“This is why Trump won” is one of the worse arguments of the last four years, and it is every time used to shut someone down who’s arguing for the rights of others. Maybe stay away from it.
-
Who is asking me to see a male-passing woman as a woman? The trans activists and allies who treat “anyone who says they are a woman is a woman” as a fact rather than their own personal opinion, that’s who! These are the people are think women are crazy hate-mongers for not wanting just any and everyone to gain entrance in women’s only spaces. They don’t want me to have a hostile or fearful look on my face when a male-passing male enters the same shower room as me. They want me to celebrate something like this as an achievement for all women, even though it feels more like an achievement for men.
-
Women are a numerical majority but they are a minority in power dynamics. Women have privilege in their own spaces, sure. But they don’t have privilege in society as a whole. The fact that you’ve got males in this thread lecturing women on what it means to be a woman is evidence of this. Men have been accustomed to having their notions listened to and respected and not scrutinized, even when those notions are not based on first-hand experience. So women are expected to just go along with a dude-looking person who says they’ve lived the life of a woman while men don’t see what’s wrong with this, since they are accustomed to always taking what a fellow male says at face value and they’re accustomed to not caring what women say. Even other women will defer to men like this. The debate of over who gets to be a woman should have minimal male participation, and yet notice that this discussion has been dominated by men. So tell me again how women are privileged?
-
I don’t have any beef with trans folks as long as what they want doesn’t require me to change my own definitions of my gender class or how I speak about my body. I should not be obligated to see trans folks as women by virtue of them saying they are. I should be able to decide who I consider a sister and who I don’t consider a sister. I can respect everyone’s pronoun usage and fight for their right to live in safety and security (no job or housing discrimination). But I’m not going to start describing myself I’m a biological female as a matter of course on the off-hand chance that I’m within earshot of a transwoman who is triggered by ciswomen describing their bodies that way. I’m not going to be happy-happy about a transwoman who does not alter their biology in any way being allowed to compete against females in sports venues. I’m not going to necessarily keep my mouth shut when I hear a transwoman argue that biology doesn’t matter in one breath but then wants taxpayers to fund their sex reassignment surgery or hormone treatment in another. As long we are able to treat the trans rights movement as a political one and thus fair game for political criticism the same as any other movement, then I don’t have a problem with trans folks or their movement. But if acceptance of trans folks requires me to go along with any and every idea peddled by trans folks, then yes, I’m going to have a problem with that.
I can tell you haven’t really been reading my posts. It is exasperating being lectured to like this by someone who can’t even be arsed to read for comprehension.
First off, when have I said experience with racism is how I determine who is black and who isn’t? I have never said anything that should give you that impression. For your information, just so you can understand me a lot better than you obviously do, I take someone’s black identity narrative on a case-by-case basis. If someone looks black, they are always going to be black to me. Even if they’ve never experienced racism. Why? Because they have the biological reality of blackness. If they are white-passing, I will be looking for a narrative that includes recent black ancestry or long-term experiences in black spaces. If these indicia are missing, then I will not view a claimant as black. Which I’m guessing 99.9% of people would say is reasonable. 99.9% of people would not say I’m a hateful person just because I don’t give a negro card to everyone who says they are black.
Secondly, I’ve said repeatedly that I believe biological and social realities are the substance of gender membership. Discrimination is just one aspect of the social reality of womanhood. It’s not the only one. Pretty much all ciswomen have experienced certain biological realities (do I really need to list them?) Pretty much all ciswomen have been abused or harrassed by sexually aggressive dickheads at least once in their lives. To be fair, not all of the realities are unpleasant. Many women enjoy being objectified. Many women enjoy chivalry and being treated as delicate creatures put up on a pedestal. Personally, I like being given the social freedom to express my emotions without facing condemnation. This is also a social reality. Even the most privileged ciswomen will have experience with these realities. Shared experiences have always been the substance of “sisterhood” and “brotherhood”. They should continue to be.
One definition of gender is 100% in line with biological sex. So let’s not pretend that there’s a single definition of gender. There are multiple definitions. Your definition (whatever it is) is not superior to mine or someone else’s just because it is more expansive.
Transfolks exist. That much we agree on. And I believe that the majority of transfolks have narratives that justify treating them as their preferred gender. But I don’t think all of them do. And more important, I don’t think all of them will going forward, given the current trend of young people latching on to the trans and nonbinary identities for a whole host of reasons that have nothing to do with dysphoria. You may not understand why I don’t want any genderfucker to feel entitled to the benefits of the “woman” label when its fashionable, but that doesn’t mean I’m advocating hate or bigotry towards genderfuckers. It means I think genderfuckers need to create their own spaces and leave my spaces alone, because in my spaces we don’t think gender is a game. We think gender is kind of a big deal for sociopolitical reasons. Since most transfolks agree with me that gender is a big deal, I don’t think my views are antithetical to trans rights.
In every thread dedicated to talking about Dems’ loss in 2016 and the game plan for the 2020 election, we always talk about the interests of the moderate working class white men. It’s treated as a given that this voting bloc needs to be heard and paid attention to. Always.
The Dems depend on female voters, and yet it’s clear they are being taken for granted in this discourse. The party cannot win in Nov if y’all continue to call women privileged TERFs for standing up for their own rights. I’m seeing die hard liberals saying they are walking away from the party behind this stuff. If they are saying this, then moderates are a foregone conclusion. Ignore this at your peril.
Seems to me the privileged group here is the one who thinks another group should be the sanctuary for all the gender and sexual minorities that the privileged group inflicts violence on. The privileged group is the one who doesn’t have to shoulder any of the risks of this brave new world and yet they are the ones who get to tell others what is and isn’t threatening or scary.
Privilege is having the luxury of not being worried about who has access to your locker room.
So forgive me, @BigT, for not seeing how ciswomen are the ones who have all this privilege you’re talking about.
Actually, I’m under the impression that until the recent right wing “there’s someone with a penis peeing inside that dead bolted cubicle and we are all in grave danger” hysteria , in most jurisdictions there were no laws against someone using the “wrong” bathroom. Depending on intent and behavior, it might be covered by disorderly conduct, or not.
It isn’t like there were issues in public places like department stores and airports, where people have traditionally used the bathroom that most closely matched their external presentation and no one noticed or cared. The issues started in places like schools, where it was generally known that Bob or Susie or whoever was transgender and a therefore prime target for legal harassment.
In the past, if a man entered the women’s loo, he could be reported and asked to leave and then arrested for trespassing if he didn’t.
Believe it or not, the law is unchanged. The same thing can happen now. But it’s less likely to happen because our culture has become more trans friendly.
On the issue of politics, Dems need to pay attention to this:
The two polls that are described show:
-
Over 70% of Scottish and English voters reject defining woman as “anyone who says they are a woman”. Instead, they support defining woman using biological sex criteria (XX chromosomes and female genitalia).
-
Over 80% believe trans women with penises should not be allowed in women’s locker rooms and dressing rooms. Only a minority think penis-havers have a right to undress around females.
Are Scotland and the UK teeming with TERFs or something? How can it be that both men and women in these two countries think biological sex trumps gender identity when it comes to defining womanhood and access to sex-segregated spaces?
Newsflash: these polls likely reflect how people in the US think of gender identity too. If Dems think it’s totally fine and appropriate to dismiss 80% of the electorate as TERFs in need of re-education, then Dems deserve to lose in November. I’m already bracing myself for Trump’s second term.
Is that an actual Democratic policy plank? And wouldn’t 80% of the electorate include a majority of Democrats anyway?
Powers &8^]
It seems to me that the basic conflict here might be between people whose sense of gender is entirely external versus those whose sense of gender is entirely internal.
My understanding of the scientific consensus is that most people inherently know what gender they are from a young age, and that is usually quite independent from their anatomy (or even their genetics, less often); that’s why people who were surgically altered at birth due to indeterminate anatomy more often comport with their genetic sex than with their anatomical sex.
Powers &8^]
While not the same poll question, per Pew,
Overall, roughly half of Americans (54%) say that whether someone is a man or a woman is determined by the sex they were assigned at birth, while 44% say someone can be a man or a woman even if that is different from the sex they were assigned at birth.
The trend wrt younger generations and Dems parallels support of same sex marriage.
ETA this is for 2017.
This is interesting.
https://www.prri.org/research/americas-growing-support-for-transgender-rights/
But only 47% oppose ‘bathroom bills’ (legislation that would require transgender people to use bathrooms consistent with their sex assigned at birth), and the number in favour has actually increased from 38% in 2017 to 45% in 2019.
Any of the Americans here have any idea why?
My hypothesis?
Conservative/Republicanism is becoming unpopular as the population grows younger and browner. Bathroom bills are always pushed by conservatives, who also push anti-abortion bills, anti-immigrant bills, anti-social welfare bills, anti-education bill, and pro-military/prison industrial complex bills. So folks who are against those things tend to also be against bathroom bills by default.
Also, I think for me, there’s an “ickiness” to a bathroom bill. I don’t want cops standing outside of public restrooms asking you to prove that you belong. I don’t want folks feeling emboldened to sic the police on people they think aren’t sufficiently gender conforming. And not because they are genuinely afraid, but because they just want to get someone in trouble. As you probably have heard, this happens in the States a lot. And we don’t have a lot of trust in our police to not go overboard.
One time I had to pee really bad while I was on a road trip. I was in North Carolina, at a time when the bathroom bill was in the news. The woman’s restroom was occupied and my bladder was screaming, so I did what I had to do. All the while, I was praying that no one had seen me go in because I just wasn’t in the mood to have to explain myself to a police officer. Fortunately it was a single-stall number. I wouldn’t have had the courage to go in if there had been guys in there (which means I would have had to pee in some bushes somewhere).
I interpreted the question as being about the discrepancy between the statistics.
ETA maybe I should actually read the article. Doing that now.
That’s why I thought support for bathroom bills would have fallen rather than risen. It surprised me.
It also seems odd that some Americans say they would be comfortable having a close friend tell them they are transgender, but they support banning them from the bathroom of their new gender. I’m less surprised that support for laws against discrimination is much higher, since you can oppose discriminating even against people you personally disapprove of.
Sorry, I misunderstood the statistics.
Not a whole lot of time points in the study so it’s hard to say much about trends one way or another. Looks like more of the support there came from the “I don’t know” category rather than from people who opposed the bills changing their minds.
The new thing on Twitter today is a woman was banned for hate speech for saying this, which I am typing out verbatim:
“Only females can get cervical cancer.”
I did make a comment that this is pretty clearly true - I wasn’t mean or anything, just said it was true. I was promptly told I was transphobic. So now I guess “female” and “male” don’t mean anything.
Anyway, as to those polls: there is nothing contradictory about any of those numbers; they’re all different questions. You’re getting 71% to say “I favor laws that prohibit discrimination against transgender people” but 47% saying “I support bathroom bills” because those are very different questions and they’re framed in different ways. You can alter a person’s memory of an event that happened an hour ago by phrasing a question slightly differently. Honestly, don’t put much stock in polls like this.
I think @RickJay is right in that depending on how the question is written, you can get unexpectedly different results.
But I also think its possible that in the last two years, people have become more aware of the diversity that exists within the transgender population. The number of actual transsexuals (people who had sex reassignment surgery) is pretty small relative to those who have only socially or medically transitioned. In 2017, people answering the poll were probably more likely to imagine bathroom access for someone capable of blending in with the user population. This was me back in 2017, because I didn’t know any differently. People’s concept of transgender has widened since then, and the prospect of bearded males entering the restroom resonates differently than the prospect of a stealth transsexual does.
What’s noticeable to me is that all these polls seem focused on restrooms, but the real tensions are occurring in more intimate settings like locker rooms and rape shelters. The poll that I cited earlier was the first I’d seen that specifically looked at how people feel about intact males sharing locker rooms with women and girls. I would be surprised if Americans were drastically different than the English and Scottish in their feelings on this.
They do mean something; they just don’t seem to mean what you think they mean. They don’t refer exclusively to reproductive anatomy. They can, but they don’t have to. They can refer to any male or female attributes.
So, while it’s true that cervical cancer is a problem unique to the female reproductive system, there are female humans without cervices, and there are male humans with them. (Yes, there are male humans with female reproductive systems because “male” and “female” do not solely refer to anatomy.)
Powers &8^]