Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Thermal]

I go back and forth on the pronouns thing. I don't want to upset people for no good reason, but I do wonder how kind it really is to encourage someone to believe they actually have changed reality with the thoughts in their head, because sooner or later reality to going to bite them on the arse. It seems a bit too much like encouraging an anorexic to join their local weightwatchers club.

That's the thing about the reality of it though: they know they are trans. They can tell. They wouldn't be lobbying for trans rights if they didn't know. They'd just be confused about what everyone was all excited about.

They know the physical reality as much as you and I. They are just asking that whatever crossed wire they have going on upstairs not be rubbed in their faces constantly. I find that reasonable enough, and no skin off my nose to use the preferred pronoun make someone else feel a little more at ease.

 

[Ziggurat]

They know the physical reality as much as you and I. They are just asking that whatever crossed wire they have going on upstairs not be rubbed in their faces constantly.

Indeed, that reality should not be rubbed in their faces constantly. Instead, it should be constantly rubbed in the faces of everyone else who must pretend to deny reality.

I find that reasonable enough, and no skin off my nose to use the preferred pronoun make someone else feel a little more at ease.

If it's no skin off your nose, do whatever you want. But it very much is skin off other people's noses.

 

[Thermal]

The harm of course is to ones freedom to express their own concept of truth and reality. Whether or not the argument you're responding to spelled that out exactly.

I think there's a time to make a stand for ultimate truths, and a time to be a little more casual about it.

And again, you can say all the same things about forced religious participation. Whether or not you pray has no effect on the reality of whether God exists or not so why shouldn't society demand you just bow your head and say the words? Don't be the insensitive jerk who ruins it for everybody when God decides to flood the place again.

The prayer thing hits home for me. I did my first year of High School in a Catholic school, being a protestant (my whole town went to this school because our public sending district was shared with one of the state's most violent school systems). My attitude was ultimately 'when in Rome' and I didn't raise a stink over Hail Marys and the other Catholic jazz. I knew what I was, and 'playing ball' in that limited context didn't compromise my essence.

 

[Thermal]

Indeed, that reality should not be rubbed in their faces constantly. Instead, it should be constantly rubbed in the faces of everyone else who must pretend to deny reality.

I don't find it to be denying reality when I tell my young neices that Santa is coming. 'Playing along' isn't hurting you or anyone else.

You guys take this way too seriously.

If it's no skin off your nose, do whatever you want. But it very much is skin off other people's noses.

What can I tell you? Lighten up.

 

[smartcooky]

That's the generic bigoted rhetoric, yes.

Facts are not bigoted.
Facts are not rhetoric.
Facts don't care about feelings.

No, you don't.

Well its surprising then, since it is a theme that runs through your entire shtick... 'treat them with dignity', remember?

Truth and reality are not affected by your beliefs

Truth and reality are effected when multiple people believe the lie that "transwoman are women". (Remember that a lie repeated loud enough and often enough becomes the truth, especially in the minds of the weak-minded and easily-fooled)

Thankfully that lie is being exposed; more and more people are coming around to the understanding that transgenderism is an ideological Cult of Mentally ill people (mostly men).

and cowardly justifications.

They are not cowardly, and they are not justifications, they are just factual reasons.

Your bald assertion that 'he' can only refer to sex, not gender (many languages want to have a word with you, as do many English expressions) is the cheapest of fig leaves.

Utter poppycock!
You are deliberately and dishonestly mischaracterizing what I said. You know perfectly well I wasn't talking about about masculine and feminine with regards to languages. I was talking about the biological sex of mammals, particularly humans. In case this escapes you, I will now walk you through this grade school concept in baby steps..

When talking about humans...

1. "He/Him" can ONLY EVER correctly refer to humans if they are the biological sex "MALE".
2. "She/Her" can ONLY EVER correctly refer to humans if they are the biological sex "FEMALE".
3. There is no case, EVER where a human male is correctly referred to as "she/her"
4. There is no case, EVER where a human female is correctly referred to as "he/him"
The above is regardless if whatever the human in question or may not wish.

So, it was not a bare assertion, it was, and is, a bare scientific fact.

So you keep saying.

And I will keep saying it.

 

[smartcooky]

I think there's a time to make a stand for ultimate truths, and a time to be a little more casual about it.

There is NEVER a time to casual about ultimate truths--- that path leads to misinformation and falsehoods.

The prayer thing hits home for me. I did my first year of High School in a Catholic school, being a protestant (my whole town went to this school because our public sending district was shared with one of the state's most violent school systems). My attitude was ultimately 'when in Rome' and I didn't raise a stink over Hail Marys and the other Catholic jazz. I knew what I was, and 'playing ball' in that limited context didn't compromise my essence.

Religion is a fiction, and has no relevance here.

 

[Ziggurat]

I don't find it to be denying reality when I tell my young neices that Santa is coming.

It is. That doesn't mean it's wrong to do, but it still is.

'Playing along' isn't hurting you or anyone else.

How would you feel about forcing your niece to pretend she believes in Santa when she doesn't want to? Does that not hurt anyone? Or does that compulsion maybe hurt your niece? See, I don't care if YOU want to play along with the trans identifying male. I have no objection to that, just as I don't object to you telling your niece that Santa is coming. But you're demanding a lot more than that.

You guys take this way too seriously.

I'm not the one who's in favor of compelled speech. That's quite serious.

What can I tell you? Lighten up.

Tell that to the trans identifying male when someone uses "he" pronouns to describe him.

 

[Emily's Cat]

You've made it pretty clear that you don't think transpeople exist except as play actors.

I do wish you'd stop using activist language and framing. It would go a long way toward convincing people that you don't accept activist concepts, and don't support activist agendas.

Not a single person in this thread literally thinks transpeople don't exist. I have eyeballs, I'm pretty sure that Dylan Mulvaney and Laverne Cox and Elliot Page aren't figments of our collective imaginations.

But that's never been what activists mean when they use that phrase. Activists use it as a rhetorical sledgehammer in order to imply bigotry to gender critical people, and to insinuate that we view transgender people as being less human, or otherwise not deserving of recognition as full humans. It gets used to imply that we think transgender people don't deserve fair protection under the law, or that discrimination and harassment against transgender people is acceptable. And that is absolutely not true.

I think most of us take the view that people who claim a transgender identity are 1) mentally disordered or confused, 2) engaging in a fashionable trend, or 3) pretending for personal gain including predatory access to people who would deny consent. The underlying commonality in there is that we do not think that a person having (or claiming to have) a transgender identity is actually the opposite sex. A male who proclaims a transgender identity, regardless of how sincerely they feel, is not actually female. And since the spaces and services that we're concerned about are divided on the basis of sex, we generally do not support overriding sex with self-proclaimed gender identity.

Your framing of "you think transpeople don't exist" is activist framing. You deriding or criticizing us on that basis is you carrying water for activists, and supporting an activist agenda that seeks to supplant sex in policy with gender identity.

 

[smartcooky]

What can I tell you? Lighten up.

Tell that to the trans identifying male when someone uses "he" pronouns to describe him.

Tell that to the people who will fire you for using "he" pronouns to describe a transgender identified male!

https://www.skynews.com.au/lifestyle/trending/aussie-worker-fired-after-calling-nonbinary-colleague-he-instead-of-they/news-story/54252eba875bfe3c62e10fa88e18ed0c

 

[Emily's Cat]

Right. You are snipping out the meat of the post, which challenges the very core if your position, because you want to talk about something less thorny to you. As I keep repeating to you, this bores the ◊◊◊◊ out of me.

You telling me you don't consider me to be one of the bad ones, and besides, transpeople only make up a tiny bit of the population is something you think challenges the core of my position?

How about you go back and read your own goddamned post, look at what I snipped, and reevaluate your petulant response here?

And I'll ask yet one more time: What are YOUR reasons for objecting to policies that allow males to use female single sex spaces and services? What do you think OUR reasons are for objecting to those policies?

You made the claim that you think we have bad/nefarious/bigoted reasons for objecting to those policies, and you have good/benign/sensible reasons. But you refuse to elaborate on what any of those reasons are.

 

[theprestige]

Constantly calling a transwoman a he easily moves into harassing territory, more because it is a gendered term (arguably).

We've had this argument. Third-person pronouns are pretty clearly sexed terms, not gendered terms. When people default to calling you "he" behind your back, it's not because they read your mind and picked up on your inner sense of self. It's because that's what they perceive, and that's what they expect the person they're talking to will perceive. That's the reason "preferred" pronouns have to be declared as such. Because they're at odds with the perceivable sex of the person, which is what actually informs third person pronoun usage.

When a man tells you his preferred third person pronouns are "she/her", what he's telling you is that he wants you to pretend you perceive him as female, even though he passes as male to you. If he passed as female, he wouldn't have to say boo about his pronouns.

 

[smartcooky]

I do wish you'd stop using activist language and framing. It would go a long way toward convincing people that you don't accept activist concepts, and don't support activist agendas.

THIS!

Not a single person in this thread literally thinks transpeople don't exist. I have eyeballs, I'm pretty sure that Dylan Mulvaney and Laverne Cox and Elliot Page aren't figments of our collective imaginations.

AND THIS

But that's never been what activists mean when they use that phrase. Activists use it as a rhetorical sledgehammer in order to imply bigotry to gender critical people, and to insinuate that we view transgender people as being less human, or otherwise not deserving of recognition as full humans. It gets used to imply that we think transgender people don't deserve fair protection under the law, or that discrimination and harassment against transgender people is acceptable. And that is absolutely not true.

I think most of us take the view that people who claim a transgender identity are 1) mentally disordered or confused, 2) engaging in a fashionable trend, or 3) pretending for personal gain including predatory access to people who would deny consent. The underlying commonality in there is that we do not think that a person having (or claiming to have) a transgender identity is actually the opposite sex. A male who proclaims a transgender identity, regardless of how sincerely they feel, is not actually female. And since the spaces and services that we're concerned about are divided on the basis of sex, we generally do not support overriding sex with self-proclaimed gender identity.

Your framing of "you think transpeople don't exist" is activist framing. You deriding or criticizing us on that basis is you carrying water for activists, and supporting an activist agenda that seeks to supplant sex in policy with gender identity.

Exactly!

 

[theprestige]

And now for something completely different:

Log in to Facebook

Log in to Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family and people you know.

www.facebook.com

I mean... If Rachel is his legal name, then they should use his legal name. If a dude wants to call himself Rachel, that's fine with me.

 

[Emily's Cat]

And I don't think you understand how objective it is in practice. You will have the occasional Misty Hill, with no makeup and wearing cargo pants, that you would not objectively catch on the first glance. But overwhelmingly, someone's gender jibes with their presentation so well that it meets the bar for what is objectively understood.

So... you're for hard-line socially enforced presentation then? If a female doesn't like wearing frilly ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ dresses with a ton of make-up and high heels, then they're not a "real female" and you're going to "treat them like a man" as a means to coerce strict gender roles?

That's the outcome of your position, Thermal. Butch females need to be treated "like men" because they don't meet your bar for femininity. Effeminate males need to be treated "like women" because they don't meet your bar for masculinity. That's not progress, that's regression to the fifties.

 

[Emily's Cat]

All of it, but most glaringly when you say they are pretending to be the opposite sex. You don't acknowledge that they are just being themselves, and expressing and choosing what feels right to them.

Thermal, do you believe that a male with a transgender identity is, in actual objective reality, a female?

It doesn't ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ matter if they're just being themselves and expressing what feels right to them - more power to them! I support and salute their right to do so! But the actuality is that they are still unequivocably male. They are not capable of becoming female. They are NOT ACTUALLY FEMALE.

So yes, in that sense, they are mimicking what they believe are female characteristics. They are pretending to be female.

Serious question: do you think women pretend, and choose their presentation? Do you pretend to be a man, and choose accordingly? I don't think transwomen do, either. I think they are choosing their expression just as naturally and genuinely as you choose yours. To dismiss them as pretending is implying they are being deceitful. They are not. Wearing a dress is just as genuine to them as wearing jeans is to you.

Dude, none of us care what they wear, we genuinely truly don't. None of us are trying to prohibit males from wearing dresses, and we don't give a ◊◊◊◊ whether they feel it's natural or not. It's irrelevant.

I'm not "pretending" to be a female human being, I ***am*** unquestionably and incontrovertibly a female human being in actual reality. FFS, I'm not even particularly feminine! I don't style my hair, I only wear make-up when it's professionally appropriate to do so (and I resent it even then), I don't wear heels or stockings, I haven't worn a skirt or a dress in nearly a decade, and I stopped shaving my armpits and legs about five years ago! If you and I were to interact, by the way you've framed your views, you would end up treating me "like a man" because I don't meet your stereotype-driven idea of what a female should look like. Which doesn't alter the fact that I'm a goddamned actual for realsies female one whit.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'm not arguing that practicality is not important, and ultimately what we have to consider. But to use it as a fig leaf to cover contempt for transpeople is a pointless roadblock to anything productive here.

Why do you think that not believing that a male with a transgender identity is actually a real female is "contempt"?

 

[Emily's Cat]

There it is again- 'who want to be thought of" instead of "believe they are". You keep begging the question of insincerity.

Is it your belief that males who profess a transgender identity actually, genuinely sincerely believe themselves to be female human beings?

 

[theprestige]

'Playing along' isn't hurting you or anyone else.

Playing along should always be an opt-in thing, not a compulsory thing, and certainly not a state-mandated thing.

Playing along is something you do for kids, and the feeble-minded. Playing along is something you do when you're trapped in a cult or a gang, and can't easily escape.

There is no scientific evidence that playing along with dysphoric ideations is the most ethical or effective treatment for gender dysphoria. Meanwhile, we do have reason to suspect that, taken to its current extreme, such playing along is bad for dysphorics, bad for women, bad for children, bad for men, and bad for society in general.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Right, and the usage will slip and change in the same sentence, often without the user realizing it.

Loose criticisms: #1 is functionally useless, #2 is just bad, #3 can be useful in limited contexts, and #4 is the one that is relevant for discussion here.

Dude, please read that list again. #3 is regressive and coercive.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I really don't think clothes make the wo/man. Like we've all noted, jeans and a t-shirt and hoodie are pretty unisex out here.

All of my business suits involve pants and loafers. If I could find collared button-up shirts that fit well and didn't cost a fortune, I'd wear ties - I like how they look.