Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Thermal]

Also repeatedly dismissing those arguing the contrary position as bigots and haters.

Ya after being wildly insulted over and over and over, I started giving back. Dial back the hypocrisy, if you please.

 

[Pixel42]

I have never said 'there are no female characteristics'. You are inventing stuff again.

Many on "your side" have been arguing that quite vehemently.

Nobody has been arguing that.

 

[Thermal]

Your claim, your burden of proof.

What would you like to bet? I'm not here to do busy work for you, that gets summarily ignored. I've already done so.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I explain myself quite well, it's you who chooses to be obtuse.

You should stop asking questions that assume your paradigm and not mine. That's dishonest.

You haven't explained yourself at all, Mycroft. You've merely asserted the baseless believe that "Transwomen are women", but you've in no way supported or even elaborated on what that actually means to you personally. You haven't explained what you think "woman" even implies in this context, and you've actively avoided responding to questions about what exactly transwomen have in common with females that they do NOT have in common with males.

 

[Thermal]

How exactly does allowing males into (formerly) female spaces affect those of us who utilize male spaces?

Families. Children that our under our care who can't vote but will be affected. Do we really need to do this?

I'd much rather listen to his daughter in her own words, given the chance.

Probably should, but I'll take his word that he is arguing for his underage granddaughters by proxy in good faith.

I'm not directly affected at all and I trust my wife and daughter to speak up for their own interests.

Even for me, that's cold.

,Equality isn't really the efficient move here; women are not demanding an equal number of urinals and men are not demanding an equal number of disposal bins for menstrual products.

Access to a public space is in fact an equality issue.

You want males who look exactly like cisgender men to have access to female spaces for the sake of "equal rights," correct?

Their looks, and if they meet whatever standard you are setting, is not on my radar, no.

It is certainly no less enforceable than sorting by self-i.d. since anyone capable of lying can falsely claim to identify as the opposite sex and we are all capable of lying at times.

Yes, liars can manipulate all kinds of policies. Not much new there.

If we lived in a society like that, we probably wouldn't be having this debate.

That said, I find it bizarre that you value the comfort of unnamed hypothetical people over that of women who are actually participating here.

As I keep saying, I want it all. Not just, say, Rolfe to have those trannys kept away from her. Everybody treated fairly. It's a tough needle to thread.

 

[theprestige]

I'll cop to that. We were discussing on another thread recently about getting an erroneous idea in your head and holding it as true for years

Regarding what has been "belaboredly repeated" in this thread, keep in mind: search is down, and it ain't no trivial task to find old posts on a thread this size. The stat gets thrown up over and over and over is the British one with 79 trans sex offenders out of a population of 69 million. Comparing with the US, I would need to find about 300 transgender people assaulted to be comparable. Do you really think we couldn't do that, and more?

Yeah, without search it gets difficult.

Anyway, the gist of it is: Where claims of transwoman harassment by men are supported by citations, the bulk of those citations can be traced back to a single study of violence against transwomen sex workers in Brazil. It was a single study, now getting long in the tooth, and doesn't tell us anything at all about overall male animus towards transwomen.

This data set is a wholly inadequate argument for giving transwomen access to women's spaces for their own safety.

 

[Thermal]

Nobody has been arguing that.

You quite literally were, very recently, in asking what women's presentation was.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Right. Because there is nothing specifically female about being soft spoken. Christ, most guys I know are more soft spoken than most women I know.

I have no idea what any of this is supposed to mean.

I'm challenging your assertion - specifically I'm challenging whether your assertion actually represents your reality, or whether it's window-dressing that represents an idealized world that doesn't actually exist.

You previously said that if you saw a male in a dress you would 'clock them as a woman'. I don't think that's as true as you might like it to be. I don't think you actually 'clock them as a woman'; rather in the majority of cases you 'clock them as a dude that wishes they were a woman'. The latter is perfectly acceptable, there's nothing at all wrong with it.

I'm pointing out that perceiving an individual as being female is quite a different thing from perceiving an individual as a male but being willing to play along with their desire to be treated as if you perceived them as female.

An exaggeration, perhaps... but it's the difference between:
Seeing a child in a with costume at halloween and saying "my you're scary, what a wicked witch"
and
Seeing a child and actually believing them to be a real-life witch

 

[Thermal]

Yeah, without search it gets difficult.

Anyway, the gist of it is: Where claims of transwoman harassment by men are supported by citations, the bulk of those citations can be traced back to a single study of violence against transwomen sex workers in Brazil. It was a single study, now getting long in the tooth, and doesn't tell us anything at all about overall male animus towards transwomen.

This data set is a wholly inadequate argument for giving transwomen access to women's spaces for their own safety.

I'd argue that the data set ain't a whole lot better for arguing against access. I've got a trans friendly state here, right down to high school showers, and I'm not seeing the violent freakshow that posters here assure me is a certainty.

Eta: I linked Wikipedia stats below, none rely on this Brazilian study you assert

 

[Pixel42]

You quite literally were, very recently, in asking what women's presentation was.

Nope. Spectacular comprehension fail.

 

[Thermal]

I'm challenging your assertion - specifically I'm challenging whether your assertion actually represents your reality, or whether it's window-dressing that represents an idealized world that doesn't actually exist.

You previously said that if you saw a male in a dress you would 'clock them as a woman'. I don't think that's as true as you might like it to be. I don't think you actually 'clock them as a woman'; rather in the majority of cases you 'clock them as a dude that wishes they were a woman'. The latter is perfectly acceptable, there's nothing at all wrong with it.

I'm pointing out that perceiving an individual as being female is quite a different thing from perceiving an individual as a male but being willing to play along with their desire to be treated as if you perceived them as female.

An exaggeration, perhaps... but it's the difference between:
Seeing a child in a with costume at halloween and saying "my you're scary, what a wicked witch"
and
Seeing a child and actually believing them to be a real-life witch

Ok, I get your point, although I don’t remember saying that or in what context. For clarity, no, I certainly don't think I would clock any guy in a dress as a woman. I think I would almost certainly clock them as a dude in drag, unless they were abnormally "passing".

Not to give you busy work, but could you remind me what comment you are referring to?

 

[Rolfe]

I'll cop to that. We were discussing on another thread recently about getting an erroneous idea in your head and holding it as true for years

Regarding what has been "belaboredly repeated" in this thread, keep in mind: search is down, and it ain't no trivial task to find old posts on a thread this size. The stat gets thrown up over and over and over is the British one with 79 trans sex offenders out of a population of 69 million. Comparing with the US, I would need to find about 300 transgender people assaulted to be comparable. Do you really think we couldn't do that, and more?

I don't think you could, no.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Oh-oh!

Yep, good start. Shade is on the way!

This is some sort of biblical thing, right? "Go forth and procreate".

No doubt.

Nature vs. the bible or nature supports the bible?

Are morals innate?

Thank you for your honesty.

I don't agree with that and anyway I think you are overstepping your authority about what "inappropriate" means.

I'm not going to play chess with a pigeon. None of my position bears any relation to religion, it's entirely from an evolutionary perspective. It also has nothing to do with morality.

As for "inappropriate" I'm fairly sure that almost all adults believe that sporting a woody in a business meeting is inappropriate. I'm sure if you thought about it for more than a second you could glean what is meant by that very common term with respect to public erections.

 

[Thermal]

I don't think you could, no.

Betting window is open.

Eta: 5 seconds on Google and I've got 271 murdered, not just assaulted. I can probably do much better with better quality stats if given incentive. What's your bet?

Violence against transgender people in the United States - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Still feeling confident Rolfey? Here's a stat on violence against dem.pervs in your own UK(linked downthread):

"Hate crimes against transgender people in England, Scotland and Wales, as recorded by police, increased 81% from the 2016–17 fiscal year (1,073 crimes) to the 2018–19 fiscal year (1,944 crimes)"

 

[Matthew Best]

What would you like to bet? I'm not here to do busy work for you, that gets summarily ignored. I've already done so.

I'm very happy to bet that your claim results in your burden of proof - that's always been the case and I don't see why it should be any different in this thread. Saying you've already done the work is just a lie - you've provided nothing.

 

[Thermal]

I'm very happy to bet that your claim results in your burden of proof - that's always been the case and I don't see why it should be any different in this thread. Saying you've already done the work is just a lie - you've provided nothing.

I meant on other issues in this thread where I pulled documentation, and y'all ignored it and changed the subject. After a couple round and rounds with that, I get bored.

Eta: since you guys are appallingly lazy, I'll direct you to the post above yours where I linked information very much consistent with my claims with a 5 second search.

 

[smartcooky]

Right. Conservatives did, as the majority. So when you see a majority in both voting and trans views... hm, what to think?maths fai

Math fail. He wasn't voted in by a 2/3 majority

The somewhat different reasons are what makes this interesting. There's a spectrum, from the practical to the practically nazi. The latter is gaining ground on this thread, I'm seeing.

 

[Thermal]

Math fail. He wasn't voted in by a 2/3 majority

Didn't say he was.

If ya don't like the colors, don't wear them on ya sleeve.

 

[Thermal]

And although you have all gone suddenly quiet, here is the international transgender violence wiki page, which I'm sure you all have memorized over the years like you memorized those 79 British transgender sex offenders:

Violence against transgender people - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yet I don't agree it fails. You point out masculine behavior, label it as masculine, then deny the existence of masculine/feminine behavior. You don't make sense.

Your interpretation and understanding is flawed.

Masculine and feminine behaviors certainly exist. At some level, there are behavioral tendencies that have evolved along sexed-lines, just as any other sex-correlated characteristic has evolved. But that's just it: they're correlated. They're not exclusive, and they're not definitive.

For example, males tend to have larger feet than females do. Foot size is fairly well correlated with sex. But it's not exclusively driven by sex. If a male has small feet for a male, nobody thinks that they must therefore be females because they have small feet. On the other hand, if a person that you believe to be male has a vulva, vagina, cervix, uterus, fallopian tubes, and ovaries... they actually are female regardless of what you might have initially believed.

Similarly, there are behavioral tendencies that are correlated with sex. Some of these are tied to hormones, some are evolutionarily driven. In general: females tend to be less physically aggressive and confrontational than males, females tend to exhibit more caregiving behaviors than males, females tend to have stronger freeze and flight instincts than fight instincts compared to males, females tend to be less sexually motivated than males and more emotionally motivated. There are many behavioral tendencies that are correlated with sex - and a lot of those behaviors span species, they're not unique to just humans.

But those tendencies aren't prescriptive. If a male is nonconfrontational, with a strong caregiving instinct and a tendency to run away from danger, that doesn't make them female. You could describe them as being effeminate, you could say that they aren't particularly masculine. But that in no way makes them female.

An effeminate male is not a woman; a masculine female is not a man.