Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Thermal said:
This is why you are the thread's most annoying poster. You dont even read your own citations. From your link:

"Prince also helped popularize the term 'transgender', and erroneously asserted that she coined "transgenderist" and "transgenderism""

That's what I said, scooter.

After all this time, you genuinely still can't wrap your head around the fact that 'transwoman' does not mean literary turned into a female, can you?
Click to expand...
Some people get their stuff just from the headlines, no need to actually read the whole thing. The Daily mail and telegraph and other papers work on that very principle.
 
d4m10n said:
You are expecting people on a skeptic forum to go beyond "trust the science" and start digging in to which scientific studies will most likely stand the test of time? Good luck!
Click to expand...
I'm not expecting anything, but if any people ought not to trust "the science" it's people on a skeptic forum. A trusting skeptic is something of an oxymoron.
 
Ziggurat said:
I did not say that, even accounting for paraphrasing. I said,

Your sex is not a role. The important distinction here isn't between gender and sex, but between something that's a role (ie, socially constructed) and something that's not a role (ie, biological reality). My statement would have worked just as well had I said "sex role" instead of "gender role". But it would make no sense if I had said "sex role" instead of "sex", as you falsely claimed. I'm going to assume that this was not a deliberate lie, but the fact that you could substitute "sex role" for "sex" in what I said betrays your fundamental misunderstanding of this entire issue and the arguments at play here.
Click to expand...
Ah sorry, I apologize for adding the role bit, it wasn't intentional, sorry.
My point still stands though.
 
John Freestone said:
Sometimes people here are equating the words 'gender' and 'sex' (as they once generally meant exactly the same thing), and sometimes they're talking about 'gender' more along the lines you are, as a role or set of expectations of one's sex. I think you're just not always aware what they're saying.

The gender critical folk are usually doing the latter in order to analyse the position of the gender activists and allies. I feel confident most GCs will agree that people should not feel societal pressure to fulfill an arbitrary gender role, just as you say we shouldn't.
Click to expand...

Hopefully.

John Freestone said:
The gender activists and allies are usually the only ones conflating those uses of the terms, switching as and when it suits, because they want to choose something they call their 'gender identity', but they hold the idea (overtly or more subtly), either that it's their actual sex or that their choice of gender should trump their sex in certain ways, like demanding to use the other toilet or, in at least one instance I remember, claiming they were discriminated against because they were refused gynecological services, despite being male without any reassignment surgery.

They range from the relatively sane, who know their sex but just want to behave and feel like the opposite (or none) to those who literally think their soul somehow got in the wrong body. Some therefore think of transition as moving towards the way they want to look, despite knowing their actual sex, while others are on a quest to fix the body that they think should never have been theirs, because they think their (inner, true) sex is right and their body is wrong.
Click to expand...

That doesn't sound good according to your description, let's assume it's correct. Activists are actively doing stuff (which is not a nice thing to do) and taking advantage of loopholes that exist. The reason people can use loopholes to argue about laws is that they're not clearly defined in the first place.



John Freestone said:
In just about every account of 'transition' that I've read about, the person demonstrates that they thought they were 'trans' because of some gender role or stereotype. It may have been removed by now, but at one time the front page of the Mermaids uk website advertised the tremendous joy and freedom of a kid who 'came out as trans' and was on the path to medication and surgery. He was a boy, but at some point he knew he was a girl, it reported in his own words, because he never liked football like his other friends, and liked to hang about with the girls doing their sorts of games. Right in your face, there it was. The most regressive sexism, persuading kids they'd better get their body in line with their likes and dislikes.

/rant
Click to expand...
Social pressure once again. I know of one case where instead of saying they were gay, they decided they were in the wrong body rather than just saying they were gay... because of social pressure. It's all nonsense.
 
p0lka said:
That doesn't sound good according to your description, let's assume it's correct. Activists are actively doing stuff (which is not a nice thing to do) and taking advantage of loopholes that exist. The reason people can use loopholes to argue about laws is that they're not clearly defined in the first place.
Click to expand...
That's not true. They were clearly defined. The TRAs made clear definitions unclear, on purpose, in order to create loopholes that did not previously exist. And they can do it again with whatever words you choose, as long as they have power.

This fight has always been about goals, and who has the power to achieve their goals. It has never, ever been about definitions or ambiguity or any other semantic quibble you might have.
 
smartcooky said:
I've been seeing it for months, and I am sure @Ziggurat, @Rolfe, @Emily's Cat, and @theprestige have also seen it. Its why there is so much confusion about his flip-flopping from one position to the next. ...first he states views that align with TRA's, then views that don't, then they do, then they don't.

Its like I said earlier; he seems to imagine his position is somehow so complex, considered and nuanced that is beyond the comprehension of all of us intellectually inferior dumb-◊◊◊◊◊... like he thinks he's playing five dimensional chess, when in reality, he's playing checkers and doing so sufficiently poorly that he keeps getting huffed!!
Click to expand...
I dunno. I mean, I think Thermal is genuine in saying that they don't think males should be allowed in female spaces. Except for bathrooms, where they're on the fence and kind of think that females should just let males into female restrooms because that would ne "nice".

It's just that we have to be superciliously polite and obsequious toward the males that we're excluding from female spaces, we have to make super duper sure that we don't hurt any of their feelings. And we have to use their language and their terminology while we very politely and subserviently ask them to stay out of female spaces, services, and sports. And we aren't allowed to be angry about female boundaries being violated, because that would be mean... and we wouldn't want to be mean to the males that are violating our boundaries, right? And when we find cases of males being perverts or predators who are shielded by the narrative around transgender identified people, we absolutely cannot call them out as perverts, that might hurt their feelings, and someone who is totally not at all a pervert or a predatory might get offended by calling a pervert a pervert. And if there are already laws that allow males to violate female boundaries and use female spaces, then females shouldn't complain about those laws, and instead if females disagree they should just stay home so they don't offend any of those males.

So you see, Thermal completely agrees that males should not use female intimate spaces, unless there's a law that lets them, or if Thermal thinks they're "real trans". We just have to make sure we're super duper extra nice about it or Thermal will be upset on behalf of the males that we're telling to get out of female spaces.
 
p0lka said:
Social pressure once again. I know of one case where instead of saying they were gay, they decided they were in the wrong body rather than just saying they were gay... because of social pressure. It's all nonsense.
Click to expand...
Things like this make me feel bad for giving you a hard time. You seem pretty new to the gender rabbit hole. It's deep and extensive! I'm pretty sure there are thousands of cases like the one you mention. After all, it's been known for decades that the majority of kids who declare they're trans, with 'watchful waiting' instead of affirmation, turn out to be gay. So there's quite a community of self-styled 'straight trans', male and female, in what are in fact gay relationships (with or without bodily interventions). Homophobia is live and kicking in many places. This is one of the disgusting tragedies, that organisations like Stonewall did such sterling work against homophobia, and then pushed transgenderism, which undermines so much of the earlier work. A lot of LGB, of course, distance themselves from or completely reject the validity of the T.

There is also the opposite, straight people identifying into self-styled 'homosexual' roles. Some say that a high proportion of heterosexual TIMs are autogynephiles, where their sexual desire for women either includes a fantasy of themselves as women (many start from transvestism) or the latter takes over their obession completely to the exclusion of actual women. Those in relationships with women may demand that they and their partner are now lesbians (again, with or without bodily interventions).

The females I've read about have a different trajectory, and autoandrophilia seems much less common if it exists at all. Many of the younger females, still in school or college, declare they are gay boys and date boys (who, if they're straight, may just take advantage of the situation, and if they're gay, may or may not care - gender identity is replacing sex in this generation's conception of sexual orientation). It is thought that this may be a reaction to unwanted sexual attention or abuse from heterosexual boys and men, while gay men seem safe and may share some of the same typically feminine interests. A lot of these girls read gay male fiction and begin to identify with the characters.

Sarah Mittermaier has been analysing these kinds of motivations through lurking on the trans online spaces. Worth looking her up on Substack. And then there's lots of info on Genspect and similar sites.
 
Thermal said:
You're rather comically misreading that post. Louden Wilde is saying quite clearly that YOUR terminology is not used in the real world.
Click to expand...

Are you genuinely under the impression that Louden is responding to your post claiming that 'transwoman" is used by doctors for medical purposes to say that they haven't seen the terms that smartcooky hasn't mentioned used in their work?
 
Rolfe said:
If anyone is still interested, the reason premises are not allowed to permit smoking even if everyone consents (at least in Britain) is the health and welfare of the staff who would be exposed to the smoke. Employees have a right not to be exposed to toxins and they can't sign that away.
Click to expand...
That's generally true in the US, but I believe there are still some cigar our tobacco lounges that are allowed in some areas. Given that smoking is explicitly what they're all about, I think there's an expectation that anyone applying for a job is aware of and consents to the risks.

Kind of like the expectation that any females applying for a job as a stripper is aware of and consents to the fact that a bunch of males are going to be leering and ogling them.
 
Ziggurat said:
That's not true. They were clearly defined. The TRAs made clear definitions unclear, on purpose, in order to create loopholes that did not previously exist. And they can do it again with whatever words you choose, as long as they have power.
Click to expand...
Again with the omnipotent spooky invisible MKULTRA enabled TRAs. They don't even really exist, much yet wield these influential powers.
Ziggurat said:
This fight has always been about goals, and who has the power to achieve their goals. It has never, ever been about definitions or ambiguity or any other semantic quibble you might have.
Click to expand...
What I see are some low-level activists who exploited the existing ambiguity in the laws (gender and sex discrimination). The legislators looked at it and said 'oh ◊◊◊◊, they are right, this is highly ambiguous'.

And that's it. These spooky spooks don't have to wield hypnotizing power over the bulk of the worldwide medical communities, legislative executive and judicial branches, and the majority of Western civilization. No tin foil hats are needed in my interpretation. There is no influential Cabal controlling everyone's minds.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Are you genuinely under the impression that Louden is responding to your post
Click to expand...
Louden was.
Emily's Cat said:
claiming that 'transwoman" is used by doctors for medical purposes
Click to expand...
Not my claim. I said in the medical literature. The medical literature is the ◊◊◊◊ that is published and we can all read.

Serious question: are you claiming that a doctor's notes regarding their patient should be referred to as "the medical literature"?
Emily's Cat said:
to say that they haven't seen the terms that smartcooky hasn't mentioned used in their work?
Click to expand...
smartcooky wasn't part of the exchange, so I have no idea what you are talking about. He inserted himself in after it was over.
 
Some of you may have read about the controversy over San Jose State University having a transgender identifying male in their women's volleyball team. Long story short, much like the Will Thomas affair, players complained and were threatened to keep quiet. Coach was fired for taking a stand, players received death threats and the house of a complainant was shot at. (all the usual TRA responses when people tell them things they don't like).

Well, the USDE's Office for Civil Rights has ripped SJSU a new one, and found they have violated Title IX.

www.ed.gov

U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights Finds San José State University Violated Title IX

Today, the U.S. Department of Education’s (ED) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) found that San José State University (SJSU) violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX).
www.ed.gov www.ed.gov

Here is a shortlist of what SJSU must do...

  • Issue a public statement to the SJSU community that SJSU will adopt biology-based definitions of the words ‘male’ and ‘female’ and acknowledge that the sex of a human – male or female – is unchangeable;
  • Specify that SJSU will follow Title IX by separating sports and intimate facilities based on biological sex;
  • State that SJSU will not delegate its obligation to comply with Title IX to any external association or entity and will not contract with any entity that discriminates on the basis of sex;
  • Restore to individual female athletes all individual athletic records and titles misappropriated by male athletes competing in women’s categories, and issue a personalized letter of apology on behalf of SJSU to each female athlete for allowing her participation in athletics to be marred by sex discrimination; and
  • Send a personalized apology to every woman who played in SJSU’s women’s indoor volleyball (2022–2024), 2023 beach volleyball, and to any woman on a team that forfeited rather than compete against SJSU while a male student was on the roster—expressing sincere regret for placing female athletes in that position.
I hope and expect this will encourage more gender critical people to stand up and be heard about the injustice on this issue.

Beware all those institutions still allowing transgender identifying males to compete in women's sports. Accountability is coming for you...
 
Thermal said:
Again with the omnipotent spooky invisible MKULTRA enabled TRAs. They don't even really exist, much yet wield these influential powers.

What I see are some low-level activists who exploited the existing ambiguity in the laws (gender and sex discrimination). The legislators looked at it and said 'oh ◊◊◊◊, they are right, this is highly ambiguous'.

And that's it. These spooky spooks don't have to wield hypnotizing power over the bulk of the worldwide medical communities, legislative executive and judicial branches, and the majority of Western civilization. No tin foil hats are needed in my interpretation. There is no influential Cabal controlling everyone's minds.
Click to expand...
Arighty. So Thermal completely agrees that males should not be allowed in female intimate spaces... but denies that there has been any sort of organized group of activists who have lobbied both politically and socially in order to try to normalize males using female intimate spaces at their whim. Clearly Stonewall, Mermaids, GLAAD, ACLU, Advocates for Trans Equality, Trevor Project, Stand with Trans, Human Rights Campaign, WPATH, and nny of the other many organizations dedicated to advocating for the expansion of transgender privileges are figments of our collective imagination.
 
Thermal said:
Again with the omnipotent spooky invisible MKULTRA enabled TRAs. They don't even really exist, much yet wield these influential powers.
Click to expand...

Emily's Cat said:
Arighty. So Thermal completely agrees that males should not be allowed in female intimate spaces... but denies that there has been any sort of organized group of activists who have lobbied both politically and socially in order to try to normalize males using female intimate spaces at their whim. Clearly Stonewall, Mermaids, GLAAD, ACLU, Advocates for Trans Equality, Trevor Project, Stand with Trans, Human Rights Campaign, WPATH, and any of the other many organizations dedicated to advocating for the expansion of transgender privileges are figments of our collective imagination.
Click to expand...

As are the following individuals (and these are just the ones who warrant their own Wikipedia page....)
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
Arighty. So Thermal completely agrees that males should not be allowed in female intimate spaces... but denies that there has been any sort of organized group of activists who have lobbied both politically and socially in order to try to normalize males using female intimate spaces at their whim. Clearly Stonewall, Mermaids, GLAAD, ACLU, Advocates for Trans Equality, Trevor Project, Stand with Trans, Human Rights Campaign, WPATH, and nny of the other many organizations dedicated to advocating for the expansion of transgender privileges are figments of our collective imagination.
Click to expand...
If you think they wield the hypnotizing influence and powers claimed by others here, yes, they are figments of your imagination. Those organizations primarily remove money from donor wallets. They do not direct the medical community or instruct the courts.
 
smartcooky said:
They don't exist?
Click to expand...
Same as I said to EC. What you have here is a list of people who talk. Demonstrate their awesome powers and influence over major institutions globally.
 
Thermal said:
If you think they wield the hypnotizing influence and powers claimed by others here, yes, they are figments of your imagination. Those organizations primarily remove money from donor wallets. They do not direct the medical community or instruct the courts.
Click to expand...
With all possible respect, are you high?

Stonewall, GLAAD, and ACLU absolutely have influenced legal policy and the courts. WPATH absolutely has influenced medicine - they are almost singularly responsible for the changes in DSM 5 on this topic. They were incredibly involved in lobbying the medical and psychiatric communities to eliminate the diagnosis of Gender Identity Disorder, and to replace it with a much broader description of Gender Dysphoria that has intentionally been removed from the heading of Disorder. WPATH commissioned Johns Hopkins to do studies on "gender affirming care", and then blocked publication of the studies that didn't support the results they wanted.

In the UK, Stonewall actively worked with policy-makers without public knowledge to allow people with transgender identities extra privileges denied to everyone else, and were heavily involved in shaping policy to allow male prisoners to be housed in female facilities, to require that rape and domestic violence shelters that serve "woman" must also take males who say they identify as women, to alter medical language and remove female-specific language in forms and treatment resulting in "birthing parent", "chestfeeding", and "menstruators" and similar absurdities.

Do you think that your beloved state legislators just woke up one day with a god-given epiphany and said "We really need to let males with transgender identities use female restrooms by law!" all by themselves? GLAAD and HRC have been involved heavily in lobbying states to grant access to facilities based on "gender identity" across the country. The citizens of CA didn't propose the absurd laws that give Darren Merager the legal right to show of their penis to nonconsenting females in Korean spas - that was the result of organized advocacy organization working almost completely without public knowledge to influence legislators. The same is true of ACLU, which has been deeply involved in pushing gender identity, going so far as to literally BLOCK FOIA requests for information on the number of males housed in female prisons.
 
Thermal said:
Same as I said to EC. What you have here is a list of people who talk. Demonstrate their awesome powers and influence over major institutions globally.
Click to expand...
You're talking out of your backside.

I get it - I really do. I know you don't want to believe it, but I started this journey more or less in the same position you're in. I started out with the belief that 1) most males with transgender identities were perfectly safe and had already had surgery so they didn't represent a significant risk, 2) intact males wouldn't transgress female boundaries because that would be obviously wrong, 3) years of therapy and clinical oversight were always required before a person started using opposite-sex spaces, 4) clinicians working with youth would spend years and significant effort addressing all other comorbidities before turning to pharmaceutical or surgical intervention as a last resort, 5) courts would never place the desires of male criminals above the safety of their female victims in either court proceedings or prison placement, and a host of other assumptions.

I believed those things because that would make sense. And doing anything other than that would not make sense and would be disastrous in effect.

But over the years, all of my naive beliefs on this have been shattered over and over again. None of those assumptions are true.

  1. Males with transgender identities routinely do NOT remove their penis or testicles, and they have the same criminal offending rates as all other males - and they have a higher rate of sexual offending. That does NOT include technical statutory rape for close-in-age people in states without Romeo and Juliet laws, nor does it include solicitation or prostitution. We're talking about actual real sexual offenses, not borderline morality-based offenses.
  2. A substantial number of completely intact males have repeatedly shown up in female intimate spaces, often being very demanding and aggressive while doing so.
  3. There is NO requirement for any kind of diagnosis or treatment of any kind in place, and advocacy groups have very intentionally opposed and removed the requirements that used to exist.
  4. Up until the last couple of years, many gender treatment facilities would prescribe blockers and/or cross-sex hormones on the very first visit of a youth, with no mental evaluation at all. The only evaluation in place was a review of pre-existing medical conditions that would make blockers or hormones explicitly dangerous. My niece got a prescription for testosterone on their first visit, in less than 30 minutes, without parental approval or involvement, and with a history of anxiety disorder and bipolar disorder.
  5. Courts have repeatedly demanded that the victims honor the criminal's desire to be affirmed by using female pronouns (no matter how absurd it sounds to say "she raped me with her penis") and have taken the criminal's professed, undiagnosed, untreated, newly discovered gender identity into consideration for sentencing - even when that identity was discovered AFTER they were arrested.
I get that you want to be nice and believe the very best of (this group of) people. I get that it seems "mean" to not take all of them at their word. I understand the desire.

But you are naive about this, Thermal. You're working from a set of assumptions that make sense to a rational person, and because you refuse to acknowledge or consider the reality, you end up excusing and dismissing the plethora of substantiating evidence that you're provided that falsifies your beliefs.
 
Emily's Cat said:
With all possible respect, are you high?

Stonewall, GLAAD, and ACLU absolutely have influenced legal policy and the courts. WPATH absolutely has influenced medicine - they are almost singularly responsible for the changes in DSM 5 on this topic. They were incredibly involved in lobbying the medical and psychiatric communities to eliminate the diagnosis of Gender Identity Disorder, and to replace it with a much broader description of Gender Dysphoria that has intentionally been removed from the heading of Disorder. WPATH commissioned Johns Hopkins to do studies on "gender affirming care", and then blocked publication of the studies that didn't support the results they wanted.

In the UK, Stonewall actively worked with policy-makers without public knowledge to allow people with transgender identities extra privileges denied to everyone else, and were heavily involved in shaping policy to allow male prisoners to be housed in female facilities, to require that rape and domestic violence shelters that serve "woman" must also take males who say they identify as women, to alter medical language and remove female-specific language in forms and treatment resulting in "birthing parent", "chestfeeding", and "menstruators" and similar absurdities.

Do you think that your beloved state legislators just woke up one day with a god-given epiphany and said "We really need to let males with transgender identities use female restrooms by law!" all by themselves? GLAAD and HRC have been involved heavily in lobbying states to grant access to facilities based on "gender identity" across the country. The citizens of CA didn't propose the absurd laws that give Darren Merager the legal right to show of their penis to nonconsenting females in Korean spas - that was the result of organized advocacy organization working almost completely without public knowledge to influence legislators. The same is true of ACLU, which has been deeply involved in pushing gender identity, going so far as to literally BLOCK FOIA requests for information on the number of males housed in female prisons.
Click to expand...
Being involved does not grant the Holy Cult Powers of Indoctrination and Brainwashing attributed to these organizations. They have no power on their own. They can only point at the ambiguity, and legal bodies see it. They didn't need to do settling to the medical communities, because the whole concept of gender came from their own research and studies.

My argument is that once it is pointed out, the TRAs have no further influence on thr minds of legislators. They ain't MKULTRA. The judiciary et al agree with the reasoning, and are not cowtowing to these spooky powers as claimed so often here.Why would they? The world does not fold in fear of these people or regard them as gurus. They just agree with them.
 
Thermal said:
Being involved does not grant the Holy Cult Powers of Indoctrination and Brainwashing attributed to these organizations. They have no power on their own. They can only point at the ambiguity, and legal bodies see it. They didn't need to do settling to the medical communities, because the whole concept of gender came from their own research and studies.

My argument is that once it is pointed out, the TRAs have no further influence on thr minds of legislators. They ain't MKULTRA. The judiciary et al agree with the reasoning, and are not cowtowing to these spooky powers as claimed so often here.Why would they? The world does not fold in fear of these people or regard them as gurus. They just agree with them.
Click to expand...
For years, Stonewall lied, and lied and lied to organizations about what the law meant. These facts are easily researched - the whole of the FWS case brought to the UK Supreme Court has been instrumental in beginning the task of dismantling Stonewall's influence, and undoing the some of damage they have done.

You're in complete denial, and Thermal, if you don't understand the enormous impact that Stonewall had on policy and legislation in successive governments in the UK, then there isn't much I can to to help you. I find it astonishing that you live in the USA, yet you do not understand the power of lobby groups and vested interests in the legislature. People here in "That Thread" (The Thread Where Science Deniers and Intellectual Cowards Fear to Tread) have bee talking about what Stonewall has been doing for years.

You claim there is a conspiracy against TRAs - that's a positive claim so its your burden to prove. If you want any more research done, you'll have to do it yourself... I'm not doing any more of your homework for you, and I'm sure others feel the same way.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom