Transgender people who start hormones as teenagers rather than adults 'have better mental health’

VS saying transwomen are women when women are Adult Human Females is silly and wrong, but it’s your prerogative to say that, so go ahead. It won’t make it any more true.

Rosie51

trisher it is an absolute falsehood to say that the word woman has always included men, and you make yourself look foolish or dishonest when you assert this. Why has the dictionary definition been "adult human female" since dictionaries have been published? There is a way back from the highjacking of our term by men. We refuse to concede our word without a fight.

Probably because dictionary definitions are written mostly by white academic men who live restricted lives and who are trying to make everything definable. Unfortunately real life isn't. So amongst those living as women there have always been people who were identfied as male at birth and amongst those living as men there have always been some designated female at birth. No one bothered to examine these people to make sure they were "adult females" or indeed "adult males" they passed as women and men, which is exactly why this is a gender term and nothing to do with sex.
I don't think anyone actually lives in a dictionary.

trisher me too, trans women are women and unless there is a medical need or they wish me to know for personal reasons, or we are discussing general issues faced due to transitioning... I don't see any reason for them or myself to differentiate.

You are doing it again.

It's not a case of 'can't be bothered', and there is bugger all I can do about CS's case (and in any case it is clear from Galaxy's post that there is more to it than meets the eye).

Further, the fact that someone is black does not mean that white people (intersections feminist or not) should automatically leap to their defence - doing so would be, in itself, racist.

I see CS's case, as far as this thread is concerned, as a diversion from the topic.

Wrt your post above this one - clearly there is going to be no compromise from your side. As far as you are concerned, because a minority has decided that they are something they (biologically) are not, everyone else has to believe them. You have decided, 'they' believe it, so therefore it is true.

You seem happy that, as ever, men can tell women what to do. Move aside and let them dominate sport, let them touch us intimately without our necessarily even knowing that they are doing it, skew research figures so that there is less chance of a pushback, misinform stats on pay, make a nonsense of sex-based shortlists for appointments, demonise those who don't fancy them or want a same sex relationship that excludes those with male gametes and so on, and so on.

And yes, I know that there are transmen, but their situation is different as they (generally) are 'entering' the other sex from a position of weakness. They are unlikely to be able to beat most men at sport, there are fewer intimate examinations for most male patients than for most female ones, they have been socialised as female so are less likely to automatically dominate single sex gatherings than transwomen in a female space, they are less likely to have had preferential treatment in the workplace before transitioning and so on, and so on.

I am not 'standing on the Quayside crying' - not my style. I am not, however going to meekly defer to a narrative that pushes the patriarchy even further into women's lives and life chances.

The withdrawal of your KKK accusation is noted, thank you.

trisher it is an absolute falsehood to say that the word woman has always included men, and you make yourself look foolish or dishonest when you assert this. Why has the dictionary definition been "adult human female" since dictionaries have been published? There is a way back from the highjacking of our term by men. We refuse to concede our word without a fight.

Yes there are a number of gender critical transwomen. I follow fionne orlander on twitter, lovely posts on art and just general whimsy. Probably my favourite person on Twitter. Very calm.

Racism is a HUGE diversion from the OP but since it has once again been raised by you, I’ll go with it and add my own diversion.
You’re right trisher, offering sympathy to black athletes when they’re not allowed to compete because of their colour could be considered racist. Offering sympathy to female athletes who’ve been pushed out of competing or lost medal chances because of male athletes competing as women is equally unfair don’t you think?

Debbie Hayton is a transwoman who understands that she is still male. There must be other transwomen with the same view. They are individuals the same as anyone else surely.

No one is standing anywhere and crying, we are fighting via the courts and frequently being successful. No one is sobbing honestly.

Doodledog

*So black female athletes aren't worth supporting, they should
"stop putting themselves forward for testing". Accept that becaiuse they look different and are physically superior, white female athletes will constantly challenge their right to run, and they will be forced to be tested every time they want to compete and to take compulsory medication because their body does not conform with an unsupported medical belief.
Honestly it's just short of KKK stuff.*

trisher, please stop doing this?

I was very careful to say that I have every sympathy with CS. I also said that there is no reason why she shouldn't live her life as she wishes. However, as things stand, that stance will mean that she is subject to testing, which is, apparently (I have no knowledge of this area) deeply unpleasant. If that is the situation, and if there is no other way of testing (which these days seems unlikely) then there is a choice. An unfair choice, but that is the situation.

I am nowhere near the KKK in anything I think or do, and if you are honest with yourself, I am sure you know this. Posting accusations like that is offensive and frankly ridiculous.

Dodledog if you don't understand that offering "sympathy" to a black person is equivalent to the most racist attitude in history that isn't my fault.
If you can't be bothered to find out about the discrimination that black women athletes suffer that isn't my fault. You only have to Google it. But here's one article www.salon.com/2021/07/06/shacarri-richardson-black-women-olympics-misogynoir/
I regard finding out about these things as part of my intersectional feminism, of recognising my white privilege, if you don't want to do that that's fine I suppose.
I'll withdraw my KKK accusation.

Doodledog

trisher

Doodledog can you explain to me why it is OK for you to target one poster with your remarks and yet pull in another posters comments when it suits you?.

Why not insead look at the discussion as a whole? So for the question of cis women you have been asked "what do you want?" It seems you want the impossible, well you really can't blame the rest of us if you don't get it. And that's really shutting it down isn't it. No one can give you the impossible so just try focusing what is posssible and perhaps there is compromise somewhere. But the idea that woman has always just meant people who were born women is just wrong, it never has, it never will. No matter how much you legislate (and there have been societies who have attempted to eliminate what they saw as deviant) there will always be people whose birth gender doesn't match their chosen gender. They are simply now more open about it.

Whatever I'd done would have been wrong. I can do the same with the whole thread if you like, but maybe not today - I have chores to do.

I don't want the impossible. The notion that TWAW is in your head, and the heads of others who want to change nature. It is not true that no-one can 'give me' recognition of that.

I don't want to eliminate deviance - not at all. Please don't spin my words into suggestions that I am intolerant, particularly in the light of my post above.

It is not 'an idea' that women just means people born as women'. It is a fact. That doesn't mean that transwomen can't 'live as' women, taking into account that these days women can live in many different ways. The idea that there is somehow a lifestyle that encapsulates womanhood is one I struggle with, so 'living as a woman' doesn't really compute for me; but I understand the gist of it.

The fact that transpeople have always been with us is true, but not relevant to whether or not they are women in the true sense of the word.

I'm not sure how I can compromise. I mean, I am happy to accept transwomen as they are. If one joined the WI or the NWR, or the Ladies' knitting circle (assuming I belonged to any of these things) I would happily include her. I would use her preferred name and gender and lend her my lipstick if I wore it. None of that is meant to sound flippant - I just don't grasp the 'live as a woman' thing in that sense. Nevertheless I am not phobic or anti-trans. I can't prove that on here, but it is true.

What I can't accept is that someone with male gametes is a woman, or that they should be able to compete with women in sport and so on, or insist that the language should change to accommodate them, as doing so eradicates women. That is simply not fair, and I don't understand why that compromise can't come from the TRAs?

Doodledog if you don't understand that the boat has sailed and standing on the quayside crying ain't gona make it turn round I don't know what you can do. Transwomen believe they are women, transmen believe they are men. You don't. They can't change their belief to suit you. So you may continue to call them transwomen if you wish. But if you want to be delineated as someone who was born a woman then you are going to have to come up with something, because if you use the term woman I will always regard transwomen as being part of that group. So will they, so will many other people. The language isn't changing as I said before they have always been there. The fact that you now know they are there doesn't change things. The fact that you reject the term they have given you -ciswoman is fine, you can use woman, you can even refer to them as transwomen if you wish, what you can't do is stop them, or any of us , referring to them as women. So whatever legislation is brought in they will still be women and transmen will still be men.

*So black female athletes aren't worth supporting, they should
"stop putting themselves forward for testing". Accept that becaiuse they look different and are physically superior, white female athletes will constantly challenge their right to run, and they will be forced to be tested every time they want to compete and to take compulsory medication because their body does not conform with an unsupported medical belief.
Honestly it's just short of KKK stuff.*

trisher, please stop doing this?

I was very careful to say that I have every sympathy with CS. I also said that there is no reason why she shouldn't live her life as she wishes. However, as things stand, that stance will mean that she is subject to testing, which is, apparently (I have no knowledge of this area) deeply unpleasant. If that is the situation, and if there is no other way of testing (which these days seems unlikely) then there is a choice. An unfair choice, but that is the situation.

I am nowhere near the KKK in anything I think or do, and if you are honest with yourself, I am sure you know this. Posting accusations like that is offensive and frankly ridiculous.

Galaxy

No CS cant compete in womens sports because she has one of five specific conditions that exclude them from womens sport. It would apply to anyone who had that condition.

The reason given for banning is specifically her high level of testosterone. She has been told that taking drugs to lower this would enable her to compete. Unfortuantely the WHO advises medical practitioners not to administer such drugs. She is undoubtedly a black woman, raised as a woman who competed as a woman until she began to win medals then she was challenged. The real anomaly is that there is absolutely no evidence that high levels of natural testosterone have any influence on performance.
theconversation.com/ten-ethical-flaws-in-the-caster-semenya-decision-on-intersex-in-sport-116448

trisher

Doodledog can you explain to me why it is OK for you to target one poster with your remarks and yet pull in another posters comments when it suits you?.

Why not insead look at the discussion as a whole? So for the question of cis women you have been asked "what do you want?" It seems you want the impossible, well you really can't blame the rest of us if you don't get it. And that's really shutting it down isn't it. No one can give you the impossible so just try focusing what is posssible and perhaps there is compromise somewhere. But the idea that woman has always just meant people who were born women is just wrong, it never has, it never will. No matter how much you legislate (and there have been societies who have attempted to eliminate what they saw as deviant) there will always be people whose birth gender doesn't match their chosen gender. They are simply now more open about it.

Whatever I'd done would have been wrong. I can do the same with the whole thread if you like, but maybe not today - I have chores to do.

I don't want the impossible. The notion that TWAW is in your head, and the heads of others who want to change nature. It is not true that no-one can 'give me' recognition of that.

I don't want to eliminate deviance - not at all. Please don't spin my words into suggestions that I am intolerant, particularly in the light of my post above.

It is not 'an idea' that women just means people born as women'. It is a fact. That doesn't mean that transwomen can't 'live as' women, taking into account that these days women can live in many different ways. The idea that there is somehow a lifestyle that encapsulates womanhood is one I struggle with, so 'living as a woman' doesn't really compute for me; but I understand the gist of it.

The fact that transpeople have always been with us is true, but not relevant to whether or not they are women in the true sense of the word.

I'm not sure how I can compromise. I mean, I am happy to accept transwomen as they are. If one joined the WI or the NWR, or the Ladies' knitting circle (assuming I belonged to any of these things) I would happily include her. I would use her preferred name and gender and lend her my lipstick if I wore it. None of that is meant to sound flippant - I just don't grasp the 'live as a woman' thing in that sense. Nevertheless I am not phobic or anti-trans. I can't prove that on here, but it is true.

What I can't accept is that someone with male gametes is a woman, or that they should be able to compete with women in sport and so on, or insist that the language should change to accommodate them, as doing so eradicates women. That is simply not fair, and I don't understand why that compromise can't come from the TRAs?

I want children with gender dysphoria to have the best treatment, currently many countries are saying this may not be puberty blockers at a young age. Asking questions about this is not anti trans. Exactly the opposite I would have thought.

Doodledog you have tried, lord knows.
I am not au fait enough on this subject to get into it deeply but I do strongly object to being labelled anti trans and a canceller just because I don’t fall into line with the OP’s views.
As I said earlier, but no reply came, how are those who harass JK Rowling and various university lecturers not bullies ?

If I’m not supposed to call myself a woman, are men not allowed to call themselves men ?

Suddenly we’re back to racists. Was CS banned from competing because she was black trisher?

No CS cant compete in womens sports because she has one of five specific conditions that exclude them from womens sport. It would apply to anyone who had that condition.

doodledog I have tried very hard to find a way to get on with you (and others) by modifying many things about my language and how I express myself. This is not reciprocated and I just get called labels and given the assertion that other posters who also treat me unkindly across threads agree with you so you must be right.

So I've given up

You often post about Caster Semenya, and whilst I take your word that she has had a very rough time, and that there is (on the face of it) no reason why she should not be able to live her life as she chooses, maybe given the circumstances she might have been better to tread a different path? To keep putting herself forward for testing could be seen as perverse. Life doesn't always work out the way we want it to, and there are times when the needs of one person have to come after the needs of large numbers. As CS seems to be an anomaly, I would suggest that this is one of those times, and that to throw the chances of all female athletes away so that she can fulfil her potential is a step too far.
So black female athletes aren't worth supporting, they should
"stop putting themselves forward for testing". Accept that becaiuse they look different and are physically superior, white female athletes will constantly challenge their right to run, and they will be forced to be tested every time they want to compete and to take compulsory medication because their body does not conform with an unsupported medical belief.
Honestly it's just short of KKK stuff.

Re your post DD. The answer will be no, or an excuse for not explaining, or you will be given a convoluted explanation that doesn’t explain, called dodging the issue. Read the political posts for examples of this.
Since I have read two conflicting posts from the same poster with no explanation of which is true . . .

VioletSky

Lol

Helpful.

Doodledog can you explain to me why it is OK for you to target one poster with your remarks and yet pull in another posters comments when it suits you?.

Why not insead look at the discussion as a whole? So for the question of cis women you have been asked "what do you want?" It seems you want the impossible, well you really can't blame the rest of us if you don't get it. And that's really shutting it down isn't it. No one can give you the impossible so just try focusing what is posssible and perhaps there is compromise somewhere. But the idea that woman has always just meant people who were born women is just wrong, it never has, it never will. No matter how much you legislate (and there have been societies who have attempted to eliminate what they saw as deviant) there will always be people whose birth gender doesn't match their chosen gender. They are simply now more open about it.

Ah but Galaxy if you repeat something often enough it becomes accepted as a truth. Trump employed that tactic with a degree of success.

trisher, if that is one of the most sexist and dismissive comments you have ever read, I wonder what you are reading? Maybe if you read about some of the things that are said to lesbians by TRAs who want their autogynephilia to be satisfied by having sex with someone who 'fancies' women, you would think again.

You often post about Caster Semenya, and whilst I take your word that she has had a very rough time, and that there is (on the face of it) no reason why she should not be able to live her life as she chooses, maybe given the circumstances she might have been better to tread a different path? To keep putting herself forward for testing could be seen as perverse. Life doesn't always work out the way we want it to, and there are times when the needs of one person have to come after the needs of large numbers. As CS seems to be an anomaly, I would suggest that this is one of those times, and that to throw the chances of all female athletes away so that she can fulfil her potential is a step too far.