Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Thermal]

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.

Ok, point scoring and quibbling aside, you are not too far off. I want the best for everyone, and ad I keep saying, I'm conflicted about this because of some of the reasons you point out above, and the conflict of wishes. I haven't been shy about saying so.

But what you don't seem to understand is the vibe that your side is giving off. When (g)you act pissy and petty and go out of your way to degrade and insult transpeople (and those who are sympathetic towards them), you're going to rouse that contempt a lot of us have for mean spirited bullying. Whatever perfectly valid arguments you might have get drowned out behind the tweetys of them cross dressing perverts (who are never shown attacking in the way we are assured they regularly do). If you want a crystal clear demonstration, take a look at the comments in any of the anti-trans tweetys. Those people are vile.

I mean, all sparring aside: can you see that some on your side are working super hard to give off the impression of judgemental bigotry, and there's only one response you could reasonably expect?

 

[Thermal]

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.

They absolutely do- when they are packing punch and actual influence. The NRA is very small, but has a fat wallet. The ACLU is jam.packed with lawyers who know what they are talking about. The TRA groups have nothing, except a valid standalone point that has traction even without a lobbying group. Hell, gender theory was rapidly developing in medical circles long before any advocacy movements.

People here in "That Thread" (The Thread Where Science Deniers and Intellectual Cowards Fear to Tread)

No one thinks this but you. Everyone else is revolted, not because of the content, but it's delivery.

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.

? What in the ever loving ◊◊◊◊ are you talking about now???

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.

Yeah, you're not doing well with evidence. On your last foray, we were talking about the term transwoman, and you brought up Ginny Price coining the term 'transgenderal', which had ◊◊◊◊ all to do with anything. 'Transgender' had been in thr lexicon for years before her helping to popularize it, but she had zero to do with the term transwoman.

 

[d4m10n]

...you genuinely still can't wrap your head around the fact that 'transwoman' does not mean literary turned into a female, can you?

That is literally what it means to @Boudicca90 and any other trans rights activists who claim sex can be changed or that it lives between our ears.

The TRA groups have nothing, except a valid standalone point that has traction even without a lobbying group.

In the tradition of steelmanning^WP how would you characterize their most valid point?

 

[Thermal]

That is literally what it means to @Boudicca90 and any other trans rights activists who claim sex can be changed or that it lives between our ears.

And do we need to wear name tags to remind you of who you are exchanging with? I am not Buddoca and do not speak for them, nor do they for my own self. The term standalone generally refers to a male with the internal self ID of a woman.

In the tradition of steelmanning^WP how would you characterize their most valid point?

They believe they are protected against discrimination based on existing law, and are within their rights as-is to demand that discrimination against them stop.

But that wasn't what I asked you nicely about. You were going to drape some TRA colors on me for a test fit, and be right back with that? Been waiting a long time. You get lost?

 

[Ziggurat]

Again with the omnipotent spooky invisible MKULTRA enabled TRAs. They don't even really exist, much yet wield these influential powers.

This is a really weird argument. Why would you deny that trans rights advocates exist? Given the recent passage of trans rights legislation, why would you deny that they have influence?

What I see are some low-level activists who exploited the existing ambiguity in the laws (gender and sex discrimination).

Nope. There was no ambiguity in Title IX. The Biden administration decided to make "sex" include gender identity anyway. Do you think that was by accident?

The legislators looked at it and said 'oh ◊◊◊◊, they are right, this is highly ambiguous'.

Nope. The California prison law I linked to had nothing to do with clarifying ambiguity. It was entirely about creating entitlement for trans people.

There is no influential Cabal controlling everyone's minds.

I never said there was. But straw is all you have, so straw is what you use.

 

[d4m10n]

Please do report back on all my 'TRA positions" and we'll see how I wear those colors.

You woefully misunderstand; I didn't say you hold "TRA positions" at all.

You do, however, "use their lingo" and therefore "wear their colors" according to your own heuristic.

 

[Ziggurat]

But what you don't seem to understand is the vibe that your side is giving off.

Do you understand the vibe you are giving off? Do you understand the vibe the TRAs are giving off?

No, you don't. In fact, you complain quite loudly that we should never judge them by their vibe.

 

[d4m10n]

They believe they are protected against discrimination based on existing law

If that were true, Hunter Marquez would still be in uniform and Lia Thomas would still hold her Ivy League records.

 

[theprestige]

If there's om

But what you don't seem to understand is the vibe that your side is giving off.

I understand the vibe I'm giving off quite well, thank you. The two main things I understand about my vibe are that

1. its perceived hatefulness is almost entirely in the eye of the beholder - dissent is attack, disagreement is oppression, biology is transphobic; and
2. there's not much I can do to change the vibe I'm giving off without compromising my considered, principled conclusions on the topic.

Yes, I know that Trans Privilege Activists think I'm Double Hitler for espousing biological essentialism and strict sex segregation. I could put it as neutrally as possible, and they'd still feel a Double Hitler vibe emanating from my persona.

The only way I could avoid giving off this vibe is to abandon my position and accept theirs. Which is probably never going to happen.

So what do you suggest? I keep using the terms that reflect my views on sex segregation and the utility of gender decoupled from sex? Or should I instead use TPA terms that imply I'm conceding their arguments? Or that I should actually concede their arguments and join their team?

You scolding me about my "vibe" doesn't help, if you don't understand it and won't suggest any solutions.

 

[smartcooky]

You woefully misunderstand; I didn't say you hold "TRA positions" at all.

You do, however, "use their lingo" and therefore "wear their colors" according to your own heuristic.

Yeah, that comment he made about "Nazis sitting at a table" aged really well didn't it?

 

[Louden Wilde]

Re: nomenclature. I did a pubmed search and see plenty of uses of "transwomen" as well "trans-identified individuals". I agree the former enabled the "trans is an adjective just like tall, black (etc)" gambit by activists.

In the clinical settings, folks have become more sensitive in the last few decades as to what might potentially offend patients or patient parents/caretakers - perhaps to an extent that obscures the condition/what's actually being discussed. We moved from "mentally retarded" to "intellectual disability" to "intellectual differences"; disabled to "differently abled (I also see "specially abled" in pubmed). In the "denial of what they are" realm, there's "MSM" - men who have sex with men - which was developed so public health folks could track sexual behaviors/disease spread in guys who don't consider themselves gay (or bi).

As far as fostering dialogue- it seems we're at an impasse with terms - and pretty much everything else. Towards the end of the Biden admin, there were Democrats suggesting that maybe males shouldn't be in girls/women sports, but they've been castigated.

 

[theprestige]

Re: nomenclature. I did a pubmed search and see plenty of uses of "transwomen" as well "trans-identified individuals". I agree the former enabled the "trans is an adjective just like tall, black (etc)" gambit by activists.

I'm okay with it being an adjective, as long as we're clear that it's modifying the sex of the person, not their gender. I.e., 'trans male', not "trans woman'.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Ok, point scoring and quibbling aside, you are not too far off. I want the best for everyone, and ad I keep saying, I'm conflicted about this because of some of the reasons you point out above, and the conflict of wishes. I haven't been shy about saying so.

But what you don't seem to understand is the vibe that your side is giving off. When (g)you act pissy and petty and go out of your way to degrade and insult transpeople (and those who are sympathetic towards them), you're going to rouse that contempt a lot of us have for mean spirited bullying. Whatever perfectly valid arguments you might have get drowned out behind the tweetys of them cross dressing perverts (who are never shown attacking in the way we are assured they regularly do). If you want a crystal clear demonstration, take a look at the comments in any of the anti-trans tweetys. Those people are vile.

I mean, all sparring aside: can you see that some on your side are working super hard to give off the impression of judgemental bigotry, and there's only one response you could reasonably expect?

It would be really refreshing if just once in a while you would call out the mean-spirited bullying that males with transgender identities engage in toward females. Or even call out the mean-spirited bullying that trans privilege supporters on this very site engage in toward those of us who recognize that males are not females, and that allowing males to have legal access to female spaces is a massive problem for females.

At some point, we just get entirely fed the ◊◊◊◊ up with constantly being called bigots and transphobes and nazis for simply wanting to exclude males from our sports, and from spaces where we're naked or vulnerable.

Why do you never seem to view *that* behavior as bigoted and vile?

And why do you feel the need to punish those of us in this thread for the mean tweets of people who aren't us?

 

[Emily's Cat]

They absolutely do- when they are packing punch and actual influence. The NRA is very small, but has a fat wallet. The ACLU is jam.packed with lawyers who know what they are talking about. The TRA groups have nothing, except a valid standalone point that has traction even without a lobbying group. Hell, gender theory was rapidly developing in medical circles long before any advocacy movements.

Did you even look at the list of organizations I provided links to?

ACLU is one of the BIGGEST trans avocates in the US, and they have been actively involved in shaping policy.

 

[Emily's Cat]

They believe they are protected against discrimination based on existing law, and are within their rights as-is to demand that discrimination against them stop.

Great. I also want them to be protected against discrimination.

The difference is that I do not believe that the things they demand are indicative of discrimination. I don't think it's discrimination against trans to disallow males access to female-specific spaces. I don't think it's discrimination against trans to use sex-based pronouns about people who aren't even present. I don't think it's discrimination against trans to recognize that males with transgender identities are no kind of woman whatsoever.

 

[Brainster]

If trans-identified male is a slur, then isn't transwoman or trans woman? It should just be "woman" right?

 

[John Freestone]

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.

Really? I gave that idea up long ago.

Whatever
perfectly valid arguments you might have get drowned out behind the tweetys of them cross dressing perverts (who are never shown attacking in the way we are assured they regularly do).

No, they don't get drowned out. You repeatedly ignore them, deny them with ridiculous posturing, and pretend that all we do is harp on about cross-dressing perverts, that you don't think are a problem. Since that's your focus, rather than the "perfectly valid arguments" (that are somehow drowned out), here's that small sample of names again. I await your nitpicking about the meaning of 'regularly' in your quote, and further smirking at how I've proved you right with another attacking tweety drowning out the perfectly valid arguments (that somehow you always deny at the time they're posted).

The thing that never happens:​

Michael Maria Pentholm, Karen White, Katie Dolatowski, Jessica Winfield, Tara Desousa, Janiah Monroe, Kristen Lukess, Lisa Hauxwell, Laken McKay, Aliea Rose Brown, Paula Witherspoon, Davina Ayrton, Johanna Wolf, Hanna Tubbs, Christopher Hambrook, Dakota Nieves, Tarah Jo Morgan, Marie Dean, Jessica Brennan, Rachel Smith, Marcia Walker, Synthia China Blast, Michelle Winter, Paris Bregazzi, Melissa Wilson, Barbie Kardashian, Jessica Smith, Wolfgang Schmidtd, Chloe Thompson, Denen Anderson, Kadence Pinder, Beth Hannay, Leah Harvey, Julie Marshall, Blaine Maney, Amber Thorden, Evi Amati, Babs Longmire, Rachel Fenton, Jorven Seren, Claire Goodier, Kim Marie Johannson, Steven Hayes, Jacinta Brooks, Alexander Eshawn Lions, Ashley Winter, Steph Ricciardi, Vicky Green, Ella Davies, Melissa Addis, Madilyn Harks, Jessica Marie Hann, Michelle Martinez, Nicole Summers, Shauna Patricia Smith, Evelyn Young, Claire Goodier, Allison Woolbert, Nur Ahmed, Vyvyenne Ward, Laura McCann, Lisa Jones, Rayne Aloysius Constantine Rose Bennett, Louise Foord, Robert Glanowski, Lily Bate, Alyssa Celusta, Sora Kuykendall, Lydia Helena Vision, Ava Jones, Alex Ray Scott, Diego Melendez, Paris Green, Tiffany Scott, Zoe Lynes, Vicky Green, Pauline Long, Chloe Walker, Toni Prince, Lana Laws, Christyl Knight, Carrie Cooper, Jasmine Hill, Diamond Blount, Nicola Florida, Dawn Love, Stacey Pool, Alexis Herschell, Scarlet Shadows, Karen Louise Lawson, Nicola Cope, Gina Owen, Kayleigh Louise Woods, Claire Darbyshire, Kira Leverton, Kathleen Carpenter, Donna Perry, Karen Jones, Carol Lea, Michelle Lewin, Alanna Nicole Partin, Yostin Murillo, Peter Selby, Wendy Jones, Rose Whitby, Daryl Graves, Diana Guevara, Jason Croker, Jody Matthew Burke, Patricia Trimble, Klaus T, Sally Dixon, Milan Wash, Adree Edmo, Jayden Dean, Paul Denyer, Bruno Meirelles, Pandora Electra, Robert Gordon Cummins, Danielle Rose Gemini, Amber McLaughlin, Brooke Lyn Sonia, Nonnie Lotusflower, Tianne Miller, Narsimha Bichappa Shirvati, Brandy Wood, Isla Bryson, Kelly McSean, Michelle Renee Lamb, Andrea Balcer, Ketan Shende, Serenity Alana Mann, Sacho Samson, Harryetta Thompson, Jenna Hansen, Jane Beck, Audrey Robinson, Lexi-Rose Crawford, Carissa Marie Radcliffe, Jolene Charisma Starr, Zara Jade, Rhiley Carlson, Claire Fox, Robert William Perry II, Tanya Howes, Loana Luna, Dwight Chisolm, Amy George, Stuart Bulling, Lorena Santana, Christopher Williams, Alyssa Christine Trenchard, AK, Danielle Edney, Julie Shepherd, Izzabella Raymundo, Sophie Louise Carter, Autumn Cordellioné, Katana Paris, Shauna Kavanagh, Zera Lola Zombie, Nicole Rose Campbell, April Welsh, Tânia Ferrinho, Scarlet Moon Shadows, Laura Miller, Thorsten Heinz, Tara Pearsall, Adam McDonald, Samantha Norris, Abigail Waller, Rachel Queen Burton, Maria Childers, Xenia Jade Millar, Anonymous in Mumbai, Krystel Lauzon, Amber FayeFox Kim, Ash Cooper, Natalie Pershall, Kazumi Watanabe, Claire Caballero, Jacqui McWilliams, Sabrina/Morrigan Hetke, Jo White, July Justine Shelby, Joanna Evans, Louise Thomas, Miquel Toni Riera Prats, Ömer (Lara K), Emma Davies, Lexi Secker, Pierre Parsons, Claire Anderson, Michell Silva Perez, Michelle Blessent, Cassidy Honsinger, Elijah Thomas Berryman, Sean Windingland, Duane Owen, Dana Rivers, Alfie Howe, Marceline Harvey, Chloee-Mae Danvers, Jamie Kim Belladonna, Catarina da Lapa, Renee Mills, Aria Peers, an unnamed Norwegian, Danielle Marie Whitebird, Makayla Craig, Angel Hill, Farin Kinar, Reiyn Keohane, Michelle Ward, Levana Ballouz, Francesca Bartkus, María López Barrera, Autumn Tulip Harper, Richard Kenneth Cox, Oliver smith, Rebecca Clark, Dakota Rose Austin, Catherine Lynn, Naomi O’Brien, Nicola Watson, Bunny Autumn Colasimone, Tiffany Aching, Sophie KoKo, Kao Siew Saetern, Jayson David B, Arbend S, Hannah Viramontes, Katie Birtles, Damia Scarlet Rose Nesne, Eevee Seberg, Scarlett Lee, Katie Wallis and Jessica Garnham Burton.

There's been another four years since that was compiled. Click the title for details of these lovely ladies' mild transgressions.

 

[smartcooky]

It would be really refreshing if just once in a while you would call out the mean-spirited bullying that males with transgender identities engage in toward females. Or even call out the mean-spirited bullying that trans privilege supporters on this very site engage in toward those of us who recognize that males are not females, and that allowing males to have legal access to female spaces is a massive problem for females.

Why would he call out behaviour he doesn't care about, and that he is just fine with?

At some point, we just get entirely fed the ◊◊◊◊ up with constantly being called bigots and transphobes and nazis for simply wanting to exclude males from our sports, and from spaces where we're naked or vulnerable.

Indeed, and gender critical males such as me have our daughters and granddaughters in mind!

Why do you never seem to view *that* behavior as bigoted and vile?

Because he doesn't care, so why would he?

And why do you feel the need to punish those of us in this thread for the mean tweets of people who aren't us?

Only he knows, but I have a fair idea!

 

[smartcooky]

Really? I gave that idea up long ago.

No, they don't get drowned out. You repeatedly ignore them, deny them with ridiculous posturing, and pretend that all we do is harp on about cross-dressing perverts, that you don't think are a problem. Since that's your focus, rather than the "perfectly valid arguments" (that are somehow drowned out), here's that small sample of names again. I await your nitpicking about the meaning of 'regularly' in your quote, and further smirking at how I've proved you right with another attacking tweety drowning out the perfectly valid arguments (that somehow you always deny at the time they're posted).

The thing that never happens:​

There's been another four years since that was compiled. Click the title for details of these lovely ladies' mild transgressions.....

...and each name in the list on the website is a clickable link that goes to a news report with details about who they are, what they did and what they look like.

There will be a few possible responses...

1. Bleat about how these didn't happen in toilets a therefore claim they're irrelevant.
2. Nit-pick one or two words and drone on and on about those while ignoring the actual content of the list.
3. Whinge about all the sources being far-right rags read by bigots and transphobes (of course).
4. Complain that such reports not seen in mainstream media (now, I wonder why that is?)
5. Simply ignore it altogether (because it doesn't fit the chosen narrative)

 

[Rolfe]

6. Declare that as the list was compiled several years ago the statute of limitations has run out on these incidents and they don't count.
7. Declare that this is such a tiny number of incidents gleaned from a huge world population (a.k.a. "a tiny minority") of trans people that it actually proves how safe and lawabiding that population is.