"Misgendering" is now a federal offense

[smartcooky]

You claim to be a supporter of the LGBT community. The "T" is part of that, yet you refuse to acknowledge that transgender people are the gender they say they are. That's not support. That's opposition. I will even grant you the LBG part. But if you want to support the T part, you need to start by acknowledging transgender identity.

You can call yourself anything thing you want, but it does not magically make you what you claim to be. Furthermore, NO-ONE has to believe you. This is the crux of the debate!!

If you are not a black person, you can't simply declare yourself to be one by fiat, magically become one, and then expect everyone else to agree that you are black.

If you were not born 2010, you can't simply declare that is your birth year by fiat, magically become 14 years old and then expect the bus driver to give you the youth concession rate.

If you are not a superhero, you can't simply declare yourself to be one by fiat, magically become one, and then expect everyone else to call you Superman.

And likewise, if you are not a biological female, you can't simply declare yourself to be one by fiat, magically become one, and then expect everyone else to refer to you as she or her.

I'm sick to death of having to continually repeat this. I support all LGBTQ+ peoples' rights to exist, to be who they are, to love who they wish, to dress however they like, to live where they want, but that support, like my support of anything, will only go so far. I believe, and will always believe that a woman is always, and only, a human, biological female, and that a man is always, and only a human biological male, and that it is impossible for one to change into the other. This is an irrefutable, observable, scientific reality - a reality I am not prepared to deny. When someone can show me a functioning biological female who has fathered a child, and a functioning biological man who has conceived and birthed a child (intersex exluded or course) I might have to reconsider that position.

Furthermore, just because I refuse to deny this scientific reality does not make me a transphobe or a bigot any more than refusing to call a white person black makes me a racist, or refusing to accept a 65 year old person as 14 year old makes me ageist.

Therefore, in spite of the fact that, as stated above, I support those who are in the LGB and T communities, I do not accept, and I will never accept, that a trans woman is a woman, or that a trans man is a man....

 

[smartcooky]

Since when are trans activists demanding things that disadvantage women?
And before you reply, no, bathroom privileges are neither a demand, nor do they disadvantage women, which is something that trans women are. No, I will not be participating in that thread.

Also, why is nobody complaining about trans men? Think about that question for just a little bit.

You just answered your own question.

You do understand that biological males are physically bigger and stronger than biological females, right?

- A male's upper body strength is on average between 40-60% greater than a female's

- A male's lower-body strength is on average 25% greater than a female's

- A male's grip strength is 70% greater than a female

- One in every five females will be raped at least once by a male in their lifetime, but only one in every 71 males will be raped by a female?

- 91% of the victims of rape and sexual assault are female, but only 9% are male?

And yet you don't think females can ever be disadvantaged by males being allowed into their safe spaces.

 

[smartcooky]

Because the trans-men don't pose the same problems to biological men? If a biological woman wants to call herself a man and compete in the same boxing weight category, he doesn't pose a higher risk of cracking the other guy's skull like when the reverse happens. Or if a trans-man actually demanded to be put in the men's prison, I don't think many would expect him to even be able to rape the others. Or in sports, if we had a trans-man insist to compete in, say, men's swimming, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have as big an advantage as in the opposite case. (In all swimming events, men's records are consistently about 90% shorter, to the point where even a moderately trained biological male high schooler can outcompete a top woman athlete.)

I'm sure you could figure it out yourself if you had taken your advice and thought about that question for just a little bit.

And just to add to my post, I am just an average 68 year old guy, 5ft 10½ and 13 st. I keep myself fit by walking at least 5 - 10 km a day, but I don't do any strength conditioning such as weights of any kind.

If I were to hit Mike Tyson across the jaw as hard as I could, he would probably hardly feel it. (But I'd likely end up with fractured fingers)

If I were to hit an average sized man like me across the jaw as hard as I could, I might break his jaw and he might end up with concussion.

If I were to hit an average sized woman (5ft 5in, 10 st) across the jaw as hard as I could, I would very likely do her serious damage, maybe even fatal damage.

But yeah, females could never be disadvantaged or frightened by being alone in a toilet with a male stranger, right?

 

[Ziggurat]

Also, why is nobody complaining about trans men? Think about that question for just a little bit.

Hans touched on this, but let me make a key aspect more explicit.

Male sexual predators have an incentive to pose as females to access victims. The trans rights movement, particularly self ID, gives them cover to do so. Female sexual predators don’t operate the same way as male sexual predators. They don’t need to pose as males to access victims, they have no incentive to. So people worry about sexual predators posing as trans women, but they don’t worry about sexual predators posing as trans men, because there’s an asymmetry to sexual predator behavior. This is completely logical, and also completely obvious.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

It's even worse in college (since the OP is about college,) where last I heard some statistics, the percentage of sexual assaults on women can be staggering. E.g., according to a study by the National Institute of Justice, 19% of women in college will experience sexual assault or attempted sexual assault, while a study by RAINN puts the risk of rape at 26.4% of undergraduate females. That's equal and respectively higher than the average for the whole life among women. It's already like college is how you speedrun getting raped.

Also a lot of rapes happen when the female is incapacitated (e.g., drunk, drugged, etc) and cf the same National Institute of Justice it's estimated that only 2% of those are reported.

(And yes, males also have a higher risk of being raped in college, by a whopping 78% higher, but nevertheless, they too are FAR more likely to get raped by other males, rather than by females.)

Forget toilets. Even putting biological males in the same dorm room as a biological woman, just if the former ticked a checkbox that they identify as the latter, is just increasing the risk. A woman who had one drink too many or was at a party all night can't even go to her dorm room as a safe(r) space, if she's been put in a room with a biological male.

Meanwhile a cis male being put in the same room with a trans male, is probably not the one in danger.

 

[theprestige]

You claim to be a supporter of the LGBT community. The "T" is part of that, yet you refuse to acknowledge that transgender people are the gender they say they are. That's not support. That's opposition. I will even grant you the LBG part. But if you want to support the T part, you need to start by acknowledging transgender identity.

I am happy to stipulate that anyone is the gender they say they are.

They're not the sex they say they are, though. And that's the issue. Gender decoupled from sex is functionally meaningless. The only time a transgender claim becomes relevant is when it's actually a claim of entitlement to transcend sex segregation. As long as a transwoman isn't trying to enter sex-segregated spaces set aside for women, they have my full support. On the other hand, as long as they're not trying to do that, their gender is totally irrelevant anyway.

"Misgendering" - i.e., correctly referencing someone's biological sex - may seem like a minor issue. But preferred pronouns are the first step down the path to transcending sex segregation. Which is something I find intolerable. I wouldn't begrudge the inch, if it hadn't turned into a mile. But here we are.

 

[Matthew Best]

Also, why is nobody complaining about trans men? Think about that question for just a little bit.

There have already been quite a few answers to this question, so I won't bother writing my own.

But I am intrigued as to what arthwollipot was expecting us to come up with if we gave this some thought?

 

[plague311]

(since the OP is about college,)

pffhahaha like the OP means ******* dick anymore. That's hilarious, pull the other one, it has bells on it.

Arth, I don't like telling people what to do, but I'd just leave this thread all together. Let them have it. It's just a circle jerk of high fiving each other and spouting the same nonsense as the other threads.

Seriously, there's nothing to be done in this thread. Let this group have it.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

pffhahaha like the OP means ******* dick anymore. That's hilarious, pull the other one, it has bells on it.

What a weird position. Just because some of you already went off topic, is hardly a reason to actually condemn someone for trying to stay on topic.

Doubly so when

A. the point made wasn't even depending on it being on topic or not. And

B. it was still answering a question (incidentally from Arth), on the previous page. It doesn't actually NEED going all the way back to the OP as a justification to post it.

Address it, or not, but being dismissive because it's not about whatever detour into dada-land you wanted to address instead, is weird at best.

Arth, I don't like telling people what to do, but I'd just leave this thread all together. Let them have it. It's just a circle jerk of high fiving each other and spouting the same nonsense as the other threads.

Seriously, there's nothing to be done in this thread. Let this group have it.

Translation: let's do the full spoiled brat thing and make a big show of leaving and slamming the door

Look, nobody forces you to take part in any discussion whatsoever. But making sure everyone sees you throwing a fuss and slamming the door ain't say much else than that you've indeed run out of arguments

 

[d4m10n]

Seriously, there's nothing to be done in this thread. Let this group have it.

Nothing to be done? Try making an argument using evidence instead of shaming fellow skeptics for taking an opposing view.

 

[Ziggurat]

It's even worse in college (since the OP is about college,) where last I heard some statistics, the percentage of sexual assaults on women can be staggering. E.g., according to a study by the National Institute of Justice, 19% of women in college will experience sexual assault or attempted sexual assault, while a study by RAINN puts the risk of rape at 26.4% of undergraduate females. That's equal and respectively higher than the average for the whole life among women. It's already like college is how you speedrun getting raped.

I don't generally trust these statistics, I think they're usually gamed to make the problem seem worse. It doesn't really matter for this thread since the argument stands even with much lower rates (sex segregation is part of how you keep rates low, and it's not like 26% is intolerable but, say, 5% would be fine), but I think if a quarter of women were getting raped in college, we wouldn't see women outnumbering men.

 

[Thermal]

Seriously, there's nothing to be done in this thread. Let this group have it.

In a fit of optimism, we could try to make some headway by ignoring the trolly stuff (although conceded, I've participated) and push for something substantial among the reasonable posters. I'll start:

Trans people have 100% every right to live their lives without harassment. I'll call a male a "she" if I reasonably think they are living the life. My line in the sand is drawn where a dude wants to walk into a women's locker room with nothing more than a claimed self identification to be there. That's too open to abuses. The women have rights too, one of which is to not have a naked male body walk up along side them while the females are changing or showering.

I think the trans person is the one who should give way here, simply because if they feel they are actially in the "wrong" literal body, being in the "wrong" locker room is pretty trivial. And if they are concerned about harassment to themselves (as they have every right to be), they probably emmpathize with the idea that their male body would feel very threatening to some women in a female "safe space"

Eta: I'm a fairly big and scruffy looking guy, and even though I'd never ever assault a woman, I get that my appearance will make some women feel uncomfortable or unsafe, so I'll go out of my way to have the women feel more comfortable. I think a trans woman should behave the same way. It's not belittling the trans woman's identification; it's just what males have to keep in mind if me don't want females unnecessarily alarmed.

Years ago in the pay phone days, I walked up to a bank of phones late at night where a lone young woman was making a call. No one else around. She was scared witless and screamed "don't touch me", and I literally had to explain that I just wanted to use the adjacent pay phone. She laughed nervously and apologized.

My takeaway is that she didn't need to feel threatened by me. I literally did nothing menacing. But young women are the ones who get raped by men. It's a very real threat to them, that I have no fear of happening to me. So I can go a few steps out of my way to not even suggest menace, reasonably or not, because I don't want to make anyone else feel even vaguely ill at ease because it's "my right" to do be wherever I want.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

I don't generally trust these statistics, I think they're usually gamed to make the problem seem worse. It doesn't really matter for this thread since the argument stands even with much lower rates (sex segregation is part of how you keep rates low, and it's not like 26% is intolerable but, say, 5% would be fine), but I think if a quarter of women were getting raped in college, we wouldn't see women outnumbering men.

Well, as you also seem to agree, the exact number doesn't really matter for that argument.

Not sure what you mean, by "we wouldn't see women outnumbering men", though, so some explanation would be welcome. Most rapes aren't murder-rape, and most women don't even report a rape (which is why the number is higher for the organization providing counselling is higher than for DOJ statistics), much less kill themselves over it. So I'm not sure what you think would change the number of women there.

 

[Lithrael]

In a fit of optimism, we could try to make some headway by ignoring the trolly stuff (although conceded, I've participated) and push for something substantial among the reasonable posters. I'll start:

Thanks Thermal, and yeah that seems like a sensible position to me too.

 

[Stout]

I'm sure they would object if their position on this issue was labelled misogynistic, though that's more defensible than labelling most of the posters here as bigots or anti-trans. Which is not to say that there aren't people who are genuinely bigots and anti-trans, because there certainly are.

The typical "counterargument" to that approach is to label the person making it a TERF, just like noted "transphobe" Meghan Murphy.

All-women's college, Mount Holyoke, deems vaginas 'exclusionary'

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

I think the trans person is the one who should give way here, simply because if they feel they are actially in the "wrong" literal body, being in the "wrong" locker room is pretty trivial. And if they are concerned about harassment to themselves (as they have every right to be), they probably emmpathize with the idea that their male body would feel very threatening to some women in a female "safe space"

My problems are that:

1. empathy is exactly the one thing notably missing in these conversations. I'm supposed to believe it's nothing but empathy, respect, understanding, and such things, but strangely enough they only apply to group A getting everything the speaker wants them to get. When B even mentions their problem, on the best of days they get an "X is Y because I said so" non-sequitur, and on the worst of days, out comes the abuse towards group B. Now I'm not saying that any group should actually get everything they want, B included, but basic empathy and respect would mean at the very least listening to their arguments.

I submit the idea that, as the old saying goes, if someone is nice to you but rude to the waiter, they are NOT a nice person. Or, equivalently, if their empathy only extends to what furthers their goal (be it getting into a date's panties or aligning themselves with the cool progressive position), and drops to zero outside of that, then no, that's not empathy. It's in fact being a sociopath.

2. Doubly so when it's clearly stuff that is already used to game the system. Like the rapist in Scotland suddenly identifying as a woman, and being sent to a women prison... where, predictably, she raped some. Not just dismissing stuff like that, but being anywhere between dismissive and abusive to the women having a problem with that, is NOT empathy.

3. it's not even actually a position of most trans (before it became fashionable to use it to game the system), and most of the activists aren't showing empathy to the trans EITHER. They're not even actually asking the trans what they want. Mostly it's just a case of people who aren't actually trans, and have no idea of or care for what the trans actually want, TELLING the trans what they should want or do.

There's a reason why an actual trans once posted: we're not a team in the game, we're the ball.

Because that's really it. It's just a bunch of people trying to score some kind of social score off the trans. And lacking the empathy to even consider that it might not actually be respectful or kind to do so.

 

[Ziggurat]

Not sure what you mean, by "we wouldn't see women outnumbering men", though, so some explanation would be welcome.

My wording wasn't very clear, but I was referring to the fact that more women go to college (and graduate) than men. If rape rates were really that high at colleges, I think a lot of women would respond by not going to college in the first place. Just like a lot of women respond to the risk of being assaulted at night in public parks by not going to public parks alone at night.

 

[Thermal]

My wording wasn't very clear, but I was referring to the fact that more women go to college (and graduate) than men. If rape rates were really that high at colleges, I think a lot of women would respond by not going to college in the first place. Just like a lot of women respond to the risk of being assaulted at night in public parks by not going to public parks alone at night.

Estimates are that 97% of rapists walk free. Rape may be very prevalent at colleges, and simply go as unreported as anywhere else in society. A female student is not likely planning her career, thinking "now if I want to become a lawyer, I'll have to assume being raped three times, its the price of an education." No one thinks it will happen to them, or that they are not on guard enough to prevent themselves from becoming statistics.

 

[The Atheist]

Huh? I’m trying to figure out the situation here.

You thought you were talking to a man until her girlfriend showed up? What was it about this meeting that made you realize you were talking to a woman?

When they started kissing.

Also, why is nobody complaining about trans men? Think about that question for just a little bit.

Very difficult for a FtM trans to rape anyone, they don't have anywhere near the strength to compete against men, and they're an exceedingly small minority of all trans people.

That said, I have a serious issue with trans blokes - I was witness and signed the marriage certificate of a young FtM trans bloke a few months ago and his bride is one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen. She's also compassionate, highly intelligent and articulate and earns more than me.

When are going to take our women, I'm definitely complaining.

Oh please keep up. I know you have no interest in sport. But a lot of women do. They are being injured in contact sports by transwomen. At least acknowledge that.

Ahem.

I posted the volleyball concussion - it's not just contact sports. I wouldn't want to see Brett Lee in a skirt bowling at a female cricketer.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

My wording wasn't very clear, but I was referring to the fact that more women go to college (and graduate) than men. If rape rates were really that high at colleges, I think a lot of women would respond by not going to college in the first place. Just like a lot of women respond to the risk of being assaulted at night in public parks by not going to public parks alone at night.

It seems to me like:

1. There is still a significant difference in outcomes, based on whether you went to college or not. I don't think you can even be in some jobs like lawyer or doctor if you didn't.

And even in other jobs, there's a pervasive idea for employers that if you went to ANY college, just the fact that you made it through those years and managed to fit in the structure and study and pass exams, those are already positive flags. Like, you could have gone and studied gender studies (nothing wrong about that), and then apply for a programmer job, and it being a different domain is less important than having been through college.

2. People tend to be optimistic and hope they're in the other three quarters.

I mean, historically people actually went and tried to get into jobs like mercenary. Even in higher risk versions like a two-hander doppelsöldner (double pad mercenary), even if that double pay was based on the extra risk you took by going in with a great sword and no protection. Not only that but they paid themselves for the training to qualify as a trained greatsword user, so they could get that job.

Or every soldier in the Roman army (before they started drafting much later in AD times) was a volunteer, even if IIRC it meant about 50-50 chance you'll get out of it alive.

Or European officers were even paying for a commission, when the life expectancy was that you probably won't make it past the age of 30. (French cavalry general Antoine de Lasalle even told his hussars, "Any trooper who is not dead by thirty is a coward, and I don’t anticipate exceeding that length of time." He actually died at 33, so make of that what you will.)