• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

d4m10n said:
At this point in time, we need to talk about adding "sex" rather than adding "gender" because most Americans live in states where the two categories have already been mashed together into a single (useless) one which suffers all the deficiencies you mentioned above but also fails to tell us sex at birth.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, and I do think that having separate listings for sex and gender is a better solution than having one called sex which is just a gender self-ID in practice.
 
Darat said:
That you can work out the sex by decrypting a string does not mean that the driving licence has your sex on it - there is no M or F. I bet apart from perhaps the police most people have no idea you can decrypt the sex of the person handing you their ID.
Click to expand...

If the information is there (and it's there in that final digit), then the question is who's use it's there for. If those people are aware of the code, then it doesn't matter if it's presented as a number or a letter or a Chinese character.

And it seems reasonable to me that the purpose of having sex on an ID is so that people can look at an ID and ensure that it is identifying the person holding it. Its not necessary for the holder of the ID to be able to do this. So, do those who perform the act of identification know this code? Again, I think it's reasonable to expect that they do.
 
d4m10n said:
This case is kind of wild:
https://x.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1805743208309440756

I'd've expected the city could have fought this one and (eventually) prevailed, given the current composition of SCOTUS, but maybe that would've been even more expensive.
Click to expand...
This is the sort of case that guarantees JD Vance with his bans as vice president. I think the democrats have way overplayed. There are huge numbers of lefty women unspeakable angry over this sort of thing.
 
Roboramma said:
If the information is there (and it's there in that final digit), then the question is who's use it's there for. If those people are aware of the code, then it doesn't matter if it's presented as a number or a letter or a Chinese character.
...snip...
Click to expand...

No one uses it apart from the licence issuer. As I said I could see that the police are taught how to decrypt it but I don't know if they are.

The most recent use for it as a source of ID was for the just happened general election as voter ID. Polling station staff were not told how to (nor told to do so) decrypt the driving licence number to work out what sex the person was. It is photo ID, i.e. you check the name and the picture match with what the person presenting it says their name is - (you can also use the driving licence as an address check.)

The recent official guidelines were as follows:

What should you look for when checking an
elector’s photographic ID?
You should check that the photographic ID is
included on the list of accepted photographic
ID shown on this page. Appendix 13 sets out
the eligible British Overseas Territories, EEA
states and Commonwealth countries.
You should check that the photographic ID
includes a photo that is a good likeness of the
elector:
• Does the person have any distinguishing
features e.g. moles, scars etc?
• Compare the shape of the face and look at
the position of the main features (e.g. eyes,
ears, nose, mouth) in relation to the rest of
the person’s face.

You should also check that the holder’s name
as shown on the photographic ID matches the
elector’s entry on the electoral register.

You should not refer to any other markers on
the photographic ID ...snip...
Click to expand...

I've worked in plenty of places that have used the driving licence as a proof of ID - never once have I've seen any training materials on how to decrypt the sex from the driving licence number.

I stand by what I said: That you can work out the sex by decrypting a string does not mean that the driving licence has your sex on it - there is no M or F. I bet apart from perhaps the police most people have no idea you can decrypt the sex of the person handing you their ID.
 
Graham2001 said:
Commentary by the contrarians at Spiked on the Trans-Activist response to Wes Streetings announcement...




https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/07/15/wes-streeting-is-right-to-ban-puberty-blockers/
Click to expand...
This passage is a savage indictment on the green party, and proves Wes Streeting is a knight in shining Armour for the families being wrecked by the cult.

"Zack Polanski, deputy leader of the Green Party, has accused Streeting of ‘selling out our LGBTQIA+ communities’ with the ban and ‘continuing the right-wing attacks on trans people’. As it turns out, Polanski used to dabble in hypnotherapy that purported to be able to increase a woman’s breast size. So it’s safe to say he’s not exactly a trusted source on what is or isn’t scientifically sound."
 
This is not a good look for the SNP's Equalities Officer...

A former SNP equalities officer has been jailed for six years after inflicting “unimaginable trauma” with a string of sexual and physical assaults.

Cameron Downing, 24, attacked seven people at a variety of locations in Scotland over a five-year period between 2016 and 2021.

Downing, from Edinburgh, sexually assaulted one of his victims “on various occasions” in early 2021.

The former drama student also sent a partner threatening messages, demanded he share his social media passwords, and threatened to falsely accuse him of rape if he did not stay in a sexual relationship with him.

Last month a jury at the High Court in Edinburgh found Downing guilty of a total of 10 charges, including sexual and physical assault, and domestic abuse.
Click to expand...

Link

Apparently he was fond of talking about how much he liked to beat people up, so it probably shouldn't be too surprising.

Link
 
d4m10n said:
wut :confused:
Click to expand...
He is filing bans on Trans care for minors, which is supported by ex lefties like Erin Friday I think.
There are a swathe of single issue voters who loathe Trump but despise and fear Biden for his assault on females via Rachel Levine etc.
I thought this was a commonly understood fact. 51% annoyed that 1% are given rights to take over.
Hence every story like your link sends more women across the divide.

Here is a helpful link, an up to date article by Leor Sapir and Erin Friday

https://unherd.com/newsroom/california-passes-deceptive-trans-policy-in-schools/

"On Monday, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 1995 into law. The so-called “Safety Act” is the first in America that prevents schools from adopting any policy that would require teachers and staff to inform parents when their child wants to be referred to and treated as a member of the opposite sex or as “non-binary”."

It continues
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
In the UK one of the two most used “ID” verification methods - the driving licence - doesn’t have sex on it, and I’m struggling to think why we need that info on any officially accepted ID these days. For instance the UK driving licence has a photo of you which is probably the best quick check method of verification. And given technology today if we need more than that we should be looking at biometric verification.
Click to expand...

In the UK, does DL get used as a general purpose means of confirming that a person is who they claim to be? In the US, they're used as an all-purpose ID document, since up until the last handful of years, most people took tests to be able to drive. We have a State ID as an alternative, and a lot of younger people (especially in cities) have decided they don't need to drive and just never learn. So when us older folks talk about DL, we're really talking about a general identification document that gets used a lot more like a passport within the US.
 
d4m10n said:
Gender is what people say when you ask them if they see themselves as a man, woman, or neither.
Click to expand...

I see myself as the emperor of the known universe. :rolleyes:

That's a very circular and empty explanation - it provides no useful meaning whatsoever. You're pretty much arguing that a woman is anyone who says they're a woman.
 
d4m10n said:
Okay I think you're talking about this: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2357/text

I've never yet met one. Are they numerous enough to swing a city council election?
Click to expand...
I meet plenty in New Zealand. I joined a political party first time ever, on this issue.


https://womensrightsparty.nz/

I did note Posie Parker got just 196 votes in Bristol, so it is moot whether it makes a difference. You will need the marginal electorates to move the dial.
 
Darat said:
I've worked in plenty of places that have used the driving licence as a proof of ID - never once have I've seen any training materials on how to decrypt the sex from the driving licence number.
Click to expand...
Sure, if people don't find it important to use the information about sex, they're not going to be training staff in how to find it.

(This may have been your original point, that the information about the sex of the holder of ID documents isn't generally important or used)

I stand by what I said: That you can work out the sex by decrypting a string does not mean that the driving licence has your sex on it - there is no M or F. I bet apart from perhaps the police most people have no idea you can decrypt the sex of the person handing you their ID.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can argue that it's not there when it's actually there. You can maybe argue that sex isn't explicitly listed on the driver's license. And it's possible that that's enough for whatever point you were originally making (I've forgotten what this was about). I do agree with you that there's a difference between including "Sex: M/F" and having a number whose last digits encode the sex of the holder of the document.

I simply disagree with your phrasing "the driving license [doesn't have] your sex on it". If it didn't have that information there, it wouldn't be possible to look at that document and get that information.
 
d4m10n said:
Gender is what people say when you ask them if they see themselves as a man, woman, or neither.
Click to expand...

I think Mathew's objection about gender being able to change is less important than the fact that it's not observable. As you say, you can find it out by asking them. But that's precisely the problem with using it for ID: you cannot determine it by observation, but ONLY by asking. But the whole point of identifiable features is that you can observe them. Weight can change (although it does so very slowly in the vast majority of cases) and hair can change, but at any given moment, weight and hair color are observable features. I can determine them without asking you. And you can't just make up an answer and demand to have that answer taken as gospel truth.
 
Ziggurat said:
I think Mathew's objection about gender being able to change is less important than the fact that it's not observable. As you say, you can find it out by asking them. But that's precisely the problem with using it for ID: you cannot determine it by observation, but ONLY by asking.
Click to expand...
I don't think "ONLY" is correct here, much less ALL CAPS level correct. Most people who identify as men or women (whether cisgender or transgender) tend to present themselves to the public wearing clothing obtained from either the men's or the women's department of their local clothier, at least most of the time. This allows us to make reasonable inferences from gender expression to gender identity.

Moreover, you seem to be arguing here that we determine sex by direct observation, but that's not really true. We observe secondary sex characteristics only and then make statistical inferences about probable sex at birth. We will come up with the wrong answer whenever someone has had enough cross-sex treatments (not to mention genetic luck) to pass as the opposite sex.

Since it is easy to mistake a passing trans (wo)man for a (wo)man, "gender" is helpful information to have in addition to birth sex, which would prove more confusing than helpful in such cases.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
That's a very circular and empty explanation - it provides no useful meaning whatsoever.
Click to expand...
It tells you whether someone sees themselves as a woman or as a man; you are welcome to find that useful or not as you see fit.

Emily's Cat said:
You're pretty much arguing that a woman is anyone who says they're a woman.
Click to expand...
No, I'm telling you what gender means, as you asked me to do. Please do not mischaracterize my statements here.
 
d4m10n said:
I don't think "ONLY" is correct here
Click to expand...

Under self-ID, it is. You can only determine someone's gender by asking them. There is no other method to determine gender, that's the entire point of self-ID. If someone else asked for you, and you're relying on that previous answer, that's still asking them.

Most people who identify as men or women (whether cisgender or transgender) tend to present themselves to the public wearing clothing obtained from either the men's or the women's department of their local clothier, at least most of the time. This allows us to make reasonable inferences from gender expression to gender identity.
Click to expand...

Which means that you can guess with a high percentage accuracy. But guessing correctly is different than knowing. If you accept self ID, you cannot know, even in principle, without asking.

Moreover, you seem to be arguing here that we determine sex by direct observation, but that's not really true.
Click to expand...

In practice we don't tend to bother, but it's possible. And that's my point. We don't tend to weigh people we meet either, but we could.

Since it is easy to mistake a passing trans (wo)man for a (wo)man, "gender" is helpful information to have in addition to birth sex, which would prove more confusing than helpful in such cases.
Click to expand...

That's the key bit, though. The TRA's don't want gender in addition to sex, they want it instead of sex.

But I'm struggling to see a realistic case where you can observe a person, note their sex from their ID, and then be confused about what they're trying to pass as. If they're presenting as a woman and you know that they're male, then it seems safe to assume that they're trans. How does noting their gender on the ID really help?
 
Ziggurat said:
If you accept self ID, you cannot know, even in principle, without asking.
Click to expand...
People lie about their own subjective mental states oftentimes, so you can never really know, much like when someone refuses to tell you they are in physical pain.

Ziggurat said:
The TRA's don't want gender in addition to sex, they want it instead of sex.
Click to expand...
Which would be made perfectly clear if some jurisdiction were to implement both sex and gender. I don't believe the majority of places that have already made this accommodation understand that the goal is to supersede the one with the other.

Ziggurat said:
But I'm struggling to see a realistic case where you can observe a person, note their sex from their ID, and then be confused about what they're trying to pass as.
Click to expand...
I've definitely been confused on occasion myself, but maybe those folks were deliberately performing androgeny. Anyhow, the identification information is on state-issued i.d.'s doesn't live only on the i.d. itself, it also lives in government databases and can be accessed by the sort of people who need to i.d. a suspect or a body.
 
d4m10n said:
People lie about their own subjective mental states oftentimes, so you can never really know, much like when someone refuses to tell you they are in physical pain.
Click to expand...

Under self-ID as the TRA's want it, you cannot lie about this. Whatever you say is axiomatically true. It is true because you said it.
 
Aber said:
To show how strange the discussion has got



https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2024/07/why-are-british-doctors-voting-to-reject-the-cass-report
Click to expand...

I was curious to see if anything had come of this. Googling 'BMA Cass' found this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2l7ze7m0o

British Medical Association (BMA) leaders have met to discuss the approach being taken to children and young people struggling with their gender identity.

The union’s senior doctors debated the Cass review on Wednesday at a meeting of its council – the BMA's top decision-making body.

Ahead of the meeting, a council member questioned the way the review was carried out and called the ban on puberty blockers "terrible".

Meanwhile, the New Statesman has reported that a motion proposing the BMA “publicly disavow” the review was to be debated.

The BMA described the magazine's claim as misleading but refused to release details of the motion voted on.

It did say that the Cass review was debated alongside the “woefully inadequate” provision of services for children and young people with gender dysphoria.
Click to expand...
 
Pixel42 said:
I was curious to see if anything had come of this. Googling 'BMA Cass' found this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2l7ze7m0o
Click to expand...

Apparently the BMA criticized Hannah Barnes for having written the New Statesman article and are refusing to say whether the vote was undertaken, and if so, what the outcome was.

I suspect they were hoping to push this through quietly and are upset at the exposure. There are committed activists in the governing body of the BMA.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I see myself as the emperor of the known universe. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Self-ID is a thing apparently. This is how my neighbour's dog sees himself when someone knocks on the door!

DogPerception2.jpg
 
Elaedith said:
What do the different versions say? I just looked up their definition online and it still says adult human female.
Click to expand...

I suggest you look up their definition of female

a: of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggs
b: having a gender identity that is the opposite of male
Click to expand...
 
That was my fault, implying that "woman" was directly in play at M-W. It is only indirectly in play by way of "female," at least for now.
 
d4m10n said:
I don't think "ONLY" is correct here, much less ALL CAPS level correct. Most people who identify as men or women (whether cisgender or transgender) tend to present themselves to the public wearing clothing obtained from either the men's or the women's department of their local clothier, at least most of the time. This allows us to make reasonable inferences from gender expression to gender identity.

Moreover, you seem to be arguing here that we determine sex by direct observation, but that's not really true. We observe secondary sex characteristics only and then make statistical inferences about probable sex at birth. We will come up with the wrong answer whenever someone has had enough cross-sex treatments (not to mention genetic luck) to pass as the opposite sex.

Since it is easy to mistake a passing trans (wo)man for a (wo)man, "gender" is helpful information to have in addition to birth sex, which would prove more confusing than helpful in such cases.
Click to expand...

d4m10n, what has occurred in your life that has shifted your view on this so substantially from what it was just a year ago? For a while, I thought you were playing Devil's Advocate, but now I'm not so sure of that.

You're now seem to be pretty well embracing gender identity and the notion that everyone "identifies" as a "man" or a "woman", as well as the language of "cisgender". Then you throw in arguments that are on the ragged edge of "you can't actually tell what someone's sex is, it's just an educated guess and you're likely to be wrong".

It's actually NOT easy to mistake a transwoman for an actual female human being. The overwhelming majority don't come anywhere near to passing, and those that do have had immense amounts of cosmetic surgery.
 
d4m10n said:
Which would be made perfectly clear if some jurisdiction were to implement both sex and gender. I don't believe the majority of places that have already made this accommodation understand that the goal is to supersede the one with the other.
Click to expand...

You seem to be working from the assumption that everyone has a gender identity. I don't accept that assumption. Putting both elements on ID cards is effectively forcing everyone in that society to play make-believe so that a minority of people can have euphoria about their ID cards.

It's about as useful and meaningful as requiring that everyone must put their religion on their ID Cards, and then to go that extra step and insist that atheism is a religion too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom