Originally Posted by Letters
If you’ve got people who openly claim to be Trans when caught committing sexual crimes in order to get access to the female estate in prisons, it’s not a leap to suppose that self ID laws (which currently don’t exist in the uk) would embolden predatory men
This is just two examples of the bat of rapists and paedophiles claiming to be Trans
https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/16/trans...oilet-8914577/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...l-65549530.amp
The problem is we blurred the line between people with gender dysphoria and people with a sexual fetish by making Trans an umbrella under which everyone is welcome. We’ve now made the word transvestite forbidden, and told men who liked to dress up as women for sexual gratification that they were actually women all the time.
Now honestly If a bloke gets a sexual kick out of wearing dresses…that’s up to him, but this doesn’t need to be validated in a public setting to say well you’re just being your genuine self.
There is a term called autogynaephilia where men are aroused at the thought of themselves as women. This is seen as responsible for the rise of so called Trans Lesbians
You don't make policy decisions based on examples, you make them based on data.
It's like after that recent crossbow thing. People started calling for a ban on crossbows.
The average number of people killed in crossbow attacks a year: 1
My examples (and they aren’t exhaustive) were there to answer your question about whether men would don a wig and a dress in order to get sexual gratification from being in a female space…yes that and more so. The problem with data based decision making is if you believe the data there is a spike in sex crime committed by women…I’ll let you work out what the issue is thereYou don't make policy decisions based on examples, you make them based on data.
It's like after that recent crossbow thing. People started calling for a ban on crossbows.
The average number of people killed in crossbow attacks a year: 1
Do you think that statistics of child abuse have to be a certain level before we implement safeguarding procedures to protect children in schools and care homes?
We don’t have a ban on crossbows but I’m pretty sure there are laws that require a licence and for them to only be used in certain places like archery venues.
It would be nice for common sense to apply, such as in women’s support groups for rape and or domestic violence we probably should not have men entering a space for vulnerable women to talk. I don’t think any service that would ask Transwomen not to attend their groups should face discrimination procedures, or the women who are upset by a male presence derided as a bigot.
At the moment, single sex spaces are largely protected by law. But there is a push to encroach on these rights
Whether fully transitioned trans women have the right to use said spaces, you know what….im personally undecided on that
Last edited by HCZ_Reborn; 23-08-2024 at 01:57 PM.
It's a strange response to a post in which I questioned whether there is an "avalanche" of such cases. Literally the post you responded to I said:
Obviously you check that claim with data, not examples. I can provide examples of people winning the lottery, lots of examples. But it is still statistically very rare.I'm not saying it's never happened but I'd suggest it's pretty rare, maybe even vanishingly so.
The issue is using data incorrectly, not with making decisions based on data.The problem with data based decision making is if you believe the data there is a spike in sex crime committed by women…I’ll let you work out what the issue is there
No, but the level of safeguarding should be proportionate and appropriate. We have speed limits to try and reduce road deaths, we don't ban everyone from driving because some deaths still occur.Do you think that statistics of child abuse have to be a certain level before we implement safeguarding procedures to protect children in schools and care homes?
Common sense is lamentably...uncommon. I'm not saying that anyone who puts on a wig and says they're called Janet should be able to crack on and get their cock out in the ladies' changing room. Is anyone saying that? Someone who has fully transitioned...I'd say it would be weirder for them to be using the men's. Quite where the line is...I don't know. Like I said, I think it's complicated.It would be nice for common sense to apply
Well my last sentence should in fact negate what you are arguing against, the presumption that I’m
arguing for a blanket ban of all Transwomen from all female spaces.
I agree with you that it’s probably too complicated anyhow, plus there is precedent of fully transitioned M-F using such spaces without issue.
My response is that self ID isn’t the law of the land here therefore the safeguards do kind of exist although that in itself is a grey area. My examples suggested that if we allowed self ID to be the determining factor in whether men could enter all female safe spaces, it’s not hard to imagine these cases being commonplace.
My problem as I stated is when the term Trans becomes nebulous, and there is almost no consistency how such a determination is made. It used to be that someone had to live as a woman for two years before being able to legally change sex but I’m not sure whether that’s the case.
When making decisions it’s not just a case of gathering data (and whilst I in no way stated data shouldn’t be gathered, maybe just can’t singularly be relied on when there’s clear errors in data recording) it’s about doing a cost/benefit analysis.
If someone is sexually assaulted by a man dressed as a woman, and the policy is to record their gender identity as their sex not only does it create the impression that women are going around assaulting other women, it has the potential to provide misleading data to suggest that attacks on women of this nature are vanishingly rare when they actually may not be.
Plus it’s about determining whether the risk to women’s safety real or perceived, more or less important than that of a man who has not attempted to physically transition to be validated.
Safeguarding when it comes to children is less about what is common, and more about correcting past mistakes.
Last edited by HCZ_Reborn; 23-08-2024 at 02:57 PM.
I think the issue here is we're just not as far along the societal conversation with this whole issue as we are with some other things.
The whole homosexuality thing has happened in my lifetime. When I was a kid "gay" was a pejorative and I was born less than a decade after homosexuality was decriminalised.
The idea of gay marriage was unthinkable when I was a kid and "Christian values" were far more entrenched in society.
I don't know where things will or should land with all this. I think most people scoff at the idea that you can just wake up and decide you're an attack helicopter, but I think in real life there's not much of that going on. My overall feeling with all this is it's a psychological issue with a psychological solution.
I think it’s always sensible to make a division between the state of someone thinking that they are trans, and the political ideology that surrounds it. Transsexuals are nothing new, Transvestites have been present throughout all history
I don’t know that much about Gender Dysphoria, I think there’s clearly more to it than a fetish. But I think what we’ve seen recently is social contagion. How many teenagers (especially girls) regard themselves as non binary…now that in of itself is not a problem…it’s teenage experimentation that’s almost certainly less harmful than cutting, and probably is not psychological in the way something like Anorexia and Bulimia nervosa are.
However without wishing to be sidetracked, our lack of curiosity about this has led to what is in essence a medical scandal with children being put on puberty blockers (the medication was only ever intended to be used for immature onset of puberty…like six/seven year olds developing pubic hair…the premature onset of which can have lasting physical harm). And counsellors and medical professionals have been told that anything but unquestioning affirmation of new gender identity is doing that child harm.
I think a lot of effort is made to compare sexuality with gender identity. I think the two don’t share a common frontier. In fact the ideology underpinning gender identity actually undermines the gay and lesbian argument. It’s very hush hush that in Iran forced transitioning happens to gay teenagers because it’s better to have a daughter than a gay son.
As I said in one of my opening gambits, I genuinely think if one wants to live as if they are the opposite sex they are free to do so. I think with children as with adults there needs to be safeguarding for the individual, the type of surgery involved is permanent….it should not be promised to be a solution to all their problems.
I’m not convinced this kind of augmentation surgery is the right approach at all, however I wouldn’t attempt to legislate on it for those old enough to make their own choices, as long as the correct safeguards are in place.
I think women generally are more tolerant and accepting of men, and up to the point of gender ideology coming in…I think the issue of fully physically transitioned Transwomen using female public spaces hasn’t always been an issue.
However what we’ve seen in the last ten years is a very strident point of view, that not only Transwomen can live as women they are women. And when we say Transwoman we mean whoever says they are a woman is a woman.
As I tried to exemplify with the articles I linked to, the obvious safeguarding issues here are clear
But I don’t really take the absolutist approach with how to refer to Transwomen either. Debbie Hayton is someone I respect even though they are targeted by both sides, from being a self hating Transwoman to being a pervert by the more extreme people on the other side. And I think is that necessary, Debbie is open and honest about the reason for their transition…states without hesitation that they are biologically male and has allied herself with a lot of the women’s rights campaign groups
The whole Attack Helicopter thing comes from the idea of there being a thousand different gender identities rather than GD itself. And this has been a prominent social trend, there were identities such as other kin in which people were identifying as animals. This was in of itself in my view a harmless teenage phase (a bit like being a goth) but a lot of the sociological theory underpinning this gender ideology movement did adopt it
The idea is in the rehabilitation of the word Queer which you and I (and certainly NQ) recognise as being a pejorative term towards gay people. Now like you, I’ve been around in a time where gay was common currency as an insult. Been to football matches where the sexuality of footballers was questioned with chants. I did this and I don’t feel ashamed of it, though recognise that times and attitudes change.
Now Queer just means any identity that doesn’t conform with the stereotypical masculine/feminine heterosexual one. And basically any idiot with different colour hair can call themselves queer. This on one hand is ultimately harmless because I tend to be of the “you do you” when it comes to adults. The demand that other people validate this especially in terms of using chosen pronouns is very self absorbed and solipsistic.
This Roxanne Tickle says they find it hurtful that they are not accepted as a woman by everyone…and includes in that getting stares. Well sorry you can’t demand that people don’t look at you, life isn’t fair and even if I take you at your word that you genuinely believe yourself to be a woman….that doesn’t entitle you to demanding that everyone sharing that belief.
And it in fact rather raises the question that if someone needs that kind of unquestioning acceptable the problem is not external but internal. They state that being misgendered by the app owner led them to feeling suicidal, well yeah if that’s genuinely what happened that’s obviously undesirable. But if someone says something to me that makes me feel suicidal, I’d have to say that’s my problem not the problem of the person saying it.
The mantra of Be Kind is often thrust upon us, but in my view Being Kind sometimes means being honest. We can make you superficially appear more like a woman, but we can’t make you into a woman. Both in human kind and in all mammalian species we are sexually dimorphic. You aren’t assigned a sex, you are a sex….and those who are not one or the other are massive outliers
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote