Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?

[Treacle Toes]

Actually, MY set boundaries by defining the class "women" as including all individuals with the same reproductive systems that has allowed a single member of that class to have one of their own eggs fertilised, resulting in the conception and gestation of a child. There is nothing in that definition that says all members must have had one of their own eggs fertilised. They merely have to have the same reproductive system.

Great. Can you translate this too please...

Sorry about your di...

 

[andysays]

Actually, MY set boundaries by defining the class "women" as including all individuals with the same reproductive systems that has allowed a single member of that class to have one of their own eggs fertilised, resulting in the conception and gestation of a child. There is nothing in that definition that says all members must have had one of their own eggs fertilised. They merely have to have the same reproductive system.

And, for the sake of clarity, it doesn't have to be a functioning reproductive system, ie women who are infertile are still women

 

[kabbes]

Great. Can you translate this too please...

Sorry about your di...

Why would you expect me to translate that? I am not MY's handler. Neither do I remotely see what it has to do with your misunderstanding of the class being described as "women" by MY.

 

[Miranda Yardley]

Great. Can you translate this too please...

Please defend the claim 'trans women are women'.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Please defend the claim 'trans women are women'.

Eh? How is that a response to me asking what you meant by 'Sorry about your di...' ?

Why don't you tell me what it means.

 

[MochaSoul]

i'll take your post as a 'no'.

Ok

 

[Pickman's model]

Ok

grand

 

[Pickman's model]

Eh? How is that a response to me asking what you meant by 'Sorry about your di...' ?

Why don't you tell me what it means.

miranda yardbot is an earlier model of the theresa maybot

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Are you going for #peakirony?

Please explain how 'trans women are women'.

Putting a hashtag in front of a word isn't an argument.

Regarding your second bit, that's not my argument to explain particularly, beyond acknowledging that there is such a thing as gender as well as biological sex, and that there are people who wish to present themselves to the world and be treated as a different gender from the one they were assigned according to their biological sex at birth. And whatever your position on gender, in this world that we live in now, it informs how the vast majority of people present themselves. That involves, among other things, if you are an English-speaker, being referred to by the pronoun that is used to refer to people of that gender. Whatever your philosophical position on that, deliberately going out of your way to refer to a trans person by the pronoun used for the gender they were assigned at birth, which you have repeatedly done on this thread with evident relish, is a dickish thing to do.

The rest is purely a definitional problem, and not particularly interesting, except in the way that our language reveals how muddled most of us are about much of this - I'm not the one claiming all the answers here. It's not as though you have access to some important piece of knowledge that others are missing, which is where your patronising tone falls distinctly flat.

 

[8ball]

That involves, among other things, if you are an English-speaker, being referred to by the pronoun that is used to refer to people of that gender. Whatever your philosophical position on that, deliberately going out of your way to refer to a trans person by the pronoun used for the gender they were assigned at birth, which you have repeatedly done on this thread with evident relish, is a dickish thing to do.

There's an obvious bit of bad faith going on here.

The incomplete logical equivalence of the "trans women are women"* statement is used as a device to force a general acceptance of the statement "trans women are men".

* - in many, but not all, people's minds

 

[free spirit]

after 152 pages the answer to the original question seems clear...... it's not just the OP who's perplexed.

If Trans women are female, the same as CIS women, and should be referred to as women, female and she in the same way and fully accepted as being in the same category as CIS women, why is there a constant need by transrights activists to differentiate between CIS and Trans women via the use of the 'CIS' and 'Trans' labels?

On the one hand the differences are obvious and recognised via the CIS / Trans labels, but on the other any feminist (or apparently Trans person) who attempts to point this out is a nasty TERF.

IMO transrights activists really need to find a way to campaign alongside feminist campaigns rather than demanding they be fully included within every aspect of those campaigns as women in the same way as CIS women.

I've hesitated to say this as a CIS man, but being as the majority of the most active contributors to this thread are also CIS men I hope to avoid the accusations of mansplaining on this occasion.

 

[Miranda Yardley]

miranda yardbot is an earlier model of the theresa maybot

Except we lie on diametrical opposite ends of the political spectrum... nice try at an ad hom.

 

[andysays]

And, for the sake of clarity, it doesn't have to be a functioning reproductive system, ie women who are infertile are still women

And for the sake of further clarity, I should have added "born with" that reproductive system - having it removed doesn't mean you cease to be a woman

 

[free spirit]

There's an obvious bit of bad faith going on here.

The incomplete logical equivalence of the "trans women are women"* statement is used as a device to force a general acceptance of the statement "trans women are men".

* - in many, but not all, people's minds

or, trans women are ..... trans women.

 

[Wilf]

Please defend the claim 'trans women are women'.

Rather than taking this into the realm of definitions, why not ask the question 'what potential is there for solidarity between feminists and trans activisits'? FWIW I could ask that question of anyone making definitive statements about the gender of trans people, not just you of course. But if there isn't such a potential, it suggests something has been lost along the way.

I realise that as someone who is neither female nor trans, it's easy for me to ask such a question. But if the discussion doesn't ever get onto that kind of territory - solidarity - surely we never get to the point where identity politics is transcended.

 

[8ball]

or, trans women are ..... trans women.

I don't think that one is causing much of a reaction at Twitter at the moment, but someone might well try to dox you for it.

 

[Miranda Yardley]

Putting a hashtag in front of a word isn't an argument.

It's what passes for humour (I don't have a sense of humour).

Regarding your second bit, that's not my argument to explain particularly, beyond acknowledging that there is such a thing as gender as well as biological sex, and that there are people who wish to present themselves to the world and be treated as a different gender from the one they were assigned according to their biological sex at birth.

Your definition is reliant on stereotypes. Being 'a woman' is a biological reality with material, real-world consequences. Just as is 'being a man'.

And whatever your position on gender, in this world that we live in now, it informs how the vast majority of people present themselves. That involves, among other things, if you are an English-speaker, being referred to by the pronoun that is used to refer to people of that gender. Whatever your philosophical position on that, deliberately going out of your way to refer to a trans person by the pronoun used for the gender they were assigned at birth, which you have repeatedly done on this thread with evident relish, is a dickish thing to do.

Again, is this an act of compassion? Or cruelty (to indulge a delusion)? Or submission (why should women be compelled to do this? Or gay men accept 'trans men' as men?)

The rest is purely a definitional problem, and not particularly interesting, except in the way that our language reveals how muddled most of us are about much of this - I'm not the one claiming all the answers here. It's not as though you have access to some important piece of knowledge that others are missing, which is where your patronising tone falls distinctly flat.

I'm looking for answers, hence why I ask questions.

 

[Miranda Yardley]

On the one hand the differences are obvious and recognised via the CIS / Trans labels, but on the other any feminist (or apparently Trans person) who attempts to point this out is a nasty TERF.

IMO transrights activists really need to find a way to campaign alongside feminist campaigns rather than demanding they be fully included within every aspect of those campaigns as women in the same way as CIS women.

I've hesitated to say this as a CIS man, but being as the majority of the most active contributors to this thread are also CIS men I hope to avoid the accusations of mansplaining on this occasion.

Three very good points.

 

[smokedout]

Actually, MY set boundaries by defining the class "women" as including all individuals with the same reproductive systems that has allowed a single member of that class to have one of their own eggs fertilised, resulting in the conception and gestation of a child. There is nothing in that definition that says all members must have had one of their own eggs fertilised. They merely have to have the same reproductive system.

and intersex people?

 

[Miranda Yardley]

There's an obvious bit of bad faith going on here.

The incomplete logical equivalence of the "trans women are women"* statement is used as a device to force a general acceptance of the statement "trans women are men".

* - in many, but not all, people's minds

In fact, the dominant claim is now that 'trans women' are not just women, but also female. The problem appears to run deeper than you believe.

 

[smokedout]

Except we lie on diametrical opposite ends of the political spectrum... nice try at an ad hom.

How's David Davies? Not so far along the political spectrum that you won't have cosy meetings with Tory scum who pose a far greater threat to women's services than any transwoman.

 

[Miranda Yardley]

and intersex people?

We don't have a third sex, human beings are sexually dimorphic. IMHO transactivists should attempt to support intersex people, not use them as human shields.

(Also, can someone explain how it's consistent that transactivists appear to support intersex people being left to decide their own fate, surgery and hormone-wise, yet support the unquestioned affirmation of an adopted gender in infants?)

 

[smokedout]

after 152 pages the answer to the original question seems clear...... it's not just the OP who's perplexed.

If Trans women are female, the same as CIS women, and should be referred to as women, female and she in the same way and fully accepted as being in the same category as CIS women, why is there a constant need by transrights activists to differentiate between CIS and Trans women via the use of the 'CIS' and 'Trans' labels?

On the one hand the differences are obvious and recognised via the CIS / Trans labels, but on the other any feminist (or apparently Trans person) who attempts to point this out is a nasty TERF.

This is a daft argument, you can have lesbian woman and straight women, it doesn't mean one of those groups isn't a woman.

 

[smokedout]

We don't have a third sex, human beings are sexually dimorphic. IMHO transactivists should attempt to support intersex people, not use them as human shields.

(Also, can someone explain how it's consistent that transactivists appear to support intersex people being left to decide their own fate, surgery and hormone-wise, yet support the unquestioned affirmation of an adopted gender in infants?)

So do you respect the choice of intersex people to identify as the gender they want regardless of their reproductive potential?

 

[Miranda Yardley]

How's David Davies? Not so far along the political spectrum that you won't have cosy meetings with Tory scum who pose a far greater threat to women's services than any transwoman.

Again, that's an ad hominem argument. If you read his writing on this, he can identify the problem as it affects women and girls. Also, during the meeting in Parliament, he identified and acknowledged a number of the problems trans ideology causes for lesbians and gay men. It pains me he can see this, whereas progressives cannot: the infection of the left with identity politics, straying from the material analysis of Bentham, Mill, Marx, Engels and Gramsci, is horseshoeing the left into another form of the right, in authoritarian, metaphysical and neoliberal economic terms.

 

[Miranda Yardley]

This is a daft argument, you can have lesbian woman and straight women, it doesn't mean one of those groups isn't a woman.

No, because they're women.

 

[Pickman's model]

Except we lie on diametrical opposite ends of the political spectrum... nice try at an ad hom.

except may isn't at an end of the political spectrum.

nice admission of lying though.

 

[kabbes]

and intersex people?

Not my definition, so I don’t know.

 

[Miranda Yardley]

So do you respect the choice of intersex people to identify as the gender they want regardless of their reproductive potential?

What do you mean by 'gender'? If someone who is intersex has a clear reproductive potential, how are they intersex?

 

[Miranda Yardley]

except may isn't at an end of the political spectrum.

nice admission of lying though.

What have I lied about?