Consquences of self-identification

[MrsKCastle]

Sorry if this has already been done. I've been doing a lot of thinking about current trans thinking in the media.

As far as I understand it, this is the predominant view:
Anyone can be man or woman, male, female or neither. It doesn't depend on your genes, appearance or potential ability to hear young. What's important is how you identify. We should always treat people as they identify, with regard to how we speak about and treat them, and what spaces/roles we allow them to access.

What I'm interested in, is how this self-identification will or could change society. I'd love to hear your thoughts as I think it will help me to get things straight in my head.

So far I'm thinking:
No more single-sex schools
No more single-sex hospital wards
No more single-sex clubs, whether that's Brownies or exclusive golf clubs
Anyone can apply for any scholarship or award, regardless of sex

What else?

Gender is binary. Sex is not. = Gender is non-binary. Sex is binary that should read

Losing it today...

Why is that "othering"? I'm not saying it isn't, but why is it any different to trans woman? Because it acknowledges that you were/are male?

No, I don't wonder why trans people 'don't engage'. On the contrary, I wonder why you seek out women on forums like this and proceed to ignore everything we say about ourselves.

It's exhausting and repetitive finding ways to politely say 'please respect the ways in which i as a woman am fundamentally different from you.'

Ultimately you don't respect that and you don't respect women. And why would you? You refuse to understand how offensive you are to us, appropriating our experiences of growing up female, denying our consent, refusing to recognise the importance of sex and conflating it with gender.

You talk of low blows when women tell the truth. You forfeited your right to be molly coddled in a pretence when you failed to respect our existence as a category that excludes you.

With regards to the ad hominem thing, I've only accused one person of doing that so far.

I think I'm pretty justified in that from the last few posts.

Everyone else has been polite - thank you. It's very hard to get the posts correct and I'm trying to ensure things aren't vague or easy to pick apart. I am trying to make people question things, or at least see a glimmer of my perspective on things.

Also my humour does get a bit sarcastic at times - but sometimes you have to poke a little fun. It's not meant to be offensive.

We're talking about human beings.

You talk about 'othering' while making comparisons to electrical equipment, and our rights to not be violated by men to not wanting the roads painted. Do you know who usually compares women to objects and property? Men.

@HairyLittlePoet - I'm sorry, you lost me at the last post. I've been nothing but respectful in my posts.

You are the one that broke respect with your last few posts. Feel free to carry on posting, I won't be baited.

How is pointing out that someone has a penis, disrespectful? It's not a value judgement.

Are you questioning anything, ATM? Or seeing a glimmer of our (gender critical women who don't accept transwomen are women) perspective on things?

"So wait, a female plug (which is a commonly used term) has to produce eggs? Now I'm lost."

Poor you

Those plugs are called female because they are produced hollow and another ('male') part is inserted into them. It's an analogy to females who have vaginas, into which male penises can be inserted.

As a general rule, remember that you are a human being and that the parts of dictionary definitions that refer to plants or machinery are not about you.

The part of the definition you need to check is the actual biological definition that pertains to human beings: Female = Of the sex that can make eggs or bear offspring. You don't fit that definition.

There is another word in the same dictionary: Male = Of the sex that can make sperm. You fit that definition.

HTH

I'm not comparing women to objects. I was told that you can't use the secondary definition from a dictionary definition without the first one being engaged.

female
ADJECTIVE

1Of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes.
1.1Relating to or characteristic of women or female animals.
1.2(of a plant or flower) having a pistil but no stamens.
1.3(of parts of machinery, fittings, etc.) manufactured hollow so that a corresponding male part can be inserted.

I used the 1.3 example of a female plug. Clearly that is a case where the secondary definition (1.3 as opposed to 1) can be used without the primary definition (1).

Female plugs can't produce offspring (well, except maybe in some bizarre cartoons). Just proving my point.

And I didn't compare your rights to not being violated to roads being painted. I compared consent.

This is very illuminating.

I sincerely hope that my previous post will help with your confusion re dictionary definitions concerning machine parts, ATransMum.

@CoteDazur

But I can't produce sperm anymore...?

ATransMum

For what its worth, I do see your perspective on things. I just cannot for the life of me understand it. But this may be because I realise sex and gender are different things..as a lot of your posts come across as confusing the two?

I think you explained it very sensibly and calmly, Cote.

ATM so are you a plant or bit of machinery?

ATM - re "But I can't produce sperm anymore...?"

Of course you would say that

You are still of the sex that can produce sperm. (You don't have to produce sperm at this point in time. Neither do newborn baby boys or males with a variety of disorders/conditions).

You are still NOT of the sex that can produce eggs.

"MTT is used by TERFs to mean Male-To-Trans"

So does transwomen now include everybody who was formerly male/assigned male at birth, whether they identify as a woman/female or not? What are we supposed to use to identify those who transition to neither man nor woman?

M2T or MTT is a more inclusive term than transwoman.

@WankingMonkey

I also see sex and gender as separate things - I've bookmarked your article to read tomorrow and will get back to you :)

atm

Sorry if this sounds rude

Do you truly not understand what cote is saying

Or are you just trying to be 'clever"?

Is it the case that the only reason you can't produce sperm is because you have artificially suppressed that natural function with synthetic hormones? Or your medical condition you mentioned (sorry am not a doctor) prevents it?

ATM, can you please explain which bit of you fit the definition of woman/female? As per any of the points in the definition? What are your female characteristics?

I respect the right of women to make it crystal clear if they wish to other readers that they are referring in the third person to a male person. Whether that male person would prefer to be called a woman, a transwoman, a mother or any other title which implies femaleness is not a consideration that any woman should be forced to take into account.
Some women are ok with using she, her, transwoman in reference to a male. Often they describe this as a concession made out of politeness or consideration for feelings. That's a personal choice.
I feel uncomfortable being complicit in a deceit. I won't be deliberately inflammatory or hurtful, but no person has the right to compel another person to lie in the name of being nice.

You are arguing that you don't want crossdressers accepted as transwomen and I could fully understand your view on that - indeed I think it is sensible to retain the distinction between people actively transitioning and those dressing up / living part time etc. However, you then later said that you have not had surgery but you want to be considered a woman.

So what you're saying is that it is of importance to YOU to not be redefined by interlopers, but you think it's fine and dandy for women to be redefined to include people that have penises.