J. K. Rowling is cancelled because she is a T.E.R.F [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

Neyite

Delirium wrote: »

I'm presuming that your use of female does not include trans women?

Sports, trans women should be able to compete with cis women.
Other scenarios, it's transphobic to exclude trans women from those scenarios. In much the same way it'd be homophobic to refuse because the doctor/police officer is a lesbian.

Cis man? No
Trans man? No
Trans woman? Yes


I'd label them transphobic on some level. Wouldn't necessarily say they are a terf because as people pointed out, they aren't necessarily a feminist.

If you were a hypothetical prison warden, would you house a Trans man offender in with Cis men in a cell or cell block in say, Mountjoy or Portlaoise?

If you wouldn't, could you explain why?

Delirium

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Men’s advantage over women in sports is multifactorial. Even if you did find a woman as strong as a man (which in elite sports or even lower down is highly unlikely because when choosing players, you are selecting for the strongest, the most athletic. It is vanishingly unlikely that a female rugby player will match a male rugby player for strength), there are other advantages conferred by male puberty. Larger hands. Greater lung capacity, bigger hearts and more red blood cells, all of which confer greater stamina. Stronger grip (studies have been done to show that even the average male grip size is stronger than that of female athletes selected for having better-than-average grip size).

But the small subset of cis women that meet the criteria (outlined by the other poster) should also be excluded with trans women?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Delirium wrote: »

But the small subset of cis women that meet the criteria (outlined by the other poster) should also be excluded with trans women?

I’m not sticking to the other poster’s narrow parameters. I didn’t set those parameters. I’m adding in all the other things that must be factored in.

bada_bing

Delirium wrote: »

Sports, trans women should be able to compete with cis women.

i'm all for transgender equality and rights but i am concerned about the above. So imagine if all transwomen are permitted to compete with no restrictions with cis women and then more of them start winning olympic gold medals and tournaments etc.. You'd be naive to think that such a scenario would be widely celebrated when in fact it would have the opposite effect, it would create a huge wave of backlash and resentment against the trans community. It would also discourage biological women from competing and that would defeat the concept of fairness and equality in sport.

Delirium

Neyite wrote: »

If you were a hypothetical prison warden, would you house a Trans man offender in with Cis men in a cell or cell block in say, Mountjoy or Portlaoise?

If you wouldn't, could you explain why?

trans man, so I'd send them to mens prison.

Invidious

Delirium wrote: »

so would you also support cis women that meet that criteria being excluded from womens rugby?

I mean it follows that you should because physics still applies.

Of course not. There's natural variation in the size and strength of natal female athletes, of course, but you are supporting a farce such as this:



This is transwoman Hannah Mouncey competing against natal women. Are you really oblivious to the issue here?

Errashareesh

I see the massive misrepresentation, victimhood and the pretence that there was no trolling (I can't post in feedback yet - If I could I would be able to link post after post of some of the most spiteful, vindictive trolling I have ever seen; even the feedback itself is trolling) has begun in earnest over in feedback. Along with a certain "member" "patting" them on the "back" because everyone here is so "mean".

Why are these the only tactics resorted to by most detractors here? Because they don't have an argument.

It's so much EASIER to stick your fingers in your ears and throw insults and sneers than engage with what you know is reality.

Parabellum9

Delirium wrote: »

so trans men would be acceptable then if a female doctor was requested? Or to compete in womens sports?

Well here's the thing - if trans was such a genuine 3rd option and there were so many people who fell in to that category, then surely sports & services specific to them could be created. The existing sports and services are male or female and that is who they are designed for - so by all means a trans person can avail of them once they choose the one that applies to their birth gender. If such services/sports don't exist for a trans gender...well that's just tough isn't it. Take or leave the options provided and there's no issues - but stop this nonsense of attempting to rewrite the inclusion parameters of existing sports/services to for what is a microscopic minority "gender".

Justin Credible Darts

bada_bing wrote: »

i'm all for transgender equality and rights but i am concerned about the above. So imagine if all transwomen are permitted to compete with no restrictions with cis women and then more of them start winning olympic gold medals and tournaments etc.. You'd be naive to think that such a scenario would be widely celebrated when in fact it would have the opposite effect, it would create a huge wave of backlash and resentment against the trans community. It would also discourage biological women from competing and that would defeat the concept of fairness and equality in sport.

Reasoned debate and logic will matter to some people who are so closed minded that they will only cherry pick the scenarios that suit their agenda.



some have got on their high horse and no amount of common sense, logic, biological facts seem to matter, if it does not suit their narrative.


The very same people who speak about equality for all have no problem kicking women to the side and say screw their rights, safety etc when it suits their agenda.

Gatling

Invidious wrote: »

This is transwoman Hannah Mouncey competing against natal women. Are you really oblivious to the issue here?

Wasn't there a another Australian male rugby player that came out as trans and then went into women's rugby and in one challenge managed to snap an opponents thigh bone

One eyed Jack

Gruffalux wrote: »

They are a third gender, an alternative expression of genderhood, that is neither man nor woman but transgender. I don't even see how that could be seen as being in any way bad.

I do, because the idea of there being more than two genders is nonsense. It’s nonsense for most people, and it’s nonsense for anyone who is transgender who doesn’t share the idea that there are any more than two genders. People’s expectations of gender and encountering people who don’t meet their expectations of gender or people who determine for themselves that they do not align with their own expectations of one gender or the other, does not change the fact that there are only two genders.

Other people who disagree are entitled to petition Government for whatever changes in legislation they want, in this particular context it’s no different than any other issue where people are entitled to petition the Government to have what they perceive to be a right recognised. Rights are essentially freedoms, and no matter what rights you can think of, there will always be circumstances where rights afforded to one group cause conflicts in consequences with the consequences of affording another group rights.

Affording women rights doesn’t take rights away from men, and in the same way, extending marriage equality to non-heterosexual people didn’t take any rights away from heterosexuals. Affording people who are transgender rights doesn’t take rights away either from men or from women. Expanding rights simply gives everyone in society more freedom, and the rights which will or won’t apply in any given circumstances will be a balancing act of those rights and freedoms when and where they are in conflict, depending upon the circumstances in each case.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Delirium wrote: »

I'm presuming that your use of female does not include trans women?

Why would you assume that? Transgender men are female. Natch.

Misread. Thought you said transgender men are female and was agreeing with that.

Transgender women are transgender women.

Sports, trans women should be able to compete with cis women.

If they have taken testosterone, they can’t and shouldn’t. It’s a banned substance in sport and a PED. And you well know it. If they haven’t taken anything and are self-IDing, then yes, of course transgender men should be allowed to compete in female divisions. I love that you think you had a ‘gotcha’ there.

Scratch that, I thought you said transgender men should be allowed to compete with women.

No. Transgender women should NOT be allowed to compete in women’s sports divisions. Absolutely not. And as I said, there is no honour in them doing so. None at all.

Transgender men SHOULD be allowed to continue to compete in female divisions, provided they are not taking testosterone which is a PED.

Other scenarios, it's transphobic to exclude trans women from those scenarios. In much the same way it'd be homophobic to refuse because the doctor/police officer is a lesbian.

Ah yes, the othering of lesbians to make a point. That’s homophobic you know, Delirium. You’re saying lesbians are a different kind of woman to straight women. When we’re all just women. Much like how many transgender activists love to engage in the othering of black women to make a point.

If you think it’s transphobic to request a female in any of the scenarios above, you are putting the feelings of males above the comfort and dignity of women who are in a vulnerable position (hospital patients, prison inmates). That’s nothing sort of contemptuous of women.

Neyite

Delirium wrote: »

trans man, so I'd send them to mens prison.

Ok. Would you have any regard to their physical safety in amongst men who will almost certainly be bigger, stronger and statistically more violent than the trans man?

Delirium

Neyite wrote: »

Ok. Would you have any regard to their physical safety in amongst men who will almost certainly be bigger, stronger and statistically more violent than the trans man?

Sure, just as there would be concern for cis men who are smaller, weaker to other men.

jam_mac_jam

Delirium wrote: »

so trans men would be acceptable then if a female doctor was requested? Or to compete in womens sports?

Yes. I would prefer a trans man as a doctor then a trans woman. I don't want a smear test from a trans woman if that makes me a transphobe then I am a transphobe. That's how i feel and if I am going through a humiliating experience like that then my feelings are more important in that moment to me. Obviously not to the doctor.

I know I am not meant to feel like that but I would be as uncomfortable with a trans woman as a man. If I don't know they are transgender maybe it doesn't matter.

Is there any logical reason I don't want a male doctor no, is there any logical reason I don't want a transwoman doctor no. However it doesn't change the fact I would prefer a woman.

Neyite

Delirium wrote: »

Sure, just as there would be concern for cis men who are smaller, weaker to other men.

Smaller weaker men can't become pregnant as a result of rape though...

ProfessorPlum

When the conversation heads down this route, you have to ask yourself why we have single sex spaces at all - in prisons, in sports, anywhere.

Any if you can find a reason for having those spaces, then it follows that there have to be restrictions about who goes there.

Women’s sports are finished if radical trans activists get their way and are allowed compete with biological females.

Delirium

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Why would you assume that? Transgender women are female. Natch.

Other posters have disagreed with that statement, so only asking to establish your thoughts.

If they have taken testosterone, they can’t and shouldn’t. It’s a banned substance in sport and a PED. And you well know it. If they haven’t taken anything and are self-IDing, then yes, of course transgender men should be allowed to compete in female divisions. I love that you think you had a ‘gotcha’ there.

So trans men can compete with cis women if they reduce use of testosterone, but trans women who take hormones to reduce testosterone can't?

Ah yes, the othering of lesbians to make a point. That’s homophobic you know, Delirium. You’re saying lesbians are a different kind of woman to straight women. When we’re all just women. Much like how many transgender activists love to engage in the othering of black women to make a point.

So no one can refer to other forms of discrimination when discussing transphobia? Suppose it's one way to avoid addressing the question.

If you think it’s transphobic to request a female in any of the scenarios above, you are putting the feelings of males above the comfort and dignity of women who are in a vulnerable position (hospital patients, prison inmates). That’s nothing sort of contemptuous of women.

I though "transgender women are women. Natch".

Gruffalux

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I do, because the idea of there being more than two genders is nonsense. .

There are 2 sexes. Gender should not be conflated with sex as it has been done by this strange rights movement. The existence of third genders is historical throughout cultures.

Justin Credible Darts

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Yes. I would prefer a trans man as a doctor then a trans woman. I don't want a smear test from a trans woman if that makes me a transphobe then I am a transphobe. That's how i feel and if I am going through a humiliating experience like that then my feelings are more important in that moment to me. Obviously not to the doctor.

I know I am not meant to feel like that but I would be as uncomfortable with a trans woman as a man. If I don't know they are transgender maybe it doesn't matter.

Is there any logical reason I don't want a male doctor no, is there any logical reason I don't want a transwoman doctor no. However it doesn't change the fact I would prefer a woman.

There in lies the point,


Delirium would have us believe your rights are less important, and somehow the feelings of the trans person trumps your rights.

ProfessorPlum

Delirium wrote: »

So trans men can compete with cis women if they reduce use of testosterone, but trans women who take hormones to reduce testosterone can't?
.

Transmen are biologically women, so they qualify to compete in the female category. If they are taking testosterone, that is considered a performing enhancing drug and so they are excluded. No one is telling them to ‘reduce’ their testosterone - just that they can’t supplement it.

(Edit to add: There was the case of Mack Beggs, a US High school wrestler who got a TUE to compete in the girls category as a transman.)


Trans women are biologically male. They have natural testosterone orders of magnitude above that which occurs naturally in females. That gives them an unfair advantage (as well as lots of other advantages not related to current T levels) when competing against biological women and so they should be excluded (IMO) or as a minimum reduce their T levels. (The current levels accepted are still multiples of that which would be found in the average woman)

One eyed Jack

Neyite wrote: »

Ok. Would you have any regard to their physical safety in amongst men who will almost certainly be bigger, stronger and statistically more violent than the trans man?

In the context of prison populations? I don’t know about that tbh. There was a study among the prison population in the US, updated ten years after the introduction of the Prison Rape Act in 2003. Some of the highlights of that study include -

Highlights:

- In 2011-12, an estimated 4.0% of state and federal prison inmates and 3.2% of jail inmates reported experiencing one or more incidents of sexual victimization by another inmate or facility staff in the past 12 months or since admission to the facility, if less than 12 months.

- Patterns of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization in 2011-12 were consistent with patterns in past surveys.

- Rates reported by prison and jail inmates were higher among females than males, higher among whites than blacks, and higher among inmates with a college degree than those who had not completed high school.

- Eleven male prisons, 1 female prison, and 9 jails were identified as high-rate facilities based on the prevalence of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization in 2011-12.

- Eight male prisons, 4 female prisons, and 12 jails were identified as high rate based on the prevalence of staff sexual misconduct. Each of these facilities had a lower bound of the 95%-confidence interval that was at least 55% higher than the average rate among comparable facilities.

- An estimated 1.8% of juveniles ages 16 to 17 held in prisons and jails reported being victimized by another inmate, compared to 2.0% of adults in prisons and 1.6% of adults in jails.

- Among state and federal prison inmates, an estimated 6.3% of those identified with serious psychological distress reported that they were sexually victimized by another inmate. In comparison, among prisoners with no indication of mental illness, 0.7% reported being victimized by another inmate.


Bold emphasis my own, but here’s a link to the study -


Sexual Victimisation in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2011 - 2012


While the rates of male on male rape in prison are high, the rates of sexual victimisation among females in female only prison populations was far higher. Male rape in prison is more of a common trope than a reality, whereas the incidence of female sexual violence in prison is rarely ever highlighted which has the effect of people making all sorts of assumptions that aren’t borne out by statistical evidence.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Delirium wrote: »

.


So trans men can compete with cis women if they reduce use of testosterone, but trans women who take hormones to reduce testosterone can't?

Why on earth would a transgender man be reducing their testosterone?

And even if they did do that for some bizarre reason, they don’t have all the significant advantages of male puberty that I have listed and, I’ll note, you have ignored.

So no one can refer to other forms of discrimination when discussing transphobia? Suppose it's one way to avoid addressing the question.

You can’t cite homophobia when you are being homophobic, Delirium. You are the one who othered lesbians as if they are different from other women.

But let’s indulge you. Lesbians are females. Straight women are females. There is no significant physical difference between them. Males can never be females and it’s safe to say will almost always be stronger. We have single sex spaces because of this. Shall we just ignore that now?

Delirium wrote: »

I though "transgender women are women. Natch".

That was a typo, that I have now edited. It was supposed to read ‘transgender men are female’ as I thought you were talking about transgender men.

I think that transgender women are transgender women and male.

ProfessorPlum

One eyed Jack wrote: »

In the context of prison populations? I don’t know about that tbh. There was a study among the prison population in the US, updated a year after the introduction of the Prison Rape Act in 2013. Some of the highlights of that study include -

Highlights:

- In 2011-12, an estimated 4.0% of state and federal prison inmates and 3.2% of jail inmates reported experiencing one or more incidents of sexual victimization by another inmate or facility staff in the past 12 months or since admission to the facility, if less than 12 months.

- Patterns of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization in 2011-12 were consistent with patterns in past surveys.

- Rates reported by prison and jail inmates were higher among females than males, higher among whites than blacks, and higher among inmates with a college degree than those who had not completed high school.

- Eleven male prisons, 1 female prison, and 9 jails were identified as high-rate facilities based on the prevalence of inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization in 2011-12.

- Eight male prisons, 4 female prisons, and 12 jails were identified as high rate based on the prevalence of staff sexual misconduct. Each of these facilities had a lower bound of the 95%-confidence interval that was at least 55% higher than the average rate among comparable facilities.

- An estimated 1.8% of juveniles ages 16 to 17 held in prisons and jails reported being victimized by another inmate, compared to 2.0% of adults in prisons and 1.6% of adults in jails.

- Among state and federal prison inmates, an estimated 6.3% of those identified with serious psychological distress reported that they were sexually victimized by another inmate. In comparison, among prisoners with no indication of mental illness, 0.7% reported being victimized by another inmate.


Bold emphasis my own, but here’s a link to the study -


Sexual Victimisation in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2011 - 2012


While the rates of male on male rape in prison are high, the rates of sexual victimisation among females in female only prison populations was far higher. Male rape in prison is more of a common trope than a reality, whereas the incidence of female sexual violence in prison is rarely ever highlighted which has the effect of people making all sorts of assumptions that aren’t borne out by statistical evidence.

Was this study done before or after they started counting trans women prisoners as women, and not men in the statistics?



(Comment is a bit tongue in cheek really, but just goes to show how nonsensical these kinds of studies become when there isn’t at least a separate catagory for trans prisoners)

One eyed Jack

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Was this study done before or after they started counting trans women prisoners as women, and not men in the statistics?

(Comment is a bit tongue in cheek really, but just goes to show how nonsensical these kinds of studies become when there isn’t at least a separate catagory for trans prisoners)

I just looked up the Prison Rape Act there now and it was introduced in 2003, not 2013 (I’m bad for dates ), but from having read the study before, they do include statistics on the sexual victimisation of prisoners who are transgender, and they’re still not coming close to the incidents of sexual violence reported by female inmates in women’s prisons -

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri1112_st.pdf

They don’t give a breakdown by sex so tbh I can’t really answer your question. Given the time when the survey was conducted, I’d suggest it was before they started counting male inmates in female prisons among the statistics though.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Delirium wrote: »

I'm presuming that your use of female does not include trans women?

I’d like to return to this because it’s important. WHY would transgender women be considered female? Female refers to biological sex, which cannot be changed. And we are always being told that nobody is conflating sex and gender so of course transgender women aren’t female. To think so is to subscribe to magical thinking.

Errashareesh

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’d like to return to this because it’s important. WHY would transgender women be considered female? Female refers to biological sex, which cannot be changed. And we are always being told that nobody is conflating sex and gender so of course transgender women aren’t female. To think so is to subscribe to magical thinking.

Quite simply because they "feel" like they are female, and a narrative has been cultivated whereby disagreement with this is extremely cruel and transphobic. Now I bought into that narrative for a long time - I've no doubt numerous people here did. I don't like cruelty, I don't hate trans people for being trans... I'm not in the business of hurting people.

But then the ramifications of unquestioning acceptance of the narrative began to reveal themselves, and the realisation that this may be a lovely thing to say and hear, but it is a lie. And lies about important matters should never trump feelings. You have to put on your big boy or big girl pants when you're an adult, and face up to truths which aren't easy to swallow but should be accepted. And nobody is trying to hurt you for simply acknowledging the truth.

One eyed Jack

Gruffalux wrote: »

There are 2 sexes. Gender should not be conflated with sex as it has been done by this strange rights movement.

It was a strange movement that argued they were separate in the first place -


John William Money (8 July 1921 – 7 July 2006) was a New Zealand American psychologist, sexologist and author specializing in research into sexual identity and biology of gender. He was one of the first researchers to publish theories on the influence of societal constructs of "gender" on individual formation of gender identity. Money introduced the terms gender identity, gender role and sexual orientation and popularised the term paraphilia.


John Money

Gruffalux wrote: »

The existence of third genders is historical throughout cultures.

Sure, but that doesn’t afford the idea any more legitimacy than it didn’t have already. People who are transgender have existed throughout history too, as part of human evolution, but the idea of transgenderism itself is a fairly recent one in Western culture. Other cultures they didn’t refer to the phenomenon as transgenderism, but Western influence on their culture changed the language they used to describe the same phenomena.

This is what gives rise to people associating people with “intersex” conditions with people who are transgender, or as the example was given earlier - associating Hijira people with transgenderism. Hijira people aren’t transgender, but in terms of campaigning for their rights, some chose to adopt Western cultural ideas like transgenderism and “third gender” nonsense -


Hijra: India's third gender claims its place in law


The concept of a third gender or transgenderism just didn’t exist in Indian culture up until recently. The outside influence of Western culture informed the language they used to describe the phenomenon, stripping away the religious aspects of it and portraying it in a secular context.

That unusual “flashing” they do btw, there’s powerful symbolism behind it -


A culturally widespread belief in India is that hijras have the power to curse people with sterility and bad fortune, most dramatically by lifting their skirts and exposing their mutilated genitals. The fear and anxiety this belief provokes are sufficient to compel most people to give in to their demands or at least to negotiate with them.


https://www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/islam/islam/hijra#:~:text=Hijras are a social group, part religious cult,Mata, a version of the Indian mother goddess.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Errashareesh wrote: »

Quite simply because they "feel" like they are female, and a narrative has been cultivated whereby disagreement with this is extremely cruel and transphobic. Now I bought into that narrative for a long time - I've no doubt numerous people here did. I don't like cruelty, I don't hate trans people for being trans... I'm not in the business of hurting people.

But then the ramifications of unquestioning acceptance of the narrative began to reveal themselves, and the realisation that this may be a lovely thing to say and hear, it is a lie. And lies ahout important matters should never trump feelings. You have to put on your big boy or big girl points when you're an adult, and face to truths which aren't easy to swallow but have to be accepted. And nobody is trying to hurt you for simply acknowledging the truth.

Yup. And it’s exactly because of that feeling that we are seeing the word ‘woman’ disappear from public health literature about sex-specific conditions. It’s painted as being inclusive of females that don’t identify as a woman but pull the other one. If that was really the reason, the phrase ‘Women, transgender men and non-binary females’ would be used. That would include all of the females who need this information. It’s a male-centred move to spare the feelings of transgender women, who won’t ever have those health concerns. And why corresponding literature on male health conditions are peppered with the word ‘man’.

Errashareesh

Oh yeah and despite all this concern about feelings, fuk women's feelings.

Fuk the feelings of women who have female cancers (handy that those insisting they're female don't have to worry about those eh?), miscarriages, stillbirths, ectopic pregnancies, premature babies, endometriosis, polycystic ovarian syndrome, gestational diabetes, traumatising births, horrendous PMS, an awful time with the menopause, post natal depression.

Fuk the women around the world who live in fear of being beaten, raped, tortured and killed because of their sex. Who are sold into sex slavery. Who endure FGM. Who have to be breeding machines and walk miles for an urn of filth infested water. Who are banished to menstrual huts.

Nah, what's most important is that you write "womxn" in your online posts because of how it looks.

It's too maddening to bear at times.

But the optics of wokeness work in that perverse way - don't criticise mistreatment of women in parts of Islamic culture, or widespread in traveller culture. Do get upset though over a white middleclass heterosexual cis something something Karen... I dunno... existing (even though so many of those idiots are: white, middleclass, cis, hetero).