U.K Politics: Revenge of the Truss.

[Varysblackfyre321]

59 minutes ago, Crixus said:

Or are you saying transwomen are women (I agree) and therefore they shouldn't be mis-gendered regardless of what crime they've committed?

Yep. Partially.

59 minutes ago, Crixus said:

the latter, surely there are clearer, simpler ways of putting this perfectly reasonable statement instead of trying to twist it into some sort of clever 'gotcha' thing? 

The context is me responding to someone using the crimes(horrific ones specifically ) of some trans women to justify misgendering them. I think the question is important to highlight an inconsistency.

Least if they're pretending their want to misgender isn’t just a general distaste for trans people.

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

ETA  - maybe they could even interview a trans person about their everyday life, their hopes and aspirations, the difficulties they encounter, what they want to see from our political parties, instead of talking about toilets and prisons and abuse. I can dream. 

Oh I'm reminded of a beautiful story Fox news ran about a family with a trans son.

The right immediately cried grooming.

[Heartofice]

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Do you want cis women who are guilty of rape to not be referred to as women with she/her pronouns?

Yeah I still don't understand the question. I don't believe that Isla Bryson was a woman when they committed rape, and I don't think their victim should have to say that they were raped by a woman, when that is clearly not true. 

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Please my dude you've stated quite bluntly last thread on wanting all trans women out of women’s prisons altogether in order to protect real women regardless of the crime they've been found guilty of and are fishing for a scenario to misgebder a trans woman.

Actually no I haven't. This is one more in your many attempts to use lies to defame people. I think that all of these incidents should be taken on a case by case basis and risk assessed. However I think the bar is currently far too low when it comes to risk assessment if someone like Bryson is determined to be trans and put into a female prison, and there appears to be a number of other cases where this is happening, so clearly there is an issue. 

1 hour ago, mormont said:

I'd also like to think we could elevate the discussion in this thread in particular over which pronoun to use for Isla Bryson. 

 

The reason it keeps getting repeated is because its a perfect encapsulation of the major flaw behind much of the gender ideological thinking. That is why someone like Sturgeon is getting so much flak for her response to the question right now (and damaging the independence cause at the same time) , it highlights how captured they are by ideas that don't stand up to scrutiny.

[ants]

36 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I think that all of these incidents should be taken on a case by case basis and risk assessed. 

I agree with the first bit and believe that every prisoner should be assessed for their danger to themselves and others and housed as appropriately and safely as the system allows. There will be many situations where it is impossible to remove all risk. And the system will definitely sometimes get it wrong, even if it tries its best.

(and there are obvious questions on whether the system is trying its best, or even barely competent, let alone apolitical) 

36 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

However I think the bar is currently far too low when it comes to risk assessment if someone like Bryson is determined to be trans and put into a female prison, and there appears to be a number of other cases where this is happening, so clearly there is an issue.

I find the idea that the UK press and you are in any way positioned to make a nuanced assessment of any prisoner's mental state, their threat status, their risk status and therefore what is best for them in an apolitical way laughable. The level of detailed information that you would need to know that won't ever appear in the press (unless someone is really breaching privacy) is so high that for you to even think you can make an assessment shows an incredible level of narcism or wilful obliviousness. Or most likely, desire to treat it politically as you can make a case to support your already held views. 

[ants]

46 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

The reason it keeps getting repeated is because its a perfect encapsulation of the major flaw behind much of the gender ideological thinking. That is why someone like Sturgeon is getting so much flak for her response to the question right now (and damaging the independence cause at the same time) , it highlights how captured they are by ideas that don't stand up to scrutiny.

What ideas? The idea that unless you've personal cause not to, you should grant the simple politeness of referring to people with the gender they prefer? I have no concern with the rape victim, who obviously has a very personal and painful relation with the individual, referring to them in any way they want. She has absolutely no need to be polite to her attacker.

You seem to be arguing that third parties such as yourself, Sturgeon and others should throw politeness out the window on the justification that the offender doesn't deserve it, while ignoring you're also then being impolite to everyone who is or supports trans people. So eager to insult one that you insult all, and then justify it on the crimes the offender has committed. 

If they are really lying about their gender, how on earth does that justify you and others being impolite to an entire group? How does calling them "her" damage you or the process in any way? It doesn't. It just shows that you're not really interested in people's individual desires, but your own. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Yeah I still don't understand the question.

Do you think people are obliged to misgender cis women who are guilty of rape?

 

 

If you’re not just using  rape victims as a tool to bludgeon people you see as degenatres this should be pretty easy to answer.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

I don't believe that Isla Bryson was a woman when they committed rape,

Oh confirmation that your use of “they” was a deliberate misgendering.

Neat. I'm guessing you're not doing he/him pronouns to refer to bryson  as to avoid appearing trabsphobic bigot or getting a warning.

Can I be honest?

You've misgendered trans women who are rape victims who were just guilty of attending meeting for women who've been Sexually assaulted.

 

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

and I don't think their victim should have to say that they were raped by a woman, when that is clearly not true. 

Oh I get it now. you're trying to turn the conversation about the unjustified  media backlash over Sturgeon not misgendering someone into a “why are you wokists attacking a rapist’s victims for calling an obvious man a man?!” Oh you sneaky guy.

Question though if a trans woman and  fully medically and legally transitioned before committing a sex crime would you still cy it's okay for some people to misgender them?

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Actually no I haven't

If that's the case—I stress if—perhaps some clarification is in order.

Would you be fine with a trans woman who's gone though sex reasighnment surgery being allowed in a women’s prison?

If you can't agree to that scenario:  my previous summarization of your view seems accurate.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

This is one more in your many attempts to use lies to defame people.

I’ve tried to read your rhetoric in the most reasonable light and respond in complete honesty. 

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

gender ideological t

Gender ideology being the belief what determines who is or isn't a man or woman isn't their birth genitalia.

 

21 minutes ago, ants said:

What ideas?

The idea that trans people are the gender they identify as.

[Rippounet]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

I would think that there would be some trans people out there who were equally disgusted by the behaviour of Bryson and Scott and how much damage it does to genuine trans people when laws designed in good faith are abused by rapists and criminals. 

It also puzzles me that trans people tend to support the most extreme perspectives of gender ideology and that none seems to express condemnation or rejection of some specific cases.
Best answer I've had is that when you've been a victim of constant discrimination you will never voice an opinion that can be used to discriminate against others ; also, to criticize the "left" can only strengthen bigotry and weaken their own cause.

To many this is a simple opposition between progressivism and bigotry. As far as I can tell, criticism of social reality has so far been rather limited.
Also (to be pedantic), from the start Durkheim (who can be credited with building the concept) did not exactly separate social reality from material reality ; quite the contrary he explicitly stated that social reality could only last if it was based on material reality, that no human social construct could be disconnected from the real. I've found traces of anthropological studies suggesting differently, but as far as I can tell there is no established theory there.
I would expect that to change soon, of course.

[Heartofice]

1 hour ago, ants said:

What ideas? The idea that unless you've personal cause not to, you should grant the simple politeness of referring to people with the gender they prefer? I have no concern with the rape victim, who obviously has a very personal and painful relation with the individual, referring to them in any way they want. She has absolutely no need to be polite to her attacker.

Not that. I am absolutely all for treating people with gender dysphoria as much as possible as their chosen gender. I have no problem with that and I think very few people have an issue with that.

When we talk about gender ideological ideas, the two main ones that push back against reality and create almost all of the issues we are talking about are that:

1. You can LITERALLY change your sex. Its not that someone should be treated as another gender to the one in which they were born, it is that that ARE that gender and it's an important distinction that gets the heart of many of these problems. If for instance we pushed to make Trans it's own category and pushed to be more accepting of it, rather than trying to crowbar non reality into 2 binaries a lot of these issues would disappear. For instance we keep talking about women's prisons but really we should just have a facility for trans people and find ways the make that work, rather than trying to work out whether someone is male or female and create problems that way.

2. Gender Self ID is also problematic because it opens to the door to abuse of the system, mostly by men and is the underpinning belief that is causing most of the problems here. The belief that you can literally change gender over night or that you are the exact gender you say you are with no medical oversight or help or guidance is the issue here, and this gets misinterpreted as some sort of backlash against trans people. Yet these conversations only started happening when gender ideologists tried to introduce gender self ID as a workable system, and it isn't workable. 
 

51 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

It also puzzles me that trans people tend to support the most extreme perspectives of gender ideology and that none seems to express condemnation or rejection of some specific cases.
Best answer I've had is that when you've been a victim of constant discrimination you will never voice an opinion that can be used to discriminate against others ; also, to criticize the "left" can only strengthen bigotry and weaken their own cause.

Its not clear they do actually and there enough examples of trans people who don't agree with the most extreme positions of gender ideology to suggest it's not always supported or beneficial to trans people. I'd suggest it's been incredibly harmful to genuine trans people for this ideology to take root and create issues where there needn't be, all in the name of protecting them.

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, ants said:

You seem to be arguing that third parties such as yourself, Sturgeon and others should throw politeness out the window on the justification that the offender doesn't deserve it, while ignoring you're also then being impolite to everyone who is or supports trans people. So eager to insult one that you insult all, and then justify it on the crimes the offender has committed. 

You know if the conversation was strictly on where to put trans prisoners I can sympathize to an extent, there's a nuanced discussion to be had there 

But here the conversation is about people being outraged at others for simply not misgendering certain trans people.

There's no safety concern in Sturegon not misgendering Bryant.

there's this underlying idea that a person simply asking to be referred to as he/him or she/her isn't enough—hell shouldn't be enough—to warrant such treatment. This hurts all trans people.

[DaveSumm]

8 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Its not that someone should be treated as another gender to the one in which they were born, it is that that ARE that gender

For some people, that really is the definition of gender though. ‘Sex’ is the immutable part, ‘gender’ the mutable.

What frustrates me so much is that neither side of this debate are working to the same definition, and so we don’t have a mutual understanding of what we’re even talking about. The word ‘gender’ simply no longer has a widely agreed upon definition (I know many of you may disagree and point to some dictionary definition somewhere; that would be a misunderstanding of how words work - the dictionary’s job is to adapt to what most people think a word means).

[Varysblackfyre321]

21 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

1. You can LITERALLY change your sex.

You can LITERALLY only recognize as to what determines who is a man or woman is their birth sex.

There really isn't something that can be viewed as transphobic to you.

21 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Its not that someone should be treated as another gender to the one in which they were born, it is that that ARE that gender

Yes, trans women are women.

And queens. The only good queens.

Yes Trans men are men.

And kings. The only good kings

Unfortunately Trans women are not just men pretending to be women for their own mental wellbeing  as you’d prefer them to be looked as such.

21 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

For instance we keep talking about women's prisons but really we should just have a facility for trans

 

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

3 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Please my dude you've stated quite bluntly last thread on wanting all trans women out of women’s prisons altogether in order to protect real women regardless of the crime they've been found guilty of and are fishing for a scenario to misgebder a trans woman.

Actually no I haven't. This is one more in your many attempts to use lies to

I believe I'm owed an apology for an unjustified accusation of liable.

21 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

The belief that you can literally change gender over night or that you are the exact gender you say you are with no medical oversight or help or guidance is the issue here,

I feel the rage coming from your typing.

It's delicious.

Anyway dude if a co-worker of mine who I’ve always seen as man today says “hey listen John, I'm coming out as a woman I go by she/her pronouns” I'd freely go along with it instead launching an interrogation to determine whether or not It's to their(but really my) interest to continue to refer to her as a man.  I hope you'd act with decency too if you'd find yourself in such a scenario. Or at least get appropriate reprimand from those around you.

 

25 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Yet these conversations only started happening when gender ideologists tried to introduce gender self ID as a workable system, and it isn't workable. 

I think they started happening when Jkr got angry when companies who sell  menstrual products tried to be inclusive to trans men.

[karaddin]

4 hours ago, mormont said:

I'm bloody sick to death of trans discussion constantly being dragged to this level and I can only imagine how trans members of the board feel about their entire existence being reduced to this by people who could not name one of Bryson's victims without Googling it. 

Absolutely fucking sick to death of it. Also pretty fucking sick of having to pretend we don't all know exactly how someone feels from the 30 previous times they've edged right up to saying something but play plausible deniability and concern trolling.

But to the others in this thread pontificating on biological realities please go on and tell me what relevant difference there is between me and a cis woman that's had a hysterectomy. I've got the same genitals, I've got less testosterone, I'm of a height that's not a major outlier for a cis woman, I'm physically weaker than every cis woman of comparable age I know and by a significant margin for plenty of them, I've got chronic health conditions that are typical of women my age. I've internalised every single lesson directed at women about taking up as little space in the world as possible that I've been exposed to in my life before and after being aware of myself. What is the oh so relevant detail that makes you need to jump up and down in the air and make it clear that even if you're forced into humouring me, I'm not a real woman and I'll never be able to change my sex to your satisfaction? And before you say I don't menstruate and can't have kids, that applies to some cis women too even at younger ages and eventually all of them.

Sure, my chromosomes are still what they always were, but what expression of that is actually relevant and significant? 

ETA: And in case anyone wants to ask why this is even relevant, it's just as relevant as the discussion of over zealous gender ideological <insert culture war bullshit here> above it. I'd love for none of it to be here.

[Crixus]

55 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

You know if the conversation was strictly on where to put trans prisoners I can sympathize to an extent, there's a nuanced discussion to be had there 

But here the conversation is about people being outraged at others for simply not misgendering certain trans people.

There's no safety concern in Sturegon not misgendering Bryant.

there's this underlying idea that a person simply asking to be referred to as he/him or she/her isn't enough—hell shouldn't be enough—to warrant such treatment. This hurts all trans people.

It's Bryson, not Bryant - for someone who's arguing so passionately about accurately identifying someone, maybe you should get their name right? 

In this specific case, the victim believes the rapist was 'faking it' - and to me the victim's horrific ordeal surpasses the potential mis-gendering of a rapist by said victim by a long shot. As far as I am concerned, the victim can call their rapist whatever the fuck they want to. Also, if that shitty human being is indeed 'faking it' then I'd argue that hurts transpeople far more than their misgendering by the victim. You've made this point in earlier posts, how someone who's been raped still shouldn't 'use slurs'; that doesn't seem to account for the horrific trauma a rape victim suffers, and to me expecting political correctness or politeness from them is not only unrealistic, but quite insensitive. Rape isn't an offence equal to using a slur, especially by the actual victim, ffs. 

Whether the victim is correct in their assertion that the rapist was pretending to be a woman is something we won't ever know most likely, unless there is concrete evidence made public. And that's why I agree it costs us, people who are not their victims, nothing to refer to this shitty human being of a rapist by their preferred gender. I don't personally give two fucks about being polite to rapists, but I see the overall point so yeah, fine. 

And finally, as @mormont said, we should spare a few seconds to think of how our trans fellow board members might feel as we argue furiously on/against their behalf without their input or consent to score points.

I know my post can be held us an example of this too, so mea culpa. 

 

ETA @karaddin, thank you for your post. I'm a cis woman and infertile as they come, and I've never felt for a second that this somehow limits me from being a woman. You're as much a woman as I am, IOW (I hope this doesn't seem condescending; it was meant to show solidarity). 

[karaddin]

@CrixusThat's precisely why the vultures (whether they be media or politicians looking to exploit the situation) should be kept the fuck away from the victim. How they're coping with their trauma is no one's business, and I can certainly see how this specific scenario would be a problem for them to handle. Not intended to be arguing with you, just building on that point.

And you didn't come across condescending at all (nor condensing, which my phone's keyboard was very convinced was the word I was looking for)

[Heartofice]

Honestly I'm not edging on the levels of anything here, I've made very clear my opinion on the topic, in so many posts that I am sure you are all very sick of hearing about. Which is why I find it very odd that so many people here are so keen to mischaracterise my position, which btw seems to be pretty much the most common position in this country on the issue. It's not like I haven't been pretty clear about it.

But then I think this pretty much sums up the whole issue with the topic, you cannot even discuss it on any level without extreme levels of bad faith going on, and demonisation and mischaracterisation. Every single post by @Varysblackfyre321 in this thread and others basically sums up the level of conversation. 

Maybe we just leave it there then, talk about the reshuffle or something. 

 

 

[karaddin]

There certainly is a lot of bad faith in the discussion, that much is true

[Rippounet]

46 minutes ago, karaddin said:

 I've got the same genitals, I've got less testosterone, I'm of a height that's not a major outlier for a cis woman, I'm physically weaker than every cis woman of comparable age I know and by a significant margin for plenty of them, I've got chronic health conditions that are typical of women my age. I've internalised every single lesson directed at women about taking up as little space in the world as possible that I've been exposed to in my life before and after being aware of myself. What is the oh so relevant detail that makes you need to jump up and down in the air and make it clear that even if you're forced into humouring me, I'm not a real woman and I'll never be able to change my sex to your satisfaction?

The point is precisely that we agree on how to define a female, and that this definition goes beyond social reality alone.

A different way to put it is that after a bit of musing, my support of trans rights is leading me to despise some aspects of what is called the "gender ideology" (a misnomer imho btw). I believe there are mutually exclusive propositions at work here, or a "fundamental contradiction" (in the words of Frans De Waal).
And it's not even academic, I have had people trying to convince me about some things for a while now.

[BigFatCoward]

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 

Anyway dude if a co-worker of mine who I’ve always seen as man today says “hey listen John, I'm coming out as a woman I go by she/her pronouns” I'd freely go along with it instead launching an interrogation to determine whether or not It's to their(but really my) interest to continue to refer to her as a man.  I hope you'd act with decency too if you'd find yourself in such a scenario. 

 

Does this not happen in most cases though?  I'm pretty sure there are a very small number of very loud bigots making people think there is less acceptance of this position than there actually is in the real world. 

Obviously there will be variations within social groups and occupations etc, but generally do most people not just go 'fuck it, makes no difference to me either way', with the occasional lapse because they have known this person for years and its difficult to just flick a switch in your head overnight? 

[karaddin]

4 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Does this not happen in most cases though?  I'm pretty sure there are a very small number of very loud bigots making people think there is less acceptance of this position than there actually is in the real world. 

Obviously there will be variations within social groups and occupations etc, but generally do most people not just go 'fuck it, makes no difference to me either way', with the occasional lapse because they have known this person for years and its difficult to just flick a switch in your head overnight? 

I had a couple of older guys at my work that kept using male pronouns past the point I'm willing to chalk up to difficulty adjusting, they never did right up until they were made redundant. It was probably at the level I could have complained, but who the fuck actually wants that drama at work? So I just felt like shit and tried to ignore it every time it happened. So I'd say more than the vocal bigots you're imagining, but not too much more.

[Varysblackfyre321]

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

It's Bryson, not Bryant

Goddamn it.  Thank you for correcting me.

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

maybe you should get their name right? 

That's a fair reprimand.

 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

In this specific case, the victim believes the rapist was 'faking it' - and to me the victim's horrific ordeal surpasses the potential mis-gendering of a rapist by said victim by a long shot.

 They’re not remotely equivalent. I'll freely acknowledge that.

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

You've made this point in earlier posts, how someone who's been raped still shouldn't 'use slurs'; that doesn't seem to account for the horrific trauma a rape victim suffers

They shouldn't.

Rape victims can and often do engage in behaviors that are destructive to themselves or others— a lot of the time as a direct consequence of their trauma.

We can acknowledge and empathize with their trauma without saying  whatever they do after their traumatic experience it fne or at worst morally neutral. 

A man who was molested as a young boy by a man shouldn't say gay men are x slurs and shouldn't be left alone with children—his homophobia is bad, its not remotely the level of evil as actually raping a child. 

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

that doesn't seem to account for the horrific trauma a rape victim suffers, and to me expecting political correctness or politeness from them is not only unrealistic, but quite insensitive.

I don't expect them to be perfect angels before or after their assault.

I’m not saying cancel the rape victims for not being woke enough in regards to the commentary of their rapist.

3 hours ago, Crixus said:

know my post can be held us an example of this too, so mea culpa. 

I don't begrudge you from seeing me as guilty of that. I apologize to any trans poster  who thinks I've come off as exploitative.