"Biological sex is a multidimensional variable with various components" - Thread 2

[MissScarletInTheBallroom]

The last thread ended with Tandora attempting to sidestep the question about what she would say if her daughter had been raped by a trans woman in a female only space and no longer believed that trans women should be in female only spaces as a consequence.

Her last reply was along the lines of, "The same thing I would say if she had been bullied by a green person at school and said she no longer wanted to go to school with green people."

@Tandora can we have a serious answer?

Beth Upton is a man who tramples all over women's boundaries.

You can't change your chromosomes - but 'sex' is not just reducible to chromosomes, it's a complex system with multiple components.

You can make alterations to gonads through surgeries and hormonal therapies.

None of that amounts to changing sex.

You absolutely know this

I absolutely do not know what you mean by that, no.

It's a meaningless, nebulous, rhetorical statement.

Accepting what you say (though it is in fact moot), why should we behave differently, change the way society operates, for this small group of people?

Why should their particular internal difference require us to reorganise society? Society isn’t organised around anyone’s internal specifics.

Society is arranged around the tangible differences between sexed bodies. Not their internal sense of self. It’s just irrelevant.

No. 'Human beings cannot change sex' is not a meaningless, nebulous statement and in making it, you reveal the deeply anti science nature of the TRA position.

To be trans is to have an experience of sex other than the sex you were assigned at birth.
To treat a trans woman as if they are a man is to cause acute distress, pain, disorientation to that person.

You have stated this more than once, so it is obviously an important point for you. Maybe trans people don't 'experience sex as their birth sex', but that does not mean that they are the opposite sex. They are people who have a problem with their lack of mental alignment with their birth sex and are worthy of respect and accommodation as such, but this respect and accommodation does not extend to allowing them to identify as members of the opposite sex.

Misalignment with birth sex does not equal alignment with opposite sex. It's an understandable misconception to hold, ironically because sex is binary, but it is the error in the ideology.

Society doesn’t categorise upon psychexual neurological responses to sex hormones.

In fact what you are suggesting is quite dangerous.
We don’t imprison people for having unorthodox sexual preferences. We imprison them for sex crimes.
We don’t imprison people for listing after their neighbour’s Maserati, we imprison them for stealing it.

We don’t punish impulsive people. We punish people who do bad things.

Let’s not start acting on people’s internal sense of self or Trump really will be treated as God.

No one can have an experience of sex other than the sex they are.

That's a category error.

No, no, see you've gotten confused there, that's us you're describing.

What you want would in practicality be a misogynists paradise. Male doctors who know they are male, able to sexually assault female patients at one of her most vulnerable moments, and if she dared object the male doctor could withhold health care from her.

That is a terrifying prospect for any woman who wants same sex intimate care for what ever reason, let alone any woman who has already had experience of sexual violence from males.

That you yet again place the feelings of, in this case a trans identifying male doctor, over a female patient knowing all of the above ^ just shows your arguments to be immoral and in direct opposition to your assertion quoted.

Some people reading might find your posting style confusing or upsetting for reasons they can't articulate. I had a male partner who's discursive style, approach, and intent was very like yours he would have self described as a feminist ally, a passionate talker, and a person who liked a discussion argument designed to confuse and upset, Reader you can bet your last quid that those descriptors were not the ones I or others who "had a discussion" with him would use.

We don't have to 'reorganise society'. We just have to allow accommodations for these minority individuals, the way we do with all minorities.

Ummm.. no. So humans can in fact not change sex.

You can make alterations to gonads through surgeries and hormonal therapies.

You can remove gonads. You cannot change testes into ovaries or vice versa.

but that does not mean that they are the opposite sex.

Meaningless, nebulous, ideological claim.

They are people who have a problem with their lack of mental alignment with their birth sex

I disagree that trans people inherently 'have a problem'. Being trans doesn't have to be a 'problem'. It's ok to be trans, it's just different.

and are worthy of respect and accommodation as such

Thank you .

but this respect and accommodation does not extend to allowing them to identify as members of the opposite sex

It has to, because this literally is what it is to be trans. If you refuse/ deny this you are refusing/ allowing a person to actually be trans, and treating them as if they weren't trans. This is the direct opposite of respect and accommodation.

No, no, see you've gotten confused there, that's us you're describing

Well that did make me laugh.

And yet - they do. Such is the reality of human diversity as it exists in the real world, despite your refutation and denial.

What you call ‘accommodation’ dismantles all of the protections afforded to women because of their physical vulnerability.

That is a reorganisation of facilities that belong to only 50% of the population.

It really doesn't do this at all. The belief that rights for women will collapse if we accept and accommodate trans people is a type of moral panic, similar to historical ideas that accepting gay people would cause society/ the family to collapse.

No they don't. They physically cannot.

What they think is an 'experience of the opposite sex' is simply their interpretation of social/cultural stereotypes about the opposite sex.

Meaningless, nebulous, ideological claim

Is this the best you can do when you want to refute a point? It's not very helpful to the discussion, but I guess any lurkers will make their own minds up about that.

They physically cannot

What a curious claim. What does it mean?

What they think is an 'experience of the opposite sex' is simply their interpretation of social/cultural stereotypes about the opposite sex

No this has nothing to do with being trans. This is your interpretation of what being trans is based on misinformed social/ cultural stereotypes about trans people.

Dr Upton possibly does understand himself to be female and a wonderful doctor.

His statement on the stand in the ongoing employment tribunal where he admits he would present himself (in the female patient requesting same sex intimate heath care scenario we have all been discussing), and continue with the procedure if the patient didn't object, thereby committing sexual assault... well on that those scales of balance in the eyes of the law (or the internal weighing of morals, ethics, actual needs based in reality, etc), Dr Upton's self perception would not be shared by any rational people.

No one can physically know what it is to be another sex. Not having physically experienced it, how could they?

All they have to go on are social stereotypes.

No one can physically know what it is to be another sex. Not having physically experienced it, how could they?
All they have to go on are social stereotypes.

Sorry, just added the quote there

All the evidence at trial based on her actual practice as a Doctor suggests Dr Upton is a good Doctor. Even SP admitted this on the stand.

Dr Upton said that she would view herself as eligible to treat a patient who requested a female doctor.
This is because DU understands herself to be a female Doctor.
This understanding is also consistent with the understanding of many others who understanding and accept trans people as being who they say they are.
Therefore, DU would have no reason to think that a patient requesting a female doctor would object to her (unless perhaps she knew that the person was gender critical?)
If the patient didn't object to her treating them, how would she know that they had a problem?