QT: Who is trans “inclusive” language really for?

submitted by BiologyIsReal from (self.GCdebatesQT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Taln_Reich 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (62 children)

Anyone who is trying to replace sex with gender.

gender identity is not a social construct. And no one is "replacing sex with gender", what is happening is that sex and gender identity are seperated depending on which one is the relevant one.

including sports, stats, sex segregated spaces.

the sport one correlates with hormone levels (as these are what determines muscle buildup) which in cases of divergence between biological sex and gender identity HRT of sufficent length and dose does restore fairness.

In what regard is biological sex for non-mdeical statistics relevant?

"sex segregated spaces" - in what way is it relevant on whether the person in the cubicle next to you has testes or ovaries?

Secondly, gender identity is something we don' t even know if it exists

it does, as evidenced by the millions of transgender people experiencing distress based on the mismatch between their gender identity and physical sex.

if it exists, it would be entirely unprovable even if it existed, it would be completely dependent on people' s words

the diagnosis of clinical depression is just as dependent on the patients words as the diagnosis for gender dysphoria. Does that mean that clinical depression is entirely unprovable and does not exist?

Also, here's some studies showing a connection between brain development and transgender identities https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4699258/ , https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17352-8 , https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180524112351.htm

adherence to stereotypes

gender identity has nothing to do with stereotypes.

more importantly, lots of people don' t even have it.

really? How many people have experienced involuntarily aquierring the secondary sex characteristics of the opposite sex and did not felt distressed by that?

Also, in this reddit post is a fun little thought excercise in this regard https://www.reddit.com/r/truscum/comments/ll6tpa/we_need_to_start_asking_transphobes_what_they/

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

And who decides whether sex or gender identity is relevant in a given context?

If gender identity is not based on stereotypes, then in what is it based? How can a male feel like a woman. I'm a woman and I've no idea what is feeling like a woman.

[–]Taln_Reich 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (25 children)

And who decides whether sex or gender identity is relevant in a given context?

this needs to be discussed in a broader societal discussion. Based on what is discussed, it might make sense to go either by sex, gender identity or make some qualifications towards the state of transition for going by gender identity. It really depends on the details.

If gender identity is not based on stereotypes, then in what is it based?

it is based on what physical sexed anatomy you would be comfortable or uncomfortable with having. If it distresses you to have the typical primary and secondary sexual characteristics of your sex, regardless of the social enviroment, your gender identity might be in a misallignment with your sex. If it doesn't, then your gender identity alligns with your sex.

Essentially, there is a thought experiment (meant for self-reflection for people uncertain of whether they are transgender or just don't like their gender role/gender stereotypes): imagine you are in an enviroment without gender roles/gender stereotypes (variations are either a society without gender roles/gender stereotypes or a otherwise deserted island) and have the chance to irreversibly change your physical sexed anatomy to the opposite one (or an "neither","in between" or "parts of both" for nonbinary transgender ) would you do it?

How can a male feel like a woman. I'm a woman and I've no idea what is feeling like a woman.

The answer is, that the "I am a man/woman because I feel like a man/woman" expression is an oversimplification, that is unfortunately often misunderstood.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (24 children)

this needs to be discussed in a broader societal discussion. Based on what is discussed, it might make sense to go either by sex, gender identity or make some qualifications towards the state of transition for going by gender identity. It really depends on the details.

But who is allowed to take part in this disscussion? Many changes in law regarding trans issues are happening behind closed doors and media coverage is one sided in favour of gender identity. Women's concerns are dismissed time and time again. Any woman who speak out in favour of sex risks being threatened, smeared and de-platafformed. So, how can we have a debate about whether sex or gender identity is more relevant if only one side is allowed to talk?

it is based on what physical sexed anatomy you would be comfortable or uncomfortable with having. If it distresses you to have the typical primary and secondary sexual characteristics of your sex, regardless of the social enviroment, your gender identity might be in a misallignment with your sex. If it doesn't, then your gender identity alligns with your sex.

Essentially, there is a thought experiment (meant for self-reflection for people uncertain of whether they are transgender or just don't like their gender role/gender stereotypes): imagine you are in an enviroment without gender roles/gender stereotypes (variations are either a society without gender roles/gender stereotypes or a otherwise deserted island) and have the chance to irreversibly change your physical sexed anatomy to the opposite one (or an "neither","in between" or "parts of both" for nonbinary transgender ) would you do it?

Maybe you think that gender identity is about distress over one's sex, but there are many trans people and allies who don't think that is the case.

You can be diagnosed with gender dysphoria whithout such distress according to the DMS-5, for example. And, under the "gender affirming treatment" paradigm, it's doubtful that a therapist is allowed to question a patient's gender identity, anyway.

There are many trans natal males who like their "girldicks" very much and have no problem saying so. And they say their gender identities are as valid.

In the thread about sexual attraction, I told you self-ID was legalized in Argentina. Here, you can change the sex markers of your document without a clinical diagnosis or a judicial order. You're not required to undergone any kind of "medical transition" to do so, either before or after. You just need to say you're really a woman (or a man) despite not being born one. The law that makes this possible is commonly known as the gender identity law and gender identity is mentioned in the law text itself. There are a few other countries with similar laws and many transactivists are campaigning to expand the list.

Also, I've seen several instances of transactivists talking about forced sterelizations in reference of the requirement of undergoing genital surgery before changing your legal sex in certain countries.

The answer is, that the "I am a man/woman because I feel like a man/woman" expression is an oversimplification, that is unfortunately often misunderstood.

So, what does this expression mean then?

[–]Taln_Reich 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (23 children)

But who is allowed to take part in this disscussion? Many changes in law regarding trans issues are happening behind closed doors and media coverage is one sided in favour of gender identity. Women's concerns are dismissed time and time again. Any woman who speak out in favour of sex risks being threatened, smeared and de-platafformed. So, how can we have a debate about whether sex or gender identity is more relevant if only one side is allowed to talk?

I am against threatening, smearing or deplattforming people just based on their opinions (the first two in general, the latter excepted for when one outright promotes hate - for example Germaine Greers infamous quote equating transgender women transitioning with rape (1) - or incites criminal actions). Also, a lot of times the "concerns" presented are just Red Herrings repeated over and over 1.

(1): here is the quote in question:

All transsexuals rape women’s bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves. However, the transsexually constructed lesbian-feminist violates women’s sexuality and spirit, as well. Rape, although it is usually done by force, can also be accomplished by deception. It is significant that in the case of the transsexually constructed lesbian-feminist, often he is able to gain entrance and a dominant position in women’s spaces because the women involved do not know he is a transsexual and he just does not happen to mention it.

You can be diagnosed with gender dysphoria whithout such distress according to the DMS-5, for example.

I'm going by the ICD-10 ( under F64.0 ) that makes it quite clear, that it is about anatomical sex and the desire for medical transitioning (2).

(2):

Transsexualism

A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex

And, under the "gender affirming treatment" paradigm, it's doubtful that a therapist is allowed to question a patient's gender identity, anyway.

yeah, I'm kinda sceptical about "affirmation only" (e.g. no questioning of the self diagnosed gender identity allowed). People can be wrong about themself, and when someone transitions without actually being transgender, they are going to develop gender dysphoria towards the sexed characteristics of the gender they were transitioning to. Thats why detransitioners aren't big fans of this modell.

In the thread about sexual attraction, I told you self-ID was legalized in Argentina. Here, you can change the sex markers of your document without a clinical diagnosis or a judicial order. You're not required to undergone any kind of "medical transition" to do so, either before or after. You just need to say you're really a woman (or a man) despite not being born one. The law that makes this possible is commonly known as the gender identity law and gender identity is mentioned in the law text itself. There are a few other countries with similar laws and many transactivists are campaigning to expand the list.

well, in my country a person wanting to change their legal gender needs two independent medical assesments confirming the gender identity, that the person in question had been identifying this way for at least three years and that it is considered likely that they will keep identifying this way. Far as I heard, this is a rather hardass amount of conditions.

Though, back to self ID: it kind of depends on what this changed legal gender means in practice. From what I heard, it's mostly relevant in terms of into which prison one goes (both Blaire White and Rose of Dawn have made videos regarding this, with Blaire White advocating seperated LGBT wards.)

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

A) You say that society needs to have a discussion about the issue of sex vs gender identity. But it seems you think the issue is already settled. Here you are dismissing women's concern as mere bigotry. So, are women allowed to take part on this discussion or not? Or are we allowed to participate only under trans terms? Why is never trans people the ones who have to consider women's concerns?

B) My point with all these examples was there are many people who don't agree with your view of gender identity being based on distress over one's sexed body. We can't ignore those people's position because they are the ones driving many of the legal changes. They want more countries like Argentina and less with yours. They're also pushing among other things for "gender affirming treatment" and they want to ban any alternative treatment as "conversion therapy".

But even if we go by your clinical definition of gender indentity, the ICD-10 that you quote starts the definition of transsexualism with "A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex". What does a desire to live as the opposite sex means if not stereotypes? Also, the page you linked says this about gender identity in children (emphasis mine):

Gender identity disorder of childhood

A disorder, usually first manifest during early childhood (and always well before puberty), characterized by a persistent and intense distress about assigned sex, together with a desire to be (or insistence that one is) of the other sex. There is a persistent preoccupation with the dress and activities of the opposite sex and repudiation of the individual's own sex. The diagnosis requires a profound disturbance of the normal gender identity; mere tomboyishness in girls or girlish behaviour in boys is not sufficient. Gender identity disorders in individuals who have reached or are entering puberty should not be classified here but in F66.-

How is this not about stereotypes?

[–]Taln_Reich 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (21 children)

A) You say that society needs to have a discussion about the issue of sex vs gender identity. But it seems you think the issue is already settled. Here you are dismissing women's concern as mere bigotry. So, are women allowed to take part on this discussion or not? Or are we allowed to participate only under trans terms? Why is never trans people the ones who have to consider women's concerns?

The concerns that have been dismissed as "mere bigotry" have already been refuted. And why do you think it's only women who can't bring up those concerns - do you think there has never been a man these arguments and had been similarily dismissed?

B) My point with all these examples was there are many people who don't agree with your view of gender identity being based on distress over one's sexed body. We can ignore those people's position because they are the ones driving many of the legal changes.

that's why I am on the truscum side of the truscum-tucute-debate ("you need gender dysphoria to be trans" vs. "you don't need gender dysphoria to be trans"), Because without gender dysphoria as a criteria, transgender identity makes no sense to me.

They want more countries like Argentina and less with yours

I'm pretty sure (since you mentioned abortion restrictions in this context) they aren't pushing for harsher restrictions there.

They're also pushing among other things for "gender affirming treatment" and they want to ban any alternative treatment as "conversion therapy".

thats going to cause the amount of detransitioners to go up, causing problems for everybody. The transgender group I'm in contact with is concerned with that, and I would prefer an exploratory approach (e.g., the therapist exploring options with the patient, making sure that the patient isn't, say, confusing the constellation of "gender non conformity, internalized homophobia, homosexuality and depersonalization issues" with gender dysphoria. But this needs to be an open process, neither pushing the patient into identifying with their assigned gender, nor mindlessly affirming the initial self-diagnosis)

But even if we go by your clinical definition of gender indentity, the ICD-10 that you quote starts the definition of transsexualism with "A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex". What does a desire to live as the opposite sex means if not stereotypes?

the desire to be perceived as and treated as the sex of the gender identity they identify as. Let me bring an example. I know of a gender-non-conforming (gender non conforming relative to their gender identity that is) transgender man. That means, that, when he puts on a dress, he wants to be seen as and treated like a man wearing a dress, not a woman wearing a dress.

Also, the page you linked says this about gender identity in children(emphasis mine):

Gender identity disorder of childhood

A disorder, usually first manifest during early childhood (and always well before puberty), characterized by a persistent and intense distress about assigned sex, together with a desire to be (or insistence that one is) of the other sex. There is a persistent preoccupation with the dress and activities of the opposite sex and repudiation of the individual's own sex. The diagnosis requires a profound disturbance of the normal gender identity; mere tomboyishness in girls or girlish behaviour in boys is not sufficient. Gender identity disorders in individuals who have reached or are entering puberty should not be classified here but in F66.-

How is this not about stereotypes?

that's a bit of a problem when dealing with pre-pubertal children in this regard, as before puberty the sexually dismorphic anatomy is much less pronounced. So this is written under the assumption, that most people will be gender conforming relative to their gender identity (which, yes, can be totally wrong and does bend more than a bit towards stereotypes). To be fair, they specified "mere tomboyishness in girls or girlish behaviour in boys is not sufficient" .

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

know of a gender-non-conforming (gender non conforming relative to their gender identity that is) transgender man. That means, that, when he puts on a dress, he wants to be seen as and treated like a man wearing a dress, not a woman wearing a dress.

And what difference is there in treatment of a man or a woman that is not sexism?

[–]Taln_Reich 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

know of a gender-non-conforming (gender non conforming relative to their gender identity that is) transgender man. That means, that, when he puts on a dress, he wants to be seen as and treated like a man wearing a dress, not a woman wearing a dress.

And what difference is there in treatment of a man or a woman that is not sexism?

If any difference in treatment regarding the sexes is sexism, then "Gender Critical Feminism" is quite sexist

Piece of Evidence a.) this Ovarit (a notorious Plattform for gender critical feminists) thread, where a comics from what was assumed to be a transgender woman was posted, that, in fact, was made by a non-binary person of the female birth sex. There is quite a stark difference between how they considered the whole thing depending on whether this mistake or not. So, quite clearly, they did not treat what they considered a "man" and what they considered a "woman" the same, even when it was the same action.

Piece of Evidence b.) the constant banging about sex-seggregated spaces or other subjects where the inclusion of transgender women in previously "female only"-groups is protested by gender critical feminists. If there were to be no difference in treatment between man and woman, a man entering the womans locker room would be treated the same as a woman entering the womans locker room (or, more likely, sex-seggregated spaces would cease to exist because there would be no point towards them anymore). This is quite clearly an anathema to everything "Gender Critical Feminists" believe.

Piece of Ecidence c.) sexual orientation. The simultanous facts, that sexual orientation is unchangable while at the same time it is rather rare for someone to be a bisexual with a perfect 50-50-split means that it is literally impossible for there to be no difference in treatment.

(Note: this list was not making an argument over what this means in terms of the "A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex"-criteria)

So, clearly, a mere difference in treatment between a man and a woman is not, by itself, sexism. Sexism is more the explicit or implicit belief about the superiority/inferiority of one sex, discrimination, prejudice, or stereotyping based on sex or actions arising from these beliefs.

[–]emptiedriver 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

So, clearly, a mere difference in treatment between a man and a woman is not, by itself, sexism.

your examples are: a) someone who does or doesn't have the same life experience and b) & c) someone who is or isn't biologically the same.

These are not superficial reasons to treat someone differently but simply a recognition of actual differences that can be taken into account in certain scenarios. They don't have to always be a big deal - physical difference won't matter in a written exam - but sometimes they're a factor. Superficial change like which clothing you wear does not change your past or your physical capacities, so will only make a difference on a sexist level - what people assume about you, not what you are actually capable of.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

The concerns that have been dismissed as "mere bigotry" have already been refuted. And why do you think it's only women who can't bring up those concerns - do you think there has never been a man these arguments and had been similarily dismissed?

Do you think the preference of gender identity over sex affects both men and women equally? Do you think a woman and man speaking out in favour of sex are given the same treatment? You keep saying we can't know what genitals a person have without pulling down their pants, but many transactivists never have a doubt about what kind of person to send the death and rape threats.

I'm pretty sure (since you mentioned abortion restrictions in this context) they aren't pushing for harsher restrictions there.

Transactivist here have supported the abortion bill that passed last December and the previous law proposals regarding this, too. I wouldn't say this totally altruistic of them because they also make sure the bill used inclusive language despite that only a woman would ever need an abortion.

However, the gender identity law has been used to erase sex segreggated spaces. A few examples:

A trans natal male convicted of violence against women was sent to a women's prisson where he impregnated a fellow inmate.

A trans natal female was sent to a men's prisson despite her protests. Sorry, I'm not sure if there is a version in English of this story

There is Mara Gómez, a trans natal male who was allowed to play in the top division of female football. He was treated like a brave hero by local media. There are other cases of trans natal males competing in female categories, but Gómez is the most famous one.

Besides how it affects women, there are other problems with this law in particular regarding minors. Under this law, any minor can request to change of the sex marker of their document with the approval of their parents. Kids as young as 5 (five, yes, five, this is absolutely not a typo) have been allowed to do this. Any trans identified person is allowed to request hormonal treatment on demand. This include minors as long they have their parent's approval. Hormonal treatment for them includes puberty blockers, which are said to be reversible in local media. Surgeries on minors are allowed with parental aproval and a judicial order. I've read a news story where a 16 year-old natal female was allowed to undergone a double mastectomy on this basis. News stories regarding trans identified kids read more like propaganda. Keira Bell's case was barely covered here. I can give you links if you want, but they are all in Spanish.

the desire to be perceived as and treated as the sex of the gender identity they identify as. Let me bring an example. I know of a gender-non-conforming (gender non conforming relative to their gender identity that is) transgender man. That means, that, when he puts on a dress, he wants to be seen as and treated like a man wearing a dress, not a woman wearing a dress.

But what does being seen and treated as a man means? Is only about being told "yes, you're totally a man"? Or is there something more?

[–]Taln_Reich 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

Do you think a woman and man speaking out in favour of sex are given the same treatment?

the same treatment? Maybe, maybe not, I don't know. But I hardly think that a man bringing fourth the exact same arguments wouldn't have them dismissed as bigotry either.

Transactivist here have supported the abortion bill that passed last December and the previous law proposals regarding this, too.

Of course they were. Why wouldn't they, given what the legal situation regarding abortions was before (going of your description)

I wouldn't say this totally altruistic of them because they also make sure the bill used inclusive language despite that only a woman would ever need an abortion.

do you know what happens when inclusive language is not used? There was a case where a transgender man that was pregnant and in need of an abortion was denied said abortion, because the law in question spoke of "women who are pregnant", not "people who are pregnant" or "women and other people who are pregnant". The transgender rights movement was argueing for the law in question to be changed to fix this oversight. Gender Critical feminists were fighting against this change, meaning they were literally forcing this man to carry a pregnancy against his will. That is why inclusive language is important, and it is a lot more than mere "hurt genderfeelz".

There is Mara Gómez, a trans natal male who was allowed to play in the top division of female football. He was treated like a brave hero by local media. There are other cases of trans natal males competing in female categories, but Gómez is the most famous one.

if transgender women have to compete in the mens division, does that mean that transgender men are having to compete in the womens division - even after having been on hormones fopr year? Because there is a case like that, where a transgender men, that had been on HRT and wanted to compete in a contact sport in the men's category. He was forced into the women's category, because the rules were, that the divisons were based on birth sex. Due to the hightend muscle mass resulting from HRT, the transgender man was signigicantly stronger then his competitor, resulting in his competitor being injured. Then this story was taken by gender critical people and misrepresented in such a way, that readers were left under the impression, that this had been a case of a transgender woman beating up some vastly outmatchend non-transgender woman.

Besides how it affects women, there are other problems with this law in particular regarding minors. Under this law, any minor can request to change of the sex marker of their document with the approval of their parents. Kids as young as 5 (five, yes, five, this is absolutely not a typo) have been allowed to do this.

and what does changing ones legal gender mean in practice (other than changing what is on the passport - by the way, the personal ID in my country doesn't even list gender or sex)?

But what does being seen and treated as a man means? Is only about being told "yes, you're totally a man"? Or is there something more?

That, when you look at them, you perceive them instinctivly as sex/gender whose gender identity they are, and act acording to this perception. So, essentially, a transgender women/transgender man wants that, when a onlooker with no knowledge of them being trans perceives them, this onlooker perceives a woman/man, and treat them like the onlooker would treat a non-transgender woman/man doing the same things.

I remeber that there was a post about the mixed feelings transgender people experience over poor treatment based on being perceived as the sex/gender whose gender identity they are (say, for example, transgender women experiencing sexual harassement from men (mixed, because it is simultanously feeling bad over the poor treatment and feeling good over being perceived the way they want to). For the transgender men, I don't recall what their experiences in this regard were about, but there were some). So for the gender-non-conforming (gender non conforming relative to their gender identity that is) transgender man example, imagine him walking by an onlooker, that despises crossdressers. If the onlooker perceives the gnc-trans man as a man wearing a dress, the onlookers reaction will be very different from them perceiving a woman wearing a dress. So, if this onlookers reaction will be in line with perceiving the gnc-trans man as a man, the trans man will be left with this mixed feeling, on the one hand succeding at being perceived the way he wants to, on the other of course the negative feeling from being treated poorly. For positive or neutral actions obviously there isn't such a negative feeling, meaning the general feeling is not mixed. (Note: I chose negative treatment arising from being perceived as the sex/gender whose gender identity they are to clarify, that this is not about politely pretending that the transgender man is a man, but about there being no such pretense).

Note, that there is also the desire, that, if the transgender person informs other people over them being transgender, people don't start treating them differently because of that.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

the same treatment? Maybe, maybe not, I don't know. But I hardly think that a man bringing fourth the exact same arguments wouldn't have them dismissed as bigotry either.

So, you saw all the evidence of the death and rape threaths sent by many transactivists, but you din't see who were the target of those threaths?

do you know what happens when inclusive language is not used? There was a case where a transgender man that was pregnant and in need of an abortion was denied said abortion, because the law in question spoke of "women who are pregnant", not "people who are pregnant" or "women and other people who are pregnant". The transgender rights movement was argueing for the law in question to be changed to fix this oversight. Gender Critical feminists were fighting against this change, meaning they were literally forcing this man to carry a pregnancy against his will. That is why inclusive language is important, and it is a lot more than mere "hurt genderfeelz".

This is ridiculous. Not all females can (or want to) get pregnant, but only females can regardless of how they identify. Everyones uderstand this, regardless that so many people nowadays like to pretend otherwise. Your hypothetycal scenario could only happen not because of gender critical feminists, but because of people like you that are so keen on ignoring all what we know about human biology.

if transgender women have to compete in the mens division, does that mean that transgender men are having to compete in the womens division - even after having been on hormones fopr year? Because there is a case like that, where a transgender men, that had been on HRT and wanted to compete in a contact sport in the men's category. He was forced into the women's category, because the rules were, that the divisons were based on birth sex. Due to the hightend muscle mass resulting from HRT, the transgender man was signigicantly stronger then his competitor, resulting in his competitor being injured. Then this story was taken by gender critical people and misrepresented in such a way, that readers were left under the impression, that this had been a case of a transgender woman beating up some vastly outmatchend non-transgender woman.

  1. Source?

  2. Doping is not allowed in either category.

and what does changing ones legal gender mean in practice (other than changing what is on the passport - by the way, the personal ID in my country doesn't even list gender or sex)?

Nobody legally changes their gender here. You legally change your sex because that is what is marked in our documents. The word gender may have started to be used in areas outside of grammar, but the word sex is still widely used in Spanish-speaking countries. It's English speakers who started the practice of using the word gender as an euphemism for sex, something transactivists have taken full advantage of.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

do you know what happens when inclusive language is not used? There was a case where a transgender man that was pregnant and in need of an abortion was denied said abortion, because the law in question spoke of "women who are pregnant", not "people who are pregnant" or "women and other people who are pregnant".

It's so hard for me to believe someone was denied an abortion over that. Do you have a source you can link? Also, why didn't they just say they were female/a woman (since you literally have to be to get pregnant)? If male pregnancy was actually something that could happen, abortion rights would be written in the constitution.

if transgender women have to compete in the mens division, does that mean that transgender men are having to compete in the womens division - even after having been on hormones fopr year? Because there is a case like that, where a transgender men, that had been on HRT and wanted to compete in a contact sport in the men's category. He was forced into the women's category, because the rules were, that the divisons were based on birth sex.

This us such as bad argument. A female taking performance enhancing drugs shouldn't be allowed to compete with females not taking performance enhancing drugs. Rules about this are common in like every sport. The Mack Beggs thing shouldn't have not allowed based on that, but it's not an argument for placing people in sports based on gender identity. You give up things when you transition. I feel like it's so harmful for any sort of normalization of trans people, if that's what you want, to force males into female sports. It's just so obviously unfair.

I feel like you should stop using transmen to do all the work in your arguments.

[–]MarkTwainiac 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

the diagnosis of clinical depression is just as dependent on the patients words as the diagnosis for gender dysphoria. Does that mean that clinical depression is entirely unprovable and does not exist?

Please stop using other conditions to try to make a case for "gender dysphoria." Proponents of the idea that "gender dysphoria" is a stand-alone condition unrelated to, and not symptomatic of, other mental health issues should be able to make the case for it without constantly invoking other conditions. And it's galling when advocates of "gender dysphoria" as a condition unto itself try to substantiate it by invoking one of the very conditions many of us think that "gender dysphoria" is often an expression of, and cover for, such as anxiety and depression.

Also, your claim about depression is not entirely true. Mild forms of clinical depression might be diagnosed based solely on the patient's words, but that's not the case for major depressive disorder.

MDD usually involves dramatic changes in the person's affect, appetite, sleep patterns, sex drive and general behavior that are quite noticeable to others in their lives - family, members of their household, friends, colleagues. Often it involves physical changes like marked changes in weight, hair loss and increased susceptibility to physical illnesses due to suppressed immune function. Sometimes MDD involves mania, psychosis or catatonia - conditions which are very apparent to others.

Depression can be caused by a number of physical illnesses and conditions - thyroid dysfunction, pernicious anemia, urinary tract infections (particularly in elderly women), sinus infections, diabetes, lupus, MS, the hormonal changes that women experience after childbirth and during the menstrual cycle and so on. Depression can also be caused by various drugs and anesthesia.

People who seek help for depression are routinely given full physicals and tested for a battery of physical illnesses. They also often keep records of their daily behaviors, weight, sleep patterns, how much and what they ate and drank, all drugs taken, etc.

Also, people with depression are not trying to force the whole world to adopt an entirely new set of values in which depressed people's needs come first and being depressed is seen as the new norm; they're not demanding that laws and customs change to accommodate and prioritize depressed people; and they're not unilaterally decreeing sweeping changes in the language, forcing compelled speech on others, and insisting that everyone who hasn't suffered depression be labelled "non-depressives."

People with depression aren't always banging on about how nobody else on earth has ever suffered as much unbearable psychic pain as depressives. Nor are depressive rights lobbyists constantly citing fake suicide stats to get sympathy and to manipulate people into medicating children with drugs that will render them infertile and sexually dysfunctional. Of the large number of people who die by suicide each year - in 2018, more than 48,000 people in the US alone - the vast majority are depressed. But there is no annual "depression day of remembrance" or "suicide commemoration day" anywhere. Funny that.

[–]Taln_Reich 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Please stop using other conditions to try to make a case for "gender dysphoria." Proponents of the idea that "gender dysphoria" is a stand-alone condition unrelated to, and not symptomatic of, other mental health issues should be able to make the case for it without constantly invoking other conditions. And it's galling when advocates of "gender dysphoria" as a condition unto itself try to substantiate it by invoking one of the very conditions many of us think that "gender dysphoria" is often an expression of, and cover for, such as anxiety and depression.

yes, gender dysphoria is often coprevalent with other mental health issues. Therefore, it is often important for psychological treatment to be included, but gender dysphoria is a condition unto itself, as demonstrated by the fact, that it is not lessend by antidepressiva but is lessend by cross-sex hormones.

Also, your claim about depression is not entirely true. Mild forms of clinical depression might be diagnosed based solely on the patient's words, but that's not the case for major depressive disorder.

MDD usually involves dramatic changes in the person's affect, appetite, sleep patterns, sex drive and general behavior that are quite noticeable to others in their lives - family, members of their household, friends, colleagues. Often it involves physical changes like marked changes in weight, hair loss and increased susceptibility to physical illnesses due to suppressed immune function. Sometimes MDD involves mania, psychosis or catatonia - conditions which are very apparent to others.

And strong cases of gender dysphoria also cause enough distress to have a clearly apparent impact on the persons psychological wellbeing.

Also, people with depression are not trying to force the whole world to adopt an entirely new set of values in which depressed people's needs come first and being depressed is seen as the new norm;

in what way are transgender peoples needs "comming first" or being transgender "seen as the new norm" ?

they're not demanding that laws and customs change to accommodate and prioritize depressed people;

in what way are transgender people "prioritized" ?

and they're not unilaterally decreeing sweeping changes in the language, forcing compelled speech on others

I'm actually against laws fopr compelled speech. As far as I am concerned, legally you should absolouty be allowed to call Buck Angel "miss", "ma'm", "lady","woman" or "she/her", just be aware of (and expect the social consequences of) this being highly offensive.

insisting that everyone who hasn't suffered depression be labelled "non-depressives."

I'm sure communities of people who do have clinical depression have their terms for people who don't. It's just not in the political spotlight, because there aren't as much political/social areas affected.

Nor are depressive rights lobbyists constantly citing fake suicide stats to get sympathy

can you show that the frequently citied (and used by "gender criticals" as a joke) number of 41% of transgender people having attempted suicide (compared to 1.6 % in the general population) is wrong ( https://web.archive.org/web/20151104050421/http://www.thetaskforce.org/static_html/downloads/reports/reports/ntds_full.pdf ) ?

manipulate people into medicating children with drugs that will render them infertile and sexually dysfunctional.

a.) of course children with clinical depression are going to be medicated when needed.

b.) admittedly, I am somewhat wary of childhood medical transitioning, as before puberty it can be difficult for the child in question to discern, whether the problem lies with gender role or the sexed anatomy (as puberty causes the secondary sexed characteristics to develop). This is why gender dysphoria that persists during puberty is most likely permanent. The reason medical transitioning for children is even considered is, that the development of the secondary sexed characteristics caused by puberty is greatly distressing towards the children where the problem is the sexed anatomy while it also makes changing the physical body to match the gender identity more difficult.

Of the large number of people who die by suicide each year - in 2018, more than 48,000 people in the US alone - the vast majority are depressed. But there is no annual "depression day of remembrance" or "suicide commemoration day" anywhere. Funny that.

there is no day of rememberance for transgender suicides either. There is a day of rememberance for transgender people who were murdered.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm actually against laws fopr compelled speech. As far as I am concerned, legally you should absolouty be allowed to call Buck Angel "miss", "ma'm", "lady","woman" or "she/her", just be aware of (and expect the social consequences of) this being highly offensive.

Is misgendering more offensive than death and rape threaths? Are those threaths an acceptable social consequense for any woman who misgender someone? I'm asking you this because many supporters of the trans paradigma certainly think so. Also this issue is related to inclusive language.

[–]Taln_Reich 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Is misgendering more offensive than death and rape threaths? Are those threaths an acceptable social consequense for any woman who misgender someone? I'm asking you this because many supporters of the trans paradigma certainly think so.

I hate it when this is done (yes, I have seen the mountains of receipts regarding this). No social movement ever got anywhere by screaming angry, empty threats and people who have a different opinion. I have never done such a thing, and if it were up to me, it would immediately stop.

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

the sport one correlates with hormone levels (as these are what determines muscle buildup) which in cases of divergence between biological sex and gender identity HRT of sufficent length and dose does restore fairness.

This is totally untrue. Males have a physical advantage over females in sports that ranges from 10-12% at the lowest in sports like running to 60% in sports that rely heavily on activities of the upper body such as throwing, batting, weight lifting to 160% in sports that are largely about punching (boxing).

Males who suppress testosterone and take cross-sex hormones for a year have been shown to lose 0-4% of their muscle mass.

Also, muscle mass is not the only factor. Males have considerably larger hearts and lungs that cause them to have much higher blood oxygen, denser bones, entirely different skeletal shapes, faster twitch fibers and so on.

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1283720954657595393/photo/1

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1283720954657595393

https://resources.world.rugby/worldrugby/document/2020/10/09/a67e3cc3-7dea-4f1e-b523-2cba1073729d/Transgender-Research_Summary-of-data_ENGLISH-09.10.2020.pdf

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/07/study-suggests-ioc-adjustment-period-for-trans-women-may-be-too-short

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (28 children)

gender identity is not a social construct. And no one is "replacing sex with gender", what is happening is that sex and gender identity are seperated depending on which one is the relevant one.

First, I was talking about gender and not gender identity: gender is a social construct, and it' s replacing sex. Secondly, sex is disappearing in every aspect, replaced by either gender or gender identity.

the sport one correlates with hormone levels (as these are what determines muscle buildup) which in cases of divergence between biological sex and gender identity HRT of sufficent length and dose does restore fairness.

Hormone levels are not the only important thing that should be taken into consideration and that differentiates the sexes. Not to mention, in lots of cases hormones are not even considered and men can join women' s sports without any kind of hormonal standards.

In what regard is biological sex for non-mdeical statistics relevant?

Crime, for example.

"sex segregated spaces" - in what way is it relevant on whether the person in the cubicle next to you has testes or ovaries?

How about rape shelters in which a person with a penis shares a room with a person with a vagina who was raped by another person with a penis? A locker room where 14 years old girls get naked together with a person with a penis?

it does, as evidenced by the millions of transgender people experiencing distress based on the mismatch between their gender identity and physical sex

All their existence proves is that they are distressed over their bodies and their sexed characteristics, not that that distress comes because of gender identity.

As for those studies, there are a gazillion of studies that debunk the lady/gent brain, which means that it' s far from a settled thing. Even if it were settled and trans people were recognized to have their preferred sex' s brain, they would still have their biological sex' s bodies: I don' t give a damn how much you have a ladybrain if you also have a penis and a male socialization.

the diagnosis of clinical depression is just as dependent on the patients words as the diagnosis for gender dysphoria. Does that mean that clinical depression is entirely unprovable and does not exist?

No, but it doesn' t mean that it should replace non-depression in laws and legislation. There should be space for both without having to pretend that anomalies are more important.

How about this, in another comment you say that since you don' t change your mind on your "gender identity" if you change social setting, then it means it' s real. Does that mean that if a person who believes to be Napoleon moves somewhere else and changes social settings, still believes he' s Napoleon, then he really is Napoleon?

gender identity has nothing to do with stereotypes.

I beg to differ. Most people I have asked what their gender identity is about have answered that it' s all about adherence to sex-based roles and a preference for things that are stereotypically associated with the other sex. For God' s sake, it' s how you are diagnosed with gender dysphoria "by experts" to begin with.

really? How many people have experienced involuntarily aquierring the secondary sex characteristics of the opposite sex and did not felt distressed by that?

This has nothing to do with gender identity, it' s simply distress/trauma of not having control of your body.

Also, in this reddit post is a fun little thought excercise in this regard

That thought exercise has been done to death in the old debate sub. If I woke up in a man' s body, I would be worried about who did it and how it was done, I would worry about the beaurocracy surrounded by it, I would be worried about my relationships and how to explain to people what happened without sounding like a grifter or a lunatic. I would be distressed by the fact that I would be in another body without not knowing and not consenting, not for the fact that it' s a male body per se. If I woke up in another woman' s body, I would have the same issues.

The comparison is so disingenous that it' s not even funny anymore: I would LITERALLY be in the wrong body, trans people are in their natural and healthy bodies that they have been born and grown in.

I am highly doubtful even the most devout terfs would seriously insist that she would be 100% a man

I would be a man with the socialization of a woman (note, not a man with a woman brain, I would have a male brain because I would be in a male body), which is not what happens to trans people in the least. They are still 100% their biological sex and they still have the socialization that their biological sex had brought.

and should now use mens toilet, locker rooms, call her self gay (asuming she likes men), and go by he/him pronouns because a couple of organs bellow the waist have changed

The fact that I would be awkward using a man' s toilet has nothing to do with whether or not I should use it. I would have issues with using a man' s toilet because I was taught that it wasn' t my place since I was, literally, raised as a woman (unlike trans natal males). However, I would still 100% use it because a woman' s toilet wouldn' t be my place anymore now that I am a man. Me being weird about it is not a justification for putting other women in distress and violate a space that is reserved for them.

As for pronouns, LOL! I don' t care if you call me "he" or "mister" even now that I am in a woman' s body, in fact, I would fucking love to be called mister... why the fuck should I care if I were a man?

[–]Taln_Reich 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

Hormone levels are not the only important thing that should be taken into consideration and that differentiates the sexes.

trying not to go into that debate. We can't discuss every single transgender issue in every single thread about transgender people.

Not to mention, in lots of cases hormones are not even considered and men can join women' s sports without any kind of hormonal standards.

well, that is obviously problematic. Not going to disagree there.

Crime, for example.

can you proove that biological sex is here more important than socialisation? But, yes, I'd actually like crime stats (both in regards to perpatrator as well as in regards to victims) to record both.

How about rape shelters in which a person with a penis shares a room with a person with a vagina who was raped by another person with a penis?

And if a person with a vagina was raped by another person with a vagina, should, acording to your logic, this first person share the room with a person with a penis?

A locker room where 14 years old girls get naked together with a person with a penis?

I used to get naked in a locker room, and always felt deeply uncomfortable. And for this it would not have mattered the slightest, what genitals the other people there had. So the solution is more cubicles, so no one has to get naked in front of someone else.

All their existence proves is that they are distressed over their bodies and their sexed characteristics, not that that distress comes because of gender identity.

Gender identity is defined by what sexed characteristics you are comfortable/uncomfortable having. If there were no such thing as gender identity, there would be no such thing as gender dysphoria.

As for those studies, there are a gazillion of studies that debunk the lady/gent brain, which means that it' s far from a settled thing. Even if it were settled and trans people were recognized to have their preferred sex' s brain, they would still have their biological sex' s bodies: I don' t give a damn how much you have a ladybrain if you also have a penis and a male socialization.

And if the person in question had no longer a penis and was socialized female due to early recognition of the gender identity made possible via this method (I'm strongly in favor towards more research regarding the brain sex theory, since if it could be refined to at least a supporting diagnostic tool it would greatly help in improving the diagnostic process)?

How about this, in another comment you say that since you don' t change your mind on your "gender identity" if you change social setting, then it means it' s real. Does that mean that if a person who believes to be Napoleon moves somewhere else and changes social settings, still believes he' s Napoleon, then he really is Napoleon?

how would a person come to falsely believe themself to be Napoleon if they were in an enviroment where no one ever heard of Napoleon? If this person still believed themselves to be Napoleon even without anyone ever having heard of Napoleon, then there would clearly some weird sheniagans been going on.

No, but it doesn' t mean that it should replace non-depression in laws and legislation. There should be space for both without having to pretend that anomalies are more important.

Precisely. There should be room for both. Which is why (in regards for this threadtopic) I have proposed the compromise solution of "Men/Women and other people with/who ...", e.g. mentioning both the typical and the atypical cases, without pretending that one or the other is more important.

I beg to differ. Most people I have asked what their gender identity is about have answered that it' s all about adherence to sex-based roles and a preference for things that are stereotypically associated with the other sex. For God' s sake, it' s how you are diagnosed with gender dysphoria "by experts" to begin with.

And the transgender people I have talked to have been very insistent on maintaining a strong distinction between gender stereotypes and gender identity (in fact, if anything, conflating those to is pretty much a beserk button on that board). And let me quote the ICD-10 in this regard:

F64.0
Transsexualism
A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex.

( https://icd.who.int/browse10/2016/en#/F60-F69 )

The part regarding gender dysphoria in children (F64.2) also explicitly states that gender non-conformity is not sufficent for a diagnosis.

That thought exercise has been done to death in the old debate sub.

it's been changed here in so far, that here only your genitals are changed, so everyone (or at least everyone you aren't showing your genitals) would still see you as a woman.

trans people are in their natural and healthy bodies that they have been born and grown in.

And that are distressing them.

I would be a man with the socialization of a woman (note, not a man with a woman brain, I would have a male brain because I would be in a male body), which is not what happens to trans people in the least. They are still 100% their biological sex and they still have the socialization that their biological sex had brought.

so if you suddenly had a penis and testicles, but in all other aspects it was still your female body, you would insist to be 100% a man?

The fact that I would be awkward using a man' s toilet has nothing to do with whether or not I should use it. I would have issues with using a man' s toilet because I was taught that it wasn' t my place since I was, literally, raised as a woman (unlike trans natal males). However, I would still 100% use it because a woman' s toilet wouldn' t be my place anymore now that I am a man. Me being weird about it is not a justification for putting other women in distress and violate a space that is reserved for them.

so despite only your genitals being changed, you'd now (despite still looking female) use the men's bathroom? (also, in the opposite case, would that mean that a guy who suddenly found himself with a vagina instead would be supposed to be the womens, even if the rest of him still appeared male?)

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

trying not to go into that debate. We can't discuss every single transgender issue in every single thread about transgender people.

So, just to make it clear, you bring up the topic, say that hormones are the only thing we should think about when segregating sports, I say nope, and your answer is that we shouldn' t look into the topic more specifically and we should just stay on the general directions you can justify? Ok.

can you proove that biological sex is here more important than socialisation? But, yes, I'd actually like crime stats (both in regards to perpatrator as well as in regards to victims) to record both.

Can you prove that socialization is more important than sex?

I don' t really care much about it anyway, trans people are socialized as their sex, so it would still be a segregation that would keep trans women away from women.

And if a person with a vagina was raped by another person with a vagina, should, acording to your logic, this first person share the room with a person with a penis?

Nope, but that would be because she is a danger to the other person, a trans woman would be not only a danger but also a desrespect of a sex segregated space. Not to mention that the female rapist wouldn' t bring the possibility of unwanted pregnancy in case she attacked the victim again, and the victim could have a better chance to defend herself.

I used to get naked in a locker room, and always felt deeply uncomfortable. And for this it would not have mattered the slightest, what genitals the other people there had. So the solution is more cubicles, so no one has to get naked in front of someone else.

Great, can you tell your TRA friends to get on board of that project instead of using women' s spaces?

Gender identity is defined by what sexed characteristics you are comfortable/uncomfortable having. If there were no such thing as gender identity, there would be no such thing as gender dysphoria.

Except that' s bullshit? It' s just a name you people have created to legitimize a mental illness. All people are uncomfortable with their sexed characteristics here and there, especially growing up. By your own logic, I am not a woman because I don' t like my big boobs and I would do without my period. There is no woman in existence who hasn' t been uncomfortable with her periods for one reason or another. Are we all trans men? Give me a break.

And if the person in question had no longer a penis and was socialized female due to early recognition of the gender identity made possible via this method (I'm strongly in favor towards more research regarding the brain sex theory, since if it could be refined to at least a supporting diagnostic tool it would greatly help in improving the diagnostic process)?

A male is never socialized as a woman. Even in case he' s going to transition as a child, he would still be socialized as a very special boy, not as a girl.

how would a person come to falsely believe themself to be Napoleon if they were in an enviroment where no one ever heard of Napoleon? If this person still believed themselves to be Napoleon even without anyone ever having heard of Napoleon, then there would clearly some weird sheniagans been going on.

Transgendrism has been around for decades. Even if a person has no knowledge of the terminology, everyone knows that there are people who get treatment to pretend they are the opposite sex. In order to never been able to hear about trans people, you would have to be a hermit.

Precisely. There should be room for both. Which is why (in regards for this threadtopic) I have proposed the compromise solution of "Men/Women and other people with/who ...", e.g. mentioning both the typical and the atypical cases, without pretending that one or the other is more important.

I don' t care one bit the word you use to describe things like that, I am talking about legislation. There is no space for both currently because every sex segregated right women have are being rewritten in order to include males and rendering them useless and meaningless.

And the transgender people I have talked to have been very insistent on maintaining a strong distinction between gender stereotypes and gender identity (in fact, if anything, conflating those to is pretty much a beserk button on that board). And let me quote the ICD-10 in this regard:

Awesome, can you speak to the DMS then and make then erase the 7 out of 8 points that they list to disgnose gender dysphoria? Thanks.

And that are distressing them.

ANd they are free to do whatever they want to their bodies: doesn' t make them the other sex, and they shouldn' t be recognized as something they are not, legally at least and certainly there shouldn' t be this ridicoulous push to make it the socially acceptable and morally wholesome thing to do.

so if you suddenly had a penis and testicles, but in all other aspects it was still your female body, you would insist to be 100% a man?

If only my genitals were changed, then I would be an intersex person because I would have XX chromosomes and male genitals. Which is not what trans women are. They are the opposite of it, they have XY chromosomes with feminized bodies and, more often than not, penis and testicles.

so despite only your genitals being changed, you'd now (despite still looking female) use the men's bathroom? (also, in the opposite case, would that mean that a guy who suddenly found himself with a vagina instead would be supposed to be the womens, even if the rest of him still appeared male?)

No, that answer was about me being in a male body. If I were in a female body with a penis and testicles, I would find gender neutral bathrooms or fight for them if they didn' t exist so that I wouldn' t have to shit on women' s spaces just for my benefit. Or I would keep it until I' m home. Whatever the case, I would still not impose my presence to regular women. Just because I was the victim of a wizard, it doesn' t mean that the 51% of the population needs to cater to my needs.

[–]Taln_Reich 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (25 children)

Can you prove that socialization is more important than sex?

I don' t really care much about it anyway, trans people are socialized as their sex, so it would still be a segregation that would keep trans women away from women.

A male is never socialized as a woman. Even in case he' s going to transition as a child, he would still be socialized as a very special boy, not as a girl.

You talk a lot about "female socialization". What, in terms of socialization, do a western woman raised gender neutral, a woman raised in a quiverfull family, a Basha Posh (Afghan custom where girls are raised as boys in order to deal with the extreme restrictions put upon girls in afghan society) and a woman raised in some awfull corner of the world where FGM is still practiced in common?

a trans woman would be not only a danger but also a desrespect of a sex segregated space

first, thats quite the villification, do you have statistics backing up that transgender woman in women's shelters cause an increase in danger? Second, is that "disrespect" really that bad that it justifies withholding care from a woman that was raped? And, third, would that mean that this person would be allowed in the rape shelter?

Not to mention that the female rapist wouldn' t bring the possibility of unwanted pregnancy in case she attacked the victim again

what kind of argument is that? By that logic a child or infertile woman (whether by choice or not) being raped would be less terrible, which really doesn't strike me as particulary feminist.

and the victim could have a better chance to defend herself.

that is a really poor argument. By that logic a five times MMA world champion and a 1.5 meter petite asthmatic girl would have to be put into seperate rooms because the latter is rather unlikely to be able to defend herself against the former.

Great, can you tell your TRA friends to get on board of that project instead of using women' s spaces?

generally speaking, all the pro-transgender arguers I have seen argue for spaces where nudity occurs to have cubicles so people don't have to undress in front of complete strangers. They still want to use the space belonging to their gender identity though.

Except that' s bullshit? It' s just a name you people have created to legitimize a mental illness

yes gender dysphoria is a mental condition, suspected to be neurological in cause, that, when left untreated, is often maladaptive, with the treatment in question being medical and social transitioning and acceptance.

All people are uncomfortable with their sexed characteristics here and there, especially growing up. By your own logic, I am not a woman because I don' t like my big boobs and I would do without my period. There is no woman in existence who hasn' t been uncomfortable with her periods for one reason or another. Are we all trans men? Give me a break.

do you wish to have a sexed anatomy other than female and to no longer be considered a woman? If no, then it is not the same.

Transgendrism has been around for decades. Even if a person has no knowledge of the terminology, everyone knows that there are people who get treatment to pretend they are the opposite sex. In order to never been able to hear about trans people, you would have to be a hermit.

I have absoloutly seen transpeople that were experiencing gender dysphoria before having heard about transgender people due to growing up in some particular backwards part of eastern europe.

I don' t care one bit the word you use to describe things like that, I am talking about legislation. There is no space for both currently because every sex segregated right women have are being rewritten in order to include males and rendering them useless and meaningless.

there are no rights granted to women on the basis of being women. What there is are laws against sex-based sicrimination with a couple of exemption 1 (Note: that link is UK-specific, but it applies to most of the developed world).

The closest thing to "sex based rights" would be laws specifically related to reproductive healthercare and I don't see how writing "women and other people can get abortions if they request so" instead of "women can get abortions if they request so" would take away rights from women, but for transgender men, it makes a lot of difference 2

Awesome, can you speak to the DMS then and make then erase the 7 out of 8 points that they list to disgnose gender dysphoria? Thanks.

a.) what makes you think that will do? My country goes by the ICD-10 (local modification), the DSM-5 is the american one. You think they would listen to some random foreigner?

b.) actually, in the DSM-5 definition 3 out of the 8 points are directly relating to sexual characteristics, e.g. physical sexed anatomy, not stereotypes.

c.) no psychologist who doesn't deserve their license taken would diagnose someone as gender dysphoric just for not following gender stereotypes while the patient expresses to be completly fine with their sexed characteristics. That doesn't happen.

ANd they are free to do whatever they want to their bodies: doesn' t make them the other sex, and they shouldn' t be recognized as something they are not, legally at least and certainly there shouldn' t be this ridicoulous push to make it the socially acceptable and morally wholesome thing to do.

And instead they should be stigmatized, mistreated and made outcasts for it? Transgender people do not chose to be transgender, but transitioning is as much a choice to them as taking pain medication is for someone with crippling chronic pain. Best case scenario would be the transgender person getting to transitiong and being treated by the whole of society like absoloute garbage, worst case would be the transgender person comitting suicide because they can bear neither the stigma of transitioning nor their existence in a body that feels deeply wrong to them. Do you not see that you are argueing for tormenting people for something they can not help? And for what? What is gained by considering transitioning socially unacceptable and morally wrong?

If only my genitals were changed, then I would be an intersex person because I would have XX chromosomes and male genitals. Which is not what trans women are. They are the opposite of it, they have XY chromosomes with feminized bodies and, more often than not, penis and testicles.

Why does it always come down to "but the chromosomes"? No one gives a sh#t about chromosomes. Did you ever had your chromosomes tested? I didn't, I just assume that I have the typical case because their isn't anything about my body to indicate otherwise. No one walks around testing the chromosomes of everyone they met before deciding on how to treat them, no one.

No, that answer was about me being in a male body. If I were in a female body with a penis and testicles, I would find gender neutral bathrooms or fight for them if they didn' t exist so that I wouldn' t have to shit on women' s spaces just for my benefit. Or I would keep it until I' m home. Whatever the case, I would still not impose my presence to regular women. Just because I was the victim of a wizard, it doesn' t mean that the 51% of the population needs to cater to my needs.

Why don't you fight for gender neutral bathrooms now? Transgender rights activists actually tend to do that, with gender critical people opposing.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (24 children)

You talk a lot about "female socialization". What, in terms of socialization, do a western woman raised gender neutral, a woman raised in a quiverfull family, a Basha Posh (Afghan custom where girls are raised as boys in order to deal with the extreme restrictions put upon girls in afghan society) and a woman raised in some awfull corner of the world where FGM is still practiced in common?

What do those women... what? I think you forgot a part of the sentence.

first, thats quite the villification, do you have statistics backing up that transgender woman in women's shelters cause an increase in danger? Second, is that "disrespect" really that bad that it justifies withholding care from a woman that was raped? And, third, would that mean that this person JPG would be allowed in the rape shelter?

I don' t care if it' s a vilication, if they learned to stay away from women' s spaces, I wouldn' t have anything to "vilify" them. Second, we were talking about sexual abusers, they always raise danger when they are around potential victims. Third: nobody is saying that that guy who was raped shouldn' t get care, I am just saying that he shouldn' t get it in a women' s shelter. He' s a man, he can go to unisex shelters or an LGBT++++ one. I don' t know what JPG means.

what kind of argument is that? By that logic a child or infertile woman (whether by choice or not) being raped would be less terrible, which really doesn't strike me as particulary feminist.

Who said anything about it being less terrible? Quote me. Just because YOU made that leap it doesn' t mean I do.

that is a really poor argument. By that logic a five times MMA world champion and a 1.5 meter petite asthmatic girl would have to be put into seperate rooms because the latter is rather unlikely to be able to defend herself against the former.

If the MMA world champion were recognized to be violent or a sexual abuser, she shouldn' t be put in the same room as someone who could never defend herself against her. People with a history of being violent shouldn' t be put around other people to begin with, especially in a freaking shelter.

generally speaking, all the pro-transgender arguers I have seen argue for spaces where nudity occurs to have cubicles so people don't have to undress in front of complete strangers. They still want to use the space belonging to their gender identity though.

Of course they do, because they have zero respect for anyone else and only want their stupid identity validated. If they were reasonable people they would be ok with using separate spaces. If they are neutral, the fact that there is a woman sign in the front would be completely useless, but we obviously can' t give women the idea that they can have ONE thing without men making the argument that they are too entitled to it, can we?

yes gender dysphoria is a mental condition, suspected to be neurological in cause, that, when left untreated, is often maladaptive, with the treatment in question being medical and social transitioning and acceptance.

And? It still doesn' t prove that gender identity is a thing, unless you are ready to define gender identity as a mental illness. Still, a mental illness that makes you hate your own body 1) doesn' t equal with an innate natural identity that is at the base of womanhood for everyone and 2) it should be fought against, not pandered to.

do you wish to have a sexed anatomy other than female and to no longer be considered a woman? If no, then it is not the same.

I constantly want to not be considered a woman, given that women are not given even the fucking respect of having ONE single word to describe themselves. But not wanting to be considered a woman doesn' t change the fact that I am one.

I have absoloutly seen transpeople that were experiencing gender dysphoria before having heard about transgender people due to growing up in some particular backwards part of eastern europe.

Even assuming that were the case, which I don' t believe, they still have the knowledge of the other sex: desiring the other category' s characteristics, both physical or social, is not something that cannot occurr unless you know about trans people.

there are no rights granted to women on the basis of being women. What there is are laws against sex-based sicrimination with a couple of exemption

Yeah, because woman IS a sex category. The rights granted to women on the basis of sex ARE for women because woman = adult human FEMALE. Did you think that those rights were granted to us because of our gender identity, a concept that wasn' t even named until a few years ago?

The closest thing to "sex based rights" would be laws specifically related to reproductive healthercare and I don't see how writing "women and other people can get abortions if they request so" instead of "women can get abortions if they request so" would take away rights from women, but for transgender men, it makes a lot of difference

I wouldn' t care adding trans men and female NBs if that didn' t validate the idea that gender identity is a thing that should be respected. However, the point I was making is still that all the rights we have INCLUDE MEN. The issue here is not females who hate being females being included in things for females, it' s the fact that males are included in legislation for females.

a.) what makes you think that will do? My country goes by the ICD-10 (local modification), the DSM-5 is the american one. You think they would listen to some random foreigner?

Whatever equivalent you have in your country.

b.) actually, in the DSM-5 definition 3 out of the 8 points are directly relating to sexual characteristics, e.g. physical sexed anatomy, not stereotypes.

No, the 8 points of the guidelines are for children and it' s 7-1. The guidelines in general are 6 and they are 3-3. So counting all, it' s 14 points, 4 of which are about bodies and 10 of which are about stereotypes. As someone else has pointed out in this thread, you need three to be diagnosed with dysphoria, so even with the 6 points, you can still be diagnosed based entirely on stereotypes.

c.) no psychologist who doesn't deserve their license taken would diagnose someone as gender dysphoric just for not following gender stereotypes while the patient expresses to be completly fine with their sexed characteristics. That doesn't happen.

Considering that the current atmosphere bans any kind of treatment that isn' 100% validation, and this for mental healtchare as well, I think you are full of shit.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

And instead they should be stigmatized, mistreated and made outcasts for it?

No, they should just accept reality and not force people to pretend that things that aren' t real are real.

Transgender people do not chose to be transgender, but transitioning is as much a choice to them as taking pain medication is for someone with crippling chronic pain. Best case scenario would be the transgender person getting to transitiong and being treated by the whole of society like absoloute garbage, worst case would be the transgender person comitting suicide because they can bear neither the stigma of transitioning nor their existence in a body that feels deeply wrong to them. Do you not see that you are argueing for tormenting people for something they can not help? And for what? What is gained by considering transitioning socially unacceptable and morally wrong?

Dude, again, most of us evil TERFs wouldn' t even give a shit about trans people if it weren' t for the fact that the entire movement is trying to replace the definition of women with "whatever men in dress say women are". If they accepted that they are mentally ill people who want to live as the other sex, instead of pushing to erase the definition of sex and replace with their crap, I can assure you that most people wouldn' t be as antagonistic against them.

Being this kind of aggressive, censoring, punishing, gaslighting, pushing anti-woman/LGB rethoric, mutilating and brainwashing children, and pretending that everything should be accepted because "poor things, they would be too sad to face reality!" is just going to grow resentment. If you think things are bad now, I can assure that they are going to get worse if the community doesn' t stop being so fucking rotten.

And I never said anything about considering transition morally unacceptable, just acknwoledging that a man who transitions is a man who transitions, not a woman.

Women don' t choose to be women either, that' s the entire freaking point: it' s something we are born with, seeing men putting some make up on and being hailed as "real women", especially if they then proceed to shit on our rights and fucking lecture us on what womanhood is about, is disgusting.

Why does it always come down to "but the chromosomes"? No one gives a sh#t about chromosomes. Did you ever had your chromosomes tested? I didn't, I just assume that I have the typical case because their isn't anything about my body to indicate otherwise. No one walks around testing the chromosomes of everyone they met before deciding on how to treat them, no one.

It always comes down to chromosomes because they are the defining characteristic that describes sex. So when we are talking about sex, I want them to be included in the conversation as they should be. I give a shit about chromosomes, so yeah the fact that nobody cares is a lie easily disproven. What I don' t care about and don' t want to be included is a nebolous feeling based on self-hatred and obsession for cross-sex characteristics generated by a mental illness, because that has nothing to do with sex.

Why don't you fight for gender neutral bathrooms now? Transgender rights activists actually tend to do that, with gender critical people opposing.

TRAs are definitely NOT fighting for that. They want to use their preferred sex' s spaces, why the fuck should they care about fighting to get neutral spaces when they want women' s? And the reason why I am not fighting for them is because I have zero issues with sex segregated spaces. The only problem they bring is entitled men not respecting women enough TO STAY THE FUCK OUT, but those men would find a way to shit on women' s privacy even in gender neutral bathrooms!

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

I just want to throw in my two cents about this common TRA trope:

Why does it always come down to "but the chromosomes"? No one gives a sh#t about chromosomes. Did you ever had your chromosomes tested? I didn't, I just assume that I have the typical case because their isn't anything about my body to indicate otherwise.

Actually, lots of people have had their chromosomes tested. Chromosome testing both in utero and at other times in life is very common, and has been for decades. I had chromosome testing in the 1980s to see if I carried certain genetic mutations, and when pregnant with my children 30 years ago their chromosomes were tested via CVS when I was 8/9 weeks along.

By law, all babies born in the US and many other countries must have blood drawn shortly after birth so that state labs can run genetic tests to see if the babies might have specific diseases. The list of genetic conditions tested for varies from place to place, but the fact that it's done does not.

The NIPT allows sex chromosome and full genetic testing of human fetuses at 8/9 weeks from a standard blood draw taken from pregnant women's. It's inexpensive, widely available and used all around the world.

As for the claim that

No one gives a sh#t about chromosomes.

This just shows how ignorant trans ideologues are. Sex chromosomes have huge effects on health and are crucial for proper medical care. Males who contract COVID-19 are 3 times more likely than females to end up in hospital ICUs and are 2-3 times more likely to die of the disease than females with the exact same age, health status, fitness level, underlying conditions, race, ethnicity, family history and so on.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My parents were tested as well when I was born in the '80s to see if there were chances of their child carrying genetic anomalies. I don' t know if they tested me after I was conceived, but I know they did the test to them.

Currently, I know only of testing during problematic pregnancies, but I wouldn' t be surprised if it were standard for any pregnancy, and if it isn' t it fucking should be. It' s an incredibly useful tool to check on the foetus and possible severe anomalies.

I can' t with the "nobody cares about chromosomes" rethoric anymore. I had one some times ago telling me that they don' t influence development in the least. It is absolutely nonsensical.

[–]Taln_Reich 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

You talk a lot about "female socialization". What, in terms of socialization, do a western woman raised gender neutral, a woman raised in a quiverfull family, a Basha Posh (Afghan custom where girls are raised as boys in order to deal with the extreme restrictions put upon girls in afghan society) and a woman raised in some awfull corner of the world where FGM is still practiced in common?

What do those women... what? I think you forgot a part of the sentence.

what do these women have in common in terms of socialization?

I don' t care if it' s a vilication, if they learned to stay the fuck away from women' s spaces, I wouldn' t have to "vilify" them.

again. Do you have any statistical evidence, that admitting transgender women into women's shelters causes an increase in danger?

Second, we were talking about sexual abusers here. A sexual abuser always raises danger when they are around potential victims.

No, we were not talking about sexual abusers. We were talking about a transgender women in need of a rape shelter. But the fact, that you equate a transgender women to a sexual abuser is very telling.

And a sexual abuser, regardless of what gonads they might or might not have should not be in a rape shelter.

Third: nobody is saying that that guy who was raped shouldn' t get care, I am just saying that he shouldn' t get it in a women' s shelter. He' s a man, he can go to "gender neutral" shelters

1.) how many "gender neutral" shelters are there? 2.) do you believe, a person who looks like this would be anymore safe to put in a men's shelter than it would be safe to put a man inside a women's shelter?

I don' t know what JPG means.

I was asking, whether the person in the picture I linked (this person) should have access to a women's shelter.

If the MMA world champion were recognized to be violent or a sexual abuser, yes, she shouldn' t be put in the same room as someone who could never defend herself. Not to mention, someone violent shouldn' t be put around other people to begin with, especially in a freaking shelter. They need specific care, being around potential victims is the stupidest thing possible.

I wasn't asking, whether a "violent or a sexual abuser" should be "put in the same room as someone who could never defend" themself (because the answer to that is obviously no). I was asking, whether differences in physical ability should determine which victims are going to be put in the same room inside rape shelters (Because if you answer "no" to this question, your argument of "the victim could have a better chance to defend herself" falls apart)

If they are neutral, the fact that there is a woman sign in the front would be completely useless, but we obviously can' t give women the idea that they deserve to be separated from men, can we?

gender neutral bathrooms aside, you are seperated from men, it's just that transgender women aren't men. And if it is all cubicles (e.g. no one is naked in front of anyone else), what does it matter?

And? It still doesn' t prove that gender identity is a thing, unless you are ready to define gender identity as a mental illness. I am ok with that. Still, a mental illness that makes you hate your own body to the point that you want invasive surgery to change it 1) doesn' t equal with an innate natural identity that is at the base of womanhood for everyone and 2) it should be fought against, not pandered to.

Gender Identity is not a mental condition. Gender dysphoria - the distress arising from the incongruence between ones gender identity and ones physical sex - is. And no, just ignoring this disconect does not work. What does work, is social and medical transitioning.

I constantly want to not be considered a woman, given that women are not given even the fucking respect of having ONE single word to describe themselves. But not wanting to be considered a woman doesn' t change the fact that I am.

Of course you have a word to describe yourself. The word is "woman", or, if you don't want to include transgender women, "cisgender women".

And anyway, even assuming that were the case, they still have the knowledge of the other sex: desiring the other category' s characteristics, both physical or social, is not something that cannot occurr unless you know about trans people.

That is quite the claim you make. That it is not possible for gender dysphoria to appear in someone, who has never heard of transgender people. Do you have any evidence for this? And if that is the case, and it is solely psychological, why do purely psychological methods of treatment not work?

Yeah, because women IS a sex category. The rights granted to women on the basis of sex ARE for women because woman = adult human FEMALE.

there are no right granted on the basis of sex. https://rgellman.medium.com/there-is-no-such-thing-as-sex-based-rights-in-the-uk-140554a2c42c

The closest thing to "sex based rights" would be laws specifically related to reproductive healthercare and I don't see how writing "women and other people can get abortions if they request so" instead of "women can get abortions if they request so" would take away rights from women, but for transgender men, it makes a lot of difference

I don' t really care much about adding trans men and female NBs, the point is still that all the rights we have INCLUDE MEN.

Ok. Thanks that you finally agree to the form "women and other people can get abortions if they request so", so that transgender men and AFAB non-binary people are included.

c.) no psychologist who doesn't deserve their license taken would diagnose someone as gender dysphoric just for not following gender stereotypes while the patient expresses to be completly fine with their sexed characteristics. That doesn't happen.

LOL. Considering that the current atmosphere bans any kind of treatment that isn' 100% validation, and this for mental healtchare as well, I think you are full of shit.

regardless of what I think about the affirmation only approach (not a big fan), the affirmation only approach doesn't even do what you claim, e.g. regardless of how many male/female gender stereotypes the child with female/male birth sex follows, if the child in question doesn't consider itself to be a girl/a boy, even the most out-of-his-mind 100%-validation isn't going to claim trans.

No, they should just accept reality and not force people to pretend that things that aren' t real are real.

Where do transgender people "forcing people to pretend that things that aren' t real are real"? A transgender man/transgender woman having his/her legal gender/legal sex as "Male"/"Female" isn't forcing anyone to "pretend" that he/she have a penis/uterus.

If they accepted that they are mentally ill people who want to live as the other sex, instead of pushing to erase the definition of sex and replace with their crap, I can assure you that most people wouldn' t be as antagonistic against them.

No one "erases" the definition of sex, it's more that the argument is made, that the terms "Man" and "Woman" refer to social categories defined by these sexes, with transgender people wanting to be included in the sopcial category of their gender identity. If you want to argue, that the terms "Man" and "Woman" are purely biological, please come up with your own terms for the social categories, and replace all instances of "Man" and "Woman" that refer to the social categories and not biological categories with these new terms.

I give a shit about chromosomes. They are the defining characteristic that describes sex. So when we are talking about sex, I want them to be included in the conversation.

ok. Now, tell me again, how many people have you tested for their chromosomes? And why do you think anyone else gives a shit?

TRAs are definitely NOT fighting for that. They want to use their preferred sex' s spaces, why the fuck should they care about fighting to get neutral spaces when they can appopriate women' s?

Transgender rights activists do fight for people being free to use the sex-seggregated-space alligning with their gender identity (this also includes transgender man - who you would consider to be "women" - "appopriating" men's spaces) where there aren't gender neutral spaces, but they also pretty much always (as in: I have never seen a transgender rights activists argueing against but plenty for) fight for gender neutral spaces. Gender critical people meanwhile are the one's fighting against gender neutral spaces.

And the reason why I am not fighting for them is because I have zero issues with sex segregated spaces.

Of course you have zero issue. Because they actually are gender-seperated. Otherwise you would have to deal with transgender men (as pictured in the link) in your bathroom as often as you have to deal with transgender women now (except that you would always notice the well-passing ones).

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

what do these women have in common in terms of socialization?

The fact that they are considered female. First of all in western countries there is no such a thing as "being gender neutral": evena ssuming her parents raise her like that, everyone else would recognize that person as female and would behave accordingly. I don' t know what a quiverfill family is. As for the Afghan girl, she wouldn' t have to get "a boy role" if she weren' t treated as a second rate citizen for her sex.

again. Do you have any statistical evidence, that admitting transgender women into women's shelters causes an increase in danger?

I didn' t say anything about them raising danger statistically. I personally think they do, but the problem here is that that is a female-segregated space and natal males are males.

No, we were not talking about sexual abusers. We were talking about a transgender women in need of a rape shelter. But the fact, that you equate a transgender women to a sexual abuser is very telling.

It' s not really so much of a gotcha, dear: any male who thinks he is entitled to women' s spaces is a potential sexual abuser to me. If they feel entitled to be in a space designed for females to recover from sexual abuse, 99, 9% of times done by males, then it' s really not that big of a leap to me to see them as being entitled to women' s bodies as well and that they have no respect for women' s privacy and well-being.

1.) how many "gender neutral" shelters are there?

WORK.TO.BUILD.SOME! Do you think women had theirs granted on a silver platter?

2.) do you believe, a person who looks like this JPG would be anymore safe to put in a men's shelter than it would be safe to put a man inside a women's shelter?

That' s why I said that people like that should find LGBT+++ shelters and/or gender neutral shelters. Regardless, if that person is male, he shouldn' t be in a females' s shelter. Where he goes is not my concern as long as he' s not in a women' s shelter.

I was asking, whether the person in the picture I linked (this JPG person) should have access to a women's shelter.

If she' s a woman, she should have the right to access women' s shelters. That it would be appropriate or preferable for her is another thing entirely.

gender neutral bathrooms aside, you are seperated from men, it's just that transgender women aren't men. And if it is all cubicles (e.g. no one is naked in front of anyone else), what does it matter?

I am not separated from men if a man who calls himself a woman is there. And it matters because, once again, those spaces are SEX SEGREGATED! Males shouldn' t be there. As I told you already, it' s shitting on women' s dignity and rights.

I wasn't asking, whether a "violent or a sexual abuser" should be "put in the same room as someone who could never defend" themself (because the answer to that is obviously no). I was asking, whether differences in physical ability should determine which victims are going to be put in the same room inside rape shelters (Because if you answer "no" to this question, your argument of "the victim could have a better chance to defend herself" falls apart)

No, we were talking (and this is true for your previous sentence about how we weren' t talking about sex offenders as well) about potentially violent people in a room with others. The entire discussion started when YOU said:

And if a person with a vagina was raped by another person with a vagina

The comparison I was making was between a female sex offender and a male sex offender. Granted that I agree that sex offenders shouldn' t be housed with anyone, but if that happened, a female sex offender would be better than a male one because there would be more chances for the victim to defend herself and she wouldn' t have the aggravating of potential pregnancies.

In regular cases in which nobody is a violent/sex offender, it doesn' t matter the height, weight and muscles of the two female guests of the shelters. Males, however, should still not be there. Without exceptions.

Gender Identity is not a mental condition. Gender dysphoria - the distress arising from the incongruence between ones gender identity and ones physical sex - is. And no, just ignoring this disconect does not work. What does work, is social and medical transitioning.

First of all, I never said "ignoring", I said that "it should be fought". Therapy can help, as there could probably be other solutions that are not currently being studied because they are considered conversion therapy and transphobic. Second, if the only solution to make these people happy is to deny reality, then sorry but they are on their own as far as I am concerned. I am not going to pretend men are women just because they hate their penis or like wearing pink panties in the same way I am not going to pretend that the Earth is flat or that fairies exist.

Of course you have a word to describe yourself. The word is "woman", or, if you don't want to include transgender women, "cisgender women".

No, I don' t. Because if woman means "someone who has the gender identity of a woman", then I am not one. I don' t have a gender identity. And I am not "cis" either, because "cis" means "identifies with the gender assigned at birth". If gender are stereotypes and sex-based roles, I don' t identify with that.

That is quite the claim you make. That it is not possible for gender dysphoria to appear in someone, who has never heard of transgender people. Do you have any evidence for this? And if that is the case, and it is solely psychological, why do purely psychological methods of treatment not work?

Uh? I am not saying that it can' t happen? I am saying the opposite? That people can desire the other sex' s characteristics without knowing of trans people. It is purely psychological though, and the reason it can' t be treated is that we haven' t found a way to treat it yet.

there are no right granted on the basis of sex

Great, then we should destroy any place that has a disctinction between men and women. I wonder where trans natal male could get that sweet validation from.

Where do transgender people "forcing people to pretend that things that aren' t real are real"? A transgender man/transgender woman having his/her legal gender/legal sex as "Male"/"Female" isn't forcing anyone to "pretend" that he/she have a penis/uterus.

They are forcing them to pretend that they are male/female, which they aren' t.

No one "erases" the definition of sex, it's more that the argument is made, that the terms "Man" and "Woman" refer to social categories defined by these sexes, with transgender people wanting to be included in the sopcial category of their gender identity. If you want to argue, that the terms "Man" and "Woman" are purely biological, please come up with your own terms for the social categories, and replace all instances of "Man" and "Woman" that refer to the social categories and not biological categories with these new terms.

Except man and woman are sex categories. I don' t use those terms as social groups, so I refuse to grant that request. If you want terms for the social categories, you can have "women and men who present as women" and "men and women who present as men". I don' t think they cut, though, because people who present as the other sex still don' t have the same social experiences that people of that sex have.

ok. Now, tell me again, how many people have you tested for their chromosomes? And why do you think anyone else gives a shit?

That' s their problem, I do care about them.

Transgender rights activists do fight for people being free to use the sex-seggregated-space alligning with their gender identity (this also includes transgender man - who you would consider to be "women" - "appopriating" men's spaces) where there aren't gender neutral spaces, but they also pretty much always (as in: I have never seen a transgender rights activists argueing against but plenty for) fight for gender neutral spaces. Gender critical people meanwhile are the one's fighting against gender neutral spaces.

Never heard of that, both TRAs fighting for it, and GC being against that. GC would be more than happy to have gender neutral spaces added to the male-female one, even though we know that trans people would never use them. As for TRAs, nobody I have ever talked to was ok with them. There are posters in this sub who, when asked, always answer with "we can' t get them, if you want us to have them fight for them yourselves... we are not going to use them anyway".

Of course you have zero issue. Because they actually are gender-seperated. Otherwise you would have to deal with transgender men (as pictured in the link) in your bathroom as often as you have to deal with transgender women now (except that you would always notice the well-passing ones).

I would have zero issues with trans men there. If I were sure that they were actually women, whatever perceived problem I would feel initially would leave immediately. Does that mean that any trans natal male that doesn' t pass shouldn' t be in women' s spaces?

[–]Taln_Reich 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

The fact that they are considered female.

and that means precisely what in terms of socialization?

I don' t know what a quiverfill family is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull

As for the Afghan girl, she wouldn' t have to get "a boy role" if she weren' t treated as a second rate citizen for her sex.

the entire point why I named them is, that they are socialized male despite their sex being female.

I didn' t say anything about them raising danger statistically. I personally think they do, but the problem here is that that is a female-segregated space and natal males are males.

they are gender-segregated spaces. And unless you can point to evidence showing an increase in danger from allowing transgender women into women's shelters, I see more harm done by refusing them necessary care then from the damage to "dignity and rights", unless you can show otherwise.

It' s not really so much of a gotcha, dear: any male who thinks he is entitled to women' s spaces is a potential sexual abuser to me. If they feel entitled to be in a space designed for females to recover from sexual abuse, 99, 9% of times done by males, then it' s really not that big of a leap to me to see them as being entitled to women' s bodies as well and that they have no respect for women' s privacy and well-being.

Because a transgender woman that looks like a woman and has been raped by a man is totally going to feel comfortable sharing her space with men and totally only going to the women's shelter out of entitlement.

Also, your claim of "sexual abuse, 99, 9% of times done by males" is Wayyyy of, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_gender#Rape_of_females_by_females , https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/the-understudied-female-sexual-predator/503492/

WORK.TO.BUILD.SOME! Do you think women had theirs granted on a silver platter?

there is not a single publically financed shelter for male victims of domestic abuse in all of canada, dspite more than a quarter of victims of domestic violence being male https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/douglas-todd-why-no-shelters-for-male-victims-of-partner-violence

Regardless, if that person is male, he shouldn' t be in a females' s shelter. Where he goes is not my concern as long as he' s not in a women' s shelter.

what if she does turn up anyway, but keeps mum about her trans-status and just makes sure no one finds out? Are going to introduce genital checks to keep that from happening?

I was asking, whether the person in the picture I linked (this JPG person) should have access to a women's shelter.

If she' s a woman, she should have the right to access women' s shelters. That it would be appropriate or preferable for her is another thing entirely.

and what is to keep some predatory cis man from claiming to be a transgender man? Also genital checks to keep that from happening?

And if it is all cubicles (e.g. no one is naked in front of anyone else), what does it matter?

And it matters because, once again, those spaces are SEX SEGREGATED! Males shouldn' t be there. As I told you already, it' s shitting on women' s dignity and rights.

Can you please elaborate what exactly the problem is if it is all cubicles? How is that "shitting on women' s dignity and rights"? For transgender people their is data and facts, that forcing them to use the seggregated space of their birth sex significantly increases their risk of sexual assault ( https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/06/health/trans-teens-bathroom-policies-sexual-assault-study/index.html ). Do you really consider your "Dignity" more important than someone else not getting sexually assaulted?

Granted that I agree that sex offenders shouldn' t be housed with anyone, but if that happened, a female sex offender would be better than a male one because there would be more chances for the victim to defend herself and she wouldn' t have the aggravating of potential pregnancies.

Except I already pointed out that there can easily be significant differences in physical ability between cisgender women (meaning the argument about the victims ability for self defense falls flat) and that whether a rape has the potential for pregnancies is not generally considered an aggravating point (because, again, by that standard a infertile woman, a woman on birth control or a child being raped would be considered less terrible)

In regular cases in which nobody is a violent/sex offender, it doesn' t matter the height, weight and muscles of the two female guests of the shelters.

If neither is violent or a sex offender, I don't see how it would matter what gonads the respective women have either.

No, I don' t. Because if woman means "someone who has the gender identity of a woman", then I am not one. I don' t have a gender identity. And I am not "cis" either, because "cis" means "identifies with the gender assigned at birth". If gender are stereotypes and sex-based roles, I don' t identify with that.

How often do I have to repeat that? Again, identifying with with a gender identity does not, at all, requiere you to identify with the gender stereotypes or gender roles.

Uh? I am not saying that it can' t happen? I am saying the opposite? That people can desire the other sex' s characteristics without knowing of trans people. It is purely psychological though, and the reason it can' t be treated is that we haven' t found a way to treat it yet.

Thing is, we have found a way to treat it. It's just that the treatment to this unusual desire is to grant that desire as far as possible.

there are no right granted on the basis of sex

Great, then we should destroy any place that has a disctinction between men and women. I wonder where trans natal male could get that sweet validation from.

Ok. Let's start with bathrooms and rape shelters. Make a petition of turning all sex- and gender-seggregated spaces into gender-neutral ones. I'm absoloutly going to sign that.

Where do transgender people "forcing people to pretend that things that aren' t real are real"? A transgender man/transgender woman having his/her legal gender/legal sex as "Male"/"Female" isn't forcing anyone to "pretend" that he/she have a penis/uterus.

They are forcing them to pretend that they are male/female, which they aren' t.

A transgender person having a legal gender/legal sex other than his birth sex doesn't force you to pretend anything. Or does a single letter on someones personal ID/passport really have that much power?

No one "erases" the definition of sex, it's more that the argument is made, that the terms "Man" and "Woman" refer to social categories defined by these sexes, with transgender people wanting to be included in the sopcial category of their gender identity. If you want to argue, that the terms "Man" and "Woman" are purely biological, please come up with your own terms for the social categories, and replace all instances of "Man" and "Woman" that refer to the social categories and not biological categories with these new terms.

Except man and woman are sex categories. I don' t use those terms as social groups, so I refuse to grant that request.

If "man" and "woman" are just sex categories, than they also should only be used in the context of biological sex, with all instances of their use refering to social categories to be replaced by new terms.

Transgender rights activists do fight for people being free to use the sex-seggregated-space alligning with their gender identity (this also includes transgender man - who you would consider to be "women" - "appopriating" men's spaces) where there aren't gender neutral spaces, but they also pretty much always (as in: I have never seen a transgender rights activists argueing against but plenty for) fight for gender neutral spaces. Gender critical people meanwhile are the one's fighting against gender neutral spaces.

Never heard of that, both TRAs fighting for it, and GC being against that. GC would be more than happy to have gender neutral spaces added to the male-female one, even though we know that trans people would never use them. As for TRAs, nobody I have ever talked to was ok with them. There are posters in this sub who, when asked, always answer with "we can' t get them, if you want us to have them fight for them yourselves... we are not going to use them anyway".

Are you full blown delusional? Gender critical groups absoloutly hate gender neutral spaces ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unisex_public_toilet#Criticism plus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unisex_public_toilet#Protests_and_opposition) while the transgender generally is argueing for them ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unisex_public_toilet#Gender_nonconforming_people ). Please show me all the transgender people that flat out say that they oppose gender neutral spaces.

I would have zero issues with trans men there. If I were sure that they were actually women, whatever perceived problem I would feel initially would leave immediately.

And how would you be sure? Are you just going to ask him and take him at his word? If you see this person in the women's bathroom and, when you raise the question, this person claims to be a trans man, would your "perceived problem" "leave immediately" ?

Does that mean that any trans natal male that doesn' t pass shouldn' t be in women' s spaces?

actually, that is pretty much how both transgender men and transgender women handle it in practice for the most part. Transgender men start using the men's, when they start noticing that them being in the women's start making the women uncomfortable, transgender women start using the women's when they feel shure that they don't make the women uncomfortable, because they generally prefer to not cause to much trouble.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And unless you can point to evidence showing an increase in danger from allowing transgender women into women's shelters, I see more harm done by refusing them necessary care then from the damage to "dignity and rights", unless you can show otherwise.

Omg, I just can’t with this. Why do women have to prove to you or any other male that they need spaces away from males when they are raped or assaulted? Why do the feelings of a small number of males matter more?

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

As for the Afghan girl, she wouldn' t have to get "a boy role" if she weren' t treated as a second rate citizen for her sex.

the entire point why I named them is, that they are socialized male despite their sex being female.

No, these girls are not socialized female. As a result of not having a brother, uncle or a father who can do the things males are customarily expected to do to provide for the family, these young Afghan girl children are forced into pretending to be the opposite sex in order to do those "male" things for the family themselves. Doing this puts the girls' lives at risk, brings them "dishonour" and makes them pretty much unmarriageable. Being a bacha posh means just more self-sacrifice and more self-abnegation for girls. And once these girls hit or pass puberty, they are usually forced back into female clothing and to stay at home again.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

and that means precisely what in terms of socialization?

It means being treated as a second rate citizen, someone somewhat inferior to men, someone who is going to be a mother eventually because that' s what she is supposed to do, someone who becomes unwantable after 30, someone who is going to be a crazy cat owner by 50 uf they don' t get fucked enough, a sex object, someone less intelligent, someone who should stick to feminine roles. Add the issues with biology.

they are gender-segregated spaces. And unless you can point to evidence showing an increase in danger from allowing transgender women into women's shelters, I see more harm done by refusing them necessary care then from the damage to "dignity and rights", unless you can show otherwise.

If the issue is danger, then male astronomists with red hair and a leg prothesis should be allowed as well because there is no study that says their presence rises danger.

Because a transgender woman that looks like a woman and has been raped by a man is totally going to feel comfortable sharing her space with men and totally only going to the women's shelter out of entitlement.

Because a biological woman that is a woman and has been raped by an ejaculator is totally going to feel comfortable sharing her space with an ejaculator and totally only going to the female-only' s shelter out of bigotry against her trans sisters.

EDIT: Also, what does "a trans woman who looks like a woman" mean exactly? If womanhood is about gender identity, and anyone who had that identity is a woman, then what do looks have to do with anything? What does looking like a woman even mean? What are the signifiers that visually clock a woman as a woman if womanhood is an identity that has nothing to do with looks and stereotypes?

Also, your claim of "sexual abuse, 99, 9% of times done by males" is Wayyyy of

I wonder how many of those women were "women". That said, the numbers are still in "favour" of males. Also, if females are so dangerous, why should a dainty, harmless trans woman want to share space with those horribly violent and abusive hags?

there is not a single publically financed shelter for male victims of domestic abuse in all of canada, dspite more than a quarter of victims of domestic violence being male

WORK.TO.BUILD.SOME!

Also, in Canada the ONLY female-only shelter in the entire country was defunded by the government thanks to the "activism" of a brave and stunning trans woman.

what if she does turn up anyway, but keeps mum about her trans-status and just makes sure no one finds out? Are going to introduce genital checks to keep that from happening?

Then he' s an asshole. Personally I think that sex segregated spaces should have a DNA check so being lying assholes or not, they would get clocked immediately. That pesky Y chromosome!

Or, alternatively, putting the sex of a person (the real one) on some kind of electronic ID that should be scanned before entering.

and what is to keep some predatory cis man from claiming to be a transgender man? Also genital checks to keep that from happening?

That' s why I favour the blood testing/checking of ID with correct informations. And what is to keep some predatory "cis" man from claiming to be a trans woman?

Can you please elaborate what exactly the problem is if it is all cubicles?

If it' s all cubicles then there is no need to have a woman sign in front of the door. Just make singular spaces that are not grouped according to the woman-man binary.

How is that "shitting on women' s dignity and rights"? For transgender people their is data and facts, that forcing them to use the seggregated space of their birth sex significantly increases their risk of sexual assault

I didn' t say they should be forced to use their sex' s spaces, I just said that they shouldn' t be allowed to use their preferred sex' s spaces. As I said, I don' t care where they go as long as males are not in women' s spaces.

Except I already pointed out that there can easily be significant differences in physical ability between cisgender women (meaning the argument about the victims ability for self defense falls flat) and that whether a rape has the potential for pregnancies is not generally considered an aggravating point (because, again, by that standard a infertile woman, a woman on birth control or a child being raped would be considered less terrible)

I have no clue what you are trying to say here. If two women with no violent history are grouped together in a shelter then there is no problem.

If neither is violent or a sex offender, I don't see how it would matter what gonads the respective women have either.

Of course you don' t! What' s the point of having women' s shelters then? Just let anyone in.

How often do I have to repeat that? Again, identifying with with a gender identity does not, at all, requiere you to identify with the gender stereotypes or gender roles.

Are you capable of reading? The sentence you replied to is broken in two pieces, the first one, which was about GENDER IDENTITY made no mention of sterotypes or gender roles, it just says "having the womanly gender identity". I don' t have that womanly gender identity (whatever the fuck that is), so it means I am not a woman. The second part, which was about stereotypes and sex-based roles, was about GENDER, not GENDER IDENTITY. I didn' t even fucking named it. I said that "cis" means "identifies with the gender assigned at birth". GENDER is about stereotypes and sex roles.

Thing is, we have found a way to treat it. It's just that the treatment to this unusual desire is to grant that desire as far as possible.

If it were a treatment it would cure you from that disconnection to the point that you don' t need to get surgery and collective play pretend anymore. As it is now, transition is a placebo at best. And considering how lots of you react whenever someone "misgenders" you, I would say that it makes things even worse.

Ok. Let's start with bathrooms and rape shelters. Make a petition of turning all sex- and gender-seggregated spaces into gender-neutral ones. I'm absoloutly going to sign that.

Why should I do that? I am against it. I don' t want unisex or "gender neutral" rape shelters, I want sex segregated ones.

A transgender person having a legal gender/legal sex other than his birth sex doesn't force you to pretend anything. Or does a single letter on someones personal ID/passport really have that much power?

Considering the chaos it is doing? Yes, it does. If that letter is not that big of a deal, then there is no reason why trans people should change it. Stop being dumb on purpose.

If "man" and "woman" are just sex categories, than they also should only be used in the context of biological sex, with all instances of their use refering to social categories to be replaced by new terms.

You people are great at creating stupid labels, do it if you want.

Are you full blown delusional? Gender critical groups absoloutly hate gender neutral spaces

We hate them when they replace the male-female ones. We have no problems with added third spaces, the problem is that trans people are not going to use them.

And how would you be sure? Are you just going to ask him and take him at his word? If you see this JPG person in the women's bathroom and, when you raise the question, this person claims to be a trans man, would your "perceived problem" "leave immediately" ?

In an ideal World, the segregation of those spaces would be respected and men would stay out. So any person looking like that would be a woman. I wouldn' t need to ask, she wouldn' t be there unless she was supposed to be there. Alternatively, make that electronic ID with the sex of a person and you don' t need to ask, because only the ones who match that sex should be allowed in. If I knew that person were allowed in a women' s space, I would know she is a woman, regardless of how she looks like.

actually, that is pretty much how both transgender men and transgender women handle it in practice for the most part. Transgender men start using the men's, when they start noticing that them being in the women's start making the women uncomfortable, transgender women start using the women's when they feel shure that they don't make the women uncomfortable, because they generally prefer to not cause to much trouble.

Considering that most trans natal males I have seen have a very distorted idea of how much they pass, I seriously doubt that. Regardless, the "it' s not cheating if you are not caught" is not really something I am interested in justifying or ignoring.

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

Also, in this reddit post is a fun little thought excercise in this regard https://www.reddit.com/r/truscum/comments/ll6tpa/we_need_to_start_asking_transphobes_what_they/

That thought experiment doesn’t make sense. This person obviously want to prove female people have “female gender identities” and would be dysphoric if they woke up as male. But the argument of this person makes is that waking up as an estrogenized male would be worse for a person with a “female gender identity” than waking up as a non-estrogenized male. If that’s the case, why would males with so called “female gender identities” want to transition to estrogenized males, if staying non-estrogenized is better for those with “female gender identities”? Shouldn’t they instead argue that female people who wake up as non-estrogenized males also would want to take estrogen and become estrogenized?

Either way, to me the estrogenized male body is the most visually unappealing body configuration (nothing against those who are attracted to that body type or like having that body type though). So yes, I wouldn’t like waking up with a “girl dick” or inverted penis. If I am going to be male I would much prefer to be non-estrogenized male, and if I am going to have penis I would prefer the non-inverted one. My first act if I woke up as an estrogenized male would be to detransition the body. And yes, I would regard myself as male if I woke up male, a male with a female past, so I would be different from other natural males as I in this magical scenario would be a magical male (made male by magic, not due to nature).