Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ivor the Engineer]

You advocate for unreasonable accommodations for trans-identifying men, at the expense of reasonable accommodations for women.

It's pretty obvious you concluded who was right and who was wrong without giving the matter much thought, and now the only thought you're willing to give it is whatever justifies your predetermined conclusion.

What are the unreasonable accommodations for transsexual women that I advocate for?

How does advocating for such things as reducing economic inequality, ending childhood poverty and early intervention, which we know results in nicer, better behaved humans of all ethnicities and sexualities come at the expense of women? The only group it comes at the expense of is very wealthy and (mostly) white men and their acolytes such as yourself.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Not how it happened for me - i.e. I wasn't led to criticize the trans movement by the right (nor were most posting in this thread). Like many, I assumed it must be essentially above criticism because the right was against it. As the pandemic hit, I spent more time on social media -
I first noted some folks on "sci-twitter" (people who had mutual connections with scientists I knew or institutions where I'd been) claiming that sex was a spectrum/ not a binary during (the biologists involved were mostly not repro/devo/evo types). I initially engaged a bit and was told that stating that sex is binary is seen as a "transphobic dog whistle". Those social media arguments and the recent papers referenced explicitly appeal to social justice/inclusivity in their critiques (i.e. rather than a well-reasoned functional issue with the definition).

The more I dug, the worse it looked - in addition to the the falsehoods about biology there was the misogyny, the homophobia, the lack of an assay and evidence for transitioning kids (+ denial of the the social contagion aspect) as well as the obviously false premise at the core of the movement. Yes, you can make people recite the mantra (TW are W/ TM are M), but it will never be widely believed. In short, the movement does not hold up under even a bit of scrutiny.

When I was a grad student, I heard an older scientist say the right (in the US) doesn't like science that conflicts with their interpretation of the bible and the left rejects that which conflicts with "accepted hippy wisdom."
The politicians on the right would love for the movement to continue as long as possible - it's a gift that keeps on giving for them.

Extremists always point at other extremists to try to show how reasonable their point of view is. I like to keep my distance from all of them.

Biological sex, as it is defined, is pretty much binary. What you refuse or just simply cannot conceive of is that the vast majority of human self-identity has little to do with biological sex. One aspect I find wonderfully ironic about both extremes is their desire to pigeonhole individuals.

Your lot jump up and down about the pigeonhole of biological sex being supreme. The other side want to pigeonhole people based on gender. Your lot says because gender is self-reported it isn't real. The other side try to make the definition of biological sex operationally useless. And so it goes on and on and on...

Edited by Agatha: 

Removed off-topic material

 

[Manger Douse]

What are the unreasonable accommodations for transsexual women that I advocate for?

How does advocating for such things as reducing economic inequality, ending childhood poverty and early intervention, which we know results in nicer, better behaved humans of all ethnicities and sexualities come at the expense of women? The only group it comes at the expense of is very wealthy and (mostly) white men and their acolytes such as yourself.

How is ending childhood poverty an accommodation for transsexual women?

 

[Manger Douse]

Highlighted option, with locks on the main entrance to the facilities to keep junkies out

How will you ensure someone with a drug addiction doesn't get a key? The same way you ensure male sexual predators won't access women's safe spaces under the cover of trans? - ie: nothing at all?

who, I'm sure we can all agree, can can go die in the gutter as they're not our problem.

Projection

 

[d4m10n]

Trans rights are where liberal scepticism comes to die

Basically any political topic is where careful thinking comes to die.

 

[Ziggurat]

Biological sex, as it is defined, is pretty much binary. What you refuse or just simply cannot conceive of is that the vast majority of human self-identity has little to do with biological sex.

No, that’s not the issue.

Your lot jump up and down about the pigeonhole of biological sex being supreme.

Only in the limited situations where sex segregation is important. In most of life, we do not sex segregate precisely because it’s not supreme in general.

The other side want to pigeonhole people based on gender. Your lot says because gender is self-reported it isn't real.

I don’t care if it’s real, it’s not relevant to sex segregation. The reasons for sex segregation have nothing to do with gender. Do whatever you want with gender, just don’t substitute it for sex.

 

[smartcooky]

How is ending childhood poverty an accommodation for transsexual women?

It isn't. He simply virtue signals those things as a form of "oh look, a squirrel".

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

It isn't. He simply virtue signals those things as a form of "oh look, a squirrel".

Do you think reducing child poverty would improve the psychological health of males?

 

[Manger Douse]

Basically any political topic is where careful thinking comes to die.

I think on this forum its a case of "Reality has a liberal bias, I'm a liberal so reality is biased in my favour!"

Good article though, thanks

 

[Manger Douse]

Do you think reducing child poverty would improve the psychological health of males?

Regular exercise improves the psychological health of males - why don't you advocate for them to do that? Why advocate that women have to lose their safe spaces for the improvement of men's mental health?

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Regular exercise improves the psychological health of males - why don't you advocate for them to do that?

Stupid and flippant response noted.

Why advocate that women have to lose their safe spaces for the improvement of men's mental health?

Public toilets or changing rooms are not and never will be safe spaces from predators. A women's refuge is a safe space and I can see the function of and benefit from being able to prevent people (including other women) entering such a place.

 

[Thermal]

Laurel Hubbard took gold medals at the Pacific Games in Samoa some years ago.

Do you think that this sort of defensive lawyering played any role in that?

Again, from memory: "some years ago" there were standards and provisions for testosterone levels etc for transwomen to compete in the women's division. I don't know how effective they were at leveling the playing field (I recall they were kinda not so), but they were at least biologically based.

Was the change in policy to passport ID or whatever a result of caving to activists? I dunno, but expect not. You can surely draw correlations, but not causality. It's just as plausible that the governing bodies saw the conflict about discrimination based on gender (currently with little clear meaning) and act based on their interpretation of fairness, which they haven't got clear in their own heads yet, as many of us struggle with.

Bottom line is that while "activists" may push for certain things, that doesn't mean The Powers That Be are submitting to them. I think its more likely they see the same problem that the activists point to and are in the same hot potato mess as everyone else.

 

[Manger Douse]

Stupid and flippant response noted.

That you can't answer the question doesn't make it stupid and flippant

Public toilets or changing rooms are not and never will be safe spaces from predators. A women's refuge is a safe space and I can see the function of and benefit from being able to prevent people (including other women) entering such a place.

They are safer than sharing with men, that's why women need and have them

 

[Ziggurat]

Again, from memory: "some years ago" there were standards and provisions for testosterone levels etc for transwomen to compete in the women's division. I don't know how effective they were at leveling the playing field (I recall they were kinda not so), but they were at least biologically based.

Hormone requirements reduce but do not eliminate male athletic advantage.

Was the change in policy to passport ID or whatever a result of caving to activists? I dunno, but expect not.

Are you referring to the 2024 Olympics boxing requirements? I think that's the only sport that ever had the passport-only qualification policy.

The Olympics does not have a uniform policy on sex/gender qualifications. They vary by sport, and are mostly handled by sport-specific organizations. Prior to the 2024 games, boxing for the Olympics was mostly managed by the International Boxing Association. But the IOC dumped them in 2023, for reasons unrelated to any sex/gender stuff. They did not have a substitute organization to manage boxing for them, so the IOC basically had to administer the boxing competition directly. Which also meant they had to come up with their own rules for participation. And the IOC decided that all they wanted to do for qualification was use whatever was on the athlete's passport.

Now, what motivated that decision? I don't think the IOC has ever said, and I doubt they ever will. But was it motivated by activists? Probably. Maybe the people within the IOC who made the decision were activists, maybe the caved to pressure from activists, maybe they did it preemptively to avoid negative attention from activists, maybe they just believed the activists. I don't know. But they gave the activists everything they wanted for boxing. And I don't see any reason that would happen except under influence (direct or indirect) of the activists.

Bottom line is that while "activists" may push for certain things, that doesn't mean The Powers That Be are submitting to them.

Not always. But sometimes they do. Such as when California passes a law that prohibits schools from telling parents that the school is helping to transition their child without that child's permission.

 

[Ziggurat]

Public toilets or changing rooms are not and never will be safe spaces from predators.

I thought you said we could eliminate male violence by adopting your progressive socialist agenda? Do you mean that it wouldn't actually work?

 

[Thermal]

Hormone requirements reduce but do not eliminate male athletic advantage.

That is my understanding. Male puberty is no joke in terms of musculoskeletal development, among other advantages.

Are you referring to the 2024 Olympics boxing requirements?

That, and others. The claim.is made that organizations submit or are hypnotized by "activists", usually unnamed. Most of the actual activist groups are functionally impotent, with some like the ACLU being a toothy exception. Even there, though, I'm not sure the ACLU is doing anything but interpreting things as they always have, which is often kooky and counterproductive to the lay observer.

Maybe the people within the IOC who made the decision were activists, maybe the caved to pressure from activists, maybe they did it preemptively to avoid negative attention from activists, maybe they just believed the activists. I don't know.

Or they agreed (happily or otherwise) with the merit of the argument without giving a ◊◊◊◊ about the activists.

But they gave the activists everything they wanted for boxing. And I don't see any reason that would happen except under influence (direct or indirect) of the activists.

And I can see the reasoning running completely parallel and independent to the activists' wish list.

Not always. But sometimes they do. Such as when California passes a law that prohibits schools from telling parents that the school is helping to transition their child without that child's permission.

Elected legislators gonna legislate.

 

[Ziggurat]

Or they agreed (happily or otherwise) with the merit of the argument without giving a ◊◊◊◊ about the activists.

There is no merit to argument for using passsports to determine eligibility. Seriously, for some countries, you can be an ordinary cis male who just put a check mark on a form and that would suffice to get you listed as female. Don't need to transition, don't need to be on hormones, don't need to have a DSD, don't need to even pretend to be a woman. Just fill out a bit of paperwork, and any male could qualify for women's boxing. Mike Tyson in his prime could have qualified under the 2024 rules.

And I can see the reasoning running completely parallel and independent to the activists' wish list.

Oh really? Go on, then. Describe the independent reasoning that could arrive at the conclusion that passports were a good way to determine eligibility.

Elected legislators gonna legislate.

Indeed. And sometimes they will legislate according to the desires of the trans rights advocates.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

I thought you said we could eliminate male violence by adopting your progressivesocialist agenda? Do you mean that it wouldn't actually work?

Reducing economic inequality, child poverty and intervening earlier when families and young people are struggling are socialist now?

Maybe reducing economic inequality could be considered socialist, but there's plenty of evidence to show that lower inequality is better for everyone, though it does require one to have a concept of 'better' beyond the amount of money you have in the bank and property you own.

The link between childhood poverty and lifelong mental health problems is well documented. Intervening earlier when families and young people are struggling with all kinds of problems also pays dividends for mental health. Would it reduce all violence against women? No, but I think it would it have far more of an effect than preventing transsexuals using the public toilets and changing rooms of their choice as well as numerous other benefits for society.

Let's flip it around: Do you think increasing child poverty and economic inequality would lead to more, less or no change in the amount of violence against women?

 

[Thermal]

Oh really? Go on, then. Describe the independent reasoning that could arrive at the conclusion that passports were a good way to determine eligibility.

Ok. Passports are considered universally accurate identification, inasmuch as they are accepted worldwide for ID and entrance to another country. If a body needs to accept an ID without getting into dropping trou (or other variants), it should universally suffice. That it ended up being an imperfect system should hardly be a surprise; little is perfect and flaws abound.

More telling would be to identify who these puppetmaster TRAs exactly are, and demonstrate that ...the planet . . lives in submission to them, and why.

Indeed. And sometimes they will legislate according to the desires of the trans rights advocates.

Or, you know, their constituents that voted them into office?

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

That you can't answer the question doesn't make it stupid and flippant

I don't think men engaging in regular exercise would have a significant effect on violence against women. Do you?

They are safer than sharing with men, that's why women need and have them

Is your solution to burglary bigger locks on doors?

The people who are arguing so vehemently against transsexuals appear to be just fine with the creation of abusers of women, or at least think it's nothing to do with them and not their responsibility to do anything about it.