QT: Is there such a thing as a man wants to be a woman? + 10 additional questions

submitted by SnowAssMan from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

2- Can you define what a man and a woman are without using circular definitions or rely on sexist setereotypes?

3- Where is the proof that it works?

4- Record numbers of transgender prisoners transition from men to women

One in 50 prisoners identifies as transgender amid concerns inmates are attempting to secure prison perks

6- OP is not GC. And when GC denied neuroplasticity, anyway? Do you even know what that word means?

7 and 8 - Of course, trans identified people are the only people who matter for QT...

9a) Are you saying that desistence must not be researched?

9b) How can you design a vetting system when QT ban any research that they don't like (e.g. desistence, detransition, alternative treatments, autoginephillia, causes of gender dysphoria, why the sex ratio has switched in recent years)? Why do "gender affirming treatments" studies avoid using controls (and by controls I mean people with gender dysphoria not being treated with "gender affirming treatments"?

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I mean I'm more gender abolitionist I guess, but I thought that's what most GC feminists are.

I don't think you need to ask for a definition without stereotypes. Never understood why every feminist seems to make this qualification to the question. Personally never witnessed someone ever even answer the question, let alone using stereotypes.

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The point is to highlight how sexist their ideas of women and men are. A man with long hair wearing a dress and lipstick and who likes soap operas and hates sports? According to QT, he must really be a "woman"! A woman with short hair wearing trousers, who is good at math and likes action movies? Again to them, she must be really a "man"! I guess they realize this and that is why they usually avoid answering the question.

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (8 children)

2 - 'Adult human male or transgender female' 'Adult human female or transgender male' EZ PZ

3 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16758113/ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10508-009-9551-1 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22736225/ literally 2 seconds in google.

4 - ? Neither of these links are about trangender sex offenders, they're about male prisoners trying to abuse a broken system.

6 - And I'm supposed to keep track of these things? My point still stands, brain sex is a stupid fucking concept. When did I say GC denies neuroplasticity?

7&8 - I mean, they matter more to me than you do. I'm certain the opposite is true for you. It's just the way life works.

9a - I'm saying the current research is awful.

9b -

and by controls I mean people with gender dysphoria not being treated with "gender affirming treatments

Because that's unethical and insane?

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

2a- So, what do adult human males and transgender females have in common to be grouped together? What do adult human females and transgender males have in common to be grouped together.

2b- How are you defining male that transgender males are not included in your definition of man? How are you defining female that transgender females are not included in your definition of woman?

3- They are paywalled. I may adress them later if I find a free version.

4- I need to label better my list of links... These two are about sex offenders.

Female prisoners at greater risk of sexual assault by transgender inmates, High Court hears

High Court rules transgender women CAN go into female prisons: Judges rule government's policy is lawful despite claims from inmate it raised risk of sex attacks

Those are official numbers from the British goverment. Real numbers may be slightly higher because males with a GRC are counted as female (but nobdy is trying to erase sex, right?). Notice that the judges of this case recognized the greater risk for female inmates, but they ruled women must suck it up because the feelings of males who identify as trans are more important. Tell me again how are trans identified people the most oprressed?

7 and 8- And yet women are supused to use "prefered pronouns" and "inclusive language" and acept males in women's spaces because...? You're the one who thinks we're a hate group for refusing to do all those things yet, when questioned about TRA policies' impact on women, you simplely say that is how life works? Seriously?

9a- Have you read any pro-QT paper?

9b- That is how clinical research works. To prove that a new drug is effective to treat a certain disease you need to do a randomized double blind trial where you give a group of subjects the drug you're testing and another group of subjects, a placebo. The participants don't know which one they are taking. Neither do the doctors. If there is already a treatment available, you can include the standard treatment to see if the new drug offer any advantage over it.

https://www.britannica.com/science/control-group

https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/control-group/

https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/double-blind-study/

Blinding for "gender affirment treatment" is not possible, but there is not excuse not to use a control group. But researchers never compare patients treated with "gender affirming treatment" with patients receiving not treatment or receive alternative treatments. They use the general population as control instead, except this doesn't tell us wheter patients are getting better from the treatment provided. Worse, for ideological reasons nowadays researchers will match subjects with controls by "gender identity" instead of sex and, thus, introducing more variables in the mix. Other common methodological problems of studies supporting "affirming" the identity of trans identified people are: they usually use a convenience sampling method, lack of long-term studies, and a high rate of participant's drop-out.

[–]Juniperius 6 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

'Adult human male or transgender female' 'Adult human female or transgender male' EZ PZ

An apple is a round fruit produced by a tree of the species Malus domestica, or a brand of computer. See, they're in the same group and if you don't put laptop pieces in your pie you're a bigot.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

2 is not a definition, it is two different examples you claim to be covered by each word. Are you saying you provided two definitions for woman or man? When a word has two meanings you number the different meanings. If you did that then we could say, "I'm using the first definition, not the second" to clarify when confusion arises between the two contradictory definitions you're providing for each word.

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

That's... not how definitions work, but okay.

If I tell you I'm European, does that tell you I'm a European native or a person who lives in Europe?

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

If I tell you I'm European, does that tell you I'm a European native or a person who lives in Europe?

If you're European, you have a European passport. That means you're a native. Someone living abroad is not European but a European resident. They still belong to the country that they have the passport from, unless they go through the process to change their citizenship.

It is possible to change citizenship, of course, while it is not possible to change sex. One is an artificial distinction created by human borders while the other is a physical reality.

'Adult human female or transgender male'

If any kind of female or a certain kind of male is a woman, does that mean that a transgender female is also a woman? Why would a transgender female not belong under "adult human female"? Is a transgender person not also an adult human person?

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

Wow. There is a lot wrong to unpack here. First off, no, the word 'European' does not mean I have a European passport. It also doesn't mean I'm a native. It COULD mean I am a native. It could also mean I live there. That's it. Way to misunderstand the prompt, champ!

does that mean that a transgender female is also a woman?

transgender female

transgender

So, that would be a no. Because they are transgender. Exclusionary vocabulary.

Why would a transgender female not belong under "adult human female"?

I mean, they COULD, but now you're getting into the realm of having multiple words to describe you, and having to pick the best one for any situation. To take from my example from earlier that you didn't understand, I am European, and American (A native of Europe, a permanent resident of America.) The answer to 'what' I am, in this case, isn't a definitive answer, but a social answer, because in most cases, just saying 'both' isn't helpful.

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

First off, no, the word 'European' does not mean I have a European passport.

Well, I'm American but living in Europe and would never call myself European. As far as I understand the meaning of the word, it only refers to people who are citizens of European countries. I have a residence card, but I still have to go to the American consulate to take care of official papers.

Still, that's just semantics - you are saying that you can be European and American at the same time if you have an American passport and live in Europe. Are you then trying to say that you can be a man and a woman at the same time if you are male but presenting as female?

So, that would be a no. Because they are transgender. Exclusionary vocabulary.

How do we know if something is exclusionary when the definitions are so hazy... a transgender female is not a woman because "transgender" is exclusive, but a trans woman is a woman because "trans" is just an adjective, is that right?

I mean, they COULD, but now you're getting into the realm of having multiple words to describe you, and having to pick the best one for any situation. To take from my example from earlier that you didn't understand, I am European, and American (A native of Europe, a permanent resident of America.) The answer to 'what' I am, in this case, isn't a definitive answer, but a social answer, because in most cases, just saying 'both' isn't helpful.

So... you are both a man and a woman but it's "not helpful" to say both? That it isn't really exclusionary vocabulary in any other sense except you deciding to exclude one of the definitions.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Are you now conflating how conversations work with how definitions work? I assure you, I described how definitions work accurately. Open a dictionary. ... I'll wait. ... OK. You see words with multiple definitions, and you see them numbered. You may see words with one definition. They are not because there is no need. The word in that latter case would have only one real usage. Any other usage would be at best slang, but it would not be a real meaning or use of the word. You offered multiple definitions for a word as if they were together as one. When a word legitimately has multiple definitions, numbering makes it clear what is being said. You offered two contradictory ideas smushed together like they are one. By doing that, you are erasing the one, actual, meaning of woman by conflating it with something entirely different just like you're doing here with offering a conversational example as an example of how you wish definitions work.

Everything in "QT", and now many other places, is built on fuzzy language and insisting on a lack of clarity. You are playing by your rules, but those are unworkable and self-serving. But, as you are so open about throwing everyone else under the bus, how you do not care about others and only care about yourself because you assume everyone else is like that, because you are apparently living the dream, It makes sense that you would use fuzzy language to twist it into looking like it works the way you want it to work.