This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Transgender women could be housed with the female population only if they’ve had bottom surgery, otherwise they go into protective custody in the male wing. I believe that’s the law in many countries right now including the UK, and it seems quite reasonable to me. What would your objections be to that?
The fact that male people are so much stronger and more aggressive than female people, even after undergoing bottom surgery.
Sucks for someone like me who got beaten at arm wrestling by mildly athletic women even before transitioning, had female range grip strength even back then, and never tried to hit or slapped someone, like even when getting sexually assaulted I just froze and waited for it to be over. It doesn’t feel great to hear I don’t deserve being protected from rape because of the way I was born.
But on the hand, I recognise that I won enough at the birth lottery being middle class in a wealthy European country in the 21st century and that this is just me feeling slightly down at hypothetical scenarios that I am exceedingly unlikely to face.
You do deserve to be protected from rape, just as everyone does. But even though protecting trans-identified male inmates from rape and assault is a valid and noble goal, I think housing male inmates in the female estate is a bridge too far, and would be unlikely to pass a cost-benefit analysis. In the hypothetical scenario in which you were sent to prison for a non-violent offense, I would hope that you would be housed in a minimum security prison along with other non-violent offenders. I would also hope that the prison warden/governor would recognise that, owing to your appearance and anatomy, you are especially vulnerable to being violently victimised, and take proactive measures to prevent that outcome (such as placing you on protection if necessary).
I don't think it's really fair for you to equivocate between "if sent to prison, I don't think you should be housed in the female estate" with "you don't deserve to be protected from rape". I'm sure you don't think a slim, petite cis gay man (that is, a twink) who gets sent to prison ought to be housed in the female estate, but I doubt you'd appreciate it if I summarised that opinion as "twinks don't deserve to be protected from rape in prison".
Sure but the female estate is greater protection without the needing to be on constant protection, which is generally considered a punishment. Otherwise why have female prisons at all, just put all of them in the same building and have the women confined to their cells 23h a day.
A petite cis gay man doesn’t have a female body that’s going to attract the same kind of attention as a passing post-op trans woman in a male estate. The risk for the latter is equivalent to a cis woman in the same situation, maybe with greater violence depending on the inmates attitudes or the belief that they can “get away” with more since a trans woman will attract less sympathy.
So I do feel sad that in your worldview, I don’t deserve the full extent of protection from rape and violence some other people do, because I wasn’t born the right kind of human. I hope I never get in trouble with the law or falsely accused of a violent crime, abused by a partner and need a DV shelter, become homeless, etc, and that I can maintain my nice comfortable middle-class existence.
Or… I can live in a country that has laws that I consider reasonable (and it does seem that most western countries consider bottom surgery sufficient for most of the above - even the Reform Party justice minister spoke in favour of not automatically housing trans women in male wings), surround myself with people for whom being trans isn’t a big deal (which is honestly a much bigger number than I thought), and just live my life with a bit less stress.
If the UK is making housing trans-identified males in the female estate conditional on their having undergone bottom surgery, that's news to me.
Yes, but as I pointed out, in your worldview, some people deserve greater protection from rape and violence than others, because they weren't born the right kind of human.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link