you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 14 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 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

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.

[–]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:

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/1492364/transgender-prisoner-tiffany-scott-andrew-burns-dangerous-sheriff/

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/transgender-prisoner-branded-one-scotlands-11837767

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.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/us/steven-hayes-cheshire-transgender.html

https://www.womenarehuman.com/man-identifies-as-transgender-after-conviction-for-home-invasion-rapes-triple-murder-of-woman-her-daughters/

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.

https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-ap-trans-inmates-connecticut-law-20180526-story.html

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.