you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (89 children)

I am not arguing for the stripping of anyone’s rights though. I am arguing that I am not morally, legally, or in any other way obliged to force myself to see people a way I do not. IE, seeing males as women.

I am not obliged to view males the way you do and am not stripping anyone’s rights away by not doing so.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (88 children)

That’s ignoring the implications. If trans women are simply men they would then have no protections and no facilities they can actually use. The implications of your stance is us having no rights.

[–]SnowAssMan 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

"Rights". Men have got rights, gay men too. What additional "rights" do the transgendered ones require? The right to endlessly seesaw between erasing the female sex & appropriating it? Seeing trans-womxyn as men doesn't indirectly strip them of any rights, seeing them as women strips away at women's rights. Calling trans-womxyn women rids both women & trans-womxyn of definitions, making the whole thing redundant. It'd end up with us just going back to distinguishing between the sexes again anyway.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

What additional "rights" do the transgendered ones require?

Protection from discrimination in employment, housing, education, access to business and common carriers, access to essential services, and protections from discrimination in health care. In America on a national level we have exactly one of those.

Seeing trans-womxyn as men doesn't indirectly strip them of any rights

Yes. It does. Because of the way the few rights we’ve cobbled together have arisen in the courts.

seeing them as women strips away at women's rights.

No. It doesn’t. Women’s legal rights are entirely unchanged.

Calling trans-womxyn women rids both women & trans-womxyn of definitions

This is still offensive and childish. Stop trying to invent your own slur.

It'd end up with us just going back to distinguishing between the sexes again anyway.

Sex and gender are different. You want us grouped by sex which is why you would group me with men. I expressly don’t want to be grouped with men for a litany of reasons, the most important of which is that we are so different that to do so creates a myriad of legal problems and leaves us at the mercy of the unquestionable most powerful and dangerous form of humanity, and the one that does harm to us by a huge margin, men.

[–]SnowAssMan 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The best way to protect trans rights is to have them tied to trans status, obviously. If trans-men just get men's rights, then they have no rights that address their specific needs. Why should affirming this ideology come before all else? Oh right, trans-men are female i.e. not your concern.

Sex and gender are different

But the genders are not different, that's the point. Distinguishing between the sexes is justified, distinguishing between genders isn't, since anyone can be anything.

I expressly don’t want to be grouped with men

Women expressly don't want to be grouped with men either, nobody does, why on Earth should over 50% of the population's rights be compromised for 0.2% of the population though, especially when we don't discriminate based on orientation? Purge all the gynaephilic "trans-womxyn" from the movement first – that demographic alone is responsible for all the trans on female violent & sexual crimes. Keeping trans people separate from men is one thing (except trans-men apparently???), but grouping trans-womxyn in with women is completely unjustified. Even grouping gay men with women would make more sense, since none of them are gynaephlles.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

The best way to protect trans rights is to have them tied to trans status, obviously.

Yeah. But that hasn’t been done. Legally We aren’t being protected from being trans but generally by court decisions expanding women’s protections to us. Legal codes by and large don’t have express trans protections.

Oh right, trans-men are female i.e. not your concern.

Trans men are men. So I’m not one of them. I support their efforts to get what they need and think they deserve protections that they need as trans people but they’re men.

But the genders are not different, that's the point. Distinguishing between the sexes is justified, distinguishing between genders isn't, since anyone can be anything.

Basing treatment on sex isn’t justified because as I’ve been pointing out it leads to harm. Being forced into men’s spaces harms and kills trans women. Treating us legally as men means we lack necessary protection. Consider things like insurance. A post operative trans women doesn’t need a testicular examination but she does need a mammogram and treating us as men means she would be left uncovered for the service she actually needs.

Women expressly don't want to be grouped with men either, nobody does, why on Earth should over 50% of the population's rights be compromised for 0.2% of the population though, especially when we don't discriminate based on orientation? Purge all the gynaephilic "trans-womxyn" from the movement first – that demographic alone is responsible for all the trans on female violent & sexual crimes.

My point was that you are defining humanity by sex and that’s bad. Why should a minority be exposed to harm because it’s small? And the idea that sexual attraction should determine whether someone has rights is frankly dystopian. A man will hurt a trans woman because she is trans boy because she is gay/bi/straight.

Keeping trans people separate from men is one thing (except trans-men apparently???), but grouping trans-womxyn in with women is completely unjustified.

I don’t claim to speak for trans men. Ask them what they want. In our society grouping trans women with men causes us to have access to no necessary facilities and effectively destroys most of our protections here in the us. Until there is infrastructure and rights in place to need needs, it is justified because far fewer trans women will harm women with that grouping than men would harm trans women the other way. It’s justified because it creates the lowest overall harm.

Separate spaces or safe neural spaces ( like single occupancy bathrooms) would be my preference but that infrastructure doesn’t exist and trans people don’t have the clout to mandate that. So before you argue to remove our rights and access to safe spaces, create safe alternatives. Then the conversation might change.

[–]SnowAssMan 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If trans-men can handle men's spaces, so can trans-womxyn. The latter is not more vulnerable to men than the former.

There are men who have actual breasts, they have to deal with the same problem, except they didn't choose it. Re-categorising them as women would be just as stupid a "solution".

My point was that you are grouping men with a cross-gender self identification with women and that’s bad. "trans panic" = "gay panic", same thing.

far fewer trans-womxyn or gay men or effeminate men or trans-men will harm women with that grouping than men would harm trans-womxyn, gay men, effeminate men, trans-men the other way – there, I corrected it for you. Those protections were made for women, not everyone but women.

There is no excuse for parasitic activism.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

far fewer trans-womxyn or gay men or effeminate men or trans-men will harm women with that grouping than men would harm trans-womxyn, gay men, effeminate men, trans-men the other way – there, I corrected it for you. Those protections were made for women, not everyone but women.

By the crime statistics in the USA and UK, it is few times more likely that stranger transwoman will attack woman than stranger man will attack transwoman. Same with sexual crimes statistics. In the UK only 70 women (out of 3400 women in prison, out of 33 million women) are in prison for sexual offense, in most cases it is prostitution or molesting of youth, almost never it is attack on other women or on grown up men. At the same time there are 60 transwomen in UK prisons (our of 128 transwomen in prison, out of estimated 70 thousand transwomen, our of estimated 500 thousand transgenders (non-binary, transmen, transwomen, agender, and so on) in general) who are in prison for sexual assault, in this case majority are sitting for rape. Only 3 transmen were in prison at the same time, and none for violent crimes. There are 33 million men in UK, and 77 thousand men in prisons, with around 15 thousand being for sexual assault. There were more cases of transwomen in female prisons attacking or raping women in female prisons yearly than women attacking or raping women in female prisons in decade. Nothing strange here, actually, as majority of women in prisons are for non-violent and non-agressive crimes, so it is just mostly casual calm people who not paid fees, while majority of transwomen in prisons are either abusers "fake trans" (men who decided to become trans after getting into the prison, and then again becoming men when get out of jail) or transwomen sitting for violent crimes. Transwomen in general showing same behavioral patterns and crime patterns as men, and transmen as women, at least in such cases.

Safest way will be housing transwomen, gay men and gnc men in one branch of male prison, like it was done in some countries already, and not in female prisons.

Women's safe spaces were created because some men were violent and almost never women. And because of some men - all men were prohibited from entering women's safe spaces. As someone already said: "not all men are rapists, majority are not, but almost all rapists are men". Same should be applied here for transwomen.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sex and gender are different. You want us grouped by sex which is why you would group me with men. I expressly don’t want to be grouped with men for a litany of reasons, the most important of which is that we are so different that to do so creates a myriad of legal problems and leaves us at the mercy of the unquestionable most powerful and dangerous form of humanity, and the one that does harm to us by a huge margin, men.

So why not campaign for your own spaces, provisions and protections then instead of horning in on other people's? That's what women, people with physical disabilities and the elderly had to do. How come trans people get to barge in and claim women's hard-won spaces, provisions and sports for their own?

Also, why is it okay for trans identified males to be afraid of other males and want spaces away from them, but it's bigoted and "transphobic" for female people to do the same?

In most cities, there are separate lanes in streets for buses, cars and bicycles, and the sidewalks are for pedestrians and people in prams and wheelchairs. Whenever new forms of transport and recreation come along - skateboards, roller blades, Segways, razor scooters, electric scooters, seated motorized mobility scooters for disabled people (all of which have arrived on the scene within my own lifetime) - municipalities and communities have to get together and decide where the new devices belong.

But a majority of trans people today don't want to be held to the same rules and community decision-making processes as everyone else - they want to be able to go wherever they want whenever they want simply because they demand and insist upon it. The position of many trans people is essentially that if they want to drive a bus or car on the sidewalk or in the bike lane, that's their right. Who cares how many people they mow down and how many rights belonging to others they trample and remove in the process?

Trans activists love to tell others to "stay in your lane" but they don't want to have to carve out a lane for themselves, nor stick to their own lane once it's created.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (80 children)

They would have all the rights other males have. Transwomen also have the option of protections and facilities for themselves, seperate from males who are not transwomen.

Homosexual men are men who need and can access protections despite them being simply men. Why is it different for men who perform femininity/identify as a woman/whatever? What about males being recognised as males makes it impossible for transwomen to be a group of males with certain potential vulnerabilities to other males?

I’m all for discrimination protection for transgender people on the basis of their being transgender. It shouldn’t be reason alone to fire someone, or reject them as a renter, or to deny healthcare that is needed.

Not seeing transwomen as females/women does not deny transwomen any rights. It’s nothing more or less than the statement. It does not mean transgender people should lose any rights.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (79 children)

They would have all the rights other males have.

Which is no protections. Since any discrimination would be based on being trans not being male.

Transwomen also have the option of protections and facilities for themselves, seperate from males who are not transwomen.

Trans only facilities don’t exist though. This is a thought expirament at best. Separate facilities would be my preference in an ideal world but don’t exist.

Transwomen also have the option of protections and facilities for themselves, seperate from males who are not transwomen.

Which they have at least gained some of. You are actively arguing to fully negate any protections trans women have gained. That’s exactly my point. If trans women are “just men” then it would negate the basis for every protection we have managed to scrape together.

Transwomen also have the option of protections and facilities for themselves, seperate from males who are not transwomen.

But those protections don’t exist generally and where they are it’s on the basis we are protected as member of our identified gender.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (78 children)

It’s all the protections, plus legal protection against discrimination specifically for being trans. What more could possibly be asked for? It maintains the rights of transgender people and women.

Make them. This issue has been done to death with you. Recognising transwomen as male removes your protections how specifically? What about someone seeing a male as a male makes it suddenly impossible for that person to be protected by aforementioned legal protections?

And transwomen have absolutely zero business in spaces based on their gender. Their sex is male and their self perception should never allow them into spaces for female people.

My ideas provide protection for women’s spaces and women as a category, whilst still calling for legal protection from discrimination for men who is as women, plus advocates for spaces for those men to use safely.

Name the right being stripped away here. Full protections in place. The only thing you wouldn’t get is something you already don’t have, which is control over anyone else’s perception. Nobody can force others to see them as something they are not.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (77 children)

It’s all the protections, plus legal protection against discrimination specifically for being trans. What more could possibly be asked for? It maintains the rights of transgender people and women.

Most of those protections that do exist in America at least are based on trans women being treated as women, like educational access decisions have all been spun from women’s protections under title 9. ( The notable exception is the employment decision last year which relayed the protection for stevens on stereotype violations as a male through the lens of Bostock). If you treat us as men those protections essentially disappear. Express protections would be grand, but we don’t have them. Basically the small amount of protections we have have come through court decisions that you would negate.

Make them. This issue has been done to death with you.

As I’ve explained to you many times. We can’t. We are a small and extremely marginalized minority. There are things we can’t realistically do.

And transwomen have absolutely zero business in spaces based on their gender. Their sex is male and their self perception should never allow them into spaces for female people.

Then third spaces need to be provided. Men’s spaces are fundamentally and inevitably unsafe, therefore don’t fulfill the need. A men’s bathroom doesn’t fulfill a trans woman’s need for a bathroom because it is unsafe. It’s the equivalent of providing a bathroom for us thats on fire and claiming it is sufficient.

My ideas provide protection for women’s spaces and women as a category, whilst still calling for legal protection from discrimination for men who is as women, plus advocates for spaces for those men to use safely.

But those spaces and rights don’t exist. That’s my point. You are arguing to undo near every protection we have won in the courts and all accessible spaces on the theoretical that a small marginalized group can somehow fund building an entirely new societal infrastructure and convince legislatures to give us rights we’ve never been able to get them to give us. You see how that is arguing for us to be put in an impossible position don’t you?

Name the right being stripped away here. Full protections in place. The only thing you wouldn’t get is something you already don’t have, which is control over anyone else’s perception. Nobody can force others to see them as something they are not.

Basically every right through courts but employment protections would be at minimum newly challengeable and given how much those fights cost for victims of discrimination to fight, essentially negated. New rights from the courts would be nonstarters since they mostly come from the idea of legally protecting us as one would a woman. I would overnight lose the ability to go anywhere for more than a few minutes since I would not have access to a bathroom. “Full protections” aren’t in place. Infrastructure to support trans women just existing isn’t in place. You are arguing to set us back 50 years with no realistic path to advancement on the theory that we could ( keep in mind with a position garnering far less public acceptance than we have now if our need for protection) convince Congress to give us rights we’ve been trying unsuccessfully for for decades and convince society to build entirely new spaces everywhere to allow us to even have basically societal participation.

If trans spaces existed and trans people had enshrined rights this conversation might be different but that’s just not the case.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (76 children)

Change them.

You and men can make them. Talk to men instead of crying to women. Men are the problem.

Nowhere have I stated that it’s legal or socially acceptable to attack you or harass you. That’s the exact protection women have any way. What more could you possibly ask for?

The point is that this is what should be in place, as opposed to allowing transwomen into any spaces belonging to women. It’s a better solution than erasing women’s rights and language.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (75 children)

We can’t change them that’s still my point.

Men, Espescially straight men,hate trans women. They are the one killing us. They won’t be helping us with anything and certainly not doing something to our benefit that wouldn’t benefit them.

Nowhere have I stated that it’s legal or socially acceptable to attack you or harass you. That’s the exact protection women have any way. What more could you possibly ask for?

That’s the implication of what you are arguing for. If we are men it negates nearly all protections that have been given to us.

The point is that this is what should be in place,

But it isn’t. What you are basically saying is “they shouldn’t have the protections that have. It would be nice if they had this entirely other system of rights, but I’m not actually doing anything to put in those other rights. Still want them stripped of the rights they have now though”.

Take trans people out of the equation and apply that to any other groups rights or protections.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (74 children)

I am saying you should have protections under a different system. I’m not talking about implementing it. This is about the ideology, not the political and social barriers.

Men kill far more women than transwomen. Not women’s job to fix men for you. Been over it a thousand times.

The only thing you don’t get under my ideology is the title and shared spaces with women. Somehow this idea apparently strips you of rights but even in your arguments, it’s other males actually acting against your rights. If it’s not men’s job to educate men and it’s clearly not women’s job, who’s supposed to do it?

Once again, I’m not American,but am someone who voted for basically the exact protections I’ve described. I regularly purchase stock for my store from someone who donates part of that to transgender charities. Stop accusing me of not doing anything when I don’t vote in your countries elections and you’re 100% ignorant of me and my life.

Once again, this is about ideas, not current American politics or your personal shitty experiences. Ideas.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (73 children)

Men can’t be made safe for us. They will always be the ones harming us and the ones that pose a danger to us. They can’t be “educated”.

I’m talking about the realistic implications of your ideas. Those other spaces don’t exists this other rights don’t exist, so when you argue for us to be entirely reclassified without putting those things in place you are arguing for us to be stripped of rights. You are harming us and then justifying it by saying you wouldn’t object if we somehow magically rebuilt the entirety of society’s infrastructure. If you aren’t going to work to replace the rights and facilities you want to strip us of, you are just arguing for us to be hurt and then denying it by hiding behind a hypothetical.