Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Emily's Cat]

You have no idea what these men are really like. You have completely swallowed the propaganda about the poor harmless troubled soul who only wants to have everything women have and not be bothered by anyone about it.

To be fair... I think a lot of males don't have any idea what males are really like. I mean, most know in a very general way that males are well, sexually motivated and tend toward finding titillation in the wind blowing just the right way. That's just how males are built - and it crosses species, it's part of being the sex that makes a whole lot of little gametes and shotguns them into the world in hopes one will land. Evolution is a bit of a bitch and doesn't care about social convention.

But most males have that desire fairly well tamped down. At worst, it's the occasional fantasy in their mind, not anything they would ever actually act on.

Here's the kicker though. Every female I have ever interacted with who is over the age of about 12 has been ogled by adult males at a minimum. Around 3 in 4 females have been sexually assaulted at least once. About 1 in 3 has been subjected to an attempted or completed rape.

No male that I know is aware of any male that they know who would ever do such a thing.

That doesn't mean that they don't know someone who has - it just means that they don't tell each other about it, they keep it hidden.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I was told on another forum that transwoman is transphobic. It's trans woman. It's a type of woman, like old woman or funny woman. If you write it as one word that isn't clear.

Thus I write it as one word, so that I am being clear.

 

[Thermal]

It has everything to do with the thread, Thermal.

We're all supposed to be skeptics here, right? We're supposed to critically examine evidence when available, and to employ solid reasoning and logic when talking speculatively. We're supposed to be unafraid to point out falsehoods and baseless belief.

If an observably 48 year old person tells you that they sincerely and genuinely feel like they're actually 5 years old, a rational skeptic would at best accept that this is how they feel about themselves, but would accept no obligation to pretend that they perceive that 48 year old to be a young child. And a rational skeptic would very reasonably recognize that it is inappropriate to grant that 48 year old unfettered access to day care centers based on their internal identification.

Similarly, if we meet someone who believes themselves to be Napoleon Bonaparte, we can acknowledge that they hold this belief without feeling at all obligated to grant them control of France's military.

But in this one specific instance, where people of one observable and verifiable sex claim to have the "mind" of the opposite sex, or to "feel like" the opposite sex, or to in some fashion have a subjective, internal, unverifiable "identity" of the opposite sex... somehow we're all supposed to ignore the evidence of our eyes and our ears and our millions of years of evolutionary experience and pretend like their internal feelings about themself supersede their sex.

Herc says "what if he thought he was a 5yo in a 48yo's body?" What if he's right? Like cognitively, emotionally at a five year oldest developmental level? A five year old in every practical way but the most literal? My wife would be the first to tell you that I'm the poster child for being behind the developmental curve, well into my 30s and for all intents and purposes, still a teenager.

So if someone is for all intents and purposes exactly what they believe themselves to be (except, like sex, in the most literal sense), what are you going to treat them as? If an adult is developmentally disabled, go ahead and tell me you would demand they act their age and not like a little child.

See, if they are for all intents and purposes exactly what they say they are, even in contradiction of what we know to be most technically true, how do we treat them?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Ok! Your data shows 79 transwomen sex offenders in the UK. There are approximately 260,000 transgender hommies in the UK.

Nah, you're missing the second step.

Take the number of female sex offenders as a portion of females in the UK. And take the number of non-trans male sex offenders as a portion of males in the UK. Then take the number of transwomen sex offenders as a portion of transwomen in the UK. The prevalence of sexual offending among transgender identified males is orders of magnitude higher than it is for non-trans males, which is itself orders of magnitude higher than it is for females.

Yeah, that's enough for me to draw the relevant conclusion about how vile the trannys are, across the board.

Again... Nah, you're missing the point. And you're putting derogatory words into our mouths that none of us have actually used.

The problem is not specifically transgender identified males. The problem is 1) autogynephiles and 2) self id.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Great! Transwomen, then. Same conclusion reached, except that we can add in that transmen seem to be less violent than any of the groups at all, including Brits as a whole.

Finnish (?) study some while back - transgender identified females (transmen) exhibited criminality at a higher rate than females, but at a much lower rate than males.

You know why? It's because they're FEMALES first and foremost, but testosterone is a steroid that increases aggression.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Also, before going on, you opened up a bunch of challenges and stuff to me that were abruptly abandoned when I responded, like the priest and nun titles. Were we done with them? What was the resolution? You got quiet.

Resolution is that you're free to use whatever form of address that you feel is appropriate, but you're not free to demand that I must also use that form of address even if I feel it is inappropriate.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Ok, I hear this. But on the flip, I'm sure you are aware that using "they" is often intended as a passive aggressive insult? Its intended to emasculate, or otherwise deny sexuality. Its meant as an insult, exactly how you perceive being dorced to use gendered language is. Like, reading your posts using "they" universally, I have to mentally check myself, saying "EC doesn't mean insult by this".

It's a better option than referring to all of you meat-suit operators as "it"

 

[Emily's Cat]

Herc says "what if he thought he was a 5yo in a 48yo's body?" What if he's right? Like cognitively, emotionally at a five year oldest developmental level? A five year old in every practical way but the most literal? My wife would be the first to tell you that I'm the poster child for being behind the developmental curve, well into my 30s and for all intents and purposes, still a teenager.

So if someone is for all intents and purposes exactly what they believe themselves to be (except, like sex, in the most literal sense), what are you going to treat them as? If an adult is developmentally disabled, go ahead and tell me you would demand they act their age and not like a little child.

See, if they are for all intents and purposes exactly what they say they are, even in contradiction of what we know to be most technically true, how do we treat them?

See, now you've changed it up. Now you're moved the goal post from a 48 year old who identifies as a 5 year old, to a 48 year old who is cognitively disabled and has the mental development of a 5 year old - and those are drastically different things.

And even if a 48 year old is cognitively at the same level as a 5 year old, we still don't drop them into the kindergarten play group. Because they still have the body of a 48 year old, complete with all of it's adult responses to stimulus, greater size and strength, etc. It would be inappropriate to let them into that group, and it would be dangerous for the actual children.

 

[Thermal]

Nah, you're missing the second step.

Take the number of female sex offenders as a portion of females in the UK. And take the number of non-trans male sex offenders as a portion of males in the UK. Then take the number of transwomen sex offenders as a portion of transwomen in the UK. The prevalence of sexual offending among transgender identified males is orders of magnitude higher than it is for non-trans males, which is itself orders of magnitude higher than it is for females.

IDGAF. When we are talking about whether the legit pervs are representative of the whole (that's what the discussion was about) IDGAF about the actions of a tenth of a percent. That's dishonest beyond words.

Again... Nah, you're missing the point. And you're putting derogatory words into our mouths that none of us have actually used.

No no no no no no no! Their ain't no "our", here. There are individuals with varying viewpoints. The poster I was responding to said just that, with little sugar coating. It was a very very fair paraphrasing. Your POV, even when we are in disagreement, I have much more respect for and would not say you thought that way. Again, we ain't the Bloods and the Crips.

The problem is not specifically transgender identified males. The problem is 1) autogynephiles and 2) self id.

Agreed. Getting bored with pointing out that my POV is not the caricature you are making it out to be.

However, the much larger problem is this hyper dishonest pretending that the tenth of a percent is representative of the whole.

 

[Thermal]

Finnish (?) study some while back - transgender identified females (transmen) exhibited criminality at a higher rate than females, but at a much lower rate than males.

You know why? It's because they're FEMALES first and foremost, but testosterone is a steroid that increases aggression.

Great! Still screwing around with that tenth of one percent, and acting like it is representative of thr other 99.9%.

 

[Thermal]

Resolution is that you're free to use whatever form of address that you feel is appropriate, but you're not free to demand that I must also use that form of address even if I feel it is inappropriate.

I demand nothing of you. We are debating the relative merits and their justifications. I find no moral.or intellectual.high ground in saying to a priest "you aren't my father, maaaaaan". I find it petty, and haven't yet heard a reasonable argument in favor of it.

 

[Thermal]

See, now you've changed it up. Now you're moved the goal post from a 48 year old who identifies as a 5 year old, to a 48 year old who is cognitively disabled and has the mental development of a 5 year old - and those are drastically different things.

And even if a 48 year old is cognitively at the same level as a 5 year old, we still don't drop them into the kindergarten play group. Because they still have the body of a 48 year old, complete with all of it's adult responses to stimulus, greater size and strength, etc. It would be inappropriate to let them into that group, and it would be dangerous for the actual children.

You're both saying it doesnt apply, then making it apply. If you recall, that's why I said it was not what we were talking about, and that's why. It's a bad analogy.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

Only men can in fact be transwomen.

That's true.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

Transwomen are not Women​

If they were women they wouldn't be called transwomen.

Just like bathrooms aren't rooms, I suppose.

Rooms with a bath are bathrooms. Women who are men are not women. You can poop in a urinal but it's still a urinal (not a commode) and you can put a bow tie on a pig bit's still a pig (not an accountant).

 

[lionking]

I see we are back to “things that never really happen” again. Here is a Queensland Government report entitled “Harm of men claiming to be women”.

https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/com/LASC-C96E/PPROLAB202-EF1C/Taken%20on%20Notice%20and%20Response,%20Womens%20Forum%20Australia.pdf

It includes pages after page of sample offences committed by self ID transwomen, and harm to women (through law suits, threats, losing jobs etc) who tried to stand up to bullying transwomen.

My point is how many women have to be killed or otherwise harmed by transwomen before people acknowledge the violence of many of this cohort?

There is also no doubt that in Australia, the UK and no doubt many other countries that police are going easy on offensive behaviour by transwomen because of the negative publicity arrests would attract.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

....... My point is how many women have to be killed or otherwise harmed by transwomen before people acknowledge the violence of many of this cohort?

There is no end in sight. Is there?

..... police are going easy on offensive behaviour by transwomen because of the negative publicity arrests would attract.

I think you're right. What's the word in Kings Cross?

 

[theprestige]

Dude, you need to sober up. I have adamantly said that sex segregation is necessary, from locker rooms at the gym to prisons.

The corollary to that is that gender decoupled from sex is pretty much meaningless (where it isn't outright regressive).

 

[Thermal]

The corollary to that is that gender decoupled from sex is pretty much meaningless (where it isn't outright regressive).

Why does it have to be "decoupled"? Can't it be holding hands, and on rare occasions be holding thd other hand with the sex it normally isn't?

 

[theprestige]

Why does it have to be "decoupled"? Can't it be holding hands, and on rare occasions be holding thd other hand with the sex it normally isn't?

Of course it can. That's what we're saying: Gender and sex are coupled. It's that connection that makes gender meaningful.

You're the one who's saying gender isn't coupled to sex, and that literally the entire scientific community agrees with you.

But you're wrong. There's a reason transgender recognition hinges on trying to couple gender to the opposite sex.

 

[Thermal]

Of course it can. That's what we're saying: Gender and sex are coupled. It's that connection that makes gender meaningful.

You're the one who's saying gender isn't coupled to sex, and that literally the entire scientific community agrees with you.

But you're wrong. There's a reason transgender recognition hinges on trying to couple gender to the opposite sex.

You keep using de/coupled. I don't get why. Nothing needs to be coupled or not with other words. They are just related terms. Like any related terms, there's overlap in meaning, that whole Venn diagram intersectionality.

As with many words in the language, there is a little ambiguity. On the whole, I would prefer we just don't use 'gender' so much, because it is largely unhelpful and tends to cause more grief than not using it at all. But that shouldn't mean we redefine it to be synonymous with sex. Just use sex when you mean sex, and gender when you mean gender, which is fairly rare.

Rest rooms, locker rooms, competitive athletics and prisons were never meant to be segregated by your gender expression. They were always intended to be segregated by sex. That, for me, ends the issue of trans women and self ID access. But as a form of address, like calling a priest "Father O'brien" when he is not your biological male parent, the gender ID is fine.