all 27 comments

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 14 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

It is same as with men.

Majority of men are not rapists or paedo and not dangerous to kids and women. However, overwhelming majority of rapists are men. Overwhelming majority of violent crimes is done by men. Overwhelming majorities crimes against women are done by men and not by women.

There no way to distinguish between "good men" and "bad men". So...we not allowing ANY of them in women safe spaces. That's it.


Prisons are actually showing that acting in bad faith is very easy. At least two men in UK who were in prison for violent crimes identified as woman in prison and were moved to female prison, and after going out of prison they stopped being transwomen anymore and went being just men. Man who was asked to leave women's toilet by women there in Norway changed self-ID in internet that same day and tried to sue one of them. After court ended, he returned on being man again.

Bad actors and criminals already have no good morales in the first place, so making a bit more easy lies to get access to victims - is nothing to them.

And such behavior by bad actors and letting bad actors freedom to act like this - will not just hurt women a lot, but it also will hurt transgender movement as a whole.

[–]kwallio 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There is literally no downside to id-ing as a woman in prison. You get special treatment and the women prisoners can't complain.

Personally I'm in favor of trans only prisons, or parts of prisons. You want to get out of the gen pop in the mens prison? Fine, but you don't get to have access to women.

[–]comradeconradical[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes I agree, but in practice it is simply not cost efficient to build a separate prison for less than one percent of the population, which is why I also tend to fall back on a separate wing in the prison of their birth sex as a compromise. It's not a compromise that's well received though, because often they wish to completely co-opt women's spaces. Why? Validation? Exploitation? Whatever it is, it doesn't justify the adverse effects of housing natal males in women's prisons and on other institutions/services.

Again, it is a matter of objective, material, measurable reality versus subjective, internal, individual ideology. I don't see why the latter should ever prevail over the former, and I am still waiting for a QT to analyze how some people's individual gender ideologies are more or less valid than others and how they can tell the difference.

[–]comradeconradical[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I agree with everything you said here. I have indeed seen this phenomenon for prisons and women's shelters, as well as women's support groups, lesbian dating, bathrooms, etc.

The logical conclusion is, yes, keep these groups separate. I personally think even 'true' trans people should have their own spaces instead of those of their birth or desired sex, because I acknowledge that it wouldn't be safe to have them grouped with their birth sex either after surgery and such. But, that doesn't mean I think women's spaces should be compromised. For example, transwomen should have their own wing in a prison, not be grouped with female inmates. Women and transwomen have different life experiences and needs, but so too do men and transwomen. I don't think it's wrong to provide for female needs to the exclusion of transwomen who can't possibly have the same needs, and I don't think it's wrong to have trans spaces.

But, that being said, most TRA continue to exclaim both 'TWAW/TMAM' as well as claiming self-identification as the legitimate determinant of trans identity. But, if they want to make both these statements, and then denounce the 'bad apples' as being 'not trans', logical consistency is missing. As such, I want them to explain why they think self-identification is a proper method of identifying 'true trans people' and what it means when that fails.

[–]MarkTwainiac 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I acknowledge that it wouldn't be safe to have them grouped with their birth sex either after surgery and such.

But little boys from age 8 on have always had to use men's loos, locker rooms, change rooms etc. Same goes for slight and pretty adolescent males - gay and straight - who haven't filled out yet and might be sexually preyed upon, robbed or otherwise assaulted by other males. Same goes for frail, elderly men. Ditto males of all ages with learning and mental disabilities, visual impairments, cognitive decline, Down's syndrome, ASD...and so on.

Why are males who ID as trans so special? Why should they get favorable treatment over all other males who are just as vulnerable or even more so?

I remember during the AIDS crisis in the 1980s and 1990s watching as men in droves literally wasted away and became incredibly frail and vulnerable in the prime of their lives. None of these men said that because they'd become so weak and vulnerable, they should have the right to use women's loos and change rooms so as to lower their risk of being assaulted, insulted, ostracized, picked on and/or given side-eye by other males who were stronger and in robust health and could have easily decked, mugged or killed them. None of these men when they were hospitalized demanded to be placed in women's wards, or to share rooms with female patients.

For example, transwomen should have their own wing in a prison,

In the US, males who claim to be "trans" often do have separate sections in male prisons.

But segregating males in male prison by gender identity is complicated and unworkable coz prison placements are made depending on inmates' offending profiles and the very real security risks they pose - not on their inner gender feelings, their view of themselves, or their fantasy lives. Some male convicts need to be in maximum security prison, some in medium security, and some require super-maximum security prisons. Also, many prisons in the US and UK are for male sex offenders only.

The problem of basing prison placement on men's claimed "gender identities" is illustrated by the case of "Tiffany" Scott, formerly known as Andrew Burns, "one of the most dangerous (male) prisoners" in modern Scottish history:

And what about Stephen Hayes, one of the killers who committed the grisly "Cheshire Murders" and rapes in the US state of Connecticut? Hayes is considered so brutal and dangerous that he's serving his six life sentences in a super-max prison in Pennsylvania, coz Connecticut doesn't have a prison with such high security.

Significantly, Hayes only began claiming he's suffered from "gender dysphoria" since his teens and has always "identified as" as woman right after Connecticut passed a law saying all convicts in the state have a right to be housed in prison based on their "gender identities" rather than according to their sex, their crimes, their records and their security risk.

As you can see, the CT law also gives inmates the right to have their bodies searched - including searches that involve looking at and touching the genitals and cavities - by persons of the sex matching the inmates' professed "gender identities." This is basically a taxpayer-funded license for these men to sexually harass, humiliate and fuck with the heads of female corrections officers.

[–]comradeconradical[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think in general we agree but you've made some amazing points here that I definitely overlooked. Particularly about vulnerabilities within the same-sex group, and how is a trans identity deserving of different treatment for this reason? I usually fall back on creating third spaces as it seems like the best way to ensure women's rights are upheld all the while catering to trans conceptions of safe spaces, but you've given me some things to look into.

Also, the idea of incarceration based on severity of offense is another good point. Where I live males have been imprisoned with females despite being convicted of sex crimes and then actually sexually assaulted the female inmates, so having them separate from females has been my biggest concern, but of course it does make more sense to imprison based on the concrete measures of sex, crime, and risk without feeding the idea of internal gender identity as holding weight in these circumstances. TRA usually argue that transwomen would be incredibly vulnerable in male prison, but that ties into your first point about in-group vulnerabilities, and of course ignores both female vulnerabilities and the pervasive dangers of self-id.

The issue keeps coming back to the fact that gender identity is not a tangible condition. It cannot be measured, so the conditions to join the group are largely arbitrary. This self-identification and the subsequent demand to receive special treatment and inclusion in groups not designed for them is unfortunately impacting medicine and law where I live, which is why I'm curious how we can allow the self-id of the few to eclipse the needs, rights, and vulnerabilities of the majority.

Thanks for your thoughts and the links!

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

Yes, we agree in general and probably as far as lot of the specifics go too. I wasn't trying to be contrary, I was just attempting to point out some of the complex, nuanced issues that get totally ignored or papered over by the simplistic, superficial positions taken by trans campaigners and those trying to "be kind".

[–]comradeconradical[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes no worries I didn't take it as contrary! You outlined these issues well and I appreciate the ideas I hadn't deeply considered before. Definitely a lot of nuance gets overlooked in these debates.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I do not think the following two questions have good answers and because of that my views are very black and white or zero and one on these matters. What does it mean for someone to be trans? How is that distinguishable from falsely claiming it? The flippant answers to the first question do not stand up to scrutiny and attempt render words meaningless. There simply are no good answers, flippant or not, to the second. Gender is a useless concept at best. You are, we all are, our physical bodies. We know what men and a women are because of their physical characteristics. No exceptions and no confusion over 0.02% of the population will make a man a woman or vice versa. There is no "but what about this population or this group of people here" that will then lead anyone back to a guy with a penis and jizz-stained everything in his room and then conclude "see, that's a woman and specifically a trans woman but since twaw uwu it's a woman".

[–]comradeconradical[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes, I also agree that sex is immutable. That gender identity has no actual bearing in reality, and that it actually becomes a performative obsession for many of those who follow this ideology. I personally don't believe in a "true trans" either, as dysphoria is also a mental condition that doesn't actually mean one's sex is wrong. As a GC feminist and someone educated in science and law, I have a firm view of gender identity as a mental issue or naivety exacerbated and encouraged by specific social spheres which is having adverse impact in many areas of life. I can feel compassion for the internal turmoil of dysphorics, but I don't believe that means the problem is with society at large, nor that it means we must redefine words like woman to be circular and stereotypically based rather than rooted in clear and measurable fact. What I don't understand, though, is self-id, and why it's so widely accepted with little to no push back despite the clear implications.

But the QT group often makes these arguments, about dysphoric trans and non-dysphoric trans, and about real trans people and fake trans people, which is why I wanted to hear how they reason the inconsistency.

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I hope you don't mind if I offer a piece of unsolicited advice: as a thought experiment, stop using the terms "dysphoria" and "dysphoric" and "gender dysphoria" for a couple of weeks and instead describe these people and the source of their distress more accurately. People with "gender dysphoria" are simply unhappy sexists who feel distress over/unease with their own natal sex coz they are covetous of the bodies and perceived privileges, advantages and "goodies" they mistakenly believe are the exclusive domain of the opposite sex.

There are tons of people past and present who've had to shoulder all sorts of physical and psychological conditions that are just as, or are far more, painful, distressing, life-limiting and socially disadvantageous than "gender dysphoria." Why is transpain seen as the only kind of suffering that counts?

[–]comradeconradical[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You know, this is refreshing advice, much appreciated. I'll take you up on it. It's easy to get tunnel vision and forget the bigger picture of life and suffering. Also, I'm fairly active in GC circles but I also tend to soften my wording is debate in order not to alienate the other side- but truly why, when their views alienate me and my sex?

It must be horrible to feel so unhappy and disconnected from oneself, and it is horrible to recognize the sexist stereotypes and attitudes in society, but that doesn't mean our bodies are actually wrong or that society's expectations of sex roles and expression must be adhered to. You're right, the sexist tinge that accompanies it is extremely distasteful, and more the demands of many from this group are increasingly selfish and narcissistic.

The delusions of the involved individuals and the cult-behavior of the group are difficult to address and get through as outsiders because of how deeply entrenched they are, especially as the villainous GC, so it's more beneficial to challenge the views of the supporters who have not critically examined the ideology. That being said, I'm still hoping someone who is QT will approach the question of self-id and the 'no-true-scotsman' fallacy.

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I have a question. I might make it a post later, but I'm just curious. So your saying you shouldn't allow males in female spaces. Makes sense. Assuming you believe that trans women are male and thus men, that would also extend to trans men who are female and thus women. So trans men should have access to female spaces. Assuming transition is still an option for us trans people, doesn't this create the issue of what at least physically is a man in women's bathrooms? Since trans men pass easier than trans women this would give male predators the option to pose as trans men to invade all female spaces that don't check the id beforehand.

Sure you would be able to deal with them after the fact, but the topic is prevention not persecution.

[–]comradeconradical[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If anything, I advocate for third spaces for trans people. I don't think we should compromise the safety of the majority of women and girls for the few. That said, if someone passes entirely and is in good faith, it's generally not as big an issue to use the opposite sex bathroom. But, my question is not about passing, but about the impact of self-id and these actions in bad faith. Maybe if you or any other QT could illuminate the difference we could approach the issues of sex-specific and gender-id-specific spaces more reasonably.

To address your tangentially related question, transmen may pass better than transwomen in general, but most of the transmen I've known have been visibly female in some way or another, even with a full beard and deep voice. Further, transmen do not pose the same threat to women that males do. From a radfem perspective, transmen are female, and thus entitled to female sex-based services and spaces. A beard doesn't make a human male, as there are females with beards either naturally or through external means.

Onto your next point, The males I've heard of using the women's bathroom who don't transition usually call themselves 'butch' women even though they, for all purposes, look like normal men. That being said, I'm sure there could be a bad faith situation where a male pretends to be a transman, but it seems much less likely to be successful than to just claim to be a transwoman. It comes back to my overarching question of determining Good Faith "True" Trans from Bad Faith "Fake" Trans, which is difficult to determine with self-id.

So by all means make a post about this, I've seen this debate before but it's always good to hear more perspectives. Still, I'd really love if you could answer any part of my original question on this thread.

[–]MarkTwainiac 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I hope you start a thread about this. It's a topic that needs discussion and some workable solutions.

doesn't this create the issue of what at least physically is a man in women's bathrooms?

Certainly, it would create situations where persons who might physically appear to be men in women's loos and other spaces. Which definitely could cause distress, discomfort and fear in some/many girls and women - meaning the ones who don't "identify as" trans (and/or who don't "identify as" anything else, either, coz they don't ascribe to the theory that everyone has a "gender identity" and aren't consumed by, or don't care at all, about "identity" the way others nowadays might and do).

Since trans men pass easier than trans women this would give male predators the option to pose as trans men to invade all female spaces that don't check the id beforehand.

Yes, this might open the door to males to do this. Which is a problem.

On the other hand, though, I'm not sure the sweeping claim that "trans men pass easier than trans women" across the board actually is true, especially nowadays when so many males are having facial feminization surgeries, lots of body sculpting and some males who began identifying as trans in childhood have been put on puberty blockers.

Also, when seen and heard at close range in real life, many female people who identify as boys/men - and who've altered their appearance by taking T, binding their breasts or having had them removed, growing beards, etc - don't actually "pass" as well as they think - or as other trans people and their allies keep claiming and telling them. Things like their height, body shape, voice and the small size and delicacy of their hands and feet often give them away - particularly in the eyes of other females, coz females tend to be better at quickly and accurately sussing out other people's actual sex than males are, and women tend to improve their ability to accurately gauge sex the older we get and the more "lived experience" we accumulate.

Moreover, whereas early use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are helping males like Jazz Jennings "pass" better, the opposite is turning out to be true for females. Girls who take puberty blockers due to their trans identities end up shorter in height than they otherwise would have been, which in many cases will just make their sex more "clockable" rather than less.

A question that needs to be addressed is: do or should male people have a right to exclude female people from loos, locker rooms and other spaces where they attend to to their bodily functions and might haver their penises exposed or their entire bodies naked?

Also, generally speaking, the issues of trans-identified people of the two sexes using spaces meant for the opposite sex aren't entirely analogous. Due to males' larger and stronger bodies, male patterns of criminality, males' prurient interests in looking at girls' and women's bodies especially when naked or partly naked, and male patterns of sexually aggressive, inappropriate and intimidating behavior towards females - leering, hitting on, perving, menacing, stalking, making lewd comments and so on - males in female spaces pose threats to the safety, dignity, privacy and mental wellbeing of females that females in male spaces don't pose towards males.

Also, there's the new problem of placing spy cams in loos, hotel rooms, change rooms and so on. AFAIK, this is something only males do, and they usually do it to film female people. Of course, there are probably pedophiles who place spy cams in loos and such in hopes of getting footage of both little boys and little girls, or of either. But I've not heard of any women who've been using today's technology to surreptitiously film boys, men or children in toilets, change rooms, hotels rooms, locker rooms etc for their private viewing or to post online for all the world to see.

My understanding is that most female people who ID as trans are aware of that males pose far more threats, and far graver threats, to females than females do to males . Which is why when they are imprisoned, most trans-identified females don't ask or push to be placed in male correctional facilities - and authorities won't even consider doing so.

Another issue is: when females who identify as trans use spaces meant for males, what exactly is their motivation? Do they feel a pressing need to be in male spaces in order to get "validation" for their identities the way males who identify as women do when it comes to using female spaces? Or are they primarily acting out of their own internalized misogyny that makes them feel disgust towards female bodies and bodily functions, and therefore they wish not to be seen as female nor to be associated with/in close proximity to people of their own sex? Or are other factors/motives involved?

We know that males who identify as the opposite sex tend to see female people as second-class support humans who have a moral duty to put the needs and wishes of trans-identified males before their own needs for safety, privacy, dignity and peace of mind. But do female people who ID as men tend to see male people in similar dehumanizing and exploitative ways? Or do female people who ID as trans, having been brought up and socialized as female people, tend to view male people and male spaces with less entitlement and aggression - and less desire to dominate, conquer and colonize them and their spaces?

Lots of males who identify as the opposite sex seem hellbent on erasing and replacing female people. But the impression I get is that females who identify as the opposite sex don't have the same agenda towards male people. Females who ID as trans (or as non-binary and all the rest) seem to be trying to escape being female and all the objectification, limitations, disadvantages and abuse that unfortunately females face in a world dominated by misogynistic, porn-soaked, often abusive men. But they don't seem intent on driving male people underground or off the face of the earth, and they don't seem preoccupied with not allowing male people to talk about their male bodies or issues that affect only males.

[–]ntr4ctrAdult Male with gender dysphoria 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Honestly, these kinds of arguments are tiring. We both know you don't care if they're actually trans or not, you don't want them in your bathroom either way. So why do we have to keep playing this game where you pretend that you're concerned about non-trans males in your bathrooms when the reality is that you don't want males in your bathroom whether they're trans or not?

For example, if the requirements were changed to "6 months on estrogen", it would pretty clearly filter out anyone who didn't want estrogen for its own sake, since normal men aren't going to chemically castrate themselves just so they can ogle women. But I have yet to meet any gender critical person on here who would support something like that. So why are we having this debate over how to tell who is or isn't trans when that's not the issue here?

[–]comradeconradical[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

playing this game where you pretend that you're concerned about non-trans males in your bathrooms when the reality is that you don't want males in your bathroom whether they're trans or not?

Never said differently, no game or secret, yes I absolutely want spaces for females separate from males. Estrogen after 6 months doesn't make a male female, not even SRS does. But the question is not only about sex-specific spaces, it's about individual instances of if trans is a real condition or just a self-proclaimed identity, and how to approach the issues that arise from these assumptions.

It very much is an issue, or are you just willfully ignoring the problems that could arise from self-id?

[–]ntr4ctrAdult Male with gender dysphoria 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I think it's pointless to ask trans people to prove to you that self-ID'd people are really trans when you don't care whether they're trans in the first place. Even if they were able to prove this to your satisfaction, it wouldn't change your opinion by one inch, so why are you asking them to do it?

For the record, I think the same thing about transes who use the "we aren't safe in the men's bathroom" argument. Like, come on, even if you were safe, you still wouldn't want to use it. In both cases, I think it leads to the sides talking past each other and wasting time by dodging the actual points of disagreement.

[–]comradeconradical[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The issue of self-id is prevalent in my community because we do care. Many of us don't mind if trans people use our services in good faith, but when bad faith self-id trans people are around, we cannot act or defend ourselves without being labelled bigots or silenced. This is becoming a hot topic in my country, so why can't I ask about the nuances of it? Especially if it has the potential to impact me? Telling me I don't care either way is just false and patronizing. Maybe you're saying all this because you don't have a clear answer to the issue and would rather tell me I'm just close-minded instead?

Can you expand on your last point? Which trans people in men's bathroom? Transwomen? Why don't they want to use it? Because they prefer to make women uncomfortable than to get weird looks from men? I'd hate to change my tampon in the bathroom or change clothes in a locker room next to a male person no matter how they modify their bodies or dress or identify or feel internally. Like I've said before, I'm all for third spaces. Isn't that solution facing the disagreement head on and finding a compromise?

[–]ntr4ctrAdult Male with gender dysphoria 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Many of us don't mind if trans people use our services in good faith

I thought you agreed that you don't want transes using women's spaces.

Can you expand on your last point? Which trans people in men's bathroom?

My whole point was that that QT argument is also full of holes in the same way that this GC argument is, because it's asking the other side to prove something that will in no way change the asker's opinion.

[–]comradeconradical[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Of course I'd prefer no transwomen in spaces made for my sex, but I am willing to compromise. That's why I made this question. I know trans in cross-sex spaces will and has happened, so how can we protect ourselves against those who do this out of bad faith? My ideal solution would be a third space, but failing that, how can we ensure women's safety and ability to speak up about these issues under self-id?

I still don't understand what you mean with your example. The point is to try and fill these holes. If you don't want your opinion changed, as you seem to be projecting, why are you engaging? If you think there are no answers, what's the point of asking any questions on this sub? Accordingly, could you possibly address my questions and realistic concerns instead of wasting time saying there's no point?

[–]ntr4ctrAdult Male with gender dysphoria 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Well there's an easy solution to your concern, which is changing self-ID to require 6 months on estrogen. That filters out all the randoms who just want to enter women's bathrooms for peeping reasons, and ensures it will only be gender dysphoric men.

So, if the proposal is changed to that, your purported concern is resolved. Is that satisfactory?

[–]comradeconradical[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

6 months is an arbitrary threshold and does not change sex. Also, it's a very short period of time in the big picture. This is not an adequate solution.

[–]ntr4ctrAdult Male with gender dysphoria 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You're right that it doesn't change sex, but I thought your objection to "self-ID" was supposed to be that non-trans people would ID as trans, and 6 months is enough that nobody who likes the body they're born with is going to do it.

[–]comradeconradical[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

6 months on hormones doesn't make someone imperceptible from the opposite sex though?

Like, you're an adult male. Do you think taking elevated estrogen for 6 monts will make you similar to me, who has been a female for my entire life? Do you think it will make your presence acceptable around female toddlers and children in our spaces?

Self-id doesn't require hormones, but hormones doesn't validate self-id either. That's the real problem. Also how to prove this to keep female spaces safe?

I'm actually very curious: as an adult male who hates his genitals, do you want to access female spaces? Or do you just want to change your body but still acknowledge your male reality and keep female spaces for females?