Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Dani]

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.

Yup. There is no "self-ID, but". Once you introduce the "but", self-ID collapses.

If policies, both in the private and public sphere, need to distinguish between men and women (regardless of whether these concepts are determined via sex or gender), then self-ID is very shaky ground. In this scenario, it creates incentives the moment people see the possibility entirely in their hands of being granted access to that which is limited or denied on the basis of sex/gender differentiation.

On the other hand, if there is no need for public and private policies to make the distinction in the first place, then self-ID becomes as trivial as "nice hat!" Under this scenario, of course, everything goes and no objections from me.

The thing is, I'm of the idea that we should make the least distinctions possible between men and women when creating policies, but that some distinctions are inevitable if we want to avoid a greater harm than the good "absolute equality" produces.

Self-ID can be cool most of the time, though. Like, again, "nice hat!" I'm all in for that.

 

[d4m10n]

You seem to be working from the assumption that everyone has a gender identity.

English-speaking adults can all respond to the following question: "Do you consider yourself a man, woman, or neither?"

(I suppose for the sake of completeness we could mention that some people will say "Both!" rather than neither but I'm willing to count them under "neither" for the purposes of a gender marker scheme on official documents, that is, W/M/X or "woman," "man," "non-binary" if you've got room to spell it out.)

When you ask whether "everyone has a gender identity" you're asking something fairly tricky and perhaps even metaphysical, which is why I simplified matters by just asking people how they identify themselves.

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.

You don't have to pretend to believe anything in order to answer the question about how you identify yourself.

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.

Ever heard of dog tags?

 

[d4m10n]

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.

My personal views do not matter here, all that matters is what can be supported by evidence and arguments.

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".

Every adult I know identifies themselves as a man, a woman, or non-binary when asked to do so, typically while filling out an online registration form.

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".

Pro-tip: Don't put strawman characterizations in quotations. It's not just wrong, it's poor form.

 

[Puppycow]

Ever heard of dog tags?

I was in the Navy and my dog tags said NORELPREF. All caps with no spaces if memory serves. Basically everything on the dog tags is written in capital letters.

So, for gender you could have NOGENPREF?

When I was young, if you had to tick a box on a form, it was usually labeled "Sex" and the choices were only "Male" or "Female". Some people prefer to keep it that way. (They don't want it taken away and replaced with "Gender".)

Should we have two separate ones now? The traditional "Sex" with only two choices (or three if you want to include intersex) plus a separate one for "Gender Identity" with as many choices as you want?

 

[Aber]

Every adult I know identifies themselves as a man, a woman, or non-binary when asked to do so, typically while filling out an online registration form.

You have excluded those who consider that they are a man/woman, and that they are reporting a fact not an opinion.

 

[Emily's Cat]

English-speaking adults can all respond to the following question: "Do you consider yourself a man, woman, or neither?"

Most rational adults understand that this is a meaningless question. In response, I would say "Consideration is irrelevant, I AM a female human being, how I feel about that doesn't matter".

And that's at the heart of this issue - how a person feels about what they want their personality and psyche to represent in some ephemeral mystic fashion is meaningless and irrelevant to anyone who isn't part of their particular religion.

You might similarly ask someone "Do you consider yourself Irish or Mexican or something else?" and you can get an answer that you might even find interesting. You can have some great conversations about it. But if that person is an American citizen, and is not an Irish citizen or a Mexican citizen, then how they feel about their ancestry or a culture with which they resonate doesn't have any real-world meaning or implication.

My ancestry is predominantly Irish and German. So the **** what? I'm an American citizen, who grew up in American, who has rights guaranteed by the US Constitution, and I exist within the framework of American laws and regulations. Whether or not I really like corned beef or schnitzel, and whether I prefer Guinness or Doppel Bock to Bud Light is nothing more than a personality quirk.

When you ask someone whether they consider themself to be a man, a woman, or neither... all you're asking is whether or not they accept and have affinity for a set of stereotypes.

Every adult I know identifies themselves as a man, a woman, or non-binary when asked to do so, typically while filling out an online registration form.

Baloney. I would say that the overwhelming majority of adults that you know don't "identify" as any of those things; they acknowledge what sex they are. "Identification" has nothing to do with any answer you would get - and I would bet that the majority of adults you interact with would look at you funny if you asked them such an inane question. The only people who would take that question seriously are going to be transgender identified individuals or people who believe in mystical gendered souls.

 

[smartcooky]

English-speaking adults can all respond to the following question: "Do you consider yourself a man, woman, or neither?"

My answer could be: "The question is irrelevant. I don't consider myself to be any of those... I know I am a man... but I consider myself to be an Attack Helicopter."

You have excluded those who consider that they are a man/woman, and that they are reporting a fact not an opinion.

Exactly this, 100%

 

[d4m10n]

Should we have two separate ones now? The traditional "Sex" with only two choices (or three if you want to include intersex) plus a separate one for "Gender Identity" with as many choices as you want?

This is basically what I was suggesting upthread, but we can easily keep both fields down to three choices.

 

[d4m10n]

My answer could be: "The question is irrelevant. I don't consider myself to be any of those... I know I am a man... but I consider myself to be an Attack Helicopter."

Alternatively, you could just say "man" as you do when filling out government forms.

 

[d4m10n]

Most rational adults understand that this is a meaningless question.

Go ask 100 adults, I bet almost none of them will have trouble answering the question. Seriously, give it a try instead of just telling us your intuitions about rational adults.

Happened to come across this question in the field just this a.m. while attempting to sign up for an NBC account to watch more Olympics events.

When you ask someone whether they consider themself to be a man, a woman, or neither... all you're asking is whether or not they accept and have affinity for a set of stereotypes.

Nope.

I would say that the overwhelming majority of adults that you know don't "identify" as any of those things; they acknowledge what sex they are.

Certainly not on the NBC Universal form, since "non-binary" is about gender rather than sex.

 

[Paul2]

Go ask 100 adults, I bet almost none of them will have trouble answering the question.

My guess - and it's only that - is that the people who would have no trouble answering the question would do so on the basis of interpreting - consciously or not - the question to mean, "are you a man or a woman?"

 

[d4m10n]

My guess - and it's only that - is that the people who would have no trouble answering the question would do so on the basis of interpreting - consciously or not - the question to mean, "are you a man or a woman?"

That's just fine for those who self-identify as the gender which is (nearly always) associated with their sex at birth.

 

[Paul2]

That's just fine for those who self-identify as the gender which is (nearly always) associated with their sex at birth.

That point seems to be orthogonal to what I said. My statement was an estimate of what a poll would show, not what we'd like a poll to show. Your point is how the interpretation I offered of your question wouldn't be fine for a certain class of people. Presumably, the people for whom the interpretation that I offered of your question wouldn't be just fine wouldn't accept that interpretation.

So I don't know where you're going in relation to my point.

ETA: Perhaps it will help if I let the other shoe drop. If it is true that most people would answer the original question not as a question about how they consider themselves but as a question about what they are, then your point about your question fades away, I think.

I see this getting too far down into the weeds; I may well let you have the last say on this.

 

[Emily's Cat]

This is basically what I was suggesting upthread, but we can easily keep both fields down to three choices.

One of those fields needs to be restricted to two options.
The other field is useless, but whatever.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Go ask 100 adults, I bet almost none of them will have trouble answering the question. Seriously, give it a try instead of just telling us your intuitions about rational adults.

Happened to come across this question in the field just this a.m. while attempting to sign up for an NBC account to watch more Olympics events.

[qimg]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240724/fbf5d550aa7800851b00e8b9966723f1.jpg[/qimg]

Nope.

Certainly not on the NBC Universal form, since "non-binary" is about gender rather than sex.

Let me get this straight - You think that a drop down that panders to a very vocal group of activists is somehow representative of the views of the vast majority of people?

I'm interested in selling my very successful cranberry bog, located in sunny AZ. Are you interested in buying?

 

[Emily's Cat]

That's just fine for those who self-identify as the gender which is (nearly always) associated with their sex at birth.

I reject the entirety of your framing. I reject the implicit assumption that you're relying on, and I won't play this game.

 

[Samson]

This video covers the field.
A young white woman, typically described as unreachable by Wesley Yang, deplores Elon Musk for claiming to be tricked into allowing his young gay autistic son to be sterilized.
She is an indoctrinated weirdo.
Elon Musk vows to stop this virus.
He has discovered the great pain attached to discovering trans "women" are not women, just people who warp space and time like a black hole. (my stunning analogy)
Elon explains the death of his son to J Petersen.

https://youtu.be/W192fcF6_eU?si=-gbNyUoHilpG9APf

 

[novaphile]

This video covers the field.
A young white woman, typically described as unreachable by Wesley Yang, deplores Elon Musk for claiming to be tricked into allowing his young gay autistic son to be sterilized.
She is an indoctrinated weirdo.
Elon Musk vows to stop this virus.
He has discovered the great pain attached to discovering trans "women" are not women, just people who warp space and time like a black hole. (my stunning analogy)

https://youtu.be/W192fcF6_eU?si=-gbNyUoHilpG9APf

I don't accept that trans people are dense enough to warp space and time.

Reality distortion, I can accept.

Lots of people appear to have reality distortion fields around them.

/me looks at Sampson

 

[Samson]

I don't accept that trans people are dense enough to warp space and time.

Reality distortion, I can accept.

Lots of people appear to have reality distortion fields around them.

* novaphile;14369853 looks at Sampson

Who is Sampson?
My analogy is supposed to refer to the great damage done to a great number, all of whom have life meaning subtracted and sucked away.
But then I find the more I research this field the worse it looks for every person involved, and there are millions now.
Sorry to be so bleak, your opinion of me is completely irrelevant, but thanks for trying to help.
I am out of reach like that indoctrinated woman. There is a complete firewall between us.

 

[Samson]

To clarify, the firewall is between me and the young woman.
Wesley Yang has described this in 18 to 25 year olds, but that was last year.
Maybe it is 19 to 26 year olds now.
That sincere apologist for the industry is 28.

His views as a "public intellectual" are in his substack, I thought I first heard him on BBC, which could be deemed unlikely, as the thieves are rainbowticked into oblivion. Helen Joyce says too many "trans" kids associated with the state broadcaster. Nothing like the white middle class poshters to pollute the science.

https://substack.com/@wesleyyang

 

[smartcooky]

Alternatively, you could just say "man" as you do when filling out government forms.

You're missing the point..... again, and you do this so often, I have to believe you are doing so deliberately. You are playing silly, semantic word games - I am pretty sure no-one here is fooled by your shtick!!.

I DON'T self-identify,
I DON'T have a "perception" of myself as any gender.
When I am naked, and look down between the tops of my legs, I see I have a cock and two balls. It therefore is an observable, biological reality that I am a male. This is a FACT, not some self-perception.
The End.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Holy crap, the Olympics Opening Ceremony.

And that's all I've got to say about that.

 

[Graham2001]

I found this article on the website of the Foundation for Individual Rights & Expression (formerly the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.) in which a (self-identified) trans individual discusses why they feel the current tactics used by Trans-Activists and their Allies seem to be proving counter productive in the long run.

In recent years, the transgender community has gained a reputation for championing cancel culture. Unfortunately, this is largely true.

In FIRE’s 2024 College Free Speech Rankings, a sample of 454 students who identified as nonbinary overwhelmingly reported support for illiberal protest tactics. (The survey does not have a separate category for female-to-male or male-to-female transitioners.) Almost nine in ten (86%) nonbinary students, compared to 63% of students overall, said that it could be acceptable to shout down a campus speaker. Seventy-three percent of nonbinary students showed some level of tolerance for physically blocking others from attending a speech, while only 45% of students overall said the same. Most shockingly, 53% — more than half! — of nonbinary students did not categorically oppose the use of physical violence to stop a speech. Compare that to 27% of students overall.

https://www.thefire.org/news/im-trans-trans-communitys-illiberalism-putting-our-rights-risk

 

[Elaedith]

The emergency puberty blocker ban introduced by the last UK government is lawful, the High Court has ruled.

Full judgement here.

The judgment seems rather dismissive about attempts to smear Cass and the Cass review, describing its findings as 'powerful scientific evidence'.

 

[smartcooky]

The emergency puberty blocker ban introduced by the last UK government is lawful, the High Court has ruled.

Full judgement here.

The judgment seems rather dismissive about attempts to smear Cass and the Cass review, describing its findings as 'powerful scientific evidence'.

Refreshing to see some members of the judiciary with a better grasp on reality over this issue than most. Puberty blockers are a terrible idea.

When you drill down to the facts, using drugs to prevent a normal, natural part of human development cannot possibly be good for the person taking them, it can only cause harm. If it were not for the current gender ideology that seems to have taken hold in some parts of society, such drugs would probably never have been developed in the first place.

The problem I see here is one of peer pressure and pandering. Gender confusion is a fad, and it will eventually fade into the oblivion that bell bottom trousers, big hair, hipsters, winkle pickers and Brylcreemed hair fell into. The vast majority of kids with gender issues, kids with uncertainty about gender during their formative years, grow out of it to become normal, well adjusted people. Those who do not are generally those with parents who pander to their kids rather then just let them grow up. For those who remain, gender dysphoria should be treated in accordance with what it is... a mental illness.

Who here remembers reading all the scaremongering that banning puberty blockers was going to causes a spike in youth/teen suicides rates? Well that hasn't happened has it? Of course they have only been banned in the UK since the end of May - not long enough to glean any useful statistics, but in the US, gender affirming care has been banned in 25 states and for a lot longer.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...e-and-which-states-have-restricted-it-in-2023

Have we seen a spike in the teen suicide rates in those states since the bans were enacted? Nope, at least, not that I'm aware of.

 

[Matthew Best]

If it were not for the current gender ideology that seems to have taken hold in some parts of society, such drugs would probably never have been developed in the first place.

I don't think this is true. Puberty blockers were developed to treat precocious puberty, not gender dysphoria.

 

[angrysoba]

Refreshing to see some members of the judiciary with a better grasp on reality over this issue than most. Puberty blockers are a terrible idea. When you drill down to the facts, using drugs to prevent a normal, natural part of human development cannot possibly be good for the person taking them, it can only cause harm. If it were not for the current gender ideology that seems to have taken hold in some parts of society, such drugs would probably never have been developed in the first place.
The problem I see here is one of peer pressure and pandering. Gender confusion is a fad, and it will eventually fade into the oblivion that bell bottom trousers, big hair, hipsters, winkle pickers and Brylcreemed hair fell into. The vast majority of kids with gender issues, kids with uncertainty about gender during their formative years, grow out of it to become normal, well adjusted people. Those who do not are generally those with parents who pander to their kids rather then just let them grow up. For those who remain, gender dysphoria should be treated in accordance with what it is... a mental illness.

Who here remembers reading all the scaremongering that banning puberty blockers was going to causes a spike in youth/teen suicides rates? Well that hasn't happened has it? Of course they have only been banned in the UK since the end of May - not long enough to glean any useful statistics, but in the US, gender affirming care has been banned in 25 states and for a lot longer.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...e-and-which-states-have-restricted-it-in-2023

Have we seen a spike in the teen suicide rates in those states since the bans were enacted? Nope, at least, not that I'm aware of.

The drugs were not developed to treat gender dysphoria but were used before that for precocious puberty and apparently a number of other conditions depending on whether for male or female.

Some children go through normal puberty at an early age which is apparently not good for them if they want to reach their maximum height potential, and can be alarming for children going through puberty much earlier than their peers.

There seems to be no problem using them in the short-term, but the long-term use is apparently much less clear.

 

[Elaedith]

The drugs were not developed to treat gender dysphoria but were used before that for precocious puberty and apparently a number of other conditions depending on whether for male or female.

Some children go through normal puberty at an early age which is apparently not good for them if they want to reach their maximum height potential, and can be alarming for children going through puberty much earlier than their peers.

There seems to be no problem using them in the short-term, but the long-term use is apparently much less clear.

I think the risk versus benefits for using them to treat precocious puberty probably needs to be reviewed in light of some recent evidence. However, it is a very different use from blocking puberty that occurs during the normal time frame, followed (in almost every case) by using hormones to induce secondary sexual characteristics of the other sex. There are no systematic long-term follow up studies to show what this does to neurological development.

Meanwhile, I see a lot of activists are using the line 'they are banned for trans kids but not for cis kids, it's discrimination'. This is nonsense; they are banned for treatment of one type of condition but not others. A child with a trans identity who develops precocious puberty can be prescribed them for that.

 

[d4m10n]

When I am naked, and look down between the tops of my legs, I see I have a cock and two balls. It therefore is an observable, biological reality that I am a male. This is a FACT, not some self-perception.

I was not referring to sex (the male/female binary) but rather to the meaning of gender as typically used in 21st century English. You seem to have confusing the former for the latter, which is a common enough mistake.

You think that a drop down that panders to a very vocal group of activists is somehow representative of the views of the vast majority of people?

Having seen that drop-down in multiple websites, I assume it is comprehensible to English-speaking users and presumably useful to the website owners. If you want to argue it is intended solely to placate activists, you remain free to do so.

 

[smartcooky]

I don't think this is true. Puberty blockers were developed to treat precocious puberty, not gender dysphoria.

The drugs were not developed to treat gender dysphoria but were used before that for precocious puberty and apparently a number of other conditions depending on whether for male or female.

Some children go through normal puberty at an early age which is apparently not good for them if they want to reach their maximum height potential, and can be alarming for children going through puberty much earlier than their peers.

There seems to be no problem using them in the short-term, but the long-term use is apparently much less clear.

Interesting, probably true, but ultimately irrelevant the point I was making.

These drugs are/were being used to "treat" kids going through puberty when its NOT precocious, and is just a normal part of growing up, purely on their say-so that they "feel" they are not whatever is their observable biological sex. 12-15 year old simply DO NOT have the maturity to make such impactful decisions.

 

[smartcooky]

I was not referring to sex (the male/female binary) but rather to the meaning of gender as typically used in 21st century English. You seem to have confusing the former for the latter, which is a common enough mistake.

Oh rubbish!! I'm not confused about this at all.

The real meaning of gender is biological sex, its just different word for the same thing - it always has been, and it always will be. So when I say...

"When I am naked, and look down between the tops of my legs, I see I have a cock and two balls. It therefore is an observable, biological reality that I am a male. This is a FACT, not some self-perception." I AM talking about gender because in my world, that being the world of observable, objective scientific reality, gender and biological sex are one and the same thing

The "gender" you are talking about is a fiction, and made up term, a word that has been hijacked by ideologues. You may feel differently, but facts are facts, they don't care how you feel.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I don't think this is true. Puberty blockers were developed to treat precocious puberty, not gender dysphoria.

Achooalleee... They were developed to treat specific types of sex-linked cancers and tumors. Their earliest secondary use was for chemical castration of sex-offenders. Treatment of precocious puberty came after that.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Some children go through normal puberty at an early age which is apparently not good for them if they want to reach their maximum height potential, and can be alarming for children going through puberty much earlier than their peers.

Well... it's not really height and discomfort that is the driver for treatment. Early triggering of the pituitary process has some negative health outcomes. One of the biggest ones is osteosclerosis caused by the accretion of bone density prior to the lengthening that would normally occur when the adrenal process triggers. This can result in bones getting too dense, and that can result in deformation, particularly of the long bones, when the adrenal does actually trigger. There are other impacts related to ways in which the body changes when secondary sexual characteristics develop, but when the skeletal infrastructure isn't there to support it, as well as things like the increased size of the uterus in females putting pressure on other internal organs because the abdomen hasn't grown to a sufficient size. There are other longer term risks as well.

At the end of the day, it really isn't about "oh, I'm developing early and this makes me uncomfortable".

I think the risk versus benefits for using them to treat precocious puberty probably needs to be reviewed in light of some recent evidence.

Sure, it probably deserves some additional review of the long-term effects. There should always be a balance between immediate and future impacts, and the risks should be evaluated.

That said, there's a difference between (a) using a drug to prevent a deleterious medical outcome that would occur if the drug were not used versus (b) using a drug to prevent a natural process and introduce deleterious medical outcomes that would not otherwise occur.

 

[d4m10n]

The real meaning of gender is biological sex, its just different word for the same thing - it always has been, and it always will be.

Prescriptivist nonsense. Linguistic meaning stems from actual usage, not from some Platonic realm.

 

[Matthew Best]

Achooalleee... They were developed to treat specific types of sex-linked cancers and tumors. Their earliest secondary use was for chemical castration of sex-offenders. Treatment of precocious puberty came after that.

Either way, the idea that they wouldn't exist if not for the trans lobby is obviously nonsense.

 

[Matthew Best]

Prescriptivist nonsense. Linguistic meaning stems from actual usage, not from some Platonic realm.

Tell that to the French.

 

[smartcooky]

Prescriptivist nonsense. Linguistic meaning stems from actual usage, not from some Platonic realm.

Not when that usage if hijacked by ideologues with agendas.

 

[smartcooky]

Either way, the idea that they wouldn't exist if not for the trans lobby is obviously nonsense.

But their use would be a lot more rare were if not for the trans lobby.

 

[angrysoba]

The real meaning of gender is biological sex, its just different word for the same thing - it always has been, and it always will be.

I also disagree with this.

My understanding is that the term gender basically just meant type and the way it acquired the current meaning is through the medium of grammatical gender.

As we all know, many languages gender all kinds of nouns in their languages, and arbitrarily some of them will be grouped in one way, and others in another. It has been hypothesized, I believe, suggesting that nobody really knows, that whatever group man and woman fell into was considered masculine or feminine. Hence a table is feminine in French because the grammar around it happens to coincide in morphology with the way that woman is used.

So it defininitely did not always simply mean sex.

But anyway, what is masculine and feminine certainly is socially constructed. It may indeed have a helping hand from biology, and there is obviously a big debate about whether or not men like machines and things, and women like knitting and shopping.

Funnily enough, this is where a certain "gender critical" movement seems to split.

The right-wingers argue that there is only sex and women be shopping and cooking!

The TERFs argue that there is only sex and that gender is a patriarchal form of oppression!

In my opinion, things are more complicated than that. The right is probably correct that there is a certain hardwired form of gender that comes from biology, but that of course opens the door to the possibility that there are men who genuinely feel more like women than men because their brain says so. Then again, I somewhat agree with the TERFs who argue that just because they are women doesn't mean they can't cut their hair short and work on an oil rig if they want.

 

[lionking]

Two blokes, banned from competing as women by the International Boxing Federation, are competing in the Olympics. Surely this has to be overturned.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/a...-championships-cleared-to-compete-at-olympics


“The International *Olympic Committee has confirmed that two boxers who were disqualified from the world champion*ships last year for failing gender eligibility tests will be allowed to fight in Paris.

Imane Khelif of Algeria and Lin Yu‑ting of Chinese Taipei (Taiwan) both start their Olympic campaigns this week: Khelif will meet the Italian Angela Carini in the 66kg *cate*gory, and Lin is expected to face an unnamed opponent in the 57kg cate*gory on Friday.”

Let’s hope competent, strong woman boxers kick their arse.