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

[Jarhyn]

I think that it is not erasing women to allow any human on earth to undergo a specific puberty, develop in a specific hormonally influenced way of their choosing, and participate in a peer group centered around that hormonal influence. I don't think it's erasing women to let some "vulva havers" decide that whatever they are, the social dance of "woman" is not it. It is not erasing women for some to decide that IS it.

 

[Toni]

No I don't believe so.

What I see is that every time sex/gender is viewed as not normal some people have to get all twisted.

Even now some schools try to ban boys from having hair long hair
https://nypost.com/2017/08/24/american-indian-boy-banned-from-school-for-having-long-hair/
https://www.click2houston.com/news/...ise-concern-over-hair-policy-at-magnolia-isd/
Some schools still try to ban girls from wearing pants
https://www.today.com/style/school-s-uniform-doesn-t-allow-girls-wear-pants-so-t141519
https://doyouremember.com/121011/girls-not-allowed-pants-school
Anti-oral sex laws
https://www.ayupp.com/social-viral/...states-alabama-arizona-florida-etc-15145.html
And then the whole thing about gay sex which is still going on and the golden rods want to get the supreme court to reverse and ban

Anti-Trans is just a continuation of the same crap

As for elite sports, if it went away I'd probably never notice.

And.....in order to be supportive of trans individuals, do we have to erase women?

It does feel that way sometimes. We have prominent medical journals engaging in all sorts of gymnastics in order to avoid potentially insulting trans individuals, with nary a thought about how women might feel that once again, the word woman is seen as too inflammatory to be used in polite society.

Are urologists going to start re-wording their articles in medical journals to include pre-surgical trans women who still have their prostate? Are they going to insist on screening transmen for prostate cancer? Are they going to remove MEN from their literature?

I don't think so.

I have not advocated anything. Rather I note that I believe that much of the generally negative talk about Trans I see is most often motivated by an underlying issue that people on the right have with anything related to sex or gender that falls outside of their idea of "normal".

However if you were to ask me what a pregnant woman should be referred to as I'd probably say a pregnant woman if that's what pregnant women prefer. If you were to ask me what I think a pregnant trans person should be referred to as I'd probably say whatever they want to be referred to as.

However when people talk about an "Erasure of Women", substitute "Erasure of Gays". What do those mean? It's not the same thing. What would Erasure of Trans mean - especially when initiated by a right winger?

I don't think that 'erasure of gays' and 'erasure of women' is as different as you would like to think. A lot of people prefer that women remain quiet and invisible unless in the bedroom or giving birth and silent even then. That's not much different than insisting that gay people remain closeted or that trans people not transition but to adopt stereotypical dress/behavior that conforms to the gender they were assumed to have when they were born.

 

[Toni]

I think that it is not erasing women to allow any human on earth to undergo a specific puberty, develop in a specific hormonally influenced way of their choosing, and participate in a peer group centered around that hormonal influence. I don't think it's erasing women to let some "vulva havers" decide that whatever they are, the social dance of "woman" is not it. It is not erasing women for some to decide that IS it.

Please note: there's no corollary about erasing men. That's NEVER an issue. Men are men are men and men make the rules to ensure that things stay that way.

 

[Metaphor]

I have not advocated anything. Rather I note that I believe that much of the generally negative talk about Trans I see is most often motivated by an underlying issue that people on the right have with anything related to sex or gender that falls outside of their idea of "normal".

However if you were to ask me what a pregnant woman should be referred to as I'd probably say a pregnant woman if that's what pregnant women prefer. If you were to ask me what I think a pregnant trans person should be referred to as I'd probably say whatever they want to be referred to as.

However when people talk about an "Erasure of Women", substitute "Erasure of Gays". What do those mean? It's not the same thing. What would Erasure of Trans mean - especially when initiated by a right winger?

I don't think that 'erasure of gays' and 'erasure of women' is as different as you would like to think. A lot of people prefer that women remain quiet and invisible unless in the bedroom or giving birth and silent even then. That's not much different than insisting that gay people remain closeted or that trans people not transition but to adopt stereotypical dress/behavior that conforms to the gender they were assumed to have when they were born.

A baby's "gender" is not assumed at birth. A baby's sex is observed and recorded.

Can you tell me what you mean by gender?

 

[Toni]

I have not advocated anything. Rather I note that I believe that much of the generally negative talk about Trans I see is most often motivated by an underlying issue that people on the right have with anything related to sex or gender that falls outside of their idea of "normal".

However if you were to ask me what a pregnant woman should be referred to as I'd probably say a pregnant woman if that's what pregnant women prefer. If you were to ask me what I think a pregnant trans person should be referred to as I'd probably say whatever they want to be referred to as.

However when people talk about an "Erasure of Women", substitute "Erasure of Gays". What do those mean? It's not the same thing. What would Erasure of Trans mean - especially when initiated by a right winger?

I don't think that 'erasure of gays' and 'erasure of women' is as different as you would like to think. A lot of people prefer that women remain quiet and invisible unless in the bedroom or giving birth and silent even then. That's not much different than insisting that gay people remain closeted or that trans people not transition but to adopt stereotypical dress/behavior that conforms to the gender they were assumed to have when they were born.

A baby's "gender" is not assumed at birth. A baby's sex is observed and recorded.

Can you tell me what you mean by gender?

A baby's sex/gender is observed and ....usually recorded. If ambiguous, the sex may not be recorded at birth but that may be delayed pending further investigation/testing. Even the recorded observations may, in fact, be incorrect for that individual. There is no chromosomal analysis done at birth to verify visual observations. Moreover, some individuals are born with ambiguous sex organs and some individuals are intersex, which is not usually apparent at birth.

In casual conversations, such as this one, I often use gender the same way that people who throw gender reveal parties do.

 

[Metaphor]

A baby's sex/gender

Are you implying here that 'gender' is the same thing as 'sex', that the two terms are interchangeable? If not, what is gender?

is observed and ....usually recorded. If ambiguous, the sex may not be recorded at birth but that may be delayed pending further investigation/testing. Even the recorded observations may, in fact, be incorrect for that individual. There is no chromosomal analysis done at birth to verify visual observations. Moreover, some individuals are born with ambiguous sex organs and some individuals are intersex, which is not usually apparent at birth.

You are describing sex being observed and recorded at birth. At what point is 'gender' observed and recorded (or "assumed")?

In casual conversations, such as this one, I often use gender the same way that people who throw gender reveal parties do.

I'm afraid that does not help, as I've never thrown or attended a 'gender reveal' party nor do I know anybody who has. In any case, I am interested in what you think gender is.

 

[Toni]

Are you implying here that 'gender' is the same thing as 'sex', that the two terms are interchangeable? If not, what is gender?



You are describing sex being observed and recorded at birth. At what point is 'gender' observed and recorded (or "assumed")?

In casual conversations, such as this one, I often use gender the same way that people who throw gender reveal parties do.

I'm afraid that does not help, as I've never thrown or attended a 'gender reveal' party nor do I know anybody who has. In any case, I am interested in what you think gender is.

Nor have I ever been to or thrown a gender reveal party. Try google.

In common parlance, such as in this discussion, I tend to use gender for sex sometimes in casual conversation. Such as this one.

You may note that when talking about establishing sex by medical observation, I used sex and not gender.

 

[Metaphor]

Nor have I ever been to or thrown a gender reveal party. Try google.

I can't 'try google' to find out what Toni believes and means when she says 'gender'. I did not say 'try google' when I was asked what I meant by the word 'woman'.

In common parlance, such as in this discussion, I tend to use gender for sex sometimes in casual conversation. Such as this one.

You may note that when talking about establishing sex by medical observation, I used sex and not gender.

You have not answered my question. You have said you sometimes use 'gender' to mean 'sex'. What do you mean by 'gender' when you are not using it to mean 'sex'?

 

[Bomb#20]

It is indeed curious that men's health is still men's health, the cancer dangers of bodies with prostates notwithstanding.

I'm shocked, shocked to find that you're erasing bodies without prostates who notwithstanding which still have prostate cancer risk.

 

[barbos]

It’s also that guys think other guys entering women’s sport are just fucking jerks.

LOL, is this real?

 

[Metaphor]

It’s also that guys think other guys entering women’s sport are just fucking jerks.

LOL, is this real?

Titania McGrath is a character created by comedian Andrew Doyle.

Veronica Ivy, formerly Rachel McKinnon, formerly Rhys McKinnon, is quite real. He's even opposed to transwomen having to meet a testosterone requirement to compete against women.

 

[barbos]

OK, it's not real, it was a joke.

 

[Jarhyn]

I think that it is not erasing women to allow any human on earth to undergo a specific puberty, develop in a specific hormonally influenced way of their choosing, and participate in a peer group centered around that hormonal influence. I don't think it's erasing women to let some "vulva havers" decide that whatever they are, the social dance of "woman" is not it. It is not erasing women for some to decide that IS it.

Please note: there's no corollary about erasing men. That's NEVER an issue. Men are men are men and men make the rules to ensure that things stay that way.

More, I expect the "erasing women" dialogue was cut entire by cultural protectionists, gender essentialists, mostly said men who made the rules so as to stay some way.

Granted, I don't think this is the reality, entire. There is plenty in our modern culture which stands against moving away from classic masculinity. It just isn't seen as clearly for what it is, I guess? But there is MASSIVE pressure among the masculine to 'not be like a girl'.

In many ways there is a whole library of men being "erased", by men and by women, too. Some of it is being erased, though, because those corners are "incel" and fuck them, TBH.

 

[jab]

Words don't erase people. Bob warned about mixing Texas medicine with railroad gin. It makes people look uglier, strangles up the mind and one looses one's sense of time.

Then why is the term "woman" now unacceptable to use in reference to someone who is pregnant? Isn't it because some people are feeling "erased" by the use of that word?

 

[jab]

Words don't erase people. Bob warned about mixing Texas medicine with railroad gin. It makes people look uglier, strangles up the mind and one looses one's sense of time.

So, getting away from pointless, snide comments and getting back to the OP. Just to be clear, are you FOR swapping out the words "women" to "person" like the ACLU initially did with RBG's quote, or are you on the side of Metaphor and Trausti that we should leave the terms "women" in place. Also, how about other situations, such as referring to "Mother's Day" as "Birthing Parent's Day" instead, or calling biological women "people who menstruate" or using "pregnant people" rather than "pregnant women" as has been advocated by many on the left.

"Mother's Day should be okay as a term--I think it is a dumb concept, because transmen would have "Father's Day". "Birthing Parent's Day" would exclude adoptive parents. Actually, why not just have "Parent's Day"?

 

[Emily Lake]

More, I expect the "erasing women" dialogue was cut entire by cultural protectionists, gender essentialists, mostly said men who made the rules so as to stay some way.

Why do you assume this?

My observation is that the objection to seeing women erased comes very, very strongly from left-leaning feminists and lesbians. Because we'd rather not have to engage in newspeak to be able to describe our experiences, our reality, and our interactions.

I'm not a fucking "menstruator". It's insulting beyond all reason to be reduced to a bodily function. I'm a woman - and adult human female. And while not all women menstruate, only women do so.

 

[TomC]

More, I expect the "erasing women" dialogue was cut entire by cultural protectionists, gender essentialists, mostly said men who made the rules so as to stay some way.

Why do you assume this?

My observation is that the objection to seeing women erased comes very, very strongly from left-leaning feminists and lesbians. Because we'd rather not have to engage in newspeak to be able to describe our experiences, our reality, and our interactions.

I'm not a fucking "menstruator". It's insulting beyond all reason to be reduced to a bodily function. I'm a woman - and adult human female. And while not all women menstruate, only women do so.

But you're a woman.
Jarhyn is a man.

Why don't you just shut up and recognize your place?
Tom

 

[Emily Lake]

More, I expect the "erasing women" dialogue was cut entire by cultural protectionists, gender essentialists, mostly said men who made the rules so as to stay some way.

Why do you assume this?

My observation is that the objection to seeing women erased comes very, very strongly from left-leaning feminists and lesbians. Because we'd rather not have to engage in newspeak to be able to describe our experiences, our reality, and our interactions.

I'm not a fucking "menstruator". It's insulting beyond all reason to be reduced to a bodily function. I'm a woman - and adult human female. And while not all women menstruate, only women do so.

But you're a woman.
Jarhyn is a man.

Why don't you just shut up and recognize your place?
Tom

Hear me roar.

 

[Jarhyn]

But you're a woman.
Jarhyn is a man.

Why don't you just shut up and recognize your place?
Tom

Hear me roar.

I hear you spew hate, I don't hear much roaring though.

You are a "menstruator", as much as you are a "woman". Your problem seems to be in others not immediately recognizing you in the way and capacity you would like.

Imagine that.

r/selfawarewolves material at it's best.

 

[Emily Lake]

But you're a woman.
Jarhyn is a man.

Why don't you just shut up and recognize your place?
Tom

Hear me roar.

I hear you spew hate, I don't hear much roaring though.

What hate? Please provide some support for your accusation.

You are a "menstruator", as much as you are a "woman". Your problem seems to be in others not immediately recognizing you in the way and capacity you would like.

So sayeth the testiculator.

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH