Posie Parker on Triggernometry

[Childrenofthestones]

Posie in discussion titled "Trans women are men" with Francis Foster and Konstantin Kisin on their YT show Triggernometry.
This is a promo clip, the full show goes out Sunday evening.

I also found it very interesting how you took the normal male view of "what if a trans person has spent a long time / effort in their transition, doesn't that make a difference." line of questions to her.

This is so true. My husband, who in general takes a very dim view of men in women's sports, prisons and the usual self iD guff, still resorts to thinking a small number of men can be women based on their level of deserving.

It's resulted in quite a few heated debates where I repeatedly ask him how someone can actually change their sex. He can't answer of course but that's because his default opinion seems to be that men who try very hard at something should automatically get what they want.

I'm chipping away though and I think if he can get past his misplaced pride at being a 'logical thinker' he might realise the argument he is presenting is anything but logical and most likely driven by a gut emotional reaction to the idea of a man who purposely removes his penis still being a man.

It's because it's solidarity and respect for a man really trying hard to do something. It's entirely removed from a true understanding of what being a woman means.

Men need to sort this out, safe spaces are about male violence. Men need to stop giving other men shit for expressing themselves in all the ways, and stop expecting women to budge up to "widen the bandwith of what it means to be a woman." To paraphrase Magdalen Berns.

most likely driven by a gut emotional reaction to the idea of a man who purposely removes his penis still being a man.

Exactly.

I assume the thinking goes, oh come on, he's done that, for fucks sake. He's actually cut it off.

A man without a penis is a eunuch, not a woman.

It's a sexism that says women are not human beings in their own right. A category where they share the same characteristics. Characteristics which no man has.

There's not a woman on the planet who has cut her penis in half, created a hole in her perineum and lined it with said penis. It's something that is impossible for women to do.

OvaHere

"still resorts to thinking a small number of men can be women based on their level of deserving."

My wife is a scientist, specialising in RNA/DNA and she is very shocked when I tell her stuff like this, so am I as a qualified personal trainer.
This is absolutely crazy, humans can never change sex, they cannot undo what biology has given them.
Men will never be women, and women will never be men.

Quite Datun

The argument goes like this:

Him: But what about those people (note the use of people - already mentally moved them out of the man box) who have all the surgery, the full op and everything?

Me: Still men, they're men with a lot of cosmetic surgery. You can't change sex.

Him: But what are they meant do after going through all that?

Me: I don't know but it's not the problem of women to solve. Men who have extreme cosmetic surgery is not a women's issue.

Him: That seems mean.

Me: Women saying no is always framed as mean.

And round we go. He thinks everything else about gender ideology is ridiculous but has a total blind spot to this one aspect. I assume because it's too difficult to deal with within the spectrum of acceptable male behaviour so it must be made into woman's issue.

I know andy

I think he will get there in the end. He's almost at the finish line!

For the purpose of full disclosure even I was sort of where he was a few of years back. In the -what's the harm in acknowledging the small number of true transsexuals as women phase.

The extremism and absurdity that has occurred since has convinced me that going along with a legal fiction as if it were real is just too harmful and damaging. It opened a Pandora's Box.

Another thought on the brains issue.

A few years ago there was a lot of press over the so-called "god region" of the brain, an area which lit up on MRIs when subjects (who said they were religious believers) reported having religious experiences, but was pretty dormant in non religious people. Furthermore, it worked the other way too: stimulating that part of the brain could induce "religious feelings."

The researchers were at great pains to stress that this merely gave insight into the neurology of religious experience - it told us nothing about whether there was a god or not.

Suppose such a region were to be identified in the brain which seemed more similar in women and biologically male people who identified as transwomen than either group was to men (pace my comments upthread about d values and overlapping distributions and not making the mistake of thinking there's such a thing as a "male" height).

This would only tell us why some people, born male, said they "felt like a woman." It still wouldn't answer the philosophical question (see the fabulous submission to Harry the Owl's judicial review by Kathleen Stock) of whether they were actually women or whether they were men who felt like women.

(NB thought experiment, because although I've seen one study which claimed to have found this, it had tiny sample sizes, very flaky methodology - eg no quality control on the data, and no attempt to bootstrap the data to get confidence intervals).

Really great interview and well done to all. I've got both my teenage daughters to watch it.

Even if girls and boys were born with significantly different brains, and it could be proved that some men had female brains, what does it change?

Women and girl face disadvantages because of our reproductive role, not our brain. We still need sex segregation and class analysis based on that, not our brain function.

Pages behind. I just watched this, it's a fantastic interview!

@Triggerpod

You think this is a 'women's issue' because it hasn't affected you much yet because you are men. You think we should 'compromise' but none of the suggested areas of compromise actually affect you. None of the compromises so far have been demanded of men, they have all been demanded of women.

You care about sport, you romanticise the 'trans child' (while not sparing a thought for the ~90% of these children who would likely desist if they were supported to go through normal puberty) - but you don't give a shit about women.

At around 43:40 you talk about sport. Here, you are perfectly capable of recognising that men are bigger, stronger, faster ... you can clearly see that male bodied people have an advantage. It offends your sense of fair play.

Why does that knowledge go out of your head when you think about whether women should have to share our spaces with male people? How is it that this group of people are bigger, stronger and faster than women on the sports field, yet when everyone heads for the showers these apparent advantages all melt away and women should just be kind?

Do you think male violence against women and girls isn't really a thing, or do you think that male people who say they are women do not have the same risk of committing sexual violence as other male people?

Do you not think that women deserve a bit more than a fair sporting chance in the very spaces we fought for ourselves, in order to participate more safely in public life, despite the ubiquity of male violence against women and girls?

most likely driven by a gut emotional reaction to the idea of a man who purposely removes his penis still being a man

Castration anxiety is a powerful propeller!

Love this interview and brilliant to hear Posie in full flow. “Just, fuck off, no!”

Lots of very interesting points brought up in this thread as well. As Floral says (and very nice it is to see you back and swearier than ever), it’s so lovely to be able to have a proper disagreement with someone without them running off crying. Certainly in the UK, we’ve built an entire democracy and legal system out of hundreds of years of people disagreeing, debating ideas, arguing it out, persuading, convincing and finally agreeing the best way forward based on the available evidence. Why we need to throw this all away, along with common sense, is beyond me.

Yy what lang said. This is a parenting website, safeguarding of children is absolutely central here and the attacks on mn threads about child safeguarding are sinister af.

Posie said everyone should read more Sheila Jeffries and they should, start here:

radfem.org/unpacking-queer-politics/
(the kindle version is flakey but the pdf works)

Queer theory is incompatible with safeguarding because safeguarding is all about creating strong boundaries to protect children and vulnerable adults, and queer theory is about transgressing all boundaries.

I think someone else really wanted to hurt my feelings and called me a "journalist" shock shock grin.

Shout out to all the brave journalists who are putting themselves out there, risking their careers, to do honest investigation and reporting on this worldwide assault to women's rights and child safeguarding . Shout out also to all the journalists who are not particularly on the side of children or women but who care about freedom of speech and expression and not being made to lie about material reality. I watched Inherit The Wind at the weekend, it's about the Scopes monkey trial. My favourite quote was from the journalist character - 'I may be rancid butter but I'm still on your side of the bread'

We're working on getting the story to go into the mainstream media - amazingly they really don't want to bite.

This is only actually amazing if you are a man. Women are not amazed by this, it's been increasingly normal since about 2012 IME. Why do you think we are so pissed off?

Even if lady brains are a discernible thing, why on earth would a female brain accidentally end up in a male body,
considering there is increasing evidence that female organs transplanted into male bodies are more likely to be rejected?

A female brain is only a female brain when it belongs to a female body.

Queer theory is incompatible with safeguarding because safeguarding is all about creating strong boundaries to protect children and vulnerable adults, and queer theory is about transgressing all boundaries.

Brilliant nutshell explanation. Thank you.

A female brain is only a female brain when it belongs to a female body.

Quite.

We've even had that police officer, PC Gul, tell Harry Miller, quite openly, that sometimes a female brain can grow a male body around it. He knows, because he 'went on a course'.

Although, to be fair, a little reflection has him hotly denying it all now.

Great points Pencils. I haven't finished watching the interview yet, about half way through as was watching it on bitchute on the train and the wifi went down.

This is only actually amazing if you are a man. Women are not amazed by this, it's been increasingly normal since about 2012 IME

And this. I really did laugh out loud at that comment by Triggerpod

This is only actually amazing if you are a man. Women are not amazed by this, it's been increasingly normal since about 2012 IME

And this. I really did laugh out loud at that comment by Triggerpod

So much I felt the need to say it twice, obviously

I watched some of the live stream @triggerpod - I would like to congratulate you on not capitulating. Not backing down to the tech bullies OR the activist bullies is so unusual as to be worth mentioning.

You should check out Megan Murphy too - you’ll both like her. She tried to sue Twitter and failed, over a tweet that read ‘men aren’t women tho’

quillette.com/2019/11/22/youtube-censored-my-interview-with-posie-parker/

My comment about MSM not picking up the story was irony but it doesn't always work online.

Queer theory is incompatible with safeguarding because safeguarding is all about creating strong boundaries to protect children and vulnerable adults, and queer theory is about transgressing all boundaries.

Preach.

And one aspect of this - that rarely gets talked about - is that the thorough undermining of safeguarding in our schools will increase the chances of (most likely non trans) infiltrating abusers finding victims in the most vulnerable children (many of whom will be trans/questioning their gender).

Feminists are advocating for the protection of gender-questioning children while their own fucking activists are advocating for them to be placed outside the safeguards provided to all other children.

The frustration of this makes me weep tears of blood.