The trans debate

[Rich Tea Wellin]

Dont agree with the court decision, they should let puberty go its full course imho.

Surely a 15 year old is able to make their own mind up?

niiiiiiice

[Dunners]

Some 'activists' yesterday.

[Long slender neck]

what the hell is that?

[Dunners]

1:24 to 1:45 is my favourite bit.

[Long slender neck]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59074096

"accept the idea that a penis can be a female sex organ"

[Long slender neck]

Professor resigns after saying
"gender identity is not more important than facts about biological sex “particularly when it comes to law and policy”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... rights-row

[Long slender neck]

"scientists warn that IOC’s new guidance – which states there is no need for trans women to lower their testosterone to compete against natal women – ignores the science on sex, gender and performance and focuses mostly on inclusion."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/ ... male-sport

[greyhound]

what the hell is that?

blokes trying to be a woman.

[SvenO]

Women are strong and amazing and if you watch movies better than men. This shouldn't be an issue.
Sounds like discriminations.

[oxo]

Women are strong and amazing and if you watch movies better than men.

Any films in particular that have upset you, or just ones where women have leading roles in general?

[CEB]

Wondered if this was discussed here after seeing the latest JK Rowling stuff. Suffice to say I have opinions on this issue, as anyone on my Facebook will know
Some good discussion here, though it seems mostly to be of the “and now THIS?” with a bit of back and forth about fairness in individual cases. Look into what trans activism actually demands, and the coherence of what it argues for, and it’s the most batshit crazy, authoritarian, misogynistic movement you could imagine…
Look at it from first principles and nobody who is intellectually honest could end up thinking trans rights activism is anything other than sexist bullshit.

[Long slender neck]

What are the demands beyond access to female spaces? You never hear about trans people req access to mens spaces.

[CEB]

What are the demands beyond access to female spaces? You never hear about trans people req access to mens spaces.

An important thing to understand is that the underpinning demand isn’t to allow biologically male people to access female spaces: that would be an argument that could be engaged with, where compromise could be found, and where there could be productive discussion about which spaces it is and isn’t appropriate to open to male people who identify as women.

What the demand actually *is* is that laws, policy and language should change to reflect this idea: we all, every one of us, have an innate sense of ourselves called gender identity that may or may not align with our body. What we’d think of as our sexed bodies therefore are not the basis on which we should organise society, because a person with the gender identity “woman” - which has no criteria applied to it by trans activism, no definition - *is* female, regardless of sex.
That’s why if you take the sport question for example, trans activism isn’t interested in addressing the fairness, because as far as the underpinning ideology goes, trans women belong in women’s sport because they *are* female, with *female* now meaning “person who identifies as a woman”, and so if a trans woman is stronger/faster than women, that’s simply because - “yay, this woman, who is oppressed by society based on her being trans, is EXCELLENT at sport”

There are lots of negative implications here, but one of the biggest is the suggestion that female people who know that they are female people are assumed to be less oppressed by patriarchy, by gender expectations etc, than male people who identify as female.

And that’s before you get into the sexist nonsense that is a male person’s internal idea of what a female sense of identity might consist of

[slacker]

I’m really not certain what I think about this hot potato topic. I guess I’m still open to being put right on a few points I was unsure of here.

And hi CEB. Nice to have you around again. We’ve really suffered from a lack of Katie Perry drawings of late…

yeah, I’ve spotted the KP thread

[Dunners]

It's batsh*t crazy.

[Max B Gold]

What are the demands beyond access to female spaces? You never hear about trans people req access to mens spaces.

An important thing to understand is that the underpinning demand isn’t to allow biologically male people to access female spaces: that would be an argument that could be engaged with, where compromise could be found, and where there could be productive discussion about which spaces it is and isn’t appropriate to open to male people who identify as women.

What the demand actually *is* is that laws, policy and language should change to reflect this idea: we all, every one of us, have an innate sense of ourselves called gender identity that may or may not align with our body. What we’d think of as our sexed bodies therefore are not the basis on which we should organise society, because a person with the gender identity “woman” - which has no criteria applied to it by trans activism, no definition - *is* female, regardless of sex.
That’s why if you take the sport question for example, trans activism isn’t interested in addressing the fairness, because as far as the underpinning ideology goes, trans women belong in women’s sport because they *are* female, with *female* now meaning “person who identifies as a woman”, and so if a trans woman is stronger/faster than women, that’s simply because - “yay, this woman, who is oppressed by society based on her being trans, is EXCELLENT at sport”

There are lots of negative implications here, but one of the biggest is the suggestion that female people who know that they are female people are assumed to be less oppressed by patriarchy, by gender expectations etc, than male people who identify as female.

And that’s before you get into the sexist nonsense that is a male person’s internal idea of what a female sense of identity might consist of

I'm surprised you haven't taken your usual helicopter view and examined more objectively how this so called "debate" has been framed.

[Max B Gold]

It's batsh*t crazy.

I'm surprised you haven't taken your usual helicopter view and examined more objectively how this so called "debate" has been framed.

[Max B Gold]

I’m really not certain what I think about this hot potato topic. I guess I’m still open to being put right on a few points I was unsure of here.

And hi CEB. Nice to have you around again. We’ve really suffered from a lack of Katie Perry drawings of late…

yeah, I’ve spotted the KP thread

I'm surprised you haven't taken your usual helicopter view and examined more objectively how this so called "debate" has been framed

[CEB]

I’m really not certain what I think about this hot potato topic. I guess I’m still open to being put right on a few points I was unsure of here.

And hi CEB. Nice to have you around again. We’ve really suffered from a lack of Katie Perry drawings of late…

yeah, I’ve spotted the KP thread

The reason the issue is so complex is because, as far as I can see, people with an understandable predisposition towards progressive causes have happily gone along with what seems an obvious next step in society becoming more enlightened - “it’s just like gay rights” - and have kind of assumed that there’s some substantial analysis somewhere, a rationale underpinning trans activism that justifies it. And by the time you’ve gone along with it to some extent, you’re a bit railroaded into not questioning anything else lest you be considered bigoted. I think it’s easy for those who aren’t certain what to think to kind of delegate the thinking to others and see what people we’re aligned with think. That’s what I did to start with, but the absurdities were too much; i like a good argument, but I couldn’t argue in favour of trans rights activism because as I looked for the substance, there was none at all.

[CEB]

It's batsh*t crazy.

I'm surprised you haven't taken your usual helicopter view and examined more objectively how this so called "debate" has been framed.

Are you drinking already?

[Long slender neck]

What are the demands beyond access to female spaces? You never hear about trans people req access to mens spaces.

An important thing to understand is that the underpinning demand isn’t to allow biologically male people to access female spaces: that would be an argument that could be engaged with, where compromise could be found, and where there could be productive discussion about which spaces it is and isn’t appropriate to open to male people who identify as women.

What the demand actually *is* is that laws, policy and language should change to reflect this idea: we all, every one of us, have an innate sense of ourselves called gender identity that may or may not align with our body. What we’d think of as our sexed bodies therefore are not the basis on which we should organise society, because a person with the gender identity “woman” - which has no criteria applied to it by trans activism, no definition - *is* female, regardless of sex.
That’s why if you take the sport question for example, trans activism isn’t interested in addressing the fairness, because as far as the underpinning ideology goes, trans women belong in women’s sport because they *are* female, with *female* now meaning “person who identifies as a woman”, and so if a trans woman is stronger/faster than women, that’s simply because - “yay, this woman, who is oppressed by society based on her being trans, is EXCELLENT at sport”

There are lots of negative implications here, but one of the biggest is the suggestion that female people who know that they are female people are assumed to be less oppressed by patriarchy, by gender expectations etc, than male people who identify as female.

And that’s before you get into the sexist nonsense that is a male person’s internal idea of what a female sense of identity might consist of

They think law and policy should be based on gender rather than sex?

[Max Fowler]

What are the demands beyond access to female spaces? You never hear about trans people req access to mens spaces.

An important thing to understand is that the underpinning demand isn’t to allow biologically male people to access female spaces: that would be an argument that could be engaged with, where compromise could be found, and where there could be productive discussion about which spaces it is and isn’t appropriate to open to male people who identify as women.

What the demand actually *is* is that laws, policy and language should change to reflect this idea: we all, every one of us, have an innate sense of ourselves called gender identity that may or may not align with our body. What we’d think of as our sexed bodies therefore are not the basis on which we should organise society, because a person with the gender identity “woman” - which has no criteria applied to it by trans activism, no definition - *is* female, regardless of sex.
That’s why if you take the sport question for example, trans activism isn’t interested in addressing the fairness, because as far as the underpinning ideology goes, trans women belong in women’s sport because they *are* female, with *female* now meaning “person who identifies as a woman”, and so if a trans woman is stronger/faster than women, that’s simply because - “yay, this woman, who is oppressed by society based on her being trans, is EXCELLENT at sport”

There are lots of negative implications here, but one of the biggest is the suggestion that female people who know that they are female people are assumed to be less oppressed by patriarchy, by gender expectations etc, than male people who identify as female.

And that’s before you get into the sexist nonsense that is a male person’s internal idea of what a female sense of identity might consist of

They think law and policy should be based on gender rather than sex?

Based on identity.

[CEB]

What are the demands beyond access to female spaces? You never hear about trans people req access to mens spaces.

An important thing to understand is that the underpinning demand isn’t to allow biologically male people to access female spaces: that would be an argument that could be engaged with, where compromise could be found, and where there could be productive discussion about which spaces it is and isn’t appropriate to open to male people who identify as women.

What the demand actually *is* is that laws, policy and language should change to reflect this idea: we all, every one of us, have an innate sense of ourselves called gender identity that may or may not align with our body. What we’d think of as our sexed bodies therefore are not the basis on which we should organise society, because a person with the gender identity “woman” - which has no criteria applied to it by trans activism, no definition - *is* female, regardless of sex.
That’s why if you take the sport question for example, trans activism isn’t interested in addressing the fairness, because as far as the underpinning ideology goes, trans women belong in women’s sport because they *are* female, with *female* now meaning “person who identifies as a woman”, and so if a trans woman is stronger/faster than women, that’s simply because - “yay, this woman, who is oppressed by society based on her being trans, is EXCELLENT at sport”

There are lots of negative implications here, but one of the biggest is the suggestion that female people who know that they are female people are assumed to be less oppressed by patriarchy, by gender expectations etc, than male people who identify as female.

And that’s before you get into the sexist nonsense that is a male person’s internal idea of what a female sense of identity might consist of

They think law and policy should be based on gender rather than sex?

Yes. But without the word “gender” having a meaningful, tangible definition, and with activists using it to mean several distinct things, without delineating. So it’s not even based on “gender” in the sense that at least “gender” (which you could describe as stereotypes based on sex) could have a substantial, measurable definition.

It’s demonstrable now that even concepts such as what would have previously been called “sex change surgery” are now framed as being a choice made by some trans people, but which is irrelevant as criteria: the male is/should be seen as a woman on the basis of a declaration, and any surgery is their business. And the idea that women might be willing to compromise on the basis that a male who has had hormone treatment and surgery to reconstruct their body is at least taking transition seriously? That’s seen as medical gatekeeping, and blatant transphobia, on the basis that trans women shouldn’t have to meet any criteria to make them a “cis” woman’s idea of a real woman, as (as I wrote in the post above) according to them, what makes one a woman is the nebulous internal belief that one is a woman, and therefore a male body *is* a woman’s body if the person whose body it is says they’re a woman.

[Max B Gold]

It's batsh*t crazy.

I'm surprised you haven't taken your usual helicopter view and examined more objectively how this so called "debate" has been framed.

Are you drinking already?

Weak. I expected better from you as the Boards only intellectual.

[CEB]

Well, if you want to join in the discussion, do so, and you’ll get better content…