Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

Who would you see as falling outside the definition I gave earlier? ie bodies formed along one of 2 reproductive pathways?

I'm not being disingenuous at all. I'm asking how you define sex, how you categorise male and female* and whether your categorisation includes all individuals. You seem to be just waving your hands and saying 'something something biology' which doesn't really mean anything.

The 2 categories are bodies that, in normal circumstances, would develop down one of 2 reproductive pathways resulting in the ability to produce either large or small gametes. This includes all individuals. It includes people with dsd's because they have bodies where something has gone awry in the development process. It includes people who aren't able to produce any gametes or who are unable to menstruate for the same reason. It also includes people with atypical secondary sexual characteristics.

I don't think for a minute you are asking in good faith.

 

[monkers]

A butch lesbian who has been threatened, assaulted and intimidated while using the women’s bathroom is warning of the growing attacks on gender non-conforming people using public toilets.

Eloise Stonborough, 32, who presents as butch – a woman whose gender expression and traits present as typically ‘masculine’ – said she is challenged on using a women’s toilet roughly every one in three times she uses a public facility, with the attacks increasing significantly over the last two years.

This is what the TERFs and GC brigade are causing women like me to experience. Meanwhile Kathleen Stock want to recruit lesbians to her cause of challenging women going to the loo according to the way they look.

https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/butch-l...nment-review-gender-neutral-facilities-833787

 

[winjim]

I don't think for a minute you are asking in good faith

F*ck off.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Safeguarding related to risk assessment is absolutely based on probability. Clearly you don't understand the process. If a person in the women's toilet has no functional capacity for rape, then the probability for rape is zero. The control measure is 'no action required'.

So men in wheelchairs should be allowed in the women's changing rooms if they wish?

Safeguarding isn't based on individual risk assessment. It is based on probability and the probability of a transwoman commiting any offence, whether it requires a penis or not, is the same as other males.

 

[AuroraSaab]

...and let's just remind ourselves that the whole GC movement is predicated on casting trans women as a predatory threat.

One that, in the real world, has yet to present itself.

They present exactly the same threat as other males, some stats suggest higher. The question isn't why they are excluded from women's single sex spaces - we know they are excluded because their sex is male.

The question is why you think they should get a free pass and privileges that we don't extend to other men?

 

[AuroraSaab]

This is what the TERFs and GC brigade are causing women like me to experience. Meanwhile Kathleen Stock want to recruit lesbians to her cause of challenging women going to the loo according to the way they look.

https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/butch-l...nment-review-gender-neutral-facilities-833787

Kathleen Stock isn't exactly hyper feminised in appearance. You just can't stand women organising and advocating just for themselves. You've got Stonewall, let lesbians have their own stuff.

 

[icowden]

...and let's just remind ourselves that the whole GC movement is predicated on casting trans women as a predatory threat.

One that, in the real world, has yet to present itself.

Um Barbie Kardashian?

 

[winjim]

Honestly, it could have been an interesting discussion but I've been trying all day so f*ck it. Enjoy shouting at each other.

 

[classic33]

Point of order, this was your actual statement:-

Fair enough if you stated this in error, but you did state that Wolf was not found guilty. They were.


I think we are nitpicking a little. If transwomen are women and any man who says that they are now a women is a transwoman, then it follows that there are transwomen who have not taken HRT, or any sort of therapy or surgery. I think this is the nub of @AuroraSaab's position and that of many people who think that we need to have some boundaries.

The World Athletics Association has recognised that women's sport needs to be protected from men who identify as women but who have a distinct biological advantage. The justice system has been thrown into the spotlight as it seems unfair that someone like Barbie Kardashian who has not had hormone treatment and who has sworn to kill and mutilate women, should be housed in a women's prison just because they say they are now a woman. Many women seem to feel that the gender of woman is being devalued if anyone can join. Given the historical fight for equality for and the fight for homosexual and lesbian rights, many fear that without any sort of boundary or limit, there are significant risks to women.

The risks do not come from people who are genuinely disordered and want to take medication and have surgery in an attempt to transform themselves into something that their mental health can live with, and no one wants to see these people suffer unduly. It is the people (man) who will take advantage of the system that raises cause for concern.

You'll have a link for the World Athletics Association(WAA), won't you?

As for Barbie Kardashian, he never applied through the courts for the Gender Recognition Certificate. He wasn't old enough, 16, when it was granted, by the courts. The system has legally classified her as a woman.

 

[icowden]

I'm not being disingenuous at all. I'm asking how you define sex, how you categorise male and female* and whether your categorisation includes all individuals. You seem to be just waving your hands and saying 'something something biology' which doesn't really mean anything.

My reading is that it says the same as my earlier post. The definition of male and female is based on XX vs XY chromosomes and the development of either testes or ovaries. All of the DSD categories that you mentioned exist but are characterised biologically as male or female based on chromosomal analysis and the biology of the body.

If you are biologically male you have testes of some description which are generating testosterone and therefore have a biology accordingly.
Aurora's point (I believe) is that issues of gender identity are psychological. We have yet to identify any biological or genetic component to the feeling of being born in the wrong body. There are dangers that we push children to think in a particular way whilst they are still trying to decide who they are and how they feel. Equally there are dangers that men such as Barbie Kardashian will misuse gender identity to carry out their violent ideology.

What continues to amaze me is that it seems to be impossible to have a polite informed discussion, and when you do see this in public places the response is usually to shut down the conversation and label everyone TERFS and hate crime perpetrators. Discussion is not a hate crime. Hate crimes arise when discussion and information is supressed.

 

[icowden]

As for Barbie Kardashian, he never applied through the courts for the Gender Recognition Certificate. He wasn't old enough, 16, when it was granted, by the courts. The system has legally classified her as a woman.

And why has the system done that? Magic? Or because BK claims that he is a woman?

 

[icowden]

You'll have a link for the World Athletics Association(WAA), won't you?

Mistyped - World Athletics Council.

 

[winjim]

My reading is that it says the same as my earlier post. The definition of male and female is based on XX vs XY chromosomes and the development of either testes or ovaries. All of the DSD categories that you mentioned exist but are characterised biologically as male or female based on chromosomal analysis and the biology of the body.

If you are biologically male you have testes of some description which are generating testosterone and therefore have a biology accordingly.
Aurora's point (I believe) is that issues of gender identity are psychological. We have yet to identify any biological or genetic component to the feeling of being born in the wrong body. There are dangers that we push children to think in a particular way whilst they are still trying to decide who they are and how they feel. Equally there are dangers that men such as Barbie Kardashian will misuse gender identity to carry out their violent ideology.

What continues to amaze me is that it seems to be impossible to have a polite informed discussion, and when you do see this in public places the response is usually to shut down the conversation and label everyone TERFS and hate crime perpetrators. Discussion is not a hate crime. Hate crimes arise when discussion and information is supressed.

Too late, I'm out. Can't be bothered any more.

 

[multitool]

Honestly, it could have been an interesting discussion but I've been trying all day so f*ck it. Enjoy shouting at each other.

Ahem...that's two people you've told to fück off in this thread in the space of a couple of hours.

Was a haven of peace before you sullied it with your language

 

[classic33]

So men in wheelchairs should be allowed in the women's changing rooms if they wish?

Safeguarding isn't based on individual risk assessment. It is based on probability and the probability of a transwoman commiting any offence, whether it requires a penis or not, is the same as other males.

And how exactly are you going to identity trans men or trans women in order to do your risk assessment?
Are we back to you performing your "Mick Dundee" test, as you seek to find out?

As for men only being the risk of raping a female, remember Vicki Bevan, #1,887?