Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

And yet you keep banging on about allowing the sex segregated line for toilets to be crossed being no big deal

Not true.

It is true. You do it in this very post. More below.

Multiple issues: 1) I don't use that slur

It's not a slur, and nobody is demanding that you use it.

I have, earlier. Obviously, I disagree with your framing. You pee where it feels right with your self ID. 99.5+% of the time, it jibes with your bio sex. That goes in both directions: males don't have 'rights' to deny anyone from using the men's room, either, and never have.

And here you are saying it's no big deal for the sex segregation line to be crossed.

I think US Representative Sarah McBride seems to fit more naturally in a women's restroom more than the men's.

There's nothing natural about it. Anything that makes McBride seem like a woman is entirely artifice, not nature.

I think it's profoundly bigoted to want to criminalize her use of a rest room

I think it's profoundly insensitive and misogynistic to ignore the discomfort that women feel when their intimate spaces are invaded by males.

because you trawl the internet for stories of cross dressing pervs which get claimed as representative.

How do you tell the difference between an authentic trans identifying male and a "cross dressing perv"? And what even is that difference, anyways? I don't think you've ever given a coherent response to either of these questions.

 

[d4m10n]

males don't have 'rights' to deny anyone from using the men's room, either, and never have.

In a modern democratic society, we all get to have some say over the antidiscrimination laws governing public accommodations, not to mention voting with our feet and our wallets on which businesses we choose to patronize in the rare event that the government hasn't regulated on some specific issue.

Framing this argument in terms of "rights" is a bit misleading, because people tend to think rights are inalienable and ineffable, granted by god, existing in a non-physical realm, etc. Better to discuss which policies ought to be favored by private businesses, municipal codes, state laws, etc.

 

[p0lka]

Aber brought it up in response to Polka's assertion that simply changing the signs to Male and Female would stop trans-identifying men from going into the female toilets. He (I think of him as a he, but that may just be an assumption) stated that all the McDonald's toilets he has seen have been labelled Male and Female. My assumption is that Aber is Scottish, because the vehemence of his opposition to Scottish independence would have been remarkable in someone with no skin in the game (and as far as I recall he seemed to have a close familiarity with Scottish politics at that time), and there are plenty towns in Scotland beginning with "Aber". I had assumed Aberdeen.

The point is that Aber never at any time claimed that every single McDonald's in the world labels their toilets Male and Female, just the ones he had encountered. I had never paid any attention, merely going by the symbolic pictograms, but lo and behold, when I did look, it was just as Aber said. A McDonald's in Scotland used Male and Female on their signs.

What we are lacking is any evidence of male people who want to use the women's toilets being deterred from this in these branches of McDonald's. Given the normal behaviour of trans-activists, I would expect a campaign against McDonald's to stop being transphobic and replace these signs with "gender" labels, if the current signs were actually forcing them to stay out!

Re: underlined. Yes we lack data on whether female and male signs do actually cause people to rethink which one to use? And if the tra's actually did a campaign against McDonald's then well that would be interesting to see as they would be admitting that their sex has not changed.
I can't see any downside to switching to male female signs.

 

[d4m10n]

And what even is that difference, anyways?

Wouldn't the difference be between two distinct psychological states:

1) sexual arousal at the thought of oneself as a woman (i.e. AGP)

2) gender euphoria which makes someone feel great about themselves without feelings of arousal

 

[Ziggurat]

Wouldn't the difference be between two distinct psychological states:

1) sexual arousal at the thought of oneself as a woman (i.e. AGP)

2) gender euphoria which makes someone feel great about themselves without feelings of arousal

If these were mutually exclusive, perhaps. I have seen no evidence or even argument that they are mutually exclusive. But I don't think the first is what Thermal has in mind for his pervs, and it still doesn't address how you tell the difference.

 

[Ziggurat]

Re: underlined. Yes we lack data on whether female and male signs do actually cause people to rethink which one to use? And if the tra's actually did a campaign against McDonald's then well that would be interesting to see as they would be admitting that their sex has not changed.

You say that as if such an admission would change anything. It would not. Nobody is actually confused about whether or not their sex has actually changed.

I can't see any downside to switching to male female signs.

I don't think I ever asserted that there was a downside, only that there was no particular upside.

 

[d4m10n]

…I don't think the first is what Thermal has in mind for his pervs, and it still doesn't address how you tell the difference.

A wearable adaptive penile rigidity monitoring system for assessment of erectile dysfunction - Microsystems & Nanoengineering

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a prevalent type of sexual dysfunction, and continuous monitoring of penile tumescence and rigidity during spontaneous nocturnal erections is crucial for its diagnosis and classification. However, the current clinical standard device, limited by its active mechanical...

www.nature.com

 

[p0lka]

You say that as if such an admission would change anything. It would not. Nobody is actually confused about whether or not their sex has actually changed.

I don't think I ever asserted that there was a downside, only that there was no particular upside.

Previously you linked me to a thing that was about doping athletes and mentioned Heidi Krieger now Andreas Krieger and after reading about them I said a thing

Your link under the photo goes to a 'having to sign up' to view it, I had to disable javascript to actually view it without signing up.
It's a personal account from them and while I feel for them cos it sounds terrible, I had to go to the wiki to find out about them.

It seems they actually felt that because of their masculinity they had to conform to it? and lob off the female bits? That's society getting into andreas's brain. It's gender and society ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ with people once again.

I would just highlight it, but Emily's Cat told me off about highlighting so i'll underline it instead
What's your opinion about my underlined opinion?

 

[p0lka]

You say that as if such an admission would change anything. It would not. Nobody is actually confused about whether or not their sex has actually changed.

I thought the whole 'tra's are insisting that they had changed their sex' was a thing that you had said? I could be incorrect, if so I apologize and it may be other posters saying that, but according to this thread itself there are lots of people confused about the ability and whether they can change sex?

What are you on about?

 

[p0lka]

You say that as if such an admission would change anything. It would not. Nobody is actually confused about whether or not their sex has actually changed.

I don't think I ever asserted that there was a downside, only that there was no particular upside.

"Every lack of a downside is an upside" source for the quote... me.

 

[Ziggurat]

What's your opinion about my underlined opinion?

That may be part of it, but probably not all of it. The thing is, testosterone (and synthetic hormones) don't just produce physiological changes. They also produce behavioral changes. When you put women on testosterone, they don't just start looking more male, they start acting more male too. There's a fair amount of "gender role" stuff which is arbitrary, but a good chunk of it isn't. A good chunk of it is biology based. So if your behavior fits with male patterns because of brain changes caused by doping, that's not just society getting into your brain. That's the drugs getting into your brain.

 

[Ziggurat]

I thought the whole 'tra's are insisting that they had changed their sex' was a thing that you had said?

Yes, they do. But my point here is that the specific rhetoric they use is irrelevant. Whether they claim to be female or not has always been beside the point. Getting them to admit they aren't female would accomplish nothing, because this was never about the actual biological reality of the situation, and it was never about logical consistency.

 

[Ziggurat]

"Every lack of a downside is an upside" source for the quote... me.

There's a reason that quote isn't attributable to someone famous.

 

[theprestige]

"Every lack of a downside is an upside" source for the quote... me.

Doing things for no good reason is a downside. Whether you calculate the cost in terms of money, time, calories, whatever... you're spending resources and getting nothing of value in return. No upside is an automatic downside, full stop.

That's not a facile quotation or an empty slogan. It's an argument, with premises, reasoning, and conclusion. It needs no attribution, because it stands or falls independently of who makes it. But if you're handing out participation trophies, I'll take credit for it.

 

[theprestige]

That may be part of it, but probably not all of it. The thing is, testosterone (and synthetic hormones) don't just produce physiological changes. They also produce behavioral changes. When you put women on testosterone, they don't just start looking more male, they start acting more male too. There's a fair amount of "gender role" stuff which is arbitrary, but a good chunk of it isn't. A good chunk of it is biology based. So if your behavior fits with male patterns because of brain changes caused by doping, that's not just society getting into your brain. That's the drugs getting into your brain.

Tangentially:

Tired: "Why can't a woman be more like a man?"

Wired: Women can totally be more like men! Science! Progress! Olympic medals!

Inspired: All the best women are men.

 

[Thermal]

It is true. You do it in this very post. More below.

Still wrong, as you are every time you assert it. See below.

It's not a slur, and nobody is demanding that you use it.

It is, and I am being asked to answer questions with the slur as a given. See below.

And here you are saying it's no big deal for the sex segregation line to be crossed.

Nope, and obviously. I say clearly and dear God repeatedly that there is no line, but a blurry area. You and others just keep saying there is a hard line, and ignoring arguments to the contrary.

Which you have to do, or your arguments fall apart. The same robotic catch phrases get repeated over and over and over, like 'sex segregated line' and 'entitled to override' and the rest. You beg the question in every repetition, because you NEED those assumptions to be accepted. They are not, because that is what the whole debate is about.

There's nothing natural about it. Anything that makes McBride seem like a woman is entirely artifice, not nature.

You forgot to read the part where it says 'seems like a more natural fit'. Those words have meanings which don't mean 'natural v artifice'. But you know that.

I think it's profoundly insensitive and misogynistic to ignore the discomfort that women feel when their intimate spaces are invaded by males.

I'll keep that in mind if I see anyone doing so.

How do you tell the difference between an authentic trans identifying male and a "cross dressing perv"?

Oh Christ, again? First, make some sense out of your question. Why are you telling the difference? What are you doing or going to do? Are you trying to have police throw them out? You can only do so if the behavior is criminalized, and I'm not overly invested in how the bashers will enforce their criminalized penalties.

Actually, the question is unanswerable, as you have framed it with slurs in both directions. You are asking 'how do you tell the difference between an authentic darkie and an n-word?". I can't answer your reprehensible questions without acknowledging their premises, which I don't. I don't care if you want your slurs to be acceptable. You ain't making fetch happen.

And what even is that difference, anyways? I don't think you've ever given a coherent response to either of these questions.

I have, and many times. Well, not the first because of your derogatory language, and not the second because you imply that "they are all the same". So you are right, I can't/won't answer either.

 

[Thermal]

If these were mutually exclusive, perhaps. I have seen no evidence or even argument that they are mutually exclusive. But I don't think the first is what Thermal has in mind for his pervs,

"His pervs". Priceless. That's not my expression; it's from a member of your own team in this very thread who used it soberly to describe Transwomen, as a group.

and it still doesn't address how you tell the difference.

Same way you tell if someone is a Republican. You rely on what they say and do. If they vote for Trump and dislike the Libs and transwomen and all, I'm going to take them at their word. I have no reason not to.

Why are you trying to tell the difference? What are you doing or going to do?

 

[Ziggurat]

Nope, and obviously. I say clearly and dear God repeatedly that there is no line, but a blurry area. You and others just keep saying there is a hard line, and ignoring arguments to the contrary.

I didn't say the line was hard, that's entirely your own straw. Nor did I say it never gets crossed. But you are absolutely saying it's no big deal to cross it. And why would it be, if you're right that the line is hardly even there?

You forgot to read the part where it says 'seems like a more natural fit'. Those words have meanings which don't mean 'natural v artifice'. But you know that.

It's not usually put in those terms, sure, but the comparison is in fact quite apt. McBride can be made to superficially resemble a woman, but he is not actually a woman. Putting him in the women's bathroom is not in fact a more natural fit, because those superficial qualities which make him resemble a woman are not in fact the ones which make bathroom segregation important in the first place.

Oh Christ, again? First, make some sense out of your question. Why are you telling the difference? What are you doing or going to do? Are you trying to have police throw them out?

If there's a complaint about their presence, yes. Would you not want Bryson kicked out by police if someone complained?

You can only do so if the behavior is criminalized

No, this is wrong. You clearly don't understand how trespass works. Being in the bathroom doesn't have to be a crime in order for the police to kick you out. If you resist, or try to re-enter after the police kick you out, THAT can be a crime, but the initial entry does not have to be.

Actually, the question is unanswerable, as you have framed it with slurs in both directions.

You don't want to answer because the question offends you, but that doesn't make it unanswerable. That's not what "unanswerable" means. "How many angels can fit on the head of a pin" is an unanswerable question, mine was not.

And I don't care if the question offends you. I don't care if the terms offend you. They are accurate terms. If you are offended by accuracy, that's a you problem, not a me problem.

I can't answer your reprehensible questions without acknowledging their premises, which I don't.

Are they male? Yes, they are. This is factual, and true. Do they identify as trans? Yes, they do. That is factually true. Are they therefore trans-identifying males? Yes.

You are refusing to acknowledge reality. You are offended by reality.

I have, and many times. Well, not the first because of your derogatory language, and not the second because you imply that "they are all the same". So you are right, I can't/won't answer either.

I never implied that they are the same, it does not logically follow from anything I ever said. Predatory cis males and non-predatory cis males are quite different. But you can't tell the difference between them at a distance. The fact that you cannot tell the difference matters, even though they are absolutely not the same at all.

 

[Ziggurat]

Same way you tell if someone is a Republican. You rely on what they say and do.

You have this wrong. Except at the voting booth primary, we never need to know whether someone is a Democrat or Republican. And in that case, we DO NOT rely on what they say OR do, we rely on their voter registration. This confusion is part and parcel of your general incoherence on the topic.

And when you encounter a person for the first time, you cannot evaluate their behavioral history. You have no access to that. There are a few cases of sex segregation where the person making the decision will have some access to behavioral history (such as a judge deciding where to house a convict), but that won't be true in general. So what counts as what they "do"? Is it the clothes they wear? Whether they affect a feminine or masculine speech style? How long their hair is? Is there anything in this behavior that can actually distinguish an authentically trans person from someone just pretending to be trans? I still have no ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ idea how you think any of this can actually be done, even in principle.

Why are you trying to tell the difference? What are you doing or going to do?

Allow them to transcend sex segregation or not allow them to transcend sex segregation. I thought that was obvious.

 

[p0lka]

Doing things for no good reason is a downside. Whether you calculate the cost in terms of money, time, calories, whatever... you're spending resources and getting nothing of value in return. No upside is an automatic downside, full stop.

That's not a facile quotation or an empty slogan. It's an argument, with premises, reasoning, and conclusion. It needs no attribution, because it stands or falls independently of who makes it. But if you're handing out participation trophies, I'll take credit for it.

I didn't say the underlined, I said 'Every lack of a downside is an upside', they are vastly different statements.