How should we treat trans people?

Oh do get a grip, Fields. You understand the point perfectly well. Thoughts in a person's head do not alter material reality.

Well quite. It's a complete waste of everyone's time to pretend.

hoooowl I can answer for you.

The bit that trans people are pointing at within themselves when they say "I'm a woman despite my male biology" - they're talking about how their human-mind has been conditioned and moulded and emerged around gendered and sexed behaviour.

The logical implication is that all human-minds have the capacity to be conditioned-masculine or conditioned-feminine, and that sometimes society applies the wrong sort of conditioning to the wrong sort of body.

This is a fallacy, because the conditioning applies to the sexed body regardless of the feelings of the individual about the process.

Female socialisation is intended to train all human-minds in female-bodies to perform socially-constructed femininity. Feminists take umbrage at this because this means we are conditioned into being the lesser, the other, the sexually-submissive, the intellect starved of opportunity.

Saying this process is inherently natural and the resulting mindframe is inborn is therefore a declaration that female bodies are designed for servitude.

Which is a pretty damned patriarchal idea. You'll find it in Genesis, amongst other places.

Such a fantastic post, StopThePlanet. 👏🏼 💐

Trans individuals should be treated like everyone else - with dignity and respect -

I agree. I just don't see addressing a TW as "sir" or a TM as "madam" as treating them with dignity or respect.

TW getting called mister or sir are common courtesies for men, TW are men. This is not denying their existence it is stating material fact with respect. TW should not be in women's toilets/lockers because they are men. TW should not have access to women's shortlists because they are men.

I don't identify with ma'am or madam but I don't get pissed or upset when someone refers to me as such as it is meant with respect and is stating material fact. Calling me ma'am or madam is not denying my existence I am a mature woman (42yrs) thus even though I don't like to be referred to as ma'am or madam it is technically correct (and shock/awe I do not cease to exist because people label me how they see me and not how I feel).

As a child I lied a lot due to fallout from abuse I suffered (including not being believed when I reported my experience of CSA). As a teen I began to be much more self-aware and realize that I was beginning to believe my own lies and it terrified me to the core of my being. Once I learned to live without telling lies and that even "white lies" are unacceptable I vowed to always be truthful even when it was painful. I will not be coerced into using compelled speech to refer to people. As a child I had adults force me to use compelled speech in regards to their partners (my dad told me to call my just married stepmom "mom" and that she was my new mother when I knew it wasn't true as I lived with my actual mom and as recently as three years ago my actual mom was coercing me into calling her new husband "dad" even though I told her that it made me uncomfortable and creeped out (he is only 16yrs older than I). I was also told as a child that I would be a "fucking whore like my mother" so I internalized my CSA and believed that at 5yrs old I "asked for it" and was compelled by my abuser to say that I "like it, it feels good". That is how I see compelled speech.

I am polite so I try very hard to not use sexed language in greeting any unknown people. I care about stranger's feelings and many a woman I've encountered that appear to be trans men could just be women with PCOS or men I encounter that appear to be trans women and could have Klinefelter's or another DSD. I do the unsexed greetings avoiding most passing discomfort/offense because the rest of the conversation I usually employ "you" (as do most American English speakers at least). I will not be forced to lie and pronouns are Rohypnol much like CSA was for me as they both distort reality and cause denial of truth.

Perhaps trans restrooms (unisex, mixed sex, whatever), shortlists, and sports should be campaigned for by the TRAs and leave the women's alone. But that won't happen because their drive isn't for their own safe spaces (like the much coveted women's spaces were), their drive is to show us women how to woman and tell us how to talk about ourselves as well as our experiences. The goal is gain power, control, and subjugation of more than half of the global population - to subordinate us under our own sex so that men are even the default when it comes to being a woman. Why? Because men have discarded them... they aren't considered men anymore so they need to assert dominance in the spaces they can push their way into. They aren't concerned with being nice to anyone outside of their TRA tribe.

Pragmatic TW like Miranda Yardley engage reality - they do not seek to force their way into women's faces/spaces as they respect that women are a vulnerable class and that TW are a different vulnerable class that are not part of a female sex class and require accommodations unique to their class's vulnerability. These TW are empathetic, are realistic, and do not seek to "burn us in a grease fire" or "punch us in the face" because they have an abnormal mind/body experience. They recognize that their experience is unique to women's and while they may feel like they want to be women or identify with being women they don't actually know what it is to be a woman and don't claim to redefine it for those of us that are female. They live in their material reality and acknowledge they we do too.

I used to be nice to a fault... self-deprecatingly self-sacrificingly self-harmingly nice to everyone. Like the OP I felt that my discomfort was less important than someone else's (before and post lying problem) and then I grew the fuck up and dealt with my trauma and acknowledged my female socialization. My feelings are valid my feelings of discomfort (for me) trump anyone else's feelings of discomfort in any room that I am in. I will not be coerced into sharing spaces with men meant for me as a woman for my safety and dignity.

I am a woman and TWANW, this is material fact and is not mean-spirited or cruel to assert, it is the truth.

Trans individuals should be treated like everyone else - with dignity and respect -and not placated with compelled speech. Compelled speech makes conversations disingenuous and will turn us all into liars (if we succomb). Compelled speech teaches children that lying is necessary and that their instinct - their internal compasses - must always be pointed to "making nice" instead of openly curiously engaging the world and/or speaking out when they should.

It’s debating their existence because if they say they really are women and you say they are not, you’re basically saying that what they say they are, doesn’t actually exist.

Trying to claim that women denying men's claims to be women somehow erases the existence of women is a new low in intellectual dishonesty. And is utterly ridiculous.

How self deprecating. Somehow I don’t believe you think you are not clever enough.
By debating whether they are women or not is essentially asking are they valid as women. It’s debating their existence because if they say they really are women and you say they are not, you’re basically saying that what they say they are, doesn’t actually exist.

It really is painful trying to get anyone to debate this in good faith without personal digs. OK I'll rephrase, I have zero formal education in philosophy (except for a bit of formal logic), politics, gender studies - I'm learning as I go. I feel stupid when I read phrases I don't understand but have decided to stick my hand up and say when I don't rather than pretend I'm clever and already know it all. What I don't do is assume people are lying. Anyway.

I think I get it - they say there exists such a thing as a woman who was born a man, and others say there is no such thing. But surely it is ALL about the definition of the word 'woman' (or man, or born...) and that is where the debate lies? It strikes me as an odd turn of phrase to keep repeating. Again, I have no education in this so it might have connotations I'm not seeing.

It's like instead of saying, Boris Johnson is not a successful prime
minister, I deny the existence of successful prime minister Boris Johnson. Kind of a mangled way of putting it.
Or, instead of saying 'anyone can self-identify as a woman' it's 'I deny the existence of women as a sex class'. Yet I constantly, constantly see scoffing 'no-one's trying to erase women'.

I keep coming back to the question, if not biological sex, in what way are they women? I am still looking for an answer I can understand, that makes sense to me.

Surely trans women are a subset of men and trans men are a subset of women. In that case we need to bring up our children to accept that anyone born a man uses male 'things' (you know, loos, health care and so on. Just not enough time list everything). And vice Versa. And we all accept everyone however they look or present. So a female looking person could run in a mans race. A male looking person using the women's loos etc.

We are born with one unchangeable sex. Gender is simply what we wear/appear

I can see the logical consistency

And yet arguments with logical consistency are wrong because.......?

these days there is more than one way to be a woman

Super, I’ve been dying for an answer to this

What’s your definition of ‘woman’?

Is Paris Lees a woman?
Is Jessica Yaniv a woman?
Is Theresa May a woman?
Is Boris Johnson a woman?

It’s debating their existence because if they say they really are women and you say they are not, you’re basically saying that what they say they are, doesn’t actually exist.

"It's debating my existence because if I say I am really the Pope and you say I am not, you're basically saying that what I say I am, doesn't actually exist."

Word salad arguments fool no one. If I claim to be the Pope and someone tells me I am not, the actual Pope and I both continue to exist.

I really don’t know what to say.

I’m not trying to change any of your minds. I can see the logical consistency in your arguments. One way or another everyone has to try and get on somehow.

Oh do get a grip, Fields. You understand the point perfectly well. Thoughts in a person's head do not alter material reality. Neither do hormones. Neither does surgery.

The original classes of human being still exist, however the Woke murder language in an attempt to destroy perceptions.

Unless, of course, you're advocating for a theocracy, in which the power resides with the Bringers of Enlightenment and everything they say must be true just because they say it, no matter how ludicrous or fatuous.

You cannot think yourself into a different physical state of being. We're not bit players in the Celestine Prophecy.

these days there is more than one way to be a woman

Well done for getting the first principle of feminism down.

There are many ways to be a man, too.

About three billion, in fact. Give or take. And every one of them involves a Y-chromosome, an SRY gene, a sperm-producer body-type encoded in the DNA and brought forth in the womb.

There are seven billion ways to be a human. Your personality and sexual interests do not determine which reproductive sex-class you belong to.

All the ways to be a woman involve a body that was encoded to develop along typical egg-producer pathways.

If someone is chromosomally male then they will stay chromosomally male whatever society does to them. I’m not disagreeing with that.

It just makes them a different type of woman.

🤣 there really is nothing like the utter incoherence and universal contradiction of this ideology.

No Birds I’m not favouring them. I would extend the same courtesy to trans men.

The bobbles/ unbobbles scenario doesn’t take into account the (supposed) difference between sex and gender. I feel like saying trans bobbles are bobbles, but I’m not trying to make light of it.

If someone is chromosomally male then they will stay chromosomally male whatever society does to them. I’m not disagreeing with that.

The fact that you know transwomen are men field is the only reason why your are favouring them.

Field you can have a TW / “c*s” woman combined homeless shelter over there.

While will have a female-only homeless shelter over here.

You organise by “gender” (something both TW and CW identify as having).

We (the general we) will organise by sex.

I’ve yet to hear any reasonable objection to this proposal.

But these days there is more than one way to be a woman

Perhaps in your opinion there is, but not in my opinion. My definition of woman is the age old one that has worked perfectly well for millennia.

It just makes them a different type of woman.

Yes. I did say. They're the newfangled type of women who have unbobble risk factors and privileges and none of the bobble vulnerabilities or needs.

Changing the words doesn't change the underlying material reality.

We are not avatars.

Try again.

Transwomen are men, EVERYBODY knows this and recognises this. That is why they are getting listened too, why they are getting favourable treatment, why they feel free to issue violent threats to women, why people are scared to disagree with them.

Can anyone explain how my rights as a woman conflict with the rights of any other women?

It’s not just the definition of women, it’s the definition of men as well. You don’t have to have a penis or a Y chromosome to be a man nowadays you know

Unfortunately for you nearly all the population disagree with your appropriation of the word women. The fact that TRAs have persuaded some weak minded people otherwise does not mean everyone else is not quite clear on the definition. As is the Equality Act.

They are not the same people. No one, including themselves, thinks it.

They’re not the same, I agree. But these days there is more than one way to be a woman. It just makes them a different type of woman. With some issues that are the same as us and some that are different.