Cont: Transwomen are not women part XII (also merged)

[ponderingturtle]

Why? Sex is one area where what is in someone's underwear is relevant. If someone doesn't have the genital configuration you want in a sexual partner it doesn't matter whether they are male or female they aren't going to do it for you.

And also straight men should refuse to date cis women that find intercourse painful. Really you should put a list of required sex acts that they must be willing/able to perform before dating someone.

 

[ponderingturtle]

If there was no surgery or hormone therapy, i would consider dating a transman, as they are physically still women.

So no cancer patients with mastectomies for you either I see.

 

[Hercules56]

So no cancer patients with mastectomies for you either I see.

What if they got implants?

 

[d4m10n]

So I'm an ageist then because I think that wrinkled old Rupert Murdoch is physically unattractive?

I suppose there is a legal definition of "ageism" which exempts personal evaluations for things like dating, but the general sense of "ageism" is simply that you are prejudging someone on account of age. If you don't want to date wrinkled old men, you are prejudging them, just as the lesbians in the erstwhile OP are prejudging women with penises.

Am I a religious bigot because I think those men bowing their heads over and over against the wailing wall are idiots...?

I'm going to go with an unqualified "yes" here. Religiously devout people can be geniuses, and I'd be willing to bet that many of the more famous Talmudists were in fact geniuses. It's a shame that they applied their considerable intellect exclusively to thinking deeply about the World's Oldest Book Club, but such is life and humanity.

 

[JoeMorgue]

"It's technically a kind of prejudice in a way that doesn't matter and nobody will judge you for" seems like a less then useful distinction to add to the discussion at this point.

 

[d4m10n]

Commentary from Jeremy Coyne, on a San Fransisco Chronicle article...

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/...-not-binaries/

The original article is linked below:

https://web.archive.org/web/20230601...x-18087147.php

Pulling out this paragraph from the original article for consideration:

Now, let’s consider the most reductive definition of sex. The gametes. What are gametes? Reproductive cells. Eggs and sperm. Sounds binary, right? As a human, you either produce eggs or sperm, yeah? Nah. On average, most cis women and trans guys are born with all of the eggs they may eventually ovulate with. But some are born without them. Some have their ovaries removed. So, they have no gametes. What about them? Cis men and trans women don’t even start producing sperm until the onset of puberty. So, before puberty, they have no gametes. None. Some cis men are sterile. What about them? As you can see, some people, for these reasons, don’t produce or have gametes at all. Therefore, there are three states: no gametes, eggs or sperm. It’s a triplet, a trifecta. Gametic sex is not binary.

What Dr. Zemenick seems to be missing here is that sexual reproduction as a process precedes the linguistic construction of sex as a category. Every mammal who participates in the process does so by contributing one of two gametes. This is just to say that there is indeed a binary lurking just beneath the trifecta, one that applies to >99% of humans.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

"It's technically a kind of prejudice in a way that doesn't matter and nobody will judge you for" seems like a less then useful distinction to add to the discussion at this point.

I mean, some people may judge you for such intensely personal preferences, but whether or not that judgement occupies any space in your mind really depends on how highly you esteem those passing such judgements.

 

[Blank]

What if they got implants?

Spoken like a true champion for womens rights.

 

[d4m10n]

"It's technically a kind of prejudice in a way that doesn't matter and nobody will judge you for" seems like a less then useful distinction to add to the discussion at this point.

I'm sure there is someone griping on the internet about being prejudged based on age when using dating apps, just as Natalie Reed believes people shouldn't be prejudged on their genitals. I think it's just fine to have such preferences, but I don't expect everyone to agree.

I mean, some people may judge you for such intensely personal preferences, but whether or not that judgement occupies any space in your mind really depends on how highly you esteem those passing such judgements.

Or how well they phrase their arguments. I have to say that Reed does a fairly good job.

 

[Paul2]

Pulling out this paragraph from the original article for consideration:
What Dr. Zemenick seems to be missing here is that sexual reproduction as a process precedes the linguistic construction of sex as a category. Every mammal who participates in the process does so by contributing one of two gametes. This is just to say that there is indeed a binary lurking just beneath the trifecta, one that applies to >99% of humans.

The other way to voice that distinction is one I’ve seen Jerry Coyne make: there’s a difference between the definition of sex (by gamete type) and the diagnosis of sex (by numerous factors and thus can ambiguous).

 

[Hercules56]

Spoken like a true champion for womens rights.

Uh huh...

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'm sure there is someone griping on the internet about being prejudged based on age when using dating apps, just as Natalie Reed believes people shouldn't be prejudged on their genitals. I think it's just fine to have such preferences, but I don't expect everyone to agree.

Or how well they phrase their arguments. I have to say that Reed does a fairly good job.

If we focused on gamete type then after menopause they are no longer female, and no one who is infertile has a sex. That simple definition always seems to be rejected despite the biological clear basis.

 

[d4m10n]

Currently in Australia, you have the case of Sall Grover, who set up a female-only social network and dating/networking app called Giggle, but is being sued by a trans woman called Roxanne Tickle (possibly not their real name) because the app rejected them due to their appearing to be male.

Any time females are permitted by wider society to have their own spaces/leagues/record books/awards/etc. someone like Tickle will come along to shake things up.

 

[d4m10n]

If we focused on gamete type then after menopause they are no longer female, and no one who is infertile has a sex.

Looking at exactly one point in time is a nonsensical approach. If someone was born with ova, then she was born female in either the colloquial or biological sense of the term and will quite likely require the sorts of birth control designed for females if she wants to avoid pregnancy. If after all this, she no longer produces ova, we still say she is of the sex that produces large immobile gametes and (under propitious conditions) gestates the next generation. We've covered all this in another thread.

What makes cover model Logan Brown female is the capacity to produce ova and gestate young. This doesn't tell us much of anything about his gender identity or gender role, of course.

Sent from my Albany Primo using Tapatalk

 

[Blank]

A story that actually made the news even here: https://www.sfgate.com/connecticut/article/court-hearing-ct-athletes-appeal-agaist-ciac-18137970.php

What jumped into my eye is the Title IX used to litigate and that is previously ensured trans athletes rights to compete and the thing smells like incompetent administration on a Fed level that has failed to make any country wide law to unify Trans status and now some across state non-profit is damned if they do, damned if they don't situation.

Prolly getting spun into "eeeeviiil TRAs " when the root of the problem really is congress or senate that stops any real solutions to the issue.. And nope removing trans rights without messing up with constitution or going against UN HR declaration is not going to happen.

In the suit they have used XY and XX chromosomes as the defining factor.

 

[d4m10n]

Prolly getting spun into "eeeeviiil TRAs " when the root of the problem really is congress or senate that stops any real solutions to the issue.

Suppose Congress decided to draft a real solution to the problem of segregation in youth sports, either by sex or by gender. What would that look like?

 

[Blank]

Suppose Congress decided to draft a real solution to the problem of segregation in youth sports, either by sex or by gender. What would that look like?

Probably a bill recognizing Trans as 3rd gender and that way force whoever runs statewide sports to offer the "fair chance to compete against similar athletes" as a separate division or something, they probably won't do it without having to.

I'm a jockphobe so I might be biased since I consider having a competition about who is best at something useless, a waste of time and just a part of the entertainment industry so take the stand with a grain of salt. (I can swim fast enough so if I end up in a capsized bout in shark infested waters, I'm probably faster than atleast one other so good enough for me)

 

[Cat Not Included]

It is not bigotry to refuse to date transwomen.

Full stop

If its on a canvas its art. Full stop.

Why are you so obsessed with this anyway? What possible difference does it make to your life, aside from being afraid someone else somewhere in the world is thinking "wrong"?

Let's say you meet someone and date them. And you go on some dates and are having a great time and are really attracted to them and enjoy being with them and are going on about how in love with them you are.

They you discover that they are transgender.

If you think about it a while and say to them "I'm really sorry. I think you are a great person and I've really enjoyed spending time with you, but I just don't think I can properly handle this. I wish you the best and hope you find someone who can love you properly" and then you go home and you're really sad because you thought you'd found "the one" and it didn't work out, I would absolutely NOT call you bigoted. I would be inclined to console you and tell you that hey, that's a big thing to get past and its totally OK to make that decision.

If you immediately scream "YOU'RE NOT A REAL whatever gender we're talking about here!!", punch them in the face, and go home and post about how this horrible person lured you into a relationship and probably just wants help eating children (or whatever the current right-wing rage du jour claim is), I would be inclined to tell you that you absolutely are being bigoted, and a thoroughly terrible human being on top of that, and that person should thank their lucky stars to be done with you before getting in too deep.

There's an enormous range of possibilities between those two and off to either side.

TLDR: Humans are f'in complicated.

 

[Hercules56]

If its on a canvas its art. Full stop.

Why are you so obsessed with this anyway? What possible difference does it make to your life, aside from being afraid someone else somewhere in the world is thinking "wrong"?

Let's say you meet someone and date them. And you go on some dates and are having a great time and are really attracted to them and enjoy being with them and are going on about how in love with them you are.

They you discover that they are transgender.

If you think about it a while and say to them "I'm really sorry. I think you are a great person and I've really enjoyed spending time with you, but I just don't think I can properly handle this. I wish you the best and hope you find someone who can love you properly" and then you go home and you're really sad because you thought you'd found "the one" and it didn't work out, I would absolutely NOT call you bigoted. I would be inclined to console you and tell you that hey, that's a big thing to get past and its totally OK to make that decision.

If you immediately scream "YOU'RE NOT A REAL whatever gender we're talking about here!!", punch them in the face, and go home and post about how this horrible person lured you into a relationship and probably just wants help eating children (or whatever the current right-wing rage du jour claim is), I would be inclined to tell you that you absolutely are being bigoted, and a thoroughly terrible human being on top of that, and that person should thank their lucky stars to be done with you before getting in too deep.

There's an enormous range of possibilities between those two and off to either side.

TLDR: Humans are f'in complicated.

This is a fascinating conversation.

 

[Trausti]

Suppose Congress decided to draft a real solution to the problem of segregation in youth sports, either by sex or by gender. What would that look like?

Simply make clear that Title IX has nothing to do with subjective identity.