Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

That would be a discussion, wouldn't it? Except you just dismissed it with, what does it matter?

You misunderstand. I'm not dismissing anything, and I'm not asking that rhetorically. I want an actual answer about what you think matters and what doesn't. If it matters (and presumably it does matter to you), then there's a why, and I want to know the why.

I reject the idea that Bryson represents all trans-people.

Again, this is a straw man. I never said Bryson represents all transpeople. Let me make it even more explicit: Bryson is an anomaly.

Nevertheless, Bryson is also real. So how would your preferred policy handle Bryson? Nothing about answering that question requires that Bryson be treated as a typical transperson. In fact, I'll let you in on a secret: your answer doesn't even have to treat Bryson as being trans at all.

Nevertheless, any real-world policy still needs to do something with Bryson. So what would your preferred policy do with him? There's no fear mongering about this question. It's a very simple real-world question.

But you clearly can't handle it.

 

[Thermal]

Where I bog down is...

How do you know Bob lied? How is it possible for anyone to know that Bob lied?

We weren't talking about how an outside observer could tell. We were talking about if it was possible. Do you think it would be possible for Bob to lie? Ziggurat doesn't.

 

[Ziggurat]

We weren't talking about how an outside observer could tell. We were talking about if it was possible. Do you think it would be possible for Bob to lie? Ziggurat doesn't.

In any practical sense, that's correct, he can't. In an abstract sense, OK, he can lie, but that doesn't actually matter, because we can never know that. Since no lie can ever be shown to be a lie, practically speaking it's the same as being impossible to lie. Moreover, we must take any declaration as if it were true, meaning that it IS true in the only sense that matters from a policy perspective. So in terms of policy, it is very much like lying is impossible. It is indistinguishable from lying being impossible. Anything beyond that amounts to counting angels on the head of a pin.

 

[theprestige]

You forgot this part:

It's really only a few Jews who are sex predators or fraudsters, not all Jews should be judged by Weinstein or Madoff.

It's really only a few black people who are sex predators or murders, not all black people should be judged by Bill Cosby or O.J. Simpson.

It's really only a few clowns who eat people, not every clown should be judged by John Wayne Gacy.

No, I did not forget that part. I ignored it because it's not about organizations protecting wrongdoers, and doesn’t in any way represent my attitude towards people with gender dysphoria who are seeking social transition to ameliorate their distress. Those, to me, are like the good cops and righteous Catholics, who are likewise harmed by the toxic and anti-social policies of their organization and its leaders.

You're conflating two different things. One of them gives you a good handle on what I think and why. The other is misleading nonsense based on another premise entirely. A false premise. I didn't forget it at all. I just ignored it for being as steeped in irrelevancy as it was in bad faith.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Just sitting here waiting for Emily's Cat, because she has chapter and verse on all this, due to having a relative who was directly affected by it.

It's been an incredibly busy week, and this thread has suddenly become a lot more active!

Alrighty then.

My godchild has Kallmann Syndrome, and is at the more extreme end of the possible impacts. While it's not a chromosomal disorder, it's still considered a Disorder of Sexual Development, because the condition interferes with how puberty proceeds. Puberty in humans is a two-part process, which involves the adrenal gland and the pituitary gland. In generalities, the adrenal governs the growth of the long bones, closure of the growth plates, and the development of fine armpit, pubic, and leg hair. The pituitary governs production of sex hormones, and during puberty it prompts development of secondary sex characteristics that differ by sex, as well as the accretion of bone density. The pituitary drives the hormone flood that in females results in widened hips, maturation of milk glands in the breast, deposition of fatty deposits in the breast, buttocks, and hips, enlargement of the uterus, and onset of menarche. In males, it drives an increase in muscle density, descent of the scrotum further away from the body, enlargement of the penis, coarsening of leg and arm hair, and the growth of facial hair.

Kallmann syndrome is a condition that affects the pituitary gland, but not the adrenal. In my godchild's case, their pituitary didn't trigger ANY of its pubertal function at all. This is a particular concern because a failure for the two glands to work in concert has deleterious effects. The most immediate of those is that the long bones grow but do not increase in density which makes them brittle. And if the growth plates close before accretion occurs, there's no way to reasonably address that brittleness. So you get a child that grows taller, but whose bones become weaker in the process. Additionally, without the pituitary side of the system functioning, the child becomes sterile. In females, eggs never mature and never begin being released; in males, the testes don't fully mature and don't begin producing sperm.

Puberty blockers ONLY block the production of sex hormones - thus they only impact the pituitary half of the process. They do not halt or slow down the adrenal process at all.

 

[Thermal]

In any practical sense, that's correct, he can't. In an abstract sense, OK, he can lie, but that doesn't actually matter, because we can never know that. Since no lie can ever be shown to be a lie, practically speaking it's the same as being impossible to lie. Moreover, we must take any declaration as if it were true, meaning that it IS true in the only sense that matters from a policy perspective. So in terms of policy, it is very much like lying is impossible. It is indistinguishable from lying being impossible. Anything beyond that amounts to counting angels on the head of a pin.

I totally get your point. You're saying that since we can't verify the veracity of his claim, it effectively doesn't matter if it's true or not- the end result is the same.

But changing that to "it's literally impossible for him to lie" is exactly the kind of ambiguous bull ◊◊◊◊ that got this all started, ie gender is kinda sorta the same as sex. Keep the meanings crystal clear and that wiggle room starts vanishing.

 

[Emily's Cat]

The segregation of the rooms is based on gender identity, not comfort of amenities.

The segregation of the rooms is based on sex, not unverifiable subjective feelings inside someone's head.

 

[Thermal]

The segregation of the rooms is based on sex, not unverifiable subjective feelings inside someone's head.

You're going to need to notify a lot of people, States, and courts about that. They don't know.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Your diminutive attitude is. Gender reassignment surgery is not just cutting a penis off.

Often, it's bolting on fake boobs.

Gender reassignment surgery includes ANY of the following, in any combination:
Removal of breasts in females for the purpose of gender identity
Hysterectomy for the purpose of gender identity
Ovariectomy for the purpose of gender identity
Breast implants in males for the purpose of gender identity
Penectomy for the purpose of gender identity
Orchiectomy for the purpose of gender identity
Facial feminization cosmetic surgery
Tracheal shaving in males
Vaginoplasty in males
Phalloplasty in females
Creation of artificial scrotum with implants to simulate testes in females

Which of those do you think should be required for a male who claims a transgender identity to qualify as "true trans"?

 

[Mycroft]

You misunderstand. I'm not dismissing anything, and I'm not asking that rhetorically. I want an actual answer about what you think matters and what doesn't. If it matters (and presumably it does matter to you), then there's a why, and I want to know the why.

Stop trying to force me into your paradigms, then we can talk.

Again, this is a straw man. I never said Bryson represents all transpeople. Let me make it even more explicit: Bryson is an anomaly.

If Bryson is necessary to make policy concerning all trans-people, then he represents all trans-people.

 

[Mycroft]

In any practical sense, that's correct, he can't. In an abstract sense, OK, he can lie, but that doesn't actually matter, because we can never know that. Since no lie can ever be shown to be a lie, practically speaking it's the same as being impossible to lie. Moreover, we must take any declaration as if it were true, meaning that it IS true in the only sense that matters from a policy perspective. So in terms of policy, it is very much like lying is impossible. It is indistinguishable from lying being impossible. Anything beyond that amounts to counting angels on the head of a pin.

We can look to someone's actions to tell if they're lying. Being trans doesn't change that.

 

[Mycroft]

No, I did not forget that part. I ignored it because it's not about organizations protecting wrongdoers, and doesn’t in any way represent my attitude towards people with gender dysphoria who are seeking social transition to ameliorate their distress. Those, to me, are like the good cops and righteous Catholics, who are likewise harmed by the toxic and anti-social policies of their organization and its leaders.

You're conflating two different things. One of them gives you a good handle on what I think and why. The other is misleading nonsense based on another premise entirely. A false premise. I didn't forget it at all. I just ignored it for being as steeped in irrelevancy as it was in bad faith.

I disagree. I think conflating trans-people with a handful of scary trans-people is exactly the same kind of bigotry as those others I mentioned.

Well, maybe not the clowns.

 

[Ziggurat]

Stop trying to force me into your paradigms, then we can talk.

How the ◊◊◊◊ is asking you a question forcing any paradigm onto you? It's not.

Your refusal to talk has nothing to do with me forcing anything.

If Bryson is necessary to make policy concerning all trans-people, then he represents all trans-people.

No. Bryson is not necessary to anything. But when you make a policy for transpeople AND non-transpeople (because your policy has to deal with everyone), whatever that policy is, it will do something with Bryson. Even if that policy treats Bryson as not being trans, it's still doing something with him, because he's still a person, and your policy has to deal with all people, not just transpeople, or it isn't actually a policy at all. That's just basic logic. And I made this rather explicit. I SAID that you didn't have to treat him as being trans. But you still keep making this straw man claim. That's you trying to force your paradigm on me, not me forcing something on you.

 

[Mycroft]

Often, it's bolting on fake boobs.

Are the boobs bolted on when cis-women get them?

If you're going to use diminutive terms like this, you're going to get ignored. If you have something worth saying, you can find respectful ways of saying it. This isn't a hate-trans forum where people share yuks at trans-people's expense.

 

[Mycroft]

No. Bryson is not necessary to anything.

If the scary trans-person is not necessary then stop bringing up scary trans-people. Cherry-picking is still cherry-picking even if you think there is a grove of cherries to pick from.

 

[Mycroft]

Which of those do you think should be required for a male who claims a transgender identity to qualify as "true trans"?

Any of them is far more than self-ID. The very existence of these options demonstrates that there is a lot more than the extremes of self-ID and ...measuring hip bones?

 

[Ziggurat]

We can look to someone's actions to tell if they're lying. Being trans doesn't change that.

What actions would indicate someone is lying?

Under self ID, you cannot gatekeep trans identity. There is no obligation for anyone to act in any particular way in order to qualify as trans. They don't need to cross-dress or wear/not wear makeup, they don't need to undergo any medical or psychological treatment, they don't need to fill out any paperwork. So what would constitute lying under self ID? How would you determine that? Well, you can't. There is no way under self ID to determine that someone is lying, because none of the actions that they take can indicate they are not trans since no requirements can be placed on being trans.

And if you don't accept self ID, what requirements do you have in order for someone to establish that they are authentically trans?

 

[Thermal]

I'm feeling like we should be bringing up Casey Anthony and Lorena Bobbit every time the rights of the virtuous, defenseless women are brought up. They are very representative.

 

[Thermal]

If the scary trans-person is not necessary then stop bringing up scary trans-people. Cherry-picking is still cherry-picking even if you think there is a grove of cherries to pick from.

In fairness, they haven't delivered a measuring cup full of cherries, much less a grove.

 

[Ziggurat]

If the scary trans-person is not necessary then stop bringing up scary trans-people.

No, I won't. The fact that he's not necessary in order to form a policy doesn't mean his case isn't useful to consider. It is useful to consider. Again, any policy you want will do something with Bryson. I want to understand your position, so I want to understand what you would do with Bryson. You cannot wish him away, reality doesn't work that way. So answer the damn question. It's not that hard. Again, you can even say that he's not actually trans as part of your answer. After all, any policy on what to do with bathrooms has to handle non-trans people too.

You keep running away.