FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
User ID: 1175
The fact that male people are so much stronger and more aggressive than female people, even after undergoing bottom surgery.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
9hr ago
ב, Do I need to tap the sign?
I don't know what this is supposed to mean.
I have even heard of men who were born with all the visible male parts, never considered that they were anything other than men, fathered children, and then went to hospital for some procedure and found out that they had been carrying around uteruses for seventy years!
Some concrete examples or citations would be appreciated. The sex-is-a-spectrum people routinely claim such edge cases exist and then are unable to dredge up even a Weekly World News article.
I didn't set the terms of the thought experiment. @Celestial-body-NOS did: take it up with him them because their sex is a private matter between them and the Almighty, and no one is entitled to know it without their explicit say-so!
I reiterate that I think my preferred proposal is vastly superior for any metric you care to mention:
- Segregate violent offenders from non-violent offenders, by putting the former in maximum security prisons and the latter in minimum security prisons. The really dangerous ones go to supermax prisons.
- Place prisoners who might be especially at risk of being violently victimised on protection, on a case-by-case basis. Examples of the kinds of prisoners who might be especially vulnerable include: unusually young prisoners, prisoners with physical disabilities, prisoners who have testified against other prisoners, gay prisoners, and trans-identified males who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and begun medically transitioning.
You might recognise this system as the system which most Western countries already use. Every proposed alternative (transferring trans-identified males to the female estate, or constructing a special facility just for trans-identified males regardless of whether they have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria or not) just seem obviously worse to me than the above: the former because it needlessly endangers female prisoners, the latter because it needlessly endangers non-violent offenders by speciously lumping them in with violent offenders on the basis of an unfalsifiable identity characteristic they purportedly share.
I will admit that, in many cases, placing a prisoner "on protection" entails keeping them in their cell for almost the entire day. On the one hand, this does generally accomplish the stated goal of preventing them from being assaulted or murdered by their fellow inmates; on the other hand, it's functionally equivalent to solitary confinement. What we'd ideally want is some kind of special facility or wing within a prison in which all protection prisoners could be sequestered, but still be able to move about and interact with each other with a comparable degree of freedom as they would expect in general population, but with a reasonable expectation that they would not be violently victimised. Of course, such a facility or wing would immediately become the place that every prisoner would want to serve the entirety of their sentence in, and we'd end up right back where we started. For this solution to be effective, there would have to be some gatekeeping and discretion on the part of the prison governor to distinguish the legitimately endangered from the malingerers. Simply admitting everyone who claims to identify as a woman (or gay, or suffer from a physical disability etc.) is not a workable solution. It is not just ripe for abuse: it is practically designed to be abused. It makes a mockery of the prison system.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
9hr ago
You know, I have a very hard time believing that a heterosexual male (that is, a member of the sex responsible for a good >90% of indecent exposure arrests and unsolicited photos of their genitals sent to people they barely know) has wholly innocent reasons for inviting a female person to inspect his genitals within an hour of meeting her, even if he has maimed said genitals beyond recognition. I think you would interpret Charlie's behaviour much less charitably if he did not purport to identify as a woman, and I don't think this is at all warranted. "I identify as a woman" is not a get-out-of-jail-free card to act like a creep and a sex pest.
to conclude that they're sneakily getting off all the time just from being perceived as female.
Yes, it would be wrong to conclude that they're doing it sneakily. Plenty of them make no secret of it.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
9hr ago
Skill issue.
Sincerely – what on earth are you talking about?
If some wants to know the PIN for your bank card, not out of an intention to use it for fraud, but because they think it relevant whether it is a prime/square/triangular number, does the fact that they are not technically a thief mean that they are justified in prying it out of you?
If the PIN for my bank card was tattooed on my forehead in 60pt characters and I didn't wear a beanie or a burqa, it would be meaningless to demand that people respect my privacy.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
9hr ago
Maybe try going to a physio before going to a doctor? Doctor will probably just tell you to go to a physio anyway.
but I think the MTFs themselves, if asked, would rather take that chance than the much higher probability of such rapes if they all had to go to men's prisons; don't you?
Not necessarily. As I argued the other day, supposing you have a trans-identified male who's been convicted of a non-violent offense and is housed in a minimum-security prison with other non-violent offenders. One morning, the warden announces that all trans-identifying inmates are to be transferred to a special facility just for them. This facility, per the terms of your and @Celestial-body-NOS's thought experiment, will not distinguish between the legitimately dysphoric and the opportunists, nor will it distinguish violent from non-violent offenders. Among others, it will include the aforementioned Sophie (née Daniel) Eastwood, already convicted for murdering a fellow inmate; and assorted inmates convicted for raping men. I imagine a legitimately dysphoric non-violent offender might react to the announcement that he is to be transferred to this facility with more than a little alarm.
By lumping all trans-identifying inmates together (regardless of how long they have identified as trans or what they were convicted for), I find it entirely credible that this proposed policy might result in an increase in the rate at which trans-identifying inmates are assaulted, raped or murdered. Especially the legitimately dysphoric inmates we are particularly committed to protecting.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
10hr ago
Does this mean that you would consider someone born with a penis and two viable-egg-producing ovaries to be female, and someone born with a vulva and two viable-sperm-producing testicules to be male? What about someone born with one testicule and one ovary, each producing viable gametes of its associated size?
Why is that trans activists' attempts at "gotchas" always reside solely in the realm of the hypothetical?
I disagree with your claim that either of them is something which you are entitled to be told by someone who would prefer to keep to themself.
I continue to insist that asserting that one's sex ought to be kept "private" is a meaningless demand when, in 99% of cases, it can be reliably inferred at a glance. It makes about as much sense as demanding that one's height, eye colour or need to use a wheelchair be kept "private". It's a doubly meaningless demand in this debate given how many trans people will openly announce "I am a trans [woman]/[man]", and the terms "trans woman" and "trans man" are literally defined in terms which are derivative of sex: by disclosing that you are a trans woman, you have therefore disclosed that you are a person of the male sex (and vice versa for trans men). A "trans woman" is "a person of the male sex who identifies as a woman"; let's see what happens when we taboo our words:
Alice: I am a person of the male sex who identifies as a woman.
Bob: What sex are you?
Alice: That's none of your business.
Do you see how absurd this is, and how contrived it sounds post-tabooing?
One inmate per cell, all interactions between inmates supervised by guards sufficiently numerous to intervene in the event of violence of harassment having the potential thereof.
Oh, I see: you're doing that thing certain people do where, when asked what your preferred policy solution would be, you describe some impossible utopia that will never and can never exist – then when people point this out to you, you accuse them of being moral mutants.
As always, this is a tremendously useful contribution to the discussion and not a complete and utter waste of everyone's time. That's the hallmark of a truly ethical person: someone who spends all their time daydreaming about hypothetical solutions that will never come to pass, while rubbishing the pragmatic alternatives offered by the more grounded and down-to-earth.
Seriously, dude: this is about as productive a contribution to the discussion as announcing "when I'm in charge we won't need prisons, because everyone will get along with each other!"
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
10hr ago
we should afford MTF convicts special protection in prison because they are especially likely to be raped.
Well, that's the question isn't it – are they?
And as I've argued repeatedly over the last few days, how do you propose to distinguish between the legitimately dysphoric who've been cross-dressing for as long as they've been able to dress themselves (whom, naïvely, I would expect to have a particularly tough time in prison), and the opportunists who only "discovered" they were trans post-conviction? Because, to be frank, I don't think "Isla" Bryson would face an elevated risk of sexual assault in prison compared to the modal prisoner. (I do think he would be unusually likely to commit a sexual assault on another prisoner, whether male or female, but that's neither here nor there.)
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
10hr ago
Fine, no détente. If you continue to insist that my opposition to gender ideology is rooted in some kind of voyeuristic desire to know the genital configuration of everyone in my vicinity (despite how strenuously I've made it clear that I think it's tremendously inappropriate for trans-identified males to volunteer this information unprompted) – I will continue to insist that, if you really mean what you say, you are painfully naïve.
I also note that the list of dreadful experiences has suddenly expanded from "threaten heretics" to also include mentioning their transness too frequently and dressing in ways you don't like
Imagine you have a young woman, Alice, who works in an office and reports to an older man named Bob. Bob makes little secret of his sexual attraction to Alice, which is not reciprocated. Bob never touches Alice in an inappropriate way, or sexually propositions her, or makes inappropriately sexual jokes in her presence etc. However, he begins wearing shorts into the office with loose-fitting boxer shorts underneath them. When talking to Alice, he tends to rest his foot on filing cabinets or angles his legs in such a way that his genitals are visible to Alice, if only just. It is abundantly obvious that he is intentionally exposing himself to Alice, but with plausible deniability. (If you want an illustration of what I'm talking about, watch this clip from Friends, except that the man in this clip is completely unaware of what he's doing.)
In your opinion, would Alice be justified in finding Bob's behaviour inappropriate, off-putting or creepy, if not actually qualifying as sexual harassment in its own right? And would your answer change if Bob "identified as" Barbara, but his genitals were unchanged?
Or supposing, to return to an example in a previous comment, Bob began to come into the office wearing a T-shirt with "CUM SLUT" emblazoned across it. Or if he began coming into work wearing enormous prosthetic breasts under his sweater. Would it be reasonable of Alice to find either of those off-putting or creepy?
@Amadan and @SnapDragon described the trans people (let's be honest: trans-identified males – no one is claiming trans-identified females behave like this*) they knew dressing in "intentionally provocative" and "off-puttingly sexual" ways. I don't know exactly what kind of dress they were referring to. But I think it's fair to assume they were not complaining about these people wearing plaid despite paisley suiting them so much better. Glossing their complaint as amounting to the trans people in question "dressing in ways they don't like" is an uncharitable strawman, and it's really obnoxious.
*Which is not what one would naïvely expect, given that trans-identified females purport to identify as members of the sex which experiences a vastly higher sex drive and commits a hugely disproportionate share of rape and sexual assault.
Also, I think you are wrong that trans people are "people who make everything about their sexuality"
Well, not all of them, but let's say a disproportionate share. I've met hundreds of women in my life, and to the best of my knowledge not one has ever left the house wearing a T-shirt with the word "CUM SLUT" emblazoned across it. I do, however, know a trans-identified male (whom I'll call Dave) who has done this several times. Dave was doing a Secret Santa thing in work, for which the company was using a website in which you could add items to your wishlist and they would be visible only to the person assigned to be your Secret Santa. Dave requested a mug with the words "I LOVE GIRL COCK" emblazoned across it. One of her colleagues complained to a mutual friend that was profoundly inappropriate conduct for a workplace. ("He ain't persecuted, he just a asshole.")
To the best of my knowledge, Dave has never been formally diagnosed with gender dysphoria, gave no indication of a desire to transition as a child, and only came out as trans in his mid-twenties. Prior to coming out, Dave admitted to a close friend (who in turn mentioned it to me) that he was consuming so much pornography that he was debating whether, morally, he really ought to financially support the "content creators" thereof. I have a very hard time believing Dave's pornography consumption is wholly unrelated to his subsequent trans identification. I would go so far as to say that I don't think Dave identifies as a "woman" so much as he identifies as the hypersexualised portrayal of femininity which exists in porn and nowhere else. Women in real life don't wear "CUM SLUT" T-shirts, but women in porn certainly do.
Another example. Before we met, my girlfriend once worked as a tour guide in her home country, in which role she met a much older (i.e. retired) trans-identified male from an English-speaking country, whom I'll call Charlie. Literally the first time my girlfriend met Charlie, Charlie admitted that he'd fully medically transitioned, and asked my girlfriend if she'd be interested in seeing his neovagina. I believe they'd known each other for all of an hour.
I know, I know, generalising from a small sample size, Chinese robber fallacy, yeah yeah yeah. But I'd appreciate it if you could answer the following questions in complete honesty. Do you know any female people who habitually walk around in public wearing a T-shirt with "CUM SLUT" emblazoned across it? Do you know any female people who think it's appropriate workplace conduct to anonymously ask one of their colleagues to buy them a coffee mug reading "I LOVE COCK"? Do you know any female people who consume so much pornography (and so often) that they're debating whether they ought to financially support the companies or individuals who produce it? In your experience, when a female person meets another female person for the first time, do they typically expose their genitalia to one another? In your opinion, what is the difference between what Charlie proposed doing to my girlfriend and what Louis CK was cancelled over?
Like, when you have Pulitzer Prize-winning trans journalists openly admitting that they became trans as a direct consequence of watching too much "sissy hypno" porn, I think the cat is out of the bag. I'm not saying every trans-identified male is a pornsick fetishist (indeed, per Blanchard's typology I suspect that the homosexual variety has a completely different etiology to the autogynephiliac). But I am saying that trans-identified males are disproportionately likely to be pornsick fetishists when compared to males in general (and especially when compared to the females these TIMs supposedly identify as), and that this goes double for the terminally online trans-identified males which it sounds like @SnapDragon was interacting with.
And as an aside, I find it a profound insult to my intelligence that I'm expected to believe that males like this "identify as woman" or have an "internally felt sense of womanhood", when it's abundantly obvious to everyone that they are performing a misogynistic caricature of femininity that owes more of its particulars to Hugh Hefner and MindGeek than it does to any actual flesh-and-blood woman. I can't imagine how offensive I'd find it if I was a woman and I was expected to nod along with this and pretend that I believe that wearing a "CUM SLUT" T-shirt is just the sort of thing women do, that there are no meaningful differences between me and a male person wearing a T-shirt like that.
And if, after all of the foregoing, you still want to accuse me of Chinese robbering, then fine, I accept that. But at least meet me halfway and acknowledge that, even if not all trans-identified males behave anything like the above, it is perfectly reasonable (and not bigoted or hateful) to be creeped out by males who behave like the above, even if they identify as trans, and that they should not get a pass on their inappropriately sexual behaviour just because of how they identify.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
12hr ago
but I don't agree that protecting cis women from rape is inherently higher-priority than protecting men from it.
women just tend to be more vulnerable to rape in the general population and thus get the bulk of the attention
The fact that women are physically weaker and hence more vulnerable than men (and don't give me some nonsense about how this disparity is only visible at the extremes: the average man is stronger than 99% of women) is why protecting women from rape is a higher priority for me than protecting men. Accuse me of being flippant or cheeky if you must, but this really is an instance of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need": we have a special responsibility to protect those most vulnerable to harm. Women being violently raped is seen as an especially heinous crime for much the same reason that children being violently raped is, or elderly people, or physically disabled people: because these groups are uniquely vulnerable and poorly equipped to defend themselves.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
15hr ago
Is there a rule saying we can't have two different threads on the same day?
Be the change you want to see in the world. I'll be watching it with interest (pun completely unintended, I only noticed it after the fact).
"Fiscal Friday" has a better ring to it than "Money Monday" though, IMO.
- My upper back and shoulders felt stiff from Tuesday onwards last week, so I didn't feel up to going to the gym. Ended up having to do all three sessions back to back on Friday-Sunday. The most frustrating thing is that I was doing deadlifts on Saturday and felt absolutely fine during and afterwards, but when I woke up on Sunday morning I could feel that I'd aggravated my dodgy disc, yet again. I have no idea what I'm doing wrong, I genuinely thought I'd perfected my deadlift form. A quick Google suggests that I need to improve my core strength, so I'm planning to go to the gym this evening and do some core exercises (plank etc.). Any advice for strengthening my core would be greatly appreciated. Can deadlift 1.84x my bodyweight for 3 reps, squat 1.15x for 7 reps and bench press .87x for 6 reps.
- Have not consumed any pornography since waking up on January 1st.
- Planning to post my twelfth blog post of the year either today or tomorrow morning.
So in your ideal world, where no compromise was required with people like me (or those uppity women who would prefer not to be raped during their prison sentences if it's all the same), how would inmates be housed?
As an aside, don't you find it the least bit interesting that, for all your talk about the necessity of housing trans-identified males outside of the male estate in order to protect them from the "ghastly fate" that would otherwise befall them, trans activists cannot dredge up even one example of a trans-identified male being murdered in a British prison in the last twenty-five years?
I do not appreciate the repeated assertions that agreement with the 'gender-critical' position, or whatever you call your side of the argument, is a prerequisite for being considered 'mature' or 'sensible'.
I'll be more than happy to stop, if you'll stop implying that I'm a pervert for disagreeing with gender ideology. A simple trade.
If one defines 'sex' as "If I look between this person's legs (and don't get a face full of pepper spray), will I see a tallywhacker or a hoo-ha?"
Well, that's not how any sensible person would define sex, so I really don't know why you're bringing up this hypothetical scenario.
I've made it abundantly, abundantly clear to you that when I use the term "sex", I'm referring to whether a person was born with the organs associated with the production of large or small gametes, even if faulty. Obviously one cannot change what organs one was born with, and medical technology currently admits of no way to transform organs which produce large gametes into organs which produce small gametes, or vice versa. If you were born with functioning testicles, the only kind of gamete you will ever be able to produce throughout your life is a small one, and emasculating yourself doesn't change that.
Your continued insistence on trying to imply that, by virtue of being gender-critical, I'm therefore a sex pest obsessed with the genitals of complete strangers is not just tiresome and dishonest, but also profoundly immature. If this is the best rebuttal you can think of, maybe just don't bother.
As an aside: your contention that the configuration of the genitals belonging to trans-identified males are some kind of jealously guarded secret is not at all consonant with my experience. This is information that trans-identified males seem disproportionately keen to volunteer, even (especially) to those who have expressed no desire to hear about it (that is, if the legions of such people inviting TERFs to "choke on my girldick" and similar are any indication).
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
Novel or “novel”?
Novel in the context of trans violence.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
I'm not American. I was bringing it up to illustrate a point about how it's possible to make a statement which is technically true, and yet which any reasonable person would consider lying, using an example most people are familiar with. If you think I brought it up just to attack a President who's been out of office for a quarter-century – I mean, maybe read the actual article first?
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
I don't think it is delusional as such - I just think it's mistaken.
What's the difference? A delusion is a false belief.
Noted, I've amended.
More options
Context Copy link