Transgender issues: Why blurring the line between men and women is not the problem

[Shadow Wolf]

Again, it's not possible for humans to change sex. So a woman pretending to be a man is still a woman. Hormones do not change that, neither do surgeries. Hormones can certainly change a person's behavior to some degree but that doesn't change a person's sex.

You wouldn't see it like that. You would see a man invading your space. You'd overlook the trans woman and youd be hyperfocused on what you see as a bearded, hairy, tattooed man who walks like a man and also has larger muscles and an Adam's apple like a man.
I don't think you'd want that.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Again, it's not possible for humans to change sex. So a woman pretending to be a man is still a woman. Hormones do not change that, neither do surgeries. Hormones can certainly change a person's behavior to some degree but that doesn't change a person's sex.

No matter how much you want to be, you are not a chromosome detector, and our society doesn't operate on sex determination based off chromosomes anyway.

 

[icehorse]

No matter how much you want to be, you are not a chromosome detector, and our society doesn't operate on sex determination based off chromosomes anyway.

The solution we've had for the last number of decades was not perfect. But it was better than nothing. What I'm inferring from your post is that you're cool with making the decades old solution a little bit worse? Because I think it's common sense, that if people who look like men can go into women's safe spaces without raising an eyebrow, things will get worse for women.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

The solution we've had for the last number of decades was not perfect. But it was better than nothing. What I'm inferring from your post is that you're cool with making the decades old solution a little bit worse? Because I think it's common sense, that if people who look like men can go into women's safe spaces without raising an eyebrow, things will get worse for women.

Things are already worse for women by people policing femininity. Me getting pulled aside to wait for security (who also has no business checking my sex) because I have PCOS beard stubble is a bigger worry and far more likely than getting assaulted in a bathroom, an incredibly rare event as sexual assaults go, and something that has never been stopped by a sign or pearl clutching Karen investigating people's necks.

It's sacrificing freedom of my presentation for intangible security. And this has been something talked about by masculine presenting women for decades.

Besides, I'm not debating this bathroom debate anymore public bathrooms are largely transitioning to unisex stalls with locking doors, and removing blind corners into bathrooms. Which is already a safer solution.

 

[icehorse]

Things are already worse for women by people policing femininity. Me getting pulled aside to wait for security (who also has no business checking my sex) because I have PCOS beard stubble is a bigger worry and far more likely than getting assaulted in a bathroom, an incredibly rare event as sexual assaults go, and something that has never been stopped by a sign or pearl clutching Karen investigating people's necks.

It's sacrificing freedom of my presentation for intangible security. And this has been something talked about by masculine presenting women for decades.

Besides, I'm not debating this bathroom debate anymore public bathrooms are largely transitioning to unisex stalls with locking doors, and removing blind corners into bathrooms. Which is already a safer solution.

I understand your points. But a couple of thoughts:

- as a society, we often tend towards utilitarian solutions, i.e. solutions that work for the majority.
- the discussion is broader than just rest rooms, it's all women's safe spaces and/or women only events.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I understand your points. But a couple of thoughts:

- as a society, we often tend towards utilitarian solutions, i.e. solutions that work for the majority.
- the discussion is broader than just rest rooms, it's all women's safe spaces and/or women only events.

Utilitarianism is not majority rule. And I wouldn't want to live in a society that pretends it is, as they tend to be ghastly for minorities. Especially when said majority trumps up fake safety concerns to marginalized minorities they simply are reacting to with aversive arousal and looking for excuses to exclude. E.g. 'white women need white women's spaces, for their safety, see this article about black women assault rates on white women.'

Edit: also western conceptions of feminine presentation are deeply rooted in racist exclusionary of black women, who were characterized as mannish.
As a result they're investigated far more than white women in sports and safe housing as 'men in disguise.'

But that's another topic for another time.

 

[icehorse]

Utilitarianism is not majority rule. And I wouldn't want to live in a society that pretends it is, as they tend to be ghastly for minorities.

I never equated utiltiarianism with majority rule. But you already live in a society that's chock full of utilitarian laws and practices. And modern western societies are better than any other societies in history for minorities. Could they be better? sure. But i'm not sure how "ghastly" comes into the conversation here? Life for LGs, Bs, Ts, and the rest is FAR better in the west than it's ever been in the history of the world. Again, not perfect, but hardly "ghastly".

Especially when said majority trumps up fake safety concerns to marginalized minorities they simply are reacting to with aversive arousal and looking for excuses to exclude.

Why do you think we have women's only spaces in the first place? It seems to me you're dismissing most or all of what feminists fought for decades to obtain? Perhaps I'm not understanding you here?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

And modern western societies are better than any other societies in history for minorities.

Demonstrably untrue. The arrival of evangelical religions with strict gender binaries made largely inclusive nations and peoples in West and East far worse. Nations which didn't have as much colonialist impact were way faster with LGBT rights than we were, such as Japan and First Nations, as well as various Neo Pagan strongholds throughout Europe and Oceania.
Meanwhile in much of Africa and China, the homophobia was a 1700 and 1800's British import, and positive change has been slowed by poverty, limited education, tyrannical governments and continued missionary work by homophobic religious practices.

Now, there has been plenty of positive change, but it was in spite of, not because of, western colonialism and the social norms it left behind even in the irreligious.

Here specifically in the US has been the slowest in almost every civil rights battle compared to contemporary wealthy nations, period, let alone ones relating specifically to LGBT. "Not perfect" is a bit of an understatement.

Why do you think we have women's only spaces in the first place? It seems to me you're dismissing most or all of what feminists fought for decades to obtain? Perhaps I'm not understanding you here?

Feminism isn't a monolith, there were different waves for a reason. The largest reason for waves were using ostensibly feminist arguments that excluded marginalized groups from access to feminism and women's spaces, often using incredibly reductive, reactive, or regressive arguments. Such as reducing women to a single form or function. Literally the entire reason 2nd and 3rd wave happened.

 

[icehorse]

Demonstrably untrue. The arrival of evangelical religions with strict gender binaries made largely inclusive nations and peoples in West and East far worse. Nations which didn't have as much colonialist impact were way faster with LGBT rights than we were, such as Japan and First Nations, as well as various Neo Pagan strongholds throughout Europe and Oceania.
Meanwhile in much of Africa and China, the homophobia was a 1700 and 1800's British import, and positive change has been slowed by poverty, limited education, tyrannical governments and continued missionary work by homophobic religious practices.

Now, there has been plenty of positive change, but it was in spite of, not because of, western colonialism and the social norms it left behind even in the irreligious.

Here specifically in the US has been the slowest in almost every civil rights battle compared to contemporary wealthy nations, period, let alone ones relating specifically to LGBT. "Not perfect" is a bit of an understatement.

I know it's quite fashionable these days to bash the west and romanticize indigenous cultures. I would suggest you read the work of Ibn Warraq. If all you read is the intro to "Why the West is Best" you might think twice about biting the hand that has so clearly given you the ability to hold all the luxury beliefs you hold.

Feminism isn't a monolith, there were different waves for a reason. The largest reason for waves were using ostensibly feminist arguments that excluded marginalized groups from access to feminism and women's spaces, often using incredibly reductive, reactive, or regressive arguments. Such as reducing women to a single form or function. Literally the entire reason 2nd and 3rd wave happened.

With respect, I'm not quite sure I know what question you were answering here, but it was not the question I asked

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

So, you’re in favor of trans men whose behavior is influenced by male hormones and a surgically functioning penis to share a restroom with you because, you know, they’re still women?

Yes.
And, most women pretending to be men don't get a phalloplasty.
And, most phalloplasties have complications.
And, for those who don't have complications, to use the rolled up skin as a fake penis requires the use of a pump.
And, none of them look anything like a real penis.
Seeing a phalloplasty wouldn't scare me. And indeed I'd prefer that women pretending to be men use the women's room; they are much safer there than in the men's.

Women are extremely good at detecting sex. There are many clues. Most women pretending to be men don't "pass" just like most men pretending to be women don't "pass". Also I remember reading a study that showed that women are much better than men at detecting someone's sex, and do it in microseconds without even thinking about it. There is obvious evolutionary advantage for women to detect men quickly given that men pose much more of a threat to them than women, and men are far less vulnerable to other men than women.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I know it's quite fashionable these days to bash the west and romanticize indigenous cultures. I would suggest you read the work of Ibn Warraq. If all you read is the intro to "Why the West is Best" you might think twice about biting the hand that has so clearly given you the ability to hold all the luxury beliefs you hold.



With respect, I'm not quite sure I know what question you were answering here, but it was not the question I asked

Without respect, I'm not sure why I keep bothering to interact with you at all. Your takes are always shallow and arrogant at the same time. 'Why the West is the Best,' christ.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Yes.
And, most women pretending to be men don't get a phalloplasty.
And, most phalloplasties have complications.
And, for those who don't have complications, to use the rolled up skin as a fake penis requires the use of a pump.
And, none of them look anything like a real penis.
Seeing a phalloplasty wouldn't scare me. And indeed I'd prefer that women pretending to be men use the women's room; they are much safer there than in the men's.

Women are extremely good at detecting sex. There are many clues. Most women pretending to be men don't "pass" just like most men pretending to be women don't "pass". Also I remember reading a study that showed that women are much better than men at detecting someone's sex, and do it in microseconds without even thinking about it. There is obvious evolutionary advantage for women to detect men quickly given that men pose much more of a threat to them than women, and men are far less vulnerable to other men than women.

Bahaha. Another contender for the 'I can always tell' Olympics. Always funny, especially when they put it to public test and find out they're way worse at 'clocking' than they think they are.

 

[BlueIslandGirl]

Bahaha. Another contender for the 'I can always tell' Olympics. Always funny, especially when they put it to public test and find out they're way worse at 'clocking' than they think they are.

Ultimately, I hope this medical scandal ends as soon as possible, and that we maintain single sex spaces which have mostly worked well for decades until they started getting broken down in recent years. Reading about the women in prison who have been assaulted by men pretending to be women; reading about women who feel they cannot use rape shelters because they are too traumatized by men and are uncomfortable using a space where there are men; it's heartbreaking to read about women's rights being rolled back like this. I can only hope it ends as soon as possible.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Ultimately, I hope this medical scandal ends as soon as possible, and that we maintain single sex spaces which have mostly worked well for decades until they started getting broken down in recent years. Reading about the women in prison who have been assaulted by men pretending to be women; reading about women who feel they cannot use rape shelters because they are too traumatized by men and are uncomfortable using a space where there are men; it's heartbreaking to read about women's rights being rolled back like this. I can only hope it ends as soon as possible.

And I hope that terfs which pretend to care about women by excluding some of the most vulnerable ones out there pull their heads from their rectums and stop telling rape victims like me that I need to be a flighty idiot to suit their agendas.

 

[icehorse]

Without respect, I'm not sure why I keep bothering to interact with you at all. Your takes are always shallow and arrogant at the same time. 'Why the West is the Best,' christ.

Another lesson from the master of projection

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Another lesson from the master of projection

Lol okay, Pee-Wee Herman. Back on ignore you go. And nothing of value was lost.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I know it's quite fashionable these days to bash the west and romanticize indigenous cultures. I would suggest you read the work of Ibn Warraq. If all you read is the intro to "Why the West is Best" you might think twice about biting the hand that has so clearly given you the ability to hold all the luxury beliefs you hold.



With respect, I'm not quite sure I know what question you were answering here, but it was not the question I asked

You aren't hip, cool or sly like you try to project.

 

[Augustus]

does all that mean we shouldn't try to communicate better?

Case in point.

I was noting that these are not really the cause of the kind of problems common to the medium and so aren’t likely to be effective solutions.

You interpreted that as saying we shouldn’t try, so I could feel that you are misrepresenting me.

Or perhaps I view it as a genuine question, rather than a rhetorical one and reply with a genuine answer.

What you wrote is the same, what I read can be very different depending on my “mind reading” ability. My mind creates either a friendly question or a terse misrepresentation to be challenged.

If I interpret it as a genuine question then I’d say that we can only control our own communications and reactions which relies on giving people the benefit of the doubt as much as possible while being thick skinned.

So if we start from there, then whenever we read a post that includes phrases like:

"you're a bigot"
"you're a transphobe"
"you say exactly what the alt-right says"

this can extend to:

"you're ignorant"
"you don't know what you're talking about"

Notice a pattern here? Instead of debating ideas, all these "you're X" phrases shift from debating ideas to attacking posters.

Different folk have different bugbears like not answering questions, quibbling and pedantry, crying fallacy without explaining, not focusing on the topic, or the opposite: not contextualising the topic into a big picture, etc.

It’s just the way things are.

Generally what you say are not statements of pure ad hominem but explicitly or implicitly “you are ignorant because…”

They can be annoying and we usually disagree of course, but if you just read it as “the science doesn’t support your position” instead of “you are a stupid and ignorant fool”and reply to that then you are more likely to get a dialogue.

But sometimes you won’t make any progress no matter what you say.

The only thing you can do is be exemplary in your own conduct, and few of us here can say that is true for us consistently.

 

[icehorse]

The only thing you can do is be exemplary in your own conduct, and few of us here can say that is true for us consistently.

So what would be the problem if we all committed to not starting phrases with "you are a..." ?

wouldn't that be a positive step?

 

[Augustus]

So what would be the problem if we all committed to not starting phrases with "you are a..." ?

wouldn't that be a positive step?

It’s easier for folk to change how they read it than to make voluntary rules that won’t be followed regarding what people write.

Just interpret it differently, that’s fully in your control.

There are so many different bugbears and so many different reasons these can be triggered that it’s not really possible to create “model discussions” through rules.