Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[theprestige]

First you say gender dysphoria is neurodivergence then you say it's not, contrasting it with schizophrenia.

No. I'm saying neurodivergence is a spectrum, leaving people with a lot choice about how they manage it at one end, and very little choice at the other. Pedophiles (and, I believe, dysphorics) have a lot of agency, about how they handle their divergent urges. Schizophrenics do not.

Yet transwomen very often say they were 'born this way'.

Note, I do think there is concurrently also a trans fad happening from the likes of the misinformation vortex tiktok where people have social contagion.

I don't think this has been studied in enough detail, so don't be too sure that all transwomen are not compelled to act the way they do.

I think I understand. We were talking about the choice of how to express a transgender identity - modestly or immodestly. You jumped into the middle of that conversation without realizing, and assumed we were talking about gender dysphoria itself as a choice.

 

[Thermal]

If a person's chosen way to present them selves is naked, in public, covered in pig's blood, is that acceptable to you?

No, but since that is a ridiculous strawman, why do you ask?

"Can you speak freely about your political opinions? What if they are to kill the president? Huh? HUH?"

Which of these do you think the transgender protester in UK chose? Do you think they chose wisely?

No, and since the extremists don't represent my position, as I've said many many times, why do you ask?

That might depend on what the marching results in. What if the person is a serial killer, and that drum tells him to kill people. This is OK with you?

No, and since that is an even more ridiculous strawman, why do you ask?

When those dressing in women's clothes are using their appearance to invade women's safe spaces, its far from inconsequential.

No one is talking about invading anything.

This is a non-sequitur... why would he?

For the same reason he literally just said. Immodesty is a choice, and he wants the right to publicly mock and ridicule those who don't comply with his personal standards for what is appropriate. I point out that he likely has the decorum to not do so with others, yet wants trans people to have a lower standard for tolerance.

Womanface is ANY time a man wears specifically women's clothing.

It is not.

I find your attitude on this surprising, given your willingness to use racial segregation as a comparison. But maybe you think blackface isn't a thing "beyond some frat boys" and face paint?


Schizophrenic people have detectable chemical imbalances in the brain, that can be treated medically with drugs to correct the imbalance. Same goes for those with bipolar disorder. This is not the case with gender dyphoria... there is NO detectable change in brain chemistry...

A) who cares? It's not related to what we were discussing, and
B) you are reinforcing my stated piint that they were not comparable.

gender dysphoria is purely a figment of the mind - it can be treated and reversed without drugs, using talk therapy.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Many young sufferers revert on their own... a phase they grow out of. The last thing we should be doing is affirming that young person's fantasies by irreversibly blocking the natural course of puberty, and carrying out devastating irreversible surgery.

Agreed, and I've said so several times. And? Or are you arguing with imaginary adversaries again?

In years to come, our descendents are going to look back at this time, and wonder what the ◊◊◊◊ we were thinking. They will compare this debacle with the scandals over the use of thalidomide and epilim, and will be very harsh in their judgement of us..

Agreed. I think our descendants will marvel at the hate and intolerance directed at transgenders. I have a dream that one day a transwoman will be judged not by the color of her dress, but by the content of her character.

 

[Ziggurat]

Their responsibility for what? To present in a way that you feel comfortable with? Do you have the same obligation to them?

People are generally responsible for how they present. If they choose to present in a way that they know makes others uncomfortable, they are indeed responsible for that. Depending on the details, that may not be wrong to do, but they are still responsible for it.

Maybe not branding someone who marches to the beat of a different drummer as 'ridiculous' might be a start?

Why? Are they not ridiculous? Or is it just not acceptable to call them ridiculous?

I would certainly hope and expect that you wouldn't ridicule someone tormented by schizophrenia.

I wouldn't ridicule someone for being tormented by schizophrenia. That does not mean that no schizophrenic can ever do anything worthy of ridicule. That's not how it works. Nor would I expect everyone to pretend that a schizophrenic isn't a schizophrenic, or that disruptive behavior caused by their schizophrenia isn't disruptive.

If that self ID goes not much further than using a bathroom and dressing as they please, 'beclowning' is needlessly judgemental. Live and let live.

If a clearly male person is invading female spaces and making them deeply uncomfortable, that person isn't just letting other people live.

Do you loudly call young girls in bikini tops at the grocery store 'whores'?

Nothing we say here on this forum is the equivalent of loudly calling anyone anything in public.

Womanface isn't a thing beyond some frat boys in wigs acting like sluts for the other guy's amusement.

Oh, it absolutely is. You're in denial here.

Ok. Is there any distinction in your view between choosing to dress as you feel comfortable (many of us think of that as a kind of basic human right) and the suffering of a schizophrenic? Cuz I don't see them in the same universe.

Wait, what? If they aren't the same, then why do you compare criticizing one to criticizing the other? You aren't making any sense here.

 

[Ziggurat]

It's actually YOU and Ziggurat who has burnt all credibility.

The 1650 is in YARDS, not METRES.

You are right, I screwed up. I had looked into this issue quite some time ago and had remembered that there were inequivalencies that weren't being taken into account, but did not remember the details, and I jumped on what looked like an inconsistency which is actually pretty small. So I was wrong.

But I don't think you've got a full handle on the issue either. You said Ledecky's record for 1650 yards was 15:03.92. And yet, her Wikipedia page lists her 2013 World Championship 1500 meter time of 15:36.53 as being a world record. Why the discrepancy? Why was a significantly slower time a world record, rather than the faster time?

The answer is pretty simple, and it's what I forgot the details of. Her 15:03.92 time was in a 25-yard pool, her World Championship record was in a 50 meter pool. 66 laps of a small pool vs. 30 laps in a larger pool. The smaller pool times will be significantly faster than the larger pool times (despite being slightly father), because you can gain a lot of speed on each kickoff. So you cannot compare large pool and small pool times as being equivalent. Not only do you need to specify the length of the swim, you need to specify the size of the pool.

OK, what about Thomas's 15:59.71 time? It was held at Ocasek Natatorium, which has a 50 meter pool. So his time is more comparable to Ledecky's 15:36.53 time than her 15:03.92 time. Still behind, though, right? Yes, but the thing is, that isn't Thomas's best 1650 time. Thomas's actual best 1650 time is 14:54.76, which beats either of Ledecky's times. I'm having a hard time finding out if this was a small pool or a large pool, but either way Thomas was still faster than Ledecky.

 

[Rolfe]

Just "marching to a beat of a different drummer", right.

‘Protect the Dolls’ is trans activism at its creepiest

The celeb-fronted t-shirt campaign unwittingly reveals the weird misogyny of the gender cult.

www.spiked-online.com

 

[theprestige]

We were talking about the autistic transwoman everyone felt free to 'point and laugh at'. Near as I can tell from her feed, she doesn't lobby for female restroom access. She just wants to be accepted as a person as-is. So... what 'harm' is she causing again? What does she do that's anti-social? And she needs treatment for wanting to dress the way she wants?

Clothing is a choice. If you're going to use a mental health condition to excuse ridiculous clothing choices, then either you're shirking your responsibility to manage your condition, or you're saying your condition is so severe that you can't control what you wear.

You do not expect her to conform to your expectations, but you want to be able to mock and ridicule her if she doesn't meet them?

I've given this some thought, and you are right: I do expect people to conform to some of my expectations.

I don't expect people to conform to traditional norms of gender expression, that much is true.

But it is also true that I expect people to conform to norms of modesty and propriety. If you dress like a clown, I get to point and laugh. If you dress like a slut, I get to say you should be ashamed of yourself. If you go out in public wearing a flesh-tone body stocking, you know what you're doing, and I get to both point and laugh and say you should be ashamed. Likewise if you dress like a refugee from the set of a May-December lolicon porno shoot.

If you show up to a job interview dressed in lolicon fetish costume, that's not you nonconforming with social norms. That's you not getting the job. Freedom from discrimination is not freedom from the consequences of acting a fool (or a pervert) in public.

 

[theprestige]

Ok. Is there any distinction in your view between choosing to dress as you feel comfortable (many of us think of that as a kind of basic human right) and the suffering of a schizophrenic? Cuz I don't see them in the same universe.

Neither do I. In fact, I've been making that distinction repeatedly in recent pages of this thread.

Similarity: Schizophrenia and gender dysphoria are both mental health conditions that cause distress and merit treatment.

Distinction: Gender dysphorics have a lot of agency over how they present themselves and how they behave towards others. Schizophrenics have much less agency.

And "dress as you feel comfortable" is irrelevant. If what makes you feel comfortable is to dress ridiculously, then I hope you feel comfortable getting ridiculed. We all know the difference between dressing for the office and dressing for the beach. We all know the difference between appropriate attire for a school yearbook photo, and appropriate attire for a boudoir photo shoot.

And while we're here: Let's make sure we don't conflate being ridiculed for choosing to dress ridiculously, with being ridiculed for a mental health condition that leaves no choice but to dress ridiculously. You think I shouldn't point and laugh and chastise a man who's decided to go out in public in a costume at the intersection of "pedo" and "loli"? Then be very clear that you believe such costumes are forced on him by a tragic mental health disorder, that needs to be treated, not enabled.

 

[Ziggurat]

Yet transwomen very often say they were 'born this way'.

They might be born with those feelings. But the fact that so many do not transition until well into adulthood demonstrates that they are capable of hiding it. See below.

Note, I do think there is concurrently also a trans fad happening from the likes of the misinformation vortex tiktok where people have social contagion.

I don't think this has been studied in enough detail, so don't be too sure that all transwomen are not compelled to act the way they do.

One of the commonly used arguments against the notion that there's a social contagion component to this is the claim that the increase in trans identification is merely the result of greater acceptance, that the number of trans people in the past was larger than measured because so many people hid it.

If you are able to hide it, that means you are able to choose to not express it. Which also means the manner of expression is a choice. People with Tourette's cannot hide their ticks. It isn't a choice for them. They don't feel like performing the tick behavior, they are compelled by their condition to do so regardless. You can argue all you want to about how we should judge transpeople's choices about how they dress, but arguing that it's not a choice at all is just factually wrong. We know it is with certainty, we don't need to study it to figure that out.

 

[d4m10n]

Thomas's actual best 1650 time is 14:54.76, which beats either of Ledecky's times. I'm having a hard time finding out if this was a small pool or a large pool, but either way Thomas was still faster than Ledecky.

While it is noteworthy that Thomas swam faster than Ledecky's world record, that time was achieved in the men's category prior to any hormone therapy.

That said, it still seems like a bad idea to assume that cross-sex hormones will turn a replacement-level male swimmer into a similarly situated median swimmer in the female category. It would be an implausibly happy coincidence if two years of hormones just happened to shift the male performance curve exactly that much.

 

[smartcooky]

No, but since that is a ridiculous strawman, why do you ask?

"Can you speak freely about your political opinions? What if they are to kill the president? Huh? HUH?"

No, and since the extremists don't represent my position, as I've said many many times, why do you ask?

No, and since that is an even more ridiculous strawman, why do you ask?

These are not strawman arguments, i.e. they are not me changing your argument to represent you as wrong. I was simply pointing out some logical conclusions of the completely generalised statements that YOU made. I'm trying to get you to recognize there are limits on your generalisations.

No one is talking about invading anything.

Transwoman protesters have made it quite clear that they intend to break the law in the UK by going into women's safe spaces. We already see some of them plotting to bypass the FA ban on transwomen in football (soccer)

Transgender footballers plot to flout ban and play on

archived 2 May 2025 10:50:55 UTC

archive.is

For the same reason he literally just said. Immodesty is a choice, and he wants the right to publicly mock and ridicule those who don't comply with his personal standards for what is appropriate. I point out that he likely has the decorum to not do so with others, yet wants trans people to have a lower standard for tolerance.

My low tolerance for exhibitionists means I will mock and ridicule people who do ridiculous things, transgender or not - and I have the absolute free speech right to do so.

It is not.

Oh, it absolutely IS a thing

Agreed. I think our descendants will marvel at the hate and intolerance directed at transgenders.

Nope, that is not what I meant, and you know it. Government approved coercion and medical butchery of children is abhorrent.

I have a dream that one day a transwoman will be judged not by the color of her dress, but by the content of her character.

Transwomen are NOT women, they are MEN. The correct objective third-person pronouns for a trasnwoman is "his"

And it is an insult to Dr.King to dirty his words by paraphrasing them. Disgusting!

 

[Hercules56]

People see articles like this, and wonder why we should not treat most if not all transgender women as just men with mental illness.

School defends ‘gender rights’ of trans teacher with giant prosthetic breasts

A Canadian school board is “standing behind” a trans teacher who sparked protests after turning up to classes with “clownish” giant prosthetic breasts.

nypost.com

Not surprising they have a much higher rate of Autism spectrum than the general population.

 

[Ziggurat]

I think our descendants will marvel at the hate and intolerance directed at transgenders.

I think our descendants will marvel at the idea that surgical an hormonal mutilation along with mass delusion is the appropriate remedy for body dysphoria.

I have a dream that one day a transwoman will be judged not by the color of her dress, but by the content of her character.

I have a dream that people will recognize that an obvious male choosing to invade female-only intimate spaces over the objection of females in that space reveals a character flaw.

 

[Brainster]

People see articles like this, and wonder why we should not treat most if not all transgender women as just men with mental illness.

School defends ‘gender rights’ of trans teacher with giant prosthetic breasts

A Canadian school board is “standing behind” a trans teacher who sparked protests after turning up to classes with “clownish” giant prosthetic breasts.

nypost.com

Not surprising they have a much higher rate of Autism spectrum than the general population.

That was three years ago, and it was clear even back then that the teacher was taking the piss.

 

[Ziggurat]

That was three years ago, and it was clear even back then that the teacher was taking the piss.

Sure. But it still showed the ridiculousness of the policy of accommodating anything and everything trans.

 

[Rolfe]

We did discuss it at the time, but as far as I know it's still a bit up in the air. It seems only reasonable to assume that the teacher was taking the piss, but there was never a punchline. He never came clean and said, yes of course it was a stunt, to demonstrate how insane this policy of genuflecting to anything anyone claims as their "gender identity" is. He stuck to his guns and doubled down. The news cycle has moved on and I don't know what his position is now, but the last I heard of it he was still the transwoman whose presentation had to be respected.

 

[Hercules56]

That was three years ago, and it was clear even back then that the teacher was taking the piss.

This absolute weirdo, trolling for attention, was defended by the trans community. Even though it was obvious the game she was playing with children.

 

[d4m10n]

I think our descendants will marvel at the idea that surgical [and] hormonal mutilation along with mass delusion is the appropriate remedy for body dysphoria.

I object to "mutilation" of course, since it's emotionally loaded language you most likely wouldn't use to describe, say, mastectomy or orchiectomy in other (more clearly lifesaving) circumstances.

That said, it is a source of constant fascination to me that this is the only area of medicine where the medical guilds agree upon the idea of removing healthy tissue and/or body parts for the sake of treating a condition arising between the ears.

 

[Hercules56]

I object to "mutilation" of course, since it's emotionally loaded language you most likely wouldn't use to describe, say, mastectomy or orchiectomy in other (more clearly lifesaving) circumstances.

That said, it is a source of constant fascination to me that this is the only area of medicine where the medical guilds agree upon the idea of removing healthy tissue and/or body parts for the sake of treating a condition arising between the ears.

Mastectomy is not a purely elective surgery for cosmetic purposes.

Mutilating your penis to look something like a vulva, is.

 

[theprestige]

This absolute weirdo, trolling for attention, was defended by the trans community. Even though it was obvious the game she was playing with children.

He.

 

[Ziggurat]

I object to "mutilation" of course, since it's emotionally loaded language you most likely wouldn't use to describe, say, mastectomy or orchiectomy in other (more clearly lifesaving) circumstances.

But these aren't clearly lifesaving circumstances. An elective mastectomy for cosmetic reasons absolutely is mutilation. You've got a better argument against using the term for hormone therapy, but I'm still sticking with it. Yes, it's emotionally loaded language. Used in response to an emotionally loaded accusation.

That said, it is a source of constant fascination to me that this is the only area of medicine where the medical guilds agree upon the idea of removing healthy tissue and/or body parts for the sake of treating a condition arising between the ears.

The medical field has done worse. Don't forget that lobotomies used to be thought of as compassionate care.