Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Thermal]

This brings me almost full circle to where I was at the beginning of this thread.

I thought that it wasn't right to make dysphorics go through expensive and time-consuming trans-affirming treatments and surgeries, just to enjoy the simple comfort of being allowed to use the "gender"-segregated bathroom the preferred.

I thought it wasn't right to force them to do a certain amount of cosplay, or invest in a minimum number of years of "lived experience", in order to enjoy this simple comfort.

I came into this thread thinking there had to be some middle ground, some humane compromise, that was neither "papers please" nor fiat self-ID.

It took me a while to realize that fiat self-ID was the agenda all along. It took me a while longer to realize that the entire Trans Rights Edifice was rotten to the core. To realize that there's no good science supporting social transition as an ethical treatment for gender dysphoria. That vast swaths of public and private policy have been captured by an anti-science, anti-social interest group. An interest group that in its toxic advocacy is more similar to incels and child groomers than it is to the LGB rights movement that it has parasitized.

The entire thing is rotten. If we could go back to sincere efforts to pass, the polite fiction that a transvestite man is a woman as long as he doesn't cause trouble, and leaves when told... If we could go back to that, I would. But the TRAs have carried us far past that point. That ship has already set sail for the distant shores of memory.

Now, contra @d4m10n and @Thermal , thanks to the toxic, misogynistic advocacy of modern trans rights activism, a new order is needed. Similar to the old, but ensuring that women have legal protection, if they wish to enforce sex segregation where appropriate.

I am actually kinda on board with this thinking. You (and others) do seem to be right that the new crew of TRAs are more aggressive; they are not the harmless transwoman being low key, just going potty. Some are very obnoxious about it, and they are loud and vocal.

But I'm not willing to give up just yet in finding a way to be cool with pretty much everybody. Some at the extremes of either end, you're never going to please. That's a given.But to take the position that police should be called on a Rep McBride seems to tilt the scales too far to one position in terms of reasonable compromise.

 

[theprestige]

I am actually kinda on board with this thinking. You (and others) do seem to be right that the new crew of TRAs are more aggressive; they are not the harmless transwoman being low key, just going potty. Some are very obnoxious about it, and they are loud and vocal.

But I'm not willing to give up just yet in finding a way to be cool with pretty much everybody. Some at the extremes of either end, you're never going to please. That's a given.But to take the position that police should be called on a Rep McBride seems to tilt the scales too far to one position in terms of reasonable compromise.

Hope springs eternal. If you do end up thinking of a functional compromise, I'll be happy to endorse it. But it'll be a tough row for you to hoe: You'll need to make a convincing argument that any compromise is even necessary. More about that in moment.

---

First, I'd like to address a point that may seem minor to you, but that I think is very important. This:

You (and others) do seem to be right that the new crew of TRAs are more aggressive; they are not the harmless transwoman being low key, just going potty. Some are very obnoxious about it, and they are loud and vocal.

Conflates trans-identifying men with Trans Rights Activists. I'm not saying that all TIMs, or all of the "new crew" of TIMs are aggressive, misogynistic predators. I don't believe that at all.

What I do believe, and what I am saying, is that the current Trans Rights Activists - a tiny minority of which are actually trans - are aggressive, obnoxious, loud and vocal. I further believe that current Trans Rights Activists are aggressively pushing for policies that patently enable misogynistic predators. These policies are harmful to women, to children, to actual dysphorics, and to society as a whole. The solutions they're proposing won't help the actual dysphorics, and will harm a lot of other people. That's not the dysphorics' fault. That's the activists' fault.

If you want to conflate the two, that's fine with me, but don't assume I'm conflating them. Don't assume - or imply! - that my dislike of TRAs is a dislike of dysphorics.

---

As to whether a compromise on anything is necessary, I say it isn't.

No medical necessity for compromise has been properly researched nor scientifically established. I doubt one exists.

No moral or ethical necessity for compromise has been demonstrated either.

You want some such compromise because it feels good to imagine such a thing, not because it makes any sense or actually helps anyone. And you can't even figure out how it would work, in a way that doesn't promptly reduce to fiat self-ID.

 

[Darat]

I'm very interested in why @Darat made the claim this was only for schools despite haranguing us for not reading their link

I’m very interested as well since I didn’t make that claim.

 

[Matthew Best]

The case I mentioned here:

Cont: Post in thread 'Trans women are not women (IX)'

Jun 28, 2022

A woman is suing a rape crisis centre because the charity allowed a trans woman (who apparently presented as male, wearing male clothing) into the women's group therapy sessions.

"I don't trust men because I have been raped by a man. I've been sexually abused by men. And I just don't necessarily trust that men are always who they say they are," she said.

However, she says the person running the session asked her to speak to the group. "I felt manipulated and coerced into talking," she said. "When I left the session I had a panic attack, I was absolutely distraught."...

• Matthew Best

Woman suing rape charity over transgender row

"Sarah" says she felt unable to speak in a rape support group after a trans woman began attending.

www.bbc.co.uk

has now been resolved.

Sarah Surviving & Survivors Network: Joint Statement

Joint Statement

sarahsurviving.substack.com

"Survivors’ Network is proud to be providing a new peer support group for biological women and we are collaborating with Sarah Surviving along with other women survivors about this additional space. This group will be open to biological women who identify as women and biological women who do not have a gender identity. We understand for some biological women such a space is imperative for their healing and acknowledges their trauma."

 

[theprestige]

The case I mentioned here:

Cont: Post in thread 'Trans women are not women (IX)'

Jun 28, 2022

A woman is suing a rape crisis centre because the charity allowed a trans woman (who apparently presented as male, wearing male clothing) into the women's group therapy sessions.

"I don't trust men because I have been raped by a man. I've been sexually abused by men. And I just don't necessarily trust that men are always who they say they are," she said.

However, she says the person running the session asked her to speak to the group. "I felt manipulated and coerced into talking," she said. "When I left the session I had a panic attack, I was absolutely distraught."...

• Matthew Best

Woman suing rape charity over transgender row

"Sarah" says she felt unable to speak in a rape support group after a trans woman began attending.

www.bbc.co.uk

has now been resolved.

Sarah Surviving & Survivors Network: Joint Statement

Joint Statement

sarahsurviving.substack.com

"Survivors’ Network is proud to be providing a new peer support group for biological women and we are collaborating with Sarah Surviving along with other women survivors about this additional space. This group will be open to biological women who identify as women and biological women who do not have a gender identity. We understand for some biological women such a space is imperative for their healing and acknowledges their trauma."

Interesting that they haven't opened it up to biological women who identify as men. Are they supposed to get their support from a men's rape support group?

 

[Thermal]

Hope springs eternal. If you do end up thinking of a functional compromise, I'll be happy to endorse it. But it'll be a tough row for you to hoe: You'll need to make a convincing argument that any compromise is even necessary. More about that in moment.

---

First, I'd like to address a point that may seem minor to you, but that I think is very important. This:


Conflates trans-identifying men with Trans Rights Activists. I'm not saying that all TIMs, or all of the "new crew" of TIMs are aggressive, misogynistic predators. I don't believe that at all.

What I do believe, and what I am saying, is that the current Trans Rights Activists - a tiny minority of which are actually trans - are aggressive, obnoxious, loud and vocal. I further believe that current Trans Rights Activists are aggressively pushing for policies that patently enable misogynistic predators. These policies are harmful to women, to children, to actual dysphorics, and to society as a whole. The solutions they're proposing won't help the actual dysphorics, and will harm a lot of other people. That's not the dysphorics' fault. That's the activists' fault.

If you want to conflate the two, that's fine with me, but don't assume I'm conflating them. Don't assume - or imply! - that my dislike of TRAs is a dislike of dysphorics.

Ok, setting aside the derogatory names and use of medical diagnoses that aren't always in evidence, I roundly agree. The As in the TRAs are largely different than the "TIMs" I see. I'm not conflating them; I agree. The angry, table flipping activists are not representative of the group they claim to advocate on behalf of.

As to whether a compromise on anything is necessary, I say it isn't.

No medical necessity for compromise has been properly researched nor scientifically established. I doubt one exists.

No moral or ethical necessity for compromise has been demonstrated either.

I dont think it's an issue of necessity, as much as sincerity in not discriminating. Its awkward to say "oh I'm totally supportive of transwomen, till they have to relieve themselves. Then that mother ◊◊◊◊◊◊ aint no 'she' to me".

Until.we get clarification on sex v gender and establish rest rooms as strictly sex segregated spaces, I feel.like we are being hypocritical and self serving to deny access.

You want some such compromise because it feels good to imagine such a thing, not because it makes any sense or actually helps anyone. And you can't even figure out how it would work, in a way that doesn't promptly reduce to fiat self-ID.

I dunno man. My state has it. We are not having the scary problems we hear so much about ITT. Nor does MA or the other jurisdictions that we can scrounge up data from.

 

[Matthew Best]

Interesting that they haven't opened it up to biological women who identify as men. Are they supposed to get their support from a men's rape support group?

They would get support from another rape support group which already exists.

 

[Thermal]

In broad brush, I'm seeing a solution to the restrooms as being the long standing status quo maintained (men here, women there, sort yourselves out without legal force), with a more liberal expulsion policy introduced. Something along the lines of "This is an intimate space, if you are making people feel unsafe, you need to leave", with a provision for litigating/penalties those who abuse it for protected class exclusions.

 

[Emily's Cat]

The entire thing is rotten. If we could go back to sincere efforts to pass, the polite fiction that a transvestite man is a woman as long as he doesn't cause trouble, and leaves when told... If we could go back to that, I would. But the TRAs have carried us far past that point. That ship has already set sail for the distant shores of memory.

Yep. Would have been perfectly happy to continue what we had in place about 20 years ago. But I don't think it's possible to go back to that.

 

[smartcooky]

I am actually kinda on board with this thinking. You (and others) do seem to be right that the new crew of TRAs are more aggressive; they are not the harmless transwoman being low key, just going potty. Some are very obnoxious about it, and they are loud and vocal.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I am actually kinda on board with this thinking. You (and others) do seem to be right that the new crew of TRAs are more aggressive; they are not the harmless transwoman being low key, just going potty. Some are very obnoxious about it, and they are loud and vocal.

That loud, vocal, obnoxious cadre isn't a tiny minority though - they're the majority of people pushing policy, and they've been successful in getting their preferred policies adopted in a lot of cases that I would have previously thought were impossible. Like having WA state uphold the right of a completely male-bodied male person to use the female side of a Korean spa, based on that male's feelings about their inner self. Or like having CA and WA and ME decide that if male prisoners find their true selves, they're eligible to share cells with female prisoners. Like having a judge tell teenage females that they have no right to visual privacy from males while they're using the female changing room. Or like seeing the ACLU act to BLOCK a FOIA request.

That "some" is an awful lot.

But I'm not willing to give up just yet in finding a way to be cool with pretty much everybody. Some at the extremes of either end, you're never going to please. That's a given.

I no longer think there's a way to be cool with pretty much everybody. The TRA side of this conflict is unwilling to give on reasonable grounds at all. Any compromise proposed so far ends up being a serious disadvantage and increase of risk for females exclusively, and I'm not okay with that.

But to take the position that police should be called on a Rep McBride seems to tilt the scales too far to one position in terms of reasonable compromise.

McBride has 1) their own person restroom and 2) several unisex restrooms easily available. If McBride insists on forcing their way into female restrooms against the rules in place, they shouldn't be protected from the consequences of their actions.

 

[smartcooky]

In broad brush, I'm seeing a solution to the restrooms as being the long standing status quo maintained (men here, women there, sort yourselves out without legal force), with a more liberal expulsion policy introduced. Something along the lines of "This is an intimate space, if you are making people feel unsafe, you need to leave", with a provision for litigating/penalties those who abuse it for protected class exclusions.

All very well, but currently, it is the person who asked the TIM to leave who is then branded as a bigot and a tranny basher, with the force of law being behind the TIM. In the UK, in spite of the fact that their Supreme Court has ruled that sex in "sex discrimination" refers only to biological sex, it is still the case that a woman who asks a TIM to leave the restroom can have a Hate Crime Incident (HCI) recorded against their name for no other reason than asking them to leave.

A Hate Crime Incident is recorded against your police record (even if you have never been charged with anything) and if a prospective employer does a CRB (Criminal Records Bureau) check on you, that HCI will appear. This is wrong at every level. If you have never been charged AND convicted of anything, your police record should be blank.

 

[Matthew Best]

They would get support from another rape support group which already exists.

Sisters Salon say this: "the new group for biological women does not replace existing mixed sex provision and is a dedicated additional space for women who need it."

Statement on the resolution of Sarah’s case against Survivors’ Network

We welcome today’s news confirming the resolution of a legal case between one of our members – Sarah Summers – and our local rape crisis centre Survivors’ Network. One of our key campai…

brightonsisters.wordpress.com

 

[theprestige]

Ok, setting aside the derogatory names

Technically accurate descriptions. "Transwoman" and "trans woman" are the jargon of a toxic, misogynistic cult. I'm not going to normalize them. Any man who is offended by being accurately and dispassionately described as a trans-identifying male needs therapy, not concessions.

and use of medical diagnoses that aren't always in evidence,

The fact that the medical diagnoses are *never* in evidence, when it comes to discussion of trans rights in public policy, is pretty central to the debate. If we're not talking about dysphorics, than what is even left to talk about? Men who like to cross-dress? Literal predators?

I roundly agree. The As in the TRAs are largely different than the "TIMs" I see. I'm not conflating them; I agree. The angry, table flipping activists are not representative of the group they claim to advocate on behalf of.

Agreement! I'm into it.

I dont think it's an issue of necessity, as much as sincerity in not discriminating. Its awkward to say "oh I'm totally supportive of transwomen, till they have to relieve themselves. Then that mother ◊◊◊◊◊◊ aint no 'she' to me".

That guy is never a she to me in the first place. I fully support people who suffer from gender dysphoria. I support getting them medical diagnosis. I support them getting the most scientific, ethical treatment for their condition that civilization offers. I support them being treated with compassion by society. I support them being legally protected against discrimination in employment, housing, etc.

I don't support them being entitled to being treated as women, in cases where such distinctions actually matter.

Until.we get clarification on sex v gender and establish rest rooms as strictly sex segregated spaces, I feel.like we are being hypocritical and self serving to deny access.

My position is that we're already abundantly clear on sex v gender, and that we've already adequately established that restrooms are sex segregated. Nobody is as confused as TRAs would have you beileve.

I dunno man. My state has it. We are not having the scary problems we hear so much about ITT. Nor does MA or the other jurisdictions that we can scrounge up data from.

The increased risk and lack of legal protection has a chilling effect on the dignity and comfort of women.

Further, we have seen the scary problems already in some jurisdictions. You've been provided with examples, multiple times.

This looks like your familiar bait and switch once again. You offer the olive branch of agreement, but then pull it back in favor of nonsense like this.

 

[theprestige]

In broad brush, I'm seeing a solution to the restrooms as being the long standing status quo maintained (men here, women there, sort yourselves out without legal force), with a more liberal expulsion policy introduced.

We've already seen the kind of lawfare that gets waged against women who try to enforce the long-standing boundaries without legal protection.

Something along the lines of "This is an intimate space, if you are making people feel unsafe, you need to leave", with a provision for litigating/penalties those who abuse it for protected class exclusions.

"Officer, this cis woman is making me feel unsafe by calling me a man and demanding that I leave. It's transphobic and I'm scared. Please make her stop."

The legal balance needs to favor the women in the restroom, not the non-dysphoric man who likes to cosplay as a woman in public.

 

[p0lka]

You're going to have to walk me through that logic I'm afraid. Saying that someone has shaved off a beard is like saying a banana is a potato? I'm just not following you.

I'll do my best.........Someone showed 2 photos, in which the photo on the left shows someone with a beard and the photo on the right shows the same person without a beard,
and then they claimed that that person in a thing that happened, looked like the photo on the left but without a beard which is illogical, akin to saying something is A, if you ignore all the B bits of it.

 

[Rolfe]

I am actually kinda on board with this thinking. You (and others) do seem to be right that the new crew of TRAs are more aggressive; they are not the harmless transwoman being low key, just going potty. Some are very obnoxious about it, and they are loud and vocal.

But I'm not willing to give up just yet in finding a way to be cool with pretty much everybody. Some at the extremes of either end, you're never going to please. That's a given.But to take the position that police should be called on a Rep McBride seems to tilt the scales too far to one position in terms of reasonable compromise.

If Rep McBride doesn't go into women-only spaces there is no danger at all that someone will call the police on him. If he does, he is not harmless and he is not being low key. Everyone knows he is a man, and he has plenty choices other than to go into the women-only facilities. If he chooses to go there in spite of all that, he is trouble. If he then refuses to leave when requested to do so, yes, the police need to be called.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Now that search is functional, I traced back to the very first chapter of this thread, started in December of 2017 - 7.5 years ago.

Thread 'Trans Women are not Women'

Dec 5, 2017

This subject has been brought to a head in NZ by the inclusion of a trans woman in our weightlifting teams for the Commonwealth Games. Link: https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opini...urel-hubbard-carrying-the-weight-of-the-world

She competed as a bloke until a few years ago when it occurred to him that under new rules he could compete as a shiela and actually win something he was actually a woman trapped in a man's body, despite having male DNA.

In these inclusionary times I find it interesting that the main group of people who openly...

• The Atheist
• new zealand incidents transgender incidents transgender issues
• Replies: 3,370
• Forum: Social Issues

 

[Rolfe]

Yep. Would have been perfectly happy to continue what we had in place about 20 years ago. But I don't think it's possible to go back to that.

I wouldn't be happy about that. I know too much now.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I wouldn't be happy about that. I know too much now.

Fair point. Still... if the general situation hadn't shifted so far, I'd still probably be willing to tolerate it, even if I weren't happy about it. Definitely no longer even on the table though.