ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 4th August 2019, 12:40 AM   #1041
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,209
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
I believe I have demonstrated that when called on the question no member here will state this as a demand.

It is a recurring suggestion that scurries away under scrutiny only to reappear later. One that is to be dismissed as pure folly.

Tell me if you disagree.

(my correction)

So even when the issue is between trans women and women, the whole thing still turns out be the fault of males.

Was bound to happen

Let me apologise on behalf of all males, for while not having the slightest thing to do with the issue, hey hands up. We probably did something wrong psychically
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 01:06 AM   #1042
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,559
The issue of predatory behaviour by males is the fault of predatory males yes.

Would you wish that it was somebody else's fault?

For sure there are many who think it is women's fault. Maybe that it is the fault of trans people too.

However as stated you have it correct.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 01:12 AM   #1043
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,209
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
The issue of predatory behaviour by males is the fault of predatory males yes.

Would you wish that it was somebody else's fault?

For sure there are many who think it is women's fault. Maybe that it is the fault of trans people too.

However as stated you have it correct.
Hey

I have already apologised for all males for the whole thing.

And every time from now on I go to the bog I will feel ashamed on behalf of all men.
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 03:03 AM   #1044
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Well, I thought it was clever and super amusing.
You? Clever and super amusing? Never heard of it!
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 03:18 AM   #1045
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
What crazy world it would be if a man could become a woman! What's next? Black people being considered Swedish? Non-Lutherans (actual heretics and heathens) being allowed to be citizens? Same-sex relationships being recognized as real marriages?

It's a slippery slope that will only end in the destruction of all civilization!
Except that men don't become women. They can approximate being one, thanks to modern technology, and if that's their thing, great! But I don't think we should pretend that reality's been bent in any way here.

Originally Posted by Strawberry View Post
I expect almost everybody reading already knows those facts.
I'm sure we do, but... you did say you had facts. TM just wants to see them.

Quote:
You need to see proof that the human species is sexually dimorphic, do you?
That we are dimorphic does not exclude that there are exceptions to the binary rule, however.

Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
Bigots, who obviously will refuse to concede that they are in fact bigoted, won't acknowledge that a trans-woman is in fact a woman for no good reason at all.
That's a very nice, pretty infraction-safe way of calling everybody who disagrees with you on this topic bigots for no good reason at all.

Disagreement is not bigotry, sir. As for conceding, it's far easier when the facts are there. So far we have mostly claims. I think it's clear that some people believe that they are of a different gender than what objective evidence suggests, but I see no evidence to go from there to concluding that their belief IS objective evidence that they are that gender.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 03:30 AM   #1046
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
Much like how you apparently fail to apprehend the difference between "nationality" and "ethnicity" you also fail make to a distinction between sex and gender. There's no reason to treat them as synonyms just to suit your trans-phobia or some insane and obsessive need to treat one definition as absolute and impossible to change.
No, there's reason to treat them as synonyms because it has, historically, been understood that way. In fact, as I said earlier it's still the same word in some languages. That some are trying to change the definitions now doesn't mean we should just roll over and accept it.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
My favorite is the earth is locally flat for all practical purposes.
Very locally.

Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Again with the idea that identifying as a woman means you just say so but take no other steps. Is this really how you believe it works?
Here's the problem: a lot of people are trying to champion just that, whenever this issue comes up and someone asks what makes someone a certain gender.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 05:34 AM   #1047
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Here's the problem: a lot of people are trying to champion just that, whenever this issue comes up and someone asks what makes someone a certain gender.
The only ones who seem to even think that is what happens are the ones also claiming trans women are predatory males who may also want (real) women's used tampons.

For once, I actually agree with cullennz, in that for some this is not an issue of changing in front of a trans person, it's yet more "menz are all evil, even the ones who chopped off their dangly bits!!one!"
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 06:06 AM   #1048
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
More to the point, how you get "nobody needs to change in locker rooms" from the post you are referencing is a mystery. Fengirl wrote "nobody needs to change locker rooms" which would be pointing up the sheer hypocrisy of those like you who suggest males should be able to bulldoze female only space and objection to this is to demonise them.
Yeah, that's in no way an accurate summary of the people you are debating. eta: It does remind me of the argument I had on here with someone claiming that a 'black man trying to enter his own apartment but being blocked by a white woman demanding proof of his residency before she would allow him to pass' was a 'big black man bulldozing down a small woman'. I guess this is just more evidence that bigotry, whether anti-trans, anti-men, or anti-black tends to use the same technique.

Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
It seems that in your misogynistic fury you are not reading the content of posts before blasting away. It is also noteworty that you label the first post from a particular member on this topic as "your side" (tribal mindset) so that you think one member saying something different from another member is a "contradiction". Rather--you saying something that nullifies something else you said is a contradiction, as has been pointed out.
Jesus, you guys just can't stop tripping over your own hypocrisy, can you? In your opening paragraph, you state a bs position that "people like me" are not arguing, then in your second paragraph you whine about a "tribal mindset" by labeling people using the same talking points and fallacious reasoning a side.

Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
Males have been shouting down females and telling them what to think and do for millennia just as you are now. It's getting a little old don't you think?
Speaking of tribalism, what a pathetic attempt to shut down discussion. You are not a poor, victimized woman not allowed to think for herself.

Last edited by wareyin; 4th August 2019 at 06:15 AM.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 08:26 AM   #1049
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,559
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Yeah, that's in no way an accurate summary of the people you are debating.
I think it could be a summary of your position. After all you refuse to answer no when asked if you think that should happen. If you did answer no then it wouldn’t reflect your position (and I would agree with you) but your choice is not to clear this up. You cannot credibly claim misrepresentation if you won’t represent yourself.

More to the point, you failed to understand the post by Fengirl and therefore you have not yet addressed the point about your self contradictory position. Would you care to do that please?

Quote:
You are not a poor, victimized woman not allowed to think for herself.
Correct. You however are telling women what they should think and do despite a profound lack of awareness on your part of the issues you proclaim wisdom about.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2019, 02:59 PM   #1050
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 4,310
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
So even when the issue is between trans women and women, the whole thing still turns out be the fault of males.
In fairness, we did design the bathrooms.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 02:31 AM   #1051
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
The only ones who seem to even think that is what happens are the ones also claiming trans women are predatory males who may also want (real) women's used tampons.
Well, you've got an exception right here.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 04:07 AM   #1052
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
I think it could be a summary of your position. After all you refuse to answer no when asked if you think that should happen. If you did answer no then it wouldn’t reflect your position (and I would agree with you) but your choice is not to clear this up. You cannot credibly claim misrepresentation if you won’t represent yourself.
Nonsense, again. Not answering an absurd hypothetical does not allow you to ascribe an answer for me.

Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
More to the point, you failed to understand the post by Fengirl and therefore you have not yet addressed the point about your self contradictory position. Would you care to do that please?
My self-contradictory position? Project much?

Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
Correct. You however are telling women what they should think and do despite a profound lack of awareness on your part of the issues you proclaim wisdom about.
No. I get that an irrational bigotry towards anyone born with male genitals might cause someone to see positions and motivations that aren't there in those they debate. That bigotry doesn't make it accurate, though.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 04:08 AM   #1053
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Well, you've got an exception right here.
You are saying that you actually do believe that all it takes for a man to enter the women's changing room is to simply mutter how he feels like a woman right now as he enters? Do tell, where is this happening?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 04:12 AM   #1054
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
You are saying that you actually do believe that all it takes for a man to enter the women's changing room is to simply mutter how he feels like a woman right now as he enters? Do tell, where is this happening?
No, I believe that what I said is true, not what you wrote. Did you misrepresent me on purpose, or did you just lose track?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 05:50 AM   #1055
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
No, I believe that what I said is true, not what you wrote. Did you misrepresent me on purpose, or did you just lose track?
What you said was that you were the exception. In what way are you the exception, then?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 06:59 AM   #1056
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
What you said was that you were the exception. In what way are you the exception, then?
That's also not what I said. Seriously is it that hard to go back and read the post you responded to?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 07:12 AM   #1057
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,559
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Nonsense, again. Not answering an absurd hypothetical [ . . . ]
You have been shown evidence that it is not hypothetical. If you will not represent yourself in respect of this question you can't really complain about misrepresentation.

Quote:
My self-contradictory position?
Yes, your self contradictory position. Go back and read the post by Fengirl, see where you misquoted it, correct your misquotation and respond to the contradiction please. Your post 1012 contradicts several from you before that. You wrote the posts nobody else did.

Note that one member saying something different from another member is not self contradiction
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 07:30 AM   #1058
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,752
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
The only ones who seem to even think that is what happens are the ones also claiming trans women are predatory males who may also want (real) women's used tampons.
I said it before but I'll try again. When Rolfe described such fetishists she did not say they were trans women. She said they would be enabled to access women-only spaces by rules intended to accommodate trans women.
Jack by the hedge is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 07:32 AM   #1059
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,015
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
I've stated on multiple occasions now that allowing trans women access to these spaces based on self-identification as trans opens them up to every man.

Because every man will then self-identify as trans, right?!

Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Because every man will then self-identify as trans, right?!
Oh well as long as not every man will self-identify as trans female, that's fine then.

Take it up with GlennB if you want an argument.


Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
Not only is it dehumanizing for any and every male to be prevented from using formerly female only spaces on any whim, no questions asked, but also females who express a wish against this idea are guilty of hate crime and must be punished accordingly.

Hyperbolic strawman is always the best argument.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 5th August 2019 at 07:36 AM.
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 07:47 AM   #1060
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That's also not what I said. Seriously is it that hard to go back and read the post you responded to?
Oh, good, another stupid back and forth argument about what you said. I'm really not interested in another Argumemmnon fest. If you want to post short, cryptic posts, go ahead. Let me know when you get to your point.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 07:57 AM   #1061
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
You have been shown evidence that it is not hypothetical. If you will not represent yourself in respect of this question you can't really complain about misrepresentation.
No, I really have not. Where are these changing rooms located, in which all a guy has to do to get access is mutter to himself that he's a woman as he "bulldozes" his way in?

Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
Yes, your self contradictory position. Go back and read the post by Fengirl, see where you misquoted it, correct your misquotation and respond to the contradiction please. Your post 1012 contradicts several from you before that. You wrote the posts nobody else did.
My post 1012 where I state that you should be worried about behavior? What exactly does that contradict?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 08:13 AM   #1062
Fengirl
Graduate Poster
 
Fengirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,278
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
It is indeed a contradiction, and watching you happily disregard the feelings of trans people while demanding that they bend themselves out of shape to respect yours is sadly rather par for the course in this thread.
I'm so sorry that you have struggled so to understand my point (or even read it correctly). Let me try again in a slightly different way to represent how your argument comes across:



Is that any clearer?

If you don't feel that's an accurate representation of your view point, then I suggest you really need to work on your trans-advocacy skills, because you're doing the cause more harm than good.

And just to be crystal clear, the "small subsection of men" of whom women are fearful does not equate to "transwomen". They are not the same group. I am not at all phobic or fearful of the latter because I consider them my sisters and deserving of protection. I am extremely phobic and fearful of the former group because they seek to victimize women (and have already victimized me in other shared spaces.) This is not a hypothetical fear of what "might" happen, or what "could" happen. It is what DOES happen.

It is an unintended consequence of gender self-identification that we cannot reliably screen out the former group whilst allowing entry to the latter. That's why it is a naive and harmful policy which puts women at risk.
__________________
"'Tis with our judgments as our watches, none
Go just alike, yet each believes his own."

Alexander Pope: An Essay on Criticism lines 9-10
Fengirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 08:16 AM   #1063
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Oh, good, another stupid back and forth argument about what you said. I'm really not interested in another Argumemmnon fest. If you want to post short, cryptic posts, go ahead. Let me know when you get to your point.
If you're not interested in me telling you to read the ******* post you reply to, why didn't you start by reading the ******* post before you replied? Was it that complicated?

Here's the conversation again:

Originally Posted by you
Again with the idea that identifying as a woman means you just say so but take no other steps.
Originally Posted by me
Here's the problem: a lot of people are trying to champion just that, whenever this issue comes up and someone asks what makes someone a certain gender.
Originally Posted by you
The only ones who seem to even think that is what happens are the ones also claiming trans women are predatory males who may also want (real) women's used tampons.
Originally Posted by me
Well, you've got an exception right here.
If you bothered to pay attention, you'd know what I said that I was AN exception, not THE exception, to the rule YOU established that the 'only people' who thought that some were pushing for self-identification to be the only criterion were those who thought that transwomen are predatory males.

In other words, I don't think that transwomen are predatory males, but I also think that some are pushing for self-identification to be the only criterion for establishing gender.

Once again you lost track of the conversation in the course of a single post, and refused to go back to read the actual conversation. And you have the gall to act as if you're the one whose time is being wasted by a back-and-forth?

If you're going to participate in a conversation, pay ******* attention to the posts of those you're replying to rather than complain that they should pay attention for you.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 08:17 AM   #1064
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,015
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
A biological component that only expresses itself in patriarchal societies? That's a peculiar biological component, especially considering that the various Native American societies lived right next to each other and interbred regularly.

Yes, in this respect it isn't very different from the biological phenomenon of lactose tolerance: If you find yourself in a non-dairy society, you'll never notice that you have it. And lactose intolerance won't be a problem in a society like that. It's very different if you are in a place where they put dairy in everything like they do in most Scandinavian countries. I know a couple of immigrants from Southeast Asia who have problems with that.
I visited Louisiana in the mid-90s, and I enjoyed the trip immensely because I hadn't yet become allergic to shellfish. Nowadays, I am. If I went to Israel instead, I probably wouldn't have to worry.

If the biological component is that you're gay, you'll have serious problems in homophobic societies. Being there won't change your sexual orientation, but it will most certainly change your behaviour and the attitudes towards you if you're found out. You'll be categorized differently than you would be in a society where nobody considers your sexual orientation to be of any concern.

Similarly, a male person with a less than average masculinized (for lack of a better word) brain, is more likely to become a transsexual in a society with rigid gender roles, which probably won't happen in a society with a third (and maybe even fourth or fifth) gender category because there are other groups to identify with than the (to some extent imaginary) hemales and ultra-feminines, for instance the Fa'afafine in the case of Samoa: Causes of transsexuality: Biological factors (Wikipedia).
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 08:20 AM   #1065
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 6,829
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Take it up with GlennB if you want an argument.
No she should take it up with you, you'e the first (and only) one to have stated the idea that every man will self-ID as a transwoman. What GlennB said is that it would be possible for every man to self-ID as a transwoman, which is obviously an entirely different statement from yours.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 08:31 AM   #1066
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 6,829
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Yes, in this respect it isn't very different from the biological phenomenon of lactose tolerance: If you find yourself in a non-dairy society, you'll never notice that you have it. And lactose intolerance won't be a problem in a society like that. It's very different if you are in a place where they put dairy in everything like they do in most Scandinavian countries. I know a couple of immigrants from Southeast Asia who have problems with that.
I visited Louisiana in the mid-90s, and I enjoyed the trip immensely because I hadn't yet become allergic to shellfish. Nowadays, I am. If I went to Israel instead, I probably wouldn't have to worry.
But this isn't about reproductively distinct populations which evolve over generations, the comparison is between various Native American tribes which were right next to each other and regularly interbred.

Quote:
If the biological component is that you're gay, you'll have serious problems in homophobic societies. Being there won't change your sexual orientation, but it will most certainly change your behaviour and the attitudes towards you if you're found out. You'll be categorized differently than you would be in a society where nobody considers your sexual orientation to be of any concern.
Which means that in a homophobic society there would be less (recognizable) homosexuals than in an egalitarian one, the exact opposite of what we see with transgenderism where the phenomenon is rarer to non-existent in egalitarian societies.

Quote:
Similarly, a male person with a less than average masculinized (for lack of a better word) brain, is more likely to become a transsexual in a society with rigid gender roles, which probably won't happen in a society with a third (and maybe even fourth or fifth) gender category because there are other groups to identify with than the (to some extent imaginary) hemales and ultra-feminines, for instance the Fa'afafine in the case of Samoa: Causes of transsexuality: Biological factors (Wikipedia).
What about when there are no gender roles or such groups to identify with?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 08:50 AM   #1067
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
But this isn't about reproductively distinct populations which evolve over generations, the comparison is between various Native American tribes which were right next to each other and regularly interbred.



Which means that in a homophobic society there would be less (recognizable) homosexuals than in an egalitarian one, the exact opposite of what we see with transgenderism where the phenomenon is rarer to non-existent in egalitarian societies.



What about when there are no gender roles or such groups to identify with?
Egalitarian doesn't mean no gender roles.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 09:01 AM   #1068
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
If you're not interested in me telling you to read the ******* post you reply to, why didn't you start by reading the ******* post before you replied? Was it that complicated?

Here's the conversation again:









If you bothered to pay attention, you'd know what I said that I was AN exception, not THE exception, to the rule YOU established that the 'only people' who thought that some were pushing for self-identification to be the only criterion were those who thought that transwomen are predatory males.

In other words, I don't think that transwomen are predatory males, but I also think that some are pushing for self-identification to be the only criterion for establishing gender.

Once again you lost track of the conversation in the course of a single post, and refused to go back to read the actual conversation. And you have the gall to act as if you're the one whose time is being wasted by a back-and-forth?

If you're going to participate in a conversation, pay ******* attention to the posts of those you're replying to rather than complain that they should pay attention for you.
It's frustrating when people won't play your game, isn't it? Let's ignore how you quoted 4 posts to claim I lost the conversation in a single post, for now.

I realize that in your head, your point is clear. On the screen, however, "you've got an exception right here" is nowhere near as clear a point as you seem to think.

All that aside, what does "self-identification" in this situation mean, to you? Francesca has stated that men would be able to declare that they are a woman "on a whim". Rolfe seems to agree, but also seems to think that people who dress and live as women full-time have done nothing more than self-identify. Meadmaker says legally, all you have to do currently is declare yourself a woman and pow, you're allowed into the women's showers. There's a range, and I'd hate for you to think I misrepresented you.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 09:08 AM   #1069
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
It's frustrating when people won't play your game, isn't it?
I think I've just demonstrated very clearly that it's not a game, and that you DID lose track of the conversation. That you think you just scored some sort of imaginary point when in fact I just showed how wrong you were speaks volumes.

Quote:
I realize that in your head, your point is clear.
It's clear from the conversation, but you didn't bother reading it. I just posted the conversation just to show how obvious it was. And even with that you're confused. It seems to be a recurring problem for you in this thread, from what I can see.

Quote:
All that aside, what does "self-identification" in this situation mean, to you?
Gods, are you really asking me this question? Self-identification means someone saying "I'm trans". Some people are in favour of this being the only relevant criterion. Several on this forum, in fact. It's no fantasy; people are actually calling for this. That it's not official policy doesn't change that, and acknowledging that doesn't mean that I think trans people are deviants.

Either you have reading comprehension issues or you're deliberately misrepresenting the statements of people you disagree with. So which is it?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 09:21 AM   #1070
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Fengirl View Post
I'm so sorry that you have struggled so to understand my point (or even read it correctly). Let me try again in a slightly different way to represent how your argument comes across:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8313708061.jpg

Is that any clearer?
It's certainly easier to argue against a strawman, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Fengirl View Post
If you don't feel that's an accurate representation of your view point, then I suggest you really need to work on your trans-advocacy skills, because you're doing the cause more harm than good.
Meh, I'm not really bothered by those who argue against trans rights claiming I need to work on my "trans advocacy skills".

Originally Posted by Fengirl View Post
And just to be crystal clear, the "small subsection of men" of whom women are fearful does not equate to "transwomen". They are not the same group. I am not at all phobic or fearful of the latter because I consider them my sisters and deserving of protection. I am extremely phobic and fearful of the former group because they seek to victimize women (and have already victimized me in other shared spaces.) This is not a hypothetical fear of what "might" happen, or what "could" happen. It is what DOES happen.

It is an unintended consequence of gender self-identification that we cannot reliably screen out the former group whilst allowing entry to the latter. That's why it is a naive and harmful policy which puts women at risk.
If your policy is that some small subsection of men are a risk, and so allowing trans women into your changing room exposes you to greater risk, then forcing those trans women to use the men's facilities exposes them to a much more increased risk. Simply by the fact that they are going to be exposed to many more men, you are putting them at the risk you are seeking to avoid.

If you, like Rolfe and FrancescaR, believe that self-identification is men merely by stating "at a whim" that they are women, then under that absurd hypothetical situation, self-identification is a problem. The thing is, even when they are trying to prove that's what would happen, those posters are only able to give examples of trans women doing far more to identify as women than just stating it on a whim. Which leads me to believe that it isn't quite the way they are presenting it.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 09:33 AM   #1071
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I think I've just demonstrated very clearly that it's not a game, and that you DID lose track of the conversation. That you think you just scored some sort of imaginary point when in fact I just showed how wrong you were speaks volumes.



It's clear from the conversation, but you didn't bother reading it. I just posted the conversation just to show how obvious it was. And even with that you're confused. It seems to be a recurring problem for you in this thread, from what I can see.
Congratulations. You posted a short, cryptic remark and weren't understood. Clearly you win. Sadly enough, rereading the conversation shows that you lost track, rather than I. I was talking about people who believe men simply saying "I'm a woman" to get into the showers already happens, while you state that you do not believe it already happens but that it's being called for. Therefore, you are not an exception to my statement about what those who claim it already occurs are also saying.



Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Gods, are you really asking me this question?
Of course I am. This is clearly a phrase that means something different to several posters in this very conversation. When you use it, I want to know what you mean by it, as that may be different than what Rolfe or I or dann means by it. Don't get pissy that people don't understand you then pissy some more that they ask for clarification.
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Self-identification means someone saying "I'm trans". Some people are in favour of this being the only relevant criterion. Several on this forum, in fact. It's no fantasy; people are actually calling for this. That it's not official policy doesn't change that, and acknowledging that doesn't mean that I think trans people are deviants.

Either you have reading comprehension issues or you're deliberately misrepresenting the statements of people you disagree with. So which is it?
Now that we've established who exactly got confused, care to drop the personalizations?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 09:55 AM   #1072
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Congratulations. You posted a short, cryptic remark and weren't understood.
If I made any mistake it was assuming that you were sufficiently on the ball to keep track of the conversation. I've clearly established what the context was. When I replied about people championing self-identification as the only relevant criterion as opposed to it being the case now, YOU lost track, not me. It's not my problem that you don't have the humility to admit this, and are trying to blame me for your error.

Quote:
care to drop the personalizations?
You reap what you sow. If you didn't misrepresent me, repeatedly, and then accused me of playing a game, none of this would've happened. But you're too proud to admit to being wrong.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 09:58 AM   #1073
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,559
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
My post 1012 where I state that you should be worried about behavior? What exactly does that contradict?
Fortunately Fengirl has now illustrated your self contradiction in highly lucid and simple terms that I am sure you can apprehend unambiguously.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 10:22 AM   #1074
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
If I made any mistake it was assuming that you were sufficiently on the ball to keep track of the conversation. I've clearly established what the context was. When I replied about people championing self-identification as the only relevant criterion as opposed to it being the case now, YOU lost track, not me. It's not my problem that you don't have the humility to admit this, and are trying to blame me for your error.



You reap what you sow. If you didn't misrepresent me, repeatedly, and then accused me of playing a game, none of this would've happened. But you're too proud to admit to being wrong.
When I am talking about a group of people that you are not a part of doing something, you are not an exception to that group of people who also perform that action. That you do not understand this does not mean I can't keep track of the conversation. Since you mistakenly claimed to be an exception to a group of people I mentioned, despite not being in that group at all, of course your statement would be confusing.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 10:24 AM   #1075
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
Fortunately Fengirl has now illustrated your self contradiction in highly lucid and simple terms that I am sure you can apprehend unambiguously.
That was the post where she straw-manned my position? Yes, that was simple. No, those were not my positions, and so no, those were not self-contradictory statements made by me.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 10:25 AM   #1076
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 18,559
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Take it up with GlennB if you want an argument.
It is you who typed it. My response is to you, hopefully it is clear that your statement is wholly immaterial (in respect of needing to be true, which of course it is not) to the issue.

Do you think think men should simply be able to claim to be female to get into a formerly female-only shower room?

This is also a question to you. At least two members refuse to answer it. My answer is "no". Are you prepared to answer it?
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 10:34 AM   #1077
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,348
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
When I am talking about a group of people that you are not a part of doing something, you are not an exception to that group of people who also perform that action.
See what I mean? You're still confused about what I was talking about, even after multiple explanations.

Let go of that interpretation you had at the begining. Let go of it. It's not correct. It's wrong. It's erroneous. It's fouled. Format that drive in your brain and try this:

I was saying, and am still saying, that there are people who are arguing that self-identification (hopefully you remember how I defined it) is the only criterion that should be used. It's not the only criterion now, but these people, including posters here, want it to be.

Quote:
Since you mistakenly claimed to be an exception to a group of people I mentioned
NO! I claimed to be an exception to a group of people _I_ mentioned, and which you then characterised, not realising what I was talking about because you didn't read my post correctly. Again, despite multiple clarifications, you're still not following. Again, here was my post:

Quote:
Here's the problem: a lot of people are trying to champion just that, whenever this issue comes up and someone asks what makes someone a certain gender.
That's the post that eluded you, and continues to cause you issues. You really need to read it, in context, for comprehension. I can take you to water but I can't make you drink.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward



Last edited by Belz...; 5th August 2019 at 10:37 AM.
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 12:18 PM   #1078
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
See what I mean? You're still confused about what I was talking about, even after multiple explanations.

Let go of that interpretation you had at the begining. Let go of it. It's not correct. It's wrong. It's erroneous. It's fouled. Format that drive in your brain and try this:

I was saying, and am still saying, that there are people who are arguing that self-identification (hopefully you remember how I defined it) is the only criterion that should be used. It's not the only criterion now, but these people, including posters here, want it to be.



NO! I claimed to be an exception to a group of people _I_ mentioned, and which you then characterised, not realising what I was talking about because you didn't read my post correctly. Again, despite multiple clarifications, you're still not following. Again, here was my post:



That's the post that eluded you, and continues to cause you issues. You really need to read it, in context, for comprehension. I can take you to water but I can't make you drink.
Good lord, watching you complain about someone else getting it wrong, then linking to the wrong damn post is hilarious. The post you quoted and responded to was me talking about "the people who," a group you were not part of. You quoted that, and responded to it that you were an exception. The problem is you can't be an exception to a group you aren't part of!

And jeez, you still roped me into a back and forth argument over what you said. I'm done with your silly game. Have a great afternoon.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 12:36 PM   #1079
TomB
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 648
Originally Posted by Fengirl View Post
And just to be crystal clear, the "small subsection of men" of whom women are fearful does not equate to "transwomen". They are not the same group. I am not at all phobic or fearful of the latter because I consider them my sisters and deserving of protection. I am extremely phobic and fearful of the former group because they seek to victimize women (and have already victimized me in other shared spaces.) This is not a hypothetical fear of what "might" happen, or what "could" happen. It is what DOES happen.

It is an unintended consequence of gender self-identification that we cannot reliably screen out the former group whilst allowing entry to the latter. That's why it is a naive and harmful policy which puts women at risk.
Wading through all of this, I find that this is a good rational point to re-frame the discussion.

If we can agree on a few givens, we might be able to talk about a way to address the issue:

1) Trans-women and predatory men are not the same thing. (Yes, there may be trans women who are predators just as there may be women who are predators.)

2) Self identification is desirable for trans people because it eliminates the need for them to appeal to some authority to validate their identity.

3) Predatory men exist who would like access to women's spaces for reasons that victimize women, sometimes in physically dangerous ways.

4) Most trans-women want access to female spaces for purposes that do not victimize women. (Draws less negative attention and identity validation among others.)

5) Self-ID being the only barrier to entry to female spaces creates an opportunity that predatory males may take advantage of.

So, instead of the all or nothing extremes, can a workable solution be devised that accommodates legitimate trans people but prevents abuse by predatory men pretending to be trans?

Personally, I think that self-ID, while fine in other contexts, does not work for segregated spaces. Thus, there needs to be some sort of legal gender change process before such access is allowed. It is possible that the processes in place are too high a hurdle and should be revised, but at the same time it shouldn't be so easy you can do so on a whim.

If there is restriction to access it follows that one must be able to question a person's presence. Of course, challenging to the the point of harassment should not be allowed either. But where is the line?
TomB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2019, 01:03 PM   #1080
Fengirl
Graduate Poster
 
Fengirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,278
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post

If your policy is that some small subsection of men are a risk, and so allowing trans women into your changing room exposes you to greater risk, then forcing those trans women to use the men's facilities exposes them to a much more increased risk.
The male locker room is probably not the primary target area for men seeking to victimize women. But anyway...

The fact that transwomen are at risk of transphobic abuse or attack in the male locker room is a huge concern that needs to be addressed. On that - at least - you and I would be in agreement. It is (or should be) the whole starting point for this debate.

What changes would need to be made in those male-only environments to reduce the risk to transpeople? As has already been noted, there is no symmetrical clamour from transmen to be allowed entry to male facilities. Why is that? What is it that makes male facilities the place that everyone's trying to get away from?

There is nothing about men that makes them intrinsically less capable than women of treating transpeople with dignity and respect. To suggest otherwise would be to insult and demean men. Neither do I believe that men are any less willing than women to do that. I just haven't seen anyone ask them the question.

So, I'm asking: Men: What do you think should be done to change the culture of your locker rooms to be more respectful, accommodating and accepting of transpeople, so they do not feel forced to seek an alternative?

"Just let them use the women's facilities" is a quick-fix. It's a sacrifice-free (for men) solution to the problem which requires men to give up nothing and make no accommodations.

Instead the issue has been handed to women to negotiate, and has predictably become a battle between the trans-rights lobby and the women's-rights lobby, over what hard-won rights should be sacrificed by whom, to whom and to what extent. It's a mess.
__________________
"'Tis with our judgments as our watches, none
Go just alike, yet each believes his own."

Alexander Pope: An Essay on Criticism lines 9-10
Fengirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:48 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.