• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

I'm not subscribed to the thread in which the trans folk on the other forum I belong to complain to each other about how they're being persecuted (mostly because I think they deserve their safe space) but I just clicked on the last page to see how they're taking the Darlington verdict and noticed this gem, which I'm quoting for p0lka's edification:

It's not clear that the term "biological woman" even makes sense, but if it does, trans women are definitely biological women. The brain is the piece of our biology which makes us special.

The birth certificate is not even part of our biology at all.
 
I'm not subscribed to the thread in which the trans folk on the other forum I belong to complain to each other about how they're being persecuted (mostly because I think they deserve their safe space) but I just clicked on the last page to see how they're taking the Darlington verdict and noticed this gem, which I'm quoting for p0lka's edification:
They need to cope harder!!
 
point one. I use the term transmale in this thread to be clear to what I'm referring to, as people in this thread get confused with the woman part.
But 'transmale' obviously invites confusion with 'transman', for anyone who doesn't keep referring to your particular glossary.
point two, I was referring to the judgement and how they were defining terms.
You just said 'I use the term transmale in this thread to be clear what I'm referring to.' Claiming points 1 and 2 at the same time, interesting.
It seems your confusion is coming from you, maybe read peoples entire post before replying?
I did that.
 
What did they do?
You commented on the case and even claimed you were using the court's language (which you use generally in this thread anyway, you also claim), and you don't know what the man did? (Sorry for the confusion: that's "woman" or "transman" to you.)

You must know what he did (or "they" if you prefer). I'm asking you if you condone it.
 
But 'transmale' obviously invites confusion with 'transman', for anyone who doesn't keep referring to your particular glossary.

You just said 'I use the term transmale in this thread to be clear what I'm referring to.' Claiming points 1 and 2 at the same time, interesting.

I did that.
Point one was referring to the red part of my post in which I used the words I have taken to use in this thread to lessen confusion, but I can use transwoman instead if you want? If i'm actually causing more confusion by using transmale i'll switch. I thought I was being clearer by using transmale, as that refers to the sex of the transperson and not the gender vagueness.
This judgement was against the bosses and their failure to act, the transmale was found to have done nothing wrong.

I do think it's good that they are calling them female changing rooms in the judgement, and that rose is a biological male transwoman. Yay progress of sorts.
Point two was referring to the underlined part of my post in which I used the words of the judgement, not my own.
 
Last edited:
You commented on the case and even claimed you were using the court's language (which you use generally in this thread anyway, you also claim), and you don't know what the man did? (Sorry for the confusion: that's "woman" or "transman" to you.)

You must know what he did (or "they" if you prefer). I'm asking you if you condone it.
See my previous post for the explanation of point one and two.

The judgement says they didn't do anything wrong as far as I can tell, what do you think they did wrong? as I'm not seeing it.
 
I'm not subscribed to the thread in which the trans folk on the other forum I belong to complain to each other about how they're being persecuted (mostly because I think they deserve their safe space) but I just clicked on the last page to see how they're taking the Darlington verdict and noticed this gem, which I'm quoting for p0lka's edification:
Thanks. So some of them are cherrypicking bits of science that they want to believe whilst ignoring the rest. That way nonsense lies.
 
"They"? There was one person, not multiple people.

You claim that the solution to these issues is clarity of language, and yet you participate in its obfuscation and corruption.
That's a weird complaint, 'they' can be used in the singular too.
Example: the driver turned left then they proceeded north.
 
Last edited:
No, the UK is equating them (man=male, woman=female). That's not the same as 'mixing them up'. Men and women sharing the women's toilet is 'mixing them up.'
No, it's mixing up gender and sex together as being the same thing; which is not going to solve the problem, instead of treating them differently as they are.
Edit: look at the previous post about buck angel, they are more manly than I will ever be, they've got muscles and a beard and everything! But they are female. Gender and sex are independent of each other as one is social, the other is biological.
 
Last edited:
But 'transmale' obviously invites confusion with 'transman', for anyone who doesn't keep referring to your particular glossary.
That is precisely the problem with "trans identifying male". For decades, the 'trans' part meant 'transitioning' towards the identified gender, and a transgender identified woman is still used in the literature to describe MtF transpeople. Using 'transgender identified male' sounds like someone who is transitioning/transitioned to male, which is the opposite of your intent. As you say, ya really can't run around with personal glossaries to interpret what individuals mean when using terms in their opposite sense.

Transwoman is the general label used for decades and universally to describe a MtF transperson. It may not be perfect, but neither is 'gay' for a male homosexual (he might in fact be gloomy), nor is a lesbian necessarily from a Grecian isle. 'Strue. It's a short label, not a position statement.

The sole benefit of using 'trans identified male' is that it is universally considered a slur, so it's users are dogwhistling their bashing position unambiguously. That's handy to get debaters sorted quickly.
 
Last edited:
That's a weird complaint, 'they' can be used in the singular too.
Example: the driver turned left then they proceeded north.

The singular usage of "they" is correctly confined to situations where the sex of the person is either unknown (as in your example) or indeterminate, for example when describing a hypothetical situation.
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom