A little piece of insight

[Tandora]

Into a topic so woefully misunderstood.

It’s reasonable, or at least understandable, to believe that being trans is a natural form of cognitive difference.

It’s entirely unreasonable to believe that the cognitive difference is in any way connected to the biological difference between men and women.

its beyond bizarre to believe that any such cognitive difference makes a person the opposite sex.

Trans identifying men may or may not be inherently “different” to other men, but being different to other men doesn’t make them women. Not even if entering women’s single sex spaces alleviates their discomfort.

What matters is the person, the reality of their experience; and how society should respond to that.

Society has responded. Trans-identified people have exactly the same rights as everyone else.
Now get on with your lives, like the rest of us.

Tandora does not care about your horrific experience or your reasonable questions. Tandora knows that demanding that the needs of trans-identified males should override those of traumatised females is not going to sound too great on any board, let alone a feminism one

It’s reasonable, or at least understandable, to believe that being trans is a natural form of cognitive difference.

This is encouraging thank you.

It’s entirely unreasonable to believe that the cognitive difference is in any way connected to the biological difference between men and women.

Actually it's not unreasonable or absurd at all - it's very plausible. it is highly likely that transness has a durable biological underpinning tied to genetic differences that drive sex- hormone signalling processes.

its beyond bizarre to believe that any such cognitive difference makes a person the opposite sex.

This is a linguistic framing that is neither here nor there. We all know that there are biological differences between trans women and cisgender women. No one is pretending differently - they really aren't. This is a row about language.

What matters is the person- their difference- how it affects them- what can (or can't) be done about it- and how we should reasonably manage/ accommodate that in society .

Exactly. To use Tan’s oft-repeated words, “What matters is the person, the reality of their experience; and how society should respond to that.”

Third spaces seem like a good compromise that acknowledges that there are several “realities” here needing to be accommodated - that of the dysphoric transwoman, and that of the female victim of assault suffering PTSD.

Not to mention other women wanting single sex spaces for other reasons, but given that Tan’s focus is on an internal experience of intense distress as justifying - requiring - societal accommodation, I wanted to highlight (for the hundredth time it’s been highlighted in the thread) that extreme distress isn’t the sole property (there’s a better word for this - what is it?!?) of the transwoman.

Actually it's not unreasonable or absurd at all - it's very plausible. it is highly likely that transness has a durable biological underpinning tied to genetic differences that drive sex- hormone signalling processes.

Even if there is evidence found for this possibility (unlikely), then you are still left with the problem that people are still the sex they are but with a medical condition.

So a male with a trans cognitive issue. Or a female with a trans cognitive issue.

They still aren't the opposite sex.

No, we need third AND fourth spaces (or trans people need to learn to live in the real world). It is completely unacceptable for society to facilitate the sexual assault of women who think they're men by men who think they're women in mixed-sex trans spaces.

Well let's be honest: it says 'person', it actually means 'man with gender identity who wants into women's spaces'.

These aren't equal standards or values. This just all boils down to women having a sex based duty from birth to enable special men.

I won't bother saying 'no', because it's irrelevant: the law does not allow men to erase women's rights, equality and access like this. And this behaviour and sexist perception of women is why that law exists and is needed.

It's a good start that OP acknowledges that a trans person is someone who is biologically observably different from other people of their sex, and that self ID is nonsense.

And the Supreme Court ruled on that and said they had to use the facilities that align with their birth sex.

are you campaigning for a change in the law?

If you could answer my question - which I’ve asked repeatedly - that would be great. Thanks.

This is a linguistic framing that is neither here nor there. We all know that there are biological differences between trans women and cisgender women. No one is pretending differently - they really aren't. This is a row about language

Undortunately if you look on trans Reddit and elsewhere online, you will see it very much argued that there are no biological differences between “trans women and cisgender women”, to use your language.

Much time and energy is wasted having to argue this obvious point that there is a clear bright-line difference.

We can manage it by keeping all transwomen and other men out of female spaces. The main difference between them and women is they are male. So by keeping all males out of all female spaces society can manage pretty well. See! We’ve solved it. Yay!!!

Even if, and I don’t believe that it IS likely for the current group of people with transgender identities, a cognitive difference is found, it still doesn’t mean that that person should expect all of society should treat them as they perceive themselves when that doesn’t reflect material reality. Male people should not be accessing female single sex provisions. If specific provisions for them need to be created or provided, then that needs to be discussed.

a trans person is someone who is biologically observably different from other people of their sex

Everybody acknowledges this. It is your projection/ straw man/ misunderstanding that you think they don't.

and that self ID is nonsense
I don't know what this means but it has nothing to do with what I have said.

This thread does indeed give “a little bit of insight” into the TRA mindset - their discomfort should supersede the feelings and rights of all others.

It is so bizarre. Why on earth do these men continue to believe their rights trump everyone else’s? Despite the law now being crystal clear on the matter? It looks like mental illness to me.

How is a transwoman biologically observably different from other men? Before surgery, before transition socially, before implants and cross-sex hormones, how are they biologically, observably different from other men?

and why does their distress trump mine?

The law is clear. Men keep out of our spaces. You have lost this argument. UK says no.

Everybody acknowledges this.

No, they really don’t. You need to put on a disguise and loiter on trans Reddit more, to see what people write. Or do I need to post quotes?

I cannot speak for everything that anyone has ever said on Reddit, but I can assure you that it is not a mainstream position within the trans community or within the community of people who support, recognise trans people to claim that there are no biological differences between “trans women and cisgender women”. That would be completely absurd, and would also render the need for hormonal therapies and surgical interventions completely obsolete.

Please do post some quotes as I'd be interested to unpack whether there are people on reddit saying this (plausible as there are a lot of nutty things of all description said on reddit) or whether it is your interpretation of what people are saying based on a linguistic dispute about how the word "female" should be used (this I find most likely).

No one cares

Thank you for your honesty

it is highly likely that transness has a durable biological underpinning tied to genetic differences that drive sex- hormone signalling processes.

You have stated this across numerous threads. We can see how desperately you want it to be true and how you cling to any weak evidence for it that you can find. However, even if there was some massive break through on this tomorrow and we could all point at the gene and say that is what makes some people 'trans', it still won't alter biological, material reality. The male body will continue to be a male body and the person inhabiting it will need the same safeguarding approaches that are applied to all males.

Tell us in plain language why you want there to be no single sex spaces for women who need them, and we will be able to thank you for yours.

We are more likely to find there are cognitive problems following trauma and cognitive issues with porn consumption and cognitive issues with constantly being affirmed.

What we HAVE scientifically studied and proven is the concept of 'the extremist / cult brain'. This shows that the brain rewires when radicalised and isolated from alternative social groups. This has been proven in a number of studies across a number of different issues.

It's also been proven this can be reversed when exposed to a broader number of social groups and ideas. Basically radicalisation and echo chambers change the brain but it's reversible.

Thus on the basis of this research we really should be questioning the wisdom of affirmation only approaches and silencing of others who disagree with the concept of trans ESPECIALLY in children, because this evidence suggests it CREATES the problem and affects the brain.

I've posted about this before.

The more that we see emerging trans craziness and related threats (and actual) violence, the more this tends to support the 'extremist / cult brain theory' being appropriate to apply to it to trans activism.

What's noticeable is that it's STILL not women making threats to trans people, despite what's happened / happening to them.

But yeah, this isn't something that's being taken seriously despite the actions of some prominent trans activists.