|
Post by Netsuke on Jan 21, 2024 9:46:40 GMT 2
I am nowhere up to Baz’s and Slow’s standards for being cleverly funny but I do like explaining the rules of Cricket to newcomers who have no idea except you’re either holding a bat or you aren’t. And so….I tell them this…
The Rules of Cricket You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side thats been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have got out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game!
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 21, 2024 11:50:41 GMT 2
Scrubb, just to clarify, I would uphold the right of a trans person to be so. Just like I would uphold the right of a female.
With brains, I can appreciate some parts of a male brain can display commonality with a female brain. I did say, "I doubt you'd find a brain that shows all the anatomy of being female in a body that is male." The studies you quote agree with that.
I am happy you are happy for trans people to do anything and everything a female can and be involved in all aspects of being female and you'd be quite happy your 13 yr old daughter going to the gym/swimming pool and having a shower with a hairy chested, penis endowed (with or without an erection), no breasts person. You'd be quite happy having you or your female children attempting to compete with biological males. Or spending years and years attaining a high competitive standard to then be creamed by a failed male who is transitioning. Amongst many other things.
That beggars the question of when does a trans person become one. At what point. And at what point can they be classed as female, if ever? Or do they forever stay trans? Does this extend from one end of the spectrum to the other, i.e. someone who has undergone surgery and hormones etc to a male who has today decided he will transition? It is this end of the scale that concerns me and that end stretches way, way towards the other end where that person still has a penis. There has to be, for important practical and pragmatic reasons, because I am above all, a practical and pragmatic person, a line somewhere. Because, for example -
The law in the UK regarding rape can only be committed by a penis. A 'person with a penis' is male. Not trans, not female, not anything else. The person is male. Should a trans person have the laws re-written so that they are a separate category to male and female? Is the ultimate aim of a trans person to not remain in that state but be forever classed as a female? They wish to attain femininity. After all, that is the definition of 'transit', to get from one place to another. If there is a line somewhere that clarifies when a male has transited to a female? No. The waters are muddy no matter the definitions trans people want and are pandered to that a female can have wedding tackle.
If you are trans and by definition it is a temporary state, then until you have completed that, i.e. have no male genitalia, you can be classed as "other" but for all relevant lawful and practical aspects of life, you are bound by your biology. There can easily be a case by case basis for the few numbers who are not born one or the other (see Caster Semenya). Why is it that female to male trans people don't demand to compete with males, or use male facilities, or be incarcerated in a male prison etc etc? It's always the other way round.
If you are transiting/transforming from a male to a female then you are not yet a female. So there are certain things by rights available to females you don't qualify for. It is the in between stage. The 'other'. It all depends on your definition of what a male is and what a female is. Female categories shouldn't include male trans otherwise they get the crap end of the stick. There is enough unfairness in life and that is a major one that shouldn't be added to because males say it should be. You may think different. I respect that as there is no right or wrong, just opinions.
|
|
|
Post by Scrubb on Jan 21, 2024 22:47:11 GMT 2
Scrubb, just to clarify, I would uphold the right of a trans person to be so. Just like I would uphold the right of a female. With brains, I can appreciate some parts of a male brain can display commonality with a female brain. I did say, "I doubt you'd find a brain that shows all the anatomy of being female in a body that is male." The studies you quote agree with that. I am happy you are happy for trans people to do anything and everything a female can and be involved in all aspects of being female and you'd be quite happy your 13 yr old daughter going to the gym/swimming pool and having a shower with a hairy chested, penis endowed (with or without an erection), no breasts person. You'd be quite happy having you or your female children attempting to compete with biological males. Or spending years and years attaining a high competitive standard to then be creamed by a failed male who is transitioning. Amongst many other things. That beggars the question of when does a trans person become one. At what point. And at what point can they be classed as female, if ever? Or do they forever stay trans? Does this extend from one end of the spectrum to the other, i.e. someone who has undergone surgery and hormones etc to a male who has today decided he will transition? It is this end of the scale that concerns me and that end stretches way, way towards the other end where that person still has a penis. There has to be, for important practical and pragmatic reasons, because I am above all, a practical and pragmatic person, a line somewhere. Because, for example - The law in the UK regarding rape can only be committed by a penis. A 'person with a penis' is male. Not trans, not female, not anything else. The person is male. Should a trans person have the laws re-written so that they are a separate category to male and female? Is the ultimate aim of a trans person to not remain in that state but be forever classed as a female? They wish to attain femininity. After all, that is the definition of 'transit', to get from one place to another. If there is a line somewhere that clarifies when a male has transited to a female? No. The waters are muddy no matter the definitions trans people want and are pandered to that a female can have wedding tackle. If you are trans and by definition it is a temporary state, then until you have completed that, i.e. have no male genitalia, you can be classed as "other" but for all relevant lawful and practical aspects of life, you are bound by your biology. There can easily be a case by case basis for the few numbers who are not born one or the other (see Caster Semenya). Why is it that female to male trans people don't demand to compete with males, or use male facilities, or be incarcerated in a male prison etc etc? It's always the other way round. If you are transiting/transforming from a male to a female then you are not yet a female. So there are certain things by rights available to females you don't qualify for. It is the in between stage. The 'other'. It all depends on your definition of what a male is and what a female is. Female categories shouldn't include male trans otherwise they get the crap end of the stick. There is enough unfairness in life and that is a major one that shouldn't be added to because males say it should be. You may think different. I respect that as there is no right or wrong, just opinions. I think this post shows some misunderstanding of transsexuality. A large contingent of transsexual people will not ever have their genitalia removed. The hormones they take will make it non-functional and probably "wither" to some degree, but not everyone pursues surgery. And even someone who has had their genitalia altered may be called a transsexual for their entire life. My cousin's daughter would love nothing more than to look feminine, and pass 100% as a woman, but she just doesn't, in spite of having boobs and dressing femininely and wearing make up. She's hoping to have "facial feminization surgery" soon, so maybe that will make it possible. But I am certain that as she looks now, she is a lot safer using women's facilities than she would be in a men's room. That's the main reason that transsexual women "insist" they should use women's facilities, as far as I understand it - that's where they're safer. They are not safe using men's facilities. I'm also very surprised by the UK definition of rape, since people can obviously be raped with objects other than penii. Where I live, people without penii can be charged with rape, and I thought that would be true everywhere in the western world. There are also some assumptions in there that aren't very realistic, IMO. Honestly, the "hairy chested, breastless, penis-endowed person who wants to use the women's showers" is pretty much a unicorn. They are the boogeyman that people who are uncomfortable with the idea make up. Those that do exist are almost always some kind of mentally ill person, or a skeeze bag pretending to be transsexual, than an actual transsexual, and virtually all genuine transsexuals who just haven't started the transitioning yet would just use the men's until they do. And all but a tiny number of trans people wouldn't want to be seen naked while they were still appearing as the old gender. That said, I think that society could make some straightforward changes to ease some of those fears and to discourage crazy people and scumbag predators - either go Scandinavian and have all-gender nudity at saunas/pools/change rooms,so that it's normal to shower beside anyone; or have stalls/cubicles so no one is visible to anyone else. (Actually, here in Canada, I've never seen anyone shower naked in a communal female change room. Not once in my life. Everyone leaves their bathing suits on while showering at a pool, and at the gyms there are shower cubicles so no one is exposed. And every gym I've ever been at has at least a couple of cubicles (as well as toilets) where people can change if they are worried about being near someone who may be a transsexual. Or for kids to change in privacy. Or where a self-conscious transsexual can get changed. Of course, that is here, I am not familiar with communal change rooms in other countries.) In terms of sports, I believe competition in women's categories with trans people can be unfair. If a trans person went thorugh puberty while male, there was more testosterone in their system and they will have more muscle than a natural born woman. But, my believe is that the sporting associations are the correct people to be determining the rules, and I think that they are doing so now, and in a few years it will all be sorted out. I think you're wrong about transsexual men not wanting to compete in men's categories, or use men's facilities, though. I think that they do, and that no one questions it, because most people aren't aware that trans men are trans. Much easier for women to look convincingly masculine/male than vice versa, and of course men's appearance is not quite so scrutinized as women's. And in sports, because they didn't have the benefit of testosterone during puberty, they generally can't compete at very high levels, so it doesn't become controversial about whether or not they should be allowed.
|
|
|
Post by sophie on Jan 22, 2024 0:13:47 GMT 2
After my friend’s granddaughter died by suicide (aged 17) last year, I’ve been more moved by the various discussions about this whole issue. One discussion I read (and I don’t know about the academic validity of this study) was that young females on the autism spectrum (which she was) need much more support during puberty as the onset of menses can be catastrophic to their mental health and cause them to want to do anything at all costs to avoid having menses. It certainly presented another viewpoint.
|
|
|
Post by Scrubb on Jan 22, 2024 0:47:49 GMT 2
I am nowhere up to Baz’s and Slow’s standards for being cleverly funny but I do like explaining the rules of Cricket to newcomers who have no idea except you’re either holding a bat or you aren’t. And so….I tell them this… The Rules of Cricket You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side thats been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out. When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have got out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game!Well, now it's all perfectly clear!
|
|
|
Post by Scrubb on Jan 22, 2024 1:03:22 GMT 2
After my friend’s granddaughter died by suicide (aged 17) last year, I’ve been more moved by the various discussions about this whole issue. One discussion I read (and I don’t know about the academic validity of this study) was that young females on the autism spectrum (which she was) need much more support during puberty as the onset of menses can be catastrophic to their mental health and cause them to want to do anything at all costs to avoid having menses. It certainly presented another viewpoint. I hadn't heard that, but it makes sense. In a sort of related, but very different scenario - my parents friends had a developmentally challenged daughter - she was probably born around when I was, but we lived in different places at that time so I never met her. She would never develop past the age of about 6, mentally. She had very loving and supportive parents and several siblings, and had a great life as long as our familys were in touch. One thing, though was that she was absolutely terrified by the sight of blood - anyone's blood. A single drop and she'd be absolutely hysterical and needed an hour to get calmed down again. It didn't improve at all throughout her childhood, either. So, when she was just prepubescent, her parents chose to have her sterilized so that she would never have to deal with menses. It was very clear that she could never be a responsible parent either - but she would develop physically and have normal sexual and intimacy urges. She would also be very vulnerable, unable to know when someone was using her. I thought her parents did the most logical and right thing to help her mental and physical well-being. But, her parents were pilloried for it. They received hate mail, and public discussion said they should be charged with something or other. Of course I'm not in favour of automatically sterilizing everyone who is mentally challenged, and I know the horrors of what happened to people who were called "retarded" in the olden days, and even up to the 1960s here in Canada. Lots of people who were autistic, or traumatized, or just different, somehow, were thrown into homes or forcibly sterilized. But to my mind, this situation - a loving family, doing what they believe is best for their daughter for good reasons - is a very different, and justified thing. A lot of people don't see the nuance, though - and I think that's true in a lot of these sorts of issues.
|
|
|
Post by slowcoach on Jan 22, 2024 8:37:36 GMT 2
... no one questions it, because most people aren't aware that trans men are trans. Much easier for women to look convincingly masculine/male than vice versa, and of course men's appearance is not quite so scrutinized as women's. Delayed, postponed, puberty in boys could/can balance this out. It is controversial, particularly in the areas of consent, and parental knowledge/involvement. There is a concern that whereas it might be thought you would broaden options by delaying decisions, it might do the opposite, but that is speculative. Gender transitioning for subteens is a relatively new field with few studies and you can't do randomised trials. Delayed puberty is not without social consequences.
From way back, outcomes for men transitioning to women were not wonderful. Suicides were, perhaps are, common at all stages. That is not necessarily due to the transitioning.
FWIW although used penii is neither the standard nor scientific plural of penis, (penises and penes). Penii can be considered humorous, so OK if you are taking the piss.
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 22, 2024 11:24:05 GMT 2
"..That's the main reason that transsexual women "insist" they should use women's facilities - as far as I understand it - that's where they're safer..." And their feeling of safety trumps that of women who feel unsafe in their own toilets because they are in it? It appears at times the wants of trans people outweigh the rights of non-trans and usually when it is females who object to a certain thing but oh no, you can't do that, the trans person has a right to be there. So the women’s right for it to be a safe space away from biological males means nothing? There's been a lot of instances of trans person being beaten up in male toilets? Or is it just this undefined 'feeling of safety'?
“I think this post shows some misunderstanding of transsexuality.” Transgender is the more accepted term nowadays - “Transsexual is a dated term that is sometimes used in self-reference but that may give offense when used by others. The term transgender is preferred.” Definition - “..transgender may refer to a person whom a doctor assigned as male at birth, but that person identifies as female, and vice versa.” Also - “TRANSGENDER : of, relating to, or being a person whose gender identity is the opposite sex the person was identified as having at birth” So male to female or female to male. One or the other.
But - “Some people may refer to themselves as transgender as they identify with a gender that is neither male nor female, a mix of the two, or someone whose identity changes from male to female at different points.” They are not trans anything then as trans refers to the journey between the two sexes. If a person is quite happy permanently not being one nor the other, their transition is moot. If they wish to flip between the two, again they are then either one or the other, not trans. They are gender fluid or some other term.
“I'm also very surprised by the UK definition of rape, since people can obviously be raped with objects other than penii.” There are separate offences carrying as much weight - “...a female can be charged with assault by penetration or causing sexual activity without consent, both of which carry similar sentences to rape.”
“........person who wants to use the women's showers" is pretty much a unicorn.” - We will have to disagree on that unless you want a long post of reported incidents which would include Lia Thomas who is neither “..mentally ill person, or a skeeze bag pretending to be transsexual...... crazy people and scumbag predators”.
“And in sports, because they didn't have the benefit of testosterone during puberty, they generally can't compete at very high levels, so it doesn't become controversial about whether or not they should be allowed.” Could be some truth in that but I see biological women competing in a male sport and see the same competing in sports open to both. I’ve never come across a trans person wanting to or competing in a male sport - the reason being no doubt that they just don’t have a chance. Not like when it is the other way round. The opposite side to they do compete but because it isn’t controversial so doesn’t get heard about is that you ‘can’t prove a negative’ because in reality, they don’t compete.
|
|
|
Post by slowcoach on Jan 23, 2024 8:47:16 GMT 2
I think I am correct to say that the term transsexual existed before the term transitioning was applied to the process of change.
I also think transsexualism includes transsexuals for whom it only reflects a state of mind, a need, a desire, to change sex. Those who have undergone surgery and related therapies are included as transsexual.
They were referred to as pre-op and post-op transsexuals.
|
|
|
Post by slowcoach on Jan 24, 2024 9:02:49 GMT 2
What's in a name?
Was there a day when we became the sole arbiter of what we are called, how we are referred to?
When did it happen?
Did I sleep through it?
|
|
|
Post by slowcoach on Jan 24, 2024 14:04:36 GMT 2
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 24, 2024 14:38:22 GMT 2
Cake and eat it.
|
|
|
Post by Scrubb on Jan 24, 2024 22:38:33 GMT 2
What's in a name? Was there a day when we became the sole arbiter of what we are called, how we are referred to? When did it happen? Did I sleep through it? It's more like what we're hopefully moving towards, IMO. There are all kinds of things that the dominant people have called the people they had power over, that was derogatory and harmful to the subjected people, that are now being discarded. And I think that's a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Scrubb on Jan 24, 2024 22:57:11 GMT 2
There's been a lot of instances of trans person being beaten up in male toilets? Or is it just this undefined 'feeling of safety'? Yes, it's very well documented that transgender people (thanks for reminding me of the better terminology) are subjected to something like 50% more violence than other sectors of the population, and although inter-partner violence is elevated, they are also very vulnerable in "male" spaces. “........person who wants to use the women's showers" is pretty much a unicorn.” - We will have to disagree on that unless you want a long post of reported incidents which would include Lia Thomas who is neither “..mentally ill person, or a skeeze bag pretending to be transsexual...... crazy people and scumbag predators”. You did not include the part where I said "hairy chested, etc." people were the unicorns. I am very certain that Lia Thomas does not have a hairy chest, and that she has boobs. Yes, many transgender women do still have a penis but given that they are trying to be as feminine as they can possibly be, the mental image of some lout brandishing his pecker at the poor, shocked women, is what doesn't really happen. I believe that "tucking" is the term? “And in sports, because they didn't have the benefit of testosterone during puberty, they generally can't compete at very high levels, so it doesn't become controversial about whether or not they should be allowed.” Could be some truth in that but I see biological women competing in a male sport and see the same competing in sports open to both. I’ve never come across a trans person wanting to or competing in a male sport - the reason being no doubt that they just don’t have a chance. Not like when it is the other way round. The opposite side to they do compete but because it isn’t controversial so doesn’t get heard about is that you ‘can’t prove a negative’ because in reality, they don’t compete. At the top levels, and in professional sports, you're right. I'm talking about competing in university or community sports, where I'm very certain that transmen do compete with other men. I've definitely read lots of stories about it, though I don't have any stats. The thing about "rights" is that a trans woman feels, and believes, that she IS a woman. All she wants is the same rights as other women. And not to be subjected to the abuse that is certainly possible if she is forced to use men's spaces. My stance as a cis-woman is to be welcoming. Since not everyone agrees with me, I think that our society should be working towards changing the standard public facilities so that they aren't "womens" or "mens" spaces at all.
|
|
|
Post by slowcoach on Jan 25, 2024 8:38:48 GMT 2
What's in a name? Was there a day when we became the sole arbiter of what we are called, how we are referred to? When did it happen? Did I sleep through it? It's more like what we're hopefully moving towards, IMO. There are all kinds of things that the dominant people have called the people they had power over, that was derogatory and harmful to the subjected people, that are now being discarded. And I think that's a good thing. Yes, but it doesn't seem to stop there. It doesn't stop at not using derogatory or hateful terms but on insisting that a specific term is used. Should I demand that I am a she, not totally arbitrarily let's say on the basis that I have long hair and go distinctly in at the waist. Should I be offended if I am called he on the basis that I quite clearly have a large beard.
That is what I meant by being "the sole arbiter".
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 25, 2024 10:41:07 GMT 2
"I am very certain that Lia Thomas does not have a hairy chest, and that she has boobs." Looking at photos, yes, no hairy chest but that was not meant literally but more as a euphemism for appearing masculine. Also no boobs.
"I'm talking about competing in university or community sports, where I'm very certain that transmen do compete with other men. I've definitely read lots of stories about it, though I don't have any stats." I'm sure it probably happens and would be as newsworthy as the other way round, but not something I've seen and I thought I would have done had it been so.
A cis-woman is a person who identifies as the sex they were born with, yes? So a woman, or man. Is there a real need to append a qualifier? Or is it done to just placate the transcommunity and show someone is in tune with them? It's like saying chai tea, PIN number, male male. To me, it's redundant as the established categories are male and female. If you've transitioned from one to the other then all well and acceptable that you are trans...... - which signifies well enough you weren't born the sex you are now.
"I think that our society should be working towards changing the standard public facilities so that they aren't "womens" or "mens" spaces at all." Which is the point I made before that the feelings of safety of the trans community trump that of biological females - no matter if some are happy to share that space. Thus females lose out to the wants of the minority - and how small a minority? There are 3.9 billion (approx) females in the world but using the figures from the USA -
Using rounded figures to give an idea, 1.4 million identify as transgender in the US out of 341 million. A third are male to female trans, a third are female to male and a third are fluid. So lets say half of that 1.4 million at any one time are male to female = 700,000 In the US, 170 million people are female. 700,000/170 million x 100 = 0.4% Re-write the rights of 96.6% of the population who are female because of 0.4% who shout the loudest? Even misogynistic countries (Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran et al) would not consider that even if they did accept the trans situation.
I agree trans people should have rights. What I don't agree with is displacing/ignoring already established rights of the vast majority of in this case, women (not cis-women, but women) to avoid being bullied, mobbed and classed as transphobic. The way to fair change is democracy, so form a political party, get voted in and change the system to what you (meaning not you personally but the community) want. Doing that, or attempting to do that, will if successful give then to mandate to do so and to make fair and reasonable changes. I would abide easily with that if they were voted in. Just like no matter what my opinion is, I accept Brexit happened and need to work with that.
|
|
|
Post by slowcoach on Jan 25, 2024 12:47:44 GMT 2
By The Bye
Both My wife and I had our births registered in England. Yesterday I had recourse to me certificate to prove my parents names.
Against SEX it states in blue ink a large flowing hand : Boy
We checked my wife¡s and hers states: Girl
By world standards for birth certificates in English, Sex appears to be one of (Female/Male/F/M).
Which makes me think just how relaxed we used to be and how natural and friendly.
Who ever exclamed in glee "Its a Male!"
ETA I have no idea whether this is still the case.
|
|
|
Post by Scrubb on Jan 26, 2024 2:54:02 GMT 2
Democracy does not mean the tyranny of the majority.
And I don't agree that women are losing rights when trans women have the same rights as other women.
But now I think we have taken this discussion as far as we can.
|
|
|
Post by rikita on Jan 27, 2024 0:51:19 GMT 2
the use of cis implies that when you just say "woman" it includes both cis and trans women - if you say that "cis woman" is redundant and those a just "women", then by that you imply that trans women are not women - which something i personally wouldn't agree with ... so for me, when i mean both cis and trans women, then just saying women is enough, but when i want to say that i am a woman, but not a trans woman, then i'd say that i am a cis woman.
i don't think trans people are the loudest, the conversation about their rights is just the newest, so it currently gets noticed more, because there is still especially much to talk about.
and at least for me, personally, i don't think allowing spaces for women for all women is displacing my rights. would you see trans men in spaces for men as a displacement of your rights? best of course would be if there was no risk of violence or discrimination in any space, coming from anyone, so no one would need to be scared ...
btw, as someone who is not a native speaker of english, the use of "female" as a noun, in contexts where i would expect "woman" always confuses me a bit (and seems to me more common than the use of "male" instead of "man") - what exactly is the difference in meaning when saying "the right of a woman" or the "the right of a female"?
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 27, 2024 11:59:22 GMT 2
Scrubb wanted to leave it at that and I was quite happy to do so and agree we have differing opinions as is her and my right but in answer -
A woman is an adult female. Females = women + girls. The two words are used interchangeably and understood but female is the main term of which women and girls are sub-category. If you see what I mean. A woman is human whereas a female can be anything.
A woman - "..an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth." ---- "Female human being; a person assigned a female sex at birth, or a person who defines herself as a woman."
A female - "..of, relating to, or designating the sex producing gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes (spermatozoa)" ----- "of or relating to the sex that can produce young or lay eggs".
A woman can be a female. A trans woman (unless they have ovaries etc implanted which I wonder if ever does happen?) can be a woman but not a female - or identify as female. A ciswoman is a woman who fulfils the definition of a female, so the term is redundant because there is a perfectly known and good word available to describe someone from the distaff side. Female. In the whole scheme of things it's a minor point and I'm as guilty as anyone of using woman and female in the wrong way. "Are you trans?" "No, I'm female." - can't see anything wrong with that and right at the beginning I said about using cis to placate the trans community and show you are in tune with them. Bureaucracy doesn’t use man and woman does it, it uses male, female and often, other (or refuse to say). I think that’s perfectly adequate.
“i don't think trans people are the loudest..” Who is then? Who, at the drop of a hat, are offended at the slightest thing, mob, bully, pile on, refuse to listen to a different view, hurl abuse and cancel anyone at all who doesn’t align with their views. They appear to go from zero to five hundred miles an hour with no middle ground, demand anyone and everyone respect their view but refuse flat out to respect a different one.
“........and at least for me, personally, i don't think allowing spaces for women for all women is displacing my rights.” Spaces are just an illustration, but if you are happy that absolutely everything, everything, including sports, prisons, changing rooms, womens’ colleges and universities - even things like Turkish baths, in some places having days off each month, even as well if Islamic, being forced to separate from the things they had a right to (rightly or wrongly) as a male - would trans women accept the restrictions they now have to not do things males can, no matter the subject of religion? How determined is a trans woman to be accepted as female bearing in mind in practical terms, they main gain rights, but they will also lose some.
“...best of course would be if there was no risk of violence or discrimination in any space, coming from anyone, so no one would need to be scared ...” That certainly would be good. I’d go with that. But we understand that is never going to happen so we have to deal with life and consequences as it is but try and change to make it better.
“...would you see trans men in spaces for men as a displacement of your rights?” Apples and oranges. Any right I have I’d be quite happy a female having, trans-man or otherwise. Can’t think at all of one I wouldn’t unless anyone else can think of one to give me pause. That anyway is what is being fought for, for decades if not centuries and I agree all females should have exactly the same rights as males. What I don’t agree is that biological males, should they identify as a woman or not, have all the rights and access no matter what it is, of females. Maybe seems a contradiction of “rights” and “equality” but I can easily live with that for practical and pragmatic reasons.
Should a female, trans man or trans woman have the same rights as biological males - yes. Should any religion place restriction on what females can and can't do but a male can - no. Should a male or trans woman who is a biological male or any male who identifies as a woman have the same rights as a female - no.
|
|
|
Post by slowcoach on Jan 27, 2024 15:32:58 GMT 2
“i don't think trans people are the loudest..” Who is then? Who, at the drop of a hat, are offended at the slightest thing, mob, bully, pile on, refuse to listen to a different view, hurl abuse and cancel anyone at all who doesn’t align with their views. They appear to go from zero to five hundred miles an hour with no middle ground, demand anyone and everyone respect their view but refuse flat out to respect a different one. Whereas spectra for SEX,GENDER, ORIENTATION, are distinctly bimodal, some traits aren't so distinct. Very few people are sweet as could be or totally obnoxious, most are somewhere in the middle. From my limited experience, transsexuals tend to be more towards the extremes. I have checked with someone more familiar with transsexuals but from 30 years or so ago. I am assured that an unusually large proportion of their number were complete arseholes: narcissistic, bullying, demanding, belligerent. humourless. The other group being sympathetic, reasonable, sociable, with few or none in between these extremes. Another oddity seems that in the first group a zealous pursuit of becoming female, was matched with, if not blatant misogyny, no great fondness for women. It's just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 27, 2024 15:45:13 GMT 2
I agree. Also my experiences. Not factual as in evidence, just experiences.
|
|
|
Post by Scrubb on Jan 27, 2024 21:41:09 GMT 2
My experiences do not match either of yours at all. However, I can understand the reason for trans people to speak up, loudly, even though I have zero personal experience of it - they are fighting for basic human rights, and for their safety. Sometimes you have to push really, really hard, just to get to where everyone else is.
And at least in North America, the loudest voices are currently the anti-trans people. By far the loudest.
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 27, 2024 23:28:00 GMT 2
I'm interested to know what basic human right are they fighting for, exactly? As a male they have all the male rights, no? Do they want extra ones or different ones? They have all male human rights and now they want all female human rights? - which are actually the same anyway, there is no difference because male and female rights are the same in the eyes of the human Rights Acts. Something like that? I'm confused. What exact rights would they want as a female/woman rather than a male?
According the the UK Human Rights Act, these are they - Article 2: Right to life Article 3: Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment Article 4: Freedom from slavery and forced labour Article 5: Right to liberty and security Article 6: Right to a fair trial Article 7: No punishment without law Article 8: Respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence Article 9: Freedom of thought, belief and religion Article 10: Freedom of expression Article 11: Freedom of assembly and association Article 12: Right to marry and start a family Article 14: Protection from discrimination in respect of these rights and freedoms Protocol 1, Article 1: Right to peaceful enjoyment of your property Protocol 1, Article 2: Right to education Protocol 1, Article 3: Right to participate in free elections Protocol 13, Article 1: Abolition of the death penalty
Is it number 14? Just to clarify that, to be discriminated against does include because of your sexual orientation or transexual status. Fair enough, but - "The protection against discrimination in the Human Rights Act is not ‘free-standing’. To rely on this right, you must show that discrimination has affected your enjoyment of one or more of the other rights in the Act." So you must be discriminated against in one of the other rights. Discrimination itself is as they say, not free standing by itself, it must include one of the others to be valid. My question still stands, what "basic human right" are they fighting for if you cannot be discriminated against if none of the other rights are affected.
|
|
|
Post by sophie on Jan 28, 2024 2:16:06 GMT 2
I think here in NA, there is an underlying religious thread which seems to make everyone who is different a sinner, or doomed to hell … thus the extra fervour.
|
|
|
Post by rikita on Jan 28, 2024 2:37:40 GMT 2
“i don't think trans people are the loudest..” Who is then? Who, at the drop of a hat, are offended at the slightest thing, mob, bully, pile on, refuse to listen to a different view, hurl abuse and cancel anyone at all who doesn’t align with their views. They appear to go from zero to five hundred miles an hour with no middle ground, demand anyone and everyone respect their view but refuse flat out to respect a different one. i can think of quite a few groups that do that, namely some of the AFD/Querdenker/etc. type ones ... as for your list of rights, which of these rights do trans people then endanger for cis women? since you say that the rights they fight for will set back the rights of cis women?
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 28, 2024 9:47:39 GMT 2
"i can think of quite a few groups that do that, namely some of the AFD/Querdenker/etc. type ones ..." There is a lot more common sense in Germany regarding trans and gender issues and due to the language things like, e.g. not abolishing Ärztin or Kellnerin and many others for a gender neutral alternative. I doubt a female doctor will demand to have the 'in' part dropped and I've never heard of a Kellnerin demanding to be called a waiter or a Schauspielerin an actor. If this has happened I've missed it and I'd be interested to be corrected. So other issues are more prominent like the AFD and that being due to Government policies being, they believe, to have been too open on refugees for one thing. Querdenker though completely puzzle me. Basically it is different circumstances and what is seen as priorities.
I never said it was "Human Rights" and it is the right of every female to be able to engage in activities competitive and otherwise where there is no advantage given to males because of their biology. It is also the right of females in vulnerable situations to not have males in the same space. But if you do want a Human Right it is the right to privacy, specifically as worded, "...right to control who sees and touches your body..." There is a reason why there are exceptions to Equality laws (and those laws are more relevant than Human Rights). In Germany - "Unlike the characteristic of race/ethnic origin, a difference of treatment on the ground of sex, religion, disability, age, and sexual orientation is permissible when there is an objective reason for it." There has to be an objective reason and not having males in spaces for females is important enough for it deemed to have an exception. Why do you think - "Differences of treatment that take into consideration the desire to protect one’s privacy or personal safety are also allowed." And therefore - "Separate opening hours for women and men in saunas are an example of a permissible exception."
Is it because the people who make the rules are overwhelmingly male and they've got it wrong because females have no objection? I doubt it. How would a sauna full of females (who specifically have gone there at that time to avoid males) react if a fully endowed biological male was allowed to wander around because he/she/xi/they.... et al, because that male identified as a female that day? Female protected spaces should not be opened up to anyone because they say they are female. This takes away the rights of females regarding their privacy and personal safety. That is the point I've eventually gotten to. But, as I'm debating with two females who appear not to be bothered by the issue, maybe I should just leave you with it as I am not qualified, as I'm male, to have a justifiable opinion. A male's opinion on female rights carries less weight, if any, than a female's. I can accept that and can/will say little more.
There has to be a line. A clear line whereby, and this is the main issue that is far more relevant to male to female transition than the other way round, whereby a male has all the rights of a female. Be it after gender reassignment surgery, be it after testosterone levels have been reduced and controlled, be it what and whenever. I'm not in a position to decide that and are not qualified to do so. It has to lie between a fully transitioned male to female and at the other end, Brad Pitt in a skirt. The determination shouldn't be done on a case by case basis but there should be clear guidelines where a male has to attain a certain point to be allowed access to all that is female - just as various sports bodies have realised they have to make after a backlash to "level the playing field".
Should all biological males have unrestricted access to everything, without exception, that is only open to females solely because they identify as female but have gone no further in becoming one than changing clothes and putting on some make up? If no, then we agree. Everything else is just details and definitions.
|
|
|
Post by Scrubb on Jan 28, 2024 23:57:27 GMT 2
I don't think you and I are in agreement, no. I think that trans women should be treated as women and have the rights of all women. With the exception of competing in those sports where there is sn unfair advantage to having been male through puberty.
Also, remember that in many places, including the USA, transitioning is expensive and not covered by healthcare or insurance. Lots of American transgenders can't afford the hormones, let alone surgery.
My impression is that lots of people seem to think that the norm for trans women is of big, hairy people who love to wave their willie around. Which is simply not reality. Those are the minute minority.
And honestly, since I was about 7 years old, I have questioned why we have gendered terms for the same job.
|
|
|
Post by Voy on Jan 29, 2024 4:27:41 GMT 2
Scrubb said " I don't think you and I are in agreement, no. I think that trans women should be treated as women and have the rights of all women. With the exception of competing in those sports where there is sn unfair advantage to having been male through puberty."
I have stayed out of this discussion, but jump in to say , YES this ^ !
|
|
|
Post by OnlyMark on Jan 29, 2024 10:01:11 GMT 2
If you are willing to open up every single space (inc. prisons, shelters and refuges from domestic violence etc) to biological males, there then are no female only areas at all. Nowhere at all that other women who disagree can be or feel safe from males. They, who may be the majority but it would be interesting to find out, now have no say in the matter. Any male at any time can access anywhere without exception that females can. They just have to say they identify as a woman and cannot be refused. The cost is a different can of worms to this issue. I just cannot agree that is a good thing but then, I'm not female and come at it from a male perspective.
As a woman you have more right to agree with that than I do as you would be directly affected, whereas I wouldn't and I have no right to dictate the life of a woman. I have a wife and two daughters who I've anyway asked and talked to about this over the last few days and they disagree. They wouldn't want that situation to happen. If that is done though I think it would be difficult to justify having sports as an exception. If there is no 'line' in any other part of life as I've mentioned then it has to be all or nothing. In any case, may you get what you wish for.
|
|