Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Emily's Cat]

Narrative? I did not actually make any claims about what fraction of gender euphorics are aroused about it, that was you.

Will it make you happy if I soften my language and say that an awful lot of self-professed transwomen describe gender euphoria as an erection? Or are you still going to dismiss those who describe their own experiences as somehow all being trolls and fakers?

 

[Emily's Cat]

A specifier is not a disorder. It definitionally means "a term used to further clarify a diagnosis by providing additional information about the course, severity, or specific features of a mental disorder"

Eta: it's a goddamned adjective as used in the DSM

Alrighty then. According to you, "migraine with/without aura" is not a disorder or a diagnosis, that aura part is just some additional information. Similarly, I suppose my epilepsy without photosensitivity is just some added info, not a real thing. I mean, my doctors all seem to think that whether or not a migraine sufferer gets auras makes a difference in what drugs they can prescribe for a host of things. I guess my doctors are all just overreacting when they think that aural sensitivity without photosensitivity makes a difference in my treatment options for epilepsy.

Hell. According to your approach, stage 4 metastatic sarcoma doesn't actually mean anything, it's not a diagnosis in and of itself. It's just some additional information.

 

[Emily's Cat]

No one "suffers" from AGP. Literally, by definition. it's an arousing thought and nothing more.

Females suffer from males with AGP. Maybe those males don't suffer from it.

Then again, psychopaths don't "suffer" from their psychopathy either. It's just the people around them that suffer.

 

[d4m10n]

Or are you still going to dismiss those who describe their own experiences as somehow all being trolls and fakers?

Again, you are confusing expression of skepticism with affirmation of the contrary claim. I never said they were all anything, I said that we have no good reason to presume they are actual humans, or males, or trans, especially given the number of bots, females, and cisgender posters on social media.

Back to the substantive claim here, if that's okay.

Let's stipulate that gender euphoria is a state of comfort or happiness caused by feeling that one's gender identity no longer mismatches one's perceived sex (whether perceived by oneself or by others).

Let us further stipulate that autogynephilia is the experience of male arousal at the thought of oneself as female.

I see no reason to conclude that most people who have the first one experience the second one at the same time, even if we (for reasons which were never mentioned or explained) remove gender euphoric females from consideration for the sake of this discussion. Certainly I see no reason that a smattering of cherry-picked and unvetted social media posts should cause me to move off my (agnostic) priors on this question.

 

[Thermal]

Alrighty then. According to you, "migraine with/without aura" is not a disorder or a diagnosis, that aura part is just some additional information. Similarly, I suppose my epilepsy without photosensitivity is just some added info, not a real thing. I mean, my doctors all seem to think that whether or not a migraine sufferer gets auras makes a difference in what drugs they can prescribe for a host of things. I guess my doctors are all just overreacting when they think that aural sensitivity without photosensitivity makes a difference in my treatment options for epilepsy.

Hell. According to your approach, stage 4 metastatic sarcoma doesn't actually mean anything, it's not a diagnosis in and of itself. It's just some additional information.

'Taint me or my definitions. It's the entirety of the profession, with one voice. It doesn't matter if it screws up your preferred narrative and makes you angry. It is the definition, and if you revered the DSM as much as you claim to, you would accept their own freaking terms and their usage.

This is a skeptic's forum. You can't just make ◊◊◊◊ up and trust that no one is paying attention.

 

[Thermal]

Females suffer from males with AGP. Maybe those males don't suffer from it.

Then again, psychopaths don't "suffer" from their psychopathy either. It's just the people around them that suffer.

No one suffers in any way from a thought that arouses you. Any suffering is from actions independent of those thoughts.

 

[theprestige]

Again, you are confusing expression of skepticism with affirmation of the contrary claim. I never said they were all anything, I said that we have no good reason to presume they are actual humans, or males, or trans, especially given the number of bots, females, and cisgender posters on social media.

What number is this, in the trans experience discourse space?

Back to the substantive claim here, if that's okay.

Let's stipulate that gender euphoria is a state of comfort or happiness caused by feeling that one's gender identity no longer mismatches one's perceived sex (whether perceived by oneself or by others).

Let us further stipulate that autogynephilia is the experience of male arousal at the thought of oneself as female.

I see no reason to conclude that most people who have the first one experience the second one at the same time, even if we (for reasons which were never mentioned or explained) remove gender euphoric females from consideration for the sake of this discussion. Certainly I see no reason that a smattering of cherry-picked and unvetted social media posts should cause me to move off my (agnostic) priors on this question.

Good, good.

Now relate it back to your public policy prescriptions, for trans entitlements to override sex segregation.

 

[Ziggurat]

No one suffers in any way from a thought that arouses you. Any suffering is from actions independent of those thoughts.

This is pointless sophistry. Actions are not independent of thoughts, and so suffering due to actions caused by thoughts is not independent of those thoughts.

 

[Thermal]

This is pointless sophistry. Actions are not independent of thoughts, and so suffering due to actions caused by thoughts is not independent of those thoughts.

How can you possibly be this backwards in your thinking?

"AGP" is the thought of yourself as a female that is sexually arousing. That's it. It has no accompanying actions.

I find the thought of certain types of women very arousing. Do you understand that such a thought has not a goddamned thing to do with acting on those thoughts and becoming a rapist?

A thought is benign. Acting on thoughts is an entirely separate matter.

 

[d4m10n]

Now relate it back to your public policy prescriptions, for trans entitlements to override sex segregation.

Did I miss the part where we generally agreed that this thread has to be about public policy prescriptions?

Most of my regular interactions with transgender people and gender ideology have almost nothing to do with policy, last I checked.

I have to decide whether to respect my teenagers' friends pronouns or not, for example. Until a left-wing government declares that I must respect them, or a right-wing government declares that I mustn't, this remains a matter of personal ethics rather than public policy.

 

[d4m10n]

What number is this, in the trans experience discourse space?

We have no way to know.

 

[theprestige]

We have no way to know.

Nonsense. You said we've been given this number, in support of your argument. Now you say you have no way to know if this number actually supports your argument.

Tell us more about this given number you have no way of knowing.

 

[Ziggurat]

How can you possibly be this backwards in your thinking?

"AGP" is the thought of yourself as a female that is sexually arousing. That's it. It has no accompanying actions.

I find the thought of certain types of women very arousing. Do you understand that such a thought has not a goddamned thing to do with acting on those thoughts and becoming a rapist?

A thought is benign. Acting on thoughts is an entirely separate matter.

You are confused about the logic of your own argument. What you should be saying is that these particular thoughts don’t lead to harmful actions. That’s a claim that EC will likely dispute, but it’s what you believe, and it is at least a coherent position. But this idea that thoughts are divorced from actions is delusional. People who are sexually aroused by minors frequently turn those thoughts into actions. The thoughts lead to harms. So the distinction you are trying to make doesn’t withstand scrutiny.

 

[smartcooky]

'Taint me or my definitions. It's the entirety of the profession, with one voice

Horse Cock! When it comes to transgender issues, you will struggle to find many recently graduated medical professionals who are not ideogically captured. Certainly your statement, which implies there is not a single doctor, nurse or other medical professional anywhere on Planet Earth who disagrees with your position, is preposterous on its face!

 

[smartcooky]

I struggle to understand the viewpoint of people who think we can't possibly have sex segregation for women's safe spaces because we don't have penis police or genital inspections. Humans have easily managed sex segregation for over a century without any difficulties. Everyone knew who belonged in which toilet... knew that male prisoners belonged in men's prisons, knew that males did not belong in women's sports, knew that there was no place for males in women's shelters, women's hospital wards, rape crisis centres etc. It's like the whole planet has suddenly forgotten how to do the simplest things. Why are we finding this so very difficult now, when it was so easy in the past?

 

[Thermal]

You are confused about the logic of your own argument. What you should be saying is that these particular thoughts don’t lead to harmful actions.

I wouldn't have expected to have to belabor such an obvious point, among adults discussing in good faith. Disappointed again.

That’s a claim that EC will likely dispute, but it’s what you believe, and it is at least a coherent position. But this idea that thoughts are divorced from actions is delusional. People who are sexually aroused by minors frequently turn those thoughts into actions. The thoughts lead to harms. So the distinction you are trying to make doesn’t withstand scrutiny.

You're being deliberately obtuse now. Pedophilia is a disorder in and of itself, and acting on it is an extension of it. "AGP" is unrelated to disordered behavior.

 

[Thermal]

Horse Cock! When it comes to transgender issues, you will struggle to find many recently graduated medical professionals who are not ideogically captured. Certainly your statement, which implies there is not a single doctor, nurse or other medical professional anywhere on Planet Earth who disagrees with your position, is preposterous on its face!

We were not talking about transgender issues, scooter. We were talking about universal terminology, specifically what a specifier means, and no, it is not in dispute even by a nurse, or they wouldn't have made it through their exams.

Might there be the occasional unhinged whack job who doesn't accept the basic definitions they use professionally, yet manage to put on the act like they do? Perhaps some dimwitted technician who scoffs inwardly whenever a doctor references a specifier? Sure. They are not significant voices within the profession, and like many of the arguments here, beneath consideration.

 

[Ziggurat]

I wouldn't have expected to have to belabor such an obvious point, among adults discussing in good faith. Disappointed again.

You aren't discussing in good faith. And I don't care if I disappoint you, that concerns me not at all

You're being deliberately obtuse now. Pedophilia is a disorder in and of itself, and acting on it is an extension of it. "AGP" is unrelated to disordered behavior.

That is a point of dispute. You don't get to win by simply assuming the dispute is already resolved in your favor. This is an example of your bad faith arguments.

 

[smartcooky]

We were not talking about transgender issues, scooter. We were talking about universal terminology, specifically what a specifier means, and no, it is not in dispute even by a nurse, or they wouldn't have made it through their exams.

You attempts at gaslighting are feeble and oh, so predictable

We ARE taking about transgender issues Skippy, because we ARE talking about whether or not AGP is a disorder (which it is) as it relates to trannger issues

Might there be the occasional unhinged whack job who doesn't accept the basic definitions they use professionally yet manage to put on the act like they do? Perhaps some dimwitted technician who scoffs inwardly whenever a doctor references a specifier? Sure. They are not significant voices within the profession, and like many of the arguments here, beneath consideration.

Translation: Anyone who disagrees with YOUR worldview

 

[Aber]

This is a skeptic's forum. You can't just make ◊◊◊◊ up and trust that no one is paying attention.

Might there be the occasional unhinged whack job who doesn't accept the basic definitions they use professionally, yet manage to put on the act like they do?

Happening at an employment tribunal in the UK

This week an Employment Tribunal has heard evidence that a trans doctor would treat a female patient who has requested female only care, having previously described the concept of biological sex as “a nebulous dog whistle”.

Dr Upton is being supported by his employer, in a case involving a nurse who disagreed.