• 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.

Cont: Transwomen are not women - part XI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lplus said:
Of course. To state a legitimate need for sex based segregation at elite level is to accept that the word "woman" is at least part defined by biological sex. and if that is the case then males can never be "women" and that would never do, would it...
Click to expand...

No it isn't. It would be entirely possible to refer to female sports, without using the word "woman".
 
I’ve been listening to Kathleen Stock’s book Material Girls and, while it covers a lot of familiar ground, she spoke how the Freemasons have allowed transwomen to become members. But not women.

Can someone please explain the reasoning to me? Is it that they only accept biological sex as the primary consideration and that they are admitting, well, just men? Almost certainly not. It’s rather more likely they are telling the world “look at us, we are not bigots”, while denying biological women.

Whatever their reasoning is, it is insane.
 
I’ve been listening to Kathleen Stock’s book Material Girls and, while it covers a lot of familiar ground, she spoke how the Freemasons have allowed transwomen to become members. But not women.

Can someone please explain the reasoning to me? Is it that they only accept biological sex as the primary consideration and that they are admitting, well, just men? Almost certainly not. It’s rather more likely they are telling the world “look at us, we are not bigots”, while denying biological women.

Whatever their reasoning is, it is insane.
 
lionking said:
I’ve been listening to Kathleen Stock’s book Material Girls and, while it covers a lot of familiar ground, she spoke how the Freemasons have allowed transwomen to become members. But not women.

Can someone please explain the reasoning to me? Is it that they only accept biological sex as the primary consideration and that they are admitting, well, just men? Almost certainly not. It’s rather more likely they are telling the world “look at us, we are not bigots”, while denying biological women.

Whatever their reasoning is, it is insane.
Click to expand...

Why not? That could be exactly what they're doing. Defining man as male and woman as female has been the default until recently.
 
Lplus said:
Why not? That could be exactly what they're doing. Defining man as male and woman as female has been the default until recently.
Click to expand...

Well I assume an organisation as large and wealthy as the Freemasons would have a PR division advising their leadership. I can just see that division saying “know how to show the world you are really cuddly and progressive? Invite in transwomen. Don’t worry, someone will blackball them”.
 
lionking said:
I’ve been listening to Kathleen Stock’s book Material Girls and, while it covers a lot of familiar ground, she spoke how the Freemasons have allowed transwomen to become members. But not women.

Can someone please explain the reasoning to me? Is it that they only accept biological sex as the primary consideration and that they are admitting, well, just men? Almost certainly not. It’s rather more likely they are telling the world “look at us, we are not bigots”, while denying biological women.

Whatever their reasoning is, it is insane.
Click to expand...

My guess it's primarily for the benefit of late transitioners who were already members.
 
Matthew Best said:
OKLAHOMA CITY (KOKH) — An Edmond Public Schools parent filed a lawsuit against the district, claiming her 15-year-old daughter was attacked and "severely beaten" by a 17-year-old transgender student in the girl's bathroom.

According to the lawsuit, the district knew the student, who is a biological male but identifies as female, used the bathroom assigned to girls.

https://okcfox.com/news/local/edmon...ls-oklahoma-county-district-court-may-25-2023
Click to expand...

But... but... but we've been told that this never happens! There's absolutely no danger of a female being attacked by a trans identifying male! There's no documented cases of it anywhere ever! It totally doesn't happen!

Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP> for rule 0 and rule 12.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
theprestige said:
One of the lesser horrors of stories like this is that the TRA community has no clue about how to help young men like this.

TRAs in this thread! I challenge you! Present your plan for helping female-identifying male teens to understand that assaulting women in the women's restroom is not a part of their valid lived identity. Present your plan, or go down in ignominy.
Click to expand...

Lol, I'm not even going to try for that much. I'd be tickled if the TRAs in this thread even showed up to acknowledge that the thing they have said doesn't happen and there's no evidence of happening has actually happened.

But I'm sure this is just an anecdote and an outlier, so it doesn't count. For reasons.
 
sphenisc said:
No it isn't. It would be entirely possible to refer to female sports, without using the word "woman".
Click to expand...

Sure, it's possible. But we shouldn't have to. We shouldn't have to tap-dance around reality. We shouldn't have the language we use to describe ourselves stolen from us. We shouldn't be in a position where we can't use the word that defines and adult female of the human species because some anti-science activists have wedged males into it because of feelings.
 
Emily's Cat said:
But... but... but we've been told that this never happens! There's absolutely no danger of a female being attacked by a trans identifying male! There's no documented cases of it anywhere ever! It totally doesn't happen!

Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP> for rule 0 and rule 12.
Click to expand...

Consider that strawman properly flogged.

Fights happen in high school bathrooms all the time. Bathrooms are pretty much the only place students aren't supervised and it's where a lot of prohibited behavior occurs.

Sounds like the kid got expelled, though you kinda have to read between the lines when it comes to schools dealing with the confidentiality of minor students.

What exactly is your point? Or is this thread just becoming the anti-trans version of when white supremacists just spam "black crime" reports?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lionking said:
I’ve been listening to Kathleen Stock’s book Material Girls and, while it covers a lot of familiar ground, she spoke how the Freemasons have allowed transwomen to become members. But not women.

Can someone please explain the reasoning to me? Is it that they only accept biological sex as the primary consideration and that they are admitting, well, just men? Almost certainly not. It’s rather more likely they are telling the world “look at us, we are not bigots”, while denying biological women.

Whatever their reasoning is, it is insane.
Click to expand...

Nah, it's the same reasoning as for that transwoman in England who got to retain their peerage as a lord, where the position was strictly defined as being inherited by the oldest male offspring.

It's because when it comes to privileges, males are still males, and they still have male privilege. They still count as males for the purpose of inheriting sex-based positions and powers, for being included into Masons... basically for anything that is based on the male sex, they get to still be counted as males. But they also get to invade female positions and spaces because of their feels.

They get their cake and they eat it to... and females are left with an empty plate and hunger.

So very, very, incredibly oppressed they are.
 
lionking said:
Well I assume an organisation as large and wealthy as the Freemasons would have a PR division advising their leadership. I can just see that division saying “know how to show the world you are really cuddly and progressive? Invite in transwomen. Don’t worry, someone will blackball them”.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure they don't have a PR division. Masons are still very secretive and exclusive. I don't think masons have any interest in showing the world that they're "progressive and cuddly" - they aren't either of those things.
 
TurkeysGhost said:
Consider that strawman properly flogged.

Fights happen in high school bathrooms all the time. Bathrooms are pretty much the only place students aren't supervised and it's where a lot of prohibited behavior occurs.

Sounds like the kid got expelled, though you kinda have to read between the lines when it comes to schools dealing with the confidentiality of minor students.

What exactly is your point?
Click to expand...

My point is that you have repeatedly taken the position that there's no risk at all to females in female spaces from transgender identified males. You've repeatedly insinuated that females are hysterical overly-emotional bigots for having any concern about being attacked by a transwoman in a female space.

You keep taking the position that nobody has ever shown you any evidence of it happening.

So here's your evidence. You said it never happens, it's not a concern. You've said that females who are worried or concerned about it are just evil bigots, they're overreacting, there's no legitimate reason because there's nothing at all to fear from a transwoman.

But it HAS happened. More than once. Here it is again.

And as expected... you just hand-wave it away as if it's no big deal. You won't even ******* acknowledge that the thing you argue isn't a risk IS ACTUALLY A ******* RISK.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Nah, it's the same reasoning as for that transwoman in England who got to retain their peerage as a lord, where the position was strictly defined as being inherited by the oldest male offspring.

It's because when it comes to privileges, males are still males, and they still have male privilege. They still count as males for the purpose of inheriting sex-based positions and powers, for being included into Masons... basically for anything that is based on the male sex, they get to still be counted as males. But they also get to invade female positions and spaces because of their feels.

They get their cake and they eat it to... and females are left with an empty plate and hunger.

So very, very, incredibly oppressed they are.
Click to expand...

What exactly are you complaining about? The masons seem to be adopting a policy identical to what you prefer. They allow cis men and trans women in their men's only social club, they may as well be outright saying that "Transwomen are not women" as is the title of this thread.

Nothing new about private social clubs having retrograde membership practices. The trope of the private golf club that still doesn't allow black people or women exists for a reason.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
My point is that you have repeatedly taken the position that there's no risk at all to females in female spaces from transgender identified males. You've repeatedly insinuated that females are hysterical overly-emotional bigots for having any concern about being attacked by a transwoman in a female space.

You keep taking the position that nobody has ever shown you any evidence of it happening.

So here's your evidence. You said it never happens, it's not a concern. You've said that females who are worried or concerned about it are just evil bigots, they're overreacting, there's no legitimate reason because there's nothing at all to fear from a transwoman.

But it HAS happened. More than once. Here it is again.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has claimed that trans people are uniquely enlightened individuals that do not commit crime or other antisocial behavior. hell, I wish every schoolyard beating got this much care and concern from the public, kids in my school rarely got more than a week's suspension for acts that in other contexts would be criminal assault.

Emily's Cat said:
And as expected... you just hand-wave it away as if it's no big deal. You won't even ******* acknowledge that the thing you argue isn't a risk IS ACTUALLY A ******* RISK.
Click to expand...

Take a valium, the caps key doesnt make your inane screeds any more pointed.
 
Last edited:
TurkeysGhost said:
What exactly are you complaining about? The masons seem to be adopting a policy identical to what you prefer. They allow cis men and trans women in their men's only social club, they may as well be outright saying that "Transwomen are not women" as is the title of this thread.
Click to expand...
Why on earth do you think I'm objecting to the masons sticking to a male only requirement that aligns with my view of sex?

I was pointing out that the masons aren't doing this to be edgy and progressive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom