mumblethrax
Species traitor
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,019
That people should not be subject to unfair or discriminatory treatment on the basis of sex.
I appreciate the change of heart.
Transwomen are not Women - Part 15
- Thread starter d4m10n
- Start date
Thermal
August Member
Strange claim in The Guardian article: "more than half, 57%, of respondents said they had been subjected “without their informed consent” to surgery or other medical treatment to modify their sex characteristics". The claim (evidently relying on the same source) is repeated in the FRA article.To the surprise of no-one who's been paying attention to events, there has been a major rise is violence towards trans and intersex people.
Intersex people in Europe face ‘alarming’ rise in violence, EU finds
Increase in violence since 2019 is linked to online campaigns seeking to sow disinformation and fuel hatredwww.theguardian.com
That seems... odd?
Last edited:
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,787
Sex discrimination is still in effect, is it not? It's actually quite hard to discriminate on the basis of gender identity but NOT sex (see Bostock v. Clayton County). Where sex discrimination is directly prohibited (such as housing), gender identity generally gets covered through that. So I don't think he's right at all about that at all. Even with this roll back, existing sex discrimination protections still cover gender identity.
The problem with explicit gender identity protected class status comes from trying to cover gender discrimination in cases where sex discrimination (such as bathrooms and sports) is allowed.
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,787
I wonder how much of the violence against trans and intersex people is committed by immigrants. But you're not allowed to ask that sort of question, it's racist to even consider.
You're also not allowed to ask about violence committed by trans people and their "allies", or the online campaigns that fuel their rage.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
The collective opinion of everyone here is that nobody at all should be discriminated against in housing, education, and employment on the basis of their sex, religion, ethnicity, etc. with a very, very few specific instances. Disallowing a male from having a home based solely on the fact that they like to wear dresses and make-up would constitute sex discrimination and thus, not a single one of us supports that.
Reasonable exceptions would be things like a single-sex temporary housing facility that disallows males irrespective of how they present, or a senior living community that disallows children as permanent residents.
This sounds rather like your own racial issues coming through. I don't know anyone in my personal life who would avoid a romantic partnership just because the other person has a different degree of melanin content.
What exactly do you think we're opposed to, and what do you think the objectives of "the movement" are?
I have no opposition to people being able to dress and express themselves however they please. I think males should be able to wear frilly lacy things, spinny skirts, and make-up to their heart's content, just as females should be able to wear dungarees and flannel shirts and short hair and steel-toed boots.
I started out far, far more supportive than I am now - I wasn't opposed to any of it "in the first place". It's been exposure to the movement, and the blatant overreach and disregard for the safety and dignity of females that has led to my taking a very firm stance against males invading female single-sex intimate spaces.
Do you think males should be placed in female prisons? Use the female side of the nude spa? Strip down and expose their penis and testicles in the female shower? Compete against females?
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Maybe if there'd been a push by activists for white people to chemically darken their skin so they appear black, undergo cosmetic surgery to broaden their noses and enhance their cheekbones, and wear afro wigs... and then argued that by doing so they should be granted awards for "Best Black Artist/Actor/etc." awards in recognition of the challenges they've overcome to be their true black selves...
Rolfe
Adult human female
To the surprise of no-one who's been paying attention to events, there has been a major rise is violence towards trans and intersex people.
Intersex people in Europe face ‘alarming’ rise in violence, EU finds
Increase in violence since 2019 is linked to online campaigns seeking to sow disinformation and fuel hatred
That Guardian article would seem to indicate that the word "intersex", an outdated term to describe male and female people born with disorders of sexual development, has been co-opted to cover "trans" and/or "queer". And yet still somehow include people with DSDs. There is no way "trans and intersex people" are any sort of category.
Most people with DSDs get quite upset at the implication that they aren't "real" men or women, and get absolutely incandescent at being lumped with the blue hair ladyboy contingent, but the Guardian doesn't seem to care. There's also a significant problem of people who do not suffer from any DSD condition claiming to have one (usually they can't say which one) or to be "intersex". But the Guardian doesn't seem to care.
I very much doubt that there is any violence specifically directed against people with DSDs, because how would you tell? Terrible article.
Last edited:
mumblethrax
Species traitor
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,019
Around 11% of Americans are in interracial marriages. Homophily is a powerful force.
Have you never seen a "SWF seeks SWM" personal (back when their was such a thing)?
And I don't appreciate the insinuation.
"You" appear to represent a continuum of opinions starting with skepticism about the efficacy of gender-affirming care in minors through to unadorned transphobia.
The objectives of the movement are, broadly speaking, to eliminate discrimination in all the usual areas (housing, employment, public accommodations, education, healthcare) and to create some kind of legal status for transgender people.
That's kind of irrelevant.
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,787
You don't understand. Of course housing discrimination doesn't involve transcending sex discrimination. THAT'S MY POINT. Housing doesn't permit sex discrimination. Therefore there's no sex discrimination to transcend. Therefore we don't need special gender identity protection to do so, because the prohibition on sex discrimination ALREADY prohibits gender discrimination, because you can't really discriminate based on gender without discriminating based on sex. That's basically the entire point of the Bostock ruling.
Rolfe
Adult human female
If they polled only people with DSDs and included people born quite a while ago, that could be true. There was a time when paediatricians thought that children could be raised as either sex without detriment, founded largely on John Money's flawed work, and in particular his blatant lies about the boy who became David Reimer. So they believed the best thing to do was to try to make a baby with ambiguous genitalia look as normal as possible for one sex or the other, while they were very young, so they grew up unaware that they were "different".
There were quite a lot of problems with that, not least that it's easier to construct a facsimile of female external genitalia than of male, so babies who were actually male were surgically modified to appear female as infants. With the results you'd expect, given what happened to David Reimer. However modern practice has moved away from this and the approach now is only to carry out medical procedures that are essential to health when the children are very young, and let them decide what if any surgery they want once they're old enough to understand the implications.
Of course another source for that statistic might be people who demanded some sort of sexual characteristics modification because of "trans" ideation, and then realised that the reality wasn't what they'd been led to believe. There are quite a lot of stories of that nature floating around. But since most of the victims of the barbaric "sex reassignment surgeries" seem determined to insist they're fine and it's all fantastic even as they're describing horrendous complications and profound suffering, I don't see how you'd get that to more than 57% of respondents.
Conflating real medical conditions with the mental health disorders that lead to trans ideation is not really a valid approach, Guardian.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Now, I wonder what the reason might be for that?To the surprise of no-one who's been paying attention to events, there has been a major rise is violence towards trans and intersex people.
Intersex people in Europe face ‘alarming’ rise in violence, EU finds
Increase in violence since 2019 is linked to online campaigns seeking to sow disinformation and fuel hatred
No, actually, I don't wonder at all. When you belong to a group of people whose primary activist advocates hugely overreach, use violence, intimidation, harassment and death threats against those who don't want their rights, and the rights of people they care about abrogated, then some of those people are not going to be very happy about you.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Paedophile changes gender and avoids prison | CARE
A man prosecuted for the possession of 11 indecent images of children appears at sentencing identifying as a woman.
care.org.uk
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,787
Maybe not. Keep in mind, that first link is specifically about intersex people, not about transgender people. If someone with an "intersex" condition (many of which aren't really "intersex" at all, merely sexual development disorders) had any surgical treatment for that condition as an infant, then they automatically had one without their informed consent. Because you can't get informed consent from an infant. This doesn't actually indicate that there's any problem, because some developmental issues SHOULD be corrected during infancy.
Thermal
August Member
It says it is including transgender people. Thats what struck me as weird. From the first link, second paragraph:
"All of them identified as intersex, an umbrella term referring to those with innate variations of sex characteristics and which includes people who identify as trans, non-binary and gender diverse."
Agreed. Not what either article or the study both draw from are limited to, though.
Rolfe
Adult human female
That's just nonsense though. Someone was smoking something when they wrote that.
Excluding transwomen ie males from single sex female toilets is not discrimination on the basis of sex.
Unless you're arguing that all toilets should be mixed sex?
The methodology is odd.
https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2025/being-intersex-eu
In theory the survey should be about those with DSDs, but in practice it looks like they got a self-selecting response.
Last edited:
Most useful images for trying to identify breakdown of respondents - age of first medical intervention
age at which issue identified
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Ed Davey (the leader of The Lib-Dem party) literally cannot answer a simple question....
This guys KNOWS he is on the wrong side of the facts, but he is literally so far down the rabbit hole of gender ideology that he cannot bring himself to admit it.
This guys KNOWS he is on the wrong side of the facts, but he is literally so far down the rabbit hole of gender ideology that he cannot bring himself to admit it.
Matthew Best
Penultimate Amazing
The survey was intended to be specifically about "intersex" people, i.e. people with DSDs, not transgender or non-binary people without DSDs.