Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[smartcooky]

Do you think that declaring this or that is a mental illness is the role of government?

Of course its not... but this is The Fat Orange Turd we're talking about--- he is currently in the process of putting loyalists and yes-men in place to satisfy his every whim. What on earth makes you think anyone could stop him?

You are so, so naive...

???

... and blind. He can direct his HHS to do anything he wants, and with a lunatic sycophant in charge, they will.

Sleepycooky?

No, just bored with the endless lack of insight you display on a daily basis.

 

[angrysoba]

Of course its not... but this is The Fat Orange Turd we're talking about--- he is currently in the process of putting loyalists and yes-men in place to satisfy his every whim. What on earth makes you think anyone could stop him?

You are so, so naive...



... and blind. He can direct his HHS to do anything he wants, and with a lunatic sycophant in charge, they will.


No, just bored with the endless lack of insight you display on a daily basis.

Sounds like capitulationist rhetoric to me.

If him MAGAfying the whole of the government leads you to wag your finger at people who object to it to cover your own capitulation to it then you are the one who is naive.

 

[d4m10n]

It would make much more sense for the US government to commission research into this rather than just simply make political or ideological declarations.

If the Jan 28^th EO is followed, it will be nigh impossible to pursue research into the efficacy of youth gender medicine as currently practiced in the U.S. without creating and fully funding private research institutes which accept no federal funding (e.g. Medicare, NIH grants, etc.).

 

[Emily's Cat]

Well, have at it.

Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Policy and

www.whitehouse.gov

I note that our resident "It's all fine because doctors have researched this carefully and are following international agreed best practice" contingent haven't been around lately.

Suspiciously absent from this thread since doctors and medical organizations started backtracking from their unevidenced positions. I suppose it feels better to just pretend the thread doesn't exist than have to admit that their appeal to imagined authority has always been as baseless as we said it was.

 

[smartcooky]

Brought over form the "Strict Biological Definitions" thread

Given that they have seen themselves as female their entire lives, do you think CAIS individuals ought to be forced to use male facilities, as per the new Trump EO on gender? Rolfe at #2,216https://www1.internationalskeptics....finitions-of-male-female.361531/post-14480060

Since they were assessed at birth as female, have always thought of themselves as female, look anatomically female, pass as female and have been treated all their lives as female, perhaps they should be "grandfathered in" to using female spaces. No-one's gonna know anyway... as opposed to those men who claim girly feels, and who want to cosplay as women so they can insinuate themselves into women's safe spaces in order to get off on flashing their fully intact male genitalia at women for ***** and giggles.

Individuals with AIS are not Self ID woman wannabes like these...

and these...

Who are obviously biological males. I don't want these Self ID freaks, or people like them, anyhere near where my daughters and grand-daughters are getting changed or undressing.

 

[acbytesla]

The thing is none of us are all man or all woman. We all start out female in our biological development and then some of us develop into males. We categorize species as male or female because that is a useful model. But while models may be useful, models are wrong. We can put a person into box, but few of us fit perfectly.

 

[Thermal]

The thing is none of us are all man or all woman. We all start out female in our biological development and then some of us develop into males. We categorize species as male or female because that is a useful model. But while models may be useful, models are wrong. We can put a person into box, but few of us fit perfectly.

*looks between legs* No, I'm pretty slam dunk in the one my DNA indicates.

Where you are on the masculinity/femininity by social norms is a different, and irrelevant, spectrum.

 

[varwoche]

The thing is none of us are all man or all woman. We all start out female in our biological development and then some of us develop into males. We categorize species as male or female because that is a useful model. But while models may be useful, models are wrong. We can put a person into box, but few of us fit perfectly.

Few fit "perfectly"? Whatever that means. A vast majority of the population fits just fine.

 

[GlennB]

The thing is none of us are all man or all woman. We all start out female in our biological development and then some of us develop into males. We categorize species as male or female because that is a useful model. But while models may be useful, models are wrong. We can put a person into box, but few of us fit perfectly.

Utter bilge.

 

[acbytesla]

*looks between legs* No, I'm pretty slam dunk in the one my DNA indicates.

Where you are on the masculinity/femininity by social norms is a different, and irrelevant, spectrum.

Are you sure? You do know that some people with penises have XX chromosome. And some humans with XY chromosomes have wombs.
You have estrogen flowing through your body, you have nipples you have some of the biological and chemical makeup of the female sex. And women also produce testosterone. It's natural, even useful to categorize species by sex. But the reality is there is a gradient. And where we draw the line is an arbitrary decision.

 

[varwoche]

Are you sure? You do know that some people with penises have XX chromosome. And some humans with XY chromosomes have wombs.
You have estrogen flowing through your body, you have nipples you have some of the biological and chemical makeup of the female sex. And women also produce testosterone. It's natural, even useful to categorize species by sex. But the reality is there is a gradient. And where we draw the line is an arbitrary decision.

Picture a pack of laughing dogs. Even that wouldn’t to do this abject drivel justice.

 

[acbytesla]

Picture a pack of laughing dogs. Even that wouldn’t to do this abject drivel justice.

Why? Because you're not comfortable with your feminine side? You're all man and don't let anyone suggest otherwise?

 

[Thermal]

Are you sure?

Yep.

You do know that some people with penises have XX chromosome. And some humans with XY chromosomes have wombs.
You have estrogen flowing through your body, you have nipples you have some of the biological and chemical makeup of the female sex. And women also produce testosterone. It's natural, even useful to categorize species by sex. But the reality is there is a gradient. And where we draw the line is an arbitrary decision.

And humans are bipedal, walking erect on their bilaterally symmetrical legs. That is in no way negated by an occasional crossed wire birth of a person with no legs.

 

[theprestige]

The thing is none of us are all man or all woman.

Utter bilge, but for a different reason.

Science aside, that's not the thing at all. The thing is a man can be more than man enough to be reasonably barred from women's sports. This is something even you agree about. And the vast majority of men fall into this category of "more than man enough to not count as a woman".

By definition, all transwomen fall into this category of "not woman enough to count as a woman."

Once you come to terms with this reality, that pretty much resolves the debate about trans rights in public policy. Gender expression is already protected in hiring, housing, etc. Sex segregation in sports and some other areas makes sense and should be upheld. People should have the legal right to eject a man from a women's space if they want to.

---

The debate about trans rights in public policy would be very different, if it were about trying to secure a legal right for CAIS individuals to use the women's restroom or compete in women's sports. But it's not about that. Your "none of us are all man or all woman" is a red herring, regardless of whether it's true. It's not the thing.

 

[theprestige]

Why? Because you're not comfortable with your feminine side? You're all man and don't let anyone suggest otherwise?

Are you woman enough to compete in women's sports?

 

[acbytesla]

Utter bilge, but for a different reason.

Science aside, that's not the thing at all. The thing is a man can be more than man enough to be reasonably barred from women's sports. This is something even you agree about. And the vast majority of men fall into this category of "more than man enough to not count as a woman".

By definition, all transwomen fall into this category of "not woman enough to count as a woman."

Once you come to terms with this reality, that pretty much resolves the debate about trans rights in public policy. Gender expression is already protected in hiring, housing, etc. Sex segregation in sports and some other areas makes sense and should be upheld. People should have the legal right to eject a man from a women's space if they want to.

---

The debate about trans rights in public policy would be very different, if it were about trying to secure a legal right for CAIS individuals to use the women's restroom or compete in women's sports. But it's not about that. Your "none of us are all man or all woman" is a red herring, regardless of whether it's true. It's not the thing.

Ever look at a correct map? Is Greenland or Antarctica like it appears? But despite how incorrect the map is, it still is useful. Sex is a label which is useful, but it's not correct. We've all known effeminate boys and tomboy girls. Do you not think that biology and chemistry is not involved?

 

[acbytesla]

Are you woman enough to compete in women's sports?

I'm not enough of an athlete these days.

 

[theprestige]

Ever look at a correct map? Is Greenland or Antarctica like it appears? But despite how incorrect the map is, it still is useful. Sex is a label which is useful, but it's not correct. We've all known effeminate boys and tomboy girls. Do you not think that biology and chemistry is not involved?

That's still not the thing.

The debate about trans rights in public policy would be very different, if it were really about figuring out if effeminate men should compete in women's sports rather than men's sports. But it's not about that. This sex-as-a-spectrum stuff doesn't do the work you think it does, to resolve the policy issues we're trying to resolve.

You already agree that men shouldn't be entitled to compete in women's sports simply because they say they want to.

 

[theprestige]

I'm not enough of an athlete these days.

I will accept this alternate spelling of "no, but I don't want to concede the point".

 

[Thermal]

Ever look at a correct map? Is Greenland or Antarctica like it appears? But despite how incorrect the map is, it still is useful. Sex is a label which is useful, but it's not correct. We've all known effeminate boys and tomboy girls. Do you not think that biology and chemistry is not involved?

Masculinity and femininity are behavioral and presentation traits. Nothing to do with your actual sex. Effeminate boys and tomboy girls are still males and females.