Gender again. Sorry!

[multitool]

Thanks for your invitation to debate with you.
I don't need to 'be your guest' this thread and forum are open to all.
I'm not obligated to do the 'homework' you're trying to set me.

Allow me to rephrase this in way not so open to wilful misinterpretation: If you are interested in a fact-based discussion, I'm game. If it's going to be AS-style misrepresentation, distortion and straw-womanry, then you'll find yourself ignored, like AS.

If Self ID presents a significant risk (because life is never risk free) to women in women's spaces then it should be really easy for you to quantify it given that 30 countries with a combined population of a quarter of a billion people already live with this system.

 

[classic33]

I don't think it's an age thing, Classic. 'Junior' in this sport refers to it being amateur, I believe. Regardless, a middle aged male still able to be competitive at 44 (as I recall) amongst young women suggests an innate male unfair advantage surely. Would a 44 year old woman be able to secure a place in this team? I wouldn't have thought so, unless they were ex-pros. Male upper body strength is something like 30% higher than females.

Here's self-ID Canada's Anne Andres. Took up powerlifting in 2019. Has won 8 out of 9 competitions so far.

View attachment 2860

And yes, there are women who are tall, heavy, and strong but they don't lift as heavy as men of similar height and weight.

The second "A" in GAA covers the amateur part. He's nearly twice the age limit it would appear.

Now, How about we stick to answering one part first then move onto something new.


I know one woman who played in a male GAA hurling match, one side was short. Both teams accepted her playing, one only until they lost

 

[AuroraSaab]

Why would men object to a woman playing against them instead of a man? She's at a disadvantage. Never seen a male sportsman object to playing against a transman either.

There's a reason we have age and sex categories. Same reason we have weight categories in some sports. It's for safety and then fairness. Otherwise everything would be won by blokes in their twenties.

 

[mudsticks]

Allow me to rephrase this in way not so open to wilful misinterpretation: If you are interested in a fact-based discussion, I'm game. If it's going to be AS-style misrepresentation, distortion and straw-womanry, then you'll find yourself ignored, like AS.

If Self ID presents a significant risk (because life is never risk free) to women in women's spaces then it should be really easy for you to quantify it given that 30 countries with a combined population of a quarter of a billion people already live with this system.

Rather obviously (as has been pointed out many times before) we can't measure increased risk from self ID in a system that allows self ID.
Because the self ID'ing transwomen are recorded as women in 'womens' spaces.??

Its a circular problem, where there is no way of presenting hard statistical facts, either way.

And even if it doesn't present a 'significant* risk' of actual bodily harm - and we don't know for sure that it doesn't statistically or otherwise - it still presents a potential situation of fear and discomfiture for many vulnerable women who would ( understandably in many circumstances) prefer to be in an exclusive safe space with other women..

It basically means that if self ID'ing is always allowed in all cases, no exceptions then there are no longer* any legally protected exclusive safe spaces for women only - that is a hard inescapable fact based on logic.

Its either a woman exclusive space - or its not - it can't be both.

That might not present a big problem to you or i in our relatively safe and secure lives.
For the events i run its fine for us to be 'all inclusive' women and transwomen - self ID'ing or otherwise - there are no situations of extreme vulnerability that arise.

But it certainly could be a big problem to women more vulnerable than me - in other spaces.

Ignore me all you like - I'm not here to convince you - and i dont care if you're 'game' either -
If anything I stepped in because i felt you were wilfully misrepresenting AS by suggesting she 'hated all transwomen' - and that is clearly not the case.

 

[multitool]

One thing at a time; we'll come to 'feelings' later. For the moment
I have only been discussing tangible incidents.

AS put forward the same argument already, but a few posts back I posted something from Argentina that suggested that a distinction between trans and cis women IS made in the reporting of crime in Argentina. AS rather conveniently swerved around this and pivoted onto 'feelings'. Now, I'm not discounting feelings, but I want to drill down on tangible incidents first.

I acknowledge that it is difficult to penetrate the judicial systems of other countries, but as I said it appears that Argentina does distinguish, so I'm loathe to accept AS's glib assurance that nowhere in the SelfID world does this happen.

 

[mudsticks]

One thing at a time; we'll come to 'feelings' later. For the moment
I have only been discussing tangible incidents.

AS put forward the same argument already, but a few posts back I posted something from Argentina that suggested that a distinction between trans and cis women IS made in the reporting of crime in Argentina. AS rather conveniently swerved around this and pivoted onto 'feelings'. Now, I'm not discounting feelings, but I want to drill down on tangible incidents first.

I acknowledge that it is difficult to penetrate the judicial systems of other countries, but as I said it appears that Argentina does distinguish, so I'm loathe to accept AS's glib assurance that nowhere in the SelfID world does this happen.

Oh will 'we' come to that later

I don't remember your being appointed the moderator and arbitrator of what can and can't be discussed on this thread.

I have no way of knowing your gender from your avatar, but with such a self aggrandising post such as this I'm willing to bet you're not in the 'vulnerabe woman' category of people...

Just listen to yourself

 

[multitool]

I'm the arbitrator and moderator of my own input in this discussion. Who are you to tell me what to discuss? I don't remember your being appointed the moderator and arbitrator of what can and can't be discussed on this thread.

 

[newfhouse]

Are the 'stats' whatever they 'statistally' prove or disprove, really going to allay the understandable fears that vulnerable women, have around male bodied people?

Not necessarily, but that’s not a good reason for ignoring them.

It's easy to dismiss fears that you have never faced

I hope I haven’t done that simply by agreeing that knowledge might be useful in policy formation.

Women have been accused of being 'irrational' and 'over emotional' over their (well founded) fears of male bodied people, as a means of belittlement and control and oppression for centuries.
Yet many many women are and have been abused, and traumatised by male bodied people, it's all in the 'very hard' statistics.

The question is whether such abuse and trauma has increased, decreased, or not changed in countries that have established self ID laws.

A bit of a 'silly' thought experiment for you.

Sorry, I tried and failed to understand what this was about. Why do we need to invent bear people when there is already real life experience in comparable countries? Can’t we look at them and assess what works and what doesn’t? Would we need safeguards, accommodations, or exceptions to suit our own circumstances?

I understand fear but I’m not convinced it should be the only driver of policy. Typical bloke that I am, I think data has a part to play.

 

[AuroraSaab]

What's your evidence for saying that Argentina does distinguish? It seems to be a sentence that says 'There was one report of a transwomen ...' Was that an official statistic? Was it a newspaper report? Was it an anecdotal account? Who knows. It doesn't say. It's amazing how the benchmark for what constitutes evidence from me seems incredibly higher than that you set yourself.

Unisex spaces are not good for women. We all know this. And self-ID makes every space a potentially unisex space. 90% of complaints from women are from unisex facilities and services.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...oms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html?amp

 

[mudsticks]

Sorry, I tried and failed to understand what this was about. Why do we need to invent bear people when there is already real life experience in comparable countries? Can’t we look at them and assess what works and what doesn’t? Would we need safeguards, accommodations, or exceptions to suit our own circumstances?

I understand fear but I’m not convinced it should be the only driver of policy. Typical bloke that I am, I think data has a part to play.

The bear people are not supposed to be equivalent to transgender people, they are another subset of people altogether.

I'm trying to get you to understand how it would be to have a whole subset of people who are generally benign, but not reliably so, statistically, and actually given to greater levels of violence against your subset of people..

How you would feel if you were wanting a bearpeople free environment , particularly if you'd come a cropper at the hands of a bear-person.

But were denied it because one of the bearpeople could identify as notbear and gain access to your previously bear free haven.



Basically I'm trying to get a man to imagine what it's like to be a vulnerable woman, denied acces to a safespace, because men are allowed to self ID as women into their safe spaces.

'Typical woman' 🙄 that I am, I'm also keen that data should play a part in this.
Data shows that women are far more vulnerable to attack from men, (even if they self ID as woman) than they are from any woman.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I understand fear but I’m not convinced it should be the only driver of policy. Typical bloke that I am, I think data has a part to play.

Well data doesn't cover other important stuff like privacy and dignity, but it does tell us that men are responsible for 98% of all sex offences. And that the victims are overwhelmingly women and girls. It's the reason we have single sex spaces to start with. When women are responsible for 50% of the sexual offences against women it might be time to review.

What's also interesting here is firstly the 'Oh it's all about feelings for women ..... men are interested in facts and hard data' thing going on. 98% guys. 98%. If you aren't convinced by that ratio you really aren't looking for facts.

Secondly, where are the facts that men who think they are women are in fact women? Where's the hard data on this incredible biological change? Where are the cheek swabs that shows a change in cells from male to female? Being transgender is literally only a feeling. The whole ideology is based on feelings. There's no scientific basis for it whatsoever.

 

[multitool]

Wow. Never realised Nicola Sturgeon was a man until now.

 

[newfhouse]

Well data doesn't cover other important stuff like privacy and dignity, but it does tell us that men are responsible for 98% of all sex offences. And that the victims are overwhelmingly women and girls. It's the reason we have single sex spaces to start with. When women are responsible for 50% of the sexual offences against women it might be time to review.

Would we need safeguards, accommodations, or exceptions to suit our own circumstances?

I don’t yet have a firm opinion on self ID but I’m increasingly convinced that I’m not at either extreme of the range of options.

 

[multitool]

Funnily enough, neither am I.

 

[newfhouse]

Basically I'm trying to get a man to imagine what it's like to be a vulnerable woman, denied acces to a safespace, because men are allowed to self ID as women into their safe spaces.

As I said, there is a range of possibilities between allowing self ID on a whim, changing six times a day, and the other extreme of not recognising an established life or even a GRC.