Continuation Transwomen are not women - part XI

[JoeMorgue]

I've been in all male bathrooms, locker rooms, and open floor military barracks my entire life and I haven't seen as many flopping penises as apparently going to see sharing the bathroom with a transperson for 30 seconds.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

First off, it's not going to be the trans people you know that are going to be the problem here.

Second, you personally haven't had to worry about any of this because you're a male. You aren't vulnerable to sexual predators in general, and sexual predators who do target males aren't at an advantage by claiming trans status. So of course this doesn't impact you.

But it impacts females.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

My post (the one you quoted) was explicitly directed at countering the notion that transgender identity is nothing more than someone announcing "I am transgender". In other words, that there's no such thing as genuine transgender identity, that it's merely people saying they're transgender. In the same way (according to this "argument"), it's equivalent to there being no more to identifying as an attack helicopter than stating "I am an attack helicopter": that the identity "attack helicopter" is obviously fallacious.

Your comprehension of this is incorrect.

This is not a case of saying there's no such thing as a "genuine" transgender identity. Every single one of us has repeatedly acknowledged that there are some people out there who genuinely have sever dysphoria and distress regarding the disconnect between their mental map of themselves and their sexed bodies. Every single one of us has conceded that more than once.

The entire basis of this discussion, and this disagreement, is that self-id as a policy makes it impossible to determine which random male is "genuinely transgender" and which is an exploitative predator. It is further complicated by the repeated conflation of sex and gender by you and those who share your view.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Elaedith

No, what you have done is use a motte and bailey fallacy. When asked to define 'valid' you state 'not a disorder or product of a disorder'. But what you really mean is that being a man or woman is based on self-identity rather than sex. You can't come up with any rational argument for why people should be coerced to accept redefinitions of 'man' and 'woman', and you can't come up with a coherent definition that isn't circular or based on stereotypes. Unable to defend this, you retreat to the motte of pretending that those who disagree with defining these words (and the regressive and unscientific ideology behind it) are claiming trans identity is a mental illness because we don't accept the bailey meaning of valid ('literally true').

We can actually see through this, you know.

Excellently stated.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Are you suggesting we judge a book by its cover? Because I've already pointed out how that doesn't work either.

The only alternative you're offering is that we are obligated to pretend that cassette tapes are books, when they aren't even a book on tape.

You're demanding that we ignore the reality of sex and just assume that anyone of the opposite sex in a single-sex intimate space has an ephemeral and unverifiable identity that should be view to supersede their sex.

"Yes, officer, I understand that this is a dog park. But my pet mountain lion identifies as a labrador, so it's okay"

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

Do you think gay people should not be able/allowed to "self-ID" as gay? Do you think they should have to be clinically assessed and diagnosed as gay before they're allowed to declare themselves "authentically gay"?

If gay males demand that they have a right to be in female-only spaces by dint of their self-declaration as gay, then yes.

But given that homosexuality imposes zero obligation on other people, your comparison is a deflection with no relevance to this discussion.

[JoeMorgue]

The reason the whole "Hardy-har I identity as an attack helicopter" (Which yes I find insufferable, I hate it when one side of a discussion only has one joke) thing got so much traction is because we keep getting told "Oh there's more the being trans then just saying you're trans" and we're still waiting to hear what that is.

"No you don't just have to say you are trans. You have to actually identify as trans."
"That's the same thing."
"Okay but you have to actually really live as a trans person."
"That's the same thing."

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

You're avoiding the fundamental question of whether or not transgender people should be required to be medically assessed and diagnosed in order to be "officially transgender".

Your comprehension of the position held by Elaedith and myself is incorrect.

Transgender people can self-identify as transgender all they want. They can dress however it pleases them. They can wear as much or as little make-up as they want.

For a transgender person to override the rights of females to female-only intimate spaces, for a transgender person to transgress the right of females to withhold consent with regard to their boundaries... THAT needs something more official than self-declaration.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

Is this you saying that transgender people should not be allowed to (for example) use communal changing areas that are aligned to their trans gender... until and unless they have been officially diagnosed as transgender and have a certificate to prove it?

Yes, that is what I am saying.

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

I suspect that this is what you mean. And if so, I'm afraid you're wrong, and you're fundamentally prejudiced on this issue.

Why is this wrong? And what makes the view that males who wish to transgress female boundaries ought to have more than their mere declaration? Why do you think it's fundamentally prejudiced for females to retain their right to deny males access to them while performing intimate functions? Why do you think that it's "progress" to grant males the privilege of accessing females at their whim?

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Again in the real world (not cherry picking pictures of trans people off of instagram and posting them a glib "Oh so this person isn't obviously a blah blah blah" trick people think is clever)... yeah. Do you really think most transpeople blend?

Yeah, I do. Especially the prepubescent part. My son has a kid in his class transition in the 2nd or 3rd grade. A kid who became really good friends with my son came to the school after that. When they were in their final year of elementary, I casually mentioned a story to the new kid's mom about something that happened before the trans kid had transitioned, thinking she knew. She had absolutely no idea.

I've met several people who had no idea which people in my band were trans.

EC's claim is kinda laughably naïve. Like thinking "gaydar" is a thing people can do.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Why not have them all be equal?

Because the sexes are NOT equal, they are different, and there are very good reasons for segregating certain spaces because of those sex differences.

Quote:

But I was referring to equality in gender.

Doesn't matter. Segregation is done on the basis of sex, not gender, because it is sex differences that makes segregation important.

Quote:

I treat trans men as my equals, for example.

Very few trans men could beat you in a fist fight. And no trans man can ever get a woman pregnant. Equality is easy in a lot of contexts, but impossible in some. Sex segregated spaces are very specific contexts where males and females are not equal, regardless of how you personally treat them.

Quote:

So, where would you have trans women go to use the bathroom? Would you have them use the men's room, which has all the same problems you just mentioned in having cis-men in the women's restroom?

No, it doesn't have all the same problems. If you think it does, then you haven't actually spent any real time thinking about what those problems are, and why they exist.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Yeah, I do. Especially the prepubescent part. My son has a kid in his class transition in the 2nd or 3rd grade. A kid who became really good friends with my son came to the school after that. When they were in their final year of elementary, I casually mentioned a story to the new kid's mom about something that happened before the trans kid had transitioned, thinking she knew. She had absolutely no idea.

I've met several people who had no idea which people in my band were trans.

EC's claim is kinda laughably naïve. Like thinking "gaydar" is a thing people can do.

Okay. The second part of my point, that you conveniently left off, was that if the person blends so well you can't tell what are we even talking about?

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Great. Then what's the solution that allows trans women use the women's restroom even if they can not 100% pass?

The solution is that they don't.

Why do you so strongly support granting males the privilege of invading female-only intimate spaces against the will of those females? Why do you value the privileges of this set of males more highly that the basic dignity, safety, and security of females as an entire class of people?

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I see. And what are trans women expected to do?

Why is it such an injustice to expect males to use male facilities? Why is it so much of a hurdle to expect males to be accepting and accommodating toward gender non-conforming males?

Why do you feel that you are justified in depriving females of our right to participate equally and safely in society, and to demand that we must disregard our boundaries in order to alleviate the hurt feelings of a set of males that your sex has rejected?

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Of course it's not perfect. But no one has been able to suggest anything else that is in anyway fair.

Okay for prisons, what about bathrooms?

Based on the pictures people have posted of transmen, I'd be surprised if I haven't shared a bathroom with one and never realized it--the beards really do work. But I largely wouldn't care if a gal walked in the men's room, although I would have trouble not being amused if she stepped up to the urinal.

Women (some, presumably not all) feel differently about the matter, although again, I suspect it happens all the time with transwomen who pass well.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I see. And what are trans women expected to do?

Hopefully read the answer given the last 3 times you asked this question since you can't seem to be bothered to do it.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I never said that they do. I'm advocating for equality here. The reason I keep pushing a trans perspective is because it otherwise being almost completely ignored.

How do you think you're advocating for equality, when you are demanding that females must relinquish their boundaries and their female-only intimate spaces, and allow in any male who makes an out-loud declaration of being transgender?

What exactly do you think is equal about a solution that grants a privilege to one set of people, and by doing so deprives a much larger group of people of a basic right?

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Okay. The second part of my point, that you conveniently left off, was that if the person blends so well you can't tell what are we even talking about?

well, not everyone does, do they? especially early in their transition.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I've said before that we take bathrooms (and similar public but also private spaces like changing rooms and locker rooms and all that), pronouns, and sports off the table... there's nothing to talk about FUNCTIONALLY which is weird.

It doesn't invalidate the discussion or any side of it, it doesn't mean it doesn't matter, but it is weird. It IS talking about a much smaller slice of life then say the Women's Rights or Civil Rights or even Gay Rights movements.

I’m sorry, I think you are greatly underestimating the importance of women’s sport. It is what started this thread after all. A huge number of women play competitive sport and some make a very good living out of sport. We now have self ID’d transwomen playing contact sports and hurting cis women. We also have unfair competitors like Lia Thomas and other untransitioned US track athletes unfairly competing and taking prizes, scholarships and places in representative teams away from women.

This is a huge issue to me and many others.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

well, not everyone does, do they? especially early in their transition.

So they don't blend, but we also can't tell who they are on sight.

This debate just will not get beyond "I want a hamburger with cheese, NOT a cheeseburger" level.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by crazycat

In the real world that's often not what happens. The offended women complain to the management and the management tell them that "that's the law now". (The law that your supposed experts made)

In real life. the offended women change their routines so that they don't have to be in that situation again - they change at home or don't use the offending facility, or just stop doing whatever activity they were doing there.

In real life, women tend to avoid confrontation and leave the scene. It would take a very brave woman indeed to actually bring criminal charges against the offending man. (Even a crime as serious as rape isn't often reported)

Perverts know this very well and have a good idea of just how far they can push women.

Nobody is claiming that transwomen are perverts. What has been said countless times is that self-ID allows perverts to enter women-only spaces by claiming that they are transwomen.

Does the trans community really want to have these perverts prentending to be trans?

It's an effective reintroduction of the urinary leash... but now available in lovely pink-white-blue color scheme.

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Hopefully read the answer given the last 3 times you asked this question since you can't seem to be bothered to do it.

I'm sorry. I scanned back several pages and there is a lot of wall of text posts there. The only post of yours I saw that addressed that question I agreed with, but didn't mention any specific guidance beyond "relax and go pee", which I still agree with.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Brainster

I suggest that it may mean that we will eventually have transgender prisons or at least separate wings. It seems obvious that keeping them with male prisoners is problematic and keeping them with female prisoners is also not a good idea.

To be fair... keeping male prisoners with other male prisoners is problematic. I apologize to all of the good natured males in this thread, but your sex has some problems to work out.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I'm sorry. I scanned back several pages and there is a lot of wall of text posts there. The only post of yours I saw that addressed that question I agreed with, but didn't mention any specific guidance beyond "relax and go pee", which I still agree with.

It was somewhat similar, but more direct.

(In response to you asking "What are transwomen supposed to do?")

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The same thing literally everyone is expected to do in a society with other people in it, sometimes wind up in situations that aren't 100% comfortable for or tailored to them and just live with it.

And before you hit the "You're a transphobe and history will judge you" shortcut key on your keyboard actually stop and think about what you are saying, read what I'm actually saying, and actually respond to it.

You're treating transpeople going to the bathroom they are comfortable in as some sort of 100% guaranteed human right, but cis-women being uncomfortable with trans-people as something they obviously have to get over.

WHICH IS IT? Is "a comfortable bathroom experience" something a person gets to demand or not? Because it can't something SOME people get to demand and others don't.

Why do transpeople deserve a more comfortable bathroom experience than cispeople? This is not an idle or unreasonable question.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Of course it's not perfect. But no one has been able to suggest anything else that is in anyway fair.

What is unfair about expecting males to use the facilities set aside for males? What is unfair about expecting males who wish an alternative to male only facilities to use a neutral facility?

What exactly is fair about demanding that females must relinquish their dignity and their security and grant access to any male who wishes to be there?

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

"If perfectly spherical person with no chromosomes and no genitals floating in a fiction vacuum over an infinite plane of uniform gravity falls over but there is no one around to hear it do they have a gender identity..."

At this point we're defined it to have less actual meaningful meaning than a Zodiac Sign.

:

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I wouldn't require anyone to do anything they did not feel comfortable with. And whoever said he lacks a penis? I've not personally checked, because it's none of my damn business, but the subject came up when another friend was having a medical issue in the same general area.

But you see, Upchurch, you DO require that some people (females) do something they're do not feel comfortable with.

That something being getting naked in front of males. That something being showering where males can see them. That something being seeing a male penis when they don't want to.

You keep framing this as equality, but you seem to be completely disregarding that this is not at all equal for females. It is distinctly disadvantageous for females.

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

It was somewhat similar, but more direct.

(In response to you asking "What are transwomen supposed to do?")

And I agreed with that, only I took "them" in

Quote:

...sometimes wind up in situations that aren't 100% comfortable for or tailored to them and just live with it.

to be cis-women, trans-women, cis-men, trans-men, and every other gender or non-gender in between. In Lower Decks, there is a game called Negotiation where nobody wins until everyone is a little unhappy and you shout "Compromise!" Now that I think about it, they also depict all-gender community showers on starships.

Personally, I'm really uncomfortable with people who talk on the phone in a public bathroom, but that's beside the point.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Oh, you probably actually believe that, too. Don't you?

That's adorable.

Go do your own research. This is extremely well established. Your casual dismissal of it without even the decency of an argument belies any claim to rationality you make here.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Why not have them all be equal? But I was referring to equality in gender. I treat trans men as my equals, for example.

Have you considered that you would be gaining equality in gender, by reducing equality by sex?

And you're doing so in a way that privileges and advantages males (regardless of how they identify) at the expense of females.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

And I agreed with that, only I took "them" in

to be cis-women, trans-women, cis-men, trans-men, and every other gender or non-gender in between.

And glib statements like that are easy to make.

But you've never asked some of those sides to compromise.

Tell you what. You give me a sane, real-wish world scenario where you think a transwoman using the men's bathroom would be the "right" decision.

Any one can mouth out a vague "Well sure everyone has to compromise" truism. Now let's see you workshop it.

[JoeMorgue]

Screw it. Wipe the slate clean. No genders, no sexes, no sexual identifies, no gender identifies, no orientations.

The only demarcation is whether or not someone would pay to watch your sex tape.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I was referring to EC's fictional transdar, which is super, super, super accurate! Even with kids!

First off, it's not "transdar". It's visually determining the sex of another human being.

Secondly, humans are very good at it. You are very good at it. You might pretend that you aren't for the sake of this argument, on the internet, where you can't actually see anyone. But when you walk around in real life, and you see other humans who are pubescent or older, I bet you can accurately determine which are males and which are females with nearly 100% accuracy.

This has been well studied. This ability is the basis of a whole lot of facial recognition software. Those algorithms work very well... and sex determination is an implicit element of them.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Screw it. Wipe the slate clean. No genders, no sexes, no sexual identifies, no gender identifies, no orientations.

The only demarcation is whether or not someone would pay to watch your sex tape.

If you get rid of sex, you get rid of the species. Just sayin'


ETA: Not the act of sexual intercourse, but the existence of separate sexes within a sexually reproductive species.

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Have you considered that you would be gaining equality in gender, by reducing equality by sex?

I'm not following this sentence. Are you using "you" to mean "Upchurch" or "you" to mean society? By "gaining equality' do you mean that more people are equal? Why do you consider it a zero sum game?

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

And you're doing so in a way that privileges and advantages males (regardless of how they identify) at the expense of females.

I'm really not following this one. By your assumptions, wouldn't trans men, who you consider to be females, be gaining privileges and advantages afforded to men?

[JoeMorgue]

Stop pretending people aren't being clear in what they are saying.

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Tell you what. You give me a sane, real-wish world scenario where you think a transwoman using the men's bathroom would be the "right" decision.

I don't know what "real-wish" means, but all the same reasons I think any woman using the men's bathroom would be the right decision.

• The women's bathroom is out of order.
• There is a huge line for the women's bathroom, so the women create a second line to use the men's bathroom.
• It's a single person bathroom.

I could probably come up with others. I had one with changing tables, but that usually meant I had to go into the women's bathroom, because misogyny.

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Why do you so strongly support granting males the privilege of invading female-only intimate spaces against the will of those females?

According to a Pew poll from 2016, most women think that transgender people should be allowed to use the bathroom of the gender with which they identify.

I would imagine that number has gone up since 2016, and will continue to do so.

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Stop pretending people aren't being clear in what they are saying.

Well, what the hell does "reducing equality by sex" mean? does that mean there are fewer equal men/women or that there are fewer things that are equal between men and women?

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I'm not following this sentence. Are you using "you" to mean "Upchurch" or "you" to mean society? By "gaining equality' do you mean that more people are equal? Why do you consider it a zero sum game?

In this post, you is you personally, Upchurch. And no, I don't mean that there is a net increase in equality in terms of the number of people.

I don't consider it a zero sum game, I consider it a net negative. And I do so because it LITERALLY reduces the rights of females in favor of privileges granted to a subset of males.

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I'm really not following this one. By your assumptions, wouldn't trans men, who you consider to be females, be gaining privileges and advantages afforded to men?

In some senses, yes, transmen do gain privileges related to being male. But they aren't reducing the privileges and advantages available to other males in the process.

And in reality, there are still a whole lot of male privileges that transgender identified females do not gain. Because they are still female. And while it's significantly easier for a female to pass as a small-statured male, there are still a great many cases where they will not be perceived as male.

This is especially true when you see transgender identified females in a group of males. Seriously, Buck Angel is perhaps one of the most passing transmen out there. But if you see them in mixed company, the difference in stature, carriage, body shape, and facial composition is pretty obvious.

It's also the case that transgender identified females to not increase any risk to males. they don't open up a loophole that predatory females can exploit in order to transgress male boundaries, engage in voyeurism of males, engage in indecent exposure where males are the victims, or intimidate males with their presence. They don't take male athletic spots from males.

And you know what you don't see? You don't see a rash of transgender identified females being proclaimed as leaders in their various fields, having their books held up as incredible testaments to males, being recognized as the highest paid male CEO or the first male in a field. They pretty much don't get recognized at all.

My hypothesis on this is because even though males in general (not including you) will accept transmen to a degree... they are still females, and the males know it.

There's a whole lot of articles out there written by transmen, where they discuss the sexism among males that they didn't even know was there until they were "one of the guys", and also touching on how they still get talked over, disregarded, dismissed, and essentially "muscled out" of the discussion and out of leadership positions, in the exact same way that females do.