This week in trans: The Lancet, the ACLU, the Guardian

[WAB]

Last thing I want to see is my daughter being frisked over your paranoia.
Seriously, this culture you are fighting for is problematic.

I see it as problematic that the other side is fighting for a culture where males have complete access to females of any age, in any stage of undress, and those females have no right to give or withhold their consent. I think it's problematic that some people are fighting for a culture that legalizes and normalizes voyeurism and exhibitionism as a right held in higher esteem than consent.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

 

[WAB]

Rocks are exactly the agents that they are, in the capacity they have, to be influenced by physics as they will and reflect the translation of the extant forces back out, again as they will. That is all this means, and if you wish to say that rocks are not things which get influenced by physics and translate those forces as they reflect them back on reality, I do not know what to say.

If you completely redefine "agent" to mean "object" then sure, a rock is an object that physics can act upon.

But for the rest of the people who understand what the term "agent" actually means in discussions of volition and choice, a rock is NOT an agent in any rational sense whatsoever.

Emily, we need you in the philosophy section!

 

[Metaphor]

0.0012% of births are intersex, ergo humans are not binary? Yeah, no.

Yes.

If there is any intermediate state it isn't binary. The intermediate state being rare doesn't change that. Look at something that is truly binary: That computer in front of you.

The hardware is built on a basis that .50001 = 1 and .49999 = 0. Intermediate values are interpreted as the binary they are closest to. (And, yes, the intermediates do exist--voltage drop happens.)

This is not true, and it's largely due to the term "intersex" implying that the individual is literally in-between sexes. That's not the case though.

DSDs make up about 0.2% of births... but of those over 99% of them are unambiguously male or female. Their DSD results in infertility, or results in developmental problems at puberty. Most people with a DSD don't even know they have one until they try to have a kid.

Of the incredibly low number of people who have ambiguous genitalia, most are cleanly classifiable as male or female based on their gonads.

Of the vanishingly small number of people whose genitalia and gonads are not easy to classify, they are still classifiable based on their genetic composition.

In any case: the intersex gambit is irrelevant and a distraction brought into the dialogue by the gender ideologists and their useful accomplices.

The trans movement has nothing to do with accepting that some people have disorders of sexual development. They are not proposing that only men with disorders of sexual development be accepted as women for all legal, social, and sexual purposes. They are proposing that men -- any man -- who has testes that produce sperm, a penis, a normal male karyotype, normal levels of circulating testosterone, had a male puberty and looks like a man to any and every person (including those lying to themselves that they don't look like a man), be treated as women if these men proclaim that is their 'gender identity'.

 

[Toni]

This is not true, and it's largely due to the term "intersex" implying that the individual is literally in-between sexes. That's not the case though.

DSDs make up about 0.2% of births... but of those over 99% of them are unambiguously male or female. Their DSD results in infertility, or results in developmental problems at puberty. Most people with a DSD don't even know they have one until they try to have a kid.

Of the incredibly low number of people who have ambiguous genitalia, most are cleanly classifiable as male or female based on their gonads.

Of the vanishingly small number of people whose genitalia and gonads are not easy to classify, they are still classifiable based on their genetic composition.

In any case: the intersex gambit is irrelevant and a distraction brought into the dialogue by the gender ideologists and their useful accomplices.

The trans movement has nothing to do with accepting that some people have disorders of sexual development. They are not proposing that only men with disorders of sexual development be accepted as women for all legal, social, and sexual purposes. They are proposing that men -- any man -- who has testes that produce sperm, a penis, a normal male karyotype, normal levels of circulating testosterone, had a male puberty and looks like a man to any and every person (including those lying to themselves that they don't look like a man), be treated as women if these men proclaim that is their 'gender identity'.

It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that being a transwoman is somehow a modern day version of Bosom Buddies or Some Like It Hot.

 

[Emily Lake]

Rocks are exactly the agents that they are, in the capacity they have, to be influenced by physics as they will and reflect the translation of the extant forces back out, again as they will. That is all this means, and if you wish to say that rocks are not things which get influenced by physics and translate those forces as they reflect them back on reality, I do not know what to say.

If you completely redefine "agent" to mean "object" then sure, a rock is an object that physics can act upon.

But for the rest of the people who understand what the term "agent" actually means in discussions of volition and choice, a rock is NOT an agent in any rational sense whatsoever.

What about gravity?

Also not an agent

 

[Emily Lake]

And what if they have both types?

It is not possible for a human to have both types of gametes.

In the extraordinarily rare case of true hermaphroditism, an individual may have:
Two testes that do or do not produce sperm (always considered male)
Two ovaries that produce do or do not eggs (always considered female)
One testis that does or does not produce sperm and one ovotestis that produces no gametes (always considered male)
One ovary that does or does not produce eggs and one ovotestis that produces no gametes (always considered female)
One testis that produces sperm and one ovary that produces no gametes (always considered male)
One testis that produces no sperm and one ovary that produces eggs (always considered female)
One testis and one ovary where neither produces gametes (classification based on genetic composition)
Two ovotestes that produce no gametes (classification based on genetic composition, usually male but not always)


Something on the order of 99% of cases do NOT involve having both a testis and an ovary. The most common cases involve one or two ovotestes. And in most cases where the person has two ovotestes, they are still genetically classifiable as either male or female.

Even in chimeras?

Red herring - chimeras are two people blended together, and chimerism is not a DSD, and would not be diagnosed as true hermaphroditism.

And although hypothetically possible, I am unaware of a fully functional sexual chimera existing. It would take the extremely implausible case of a person having mixed-sex chimeric DNA, which results in one testis and one ovary... and also results in their pituitary gland directing the production of near-normal male levels of testosterone AND near-normal female levels of estrogen/progesterone... and be balanced exactly right.

High levels of testosterone destroy ova; low levels of testosterone plus high levels of estrogen prevent sperm from being produced.

 

[Emily Lake]

The trans movement is about the idea that perceived gender is separate from physical gender. There seems to be a mental gender that normally but not always matches the physical gender--we saw that before the trans movement showed up. (Learned the hard way by trying to surgically correct intersex babies and sometimes getting the resulting gender different than the mental gender. The trans movement is about recognizing that nature sometimes gets it wrong, not just the surgeons.)

Oooh! Ladybrains! What fun.

There is not a mental gender. There is, however, severe gender dysphoria. That is not a case of someone being born in the wrong body or having the brain of the opposite sex or having a gendered soul. It is a symptom that is generally considered to represent no risk to others, but in many cases is deleterious to the wellbeing of the individual.

Gender dysphoria = mental gender doesn't match physical gender.

Not quite. Gender dysphoria is a symptom wherein the patient's belief about their gender is at odds with their biological sex. That does not, however, imply that their belief is accurate, or that their belief represents a true state of being. It certainty doesn't in any way suggest that their brains of their minds are actually of the other sex.

In many cases, gender dysphoria can cause extreme distress to the patient, who lives with a constant and severe disconnect between what their brain believes their body ought to be and what their body actually is. In cases of severe dysphoria, the distress cannot be alleviated by therapy, and physical transition is the only remaining recourse to provide a positive mental health outcome.

Bear in mind, however, that the current push of transgender activism has decided that gender dysphoria is not in any way required in order to be transgender. Additionally, this activism believes that no meaningful transition measures should be required. Literally, a large, bearded, be-penised bloke can say "I am a transwoman" and show up to the women's naked spa in jeans, workboots, and an athletic cup... and be entitled to gain access to a room full of naked women whether those women agree to it or not.

 

[Emily Lake]

Even in chimeras?

What about mosaics?

For all intents in this discussion, they're the same thing. The difference between mosaicism and chimerism is a technical one, based on the exact combination of eggs and sperm that occurred. In both cases, however, the resulting individual contains a mix of genetic material from multiple gametes of the same type. It's a distinction between whether there were two separate zygotes that fused or whether there was a fusion of multiple gametes prior to the formation of a zygote.

 

[Emily Lake]

The trans movement is about the idea that perceived gender is separate from physical gender. There seems to be a mental gender that normally but not always matches the physical gender--we saw that before the trans movement showed up. (Learned the hard way by trying to surgically correct intersex babies and sometimes getting the resulting gender different than the mental gender. The trans movement is about recognizing that nature sometimes gets it wrong, not just the surgeons.)

Oooh! Ladybrains! What fun.

There is not a mental gender. There is, however, severe gender dysphoria. That is not a case of someone being born in the wrong body or having the brain of the opposite sex or having a gendered soul. It is a symptom that is generally considered to represent no risk to others, but in many cases is deleterious to the wellbeing of the individual.

Obviously you are wrong as individuals born with ambiguous genitalia learned after doctors made their best guess and sometimes got it wrong.

DSDs aren't a foil for transgender ideology to use. Yes, in cases of ambiguous genitalia doctors have sometimes made a *decision* to surgically alter the genitalia to conform to one sex or the other, and sometimes choose incorrectly for the actual gametes and hormones that the individual has.

But those individuals inappropriately categorized at birth are not considered to be transgender. And they are irrelevant to this discussion.

 

[Metaphor]

This is not true, and it's largely due to the term "intersex" implying that the individual is literally in-between sexes. That's not the case though.

DSDs make up about 0.2% of births... but of those over 99% of them are unambiguously male or female. Their DSD results in infertility, or results in developmental problems at puberty. Most people with a DSD don't even know they have one until they try to have a kid.

Of the incredibly low number of people who have ambiguous genitalia, most are cleanly classifiable as male or female based on their gonads.

Of the vanishingly small number of people whose genitalia and gonads are not easy to classify, they are still classifiable based on their genetic composition.

In any case: the intersex gambit is irrelevant and a distraction brought into the dialogue by the gender ideologists and their useful accomplices.

The trans movement has nothing to do with accepting that some people have disorders of sexual development. They are not proposing that only men with disorders of sexual development be accepted as women for all legal, social, and sexual purposes. They are proposing that men -- any man -- who has testes that produce sperm, a penis, a normal male karyotype, normal levels of circulating testosterone, had a male puberty and looks like a man to any and every person (including those lying to themselves that they don't look like a man), be treated as women if these men proclaim that is their 'gender identity'.

It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that being a transwoman is somehow a modern day version of Bosom Buddies or Some Like It Hot.

Oh, it is much more unhuman and inhumane. The trans movement champions putting children on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, ensuring most of them will be infertile and probably never have an orgasm. The trans movement also tries to hush the existence of de-transitioners, because that does not fit their narrative.

 

[Emily Lake]

It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that being a transwoman is somehow a modern day version of Bosom Buddies or Some Like It Hot.

*shrug* It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that there's no problem with violent male criminals identifying as women after they've been caught and demanding to be placed in the women's prison... and being allowed to do so despite the risk that poses to the women incarcerated there. It amazes me that otherwise intelligent-seeming people don't see the obvious gaping loophole in the policy of self-declaration that allows a registered felony sex-offender to enter a female-only nude spa and expose his genitals to unwilling women and children.

It amazes me that the obvious risks and loopholes in the policy of self-declaration don't jump off the page for anyone with a brain.

I have no issue at all with transgender people, and I believe quite strongly that all people should be treated fairly and with respect. I am quite comfortable with transgender people being treated as their identified gender in most social situations. But I also realize that gender identity should not supplant sex, and that allowing such a substitution represents a considerable risk to women in society across areas of safety, dignity, economic participation, and political representation.

 

[Toni]

Obviously you are wrong as individuals born with ambiguous genitalia learned after doctors made their best guess and sometimes got it wrong.

DSDs aren't a foil for transgender ideology to use. Yes, in cases of ambiguous genitalia doctors have sometimes made a *decision* to surgically alter the genitalia to conform to one sex or the other, and sometimes choose incorrectly for the actual gametes and hormones that the individual has.

But those individuals inappropriately categorized at birth are not considered to be transgender. And they are irrelevant to this discussion.

You are correct: they are not considered transgender. You are incorrect that they are not relevant to this discussion which, for some, hinges on the notion that in nature, sex is strictly binary a d determined at conception. This is obviously untrue. Some individuals are true hermaphrodites; some present with ambiguous genitalia at birth. We know this to be so—there is documentation in medical literature. We observe individuals who are apparently male but have a more feminine body or facial structures. We observe apparent females with narrow hips, broad shoulders and other more typical male features. There are males who are very nurturing and gentle . There are females who despise children and are very aggressive physically. Society has 'decided' that little girls like pink and dolls and making pretty things. It has 'decided' that boys like more violent toys and games. It ignores the reality that boy children enjoy cuddly toys and girls like building and pretending to shoot things or blow things up. And a lot of girls hate pink.

It is absolutely reasonable to at least entertain the notion that for some, their physical characteristics are at odds with their sense of themselves. There is zero reason to insist that people are as YOU perceive them and not as they experience themselves. How are any of us harmed?

I do not understand this notion that some men are pretending that they feel like women .....in order to what? Be treated like second class citizens? Most men, in fact, are exceptionally protective when it comes to their genitalia and are not quick to have it removed.

 

[Metaphor]

Obviously you are wrong as individuals born with ambiguous genitalia learned after doctors made their best guess and sometimes got it wrong.

DSDs aren't a foil for transgender ideology to use. Yes, in cases of ambiguous genitalia doctors have sometimes made a *decision* to surgically alter the genitalia to conform to one sex or the other, and sometimes choose incorrectly for the actual gametes and hormones that the individual has.

But those individuals inappropriately categorized at birth are not considered to be transgender. And they are irrelevant to this discussion.

You are correct: they are not considered transgender. You are incorrect that they are not relevant to this discussion which, for some, hinges on the notion that in nature, sex is strictly binary a d determined at conception. This is obviously untrue. Some individuals are true hermaphrodites; some present with ambiguous genitalia at birth. We know this to be so—there is documentation in medical literature. We observe individuals who are apparently make but have a more feminine body or facial structures as well as apparent females with narrow hips, broad shoulders and other more typical male features. There are males who are very nurturing and gentle . There are females who despise children and are very aggressive physically. It is absolutely reasonable to at least entertain the notion that for some, their physical characteristics are at odds with their sense of themselves. There is zero reason to insist that people are as YOU perceive them and not as they experience themselves. How are any of us harmed?

Then I assume you accept Rachel Dolezal as a black woman. She experienced herself as a black woman. Indeed, was perceived by others around her as one, for years. She did everything she could to live her truth.

But I suspect you do not support Rachel Dolezal. Why?

 

[Toni]

It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that being a transwoman is somehow a modern day version of Bosom Buddies or Some Like It Hot.

*shrug* It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that there's no problem with violent male criminals identifying as women after they've been caught and demanding to be placed in the women's prison... and being allowed to do so despite the risk that poses to the women incarcerated there. It amazes me that otherwise intelligent-seeming people don't see the obvious gaping loophole in the policy of self-declaration that allows a registered felony sex-offender to enter a female-only nude spa and expose his genitals to unwilling women and children.

It amazes me that the obvious risks and loopholes in the policy of self-declaration don't jump off the page for anyone with a brain.

I have no issue at all with transgender people, and I believe quite strongly that all people should be treated fairly and with respect. I am quite comfortable with transgender people being treated as their identified gender in most social situations. But I also realize that gender identity should not supplant sex, and that allowing such a substitution represents a considerable risk to women in society across areas of safety, dignity, economic participation, and political representation.

Do you have any documentation of transwomen being a physical risk to imprisoned cis-gendered women?



I will absolutely grant you that prisons are dangerous, violent places and are dangerous for women. One major source of danger is male guards.

 

[ZiprHead]

It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that being a transwoman is somehow a modern day version of Bosom Buddies or Some Like It Hot.

*shrug* It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that there's no problem with violent male criminals identifying as women after they've been caught and demanding to be placed in the women's prison... and being allowed to do so despite the risk that poses to the women incarcerated there. It amazes me that otherwise intelligent-seeming people don't see the obvious gaping loophole in the policy of self-declaration that allows a registered felony sex-offender to enter a female-only nude spa and expose his genitals to unwilling women and children.

It amazes me that the obvious risks and loopholes in the policy of self-declaration don't jump off the page for anyone with a brain.

I have no issue at all with transgender people, and I believe quite strongly that all people should be treated fairly and with respect. I am quite comfortable with transgender people being treated as their identified gender in most social situations. But I also realize that gender identity should not supplant sex, and that allowing such a substitution represents a considerable risk to women in society across areas of safety, dignity, economic participation, and political representation.

Do you have any documentation of transwomen being a physical risk to imprisoned cis-gendered women?



I will absolutely grant you that prisons are dangerous, violent places and are dangerous for women. One major source of danger is male guards.

My SIL was a nurse in a prison for a short time. One of the guards implied to her that if she wasn't "nice" to him he might not be there if she needed him.

 

[Metaphor]

It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that being a transwoman is somehow a modern day version of Bosom Buddies or Some Like It Hot.

*shrug* It amazes me that people who otherwise seem intelligent seem to believe that there's no problem with violent male criminals identifying as women after they've been caught and demanding to be placed in the women's prison... and being allowed to do so despite the risk that poses to the women incarcerated there. It amazes me that otherwise intelligent-seeming people don't see the obvious gaping loophole in the policy of self-declaration that allows a registered felony sex-offender to enter a female-only nude spa and expose his genitals to unwilling women and children.

It amazes me that the obvious risks and loopholes in the policy of self-declaration don't jump off the page for anyone with a brain.

I have no issue at all with transgender people, and I believe quite strongly that all people should be treated fairly and with respect. I am quite comfortable with transgender people being treated as their identified gender in most social situations. But I also realize that gender identity should not supplant sex, and that allowing such a substitution represents a considerable risk to women in society across areas of safety, dignity, economic participation, and political representation.

Do you have any documentation of transwomen being a physical risk to imprisoned cis-gendered women?



I will absolutely grant you that prisons are dangerous, violent places and are dangerous for women. One major source of danger is male guards.

Male guards, but apparently not male inmates like Karen White.

 

[Jarhyn]

Obviously you are wrong as individuals born with ambiguous genitalia learned after doctors made their best guess and sometimes got it wrong.

DSDs aren't a foil for transgender ideology to use. Yes, in cases of ambiguous genitalia doctors have sometimes made a *decision* to surgically alter the genitalia to conform to one sex or the other, and sometimes choose incorrectly for the actual gametes and hormones that the individual has.

But those individuals inappropriately categorized at birth are not considered to be transgender. And they are irrelevant to this discussion.

You are correct: they are not considered transgender. You are incorrect that they are not relevant to this discussion which, for some, hinges on the notion that in nature, sex is strictly binary a d determined at conception. This is obviously untrue. Some individuals are true hermaphrodites; some present with ambiguous genitalia at birth. We know this to be so—there is documentation in medical literature. We observe individuals who are apparently male but have a more feminine body or facial structures. We observe apparent females with narrow hips, broad shoulders and other more typical male features. There are males who are very nurturing and gentle . There are females who despise children and are very aggressive physically. Society has 'decided' that little girls like pink and dolls and making pretty things. It has 'decided' that boys like more violent toys and games. It ignores the reality that boy children enjoy cuddly toys and girls like building and pretending to shoot things or blow things up. And a lot of girls hate pink.

It is absolutely reasonable to at least entertain the notion that for some, their physical characteristics are at odds with their sense of themselves. There is zero reason to insist that people are as YOU perceive them and not as they experience themselves. How are any of us harmed?

I do not understand this notion that some men are pretending that they feel like women .....in order to what? Be treated like second class citizens? Most men, in fact, are exceptionally protective when it comes to their genitalia and are not quick to have it removed.

I accept the thrust of this, but would be cautious to note that "their sense of self" is not a "nonphysical" aspect of them. It is created by an alignment of neurons which is not itself necessarily open to change, and which may well be initialized on the basis of a sexual n-morphism (n >= 2) for any given morphological differentiation point of the brain.

 

[Toni]

Do you have any documentation of transwomen being a physical risk to imprisoned cis-gendered women?



I will absolutely grant you that prisons are dangerous, violent places and are dangerous for women. One major source of danger is male guards.

Male guards, but apparently not male inmates like Karen White.

This is an instance of an individual who would be a menace no matter what congregate population they were placed in and also rather obviously a poor candidate for being placed in a female institution, given the history of raping women.

Honest question: What do they do with men who are convicted of raping other men? Do they place them in the general population of a male prison?

 

[Toni]

You are correct: they are not considered transgender. You are incorrect that they are not relevant to this discussion which, for some, hinges on the notion that in nature, sex is strictly binary a d determined at conception. This is obviously untrue. Some individuals are true hermaphrodites; some present with ambiguous genitalia at birth. We know this to be so—there is documentation in medical literature. We observe individuals who are apparently male but have a more feminine body or facial structures. We observe apparent females with narrow hips, broad shoulders and other more typical male features. There are males who are very nurturing and gentle . There are females who despise children and are very aggressive physically. Society has 'decided' that little girls like pink and dolls and making pretty things. It has 'decided' that boys like more violent toys and games. It ignores the reality that boy children enjoy cuddly toys and girls like building and pretending to shoot things or blow things up. And a lot of girls hate pink.

It is absolutely reasonable to at least entertain the notion that for some, their physical characteristics are at odds with their sense of themselves. There is zero reason to insist that people are as YOU perceive them and not as they experience themselves. How are any of us harmed?

I do not understand this notion that some men are pretending that they feel like women .....in order to what? Be treated like second class citizens? Most men, in fact, are exceptionally protective when it comes to their genitalia and are not quick to have it removed.

I accept the thrust of this, but would be cautious to note that "their sense of self" is not a "nonphysical" aspect of them. It is created by an alignment of neurons which is not itself necessarily open to change, and which may well be initialized on the basis of a sexual n-morphism (n >= 2) for any given morphological differentiation point of the brain.

My understanding is that there is some controversy over the differences in brain structures between men and women and between trans and cis gendered individuals. I absolutely accept that there is a physical cause for the phenomenon we know as being transgender.

 

[Jarhyn]

Do you have any documentation of transwomen being a physical risk to imprisoned cis-gendered women?



I will absolutely grant you that prisons are dangerous, violent places and are dangerous for women. One major source of danger is male guards.

Male guards, but apparently not male inmates like Karen White.

This is an instance of an individual who would be a menace no matter what congregate population they were placed in and also rather obviously a poor candidate for being placed in a female institution, given the history of raping women.

Honest question: What do they do with men who are convicted of raping other men? Do they place them in the general population of a male prison?

I wonder what they do with woman rapists, whether they place them with the other inmates, too.

As I keep pointing out, the issues seem to entirely revolve around settings which were fucked up and wrong regardless of whether one of the persons involved are trans: zero rapists of any genital configuration should be given easy access to victims, of any genital configuration.

The problem here is not "where do you imprison trans folks?", The question is "how do you protect inmates from violations by each other or by guards?" Or perhaps even "how can we make our justice system focus on correction and healing rather than punishment and revenge?"