"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?

Good. I will leave you to your pigeon chess then

Firstly, I’m confused as to why if ‘Even if it were driven by karyotype it wouldn't be relevant to a conversation about toilets.’ you introduced them into a conversation about changing rooms.

That aside, I’m arguing that what we know is that, for whatever reason, there is a widely accepted pattern of male offending. You’re the one who’s suggested there is something called ‘transness’ which is biological (in a similar way to DSDs). I’m asking for the evidence that this changes make offending behaviour.

I also think it’s disingenuous to suggest safety is not considered in relation to single-sex spaces. If women feel unsafe because of the known behaviour of men as a class, then men can be excluded in order to deliver a service.That doesn’t mean safety is the only consideration.

thanks for the suggestion. Next time I take the time to set out what it is to be trans on mumsnet I will save it as you suggest.

Yes they tried that with the SP case, trying to muddy the waters with racism accusations. You have to be very, vert caredul with that as well, as you can't possibly know the race of anyone on an anonymous internet forum.

Also some conpelling stats on male pattern offending behaviour, that everyone including the government measures based on prison stats, here:

www.change.org/p/not-our-crimes-a-petition-for-accurate-data-reporting-in-criminal-statistics

You seem to think that because something is "a social norm" that makes it somehow not a real problem for women

Absolutely not.

Of course it's a real problem. A problem I care deeply about.

It's not a problem that is in any way helped/ improved, however, by insisting that trans people must be treated according to their birth sex in all aspects of public life.

I think testosterone plays a massive part. My brother did ten years in prison for armed robbery. He had the same upbringing as me yet we couldn’t have been more different regarding working versus criminal behaviour. He started small but very young. He definitely deserved to go to prison for what he did. I’m not saying that his behaviour was due purely to being male but his male aggression was definitely part of it.

It's representative of people who have been convicted of serious offences.

Why do you think that trans identifying males are, on a per capita basis, more likely to be convicted of a sex offence than other males?

They should be treated as their birth sex in all aspects of public life where sex is relevant.

Like all other people.

I do agree that there is a physiological relationship between testosterone and aggression.

If you have a dictionary length definition of a trans person you could just type it here. It would only take you a few seconds.

Phew! Something we can all agree on!

You have demonstrated on multiple occasions that you do not understand what is compatible with the Supreme Court ruling and what isn't.

You still appear to think a "women plus trans identifying males" space is compatible with it.

Yes, and?

Does violence against women and girls only count if it's driven by chromosomes?

If one group of people is through Patriachy significantly more likely to socialised to be more violent, sexually aggressive and entitled because of their outward appearance of sex at birth than another group of people, and we do not know before it happens which members of that group this might apply to, why would we not take sex at birth into account when considering how to protect the other group of people?

And having made that decision, if a subgroup of the first group claimed they are safe to be treated as a special case despite at least some of them being proved to not be, why would we not expect some evidence of this before treating them as safe?

You cannot take prison statistics, and generalise about behaviour within the broader population.

If you believe you can do this - use prison statistics in this way - you will come to some very wrong and very harmful and discriminatory conclusions - on many matters - especially race.

Criminal justice systems data is heavily biased and not representative of the broader population.

Luckily everyone who knows anything about statistics knows this.

OK, let's try again.

Do you acknowledge that there are trans identifying males in the prison population who have been convicted of violent sexual offences against women and girls?

Assuming yes, what is your reason for suggesting that trans identifying males as a group are not at risk of committing violent sexual offences against women and girls?

"Do you acknowledge that there are 'green people' in the prison population who have been convicted of violent sexual offences against women and girls?

Assuming yes, what is your reason for suggesting that 'green people' as a group are not at risk of committing violent sexual offences against women and girls?"

How would you answer this question if someone asked it you?

I would say there is no such thing as green people.

Right guys I have to sign off and do some work on my day job.

Again, I disagree with you.

If vastly more men and up in the prison system then women, then I am most certainly concluding that men are generally more likely to engage in criminal behaviour, irrespective of race, than women. As you said, likely mediated by testosterone and a male puberty.

Let's talk about black people, who actually exist, rather than green people, who don't.

Q1. Do black people commit over 98% of all sexual offences and 100% of all rapes?

Answer: no.

Q2. Do male people commit over 98% of all sexual offences and 100% of all rapes?

Answer: yes.

This is why your analogy doesn't work.

It's not a problem that is in any way helped/ improved, however, by insisting that trans people must be treated according to their birth sex in all aspects of public life.

That is true. That just maintains the status quo.

However unless you can show that trans women always act aligned to female social norms rather than male, treating trans women as women actively increases the negative impact of these social norms on women and girls, not because trans women are some greater theat but simply because they have been allowed where no other male people are, within the protections that are supposed to exclude people of their socialisation.

And you cannot show that trans women always act aligned to female social norms rather than male, because there is are far too many undisputable instances of trans women behaving exactly along male-socialiased norms.

And ironically, treating trans women as women also actively increases the negative impact of these social norms on women and girls by giving credence to the idea that male and female behaviours are something we are born into not socialised into, differences of the mind and not the body.

And making something worse is worse than just maintaining the status quo.

(You might at first object that those two statements are mutally contradictory. I hope you do. Because if you see that, you see the fundamental issue that we are trying to highlight for you - that the belief that trans women are somehow more like women than other men (itself rooted in sexist ideas about male and female people being different innately not just through our bodies) is not backed up by trans women's actions and statements in the real world).

I’ve not read this thread.

But started to comment on the linked twin study on the last thread before it closed.

Autism rates are higher in twins, especially identical.

There are clear links to autism and being diagnosed with gender dysmorphia or referred to a gender identity clinic.

autism rates are slightly higher amongst premature babies too, twin / triplet + increase the risk of this also.

the study was in Australia where gender identity is a widely shared belief within health care settings and most likely education too.

So you advocate for entirely mixed sex prisons and mixed sex cells, with individual prisoners assessed and if necessary segregated?

GIven the incredibly high statistically correlation between (boring observed) sex and certain behaviours, it seems a very expensive way to get to roughly the same place that simple sex segregation gets us already.

And as with so much "gender neutral" progress, what you are actually advocating for is to degrade the provisions for women (boring observed by sex type) to bring them to the level of provisions based around the socially normalised worse behaviour of men.

Here's an idea - how about we bring men's social norms up to the same standard as women's before we mix the sexes in all things?

You do know SP initially spoke to her manager and was advised by her to speak to DU directly, right?

Again, why does a male karyotype person's inner sense that he is/should have been of female karyotype more meaningful to the women he shares a space with than the fact that he is in fact exactly the same physically and as far as she knows socially than all the people of male male karyotype who are excluded?

Why should his inner identity, something subjective that only he experiences, change her objective experience of him?