Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

Oh well, this settles it.

I'm not convinced that wasn't supposed to be a joke. Poe strikes again.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Oh well, this settles it. Obviously he's a woman because only women are allowed to do the things he does. (Sleeping with stuffed animals? Really?) And that's all that defines a woman, a collection of stereotypical behaviours.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1967356226997797045

I'm far more offended by that than I think I ought to be. The fact that this is how these males view females makes my heart hurt.

 

[Louden Wilde]

I'm not convinced that wasn't supposed to be a joke. Poe strikes again.

It can be pretty hard to tell in some of these cases. I thought the Dylan Mulvaney "days of girlhood" videos were obviously over the top. . OtOH, I've listened to some seemingly heartfelt interviews with TW who seem sincere when they say they knew they were trans because when they were children they liked to wear dresses, sparkly things, etc.

 

[Rolfe]

I'm not convinced that wasn't supposed to be a joke. Poe strikes again.

I don't think it was a joke. We see similar time and time again. The number of times Poe has been called on these trans videos is astronomical, but they turn out to be genuine. Nobody needs to do a parody, they parody themselves.

 

[Ziggurat]

I don't think it was a joke. We see similar time and time again. The number of times Poe has been called on these trans videos is astronomical, but they turn out to be genuine. Nobody needs to do a parody, they parody themselves.

In a world with Titania McGrath and Godfrey Elfwick, I don't want to discount the possibility, but you could easily be right. If it is parody, it's not exaggerated.

 

[Rolfe]

Don't forget Dame Katy!

 

[d4m10n]

I'm not convinced that wasn't supposed to be a joke.

I don't think it was a joke.

If it is a joke, it's a very long running one since the individual streamer in question is a real person who appears to have transitioned from male to female several years ago.

 

[d4m10n]

The fact that this is how these males view females makes my heart hurt.

They are not exactly in a position to view females in terms of sex or in terms of hierarchical oppression based on sex; they have to double down on femininity as a set of relatively harmless stereotypes (e.g. women enjoy having a wide variety of fashions to choose from in their closet) along with a few stereotypes I'd rather insulate my kids from, though they were quite true of my grandmothers (e.g. women express love by cooking for others).

 

[d4m10n]

But there's nothing stopping, say, a Catholic monastery or convent from segregating along biological lines.

IANAL but I don't think we can really say this with confidence until someone takes them to court for violating gender identity antidiscrimination laws, e.g. not allowing a trans man to undertake the vocation of priesthood.

 

[Ziggurat]

If it is a joke, it's a very long running one since the individual streamer in question is a real person who appears to have transitioned from male to female several years ago.

Yeah, that definitely tips the scale towards real. Not just the time, but the real-world identity. Both McGrath and Elfwick have been going for years, but they are alter-egos, not the joker's actual identity.

They are not exactly in a position to view females in terms of sex or in terms of hierarchical oppression based on sex;

This is one of the peculiarities of parts of modern feminism. If you abandon biology as significant, there's nothing to even anchor the concept of feminism to.

they have to double down on femininity as a set of relatively harmless stereotypes (e.g. women enjoy having a wide variety of fashions to choose from in their closet) along with a few stereotypes I'd rather insulate my kids from, though they were quite true of my grandmothers (e.g. women express love by cooking for others).

There is absolutely nothing wrong with expressing love by cooking for others. Perhaps you mean as a requirement for women to do so (or prohibition for men), which, sure. But it's a pretty normal, positive, and widely appreciated form of care, which no one should be dissuaded from.

 

[WilliamAB]

I'm far more offended by that than I think I ought to be. The fact that this is how these males view females makes my heart hurt.

I'd bet money this person is not genuine. Looks like satire.

 

[d4m10n]

Perhaps you mean as a requirement for women to do so (or prohibition for men), which, sure.

Requirement/prohibition obviously go too far, but what I really hope to avoid is discouraging my boys from learning to cook well and doing so for their loved ones. To the extent that this behavior remains gender-normed, they will be socially nudged to miss out on a useful hobby which is practical, healthful, and personally satisfying.

 

[mumblethrax]

Good luck with that.

Thanks, but I don't think we need luck. We're talking about a city of over 8 million, over a period of 23 years. Where are the bathroom outrages?

Of course there is. Access to female spaces. That’s an accommodation.

No, that's a prohibition on disparate treatment. You're confusing yourself by invoking "reasonable accommodation" law, which has no relevance here, even analogically.

One of our local watering holes (McSorley's) famously prohibited women until (I think?) the early 70s. When they were finally forced to admit women to that men's-only space, was that an accommodation? No.

Why do you think reported crimes are the only problem?

I don't. I think they're the most serious problem.

 

[Ziggurat]

No, that's a prohibition on disparate treatment.

No it isn't. Disparate treatment is allowed. That's why we have sex segregated spaces. What the TRA's are demanding isn't a prohibition on disparate treatment, but an exemption to that disparate treatment that everyone else has to abide by. They aren't demanding an end to disparate treatment. That's absolutely not what they want.

You're confusing yourself by invoking "reasonable accommodation" law, which has no relevance here, even analogically.

I'm not confused at all. It very much is an accommodation being demanded. That's what self-ID produces. There's no "reasonable" standard involved, sure, but it's still an accommodation.

One of our local watering holes (McSorley's) famous prohibited women until (I think?) the early 70s. When they were finally forced to admit women to that men's-only space, was that an accommodation? No.

Quite so: they wanted to be treated the same. That's not an accommodation.

Trans people aren't asking to be treated the same. They're asking to be treated differently. That is an accommodation.

I don't. I think they're the most serious problem.

But you're ignoring those other problems.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'd bet money this person is not genuine. Looks like satire.

It absolutely does look like satire. Nevertheless, I think you lost that bet.

That's how crazy the world has become.

 

[mumblethrax]

The Cass and other reports are showing us what should have been obvious - that the evidence for transitioning helping mental health is weak.

This simply has nothing to do with what is being argued.

If we want to help people with gender dysphoria, it's going to via better programs to help them come to terms with their (sexed) bodies, not fostering this illusion.

Is it your position is that housing discrimination against trans people should be legal? If not, then you've already conceded that this isn't the way to help trans people.

Yes, younger folks are more willing to use pronouns and repeat the mantras, but when picking long-term partners, they're not going to see TWs as women.

Most people aren't interested in inter-racial romantic partnerships, either. It has no bearing on how we treat people of different races generally.

Meanwhile, bad actor (whether "true trans" or not) incidents will add to growing resentment/rejection of the movement and give further fuel to the right (not only to attack the TQ+ movement, but the LGB as well).

This concern would be more plausible coming from people who weren't opposed to the movement in the first place.

On it's current course, the movement can only do damage - including to those with gender dysphoria.

No evidence has been presented for this position, and I wasn't discussing "the movement" in any case.

 

[mumblethrax]

Can you be more specific than that?

The problem is that those who would set aside important principles can't be more specific than "privacy" and "decency". I think it's harder than people imagine to make a coherent case against anti-discrimination law on those grounds. It is, of course, easier where we've already criminalized invasion of privacy or indecent behavior.

I'm not seeing how you draw a distinction between these positions.

By acknowledging the free exercise concerns at stake when the courts start attempting to regulate internal employment disputes for religious institutions.

 

[mumblethrax]

IANAL but I don't think we can really say this with confidence until someone takes them to court for violating gender identity antidiscrimination laws, e.g. not allowing a trans man to undertake the vocation of priesthood.

We can say it with a high degree of confidence. The reasons for granting the ministerial exception are not opaque.

 

[mumblethrax]

No it isn't. Disparate treatment is allowed.

Where specific exceptions are made.

There is no such exception in NYC's HRL.

They aren't demanding an end to disparate treatment. That's absolutely not what they want.

They are--with respect to gender identity.

I'm not confused at all. It very much is an accommodation being demanded. That's what self-ID produces. There's no "reasonable" standard involved, sure, but it's still an accommodation.

You are confused. You invoked "reasonable accommodation" in order to justify an investigation into sincerity of beliefs, when it has no bearing on the current topic.

Quite so: they wanted to be treated the same. That's not an accommodation.

Right, the same...with respect to sex.

Trans people aren't asking to be treated the same. They're asking to be treated differently. That is an accommodation.

They are asking to be treated the same, with respect to gender identity, and that's what the law requires of public accommodations.

But you're ignoring those other problems.

Because I've yet to see any serious elucidation of those other problems.

 

[WilliamAB]

If it is a joke, it's a very long running one since the individual streamer in question is a real person who appears to have transitioned from male to female several years ago.

That person, Lila Rallatos, says they love doing comedic vids and turning things into comedy. I still suspect, after reading an interview, that what they do in the vid in question might be a bit of self parody, or perhaps a kind of satire on the preconceptions of people towards transgenders.

https://www.intomore.com/the-internet/lila-rallatos-is-proving-the-haters-wrong/

If not, I don't know what to say...

In either case, it is highly misogynistic, imo.