Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Yeah sorry, I thought the thread was about facts.
Why would you think that?

Some facts are relevant to this thread. For example, are puberty blockers reversible? That's a factual question which we can debate. But the question of when to allow males to transcend sex segregation is not a factual question. Facts may help inform an answer, but the answer is still ultimately based on values. The same set of facts will produce different answers from people with different values.
 
What some would conclude this this thread is really about is certain people being disgusted by transwomen, and not wanting them to be afforded any dignity, no matter how trivial.
Why would transwomen using the men's restroom deprive them of dignity?
 
Why would you think that?

I've told you repeatedly that the heart of this conflict is that some people want males to be able to enter nominally female-only spaces like bathrooms, and some people want to keep males out of female-only spaces like bathrooms. Conflicts about terminology (such as whether transwoman are women) are just proxies for this root conflict. Two incompatible interests are in conflict. Some people side with one interest, other people side with the other interest, but that conflict isn't about facts. It's about values. Which group's interest do you value more?
I get what you're saying, but having the ability to argue about the terminology has and still is, causing lots of problems. I think it will continue to do so in the future because everyone is off their head and not using male and female labels for sports and the like, which is obviously the simplest solution.
 
Why would you think that?

Some facts are relevant to this thread. For example, are puberty blockers reversible? That's a factual question which we can debate. But the question of when to allow males to transcend sex segregation is not a factual question. Facts may help inform an answer, but the answer is still ultimately based on values. The same set of facts will produce different answers from people with different values.
RE: highlighted.. It would be a factual question if the sex segregation was labelled male and female. It's the gender labels that are causing the ambiguity.
 
This is just another way of saying that women don't actually prioritize these issues.
Oh poppycock. It is no such thing. Your statement demonstrates is that you haven't got a clue how politics work.

Asking for claims to be backed by evidence isn't contrarianism, it is skepticism.
But you weren't asking for "claims to be backed by evidence" you just posted a map claiming it meant something. I was commenting on the nature of your post, not its content (which, by the way, does not mean what you think it means).
 
re:highlighted just say female? That's what they are.
Whatever? :rolleyes:
I hadn't heard about this menstrual thing so I did a quick search to find coverage of the court case which wasn't very fruitful. But I did find a recent bbc article that was going on about a tribunal that peggie is in at the moment which is strange...


they seem to be question her about her prior posts and messages not related to the case but to do with racism which isn't part of the case. Weird.
Not weird, just desperate. The NHS lawyers know they are on a loser here, so they are trying to dig up any ◊◊◊◊ they can, no matter how trivial, and frantically throwing it against the wall like mad hoping some of it will stick.

Showing bias to anything is letting your feelings govern your head.
Nope, bias has nothing to do with emotion. In my case, it has to do with my perception of fairness.
 
RE: highlighted.. It would be a factual question if the sex segregation was labelled male and female. It's the gender labels that are causing the ambiguity.
No, it would not be. I have pointed this out multiple times, and you still haven't learned. The labels are not the rules. That's not how it works. You are wrong about the fact of what labels do.
 
I get what you're saying, but having the ability to argue about the terminology has and still is, causing lots of problems.
Not really. Terminology is ultimately arbitrary. People only care about the terminology because it's a proxy for the stuff that isn't arbitrary.
I think it will continue to do so in the future because everyone is off their head and not using male and female labels for sports and the like, which is obviously the simplest solution.
No. This would just shift the terminology proxy argument to what "male" and "female" mean. You fundamentally do not understand what this is about. It is not, and has never been, about any confusion of gender vs. sex.
 
I think the thread and topic are more about how others are affected. The original weightlifter (remember the original story?) had an unfair advantage in having gone through a male puberty, with all that muscle growth and testosterone and stuff.

So do transwomen have some advantage in a bathroom?
Fallacy of the false analogy.

Advantage in sports participation has nothing whatever to do with public bathroom use, rape crisis centres, womens shelters or women's prisons.

The argument here is about whether transgender self-identified men should be granted access to women's safe spaces, and is based in RIGHTS.
Is it fair to grant a tiny subgroup of men in womanface, the right to access women's safe spaces, if granting them abrogates the rights of over 50% of the population who have the rights to have those safe spaces for themselves.

Nothing demonstrates this more clearly than the opposition by TRAs to Beira's Place, the "biological females only" rape crisis centre in Edinburgh, Scotland that was started up by a bunch of gender critical women, partially funded by JK Rowling. Despite the fact that the Scottish goverment-funded Edinborough Rape Crisis Centre, which DOES allow TIMS to be clients, is already in the same city, TRAs opposed the existence of Biera's Place. TRAs are selfish, arrogant and egotistical misogynists - they will oppose ANYTHING for women that excludes them. They want in because their aim is to stick it to actual women by waving their lady-dicks in women's faces.

What some would conclude this this thread is really about is certain people being disgusted by transwomen, and not wanting them to be afforded any dignity, no matter how trivial.
Rubbish, and you know it.
 
Fallacy of the false analogy.

Advantage in sports participation has nothing whatever to do with public bathroom use, rape crisis centres, womens shelters or women's prisons.
Maybe Thermal knows something about competitive ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ that we don't.
 
While I'm here...

Ideologically captured women: "Toxic masculinity is real! All men are Schrodinger's rapist! I'd rather meet a bear!"

Also ideologically captured women: "Protect the dolls! Men in our toilets!"

There's a "does a bear ◊◊◊◊ in the women's restroom?" joke in there somewhere.
 
Not really. Terminology is ultimately arbitrary. People only care about the terminology because it's a proxy for the stuff that isn't arbitrary.

No. This would just shift the terminology proxy argument to what "male" and "female" mean. You fundamentally do not understand what this is about. It is not, and has never been, about any confusion of gender vs. sex.
Shifting the terminology proxy argument to what 'male' and 'female' mean would be a definite improvement. After all It's a lot easier to state 'you are female and therefore not allowed in the male things' and vice versa and back it up with biology, than it is to argue about gender labels and not be able to back it up with biology. I'm assuming that this is all ultimately about biology?
 
Shifting the terminology proxy argument to what 'male' and 'female' mean would be a definite improvement. After all It's a lot easier to state 'you are female and therefore not allowed in the male things' and vice versa and back it up with biology, than it is to argue about gender labels and not be able to back it up with biology. I'm assuming that this is all ultimately about biology?
What you prescribe is already being done. It's even working, a little bit, slowly. But it's not the easy slam dunk you seem to imagine it should be. And the reality-denying response is a lot stronger and more entrenched than you seem to think.

You seem to believe you've come up with a simple and obvious solution that has escaped the rest of us. The truth is, we've already thought of it, already put it into practice, and are already dealing with the reality-denying pushback.
 
Shifting the terminology proxy argument to what 'male' and 'female' mean would be a definite improvement. After all It's a lot easier to state 'you are female and therefore not allowed in the male things' and vice versa and back it up with biology, than it is to argue about gender labels and not be able to back it up with biology. I'm assuming that this is all ultimately about biology?
Here is why you don't get it and will never get it as long as you keep ignoring and handwaving away what you are being told.
It does not matter whether you label women's toilets "Females" or "Women" or "Ladies" or "Sheilas" or whatever. It will make no difference... Trans Identifying Males will ignore the labels and enter anyway because they are not so much interested in wanting somewhere to pee, as they are satisfying their misogynistic urge to stick it to women by waving their ladydicks around in women's faces. They claim that they feel uncomfortable using the men's, but are perfectly happy to make women uncomfortable by doing so.
 
Last edited:
Shifting the terminology proxy argument to what 'male' and 'female' mean would be a definite improvement.
No it wouldn't.
After all It's a lot easier to state 'you are female and therefore not allowed in the male things' and vice versa and back it up with biology, than it is to argue about gender labels and not be able to back it up with biology.
You still think that facts matter here. They don't. They never have, because this was never really a dispute about facts. How many times do I have to point to TRAs calling trans identifying males as "female" before you get it? Do you think people who use the term "female penis" are going to balk at transgressing the sex segregation boundaries because you used "female" instead of "women"?

For God's sake, get a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ clue.
I'm assuming that this is all ultimately about biology?
No, it isn't. It's about ideology.
 
I thought it was code for "the feelings of any male have always, and should always, take priority over the feelings of any number of females".
You're being too kind, Pixel42 ;)

It's code for "the feelings of any male have always, and should always, take priority over the safety and rights of any number of females".
 

Back
Top Bottom