Mississippi Passes "More Dead Kids Please" bill. Texas responds w/ "hold my beer"

[Emily Lake]

Any daughter of mine isn't going to be raised specifically to fear penises because I think that doing so is specifically child abuse, both of my child AND the child who has validated to the school system exactly what they are.

According to you, you will never have a daughter. So don't go all hypothetical about how you would raise the child you are adamant that you do not want and will never have.

 

[Emily Lake]

Women's shelters didn't enter into the conversation until someone was speaking how they can and do bar trans women. I'm not sure if it was you or Emily that made that claim, but the fact is, if someone can meet the bar of S-/T-, I say they shouldn't be turned away.

Sure sure. Who gives a fuck if these are women who have been brutalized by men in abhorrent ways, usually for long periods of time. Who gives a fuck if they have trauma that is exacerbated by having men around them. As long as a man doesn't make fertile sperm, his feelings and his desires are far more important than the safety and security of all the women there. Seriously, who the fuck do those women think they are, wanting to have a space free from males? Fuck them, they're just some hysterical overreacting cows, amirite?

This is how you sound to me.

 

[Emily Lake]

What I don’t think you understand is that when I express concerns about women feeling and being safe in wimen’s only spaces, I mean cis and trans women. Both. All.

But there are some conflicts inherent in the situation. Lots of women have extremely valid reasons to feel traumatized or fearful or grossed out by unexpectedly encountering a naked person with a penis standing next to her in the shower. At the same time, trans women do not need to be confronted by screams of horror or accusations or demands to know their personal medical history.

I will happily help fund co-ed shelters, as well as shelters exclusively for transgender people.

But I strongly object to forcing traumatized females to share shelters with males who usually look male, just because those particular males have "womanly feels". The fact remains that they are male.

Women in shelters are there to escape the trauma caused by men. Giving a subset of men the privilege of invalidating that safety because of their subjective identity furthers the trauma. Women should be able to have female-only shelters, which exclude ANY males, regardless of their gender identity.

Again, I will happily help fund co-ed shelters, as well as shelters exclusively for transgender people - in addition to female-only shelters.

 

[Emily Lake]

The fact, complete and utter fact that MTF represent an order of magnitude fewer convictions than their population representation trumpan order of magnitude fewer convictions than their population representations all the rest.

There is no such fact. You just repeat it over and over, as though when you say it enough times my already having pointed out what was wrong with your data will magically go away. Your inference that they have an order of magnitude fewer convictions than their population representation depends on the ridiculous premise that all the imprisoned transwomen are known to be transwomen by the prison authorities.

He has been presented data that invalidates his wishful claim. He just dismisses it out of hand. As a proportion of population, transwomen are incarcerated at a higher rate, and they have a higher rate of sexual offenses per capita - higher even than the rate for males in general.

 

[Emily Lake]

Of course you see this as a discussion about trans women and the rights of trans women

Yes, this is a discussion about trans women and their rights because this is a thread about trans women and their rights and talking about things here that are not that are either derails or red herrings.

Sure sure. Talking about how the privileges being demanded for transwomen are in direct conflict with the rights of female women should totally just be ignored. Because fuck those women, amirite? They already have all the rights they need - the right to shut the hell up!

 

[Emily Lake]

As I've said, orchiectomy is a good dividing line.

Orchiectomy is a good dividing line FOR YOU PERSONALLY.

Orchiectomy AND penectomy is a reasonable dividing line for women. But you reject that. I am left to infer that you reject it because you personally want to keep your penis, and you personally also want to have unfettered access to female spaces, without the consent of the females who use them.

You personally want your personal situation to allow you to be able to be where women are vulnerable, and you don't want women to have the right to tell you to fuck off.

 

[Emily Lake]

Your average rapist isn't going to want to volunteer to be castrated, whereas your average trans woman will usually be thrilled to no longer need two medications at once, especially if it gets them away from men.

Around 80% of transwomen still have both their balls and their dick, and have no intention of getting rid of any of them.

You are making the mistake of assuming that what you want for yourself is what other people also want.

 

[Emily Lake]

Emily has frequently signaled that her offers to compromise are in as good faith as Lucy with a football.

I gave her an example of a trans girl who had NEVER experienced life on testosterone, and she rejected that. That's not a compromise. That's hard-lining.

What the heck are you talking about? There is no such thing as a transgirl who never experienced life on testosterone. Male babies have testosterone.

This is Jarhyn circling back to a completely different argument. He want to give puberty blockers to pretty much any child who has even the most remote hesitation about puberty, because he views puberty as something horrible that people are forced to go through against their will. Jarhyn believes that puberty should be an option for all young people, to have or not, as they choose. He also believes that all those kids should have a choice about "which puberty" they get.

I object to his entire premise. Puberty isn't a choice, it's a natural element of our development as humans. All creatures in the Kingdom animalia go through some process of transformation from juvenile to adult. Some go through multiple stages - larval instar stages are all developmental stages leading to culmination as an adult insect. Tadpoles turn into frogs. The entire concept of this being a choice is, well, bonkers.

The idea that male juvenile can somehow "choose" to experience a female puberty is well beyond bonkers. It's fantasy.

I additionally have objections to the widespread use of puberty blockers, as well as to cross-sex hormones administered during the pubertal window. There are very real health risks associated with both puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

IF - and this is a very big IF - IF medical practice were demonstrating a reasonable degree of concern and care for the long term effects, and IF clinicians were able to determine which children will persist and which are experiencing transient dysphoria, and IF clinicians were doing the due diligence of identifying and treating conditions which may be contributing to dysphoria (autism, anxiety, depression, childhood sexual trauma, confusion about sexual orientation) prior to prescribing either blockers or cross-sex hormones, I would not have an objection. But the reality right now is that there are no reasonable safeguards in place to protect children from the long-term and devastating consequences of a bad decision where they truly do not understand the magnitude of what they are giving up.

My "hard line" that Jarhyn likes to bitch about isn't all that hard. It's just rational and compassionate.

He, on the other hand, has pretty much expressed "Well if a kid makes a bad decision and ends up sterile with serious health complications, oh well, fuck them, they made their bed they get to lie in it".

 

[Jarhyn]

Male babies have testosterone

So do female babies, and gonadal babies. You don't really have a point.

He want to give puberty blockers to pretty much any child who has even the most remote hesitation about puberty, because he views puberty as something horrible that people are forced to go through against their will.

Many things are absolutely something horrible WHEN forced to go through with it against their will, particularly in a way they do not want. IE sex.

Except this particular kind of slow rape of the body has lifelong consequences, a fairly long opportunity to stop it from happening, and it's YOU who wants to force it on people against their will.

Puberty isn't a choice

It absolutely is, insofar as the hormonally differentiable part, just like continuing to live is a choice, just like being an abusive parent or relative is a choice, just like killing people is a choice. This particular choice is made by taking a pill.

The idea that male juvenile can somehow "choose" to experience a female puberty is well beyond bonkers

If you can point to a relevant biochemical difference insofar as the bodily and mental developmental aspects which are sought in terms of how puberty is driven biologically, the whole trans community would be all ears.

But you don't, because you can't, because there fucking isn't one. The differentiations of puberty are caused by different levels of testosterone, progesterone, and estrogen, and those can absolutely be administered in different ratios to achieve different effects.

Those different effects are colloquially "male puberty", "female puberty" and "non-hormonally puberty".

I additionally have objections to the widespread use of puberty blockers, as well as to cross-sex hormones administered during the pubertal window

Because you don't understand the evidence based medical science that has been done over the last century and a half.

There are very real health risks associated with both puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

Which you have failed to produce beyond the risks we are already WELL aware of, and aware of the shape of, and which are readily consented to.

The fact is that the number one effect on an AMAB person is "they actually live longer".

IF medical practice were demonstrating a reasonable degree of concern and care for the long term effects,

They do.

IF clinicians were doing the due diligence of identifying and treating conditions which may be contributing to dysphoria (autism, anxiety, depression, childhood sexual trauma, confusion about sexual orientation) prior to prescribing either blockers or cross-sex hormones

Hey @Toni, hate to say I told you so, but I fucking told you so. Here she is exactly using the concern trolling to force delays in care. Bad faith ahoy!

But the reality right now is that there are no reasonable safeguards in place to protect children

ThInK oF ThE cHilDrEn!!!!1!1!1

Get a fucking grip.

Of course WPATH has published some safeguards and they are mostly reasonable.

The reality is that I propose "Trust But Verify" as a model: allow short delays to puberty during initial assessment to prevent irreversible differentiation from occurring, while doing an in-depth evaluation.

You, and the conservative concern trolls you seem in league with, are just as ready to force permanent and unwanted bodily changes on people unilaterally as your average rapist.

It is as deluded as the antagonist of Lolita.

I think the vehicle of violence you engage in is merely different, using social rather than physical means to exercise power over others. The behavior of denying people the power of self determination on the development of their bodies has all of the same hallmarks of ignoring of consent as a rapist raping someone.

 

[Jarhyn]

The fact is, there is a burden of proof here in demonstrating that there is ANY relevant difference of puberty as respects behavior or physical ability, given equivalent nurture beyond the effect of hormones, and that burden has not been met.

This is not to say "women are failed men". Women are not failed men, nor are men failed women!

People are just "people", and "people who have a certain hormonal balance involving elevated testosterone through puberty" consistently develop one way regardless of their gonads or genitals, and "people who have a certain hormonal balance involving elevated estrogen and progesterone" develop another way regardless of their gonads or genitals. Of course this is barring physiological phenomena which cause one or the other chemical to have reduced or absent effects in the body... And people who have a balance of those hormones at levels consummate with castration still develop, albeit in a markedly different way than the other two scenarios.

It is similarly these chemicals and these alone which differentiate how thought processes differ in situations of identical nurture and brain microstructure, at least according to real evidence based medicine.

It just happens that on the basis of the difference of a certain microstructure of the brain, some people gravitate towards a different one of these scenarios, and tend to find the other scenarios largely intolerable.

People can hold up red herrings all they want, such as hip bone structures or whether or not they produce eggs or sperm, but those things do not matter to the concern of that which drives how people act, and that which drives how muscle and fat distributes on the body as a result of living and exercise so as to create a physical capability.

My contention is that people deserve a choice over which of these is their experience of puberty.

 

[Rhea]

I’ve been pondering (and watching tiktok) and I think I’ve been able to identify why Jarhyn’s proposal is so wrong and so insulting.

He contends that trans women (of which he is not one) are women,
And want to be in women’s spaces because of the protection they afford,
And that women’s spaces were badly designed by the women,
And need to be changed to suit the trans women,
Who consider themselves women, but don’t like the feel of the women’s spaces
And Jarhyn, who is not a woman, will tell us how to design women’s spaces right,
In a way that includes him, who is not a trans woman.


Not buying what you’re selling.

Moreover, I don’t get the sense that trans women agree with you.

 

[Rhea]

It feels like someone wanting access to the library because it’s quiet enough to play their drums without interruption.

 

[Jarhyn]

It feels like someone wanting access to the library because it’s quiet enough to play their drums without interruption.

No. You are claiming that there's a peace that is actively being broken here, not just a difference in appearance but a difference in BEHAVIOR and a difference in RISK. Either you can, like Emily, justify the belief that this is the case with trans women, specifically the trans women who don't have balls, or you can admit the argument is based on unjustified prejudice.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And it's something your side completely ignores. You're effectively saying you can't safely be trans in a red state. Outlaw it by vigilante rather than by law.

No one is supporting vigilantism. We are merely saying that it, and sexual aggression, does exist. That is by no means the same as supporting it. You cannot be safely trans in a red state until red states take strong measures to protect trans people.

No, you're simply setting up a situation where it's bound to happen and pretending that wasn't the desired outcome.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You also have not provided any way at all fir women in a locker room to distinguish between those who are women but still have a penis and those who are potentially a threat.

Look, very few gay men are of threat to women in a locker room. That still does not mean that all women will be comfortable with gay men sharing a locker room with them, particularly if they do not know them. Because you really can’t tell just by looking.

And you haven't provided any means by which a woman is supposed to identify the rapist in drag.

Hint: Criminals size up their targets, they rarely attack total unknowns.

Ffs Loren. How do you think drag works in a shower?

And why the fuck do you think it’s my problem to solve all unreasonable demands made upon women by men? Yes, I wrote men because that’s who, in this thread, are insisting that it’s not a problem for women to deal with naked strangers with penises in wimen’s locker rooms.

This reads to me as another way to discourage women from having equal access to athletic facilities . And control of our own lives. Which doesn’t bother you one single bit.

Showers do not exist in isolation other than open showers on beaches meant for rinsing off salt water. The attacker wouldn't actually go in until they had sized up the situation.

 

[Rhea]

It feels like someone wanting access to the library because it’s quiet enough to play their drums without interruption.

No. You are claiming that there's a peace that is actively being broken here, not just a difference in appearance but a difference in BEHAVIOR and a difference in RISK. Either you can, like Emily, justify the belief that this is the case with trans women, specifically the trans women who don't have balls, or you can admit the argument is based on unjustified prejudice.

You’re still telling women how to feel, how to navigate the world.

You still do not understand life as a woman.

And, I would suggest, you are still doing no favors for trans women, who I don’t think agree with your aggressive insistence that women don’t know what they are talking about when they describe living as a woman.


Look. #NotAllMen. We know that. We already navigate that. You want to tell us we don’t know what we’re doing. You’re not interested in women’s spaces or living as a woman. You have no interest in understanding the people who occupy the space. You just want to take over the space. And you’re not even a trans women. You’re interested in living as a man among women. Without ever understanding women.

 

[Toni]

You also have not provided any way at all fir women in a locker room to distinguish between those who are women but still have a penis and those who are potentially a threat.

Look, very few gay men are of threat to women in a locker room. That still does not mean that all women will be comfortable with gay men sharing a locker room with them, particularly if they do not know them. Because you really can’t tell just by looking.

And you haven't provided any means by which a woman is supposed to identify the rapist in drag.

Hint: Criminals size up their targets, they rarely attack total unknowns.

Ffs Loren. How do you think drag works in a shower?

And why the fuck do you think it’s my problem to solve all unreasonable demands made upon women by men? Yes, I wrote men because that’s who, in this thread, are insisting that it’s not a problem for women to deal with naked strangers with penises in wimen’s locker rooms.

This reads to me as another way to discourage women from having equal access to athletic facilities . And control of our own lives. Which doesn’t bother you one single bit.

Showers do not exist in isolation other than open showers on beaches meant for rinsing off salt water. The attacker wouldn't actually go in until they had sized up the situation.

Are you kidding? My experience is vastly different than yours.

Aside from that: Exactly WHAT do you not get that I’m talking about a flight/fight response on the part of people who are likely extremely vulnerable and are likely to gave been traumatized by some kind of sexual assault in their lives, mostly by someone they thought they could trust in a situation that seemed safe?????

Womens locker rooms are supposed to be safe. No naked person wants to encounter a perceived threat.

It may be that most women would flee but a non-zero number would react as though they were fighting for their lives. Neither is a good situation for a trans woman.

This is not a situation where someone is going to look over, say something like Nice package. Is that thing loaded?

 

[Toni]

And it's something your side completely ignores. You're effectively saying you can't safely be trans in a red state. Outlaw it by vigilante rather than by law.

No one is supporting vigilantism. We are merely saying that it, and sexual aggression, does exist. That is by no means the same as supporting it. You cannot be safely trans in a red state until red states take strong measures to protect trans people.

No, you're simply setting up a situation where it's bound to happen and pretending that wasn't the desired outcome.

Nope.

And Loren, I really do wish you would stop with this ‘your side’ bit. AFAIK, everyone here supports trans rights. No one wants anyone to be traumatized or frightened to to feel unsafe. Including transwomen.

 

[Jarhyn]

Aside from that: Exactly WHAT do you not get that I’m talking about a flight/fight response on the part of people who are likely extremely vulnerable and are likely to gave been traumatized by some kind of sexual assault in their lives, mostly by someone they thought they could trust in a situation that seemed safe?????

The part where nobody is asking you to "just trust" here, seeing as there is either a desk to verify important details before they ever get in through the front door let alone the shower room door, or a lone ungendered shower stand where there is no protection for anyone anyway, or a place where we would expect and demand that they go through the trouble of installing a third option for ANYONE who might need additional privacy and space ala the ADA.

Womens locker rooms are supposed to be safe. No naked person wants to encounter a perceived threat

Not every perception of threat is justified by reality.

AFAIK, everyone here supports trans rights

The point here is that Emily and Bomb very much do not.

Emily vociferously shouts down, with myriad bad faith and myriad bad medical understanding, any effort to afford kids with useful, meaningful solutions:

IF clinicians were doing the due diligence of identifying and treating conditions which may be contributing to dysphoria (autism, anxiety, depression, childhood sexual trauma, confusion about sexual orientation) prior to prescribing either blockers or cross-sex hormones

She is absolutely using bad faith here because DEPRESSION IS CAUSED BY DYSPHORIA, and autism itself is a physiological brain configuration that is going to be fundamental to the formation of much of dysphoria itself, and that doesn't go away when you take Ritalin.

In fact, it would have led to a reduction in my autism symptoms had I just been able to access blockers, had I known they were even an option, because a lot of the distraction and difficulty comes from having "foreign" and otherwise conflicting noise in one's head, and that is a source of "foreign" noise to me.

All of those are medical red herrings designed to delay shutting the metaphorical door until the cat is already dead in the road.

 

[Toni]

Aside from that: Exactly WHAT do you not get that I’m talking about a flight/fight response on the part of people who are likely extremely vulnerable and are likely to gave been traumatized by some kind of sexual assault in their lives, mostly by someone they thought they could trust in a situation that seemed safe?????

The part where nobody is asking you to "just trust" here, seeing as there is either a desk to verify important details before they ever get in through the front door let alone the shower room door, or a lone ungendered shower stand where there is no protection for anyone anyway, or a place where we would expect and demand that they go through the trouble of installing a third option for ANYONE who might need additional privacy and space ala the ADA.

Womens locker rooms are supposed to be safe. No naked person wants to encounter a perceived threat

Not every perception of threat is justified by reality.

AFAIK, everyone here supports trans rights

The point here is that Emily and Bomb very much do not.

Emily vociferously shouts down, with myriad bad faith and myriad bad medical understanding, any effort to afford kids with useful, meaningful solutions:

IF clinicians were doing the due diligence of identifying and treating conditions which may be contributing to dysphoria (autism, anxiety, depression, childhood sexual trauma, confusion about sexual orientation) prior to prescribing either blockers or cross-sex hormones

She is absolutely using bad faith here because DEPRESSION IS CAUSED BY DYSPHORIA, and autism itself is a physiological brain configuration that is going to be fundamental to the formation of much of dysphoria itself, and that doesn't go away when you take Ritalin.

In fact, it would have led to a reduction in my autism symptoms had I just been able to access blockers, had I known they were even an option, because a lot of the distraction and difficulty comes from having "foreign" and otherwise conflicting noise in one's head, and that is a source of "foreign" noise to me.

All of those are medical red herrings designed to delay shutting the metaphorical door until the cat is already dead in the road.

I don’t think you really understand fight or flight.