all 22 comments

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

J.K. Rowling said women are in danger of rape & murder by men, including men who want to be the opposite sex. Men who want to be the opposite sex responded by sending her rape & death threats, thereby proving her point & ending the debate once & for all, in an own goal.

J.K. Rowling wouldn’t be married to a man if she believed that all men are predators. She just recognises that female-only prisons, shelters & sports need to remain female-only in order to remain safe.

Very well put!

However, it's not just about remaining physically safe. It's also about fairness and about privacy, dignity, comfort, hygiene and mental health. Girls and women don't just want fair play and safety in sports, and right to be safe from male sexual violence and battery. We want a fair chance to be able to participate equally in the world beyond the home. To have a fair shot at full participation in society, we need some spaces outside our homes to be places where we're physically and emotionally safe from male predation and we also can escape the male gaze, male catcalling, male come-ons, and males just being male.

Girls and women don't want to have to get undressed with adult and adolescent males looking on. We want a few places in society where we can find refuge from being ogled and treated like pieces of meat.

Another issue is that we don't want to have to use toilets where the seats and floors are covered in male urine. Girls and women don't have the option of peeing standing up like guys do. We have to sit on the toilet seats that boys and men pee all over. Blech. Moreover, since we pee sitting down with our underpants and trousers around our ankles, the urine that boys and men leave all over the floors in toilets gets on our clothes as well as our shoes. If we have shopping bags, handbags or backpacks and there's no hook, the male urine gets all over them too. If we have small children in tow, the male urine all over the floor gets on them too. The whole situation we are now being expected to put up with in mixed-sex toilets outside the home is gross.

Yet another issue is that girls and women don't want to have to pee with males listening in. Some boys and men are sexually aroused by the sound of girls and women urinating.

Dealing with issues of female biology like menstruation, pregnancy, miscarriage and lactation are difficult enough when outside our homes. Forcing girls and women to have to deal with such intimate matters in the close physical presence, view and earshot of our male work colleagues, classmates, and of male strangers is inhumane and cruel. It robs us of bodily privacy, dignity and comfort. It puts us under enormous needless stress because it makes it impossible for us to let our guards down and relax.

• Male sex-offenders have been assaulting female prisoners ever since they’ve been allowed in women’s prisons.

• Male athletes have been breaking women’s records & skulls ever since they’ve been allowed to compete against female athletes.

I'd add:

• Male voyeurs have been leering at and perving on girls and women in women's loos, locker rooms, change rooms, spas, shelters, refuges, dormitories, hospital wards and support groups ever since adolescent and adult males have been allowed into these kinds of formerly female-only "safe spaces."

• Male exhibitionists have been exposing their dicks and balls to girls and women in women's loos, locker rooms, change rooms, spas, shelters, refuges, dormitories, hospital wards and support groups ever since adolescent and adult males have been allowed into these kinds of formerly female-only "safe spaces."

• Male public masturbators have been jerking off in the presence and earshot of, and often in full view of, girls and women in women's loos, locker rooms, change rooms, spas, shelters, refuges, dormitories, hospital wards and support groups ever since adolescent and adult males have been allowed into these kinds of formerly female-only "safe spaces."

• Male sex offenders have been sexually assaulting girls and women in women's loos, locker rooms, change rooms, spas, shelters, refuges, dormitories, hospital wards and support groups ever since adolescent and adult males have been allowed into these kinds of formerly female-only "safe spaces."

• Males spy cam pornographers have been using tiny digital cameras to secretly videotape girls and women in women's loos, locker rooms, change rooms, spas, shelters, refuges, dormitories, hospital wards and support groups ever since adolescent and adult males have been allowed into these kinds of formerly female-only "safe spaces."

[–]one1won 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

My New Year’s resolution is to leave flyers about town. (Stickering can be charged as vandalism here.) May I print your words to leave in Women’s restrooms? In full or in part? Inquiring with respect. :)

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

I read somewhere that people find more than 3 examples to be untrustworthy & difficult to digest/remember. So I prefer using fewer, straight-forward, strong examples. I have re-written most of it to be more focused & more attractive to the more JKR-minded reader. What do you think(?):

The Transgender Debate On Female-Only Terms & Spaces is Over.

J.K. Rowling said women are in danger of rape & murder by men, including men who want to be the opposite sex. Men who want to be the opposite sex responded by sending her rape & death threats, thereby proving her point & ending the debate once & for all, in an own goal.

J.K. Rowling wouldn’t be married to a man if she believed that all men are predators. Like most people, she just recognises that female-only prisons, shelters & sports need to remain female-only in order to remain safe.

• Male sex-offenders have been assaulting female prisoners ever since they’ve been allowed in women’s prisons.

• Male athletes have been breaking women’s records & skulls ever since they’ve been allowed to compete against female athletes.

Protecting trans-identified males from human rights violations, like wrongful eviction & redundancy, doesn’t require them to be legally recognised as women. Making female-only terms & spaces male-inclusive is not a right, it’s male-entitlement. Male-only terms & spaces are already male-inclusive.

A person’s biological sex may be irrelevant 99% of the time, but female-only spaces are that 1% exception.

Trans-identified males only have trivial reasons for using female-only terms & spaces, but their movement is willing to tell any lie in order to pressure you into complying with its demands. So don’t be taken in by the manipulative “think of the suicidal trans kids” hype, because it’s all a myth.

• According to EVERY study on desistance, childhood gender dysphoria is temporary & an indication of latent homosexuality, not trans identity.

• The detransition rate is higher than the suicide rate, which is under 1%.

• Trans-identified murderers outnumber trans-identified murder victims (which have been <1 annually, in the UK; none motivated by transmisandry).

• According to a meta-analysis, the sexed brain of trans-identified males is almost identically to any other male’s, making “binary transgender identity” impossible, & even “non-binary identity” a stretch. Even gay men’s brains share some similarities with women’s, so if gay men are 100% male, then so are trans-identified males.

Even the scientific literature on the subject, like the DSM-V, describes trans-assigned males as men & never as women. There is a gaping chasm of difference between scientific consensus & trans activist claims. There isn’t a single science excerpt that even implies that an adult human male could ever be a woman.

The unsubstantiated claim that trans-identified males are women, is not only unnecessary for the pursuit of their basic human rights, & compromising of women’s rights, it’s also pseudoscientific.

The debate is over. “Trans-woman” is a euphemism for “male woman”. There is no such thing as a “male woman”, therefore there is no such thing as a “trans-woman”, only a trans-identified male. A trans-identified male wants to be female & pretends to be female, but he will never amount to being female. ‘Woman’, ‘girl’ & ‘female’ are female-only terms. Women’s prisons, sports & shelters are female-only spaces. Language & law are not playgrounds for men’s gender-swap role-play.

Remember, it costs trans-identified males literally NOTHING to continue using the male-only terms & spaces that they used before they identified as trans. Femboys manage it just fine. Any movement conspiring to make female-only terms & spaces unisex, is an anti-woman hate group that prioritises male role-play over female safety.

Pass it on.

[–]SanityIsGC 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

“Transgender identity” is not an oppressed minority, it’s cosplay."

SPOT ON!

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

In all seriousness now, what does it matter how men pretending to be women view themselves? I mean, I agree that such men don't believe their own lies deep down and that they usually exhibit typical male behaviours, but so what? At the end of the day, it's irrelevant how "masculine" or how "feminine they are and whether they are delusional or just lying to themselves (along with everyone else). What it matters is their sex: they are males because they bodies are built to produce sperm, and they will still be males regardless of how much hormones they take and how many surgeries they undergone. Sex is not a matter of nurture. There is no need to make up a social definition of what a woman is. Arguing that there is such a thing as a "social woman" is what we got in this mess to begin with.

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

My point is that even if you're only looking at gender identity, trans=identified males still aren't women. Basically, even their own "logic" dismantles transgender identity.

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You're the only not on the TRA side who cares this much about "gender identity". Saying that men pretending to be "women" are really men because of their usually stereotypical male behaviour is a self-defeating position. Women are women because of our bodies, not because a bunch of sexist stereotypes. Why anyone who is against the roles and expectations that are imposed on women and men would define the words woman and man in such terms?

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

My post is in the public domain now. You can cannibalise any bits that you may find helpful & discard the bits you mayn't.

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Wow! Thanks a lot, Snow. I don't know what women would do if not were for men like you telling us how transgenderism is a load of nonsense that hurt women. Now that you've spoked we shall not worry anymore, even if there are still many places in the world where pro-TRA laws have been passed or are going to be passed. And of course we shall talk about "gender identity" even though laws have been passed or are bing passed to replace sex for "gender identity" by the trans lobby. And you're so right when saying the DSM is the ultimate authority in deciding on whether men pretending to be "women" are women or not.

However, I cannot pass your brillant message on because you have used that dirty word, sex, and therefore is not suitable for children. Do better next time.

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Pathetic. Try harder next time.

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Hey, remember you were the one who said we were shooting ourselves in the foot by using the words sex because that is a word children don't know about. You can't blame me for finding funny how even you can't live up to your puritanical standards.

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

"The opposite sex" & "unisex" & "single-sex" & "same-sex" & "sex-characteristics" are terms in themselves which cannot be compared to using "sex" on its own to refer to the sexes – here too the word "sexes" is used as a synonym for a grammatically awkward (or even incorrect) word "genders". Terms like "unigender" don't exist, so why would it surprise you that I don't make up words that don't exist? I can't tell if you genuinely don't understand the difference, or you're just being disingenuous.

Even the DSM-V, which is a medical document, had to take time out explaining what is meant by 'sex'. Bc even among academics "sex" usually means sexual intercourse:

"The area of sex and gender is highly controversial and has led to a proliferation of terms whose meanings vary over time and within and between disciplines. An additional source of confusion is that in English "sex" connotes both male/female and sexuality. This chapter employs constructs and terms as they are widely used by clinicians from various disci­plines with specialization in this area. In this chapter, sex and sexual refer to the biological indicators of male and female (understood in the context of reproductive capacity)".

Within the DSM-V the distinction between sex & gender seems to be limited to the gender dysphoria section, bc throughout the rest of the document, at the end of every section there is a heading called "Gender-Related Diagnostic Issues", which tallies up the differences between the male & female experience/symptoms/prevalence etc. of whatever disorder is under discussion.

I don't know what sort of bubble you live in if the above surprises you, but in English, among the general public & among professionals, "sex" generally means sexual intercourse & "gender" generally refers to the sexes. Saying "sex" on its own only serves to alienate & make the message less accessible. Why else do you think Dave Chappelle translated JKR's "sex is real" Tweet to "gender is real"? Bc he knows, outside the trans vs. feminist debate, gender & sex are synonyms. And he is making jokes for regular people, not some echo-chamber that likes to believe that stipulative definitions overwrite permanent ones.

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

"The opposite sex" & "unisex" & "single-sex" & "same-sex" & "sex-characteristics" are terms in themselves which cannot be compared to using "sex" on its own to refer to the sexes

That is ridiculous. Lots of words have multiple meaning and people infer what is being used based on the context. Take the two following sentences as example:

"They were caught up having sex at the cinema restroom last night."

"There are only two sexes: male and female."

Everyone would be able to understand the fist sentence is about sexual relationships and the last one is about the biological category. Even if you left out the "male and female" part on the latter, nobody would think you are talking about intercourse. If you are filling a form and you are asked for you sex, the most logical conclusion is that you are being asked whether you are female or male, not whether you would like having sex.

Even the DSM-V, which is a medical document, had to take time out explaining what is meant by 'sex'. Bc even among academics "sex" usually means sexual intercourse:

Seriously just pick some biology textbooks and tell me what you find. Biologist Colin Wright has written a good deal about TRA's sex denialism and he has not problem saying "sex is not a spectrum", for instance.

If the people writing the DSM have the need to explain what they mean for sex is because the psychiatry stablisment has tyied themselves into knots by holding so many contradictory beliefs like "TWAW" and "TW are male, but we are not supposed to say this out loud". Or like "fetishist transvestism is a thing" and "talking about AGP is transphobic".

Why else do you think Dave Chappelle translated JKR's "sex is real" Tweet to "gender is real"? Bc he knows, outside the trans vs. feminist debate, gender & sex are synonyms. And he is making jokes for regular people, not some echo-chamber that likes to believe that stipulative definitions overwrite permanent ones.

That "translation" was unnecessary. If you read JKR's essay or her tweets, it's pretty obvious which meaning of sex she is using. Again, it's called context. And feminists are the only ones talking about sex, for goodness sake! I know you dislike the natural sciences, but you should really pick up some biology or medicine textbooks and see for yourself how they do use the word sex.

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

"Sexes" only has one meaning, so your example fails as an example. "Sex is real" is not clear, to the average person, even within context.

Dave Chappelle's translation was necessary. His show is mainstream, feminist theory is not. If you want to disseminate feminist ideas to the general public you have to first speak their language & stop living in denial & stop using exceptions as an excuse, especially since exceptions prove the rule.

[–]BiologyIsReal 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

You're being desingenous. That is not all what she said. This is the full phrase she said in reference to Maya Forstarter losing her job for thinking sex should matter more than "gender identity":

Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill

Keeping the full context in mind, it's easy to see what meaning of sex was intended. Really, the most confusing part for the average person is why there was any controversy over what she said and why someone lose a job over it. Her later tweets and her essay make it even clearer than she is talking about sex as a biological category.

And I don't know why you think saying "sex is real" is part of feminist theory. The reality of sex is a basic fact of life. You don't need to be a feminist to know men are not women.

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

I'm not being disingenuous, I'm in touch with the average person, like Chappelle is. Most people don't know the Maya Forstater backstory behind that tweet. Why do you think Chappelle made the conscious or unconscious decision to translate JKR's words from "sex is real" to "gender is real"?

Only feminists & TRAs say "sex & gender are not the same". But their actions always contradict it. If within feminism sex-roles & gender-roles are synonyms then sex & gender are synonyms within feminism. The original sentiment behind "sex & gender are different" was that gender refers to masculinity & femininity. You won't find anyone, not even feminists, who understands gender to only refer to masculinity & femininity today. So can we stop insisting that sex & gender are different, since those are empty words with no meaning behind them?

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

Truth, many people, especially outside the UK, don't know about Maya Forstater backstory. However, by the moment Chappelle special was out, plenty of people around the world knew about Rowling alleged "transphobia" (even if they assume she has said worse for not bothering to read her tweets or her essay). And Chappele talked about men pretending to be "women". What else could the word sex mean under that context? Again lots of words have multiple meanings. This pretence that the word sex is so complicated that one can't tell whether the interlocutor is talking about the sexual act or the biological category sounds artificial.

So can we stop insisting that sex & gender are different, since those are empty words with no meaning behind them?

No, I won't. You're not my boss and you already know my position on this. I'm not going to repeat myself.

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Again, why do you think Chappelle changed "sex is real" to "gender is real"? Does it demonstrate that outside the feminist vs. TRA bubble "gender" = "sex", or is there some other reason?

Sex may have two meanings, but so does gender. Why pretend that no one could possibly be confused by a word having two meanings, when "gender's" two meanings confuses you? You've made a point not to use the word "gender" as a result, meanwhile Chappelle is avoiding using the word "sex", bc he is talking to regular people. He wants to be taken seriously. If he had said "sex is real" to regular people they'd either laugh or be confused. Maybe you don't expect anything you say ever to reach regular people.

Either way, boycotting the word "gender" seems pretty pointless – counter-productive even. Conversely, Chappelle demonstrated that using "gender" instead of "sex" actually makes sense, if you want to comprehensively convey a GC message to regular people.

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

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 STANDING OVATION👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏