cis male is a slur

[jadis]

Quel dommage !

[Guybrush]

I've been too tied up to keep an eye on this the last few hours and still am, but let me be clear about this:

Any further discussion on this topic is going to be:

• According to the rules
• In line with our goals

That means no nastiness, no ad hominems. That means I expect rhetoric that ultimately promotes friendship and trust.

I will hold myself to this as well. Those who cannot are free to discuss something else.

[jadis]

It's so bizarre. You already know there are crazy, awful people of every sort. If you let anyone in anywhere, you'll also let some bad ones in. It ALSO means there's bad people already there, like there are crazy, pooping, dick fondling, meth headed cis women in women spaces too.

And getting hung up on this, aren't you also just swallowing the bait? There are so many actually important issues for society, like racism, drug use, gun violence, conspiracy theory, religion. If anything, republicans harping on trans issues and blowing them up seems like, besides being awful, like a way to shift focus away from issues that are much more important and where they're not helping.

Can we get some details on the dick fondling situation by cis women in women-only spaces?

[Guybrush]

I didn't have much time to post yesterday, but my feeling about the discussion is that it's stuck. A
I think it also may have become needlessly polarized.

Still, I'll write some of my thoughts in the hope of maybe bringing some nuance and hopefully center things a bit more.

Can we get some details on the dick fondling situation by cis women in women-only spaces?

It happens all the time. Just check out your pornhub premium account.

But joking aside, I thought it'd be interesting to see, so I googled just quickly.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/09/683711899/two-woman-charged-in-alleged-attack-on-trans-woman-in-north-carolina-bar

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/suspects-in-beating-of-transgender-woman-chrissy-lee-polis-could-face-hate-crime-charges/

It doesn't say explicitly dicks were fondled, though.

A Harvard study from 2019 concludes that risk to transgender teenagers of getting raped can be reduced by allowing them access to restrooms that match their gender identification:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/06/health/trans-teens-bathroom-policies-sexual-assault-study/index.html

Hence, I get the impression that granting such access should reduce overall sexual assault, not increase it. I hope that would be in everyone's moral interest (to reduce harm/suffering to trans people). Despite the news stories shared, I don't think transpeople represent much of a threat in terms of sexual assault.

I'm not actually a fan of gendered bathrooms at all, preferring to just have bathrooms, but I'll admit that may not be feasible everywhere or in every society and doesn't necessarily make for a good argument here.

Anyways, I also have some scattered comments to the discussion that took place yesterday.

The first is that participants in this discussion, despite appearances, share a lot of common ground. Most have acknowledged some of the stuff brought up by Jadis and I haven't seen anyone saying kids should undergo chemical castrations or surgery asap. We generally seem to think a more careful approach is better.

Gender affirming care has been needlessly equated to medicalization and surgery.

From AAMC.org:

Surgery, including to reduce a person's Adam's Apple, or to align their chest or genitalia with their gender identity, is rarely provided to people under 18.

"The goal is not treatment, but to listen to the child and build understanding — to create an environment of safety in which emotions, questions, and concerns can be explored,"

Second, about the quote or idea that transpeople are males invading women only spaces, I've addressed it before. I can quickly reiterate my utilitarian point about how I believe it helps a lot more transpeople and helps keep them safe than it is a hindrance or threat to women. I think the quote ignores the obvious personal goal of people who transition; simply to express on the outside who they feel they are on the inside (not to attack women). It seems unfair to demonize them, even if there's some validity to the concerns.

About trans women competing against biological women and having unfair advantages, I also addressed this. To reiterate, I think sports should be free to define these things to ensure fairness and rewarding competition. Hence, I myself am open to excluding bio males from bio females' competition. I am also open to using other parameters than sex so that possibly more women can compete against men. I think my stance would possibly anger some people (?), but I'm good at compartmentalizing and don't care for sports 😄 And sometimes bio sex is important, like in medicine or forensics. Sports can be like that too, unless they can ensure a level playing field by other parameters (I'd like to see that).

All these things are points I believe I've made before, but then everyone else also seem to have reiterated theirs. It may be a sign this discussion is currently at an impasse.

[Lexi Darling]

Thank you for your levelheaded response! I agree that this discussion is at an impasse and I think at this point we might just have to agree to disagree between whatever you want to call the different sides of this debate.

I think we can hopefully all agree that there are a lot of trans people who are fine, ordinary citizens of earth who just want to live their lives. There are also wackjobs among the trans contingent, same as literally any other denomination of people. In my personal experience I know more trans women who are afraid of entering women's spaces than ones who would enter an establishment and demand their dick be fondled, but apparently Jadis has had the opposite experience, so I feel like it's boiling down to a "he said she said" kind of thing almost.

[jadis]

Anyone who physically attacks a trans person should be dealt with by the police. The salient point about single sex spaces is that of sexual threat: it's posed by men, to women and men. The protected class is women.

I can only reiterate my extremely low opinion of your well-intentioned "utilitarianism" that proposes "solutions" at the expense of 51 percent of the population.

"Puberty blockers" is for the most part lupron, which is the drug administered to violent sex offenders to chemically castrate them. It is also used to treat precocious puberty, where it is reported to have caused a range of side effects. For how they actually work for gender dysphoric teenagers, see case of the shuttered Tavistock clinic. Before 2014, when they adopted the "affirmative" approach and started administering it to confused gay and lesbian kids, the vast majority of them outgrew the dysphoric feelings they had and became gay and lesbian adults. With puberty blockers, transition became universal. You may want look into Sweden's decision to discontinue puberty blockers for gender dysphoric minors. 

Let's introduce a new idea:

The biggest taboo among the MTFs is the "autogynephilia" theory, which basically posits that for a sizable proportion of them it's a sexual fetish where one is turned on by the thought of oneself as a woman. Ray Blanchard's two types of transsexual are the homosexual and the autogynephilic heterosexuals. Autogynephilia is an identification with the desired sex which can become a desire to actually be the desired sex (why this concept has become controversial is explained by Blanchard himself here: https://quillette.com/2019/11/06/what-is-autogynephilia-an-interview-with-dr-ray-blanchard/). Thus it is first and foremost a fetish or a paraphilia. One of its implications is that autogynephilic guys may well very closely imitate their idea of a women while at the same time displaying very typical heterosexual male behavior.

Again, it's a huge taboo in the trans community and they will brand it a "discredited" theory. I think it has its problems that are common to all of scientia sexualis, but empirically it has some truth. I dare anyone to watch this till the end and say there's nothing to it https://odysee.com/@Skirt_Go_Spinny:7/Wrong-Ans-Only-1:b

It's closely related to the centrality of porn to present-day transgenderism. Luckily, here we don't have to rely on taxonomies drawn by a sexologist but can turn to the first hand account by Andrea Long Chu, a writer I like a lot.

 

[jadis]

I think we can hopefully all agree that there are a lot of trans people who are fine, ordinary citizens of earth who just want to live their lives. There are also wackjobs among the trans contingent, same as literally any other denomination of people. In my personal experience I know more trans women who are afraid of entering women's spaces than ones who would enter an establishment and demand their dick be fondled, but apparently Jadis has had the opposite experience, so I feel like it's boiling down to a "he said she said" kind of thing almost.

My point is that biological men have no business is women-only spaces, including those who are fine, ordinary citizens who just want to live their lives. Societal classifications cannot be drawn on the basis of subjective self-ID. You can insinuate all you want about my "experience" in women's spaces, that changes nothing.

[Lexi Darling]

Sissy/bimbo kink is not the same thing as being a trans woman. Speaking as someone who is heavily involved in both kink and trans communities, I actually think there is a nuanced discussion that could be had here, but I'm not discussing it with someone who thinks that this applies to all trans women, and more importantly thinks that a person associating their transness with kink means they are not worthy of being respected as the gender they present as and identify with.

This hits close to home as someone who does take on a stereotypical hyperfeminine role and presentation in my kink identity. I don't claim that my kinks or others' are totally inoffensive and healthy, but having them is not a justification for gatekeeping trans identification, from anyone.

If they are happy transitioning and it makes them feel comfortable in their skin and they're not hurting anybody, what right do you have to say they are not "proper" trans people? You do not define our identity and you do not get to decide what any of it means, much less try to stop us from transitioning.

[Lexi Darling]

My point is that biological men have no business is women-only spaces, including those who are fine, ordinary citizens who just want to live their lives. Societal classifications cannot be drawn on the basis of subjective self-ID. You can insinuate all you want about my "experience" in women's spaces, that changes nothing.

I'm aware of your thoughts on this. I think my cis women friends, who regularly invite me to women-only spaces and have shown me kindness and understanding regarding my transness, would disagree with you. You are saying they're wrong in doing so and acting like you represent all cis women. Believe whatever you want, but your idea of what trans people are is not shared by all cis people and they're not dumb or wrong for not sharing it.

[Guybrush]

Societal classifications cannot be drawn on the basis of subjective self-ID. You can insinuate all you want about my "experience" in women's spaces, that changes nothing.

Interesting aside (maybe); in Norway, we have the Sami indigenous people. They have a special political influence in the north of Norway where they've lived for a long time and keep their reindeer herds.

You can register yourself as a Sami person. The basic requirement is that you feel like you're a Sami person. Essentially, that too is about identity.

This is just an example from Norway. I assume there may be many more. I ofc realize sami people have little to do wth American politics etc, but am just mentioning it so we don't assume basing legislation on identity is entirely unique.

About other things brought up, I may post more later.

[jadis]

Sissy/bimbo kink is not the same thing as being a trans woman. Speaking as someone who is heavily involved in both kink and trans communities, I actually think there is a nuanced discussion that could be had here, but I'm not discussing it with someone who thinks that this applies to all trans women, and more importantly thinks that a person associating their transness with kink means they are not worthy of being respected as the gender they present as and identify with.

This hits close to home as someone who does take on a stereotypical hyperfeminine role and presentation in my kink identity. I don't claim that my kinks or others' are totally inoffensive and healthy, but having them is not a justification for gatekeeping trans identification, from anyone.

If they are happy transitioning and it makes them feel comfortable in their skin and they're not hurting anybody, what right do you have to say they are not "proper" trans people? You do not define our identity and you do not get to decide what any of it means, much less try to stop us from transitioning.

I LOVE the idea that I'm "gatekeeping" the trans identity or trying to prevent adults from doing whatever they please with their bodies. Hilarious. 

I said maybe ten times in this thread that I have zero interest in the "legitimacy" of this or that gender identity. You literally cannot comprehend that because you are invested in this kind of talk.

There is an empirical, observable phenomenon of people "transitioning": my attitude is let's look at the vastly different manifestations of this, the array of motivations people have for transitioning. Because, among others, this is where it becomes genuinely interesting and you get talented people like ALC writing about it in ways that go beyond canned activist cliches.

That changes nothing about society's ability to accommodate certain political claims without impinging on certain groups' rights. But, as I've said, I'm keenly aware that not all trans people are as dull as you.

[Guybrush]

I'm keenly aware that not all trans people are as dull as you.

What the hell?

First, take some time off.

Second, you are barred from the Secret forum.

If you want to stick around, consider making an apology. It will be in your interest.

[jadis]

Fuck you, dullard

[Guybrush]

Fuck you, dullard

I'll leave this post alone as another reminder of the imbecile you can be.

To anyone else who wants to discuss this further, this is what I expect:

Any further discussion on this topic is going to be:

• According to the rules
• In line with our goals

That means no nastiness, no ad hominems. That means I expect rhetoric that ultimately promotes friendship and trust.

I will hold myself to this as well. Those who cannot are free to discuss something else.

[Nimbly9]

jadis, I think all your information is interesting and, as I'm sure everyone here knows, I'm not in disagreement with your points because I'm also looking at the big picture.

That being said, many trans issues are not really solvable ones in the present day as far as guaranteeing outcomes or the like (see: the detransitioners), so I don't think you will change their minds on every point since you all vary greatly in your respective personal experiences.

I've had some pretty heated arguments as well, but we all need to make the effort to be respectful or it destroys the point of even having these kinds of discussions.