"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?

Further to this, the insistence that transwomen "are" women, and transmen "are" men, has fuelled the obsession with "passing" and being "outed", and the dubious attempts at justifying stealth and sexual deception that we've seen in other threads. All these things are unhealthy because a person's mental wellbeing is then dependent upon another person's inability to recognise the true state of affairs ( or their willingness to lie through their teeth if they do see how things are).

I would guess that members of traditional third genders with a long and proud history don't end up in floods of tears on social media because somebody noticed they were a hijra or a fa'afafine rather than an ordinary woman.

It’s not delusional. They know fine well they’re male. They don’t believe they’re female. They don’t invade female spaces.

The delusion is 'trans women are women'.

I'd been dimly aware something was going on with trans people with some weird conflicts happening, but the moment I heard that was when I realised how badly their rights movement had gone wrong.

Not a phrasing I used at the time, but I'd say now that I recognised that to be a stance not worthy of respect in a democratic society. An illogical nonsense, and not just harmless nonsense - a creed people were trying to turn into public policy. Something that I had to implacably oppose.

Step back from that delusion and we can resume sensible discussions about how to integrate trans individuals' needs along with other groups. Like the not-very-progressive, but at least not delusional, 'third genders' being discussed above.

(Does anyone recall the Samoan representative's disgust at New Zealand letting a fa'afafine take part in women's weightlifting, displacing their competitor. They probably think we're incredibly primitive to not realise that fa'afafine aren't actually women.)

It's irritating when people bring the US into a discussion about women's rights in the UK.

First of all, you really can't apply American assumptions to the UK. The two countries are worlds apart. It is entirely possible that transgender people are at risk in toilets for their own sex in the US but not in the UK. The same way that primary school children are at risk of getting shot during their art lesson in the US but not in the UK.

Secondly, I can't believe that the liberal feminists in the US who wring their hands about the poor trans women haven't got bigger priorities. Abortion aside, do they know they're the only women in the developed world with no right to paid maternity leave?

Wearing gender non conforming clothes isn't delusional. Believing that you are the opposite sex is.

Okay - I am currently in the US so aware of studies and data over here re stats on violence and discrimination against trans people vs non trans people.

I am however British and lived the majority of my life so far in the UK. And I pay attention to the facts and figures that apply to both countries.

So not a liberal US feminist. Just a regular UK one.

All the way through this thread I have supported single sex services because I believe that's an important issue to protect.

I don't see why supporting the safety and dignity of trans people can't exist alongside the former.

They probably think we're incredibly primitive to not realise that fa'afafine aren't actually women.

That wasn't really it. They must think that our solution to integrating fa'afafine of treating them as if they're actually female is primitive. And they're right.

I'd summarise the positions as the following, in ascending order of progressiveness.

• Two sex/genders, fa'afafine are female sex/gender (TRA position)
• Two sexes, three genders, fa'afafine are male sex (Samoan)
• Two sexes, no genders, fa'afafine are male (GC)

I mean, ask Tandora and her friends?

They're the ones saying that protecting trans people's dignity and safety means they must have access to single sex spaces and services for the opposite sex, and that if we believe that protecting our dignity and safety means we must have spaces where no members of the opposite sex are allowed even if they identify as one of us, we are irrational and unreasonable.

I'd love to move the conversation on to what reasonable steps society can take to protect trans people but right now we're still stuck on "trans people are terribly oppressed and marginalised by the nasty old TERFs who think penises don't belong in women's changing rooms".

It needs to start with the trans rights lobby accepting and agreeing to respect the laws of this country around single sex spaces and to abandon any idea of changing those laws. They need to respect female people's right to exist and to have words and spaces and categories just for us. And then they can have a think about what things they would like just for them, which don't infringe on our rights and our spaces, and campaign for those things.

Did you notice I have been asking Tandora to explain their position across this whole thread?

All my contributions have been on the line of exploring what we can do as a society to protect single sex spaces.

So how do you see that happening? The trans community have shown no interest in creating third spaces, and actively rejected them. Unless the trans community start building and campaigning for these spaces, the only alternative is that they use the ones for their sex. Nothing else will enable women to save the safety and dignity of single sex spaces they want and need.

Its not that trans identifying people dont deserve saftey. Its the idea that they are uniquely in danger, and that the solution involves them not being treated as the sex they are. When any other group is identified as being in danger, the solution has never been separate toilets.

The problems dont occur in toilets, so the solutions dont either.

What is actually happening is that TRA are identifying themselves as an oppressed group, and issuing a list of demands to compensate.

I’m impressed by the calm dedication of some posters to keep engaging in an effort to highlight the many flaws in logic thrown up by tandora’s repeated claims.

In response, we see a stubborn refusal to acknowledge the wider impacts of equating a lady brain with the whole of a physical sexed body including our genitals and the reality that only one sex has the potential to get pregnant.

Hopefully anyone questioning the gender ideology who is reading this thread can see what women have been up against in trying to reassert hard won rights to safety, dignity and protection under the law and in keeping single sex spaces.

This data convinced me that trans women should not be in women's spaces.
Statistically they are more likely to commit a sex offence than men.

Comparisons of official MOJ statistics from March / April 2019

76 sex offenders out of 129 transwomen = 58.9%

125 sex offenders out of 3812 women in prison = 3.3%

13234 sex offenders out of 78781 men in prison =
16.8%

We can counter with arguments about skewed data, but this a clear indication that my daughter is less safe in a women's changing room with transwomen than in a women only space.

Quite. It’s a bunch of pseudo-intellectual nonsense.

For me, it's even more fundamental than that.

We keep all men out of women's spaces, for safeguarding reasons.

What justification could there be for making an exception for this group of men? There isn't one.

Actually after a good night's sleep I realise a better analogy for @Tandora 's position would be to insist that since our cultural awareness of swimming can include doggy padfle, hopping along on one foot, "I'm swimming in work this week", going swimmingly, while the thing that people do in the water might be "swimming" but might also be breast stroke, front crawl or butterfly, "swimming" can only ever apply to a self defined knowledge of whether ones own self is doing something one would call swimming, and therefore she's not going to warn those people getting into the sea (whatever that is!) that there's a sign saying "Danger No Swimming" because it's not for her to impose definitions o to someone else's truth.

But philosophically, one does not in fact need to define what something is to have boundaries. One only needs to define what it is not.

So we don't need to define with molecular level accuracy the physical sex of every single human in the world to be able to say that the people born with boring traditional male bodies are not women, and do not belong in the physical, cultural or linguistic spaces of women however they may personally define themselves.

It’s important to consider all the facts. Yo provided a chart that showed, as a lot of this data does, Iceland as one of the best, if not the best country for women. ‘Best’ has a number of facets. They do have the type of self ID laws you approve of though, so I guess that’s all that matters. The report also mentions several other Nordic countries that you hold up as being great for women.
www.euronews.com/health/2024/12/07/inside-the-nordic-paradox-why-the-worlds-best-country-for-women-struggles-with-sexual-viol

OK, so, working with rough figures here.

There are 76 trans woman serving prison sentences for a sexual offence.

It is estimated that fewer than 3% of reported sexual assaults result in someone being charged, and fewer than 2% of reported sexual assaults result in someone being convicted.

Based on that, if 76 trans women are currently in prison for a sexual offence, the number of trans women who have actually committed a sexual offence is probably in excess of 3000, almost all of whom are currently at liberty.

How do we keep them out of women's toilets and changing rooms?

It’s well known that historical and social “facts” are subject to bias via the nature of reporting.

biological and scientific facts face different processes, though as this thread shows, those results can still be interpreted or spun differently.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z

Yes, this is a concern, although that article does cover a number of reasons why this might be the case, better reporting rates and a higher incidence of partners over lifetime in Nordic countries. But clearly no country is perfect. And domestic abuse rates would seem to have little connection to gender self ID approaches.

I do not see the connection between my question and the link you have posted here.

It shows that trans people being legally allowed to use toilets of the gender ID has no impact on safety of women.

The point being it is a nonsense to say “the countries with the most liberal policies on self id are the best for women”. Particularly when you’re using it as an attempt to make women shut up