Is this woman a transphobe?
- Thread starter co-op
- Start date
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
It's always about this stuff because it's what the transphobic use to denigrate every trans person with. It's handy, it's their way of trampling over a minority, in a similar way some still do to gay men. The equating of gays with paedophiles, etc.
And when the demonisation eventually goes mainstream, the trans people will be the first inmates of the re-education camps.
Shippou-Sensei
4:1:2.5
Then shouldn't this argument just be about the management of prisoners who are dangerous to other prisoners then?
Wouldn't this argument equally apply to rapists who target the same sex?
We can have an interesting argument about prisoner safety without getting transphobic.
Last edited:
I guess there are (at least) two reasons why people bring up cases like these prison ones.
The first is pure transphobia, from people that see an opportunity to attack a hated minority. This is certainly what a lot of people do in the wider world. We see it all the time in the right-wing press, for example. As such, there is unsurprisingly an assumption, amongst those whose very right to existence is under threat, that when cases like these are raised, this is the reason why. The only viable response to these kind of attacks is one of extreme robustness to the very foundation of the assumptions behind what is being said.
However, I can see that cases like these are also raised by people who are worried, not about trans people, but about bad faith and the exploitation of well-meaning laws by bad guys. They want to know how the system is going to protect them, not from those who are genuinely trans, but from those who aren’t genuinely trans. When this group of people then encounter the defensive response appropriate to the first type of attack, the result on both sides is a lack of engagement and dialogue.
Edie — I think my first question to you would therefore be to ask what exactly is it that you are afraid of? Is it of trans women that have committed serious sexual assaults? Or is it of cis men that have committed serious sexual assaults, and then lie, claiming an artificial trans status for nefarious purposes?
I have follow-ups to both versions of response, but I think the first step is to drill into what it is that you are truly concerned about here.
The first is pure transphobia, from people that see an opportunity to attack a hated minority. This is certainly what a lot of people do in the wider world. We see it all the time in the right-wing press, for example. As such, there is unsurprisingly an assumption, amongst those whose very right to existence is under threat, that when cases like these are raised, this is the reason why. The only viable response to these kind of attacks is one of extreme robustness to the very foundation of the assumptions behind what is being said.
However, I can see that cases like these are also raised by people who are worried, not about trans people, but about bad faith and the exploitation of well-meaning laws by bad guys. They want to know how the system is going to protect them, not from those who are genuinely trans, but from those who aren’t genuinely trans. When this group of people then encounter the defensive response appropriate to the first type of attack, the result on both sides is a lack of engagement and dialogue.
Edie — I think my first question to you would therefore be to ask what exactly is it that you are afraid of? Is it of trans women that have committed serious sexual assaults? Or is it of cis men that have committed serious sexual assaults, and then lie, claiming an artificial trans status for nefarious purposes?
I have follow-ups to both versions of response, but I think the first step is to drill into what it is that you are truly concerned about here.
Well male on male sex offenders are segregated of course. I don't think they're in separate prisons. There probably aren't enough prisons. Nevertheless male bodied people who sexually assault women do not belong in women prisons. I mean even more planely so when they commited those offences before transitioning. For fairly obvious reasons... Transwomen who have committed non sexual crimes and been given a custodial sentence should be housed in women prisons IMO.
Editted. Actually I don't want to continue down this route or get into a discussion of why the thread was bumped as I think it's just gonna end up hurting the trans people who do post here. With misreadings, context not being recognised etc. I don't want to add to that.
Last edited:
Fozzie Bear
Well-Known Member
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
Neither of the people involved are in women's prisons btw.
LeytonCatLady
Well-Known Member
I agree, and something else I think we should stop doing is jailing people for non-violent crime (shoplifting, fraud etc). They should still be made to pay back what they stole/banned from working in finance or whatever punishment actually fits their crime, but custodial sentences need to be reserved for dangerous people and stop overcrowding prisons with those who really shouldn't be locked up. Then maybe no one would have to share a cell, which would minimise the opportunity for prisoner on prisoner assault.
Yep. Weirdly I think John major of all people said something like this the other day. Well that we imprison too many people.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Kenneth Clarke thinks this as well. Quite a few Tories will say it in private or when they have left power. When in power, they won't address it because they're the Law And Order Party and that means locking people up.
Not just Tories. Gordon Brown actually boasted about the number of people in prisons going up.
polly
Well-Known Member
Kenneth Clarke thinks this as well. Quite a few Tories will say it in private or when they have left power. When in power, they won't address it because they're the Law And Order Party and that means locking people up.
Not just Tories. Gordon Brown actually boasted about the number of people in prisons going up.
Yeah John Major has made much more sense since stepping down. Just goes to show how utterly devoid of principles any of them are that they think these things but just shut their mouths and get in the trough. (sorry, mixed metaphor AND derail)
The comments that trans people are an ideology or a "quasi-religious belief in a gendered soul separate from a biological reality" reveals the motivation for the post. The huge rates of sexual violence trans women face, usually committed by men who identify as straight, is proof enough that trans people are not some religious ideology but a social reality which is reflected by the way they are treated even by those who might be hostile to their existence.
But you also miss what is often going on which is the reification of an identity based on presumed inherent qualities. This happens all the time and plays a large part in how gender is policed. 30 years ago people would have looked at Bryson and said that's not a man, not a 'real' man anyway. People might have said a woman who killed a child was not a real woman. People certainly said that about lesbians and gay men. It happens in relation to race - see Tucker Carlson's recent comments about how a white man wouldn't fight like that. People denounce other's religion based on their actions and claim no real Muslim or Christian would behave that way.
It might also happen within the group as an attempt to purify it due to concerns about hostile outsiders. I'm sure you could find posts of trans people claiming that Isla Bryson is not really trans. It's happening right now within the LGBTQ community as usually older and anti-trans LGB people denounce young 'Queers' as straight people larping who are not really same sex attracted and thus legitimate targets for abuse and discrimination. It's what's behind Julie Bindel's recent lie that minor attracted people now form part of the rainbow coalition.
There's a huge amount going on here which points to how identities are formed not just by individuals but by society. That all gets lost as soon as you reduce those identities to a simple ideology that can by dismissed as an unscientific delusion that ignores reality and that no-one outside that group plays a role in creating.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
The comments that trans people are an ideology or a "quasi-religious belief in a gendered soul separate from a biological reality" reveals the motivation for the post. The huge rates of sexual violence trans women face, usually committed by men who identify as straight, is proof enough that trans people are not some religious ideology but a social reality which is reflected by the way they are treated even by those who might be hostile to their existence.
This . So this.
This . So this.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
I find it interesting and quite revealing how some people will use the word 'ideology' to dismiss or disparage something that they don't like, or are opposed to, while ignoring the fact that they themselves subscribe to an ideology or ideologies.
LeytonCatLady
Well-Known Member
And getting triggered by "pronouns". Literally everyone's got pronouns!
liquidindian
Hello
Obviously there are limits. But if someone who has committed a crime wants to be known by another name we should just say, "okay", and make that completely seperate issue from their sentence, where they should be held, and so on. If there's a suspicion that people are "gaming the system" somehow, just make it a non-issue.
There is clearly an ideological disagreement at the heart of these arguments, which is whether or not, or to what degree, gender identity should supersede or replace sex in matters of law, policy, social rules etc. Feel free to claim either side is an ideology or not, the fact is that the ideological disagreement remains.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
Silence, Santino
Is there something factually incorrect or offensive about what I wrote?
Cloo
Approved by toads
I had someone quote this disingenuous and manipulative graphic at me
There is a good debunking of it amid this article (Bang! to Rights)
I'm not actually going to say it simply isn't possible that sex offenders are over represented among trans women, but a) even if they are, a woman's chance of encountering a trans sex offender in a shared space are still utterly minute and b) the answer is not creating a much more dangerous situation for all trans people, which, due to a) would have minimum impact on on women's safety. But actually taking the 90%+ (maybe more like 99%) of sexual assaults against women by cis men seriously is too difficult of course. The key should be 'what impacts does a response have on the people its intended to protect, and who could it expose to danger'
If sex offending were shown to be actually disproportionate in trans women, then surely it might be better to look at those committing it and seeing if there were something we could find out about the profiles of offenders that produces a better response than the banning of all trans people from single sex spaces that match their identity.
There is a good debunking of it amid this article (Bang! to Rights)
I'm not actually going to say it simply isn't possible that sex offenders are over represented among trans women, but a) even if they are, a woman's chance of encountering a trans sex offender in a shared space are still utterly minute and b) the answer is not creating a much more dangerous situation for all trans people, which, due to a) would have minimum impact on on women's safety. But actually taking the 90%+ (maybe more like 99%) of sexual assaults against women by cis men seriously is too difficult of course. The key should be 'what impacts does a response have on the people its intended to protect, and who could it expose to danger'
If sex offending were shown to be actually disproportionate in trans women, then surely it might be better to look at those committing it and seeing if there were something we could find out about the profiles of offenders that produces a better response than the banning of all trans people from single sex spaces that match their identity.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
That's such a cogent and thoughtfully crafted post that I'm going to breach my self-imposed (through lack of confidence) embargo on posting on trans-related threads to say great post.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
Clearly.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
One of my urban heroes.
Absolutely worth reading and reserved when it comes to some of the DM style bullshit here.
Dunno how to they manage to keep it together in the face of such ignorance.
No, it was a concise and accurate description of the issue.
That's political disagreements though not ideological disagreements. I think if you look at the ideological thinking on either side they're pretty heterodox and fluid. To be honest I have a hard time keeping up with where the GC side is at now. These are not centralised movements with doctrinaire lines. When people start talking about ideologies, it gets my heckles up because it's one step away from outright conspiracy theorising. Do these ideologies not have a real social basis? And I think it's common for people to rally to certain causes together while in ideological disagreement - trans people are in it together not because they share an ideology about gender, but because they are dealing with the same threats to living peacefully in society without battery and with access to trans healthcare.
There is a political ground that's popular in the US and the UK (at least) that sits between that hazy space between conservativism and fascism. Think Nigel Farage here and Donald Trump there as political figureheads. This milieu is all about free speech and the agenda of the "liberal elites" and their "woke ideology" that wants to suppress them ie. the "ordinary people" (ie. white/cis/straight/male people who at best are ignorant and uncomfortable with challenges to their thinking and at worst outright bigots or even organised fascists). I see it all the time both irl and on line. They were galvanised in opposition to feminism some years back and then (in the US in particular), they were galvanised by the Black Lives Matter protests. They've moved on to trans people and environmental activists now and who knows what next. They see their way of life under existential threat. Sometimes the threat is explicitly stated in terms of "cultural Marxism". And no I don't see such people as following an explicit ideology because it's way too messy to be identified as something so definite, but they do characteristically see things in terms of concrete ideological enemies.
This is why I don't think it's good to think in terms of ideology and the clash of ideologies, because in doing so you're dipping a toe into this sort of thinking.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
You misunderstood Santino's post. The inverted commas are important.
It's not helpful to state this when you don't know the reasons or even if it is accurate. Suicide never has a singular cause, it is always complex.
That's an extrapolation.
