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

mohawk

Delirium wrote: »

Some posters have said there are biological men and women, and nothing else. "trans women are not women" is crystal clear in identifying them as men because it clearly states they are not a subset of women.

If you're upset with "assigned at birth", feel free to substitute female in it's place.


considering that people use terms to mean very different things, I see no harm in asking for clarification. Plus I agreed with the term presented, so no sure why you're insulted by the exchange?

Didn't suggest that it does, but some people deny gender is a thing (which some of your posts are coming quite close to).

Women are not a subset of their own sex.

Assigned female at birth is something that only happens with intersex conditions. The rest of us it’s pretty obvious if we are male and female. It would be more appropriate to say sex is observed at birth.

Sex is the biological part of male v female. The part you can’t change. Gender is the rest such as cultural norms and behaviour. Things like women wear make up and high heels and men should never cry. Personally I believe that gender exists but some of it is just stereotypes. I feel strongly that people should be able to go against gender stereotypes and be themselves. One of the things I notice about my friends that work in STEM careers is most of us were tomboys growing up aka climbing trees, playing sports, zero interest in dolls or pink.

Wibbs

Libski wrote: »

That's not a very understanding opinion. I believe that there are people who truly feel that they don't "fit" the body that they have. We used to call it "dysphoria" and now we generally call it "transexual" but the name only indicates our culture around it - not the reality that some people are born feeling "different".

Different to what though? I'm male, I don't know what it is to be a man, or feel like a man, I know what it is to feel like me, but that's it. Some of it is obviously reinforced by society and upbringing, but all I know how to be is me. I certainly can't explain what it is to be male, so how could I feel female, because that's just as subjective.

If I were Gay and found myself feeling different in puberty or before, again I'd just know what it feels to be me. If I was into culturally "female" stuff like makeup and women's fashion and was into the whole drag scene on top of that would this make me more a woman trapped in a man's body? Hardly. Maybe that might make me feel more like fitting in, particularly with Trans being so in play at the moment, whereas say 20 years ago I'd just come to terms with being a Gay man, who happens to have interests that are considered more "female".

Errashareesh

Delirium wrote: »

Some posters have said there are biological men and women, and nothing else. "trans women are not women" is crystal clear in identifying them as men because it clearly states they are not a subset of women.

If you're upset with "assigned at birth", feel free to substitute female in it's place.


considering that people use terms to mean very different things, I see no harm in asking for clarification. Plus I agreed with the term presented, so no sure why you're insulted by the exchange?

Didn't suggest that it does, but some people deny gender is a thing (which some of your posts are coming quite close to).

They're not coming close to denying gender whatsoever. Forget about what you feel you should say - look at the facts.

Trans women are not women... because they are not women. Nothing in this statement implies they are men (let alone "crystal clear" anything). The term "trans women" describes who they are. This acknowledges their gender - it contains the word "women". And women are not trans women. Respect women too if you are concerned about respect.

I won't accept people saying they are women full stop when they are not. When they have not experienced what women experience biologically - and socially in the developing world. Just like I have not and will not ever experience being trans.

People are saying biological sex is undeniable (which it is) - they are not saying that there are only men and women and that there is no such thing as gender.

Female is an objective term.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

I've had that debate probably at least 3 times and responded extensively. If you search under my username for keywords such as "definition" you'll find probably 100+ posts I've made on the issue.

I don't have the time these days to have the exact same debate a 4th or 5th time. But feel free to read my older posts.

Hi LLMMLL.

I've taken a look as you suggested. I can find lots of posts where you argue about the definition of woman, but I can't find anything where you propose a definition.

You appear to believe 'woman' is an undefinable thing, and that therefore anyone can be a woman.

So your statement translates as:

Trans (undefinable things) are (undefinable things).

That's really helpful!

Libski

Errashareesh wrote: »

Yeah of course but bearing in mind it goes both ways and not denying reality. I acknowledge gender, I don't deny biology.

In the context of this thread my view is that someone shouldn't be "cancelled" or fired for stating their views. That's ludicrous.

But when it comes to trans people, I think maybe the rest of us should simply say "I don't understand you" and that's it.

Wibbs

mohawk wrote: »

Gender is the rest such as cultural norms and behaviour. Things like women wear make up and high heels and men should never cry. Personally I believe that gender exists but some of it is just stereotypes. I feel strongly that people should be able to go against gender stereotypes and be themselves. One of the things I notice about my friends that work in STEM careers is most of us were tomboys growing up aka climbing trees, playing sports, zero interest in dolls or pink.

Exactly. In many cultures it's male to wear makeup and fancy peacock clothes and women are the dowdy sex. There are tribes in New Guinea where the men are as hard as granite but won't fight other tribes in the rainy season because their makeup will run and their fancy hair dos will be ruined. Pink is a classic one. Pink used to be the colour for boys, not girls. Blue was for girls. Sky blue in particular. That shifted near overnight for some reason and is pretty much lost today, save for some rare examples like representations of the virgin Mary in Catholicism where she is pictured wearing blue. The most "female" colour.

Libski

Delirium wrote: »

because it's incorrect. It's essentially saying trans women are men.

Had you said trans women are not cis women (i.e. assigned female at birth), you'd be correct.

Trans women are men - but they don't feel like they "fit" their body.

CtevenSrowder

Delirium wrote: »

because it's incorrect. It's essentially saying trans women are men.

Had you said trans women are not cis women (i.e. assigned female at birth), you'd be correct.

You aren't 'assigned' sex! It is not something that society decides. it is apart of the natural World.

sydthebeat

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh god.... No, that's not how biological sex works, though a daftly common misconception. The Y chromosome is present from the get go, it "kicks" itself in early in the pregnancy, but male fetuses don't start off as "female from conception", they're not XX, they're XY.

They're not.

They're just x

ProfessorPlum

sydthebeat wrote: »

They're not.

They're just x

No, really. Male zygotes are XY. Zygotes that are X0 (‘just X’) will develop as female, with a condition called Turner’s syndrome.

Libski

Delirium wrote: »

because it's incorrect. It's essentially saying trans women are men.

Had you said trans women are not cis women (i.e. assigned female at birth), you'd be correct.

If you believe otherwise then I'm always open to discussing things.

CtevenSrowder

Deleted User wrote: »

Hi LLMMLL.

I've taken a look as you suggested. I can find lots of posts where you argue about the definition of woman, but I can't find anything where you propose a definition.

You appear to believe 'woman' is an undefinable thing, and that therefore anyone can be a woman.

So your statement translates as:

Trans (undefinable things) are (undefinable things).

That's really helpful!

I was the person who in the main debated this with him. I think he may have finally given a definition. But I can't recall fully. As I said in this post:

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Near 99% of those posts will be you refusing to define the term, stating that you don't use 'exclusionary' definitions (which rather misses the point of what a definition is supposed to be).

Or talking of 'tables of exemplars' which likewise is not a definition.

Or stating 'transwomen are women' which is also not a definition.

Ofcourse, he is running away from the difficult questions as always. It's why he has blocked me! I have yet to receive an answer to this question asked earlier:

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Thank you for answering. If you could placate me pls. .. What if the transwomen has had sex reassignment surgery? John does still not want to sleep with the transwomen, for the previous stated reason (they are male). Is this an act of transphobia in your view?

Ofcourse I won't receive an answer because LLMMLL isn't stupid, and knows fully well they will fall over their illogicity (again) if they answer.

To conclude, and a word of advice, when asking for a definition to anything, expect endless pages of balderdash trying to masquerade as intellectualism.

Wibbs

sydthebeat wrote: »

They're not.

They're just x

It never fails to fascinate me how people will publicly double down on their ignorance. Read this. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9394625/ and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_sex-determination_system

In humans, half of spermatozoa carry X chromosome and the other half Y chromosome.[3] A single gene (SRY) present on the Y chromosome acts as a signal to set the developmental pathway towards maleness. Presence of this gene starts off the process of virilization. This and other factors result in the sex differences in humans.[4]

Males do not start out as females and then magically find a Y chromosome out of nowhere that magically kicks in. Biological sex is determined and in play just after conception.

Invidious

Delirium wrote: »

Some posters have said there are biological men and women, and nothing else. "trans women are not women" is crystal clear in identifying them as men because it clearly states they are not a subset of women.

So-called "trans women" are men who have attempted by various cosmetic, hormonal, surgical, and/or legal means to turn themselves into women or define themselves as women.

But they are not women. They are men attempting to portray themselves as women. There's a huge difference.

The term "trans woman" is highly misleading, as is the insistence that a "trans woman" be referred to as "she." These semantic slippages only play into an ideological agenda that wants us to accept that if you identify as something other than what you are, you actually become that thing.

The word "woman" and pronoun "she" should be reserved for those who are born female. Not men attempting to present themselves to the world as female.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Dante7 wrote: »

An Irish woke bloke has waded in to tell women that they are wrong. He doesn't seem to be interested in engaging in debate though.

https://twitter.com/artimusfoul/status/1311236337387831296?s=20

Yeah, he was sulking all day yesterday about the fast support the group received. Beautiful stuff.

Libski

Wibbs wrote: »

It never fails to fascinate me how people will publicly double down on their ignorance. Read this. and this

In humans, half of spermatozoa carry X chromosome and the other half Y chromosome.[3] A single gene (SRY) present on the Y chromosome acts as a signal to set the developmental pathway towards maleness. Presence of this gene starts off the process of virilization. This and other factors result in the sex differences in humans.[4]

Males do not start out as females and then magically find a Y chromosome out of nowhere that magically kicks in. Biological sex is determined and in play just after conception.

I think you've missed the point.

Gruffalux

Libski wrote: »

In the context of this thread my view is that someone shouldn't be "cancelled" or fired for stating their views. That's ludicrous.

But when it comes to trans people, I think maybe the rest of us should simply say "I don't understand you" and that's it.

But that would be untrue. It is not as if this is arcane nuclear physics. People can understand gender dysphoria. People know that some people desire to express their gender in the opposite way to their natal sex or perhaps in a non gendered fashion. And that is fine. People know that
You are basically trying to reframe the debate within the context of a 'be nice' demand.
Most people naturally want to be nice. I doubt anyone on this thread from any viewpoint would not be nice to transpeople in so far as they would be nice to anyone. Arseholes of any gender do not require niceness.

But being nice, throwing up the hands and saying I don't understand, do as you wish, it feels cery unpleasant and etc.. is leading to very challenging anomalies. Girls being defeated in their sports by males. Girls getting kidney infections in schools because they don't want to use toilets where they don't feel safe. Rape crises centres in Canada being shut down because they will not accept self ID trans people. Women being sued or losing their jobs or honorary positions. Violent trans identifying males being imprisoned with women.

The argument is always "that never happens" and yet reality shows it does and increasingly so. The internet has lots of photos of trans identifying males posing in female spaces with very nasty gloating messages. Crimes committed by males are being recorded as committed by females.
And on and on.

Being nice is a lame instruction when we must deal with complex issues, safe guarding and conflicts of rights.

Be nice though is an instruction with which many women are very familiar.

Libski

Gruffalux wrote: »

But that would be untrue. It is not as if this is arcane nuclear physics. People can understand gender dysphoria. People know that some people desire to express their gender in the opposite way to their natal sex or perhaps in a non gendered fashion. And that is fine. People know that
You are basically trying to reframe the debate within the context of a 'be nice' demand.
Most people naturally want to be nice. I doubt anyone on this thread from any viewpoint would not be nice to transpeople in so far as they would be nice to anyone. Arseholes of any gender do not require niceness.

But being nice, throwing up the hands and saying I don't understand, do as you wish, it feels cery unpleasant and etc.. is leading to very challenging anomalies. Girls being defeated in their sports by males. Girls getting kidney infections in schools because they don't want to use toilets where they don't feel safe. Rape crises centres in Canada being shut down because they will not accept self ID trans people. Women being sued or losing their jobs or honorary positions. Violent trans identifying males being imprisoned with women.

The argument is always "that never happens" and yet reality shows it does and increasingly so. The internet has lots of photos of trans identifying males posing in female spaces with very nasty gloating messages. Crimes committed by males are being recorded as committed by females.
And on and on.

Being nice is a lame instruction when we must deal with complex issues, safe guarding and conflicts of rights.

Be nice tough is an instruction with which many women are very familiar.

It's strange that you embraced my point and then contradicted it.

Errashareesh

Gruffalux wrote: »

But that would be untrue. It is not as if this is arcane nuclear physics. People can understand gender dysphoria. People know that some people desire to express their gender in the opposite way to their natal sex or perhaps in a non gendered fashion. And that is fine. People know that
You are basically trying to reframe the debate within the context of a 'be nice' demand.
Most people naturally want to be nice. I doubt anyone on this thread from any viewpoint would not be nice to transpeople in so far as they would be nice to anyone. Arseholes of any gender do not require niceness.

But being nice, throwing up the hands and saying I don't understand, do as you wish, it feels cery unpleasant and etc.. is leading to very challenging anomalies. Girls being defeated in their sports by males. Girls getting kidney infections in schools because they don't want to use toilets where they don't feel safe. Rape crises centres in Canada being shut down because they will not accept self ID trans people. Women being sued or losing their jobs or honorary positions. Violent trans identifying males being imprisoned with women.

The argument is always "that never happens" and yet reality shows it does and increasingly so. The internet has lots of photos of trans identifying males posing in female spaces with very nasty gloating messages. Crimes committed by males are being recorded as committed by females.
And on and on.

Being nice is a lame instruction when we must deal with complex issues, safe guarding and conflicts of rights.

Be nice tough is an instruction with which many women are very familiar.

Amazing post G. No disrespect to Libski who is being very respectful and decent themselves but as G says, it has moved on from what they suggest - much as I would prefer things to be as so. I think that is kinda how it used to be from most people (trans phobes aside of course). When it's affecting others though, that no longer works.

Errashareesh

Deleted User wrote: »

Hi LLMMLL.

I've taken a look as you suggested. I can find lots of posts where you argue about the definition of woman, but I can't find anything where you propose a definition.

You appear to believe 'woman' is an undefinable thing, and that therefore anyone can be a woman.

It's just so horribly disrespectful to women.

Libski

Gruffalux wrote: »

But that would be untrue. It is not as if this is arcane nuclear physics. People can understand gender dysphoria. People know that some people desire to express their gender in the opposite way to their natal sex or perhaps in a non gendered fashion. And that is fine. People know that
You are basically trying to reframe the debate within the context of a 'be nice' demand.
Most people naturally want to be nice. I doubt anyone on this thread from any viewpoint would not be nice to transpeople in so far as they would be nice to anyone. Arseholes of any gender do not require niceness.

But being nice, throwing up the hands and saying I don't understand, do as you wish, it feels cery unpleasant and etc.. is leading to very challenging anomalies. Girls being defeated in their sports by males. Girls getting kidney infections in schools because they don't want to use toilets where they don't feel safe. Rape crises centres in Canada being shut down because they will not accept self ID trans people. Women being sued or losing their jobs or honorary positions. Violent trans identifying males being imprisoned with women.

The argument is always "that never happens" and yet reality shows it does and increasingly so. The internet has lots of photos of trans identifying males posing in female spaces with very nasty gloating messages. Crimes committed by males are being recorded as committed by females.
And on and on.

Being nice is a lame instruction when we must deal with complex issues, safe guarding and conflicts of rights.

Be nice though is an instruction with which many women are very familiar.

Your post is laced with sexism and transphobia.

All I'm saying is be respectful of those whom you disagree with.

Rothko

Dante7 wrote: »

An Irish woke bloke has waded in to tell women that they are wrong. He doesn't seem to be interested in engaging in debate though.

https://twitter.com/artimusfoul/status/1311236337387831296?s=20

I think that tweet really backfired on him. He's essentially doing free publicity for them.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

mohawk wrote: »

Women are not a subset of their own sex.

Assigned female at birth is something that only happens with intersex conditions. The rest of us it’s pretty obvious if we are male and female. It would be more appropriate to say sex is observed at birth.

Sex is the biological part of male v female. The part you can’t change. Gender is the rest such as cultural norms and behaviour. Things like women wear make up and high heels and men should never cry. Personally I believe that gender exists but some of it is just stereotypes. I feel strongly that people should be able to go against gender stereotypes and be themselves. One of the things I notice about my friends that work in STEM careers is most of us were tomboys growing up aka climbing trees, playing sports, zero interest in dolls or pink.

Yeah but I kinda hate this idea too. I was in STEM. I did climb trees and pick up insects and loved building obstacles courses but I also LOVED my Barbies and clothes and sequins. I feel like girls being into girly things can be looked down on a bit, like they’re more boring or or less imaginative something. Some of the best and most interesting girls and women I’ve known have been girly.

Gruffalux

Libski wrote: »

Your post is laced with sexism and transphobia.

All I'm saying is be respectful of those whom you disagree with.

The irony.

Errashareesh

Errashareesh wrote: »

No disrespect to Libski who is being very respectful and decent themselves
.

Or are they? Already the transphobia allegation - when Gruffalux did not say one thing condemning trans people for being trans.

And people here are respectful to those who disagree with them - once they are afforded the same courtesy.

The crowd screaming "terf" and "transphobe" over and over (in place of an argument) though - hmmmm...

Gruffalux

Errashareesh wrote: »

Or are they? Already the transphobia allegation - when Gruffalux did not say one thing condemning trans people for being trans.

And people here are respectful to those who disagree with them - once they are afforded the same courtesy.

The crowd screaming "terf" and "transphobe" over and over (in place of an argument) though - hmmmm...

Well it would be interesting to know what sexism and transphobia "laced" my post.
It is the first time I have been accused of sexism. It is quite odd because as the mother of grown men I often defend against the toxic masculinity trope and I appreciate men. And maybe they think I am sexist about women? Hard to know what one could possibly be these days.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

The ‘assigned X at birth’ thing was a valid term in medicine. However it was used for potential intersex babies. And even they get reassigned to male or female once it’s figured out what’s going on with their karyotype. But the transgender movement appropriated the phrase and they dishonestly misuse it. It’s so insulting to use intersex people like that as if they are neither male nor female. And even if their sex couldn’t be designated, what in the fuck does that have to do with people who are transgender?

Gatling

Libski wrote: »

All I'm saying is be respectful of those whom you disagree with.

Oh I wonder what other accounts you have

Wibbs

Libski wrote: »

Your post is laced with sexism and transphobia.

All I'm saying is be respectful of those whom you disagree with.

This imported from America automatic "respect" nonsense again. Much beloved of the oppressor/oppressed politic, along with the usual "phobe" stuff. Respect isn't automatic, it is earned. I have no clue who you are or what you are as a person. You could be worthy of respect, you could not be. Before anyone finds that out courtesy is about all one should expect.

And Christ knows where you're pulling sexism from that post. Transphobia seems to be in the eye of the beholder and mostly wheeled out when awkward questions based on realities are posed. And please point out where Gruffalux was in error or making stuff up, rather than pulling the usual lazy phobe stuff.

Errashareesh

Transphobia is an objective term - hatred and abuse and marginalisation and lack of acknowledgment of transgender people.

I don't think it's in the eye of the beholder W. It is however misused to discredit people acknowledging facts, to insult them, to turn others against them and to shut them down.

Personally if I was a mod, I wouldn't allow it unless it is addressing actual transphobia. Don't care if that's "censorship". Lies should always be censored.