Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Pixel42]

That is precisely what you and others are saying the right thing to do is.

Rubbish. As the example just given makes clear.

Most females would object to being strip searched by any strange male, regardless of the thoughts in their head. It would make us feel anything from uncomfortable to (in the case of victims of male sexual violence) terrified. What you (and those prison authorities) are saying is that the feelings of any male are more important than, and should take priority over, the feelings of any number of females.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Ah, the old "race" canard TRAs desperately cling to when they're cornered and have no other way out.

You've got no coherent answer, just dodging questions that highlight your cognitive dissonance around non-white and gay people and other sub-groups in society you (presumably) tolerate (for now) vs. those that you don't.

On the subject of puberty blockers, I think the use of them in the UK has been very indiscriminate and the treatment and assessment of young people expressing issues about their gender identity influenced by ideology rather than medical science and, perhaps more importantly, what was is in the best interests of the individual patients.

Where we differ is that I am pragmatic. Just as I cannot comprehend what it feels like to be in the 'wrong' body, I cannot comprehend how people can treat individuals who do feel that way and have done nothing to them with so little empathy. This switching off of empathy displayed in this thread, the war in Gaza and the rise of the far-right around the world have led me to read The Science of Evil by Simon Baron-Cohen to see if it can explain what's going on in your and others' brains.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

You know, you would be far better off not insulting people you don’t know.

And at this moment the irony meter exploded!

 

[Matthew Best]

Everyone that disagrees with me is a Nazi!

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Everyone that disagrees with me is a Nazi!

Not quite. I think people in this thread are being played by the far-right. In fact if Thermal and I weren't posting it would be a near perfect cesspit of hate echo chamber.

What gives me a little hope is that most of the posters are: (a) quite old and will soon be dead or in a care facility (b) statistically unlikely to have any family members or close acquaintances who need to be supported with their gender identity issues rather than lectured about biological sex, and (c) busy ranting at each other and me rather than spreading their hate in the real world.

 

[Matthew Best]

Everyone who disagrees with me is (a) right wing (b) nearly dead.

Pretty convincing stuff.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Everyone who disagrees with me is (a) right wing (b) nearly dead.

Pretty convincing stuff.

Yes, it is. Those two groups are positively correlated.

 

[Georg]

Not quite. I think people in this thread are being played by the far-right. In fact if Thermal and I weren't posting it would be a near perfect cesspit of hate echo chamber.

What gives me a little hope is that most of the posters are: (a) quite old and will soon be dead or in a care facility (b) statistically unlikely to have any family members or close acquaintances who need to be supported with their gender identity issues rather than lectured about biological sex, and (c) busy ranting at each other and me rather than spreading their hate in the real world.

According to US standards, I'm a leftwing commie.
And I think that women have a right to dickfree zones and dickfree sports etc.
That has nothing to do with hate.
Wanting to take away the dickfree zones makes you a misogynist.

 

[lionking]

According to US standards, I'm a leftwing commie.
And I think that women have a right to dickfree zones and dickfree sports etc.
That has nothing to do with hate.
Wanting to take away the dickfree zones makes you a misogynist.

Bingo. The misogyny of “let transwomen have everything they want” advocates is very, very clear.

 

[Pixel42]

I cannot comprehend how people can treat individuals who do feel that way and have done nothing to them with so little empathy.

Says the man apparently incapable of empathising with any woman in any way whatsoever.

 

[Ziggurat]

What are your thoughts on racial profiling?

ETA: I ask because I suspect most of you believe it is a good idea and should support it. It would be particularly interesting seeing anyone try to argue why racial profiling is wrong but profiling transgender people is the right thing to do.

You keep lying that we want to profile trans people. No. We want to profile males.

And race is not equivalent to sex. This absurd claim has been debunked countless times already, this is just your latest fringe reset.

 

[Elaedith]

If people really believe that sex-segregated facilities like changing rooms are equivalent to racially segregated facilities, they should start a new thread to argue that on its merits. It has nothing to do with trans people.

 

[angrysoba]

This has probably been asked before, but I've only dipped into this megathread from time to time so I may have missed it.

I've heard enough from trans-activists to know that when someone identifies as a woman, for example, they do not have to adhere to any particular type of presentation, mode of dress, speech patterns, expectations of behavior, roles, life pathways, or anything else. They can pretty much do and act however they please while retaining their gender identity as a woman.

In this case, how is it any different from identifying as a "man", a "nonbinary person", a symbol (as the musician Prince did), or even a random collection of letters. In fact, it seems as the word "woman" when used as a gender identity has thereby just been reduced to a string of letters. It doesn't signify anything with any properties at all to distinguish it from "man", "nonbinary", or "xyzzy".

I think in linguistics speak, it's sort of like a signifier with no signified. Why does the gender identity term "woman" have anything whatsoever to do with the other word "woman" that is used to signify adult human females, other than that they share the same spelling?

I think therein lies the rub.

What does it mean to be a woman? It could either mean that someone dresses and acts according to social stereotypes and maybe fulfills the very gender roles that many feminists have been railing against for decades. Why should women have to wear make-up and dresses and high heels. However, it is usually only by virtue of this that people will understand the gender of the person, whereas women who wear T-shirts and jeans will instead be identifiable by their actual physical and sexual characteristics.

It is probably because of this that the radical feminists were the first to object to acceptance of transwomen, particularly when it came to taking their places in society or expecting to be accommodated. If you want to know a woman from a transwoman, shave their heads, put on Doc Marten boots and dungarees. Most of the time the radical feminists are still readily identifiable as women, but transwoman will find it much more difficult to pass.

I think the first instance I remember was back in the 90s when a transwoman wanted to enter an all-women college at university. I believe that radical feminists at the time, such as Germaine Greer, were against the idea of ...erm... ex-fellows joining the college.

This is why, although the word TERF is meant as a slur, it does seem to be quite a good descriptor. To the point, I think, that there are no people embracing and owning the term.

 

[lionking]

If people really believe that sex-segregated facilities like changing rooms are equivalent to racially segregated facilities, they should start a new thread to argue that on its merits. It has nothing to do with trans people.

Correct

 

[Matthew Best]

This is why, although the word TERF is meant as a slur, it does seem to be quite a good descriptor. To the point, I think, that there are no people embracing and owning the term.

Presumably you didn't mean to have that "no" in the last sentence?

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

You keep lying that we want to profile trans people. No. We want to profile males.

And race is not equivalent to sex. This absurd claim has been debunked countless times already, this is just your latest fringe reset.

As far as segregation based on a non-relevant characteristics, 'race', whatever that is - I think ethnicity and skin colour have usually been the bigots preferred characteristics throughout history - and sex are equivalent in many situations, such as which public toilet to use. We know this as a fact because huge numbers of perfectly functional public toilets exist that do not have or require sex segregation.

 

[Ziggurat]

As far as segregation based on a non-relevant characteristics, 'race', whatever that is - I think ethnicity and skin colour have usually been the bigots preferred characteristics throughout history - and sex are equivalent in many situations, such as which public toilet to use.

Sex is not a non-relevant characteristic for bathroom segregation.

We know this as a fact because huge numbers of perfectly functional public toilets exist that do not require sex segregation.

That doesn't prove that sex is not relevant. It doesn't prove that sex segregation provides no benefit.

 

[Georg]

As far as segregation based on a non-relevant characteristics, 'race', whatever that is - I think ethnicity and skin colour have usually been the bigots preferred characteristics throughout history - and sex are equivalent in many situations, such as which public toilet to use. We know this as a fact because huge numbers of perfectly functional public toilets exist that do not have or require sex segregation.

What a load of bs.
When has the color of skin ever caused harm?
But I do know a couple of women that got raped, in other words they were harmed by a dick.*
You cannot be so dumb and think that this is a valid analogy.
Or can you?

And you cannot see that you want to take away rights from women?
Or do you simply not care?
Then we are back at misogyny.

*sorry for being quite explicit, but sometimes it is necessary to make the point clear.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Sex is not a non-relevant characteristic for bathroom segregation.

Yes it is. It must be, because how could public toilets that don't segregate based on sex exist and function perfectly fine if sex was relevant?

That doesn't prove that sex is not relevant. It doesn't prove that sex segregation provides no benefit.

Yes it does prove 100% that sex is not relevant for a public toilet to function perfectly well. Loads of places have only unisex toilets in the UK and I've yet to hear of or personally witness a mass outbreak of women pissing themselves in public because there's nowhere for them to go.

 

[Ziggurat]

Yes it is. It must be, because how could public toilets that don't segregate based on sex exist and function perfectly fine if sex was relevant?

You seem to be confused about the difference between necessary and beneficial. Yes, you CAN have single sex toilets, and they can work. Sex segregation is not necessary in that sense, that much is true. That does not mean that there's no benefit to sex segregating toilets. That's an illogical conclusion. It doesn't follow.