Cont: Transwomen are not women - part XI

[Emily's Cat]

You are just giving me the hearsay. Third or fourth hand, repeated by the gender crit activists.

Are you seriously claiming that the clinicians at Tavistock were all "gender crit activists"? I mean, seriously?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Well OK, decent point.

And, not to take away from the point but to clarify, all I was doing was doing stuff I liked and not doing stuff I didn't like. That seems stonkingly rational to me.

What is stonkingly irrational is society deciding there is something wrong with me doing that stuff on the irrelevant basis if my biological sex.

No kidding! Interests should not be cordoned off by sex!

And yet... there are a whole lot of transgender activists, transgender posters on social media, transgender organizations, and transgender education that very effectively do exactly that. They say things like "my little male didn't like trucks, but liked dolls, and kept undoing their onesie to make it like a dress, that's how I knew I really had a "girl" by the time they were 3"

Artificial social stereotypes of acceptable sex-based behaviors and interests are being used to DIAGNOSE a child as transgender. If they don't conform to strict sex-based stereotypes, it means they're actually transgender.

It's dumb. It's ridiculous. Were you a child today, you would have other people insisting that because you liked dolls and "girly" things, it meant you were actually a transgirl. Because that's how it's playing out in the real world right now.

 

[Dismember]

Biological sex is real.

No-one said it wasn't as far as I know.

This much straw must be a fire hazard.

Some activists are saying it, and some are otherwise attempting to redefine what the phrase “biological sex” means or what it refers to. https://growinguptransgender.com/2018/11/01/biological-sex-is-a-social-construct/

Saying a trans girl is biologically male is not science. It is bigotry. It is simplifying complex reality to fit an anti-trans agenda. […]

My daughter is a girl. Her birth certificate may currently say male (due to an inadequate legal system in the UK), but will at some point in the future be corrected to say female. […]

There are those who call my daughter a girl, but at the same time say she is a ‘biological male’. This makes no sense whatsoever. Calling my daughter ‘biologically male’ is just as rude as calling her a boy. It is also biologically incorrect, ignoring the biological underpinning of gender identity and the current and future biological differences between a trans girl and a cis boy. […]

There is no situation in which it is acceptable, or scientifically correct, to call my daughter biologically male. It is akin to calling her a cisgender boy or a cisgender male. […]

The term ‘biological sex’ is outdated and needs to be thrown out, along with other outdated concepts that we as a society have ditched.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Most of the minors who've passed through the care of the Tavistock over the past several years have received treatment/therapy which has resulted in positive outcomes and happier people.

Sources?

Where are you getting your information? Seriously, if you have the receipts for this, maybe you should have given them to Tavistock. Then perhaps they'd still be open.

 

[Emily's Cat]

But how can a clinician "know" if mastectomies will help natal female minors with gender dysphoria..... until/unless the mastectomies are actually performed?

Yes, it would then (ie after surgery) be possible (and very desirable) to gauge whether this surgical intervention had been therapeutic and beneficial to that patient.

But one would have to actually carry out the surgery in order to be able to make that assessment, you see. Nobody can reliably know in advance of the surgery whether or not the surgery is going to turn out to be therapeutic and quality-of-life-enhancing.

Just so we're clear... You're coming out in support of medical experiments on children without clinically appropriate trial processes. Just want to make sure you fully understand where you stand on this.

 

[d4m10n]

I can see that there are various court rulings about interpretation of Title IX which beg to differ.

I don't think Bostock v. Clayton County^WP actually redefines sex to mean gender identity, but possibly you have other rulings in mind.

 

[Emily's Cat]

My general idea is that adhd, autism, gender dysphoria, dyslexia, and other alleged conditions are products of societal anomalies.

Your general idea is errant.

First off, one of these things is not like the others. Gender dysphoria is a mental health condition, the others are all neurological conditions.

ADHD is the result of a reduced or absent executive function in the prefrontal cortex. For a while it was over-diagnosed especially in kids. But continued research has revealed that it is genuinely a neurological condition. Some management techniques can be attained through therapy and cognitive training, but the condition itself is not curable.

The same is true of autism and dyslexia - they are actual neurological conditions resident in the functionality of the brain. They're as neurological as epilepsy.

Gender dysphoria, on the other hand, isn't even a primary condition. It's a symptom. And it's a mental health symptom. In a very small minority of patients presenting with the symptom of gender dysphoria, there is a neurological aberration present in the part of the brain responsible for self-perception. But in the vast majority, dysphoria is a secondary manifestation of an underlying mental health disorder.

That's part of why affirmation treatment is not a good general approach. It would be beneficial for those few with self-perception disorders... but for pretty much everyone else, it's treating a symptom and ignoring a cause. It's akin to treating anorexia by prescribing a period of fasting.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Andy Lewis publishes part 2 of his critique of Novella's muddled attempt to produce a theory of sex as a bimodal distribution.

The Muddling of the American Mind – Part II

Thank you!

FYI, Zach Elliot has some really good articles on the topic of sex. I particularly liked their article discussing the difference between Sex Definition and Sex Determination.

https://www.theparadoxinstitute.com/read/defining-sex-vs-determining-sex

 

[Emily's Cat]

On autism and so on I am wondering why it exists only for humans. I consider adhd a manufactured condition where people engaged in the wrong activities are medicated pointlessly.

First off, you're assuming that it only exists in humans. Animals display a variety of different behaviors. Some are more profound, some less so. Were a belgian malinois to be a human, they'd likely all be diagnosed as OCD.

In humans, some of these neurological conditions get medicated... because without medication we have an increased likelihood of morbidity and mortality.

Epilepsy is fairly common in both cats and dogs. We medicate those pets so they can live a longer happier life. Without medication, they die at much younger ages and suffer neurological degeneration. The rate of epilepsy in domestic dogs is about the same as it is in feral dogs and various wild dogs. But those wild dogs live much shorter lives without medication.

You don't have a basis to assume that neurological conditions diagnosed and treated in humans don't exist in other animals. Many of them probably do... they just lead to early deaths.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I imagine I have lived 99.9% as a woman, but then so have most males. Apart from public toilets, change rooms, sports teams and certain aspects of my sex life, there is nothing that I do that women don't also do.

I am wearing some trakky pants, a sloppy joe and sneakers. As quite a lot of women do.

When I wear a dress or a skirt, I am not trying to be or look like a woman. I am just wearing a dress or a skirt. They are often comfortable and some of them suit me. But I am just a male wearing a dress or a skirt.

I cook and wash up every day for my family. Quite a lot of men don't do that but there is no reason to think that is a masculine or feminine trait.

So for me to want to live any more as a woman than I already am it would involve me wanting to use different toilet and changing facilities and entering into categories in sport where I would have more chance of doing well.

But it doesn't really matter to me which facilities it uses and it matters to quite a lot of the people who use those facilities. And entering into less challenging sports categories would make sport less fun.

So for all intents and purposes I am living as a woman. And at the same time living as a man.

You have lived 0% of your life as a female.

In fact, the only elements you're using as criteria are those associated with sex-based roles and stereotypes.

So essentially, you're claiming that you've lived some of your life in accordance with a set of confining stereotypes about "what females be like". The reality is that your assumptions that "being a woman" has anything to do with the things you note is a rather male perspective.

Living as a female means having the body of a female, the disadvantages that society places on us as a result of our bodies, and the experience of society's disregard and treatment of us because of our sex.

It has **** all to do with doing dishes or wearing a skirt.

"Woman" is not a costume you can put on or a hobby you can pick up.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Recommended or not, it's not the care many actually receive.

I'll give an example I have mentioned before. Lots of providers claim that puberty blockers are fully reversible. But there is no evidence of that. So children and parents are being routinely lied to about the risks of going on puberty blockers. That's not an exception, that's the norm.

Even more than that, there IS evidence that puberty blockers have IRREVERSIBLE effects. The most dramatic of those is the interference with accretion of bone density, leading to osteopenia at very young ages.

 

[Emily's Cat]

The blockers are reversible.

This isn't exactly true. If used for three months or less, the effects of blockers are minimal, and puberty will generally progress in a relatively normal fashion.

Use for longer than three months has side effects that are NOT reversible.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Tiffany Thomas wins! [emoji469]

[qimg]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230324/73d75c7889d64e6f4811491cf19633dc.jpg[/qimg]

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Male beats female in athletics! Hooray for males winning female sports accolades! It's great for the males!

 

[Emily's Cat]

Gosh - I wonder how* you came across an article on an extremely minor cycling website about an extremely minor cycling event?


* I know exactly how.

Gosh - I wonder why once again you are expressing no ***** whatsoever that a female was displaced in a female sporting event by a male?

 

[Robin]

What do you imagine to be the bailey, then?

Traditional social gender roles, which, once stripped of her denial of human nature, is what it comes down to.

People like me being a broken version of the category "man"
(which, let's face it, society will always regard the sissy as being second class) rather than a well adjusted member of my own category.

Because as I see it, you have this backwards. It's the trans activists who most frequently try to pull a motte and bailey, with "trans people are oppressed" and similar being the motte, and "lesbians need to have sex with my lady dick" and similar being the bailey.

False dichotomy. The trans side may have a Motte too, that doesn't stop the "sex is real" position being a Motte. And I'm not a trans activist.. I regard them as being closer to the "sex is real" position.

 

[Emily's Cat]

You don't seem to grasp the significance and implications of a political activist for a particular cause a) gladly platforming a politician who has prominent extreme right-wing views and b) posing for a smiling photo with two politicians who have prominent extreme right-wing views.


Are you genuinely that naive?

Do you hold the same view when it comes to transgender activists who share space with people who advocate for violence against females? Shouldn't transgender activists be expected to distance themselves from those who call for violence and aggression?

Why is it okay for one side to share a bed with violent people but the other side has to completely divorce themselves from the entire subject?

 

[Emily's Cat]

(Hint: all rational, objective people understand that if someone hosting a political rally gratefully platforms - and takes smiling group photos with - extremist right-wing bigot politicians, there are obvious inferences to be drawn.)

Why didn't your "hint" hold for this:

 

[Emily's Cat]

Watching the Pose Parker and other protests has made me realise, of course trans women are often aggressive in their approach, as they cannot lose all the attributes of men by being trans.

Hardly surprising, as putting on a dress or taking wrong-sex hormones doesn't make a male into something other than a male.

 

[Emily's Cat]

"Let Women Speak" huh? Well Posie, women have just spoken - they don't want you here!

Am I glad she has been sent running from New Zealand with her tail between her legs? You bet I am. We don't need her kind here, spreading her hate-fuelled rhetoric.

While I am not too pleased with the methodology - what would have been better is if the minister for immigration had shown some balls and barred this bigoted piece of human trash from even entering the country in the first place - IFAIC the end justifies the means. She has been given the clear message that she is not wanted here. She is gone and is unlikely to ever return - good riddance. I also hope this serves as a warning to others like her that if they are thinking of coming to New Zealand to spread their vile crap, they are in for a rough ride.

What's your opinion on the male who punched an elderly female in the face and broke their jaw? Are you okay with that too, you know, ends justifying the means and all that?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Heck, that wasn’t even the only thing I pointed to in that post.



I didn’t realize every single anti-trans thing she tweeted needed to meet with your approval before it counted as anti-trans enough, especially if you get to cherry-pick like that.

Of course, that wasn’t what you asked. You asked what she has said that was transphobic in my view. I gave you 2-3 examples from the last 24ish hours (probably more than that now) without even looking hard. It clearly wasn’t even intended to be exhaustive. Now, you’re cherry-picking and moving the goal posts.

You didn't provide ANY support for your claim that JKR has made anti-trans statements. None.

Maybe you intended to... but you didn't. So perhaps try again?