Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3

[lionking]

The story in that paper was quite shocking, and it's remarkably well written, laying everything out very clearly and believably. I recommend it to everyone.

Yes I read it completely. One point it made well was of the number of critics of Bailey’s book who openly admitted to not reading it. They “knew” what he really was and stuck the knife in.

Very much like those in this thread who yell “TERF” or “transphobic” at those who don’t toe the trans activist line.

 

[Arcade22]

I see you both your cake and have eaten it.

Yes it's actually possible to acknowledge objective facts, such as that a group of people tend to act and look in a certain way, without prescribing that members of said group have to look and act in a certain way.

 

[Elaedith]

Note the complete absence of any similarity between LondonJohn's invented tweet and any tweet Joanne Rowling has ever posted about trans people. It's a perfect example of the straw-man response I outlined earlier.




No, it's a complete straw man. Joanne Rowling has never at any time tweeted (or written elsewhere) about transwomen in anything even remotely resembling the terms you employ in your "illuminating comparison".

The Rowling issue is disturbing - Rowling never said anything offensive about transgender people. Her criticisms were all of transgender ideology (the attempt to erase the concept of biological sex and replace it with gender identity) and the effects this has had on children (such as a conflict between gender identity and biology leading to being put on an automatic pathway to medical treatment). What is illustrates is the effectiveness of the trans lobby in getting all criticism of their ideology and practices framed as bigotry and therefore silenced.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Yes it's actually possible to acknowledge objective facts, such as that a group of people tend to act and look in a certain way, without prescribing that members of said group have to look and act in a certain way.

Split the hair all you want. I don't treat men and women differently outside of ways dictated by pure biology that none of us can do anything about. Therefore outside of pure semantics "A X who identifies as Y" is nonsensical concept to me.

And I refuse to be called a bigot based on pure semantics.

 

[lionking]

The Rowling issue is disturbing - Rowling never said anything offensive about transgender people. Her criticisms were all of transgender ideology (the attempt to erase the concept of biological sex and replace it with gender identity) and the effects this has had on children (such as a conflict between gender identity and biology leading to being put on an automatic pathway to medical treatment). What is illustrates is the effectiveness of the trans lobby in getting all criticism of their ideology and practices framed as bigotry and therefore silenced.

Exactly. The effectiveness of the trans lobby in silencing people is very troubling.

 

[caveman1917]

Note the complete absence of any similarity between LondonJohn's invented tweet and any tweet Joanne Rowling has ever posted about trans people. It's a perfect example of the straw-man response I outlined earlier.

JK Rowling? LOL. Really?

https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-criticised-for-condescending-and-transphobic-tweets-12022330

https://www.scotsman.com/arts-and-c...uthor-was-accused-transphobia-twitter-2877977

https://www.vogue.com/article/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-harry-potter-franchise

https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/19/21029852/jk-rowling-terf-transphobia-history-timeline

https://indianexpress.com/article/books-and-literature/jk-rowling-stephen-king-twitter-6481821/

Note the complete absence of the relevant JKR tweets in at least LondonJohn's first link (I didn't bother to check the others). ETA: oops, didn't notice there was another page to this thread where this was already pointed out

 

[Rolfe]

Oh Jesus ******* Christ people stop playing "No you say it first! No you say it first!"

Here: https://www.glamour.com/story/a-com...e-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy

“People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?,” - June 6th, Twitter

"If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth." - June 6th, Twitter

"The idea that women like me, who’ve been empathetic to trans people for decades, feeling kinship because they’re vulnerable in the same way as women - ie, to male violence - ‘hate’ trans people because they think sex is real and has lived consequences - is a nonsense." - June 6th, Twitter

"I respect every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them. I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans. At the same time, my life has been shaped by being female. I do not believe it’s hateful to say so." - June 6th, Twitter

"I've never felt as shouted down, ignored, and targeted as a lesbian *within* our supposed GLBT community as I have over the past couple of years." - Shared Article from a "Anonymous Lesbian" on Twitter, June 6th.

I want LondonJohn to quote the words of JKR which he regards as comparable to the disgusting invented tweet he wrote about homosexual people. I want to see exactly what he regards as the parallel.

He won't do it. All that obfuscation about "it's all there in the articles" and "I won't do your homework for you" is to obscure the fact that there is nothing comparable and he'd be exposed as a hypocrite and a fantasist if he actually quoted any of JKR's well-considered and respectful writings.

The Rowling issue is disturbing - Rowling never said anything offensive about transgender people. Her criticisms were all of transgender ideology (the attempt to erase the concept of biological sex and replace it with gender identity) and the effects this has had on children (such as a conflict between gender identity and biology leading to being put on an automatic pathway to medical treatment). What is illustrates is the effectiveness of the trans lobby in getting all criticism of their ideology and practices framed as bigotry and therefore silenced.

Exactly. And LondonJohn is going along with this. He knows JKR wrote stuff he considers is as bad as that horrible tweet he made up about homosexual people, and he goes on to damn her without ever revealing what it actually is that she said that he objects to.

 

[Arcade22]

Split the hair all you want. I don't treat men and women differently outside of ways dictated by pure biology that none of us can do anything about.

Therefore outside of pure semantics "A X who identifies as Y" is nonsensical concept to me.

And i refuse to acknowledge that Asian coworker, who was adopted by Swedish parents shortly after birth and who speaks Swedish perfectly, as actually being Swedish simply because he was born from Korean parents. You'd never realize that he was of Korean descent if you didn't look at his face, but nothing matters except his biological parents and nothing anyone does can ever change that.

If anyone is upset about this and dares to call me racist i would become very offended and cry about being persecuted for my opinions.

 

[Elaedith]

It felt like conversion therapy for gay children, say clinicians.

 

[Earthborn]

And since we're dozens of pages deep in the third part of I've lost count of how many threads on the topic where I've spend the entire time screaming

I haven't seen you screaming until now.

"WOULD SOMEBODY PLEASE JUST ******* TELL ME WHAT I NEED TO DO DIFFERENTLY THAT ISN'T PURE SEMANTICS"

What you need to do differently depends on what you are doing now. I think it isn't that complicated to know how to treat other people.

If a person made an honest attempt at presenting themselves as a woman, even if it isn't all that convincing, you make an honest attempt at treating that person as a woman, even if you don't quite believe it.

You may occasionally come across someone who seems to present themselves as a woman, but doesn't mind being referred to as a man. Their presentation means they probably don't mind being referred to as a woman either.

If a person made an honest attempt at presenting themselves as a man, even if it isn't all that convincing, you make an honest attempt at treating that person as a man, even if you don't quite believe it.

If you can't tell how they are presenting, stick to genderless ways of treating them, or politely ask.

If you really don't treat men and women any differently, that is even better.

This is what I mean. You need artificial gender roles imposed on men and women for transgenderism to make sense.

In a society without gender roles, there would still be people who have trouble relating to the sex characteristics of their body. They would just not have an easy way to communicate that to you.

But we live in a society with gender roles, and as a result it is usually quite easy to tell what sex people would rather be. They use the expectations of those gender roles to tell you.

 

[MisAndreG]

And i refuse to acknowledge that Asian coworker, who was adopted by Swedish parents shortly after birth and who speaks Swedish perfectly, as actually being Swedish simply because he was born from Korean parents. You'd never realize that he was of Korean descent if you didn't look at his face, but nothing matters except his biological parents and nothing anyone does can ever change that.

If anyone is upset about this and dares to call me racist i would become very offended and cry about being persecuted for my opinions.

Imagine believing this is in any way comparable to a man putting on an offensive women suit, being transgressive and entering women’s spaces, women pushing back on that and then being “canceled” for it, and then making fun of the women for “being very offended and cry about being persecuted for my opinions.”

 

[caveman1917]

In a society without gender roles, there would still be people who have trouble relating to the sex characteristics of their body. They would just not have an easy way to communicate that to you.

See, here's the problem with that as it relates to Native American societies. Those societies who were more egalitarian and without strict gender roles did have contact with those who were more patriarchal and with strict gender roles, and they regularly met two-spirit people from those latter societies. So any such person in one of those former societies could have easily communicated it by saying "I'm like those two-spirit people from that other tribe" - yet they didn't.

 

[Arcade22]

Imagine believing this is in any way comparable to a man putting on an offensive women suit, being transgressive and entering women’s spaces, women pushing back on that and then being “canceled” for it, and then making fun of the women for “being very offended and cry about being persecuted for my opinions.”

Yeah because we hear every single day about how women, real genuine biological females, suffer continuously from having to deal with these crossdressing men who can perv up on them in public changing rooms with impunity. Why women don't even dare use such facilities these days! Women won't stand for this travesty anymore! Well, except that they voted for it and continue to support it.

 

[theprestige]

I have already explained this to you before but apparently the difference between descriptive and prescriptive definitions is really difficult to wrap your head around.

Once again: To acknowledge the objective fact that women tend to look and act in a certain way doesn't mean that one needs to acknowledge that women should look and act in a certain way. In other words, just because it's an objective fact that women tend to dress in certain manner does not mean that women should dress in a certain manner.

If someone wanted to be treated as a woman, for whatever reason, it's pretty obvious that they should try to look and act as women tend to do.

Apparently this just to complex.

It would probably help if you could tell us with any certainty what "certain way" describes how women tend to look and act.

It also seems to me as if a certain amount of prescription is necessary, at least on an indvidual level, for transsexual presentation to work. "I have to look and act a certain way, in order to qualify as a woman in my own head. I have to look and act a certain way, in order for other people to properly see me as a woman."

Meanwhile it is exactly this soft prescription that feminists have been trying to get away from.

 

[theprestige]

NVM

 

[LondonJohn]

Yeah because we hear every single day about how women, real genuine biological females, suffer continuously from having to deal with these crossdressing men who can perv up on them in public changing rooms with impunity. Why women don't even dare use such facilities these days! Women won't stand for this travesty anymore! Well, except that they voted for it and continue to support it.

Yep. And obviously I fully expect* the huge public groundswell of anti-transgender support to manifest itself in the next Congressional (US) or General (UK) Elections - when those nutcase sheeple legislators who enshrined transgender recognition & rights in law will be voted out en masse.... in favour of sensible, correct democratic representatives who'll repeal transgender legislation.


* Not.

 

[LondonJohn]

I have to say as well: I find it extremely interesting how nobody (IIRC) who's arguing the invalidity of transgenderism has ever cared to mention the two elephants in the room wrt their position: the fact that a) the global authority in mental health conditions has now determined transgenderism to be an authentic lived condition (and specifically not a disorder), and b) legislators in many major countries (including the US and UK) now recognise transgender people (and their rights) in law.

Verrrrrrrrr in-ter-esting.........

 

[theprestige]

Yeah because we hear every single day about how women, real genuine biological females, suffer continuously from having to deal with these crossdressing men who can perv up on them in public changing rooms with impunity. Why women don't even dare use such facilities these days! Women won't stand for this travesty anymore! Well, except that they voted for it and continue to support it.

"We generally don't bother doing anything to reduce the risk of rape, or mitigate concerns about the risk of rape, until after a depressingly large amount of rape has actually occurred."

 

[caveman1917]

Oh Jesus ******* Christ people stop playing "No you say it first! No you say it first!"

Here: https://www.glamour.com/story/a-com...e-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy

“People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?,” - June 6th, Twitter

"If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth." - June 6th, Twitter

"The idea that women like me, who’ve been empathetic to trans people for decades, feeling kinship because they’re vulnerable in the same way as women - ie, to male violence - ‘hate’ trans people because they think sex is real and has lived consequences - is a nonsense." - June 6th, Twitter

"I respect every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them. I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans. At the same time, my life has been shaped by being female. I do not believe it’s hateful to say so." - June 6th, Twitter

"I've never felt as shouted down, ignored, and targeted as a lesbian *within* our supposed GLBT community as I have over the past couple of years." - Shared Article from a "Anonymous Lesbian" on Twitter, June 6th.

Oh yes I remember that, it was when trans activists were pushing their "New Biology"[*] stating that sex is a social construct and several scientists responded arguing that sex is not a social construct but that it is empirically real. Apparently JKR also tweeted support for that latter position.

* Some prominent postmodern gender theorist (I think it was Judith Butler) had declared that the science of biology should be replaced with a "New Biology" where the conclusions should be subservient to ideological requirements, and hence sex should be declared a social construct rather than empirically real. It was the funniest pomo stunt since Sokal. I didn't know the JKR tweets were about that, so thanks for actually providing them.

 

[Elaedith]

Oh yes I remember that, it was when trans activists were pushing their "New Biology"[*] stating that sex is a social construct and several scientists responded arguing that sex is not a social construct but that it is empirically real. Apparently JKR also tweeted support for that latter position.

* Some prominent postmodern gender theorist (I think it was Judith Butler) had declared that the science of biology should be replaced with a "New Biology" where the conclusions should be subservient to ideological requirements, and hence sex should be declared a social construct rather than empirically real. It was the funniest pomo stunt since Sokal. I didn't know the JKR tweets were about that, so thanks for actually providing them.

I read somewhere that a biologist at a university lost her job for giving a definition of sex that contradicted trans orthodoxy, and therefore making a transgender student 'feel unsafe'.