Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Thermal]

Certain jobs require female employees to strip search females. It has NOT usually been the case that these jobs required female employees to strip search males. Can you understand why these employees would not want such a change in their job duties? Can you understand why why should not create such a change in their job duties?

Dude, can you drop the free floating contrarianism?

I was asked if GIVEN A CHOUCE, who I would pick. That's what we call a hypothetical. In said hypothetical, it would make no sense at all to interpret it as you are choosing to. No, "nobody is this confused".

Here you are thinking it's only about sexual attraction, rather than acknowledging a biological component

No, I'm pointing out the hetero-centric component that you guys keep glossing over for rhetorical benefit. Unwanted "titilation" could go in any direction. You guys only argue from the ubiquitous pervy hetero man standpoint. It's a big world out there, brother

 

[Thermal]

Dup

 

[Emily's Cat]

No, fot the same reason that if I said "Adult Americans don't support having gay sex with children", that'd a true and accurate statement. "American NAMBLA members want this" is the qualified statement.

Nah, buddy. You've given other people hell for not specifying "not all" when it's in reference to males with transgender identities. Even though Rolfe has on multiple times literally said not all males with transgender identities are autogynephiles getting off on being in female spaces, you routinely treat Rolfe like they're evil when they simplify and assume that you understand the not all is implied. So you don't get to play the "not all" on a technicality when it suits you.

You can say "The overwhelming majority of adult americans don't support having sex with children", but you can't leave it as it stands, because NAMBLA is comprised of adult americans, so at least some adult americans absolutely support having sex with children. Similarly, you could say that the vast majority of males aren't demanding access to female single sex spaces, but since males with transgender identities are still males, and they *are* demanding access, it is not true to say "males aren't demanding access".

Either abide by your own rules, or cut other people some slack and let them generalize with the understood and unstated "not all" without you getting bitchy about it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I know damn right well y'all are ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ with me. There's a lot of playing dumb coming from your side that has zero credibility.

Pretty please, read it again. I was asked hypothetically, which I would choose if given the choice. As we all know, I am.mot given one "in reality".

Serious question: after three repetitions, you are still claiming to be "confused". I know you are sharp. So why the act?

Alternatively... you're nowhere near as good at explaining your position as you think you are, and you actually make a lot of contradictory arguments.

 

[smartcooky]

Nah, buddy. You've given other people hell for not specifying "not all" when it's in reference to males with transgender identities. Even though Rolfe has on multiple times literally said not all males with transgender identities are autogynephiles getting off on being in female spaces, you routinely treat Rolfe like they're evil when they simplify and assume that you understand the not all is implied. So you don't get to play the "not all" on a technicality when it suits you.

You can say "The overwhelming majority of adult americans don't support having sex with children", but you can't leave it as it stands, because NAMBLA is comprised of adult americans, so at least some adult americans absolutely support having sex with children. Similarly, you could say that the vast majority of males aren't demanding access to female single sex spaces, but since males with transgender identities are still males, and they *are* demanding access, it is not true to say "males aren't demanding access".

Either abide by your own rules, or cut other people some slack and let them generalize with the understood and unstated "not all" without you getting bitchy about it.

Yup... He routinely changes the grammar rules when it suits him.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I was asked if GIVEN A CHOUCE, who I would pick.

Back up that truck. Yes, you were asked the hypothetical of you being given a choice. But you were also asked a follow-up question, of why a female attendant might refuse to touch your dick. And the only explanation for that female's refusal that you could come up with was bigotry. You seem completely unable to comprehend that a female might decline to touch your dick because a lot of males are pervs and it's massive violation to force a female attendant to effectively perform a sexual service for a male. That's the problem, Thermal. Not that you personally would prefer to have your junk held by a female rather than a male... but that you can't understand that it's entirely reasonable and rational for a female attendant to decline to hold your junk in the first goddamned place.

 

[Louden Wilde]

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...

There's quite a few males on this forum who don't care about females being raped and killed and starved because they have a far more important identity: they are Palestinian. Oh, that's right @Manger Douse, Hamas made those IDF soldiers do those things to women and children. Apparently the identity of "Palestinian" trumps "Biological Female" for these brave armchair warriors and defenders of the rights of biological females.

It's not about identity. Girls and women worldwide are discriminated against, oppressed, and killed (starting w/ selective abortion and infanticide) based on their sex. It is not something they can identity out of. So long as we reproduce sexually (along with the corresponding huge asymmetry in reproductive costs and sexual dimorphism), it's going to remain a problem.

A corollary of this is that males who claim a "female" gender identity are never going to be broadly thought of in the same way - it's a fatally flawed ideology (in terms of them getting what they think they want).

Yes, in "pigeonholing" the difference between men and women, sex is the answer.

The extremists on that side are running the show. e.g. - see d4m10n's recent link to the ACLU's position. In fact, at this point, I don't know what a non-extremist trans-activist position would look like.

 

[smartcooky]

The extremists on that side are running the show. e.g. - see d4m10n's recent link to the ACLU's position. In fact, at this point, I don't know what a non-extremist position would like.

For mine, the very idea that a man convinces himself he's a woman AND wants to use those thoughts to force his way into places where women are naked is extremist in and of itself.

 

[smartcooky]

Imagine this same question but with other data categories from your official documents.

Are you okay driving people to suicide because they want to be granted birthright citizenship even though they were born abroad?

Are you okay driving people to suicide because they want to be recognized as Native American despite having only European ancestors?

Are you okay driving people to suicide because they want to compete as featherweight even though they are currently heavyweight?

Are you okay driving people to suicide because they want to be treated as if they were over 21 even though they are only 17?

See how weird that all sounds when the datum in question is anything other than sex? That should tell us something.

And of course, the "transgender people are being driven to suicide" canard is a myth and a lie. Their suicidal ideation is NOT because they are transgender, it's because they are mentally ill. It is a fact that the level of suicidal ideation in transgender people is statistically indistinguishable from that of non-transgender individuals with mental illnesses.
So treat the bloody mental illness!!

 

[smartcooky]

Virgin Active gyms have restored single sex changing rooms


The pressure of the Supreme Court decision continues to help turn the tide against the madness and to restore normality.

 

[smartcooky]

...and finally... FINALLY!!

 

[d4m10n]

And of course, the "transgender people are being driven to suicide" canard is a myth and a lie.

You are probably correct, but my point remains even if you are not.

Game theoretically speaking, it doesn't make much sense to agree to lie about what really happened (e.g. year of birth, sex at birth, ancestry at birth) because your interlocutor is threatening to kill someone. Negotiating with terrorists will tend to incentivize future terrorism.

 

[Thermal]

Back up that truck. Yes, you were asked the hypothetical of you being given a choice. But you were also asked a follow-up question, of why a female attendant might refuse to touch your dick.

No I wasn't. I was asked (somewhat nonsensically) for a reason that I wouldn't find bigoted. That qualifier threw me for a loop, because being bigoted never even crossed my mind. I had only said that many guys would prefer a woman because she had smaller diameter fingers. Yes, you guys are portraying a strip search as some kind of pervy romp; I see it as a humiliating sexual assault that I would seek to minimize the discomfort of. Which brings up the following:

And the only explanation for that female's refusal that you could come up with was bigotry.

That's a goddamned LIE, EC. I never "came up" with any such thing. Manager Douse pulled that out of thin air, it had nothing to do with me. Go ahead, check. Manager Douse's crackpot inquisition starts at post #10,959, with the first pulled-from-thin-air mention of bigotry in our interpid theoretical female strip searcher.

You did not misunderstand. You are not "confused". You are LYING. You have been lying about my positions and postings over and over and over. Knock it the ◊◊◊◊ off.

Oh, and you double barell lied in that one line. I also came up with other reasons, such as we knew each other, and being considerate, she requested a stranger perform it, or that she believed the strip search was unlawful and punitive, and refused to perform the unlawful search. Both of which are complementary to her integrity.

So you not only lied about me saying she must be a bigot, but you lied about me not coming up with non-bigoted reasons for her refusal.

You seem completely unable to comprehend that a female might decline to touch your dick because a lot of males are pervs and it's massive violation to force a female attendant to effectively perform a sexual service for a male. That's the problem, Thermal. Not that you personally would prefer to have your junk held by a female rather than a male... but that you can't understand that it's entirely reasonable and rational for a female attendant to decline to hold your junk in the first goddamned place.

If, as the hypothetical was framed, she chose me to refuse to perform it on, no, I wouldn't understand that. She took a job doing this, voluntarily and for pay. She was not a goddamned sex slave. And yours truly would not have been treating it as sexy time.

Wait... do you have the wit or imagination to visualize what a strip search is like for a male? It ain't no erotic ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ interlude. It is a humiliating, degrading experience when you are naked in a small room with like four people, one of whom is handling your body like you were livestock, all in the name of accusing you of hiding something that they have no reason to assume you personally are concealing.

I would like a direct answer from you about why you keep lying about my posts.

 

[Thermal]

What is R and M?

Making a wild assumption that R = Rapist and M = Male

If my assumption is true, then you start out by saying that the probability of a person being a rapist given that the person is male is much smaller than the probability of a person being male given that the person is a rapist.

Then bayesian math... and I'm not going to try to turn that into words.

My assumption would seem to be born out by your conclusion that P(M|R) ~ 0.98; we already know that 98% of rapists are males.

Exact answers for the remainder are hard to come by, but they're also not complete unknowns. We have some knowledge and we can make some assumptions. We know for example that P(M|~R) < 0.5. We could arguably say that P(M) = 0.49 if we limit our scope to the US.

And we can proxy P(R). The 2016 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which measures sexual assaults and rapes that may not have been reported to the police, estimated that there were 431,840 incidents of rape or sexual assault in 2015. With a population of about 320,000,000 in 2015, that puts P(R) at 0.135. Thus P(~R) = 0.865.

So we've got P(M|R) = 0.98, P(M) = 0.49, P(R) = 0.135.
P(R|M) = P(M|R).P(R) / P(M) = 0.98 * 0.135/0.49 = 0.27

That would imply that any given male has a 27% chance of being a rapist. That seems high, so let's make the extreme simplifying assumption that the 431,840 instances or rape were committed by only 43,184 males - that would mean that each rapist raped 10 people in 2015, which seems rather high, but we can treat that as a boundary scenario. That would mean that P(R) is more like 0.0135, and we end up with 0.027.

So for any given male, there's between a 2.7% and a 27% chance that they're a rapist.

Ok, you lost me here. You are comparing estimated rapes in 2015 against the population in that year. That's 432,000 out of 320,000,000. That is 0.135% of the population. Half the population are male (let's assume 100% of rapes are committed by males), so you'd have .27% chance that any given male is a rapist, assuming one unique male per rape. That's a maximum possible percentage. And that's 0.27%, not 27%.

How did you drag a quarter of a percent (max) up to 3% or dear God 27%? 27% would mean that out of 160,000,000 males, there would have had to be over 40,000,000 rapes that year?

ETA: since Emily's Cat usually takes the weekend off from posting, anyone else can field why this 27% possibility is off by orders of magnitude. Any of the 5 'thumbs-uppers' to EC's post in particular I would welcome hearing from.

 

[catsmate]

Amused, sure. But I bet they're not amused for the reason you think they're amused.

Actually they were. You are wrong (as usual). You see I actually asked people, rather than assuming they shared my prejudices. You should give it a try.

I was amused that any male has the arrogance to assume that males make better females than males. I laughed at the image... but not in appreciation.

This is just silly.

 

[catsmate]

An interesting letter on the "Real Woman" bigotry in action.

I am a gender non-conforming woman: here is what my life is like | Letters

Letter: Since I was about eight, I have been regularly mistaken for a boy or man, writes Felicity Hawksley. The way I am is no statement, no protest, no challenge

www.theguardian.com

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Imagine this same question but with other data categories from your official documents.

Are you okay driving people to suicide because they want to be granted birthright citizenship even though they were born abroad?

Are you okay driving people to suicide because they want to be recognized as Native American despite having only European ancestors?

Are you okay driving people to suicide because they want to compete as featherweight even though they are currently heavyweight?

Are you okay driving people to suicide because they want to be treated as if they were over 21 even though they are only 17?

See how weird that all sounds when the datum in question is anything other than sex? That should tell us something.

Yes, it should: that gender identity and sexuality are experienced very differently to those other categories. For example, many (most?) transsexual people know the physical sex of their body, but feel like it does not match their gender. I presume the vast majority of them are not lying about this. Some young people with these feelings will grow out of it, but other will not. Many, if accepted as their chosen gender, go on to live happier and more productive lives compared to those who are not accepted and possibly persecuted.

It must really piss some of you off that members of this tiny percentage of humans has had such a huge impact on your lives because they were fortunate to be accepted by people around them and allowed to flourish.

 

[lionking]

Not

An interesting letter on the "Real Woman" bigotry in action.

I am a gender non-conforming woman: here is what my life is like | Letters

Letter: Since I was about eight, I have been regularly mistaken for a boy or man, writes Felicity Hawksley. The way I am is no statement, no protest, no challenge

www.theguardian.com

Not terribly interesting. This person isn’t trans but gets upset when people don’t guess her sex correctly. Strange, not interesting.

Plus she gets upset when people probably politely ( this is the UK) ask her pronouns.

All that letter shows is that you can be a tosser regardless of sex or gender.

 

[smartcooky]

An interesting letter on the "Real Woman" bigotry in action.

I am a gender non-conforming woman: here is what my life is like | Letters

Letter: Since I was about eight, I have been regularly mistaken for a boy or man, writes Felicity Hawksley. The way I am is no statement, no protest, no challenge

www.theguardian.com

Not seeing how this has any relevance to the debate. So she's a bit masculine... so what? This is not bloke with a cock and balls dressing up as a woman and trying to force his way into the ladies toilet so he can swing his ladydick in their faces.

 

[smartcooky]

Yes, it should: that gender identity and sexuality are experienced very differently to those other categories.

Meh... not seeing any difference - they all want to be something they aren't

For example, many (most?) transsexual people know the physical sex of their body, but feel like it does not match their gender.

Yes, that is how they feel. Now explain why those feeling should entitle them the right to abrogate the rights of others?

I presume the vast majority of them are not lying about this. Some young people with these feelings will grow out of it, but other will not. Many, if accepted as their chosen gender, go on to live happier and more productive lives compared to those who are not accepted and possibly persecuted.

Try reading some of the horror stories told by de-transitioners - people stabbed in the back by their teachers and doctors.

Detransitioners: The Silenced Victims of the Transgender Movement - North Carolina Family Policy Council

The transgender movement has soared in America with the eruption of youth ages 13 to 17 who identify as transgender reaching approximately 300,000, a number that has doubled in recent years. Our hyper-politicized culture has been vocal about the movement, and many states across the nation have...

ncfamily.org

It must really piss some of you off that members of this tiny percentage of humans has had such a huge impact on your lives because they were fortunate to be accepted by people around them and allowed to flourish.

Some of us have felt that impact. Some have family who have felt that impact. Some have friends who have felt that impact

Thankfully, things are turning against the madness. The UK Supreme Court ruling is just the beginning. SCOTUS will be next.