame their reasoning ability.

 

[Rolfe]

Come on Rolfe, you are better than that pile of straw.

Transwomen are at risk from men in many men's spaces, in particular men's spaces in places where alcohol is consumed, or at male orientated events such as football matches.

The pile of straw - I agree with you about that - is what is being peddled by multiple trans activists in their campaign to bully and force women to #bekind.

The statistics on murder rates (I don't have any on common assault) show transwomen to be the safest demographic in society. Not only are they mudered at a lower rate (per head of population) than men (and bear in mind that most murder victims are men), they are murdered at a lower rate than women are. It has been said with some truth that on the face of the statistics, the best thing a man can do to reduce his chance of being murdered is to present as a transwoman.

In fact transwomen are the perpetrators of murder more often than they are the victims.

It's remarkable how often we read statements such as your last sentence, and yet how difficult it is to find actual examples of it happening. I'd have thought that if it was a real problem, someone might have collated some cases to give us a feel of the problem.

 

[TomB]

My point here is that trans men and women face a dilemma that some seem to dismiss regardless of which facilities they use. whatever they choose they face harassment of some sort, though I suspect that it usually doesn't escalate to violence. (And when it does, that violence probably doesn't actually occur inside the restroom.)

I'm not an advocate of trans-women getting self-id access to women's facilities. But I think if you are going to honestly consider the issue, it's important to recognize that there are valid concerns.

Lately, the arguments I've been hearing from the trans side have had less to do with safety and more to do with "validation" and outing. (Outing, however, can be dangerous as it could lead to assault outside the facility.)

I haven't found statistics, but I suspect that most assaults on trans women do not occur in men's rooms. (But the act of using the men's room can draw attention. As can using the women's room unless they pass really well.)

There are male creeps who do use the trans loophole for devious purposes. I'm not sure that what they are doing has anything to do with "transness," however. (I find the whole AGP to be increasingly unconvincing, the more I look into it.) I think these are people with issues in addition to being trans or who just have issues period.

I can condemn these people and even point to their abuse of loopholes as a reason not to allow trans-women into female spaces without somehow extending their character onto any significant portion of the trans population.