Should transwomen be legally treated as women?[W:165,1392]

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Tsunami said:

The problem with this idea is that men also do many important things and have important experiences that are centered on the notion of being a woman. The only things men can't do are related to reproductive function.

Click to expand...

The problem with your idea is that you have created this restrictive definition of what it means to be a woman merely to facilitate your ability to discriminate against a group of individuals whose behavior that you find repulsive. People do this for various reasons, amongst which are to protect some sort of egotistic position that they have, and some do it because they are fighting against something that they don't like in themselves. That is just to give examples.

Tsunami said:

It is the one that is essential, the only thing unique to females. Your circular reasoning astounds me.

Click to expand...

No you are wrong. And it is because of your rather limited field of vision. The truth of the matter is that there is quite a bit that differentiates females from males. Some vans have seats that are designed to take passengers. Actually most of them are equipped in that way. However, there are some that are not meant to carry passengers at all, and don't have any seats for passengers. What you are doing is saying that the vans without seats for passengers are not really vans. That is not the case. It is just that although one function of vans is to transport passengers, they can be quite useful for far more than that. And that is what you are ignoring in this case.

Tsunami said:

Lol I guess you might not understand what circular reasoning means. You are saying women aren't defined by ovaries because there are women without ovaries. The first part of your statement is only true because the second part says it is true. This isn't a fact, it's a definition, and not a very meaningful one.

Click to expand...

No, I understand exactly what circular reasoning means, and your statement here reveals the distortion that is taking place in your thinking. I am going to say again why the reasoning is not circular, so please take note this time. The reason is that you can take the ovaries from a woman and she will still be a woman. Did you get that? I will say it again. You can take the ovaries from a woman and she will still be a woman. That is the crucial point. IF having ovaries was such a crucial aspect of being a woman, one should be able to take them away and the person would not longer be a woman. Again to give an example. If I say gasoline creates the energy that make a car run, then I should be able to observe that if there is no gasoline in the car, then the car would not run because there would be no energy. Indeed this is the case. No gas in the car, the car does not run. You are saying that having ovaries is what makes a woman, a woman. If that is the case, then we should be able to observe that taking a woman's ovaries away would result in her no longer being a woman. Since that is not true, your assessment is flawed. Over and above that, we observe that there are persons who are born without ovaries who feel are though they are women and behave as though they are women. Some of them do not even know that they don't have ovaries until they observe that they don't experience menstruation. AS A RESULT OF THESE TWO OBSERVATIONS, we can say that the condition of being a woman is indeed not restricted to having ovaries. THEREFORE THE REASONING IS NOT CIRCULAR, but is based upon observable facts.

Tsunami said:

I'm not limiting women to reproductive function, I'm determining sex by reproductive function. You can behave in any manner you want whether you have ovaries or not. By defining them some other way, you are the one limiting women to certain behaviors. What exactly determines whether a person is a male or female to you?

Click to expand...

The problem is that you are restricting the condition of being a woman to that of a person being born with ovaries. You are doing this because you want to create an exclusive barrier to facilitate your ability to discriminate against persons who have characteristics that for whatever reason you are uncomfortable with. I have broadly touched on some things that I felt are the defining characteristics of the experience of being a woman in this post:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/221321-should-transwomen-legally-treated-women-w-65-a-24.html#post1064513740

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

ReverendHellh0und said:

So, lets say a convicted sex offender who's raped women, decides one day he's a woman, and starts dressing like one, would you still have "no problem"?


and yeah, as I said, personally I don't care who uses what bathrooms, but can see why others would have an issue with it.





right, there is that far left PC kook accusation again. Look, as I said numerous times, I don't care what you choose to do to your body, or what you believe you are. I have a problem being forced to accept others delusions as reality.

I don't advocate discrimination, or any laws against these choices. I simply don't accept being forced to accept things which are not true.

Click to expand...

You believe you have the right to tell a transgender person exactly what he or she is, contrary to what they feel inside. That's pretty patronising.

ReverendHellh0und said:

You are far less tolerant than I am. *shrug*

Click to expand...

:lamo

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

MildSteel said:

The problem with your idea is that you have created this restrictive definition of what it means to be a woman merely to facilitate your ability to discriminate against a group of individuals whose behavior that you find repulsive. People do this for various reasons, amongst which are to protect some sort of egotistic position that they have, and some do it because they are fighting against something that they don't like in themselves. That is just to give examples.

Click to expand...

I don't understand where you perceive any discrimination or judgement of behavior. You are confusing me with the other people you are arguing with (I also haven't mentioned chromosomes, btw). I've said multiple times that anyone can behave in any way they like. I am very much a feminist, I just don't think acting feminine makes you female. It's the other way around, and not always.

No, I understand exactly what circular reasoning means, and your statement here reveals the distortion that is taking place in your thinking. I am going to say again why the reasoning is not circular, so please take note this time. The reason is that you can take the ovaries from a woman and she will still be a woman. Did you get that? I will say it again. You can take the ovaries from a woman and she will still be a woman. That is the crucial point. IF having ovaries was such a crucial aspect of being a woman, one should be able to take them away and the person would not longer be a woman. Again to give an example. If I say gasoline creates the energy that make a car run, then I should be able to observe that if there is no gasoline in the car, then the car would not run because there would be no energy. Indeed this is the case. No gas in the car, the car does not run. You are saying that having ovaries is what makes a woman, a woman. If that is the case, then we should be able to observe that taking a woman's ovaries away would result in her no longer being a woman. Since that is not true, your assessment is flawed. Over and above that, we observe that there are persons who are born without ovaries who feel are though they are women and behave as though they are women. Some of them do not even know that they don't have ovaries until they observe that they don't experience menstruation. AS A RESULT OF THESE TWO OBSERVATIONS, we can say that the condition of being a woman is indeed not restricted to having ovaries. THEREFORE THE REASONING IS NOT CIRCULAR, but is based upon observable facts.

Click to expand...

This is exactly circular reasoning. She's a woman because she's a woman. That statement is meaningless. Why is she still a woman? By what criteria? I am disputing your "fact" and you aren't supporting it by anything except circular reasoning.

When you take the testicles from a horse it's not still a male horse, it's a gelding. In many cases we have different terms for fertile or infertile individuals. I'm saying to you that by a biological definition, a woman without ovaries is no longer a woman, she is neuter. There's no harm in still calling her a woman for tradition's sake, but just because you use that as part of your definition doesn't make it a "fact". That's circular reasoning.

But there is harm when you call her a man and she still has ovaries, because then we have men who can get pregnant. And that is really all that matters in this conversation, because our sex laws are based on reproductive issues.

http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Female

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Urethra Franklin said:

You believe you have the right to tell a transgender person exactly what he or she is, contrary to what they feel inside. That's pretty patronising.

Click to expand...

Facts shouldn't be patronising. Feelings can be based on falsehoods and in fact many times are.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?[W:65]

MildSteel said:

Well, what do you think?

Click to expand...

Pre-op, no, post-op, yes.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Tsunami said:

This is exactly circular reasoning. She's a woman because she's a woman. That statement is meaningless. Why is she still a woman? By what criteria? I am disputing your "fact" and you aren't supporting it by anything except circular reasoning.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute. You have become lost in your reasoning. This is your position.

A woman has ovaries, a man has testicles, there is no more to being a man or woman than that.

Click to expand...

That is what YOU said, not me. What I am saying is that IF that is true, then we should observe that taking away the womans's ovaries would result in her no longer being a woman anymore. And since that is not the case, your position is flawed. It is not circular reasoning. That is taking your reasoning and demonstrating its glaring flaw. Again what you have done is demonstrate to the discerning eye that your mind is creating a distortion in the form of inventing an instance of circular reasoning when none exists. There is a motivation for this. While I cannot say exactly what it is, I would guess that it is coming from something that is making you uncomfortable with transwomen.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

MildSteel said:

Wait a minute. You have become lost in your reasoning. This is your position.

That is what YOU said, not me. What I am saying is that IF that is true, then we should observe that taking away the womans's ovaries would result in her no longer being a woman anymore. And since that is not the case, your position is flawed. It is not circular reasoning. That is taking your reasoning and demonstrating its glaring flaw. Again what you have done is demonstrate to the discerning eye that your mind is creating a distortion in the form of inventing an instance of circular reasoning when none exists. There is a motivation for this. While I cannot say exactly what it is, I would guess that it is coming from something that is making you uncomfortable with transwomen.

Click to expand...

LOL you don't understand that you haven't supported "and since that is not the case" by anything other than circular reasoning. My opinion is objective, yours is clouded by sympathy.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Tsunami said:

LOL you don't understand that you haven't supported "and since that is not the case" by anything other than circular reasoning.

Click to expand...

And you don't understand that you either have to put forward the rather absurd notion that they cease to be women when they have their ovaries removed, or accept the rather common observation that women who have their ovaries removed do not cease to be women. For example, my mother had a hysterectomy done when I was young. I did not observe that she ceased to be a woman at that time and as a matter of fact I wasn't aware that she had it done until she told me recently that she had it done long ago. So either you put forward the absurd notion that the thousands of women who have their ovaries removed each year cease to be women at that point, or we can accept the common observation that they are still women after they have their ovaries removed.

So what is it? Do you have such a strong need to discriminate that in order to facilitate your discrimination are you going to say that the thousands of women who have their ovaries removed cease to be women at that point?

Re: Should perverted men who “identify” as women be legally treated as women?

cpwill said:

It's a simplified way to put the issue, but the basic point is, no waving penises in front of 7 year old girls, regardless of your opinion of it.

Click to expand...

A person with a penis isn't going to be waving it in front of anyone in a female bathroom, since they go in stalls with doors closed.....though I am on the fence about which washroom pre-ops should use. Probably the best solution is to use the 'family/disabled' washrooms, where they exist. (more places should have them anyway)

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?[W:65]

MildSteel said:

Well, what do you think?

Click to expand...

Not no but hell no...Would you want your wife or daughter using the same bathroom as a guy who thinks he is a woman?

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Kal'Stang said:

I can easily see a pedophile dressing up and pretending to be a transgender person just to, at the very least, take a peek at some little girl.

Click to expand...

peeping at little girls?
I guess im having trouble following the scenario

like in the case of planet fittness, they had private changing stalls, and in my personal experience any time ive been to a gym and the majority choose to be naked (which is personally weird to me) children were almost never around or could avoid those areas or again had private areas.

Also what about CURRENT pedophiles right now, pedophilia is the attraction to prepubescents and the gender preference is typically one of convenience. Meaning what ever you have access too.

My point is pedophiles dont need to be in the opposite gender locker rooms to see things that might excite them, if child nudity is already present in a locker room (which in my case Ive almost never seen, maybe a hand full of times in my life) they can already see it in thier current locker room.

I'm not saying thats OK, im just saying this doesnt "increase" the chances of your scenario happening unless Im not understanding your premise

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?[W:65]

Navy Pride said:

Not no but hell no...Would you want your wife or daughter using the same bathroom as a guy who thinks he is a woman?

Click to expand...

WHy would I care?

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

MildSteel said:

And you don't understand that you either have to put forward the rather absurd notion that they cease to be women when they have their ovaries removed, or accept the rather common observation that women who have their ovaries removed do not cease to be women. For example, my mother had a hysterectomy done when I was young. I did not observe that she ceased to be a woman at that time and as a matter of fact I wasn't aware that she had it done until she told me recently that she had it done long ago. So either you put forward the absurd notion that the thousands of women who have their ovaries removed each year cease to be women at that point, or we can accept the common observation that they are still women after they have their ovaries removed.

So what is it? Do you have such a strong need to discriminate that in order to facilitate your discrimination are you going to say that the thousands of women who have their ovaries removed cease to be women at that point?

Click to expand...

Again with the discrimination accusation. You keep repeating the same tactics, attack the opponent and talk in circles.

You must be not very close to your mother if you didn't realize she had major surgery. But as far as not noticing, it doesn't matter if you can tell the difference between a man and a woman. The internet has proven that I cannot. Even science and the Olympics sometimes have trouble telling. It doesn't matter because you should treat people the same no matter what their gender. You shouldn't have different expectations depending on their sex. Nothing in your argument matters, the only thing that does is reproductive function.

Ovaries are the logical criteria to define who is female, and a woman is an adult female. You can say that taking out the ovaries makes them neuter, ie no longer a woman, or you can say that being female at birth makes them always a female, and thus always a woman. In fact, you can even call them a man if you want, there is no significant distinction there to me (though there are some significant legal conflicts regarding same sex marriage, those will likely be overruled in a matter of weeks).

It's not in any way an absurd notion that someone who is neutered is no longer female, if you learn to speak of biology rather than public perception. If you want to play semantic games, you can even take over those terms entirely, and define "woman" and "female" by self-identification or anything else you want. As long as you don't base the laws on those terms. What does matter is having a man that can get pregnant, or a woman that can impregnate, because this possibility defeats the purpose of gender-specific laws.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Kal'Stang said:

I can easily see a pedophile dressing up and pretending to be a transgender person just to, at the very least, take a peek at some little girl.

Click to expand...

There are gay pedophiles, there are female pedophiles, there are even legitimately transgendered pedophiles. Preventing a sex change doesn't solve this problem, not a relevant issue. Except to say that pedophiles shouldn't be discriminated against any more than transsexuals should.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?[W:65]

Navy Pride said:

Not no but hell no...Would you want your wife or daughter using the same bathroom as a guy who thinks he is a woman?

Click to expand...

I care as much as you did sharing the shipboard facilities with gay men for all those years. Who would know?

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?[W:65]

Navy Pride said:

Not no but hell no...Would you want your wife or daughter using the same bathroom as a guy who thinks he is a woman?

Click to expand...

I've been using the same bathroom as men all my life. My brother, father, husband all used the same bathroom as me. True, they didn't think they were women - but maybe if they had they would have been a bit neater....

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Tsunami said:

But as far as not noticing, it doesn't matter if you can tell the difference between a man and a woman. The internet has proven that I cannot. Even science and the Olympics sometimes have trouble telling. It doesn't matter because you should treat people the same no matter what their gender. You shouldn't have different expectations depending on their sex. Nothing in your argument matters, the only thing that does is reproductive function.

Click to expand...

That was a bunch of convoluted gobbledy gook. You say it doesn't matter whether you can tell the difference between a man and a woman. You say that you cannot, but then you are arguing about what is a woman. WOW!!!!

Tsunami said:

Ovaries are the logical criteria to define who is female, and a woman is an adult female. You can say that taking out the ovaries makes them neuter, ie no longer a woman, or you can say that being female at birth makes them always a female, and thus always a woman. In fact, you can even call them a man if you want, there is no significant distinction there to me (though there are some significant legal conflicts regarding same sex marriage, those will likely be overruled in a matter of weeks).

Click to expand...

Again more convoluted gobbledy gook. Here you have made three different statements, neuter, woman, and man. WOW!!!

Tsunami said:

It's not in any way an absurd notion that someone who is neutered is no longer female, if you learn to speak of biology rather than public perception. If you want to play semantic games, you can even take over those terms entirely, and define "woman" and "female" by self-identification or anything else you want. As long as you don't base the laws on those terms. What does matter is having a man that can get pregnant, or a woman that can impregnate, because this possibility defeats the purpose of gender-specific laws.

Click to expand...

Every year thousands of women in the US have their ovaries removed. It is beyond absurd to say that they are no longer women. To say so would mean that women like my mother are no longer women. WOW!!!

No more to say here. As far as I am concerned this discussion has become ridiculous.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Tsunami said:

There are gay pedophiles, there are female pedophiles, there are even legitimately transgendered pedophiles. Preventing a sex change doesn't solve this problem, not a relevant issue. Except to say that pedophiles shouldn't be discriminated against any more than transsexuals should.

Click to expand...

Please tell me that I am reading this wrong.

From the way this is phrased I can only come to one of two conclusions.

1: You agree that transsexuals shouldn't be discriminated against but also think that pedophiles should not be discriminated against.

or

2: You are putting transsexuals on par with pedophiles in that pedophiles are pretty much the lowest form of scum on this entire planet.

Please tell me that I am wrong on BOTH of those conclusions.

Re: Should perverted men who “identify” as women be legally treated as women?

Bob Blaylock said:

All the madness and lies notwithstanding, it's a matter of simple mammalian biology.

One who has XY chromosomes and was born with “boy parts” is male.

One who has XX chromosomes and was born with “girl parts” is female.

“Transgenderism” is nothing more than insanity backed up by Political Correctness.

Click to expand...

You are incorrect.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

I've been in healthcare fields since I was 16 and I suppose that's why my opinion comes from anatomy and physiology. If you have a penis then you are a man. If you have a vagina then you are a woman. You can feel like you are anything that you want but that doesn't make you it. You can think that you are a toaster but that won't make you one.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?[W:65]

Navy Pride said:

Not no but hell no...Would you want your wife or daughter using the same bathroom as a guy who thinks he is a woman?

Click to expand...

What possible issue would that cause?

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?[W:65]

MildSteel said:

Well, what do you think?

Click to expand...

yes.....

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Kal'Stang said:

Please tell me that I am reading this wrong.

From the way this is phrased I can only come to one of two conclusions.

1: You agree that transsexuals shouldn't be discriminated against but also think that pedophiles should not be discriminated against.

or

2: You are putting transsexuals on par with pedophiles in that pedophiles are pretty much the lowest form of scum on this entire planet.

Please tell me that I am wrong on BOTH of those conclusions.

Click to expand...

Don't want to derail the topic but both are.. if not a "disorder" at least an unfortunate condition that they don't necessarily choose to have. Why would being born with one affliction make us feel sympathy while another makes the person evil scum? Psychopaths and pedophiles are born that way and need help, not hate.

MildSteel said:

No more to say here. As far as I am concerned this discussion has become ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Oh it started out ridiculous.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

MildSteel said:

You say that based on what?

Click to expand...

Chromosomes.

Re: Should transwomen be legally treated as women?

Males that have surgery to transform themselves into looking female should be call a transformed to look female. Or surgical female. Someone who needs surgery to appear a gender different than what their Chromosomes indicate should not be confused with an actual gender determined by chromosomes. If we start lying about simple biological things like gender then science with got to ****.


A test of rational. Should this guy legally be a tiger because he transformed himself into a tiger?





That being said there is nothing wrong with a adult choosing to have elective surgery to change their appearance.