Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

Because in interpersonal relationships, we don't refer to people in objectively accurate terms.

I'm not talking about pronouns. I'm talking about access to sex segregated spaces. I don't care what pronouns you choose to use.

You ain't generally calling a fat person fat, true or not.

I'm not letting a 300 lb person get on a horse that can only carry 200 lbs either. Nor am I going to agree with an anorexic that they're overweight. The equivalent to what you're describing would not be keeping a trans identifying male out of the women's bathroom, but approaching them unprompted and telling them that they're a parody of a woman. And guess what? I've never advocated doing that. Why can you never address my actual position, but only straw men?

Telling them what restroom they can use, for starters.

That's not a reason, that's your desired outcome. I asked for a reason.

Although you've come right out and said that you don't believe they are sincere,

Some people claiming to be trans are not sincere, and I don't think you even disagree with me about that. I have never, ever claimed that they are all insincere. I believe Misty Hill is sincere. I don't think he should be allowed access to women's bathrooms.

and transgenderism is a lifestyle choice

It is. Just like cisgenderism is a lifestyle choice. So what? What's that got to do with anything?

, and that we should discriminate against them

I have never said that. Largely because I don't think treating males as males constitutes discriminating against them. Nor have you explained why it constitutes discriminating against them.

, so I don't think we'll get too far here. Our starting assumptions are too disparate.

You haven't adequately explained what your starting assumptions even are. That's why I'm asking you questions, but you continue to dodge.

 

[d4m10n]

So "people who look like men" would include some transmen and lesbians and ciswomen who appear masculine.

Rule of "so" in full effect here; I've yet to see any lesbians who pass as male either IRL or WWW.

…could we bag this Riddle of the [Sphinx] and clarify who the "people" are that you referred to?

If only I'd explicitly mentioned "females…who would go on to use cross-sex hormones and subsequently pass as the opposite sex" at some point, then it would all be clear by now.

…it wouldn't take much to perceive Buck Angel as threatening to women who did not know who he was.

Buck is one of the "females…who use cross-sex hormones and subsequently pass as the opposite sex," indeed. I'm not buying your claim that there are "ciswomen who appear masculine" to the degree Buck does, and I'm skeptical whether you really mean to get that far out over your skis.

I'm not sure who they are exactly, and fairly confident I don't care.

Consider learning new things—it's all part of the fun here.

 

[Ziggurat]

Absolutely, but irrelevant. The issue is whether we decide to be douchebags to them or treat them with respect and dignity. We all make our choices.

I see nothing undignified about males using the men's bathroom. Why do you?

 

[smartcooky]

Absolutely, but irrelevant. The issue is whether we decide to be douchebags to them or treat them with respect and dignity. We all make our choices.

How does treating a male as a male impact their respect and dignity?
Do you understand that treating them as a female disrespects and impacts dignity of all women?

 

[d4m10n]

Who?

You quoted Ms. Grover quoting him earlier.

 

[theprestige]

Because in interpersonal relationships, we don't refer to people in objectively accurate terms. You ain't generally calling a fat person fat, true or not. We often defer to self ID, like if someone says they are a Christian, we don't tell them how they aren't because we don't agree with some aspect of their lifestyle that we think is inconsistent with Christianity.

I am.

Telling them what restroom they can use, for starters. Although you've come right out and said that you don't believe they are sincere, and transgenderism is a lifestyle choice, and that we should discriminate against them, so I don't think we'll get too far here. Our starting assumptions are too disparate.

How is telling them restrooms are sex segregated any worse than telling them sports and prisons are sex segregated?

Also, unlike gender, Christianity has a distinct set of meaningful behaviors. And while you might not challenge their claim, it's certainly cromulent to ask them how they reconcile this or that bit of doctrine. But asking a trans person the same kind of question is rude.

Ask your friend how she reconciles having a penis with being female. Or what she thinks of sex segregation in sports and prisons. Or how she feels about unscientific, harmful, irreversible trans affirming treatment for minors.

 

[smartcooky]

 

[Thermal]

I'm not talking about pronouns.

Nor am.i, nor did I mention them?

I'm talking about access to sex segregated spaces.

If they are legally defined as such, there is not much argument.

I don't care what pronouns you choose to use.

I'm not letting a 300 lb person get on a horse that can only carry 200 lbs either. Nor am I going to agree with an anorexic that they're overweight.

Note you are comparing with a demonstrable risk of imminent injury and a self destructive mental illness. I'm talking about neither.

Just like cisgenderism is a lifestyle choice. So what? What's that got to do with anything?

JFC, dude, no. Being cis or trans is not a choice. Did you make a choice to be cis? Walk me through your decision making process.

I have never said that.

Did someone take over your account? I seem to recall:

D ude, i agree that Merager shouldn't have been in there. But to defend that, we have to bluntly acknowledge that we are not really serious about anti-discrimination laws, and that we actually want it, at least sometimes.

YES!!!! OF COURSE WE ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ DO!!!! THAT'S THE WHOLE GOD DAMN POINT!!!!

 

[Thermal]

I see nothing undignified about males using the men's bathroom. Why do you?

For the same reasons I've said and have grown bored with repeating.

 

[Thermal]

How does treating a male as a male impact their respect and dignity?

When they are not living as a male in any way that objectively matters, it's an antisocial dickhead thing to do.

Do you understand that treating them as a female disrespects and impacts dignity of all women?

It does not. If it did, you would understand why it is disrespectful to insist that they are males.

 

[Ziggurat]

Nor am.i, nor did I mention them?

You talked about how we "refer to people". Sounded to me like you were talking about pronouns. Doesn't matter, though, since I wasn't talking about how we refer to people.

If they are legally defined as such, there is not much argument.

When we're debating how to legally define people, there very much is.

Note you are comparing with a demonstrable risk of imminent injury and a self destructive mental illness. I'm talking about neither.

But you are talking about denying reality.

JFC, dude, no. Being cis or trans is not a choice.

What you wear is. Whether or not you put on makeup is. Whether or not you choose to get surgery or take hormones is. And from an outside perspective, those are what functionally define transgenderism.

Did you make a choice to be cis?

I choose to live as if I'm cis, yes.

Did someone take over your account? I seem to recall:

You are conflating two different things. I WANT discrimination on the basis of sex in certain limited contexts such as bathroom access and sports. I DO NOT want sex discrimination in a lot of other areas of life. Discriminating on the basis of sex IS NOT automatically discriminating against trans people. The Bostock case was an example of discriminating against trans people. I don't want that. Sex segregating toilets IS NOT discriminating against trans people, because it's not discriminating against males either. Denying employment to someone on the basis of sex is discriminating against their sex.

I was right, you can't argue against me without using straw men.

 

[Thermal]

How is telling them restrooms are sex segregated any worse than telling them sports and prisons are sex segregated?

It is not. I might have mentioned a hundred and fifty thousand times that unambiguously identifying a strictly sex segregated space removes much of the debate.

Also, unlike gender, Christianity has a distinct set of meaningful behaviors. And while you might not challenge their claim,...

You mean as you advocate doing with transpeople?

... it's certainly cromulent to ask them how they reconcile this or that bit of doctrine. But asking a trans person the same kind of question is rude.

Depends on how you discuss reconciliation of doctrine, which is a far cry from telling a transman that they are a woman, loudly and in public.

Ask your friend how she reconciles having a penis with being female.

I don't know that she has one. Never asked directly about bottom surgery but I belive she had it. She does say quite bluntly that she doesn't understand why she feels like a woman in a man's body, but just wants to live her life without bigots reminding her about that anomaly every few minutes. I don't find that much of an ask.

Or what she thinks of sex segregation in sports and prisons. Or how she feels about unscientific, harmful, irreversible trans affirming treatment for minors.

Never asked about that. I think she did say once that she wished she had changed sooner, but understands that puberty and adolecence are confusing times in the best scenarios, and waiting till adulthood till medically transitioning is best overall policy.

 

[Ziggurat]

It is not. I might have mentioned a hundred and fifty thousand times that unambiguously identifying a strictly sex segregated space removes much of the debate.

And yet, you have also said that this denies trans identifying males their dignity.

 

[Thermal]

And yet, you have also said that this denies trans identifying males their dignity.

No I don't, and have said so clearly and repeatedly. If you hard line define it, it resolves. It is not hard line resolved in the bulk of the US, where gender is seen as the admission ticket. That's why we are in the discussion.

 

[Ziggurat]

No I don't, and have said so clearly and repeatedly. If you hard line define it, it resolves.

And yet, when I call to do exactly that, you say I'm a hateful transphobe.

You have zero consistency on anything.

 

[catsmate]

This is absolutely freaking insane.

I just got arrested again

I arrived back in London to discover the UK is still a police state run by trans activists

grahamlinehan.substack.com

Arresting some for advocating violence? Why not?

 

[Thermal]

You talked about how we "refer to people". Sounded to me like you were talking about pronouns. Doesn't matter, though, since I wasn't talking about how we refer to people.

Right. We were both talking about referring to them as men or women, and confronting strangers using those terms to direct them to restrooms. Not pronouns, though. That's correct.

When we're debating how to legally define people, there very much is.

But you are talking about denying reality.

Jesus, man. If you had a wife who was obese, should I and strangers refer to her as such in public? I mean, this isn't difficult.

What you wear is. Whether or not you put on makeup is. Whether or not you choose to get surgery or take hormones is. And from an outside perspective, those are what functionally define transgenderism.

The outside perspective isn't at issue. Calling an obese person fat may be entirely an accurate description of reality. Copasetic to do so? I mean, reality yo.

I choose to live as if I'm cis, yes.

WTF, man? No you don't. It never crossed your mind today or any other day.

You are conflating two different things. I WANT discrimination on the basis of sex in certain limited contexts such as bathroom access and sports.

If you WANT segregation at times with specific carve outs I'm down. If you literally want discrimination, I'm not.

I was rght, you can't argue against me without using straw men.

There's no straw in reading your own words back to you verbatim.

 

[Ziggurat]

Right. We were both talking about referring to them as men or women

No. I don't give a ◊◊◊◊ what you want to refer to them as.

, and confronting strangers using those terms to direct them to restrooms.

It's not the terms they use which should determine which restroom they use. That's stupid.

Jesus, man. If you had a wife who was obese, should I and strangers refer to her as such in public?

This is not and has never been about how to refer to people.

WTF, man? No you don't. It never crossed your mind today or any other day.

I don't generally think about it in those terms, but I am still very much still doing exactly that. I am choosing to wear pants and not a dress. It did not take me much time to make that decision, sure, but I still decided to. Nothing actually compelled me to make that choice, I could have chosen otherwise.

If you WANT segregation at times with specific carve outs I'm down. If you literally want discrimination, I'm not.

I don't think you understand what the word "discrimination" actually means. Segregation is a kind of discrimination, by definition. And not all discrimination is against someone.

And what "specific carve outs" do you want?

There's no straw in reading your own words back to you verbatim.

There is in misrepresenting what those words mean, as you have done.

But perhaps you really are that clueless that you don't understand the distinctions I'm making, even though they should be obvious and I've already explained them.

 

[theprestige]

It is not. I might have mentioned a hundred and fifty thousand times that unambiguously identifying a strictly sex segregated space removes much of the debate.

I contend that the ambiguity is manufactured, and that nobody is really that confused.

You mean as you advocate doing with transpeople?

I advocate no such thing, except when a man demand access to a women's space, regardless of how women feel about it.

Does your friend make such demands?

 

[smartcooky]

When they are not living as a male in any way that objectively matters, it's an antisocial dickhead thing to do.

Facts don't care about feelings. In my worldview, observable scientific reality trumps feelings... it always will, every time.

Gender ideology rests on two core beliefs.
Firstly, that someone's sex is determined by the thoughts in their head rather than by their biology.
Secondly, that those who do not share that belief can reasonably be expected to sacrifice their sex-segregated spaces in order to accommodate those that do.

Well, you obviously have no problem with the second core belief - you have stated so yourself many times. As a consequence, you must also clearly believe that women should be forced to sacrifice that which their mothers, and grandmothers fought so hard for over decades in the way of women's rights. You clearly believe women should be forced, against their will, to allow transgender identified males (i.e. mentally ill men under the delusion they are women) into their sex-segregated spaces. If you believe the latter, then you also believe that women should just STFU and do what they're told. That makes you a misogynist in my eyes...
- demanding that women be subservient to men's demands.
- expecting women to maintain harmony by sacrificing their beliefs.
- dismissing women's opinions, ideas and rights.
- favoring men's desires and opinions over those of women.

If, after due consideration, you decide that you disagree with the second core belief, then you DO have a problem with gender ideology, and you can expect to be demonized and vilified, and in some cases fired from your job or even receive threats of violence and death if you ever express that disagreement openly.

It does not.

You might want to ask the women on this forum about that.

Oh, I forgot, you already did, and they told you, but you ignored them and called them tranny-bashing bigots for standing up for their rights and for what they believe in.