Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Thermal]

It's been a fast-moving thread, and without a working search function it's very difficult to track down past exchanges. Would you mind reprising that evidence for me?

I appreciate you asking, but I don't keep timetables and files on when I posted things either. Moreover, I need to get out of here. These toxic rinse and repeat sessions (not you) are making me loathe coming to the forum.

 

[theprestige]

I appreciate you asking, but I don't keep timetables and files on when I posted things either. Moreover, I need to get out of here. These toxic rinse and repeat sessions (not you) are making me loathe coming to the forum.

Dang, it's been ages since I've seen any new data about harassment of transwomen. The cites always seem to trace back to that one study of Brazilian sex workers.

 

[Thermal]

Dang, it's been ages since I've seen any new data about harassment of transwomen. The cites always seem to trace back to that one study of Brazilian sex workers.

You had specifically mentioned that previously, so i was careful not to rely on any work that used the Brazilian data, and relied entirely on American respondents. IIRC, it was both the Williams study and a Reuters survey giving loosely the same percentages, with Reuters giving the rates of specific physical and sexual assaults in restrooms separately, where the UCLA combined them with verbal harassment.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Hate to break it to you, but we ain't down in da holler comparing people to chickens and saying "if it's good enough for a horse, it's good enough for my wife".

I'd like to take a moment to welcome a good chunk of this thread to the 21st century. Please be careful, we move faster than you are accustomed to. What was good enough for Grammy in the 1940s doesn't always fly anymore. Even coloreds are in your bathrooms now, and no one is asking you if you are okay with it, or if you feel safe and dignified about it.

Oh, can it. It's absurdly degrading to find that there's no term for a human female, or to be referred to as as "cervix haver" or "bleeder" or "gestational body" or otherwise reduced to a collection of body parts.

And this insistence on pretending that female humans wanting male-free spaces when we're naked or vulnerable is somehow totally the same as racism is beyond insulting.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I hate this subject. It brings out the worst in so many people. I strongly believe in women's rights. The right to vote. The right to be free to choose. The right to choose to have sex or refuse it. The right to career opportunities and the right to earn as much as any man. The right for full bodily autonomy. The right to control their own health decisions. Reproductive or otherwise. The right to be free from harassment. I also believe that women's sports is a boon to women.

Do you think that female humans have the right to deny males looking at our naked bodies without our consent? Do we have the right to be protected from voyeurism or exhibitionism?

Not having to compete directly with generally physically superior males is unfair to some men. But I think it has been a concession that is good for women and society.

But I see those rights and benefits to women as part and parcel to overall human rights. Which include race and LGBT rights. The individual's right of self determinism. And in my view, sexual preference and gender identity is part of self determinism. Finding oneself freely without coercion and oppression.

Gender expression is a social construct that evolves. And I believe in the freedom of expression.

Express away, I'm all for it. But that expression doesn't supercede sex, nor does it grant the expresser the privilege of overriding sex-based boundaries.

 

[Emily's Cat]

But you also acknowledge that there's no way to tell whether a male is or is not trans.

The last is not true, but hardly matters.

You say it's not true. Fine - how do you tell whether a male is trans or not? Explain to us how we're supposed to know whether the male in our midst is trans or not?

Let's try it a different way. When you see a woman come into the women's room, do you stop her and make her prove she has to pee? I mean hey, she might be using that stall to do drugs or download child pornography. Since you think you are the Holy Gatekeeper of Legitimate Restroom Usage, you surely are checking everyone's legitimate claim to be there, right? Lemme guess: That's different?

I don't ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ care if that female human has to pee or do something else - that female human is FEMALE.

Let's try this a different way for you: When you see a twenty-something come in to a preschool day care and want to play with the kids, does it actually matter if that adult genuinely just wants to play? When a professional basketball player wants to join the 12-14 intramural team, does it actually matter if they genuinely just want to shoot hoops? When a 15 year old shows up at the 21+ night club, does it actually matter if they genuinely just want to dance?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Did you read Blanchard's questions I posted upthread? They did not ask if the guy was aroused by his own body. They specifically asked about "picturing nude female buttocks, oh and imagine they are yours". The questions were structured to be arousing first, then restricted later. I'd be shocked if anyone with testosterone coursing through their veins didn't perk up a few notches at those questions, regardless of their orientation or ID.

ETA: consider the actual question (not your rewritten paraphrasing):

"You became sexually aroused while picturing your nude female breasts."

Take the one word 'your' out of the latter part of the sentence and it becomes a literal command to become aroused picturing nude female breasts, which the XY guys don't normally need to be commanded to comply with.

Dude, the "your" in there is a pretty key element. But I get it - you think that males who enter female spaces for the purpose of sexual titillation, who use non-consenting females as unwilling participants in their public sexual role play should just be left alone. It's no big deal to you if they use actual live females as objects to feed their paraphilia, it's just a feeling, no big deal.

 

[Ziggurat]

I found a Williams study on transgender crime victimization:
Gender Identity Disparities in Criminal Victimization
However, this article has nothing to do with bathrooms. The word "bathroom" doesn't even appear in the article. It's just about general crime victimization rates.

Furthermore, as with many other studies, this one does not attempt to control for risk factors, so there is no possible way to conclude from the presented data how much (if any) of the increased crime rate is due to being transgender versus other correlated factors such as income level, age, drug use, etc. This study clearly does not support the claim Thermal made, but perhaps he has a different one in mind.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Would your position on these issues change tomorrow if everyone on Earth was cured of all sexual paraphilias tonight?

Maybe. I think I'd want the innate aggression and sexual drive of males to be tempered first. That said... there are pretty solid evolutionary reasons that support increased aggression and sexual drive in males so... that makes it a bit more difficult.

Here's the deal - if Tom next door doesn't have a clinical level paraphilia of voyeurism... I still don't want Tom to feel that they're entitled by right to peep at me without my consent.

 

[smartcooky]

Would your position on these issues change tomorrow if everyone on Earth was cured of all sexual paraphilias tonight?

It wouldn't need to change. The result would be no more push for transwomen to enter female spaces, because it's likely there wouldn't be any transwomen.

 

[theprestige]

I hate this subject. It brings out the worst in so many people.

Also, this is a myth.

Nobody here has any problem with gender-queering and nonconforming gender expression. There is very little opposition to transwomanhood as a gender expression.

One of the actual concerns is about men being entitled to override sex segregation whenever they want, as a public policy. It's not "the worst in people" to have concerns about that. It's a reasonable, rational concern to have. Don't believe the unhinged propaganda that insists you're a transphobe if you let yourself think about this issue rationally.

Another of the actual concerns is the vehemently anti-science approach of trans rights activists, to trans-affirming care. Again, it's not "the worst in people" to have concerns about that. Again, don't believe the unhinged propaganda that insists you're a transphobe if you want to examine trans-affirming care in a rational, scientific way.

If you want to see the worst in people when this topic comes up, look for the trans rights activists. Look for the people who demonize anyone who raises rational concerns about social and medical policy. Look for the people who cry "transphobe" and call for violence against "TERFs". Look for the people who set out to silence honest researchers, and suppress their research.

If you want to see people doing their best to have a rational debate about the place of gender expression in science, medicine, and public policy, join the conversation in this thread.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Ah I see after years away from this thread and we still have no concept that trans men exist.

 

[Matthew Best]

Ah I see after years away from this thread and we still have no concept that trans men exist.

Looks at thread title....

 

[Ron Obvious]

Ah I see after years away from this thread and we still have no concept that trans men exist.

The very fact that absolutely nobody is talking about "transmen" (i.e. females) as either a physical threat to anybody or a threat in sports competitions should tell you all you need to know about the supposed bigotry of those of us in the reality-based community on this issue.

 

[ponderingturtle]

The very fact that absolutely nobody is talking about "transmen" (i.e. females) as either a physical threat to anybody or a threat in sports competitions should tell you all you need to know about the supposed bigotry of those of us in the reality-based community on this issue.

But they are required to use the facilities of their birth sex so you are normalizing seeing muscled bearded men walking into the women locker room because legally they belong there.

 

[smartcooky]

Ah I see after years away from this thread and we still have no concept that trans men exist.

The very fact that absolutely nobody is talking about "transmen" (i.e. females) as either a physical threat to anybody or a threat in sports competitions should tell you all you need to know about the supposed bigotry of those of us in the reality-based community on this issue.

BOOM!!

@ponderingturtle if you would like to make a thread called "Transmen are not men" for that topic, I'm sure all those who are interested in the topic might join you there.

But they are required to use the facilities of their birth sex so you are normalizing seeing muscled bearded men walking into the women locker room because legally they belong there.

Err what?

 

[Ron Obvious]

But they are required to use the facilities of their birth sex so you are normalizing seeing muscled bearded men walking into the women locker room because legally they belong there.

"muscled bearded men", eh? Those sad victims of surgical mutilation and testosterone treatments aren't a threat to anyone.

 

[acbytesla]

So say we all.

The point of dispute is sex segregation.

Do you believe men should be entitled to override sex segregation whenever they want?

I believe everyone needs to evacuate their bowels and bladders. Where they do it matters little to me. I hope that it is sanitary. I can appreciate a certain desire for privacy. That is why there are stalls. Beyond that, I don't care.

 

[acbytesla]

I notice that not listed in here is a right to female-only intimate spaces.

I believe in that right, as well as a right to male-only intimate spaces.

Let me echo the sentiments of others in saying that no one here is opposed to allowing anyone to express their gender (whatever the ◊◊◊◊ that even is). But males going into female-only spaces isn't simply gender expression. Males should have no right to do this under the banner of gender expression.

It's not there, I don't give a damn.

 

[Rolfe]

"muscled bearded men", eh? Those sad victims of surgical mutilation and testosterone treatments aren't a threat to anyone.

Read the Supreme Court judgment. It specifically states that women who have masculinised themselves so much that their presence in women's single-sex spaces would be problematic, may be excluded.