• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

TERFs crash London Pride

caveman1917 said:
Regarding the claim that transwomen are women. We must define the term women. By Munchhausen's trilemma we have 3 options: infinite regress, circular, or axiomatic.

We can immediately reject infinite regress since there are only a finite number of words and concepts in the English language.

Circular would be definitions of the form "A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman" or variations thereupon. Circular can also be rejected as being meaningless.

Which leaves us with axiomatic, a definition in terms of more fundamental concepts. We have two such relevant concepts available, sex and gender. Which gives us:

1. A woman is anyone who is female. This is the standard dictionary definition.

2. A woman is anyone who is feminine. From this follows the statements:

2.1. Women must be submissive.
2.2. Women must be emotional.
2.3. Women can not be rational.
2.4. Women can not have short hair.
2.5. Women must wear makeup.
2.6. etc etc

Unless someone wants to claim these statements to be true, we can reject "a woman is anyone who is feminine" leaving us with "a woman is anyone who is female" and, likewise, "a man is anyone who is male." Transwomen are male, therefor transwomen are men. QED.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed I find when contemplating complex social issues its always useful to refer to an outdated book which oversimplifies everything so it doesn't have to bother addressing complex social issues with any nuance. Some choose the Bible but the dictionary is just as good as long as it suits your purpose.

Samuel Johnson forbid that we should ever have to think when we can simply rely on a BOOK!
 
kellyb said:
You are not discussing matters in "good faith", and I'll no longer be responding to your posts. :)
Click to expand...

Were you attempting to discuss matters in "good faith" with your interjections? Do you think the post I responded to was a 'good faith' response to the point I made? Perhaps if so you may have engaged with it rather than simply post what you did?

Do you think the anti-trans posters here are arguing in 'good faith'? Do their arguments come across as people willing to engage with a complex and nuanced topic in an open-minded and empathetic way?
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Do you think the anti-trans posters here are arguing in 'good faith'? Do their arguments come across as people willing to engage with a complex and nuanced topic in an open-minded and empathetic way?
Click to expand...


Clearly not, since they actively deny the problem with anti-trans violence in the UK, which is just as high as in the US or other ostensibly developed nations.

https://www.stonewall.org.uk/truth-about-trans

Excerpt:
Two in five trans people have had a hate crime committed against them in the last year, and two in five trans young people have attempted suicide. One in eight trans people have been physically attacked by colleagues or customers at work. No wonder some trans people are scared to walk down the streets.

It’s such an extreme situation, that last year a British trans woman was granted asylum in New Zealand because the UK is so transphobic.
Click to expand...


And despite the lying claims that anyone who claims they're trans is recognized as such in the UK, it takes years and a lot of work to get a Gender Recognition Certificate, which is the only official recognition of transpeople.
 
Rolfe said:
Gender is a feeling in someone's head. It doesn't confer any particular rights.
Click to expand...

If that's true, then why all the fuss? Why do you purposefully mis-gender transpeople? Why should trans-people be forbidden from participation in anything gender related?

You can't have it both ways. You can't reserve rights to cis-women while simultaneously claiming gender is just a feeling in their head.

Rolfe said:
Trans people where I live have no legal rights denied to them that are granted to non-trans people.
Click to expand...

I've heard the exact same argument made against gay marriage. Gay people had the exact same rights to marriage that straight people did, the right to marry someone of the opposite gender. It's a very careful framing of the issue that ignores that gay people would want to marry people of their own gender, and it's just happenstance that the rights that apply equally to all don't allow them to marry who they love. Such a pity, nothing to be done, right?

So you say trans-people have all the rights of cis-people, the right to be regarded as the gender of their birth. But just like with gay marriage that’s very careful framing that ignores that trans-people would like to be regarded as the gender they feel themselves to be, just like cis-people are.
 
kellyb said:
I haven't seen anyone argue that. Re: things like prison and sports, everyone seems to agree that transwomen do need protection from cismen, but that need not be at the expense of the safety of ciswomen. Those are areas where segregating by biological sex and trans status might be the least bad option.
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have that cis-women are in more danger from trans-women than they are from other cis-women?
 
caveman1917 said:
I once identified as Napoleon and I couldn't get others to address me as Monsieur L'Empereur and dress up in French coats to invade Russia on my behalf, and it was the worst oppression that anyone in the whole wide world has ever experienced. Repeat after me: Trans-Napoleons are Napoleon!
Click to expand...

Yes, we get it. You think trans-people should be mocked.

So much for Marxist egalitarianism, eh? It just doesn't apply to those people unfortunate enough to have been born with a gender-identity compass that doesn't point in the same direction as their sex.
 
Mycroft said:
Yes, we get it. You think trans-people should be mocked.
Click to expand...

No, people who promote the factuality of a delusion (such as a male human claiming to be female, or a human claiming to be Napoleon, or...) because it gives them virtue points should be mocked. ETA: this might have been unclear, but it's not the person believing they're Napoleon that was being mocked here.

So much for Marxist egalitarianism, eh?
Click to expand...

Marxists have been mocking liberals for ages.

It just doesn't apply to those people unfortunate enough to have been born with a gender-identity compass that doesn't point in the same direction as their sex.
Click to expand...

It just doesn't apply to those people unfortunate enough to have been born with a Napoleon identity? Come on Mycroft, put that coat on and invade Russia on my behalf, you bigot! Are you against egalitarianism perhaps?
 
Last edited:
luchog said:
Clearly not, since they actively deny the problem with anti-trans violence in the UK, which is just as high as in the US or other ostensibly developed nations.

https://www.stonewall.org.uk/truth-about-trans

Excerpt:



And despite the lying claims that anyone who claims they're trans is recognized as such in the UK, it takes years and a lot of work to get a Gender Recognition Certificate, which is the only official recognition of transpeople.
Click to expand...

Do you have a source for Stonewall statistics? Stonewall is not a reliable source for truth about trans.
 
Rolfe said:
And we know that in Britain the number of murders committed by trans people (all MtF) is higher than the number of trans murder victims (also all MtF). We know that being trans in this country is actually surprisingly safe and that trans people are murder victims at a per capita rate much lower than women are.
Click to expand...

I don't know any of these things. Let's see your evidence.
 
caveman1917 said:
No, people who promote the factuality of a delusion (such as a male human claiming to be female, or a human claiming to be Napoleon, or...) because it gives them virtue points should be mocked. ETA: this might have been unclear, but it's not the person believing they're Napoleon that was being mocked here.
Click to expand...

As I said, you think trans-people should be mocked. Adding the extra step that you also think they're delusional and should be mocked for being delusional doesn't change that.

Honestly I think you're doing more than Luchog or I could ever do in illustrating the inherent bigotry of this anti-trans stance.
 
Mycroft said:
As I said, you think trans-people should be mocked. Adding the extra step that you also think they're delusional and should be mocked for being delusional doesn't change that.
Click to expand...

No your, and some other's here, ideology (I believe the technical term for it is "Fashionable Nonsense") is what's being mocked.

Honestly I think you're doing more than Luchog or I could ever do in illustrating the inherent bigotry of this anti-trans stance.
Click to expand...

And yet it is the two of you who seem to have different standards when it comes to different groups, the group of trans people in particular. You've both complained about what you call misgendering, using the pronoun for a male animal (ie "he") for a male human who identifies as female or vice versa. Since a male human isn't female, this is a delusion, so why aren't you complaining when people don't address a person who identifies as Napoleon with Monsieur l"Empereur? Or when people don't make far-reaching changes in their legal systems to the detriment of other groups in order to affirm the delusion, such as invading Russia dressed in French coats?

Your bigotry against some people's identity is killing them, Mycroft (2 in 5 attempt suicide!)
 
caveman1917 said:
No your, and some other's here, ideology (I believe the technical term for it is "Fashionable Nonsense") is what's being mocked.



And yet it is the two of you who seem to have different standards when it comes to different groups, the group of trans people in particular. You've both complained about what you call misgendering, using the pronoun for a male animal (ie "he") for a male human who identifies as female or vice versa. Since a male human isn't female, this is a delusion, so why aren't you complaining when people don't address a person who identifies as Napoleon with Monsieur l"Empereur? Or when people don't make far-reaching changes in their legal systems to the detriment of other groups in order to affirm the delusion, such as invading Russia dressed in French coats?

Your bigotry against some people's identity is killing them, Mycroft (2 in 5 attempt suicide!)
Click to expand...

It's good to see what some people's 'good faith' argument is here.

What would be your solution to the trans issue then? Just tell them to stop being so silly?
 
caveman1917 said:
Your bigotry against some people's identity is killing them, Mycroft (2 in 5 attempt suicide!)
Click to expand...

Putting aside the fact that you seem to be claiming people who think they are Napoleon and schizophrenic people are synonymous. And ignoring the woeful analogy.

OK... so the proposal for how to deal with trans people is to treat them as the gender they wish to be treated as.

And the proposal of how to deal with schizophrenic people from you is?

Or how to treat people who think they are Napoleon?

Are you suggesting that if we simply allow them to identify as Napoleon and treated them as though they were Napoleon their problems would be solved?

Because I don't think you are. In fact I don't think you could care less about any of these people and are simply throwing out 'clever' arguments to support your own bigotry.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Putting aside the fact that you seem to be claiming people who think they are Napoleon and schizophrenic people are synonymous.
Click to expand...

Of course they're not synonymous, but delusions are extremely common for schizophrenic people so I just picked an extreme delusion to make the point clearer.

And ignoring the woeful analogy.
Click to expand...

The analogy is fine, a male human saying he is female is no less delusional than a person saying they're Napoleon, or indeed any other number of delusions one might come up with.

OK... so the proposal for how to deal with trans people is to treat them as the gender they wish to be treated as.

And the proposal of how to deal with schizophrenic people from you is?

Or how to treat people who think they are Napoleon?

Are you suggesting that if we simply allow them to identify as Napoleon and treated them as though they were Napoleon their problems would be solved?
Click to expand...

What I'm suggesting is that you can't force other people to affirm someone's delusion, including forcing someone to refer to a person who isn't Napoleon with "Monsieur l'Empereur" nor forcing someone to refer to a male human with "she".

Because I don't think you are. In fact I don't think you could care less about any of these people and are simply throwing out 'clever' arguments to support your own bigotry.
Click to expand...

I think you're just projecting. Let's consider two scenarios:

1. A person going around saying "this person is female!" whilst pointing at a male human who says "I am female."

2. A person going around saying "this person is Napoleon!" whilst pointing at a person other than Napoleon who says "I am Napoleon."

Fundamentally there's no real difference, yet people (liberals in particular) are happy to do the former but not the latter. Why is that? Because one's seen as virtuous (hence why it's mostly liberals who do so, they're most involved with the liberal virtue market) whereas the other is seen as nutty. It would then seem to appear that the people doing so don't really care as much about the people they're pointing to as about their own virtue worth.

I'd even posit that to actually care about these people would be to try to achieve conditions under which their suffering would be lessened, which for the ones struggling with gendered socialization and enforcement would be the abolition of patriarchy, and for the ones with mental health problems in general, including but not limited to delusions, would be the abolition of capitalism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom