A woman is an adult female. A transwoman is an adult female who used to be male. It’s not difficult to grasp that they are different things. You can admit that and still believe that transwomen should be treated with dignity like anyone else.
Personally I don’t give a shit what bathroom people use or what they want to be referred to. I’ll go along with whatever… But a woman and a transwoman are different things, and it’s disingenuous to pretend otherwise. Always have been different things and always will be, no matter what the law states, now or in the future.
Kier’s words are still not transphobia. There is no fear, dislike, prejudice, discrimination, harassment, or violence in his statement. The scream of ‘transphobia’ is thrown around too much for anyone who disagrees with a narrow definition. Any disagreement is labelled as hate, and it’s silly.
Should a transwoman have the same rights and respect and opportunity as a woman (as per the legal definition)? Absolutely. Are they the same? No, they are not. Is that a hateful bigoted viewpoint worthy of scorn? I don’t believe so.
Should a transwoman have the same rights and respect as a woman? Absolutely. Are they the same? No, they are not.
‘As a woman’, a trans woman is a woman, different from a cis woman sure, but still a woman. This statement is fairly absurd if you substitute trans with another adjective, like is a blonde woman different from a woman?
Kier’s words are still not transphobia. There is no fear, dislike, prejudice, discrimination, harassment, or violence in his statement.
The prejudice is denying the legitimacy of trans women as women. ‘Adult human female’ is a dog whistle for ‘not trans’, so by asserting that a woman is ‘an adult female’ he’s saying trans women aren’t women (and that trans men aren’t men).
I don’t use the term cis. I use the term woman and you knew exactly what I meant. A blonde woman is a description of a woman’s hair colour and is a semantic-based response that is nothing to do with this point. You know this; it’s a foolish riposte that’s nothing at all to do with the clear and simple fact that a woman who used to be a man is not the same thing as a (cis) woman.
I can call it a woman who used to have a penis or a woman who used to be a man if you want me to be pedantic about it. Nothing to do with hair colour, or skin colour, or anything else except previously being a biological male and now identifying as a woman.
‘adult human female’ is not a dog whistle. It’s a legal and common-sense definition that you clearly understand but are trying to make out to be hate for some reason. I am not denying the legitimacy of transwomen; nor is Keir.
Transwomen and (cis) women are different things. And Transmen and (cis) men are different things. They have different names, which you yourself use for a reason. That reason being they are not the same thing. This is exactly the same as saying transwomen are not women, because they are not. They are transwomen.
A trans woman, and a cis woman are both subtypes of women. One used to be physically male, the other didn’t. Both are women and should be afforded the same treatment under law unless actually there’s actually reasonable issues created by that.
I use the term woman and you knew exactly what I meant
I didn’t actually, I wrote that to probe out what you actually meant because I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.
A blonde woman is a description of a woman’s hair colour and you know this.
And trans/cis is a descriptions of whether a woman was assigned female at birth or not. Woman is not synonymous with cis woman.
They have different names, which you yourself, use for a reason.
You give them different names, I’m using adjectives because the distinction matters in this context.
‘adult human female’ is not a dog whistle. It’s a legal and common-sense definition
It really isn’t. When you meet someone irl, you brain doesn’t decide if it thinks they are a man or woman based on their chromosomes or some bioessentialist bs, it does it based of social ques because man/woman are social categories.
I am not denying the legitimacy of transwomen [sic]; nor is Keir.
But also:
This is exactly the same as saying transwomen [sic] are not women, because they are not. They are transwomen [sic].
I’ll probably fuck my terminology up here, forgive me, I try. Questions I have:
Are there a lot of people who look at other people’s genitals in public toilets?
Can these people be arrested because I think they might be perverts and I don’t want them looking at my kids?
Are people going to have to start showing their genitals to security guards?
Has someone given security guards the right to demand to see people’s genitals?
How the fuck does that even work when someone’s had gender reassignment surgery?
Presumably trans men must now use the women’s toilets?
Does someone who’s had gender reassignment surgery need to bring their full medical history with them in order to prove they’re using the “correct” toilet?
Not aimed particularly at you flamingos - just questions that are coming to mind reading this thread.
Seems to me this would be a lot simpler if people would just stop looking at other people’s genitals in toilets uninvited.
A woman is an adult female. A transwoman is an adult female who used to be male. It’s not difficult to grasp that they are different things. You can admit that and still believe that transwomen should be treated with dignity like anyone else.
Personally I don’t give a shit what bathroom people use or what they want to be referred to. I’ll go along with whatever… But a woman and a transwoman are different things, and it’s disingenuous to pretend otherwise. Always have been different things and always will be, no matter what the law states, now or in the future.
Kier’s words are still not transphobia. There is no fear, dislike, prejudice, discrimination, harassment, or violence in his statement. The scream of ‘transphobia’ is thrown around too much for anyone who disagrees with a narrow definition. Any disagreement is labelled as hate, and it’s silly.
Should a transwoman have the same rights and respect and opportunity as a woman (as per the legal definition)? Absolutely. Are they the same? No, they are not. Is that a hateful bigoted viewpoint worthy of scorn? I don’t believe so.
‘As a woman’, a trans woman is a woman, different from a cis woman sure, but still a woman. This statement is fairly absurd if you substitute trans with another adjective, like is a blonde woman different from a woman?
The prejudice is denying the legitimacy of trans women as women. ‘Adult human female’ is a dog whistle for ‘not trans’, so by asserting that a woman is ‘an adult female’ he’s saying trans women aren’t women (and that trans men aren’t men).
I don’t use the term cis. I use the term woman and you knew exactly what I meant. A blonde woman is a description of a woman’s hair colour and is a semantic-based response that is nothing to do with this point. You know this; it’s a foolish riposte that’s nothing at all to do with the clear and simple fact that a woman who used to be a man is not the same thing as a (cis) woman.
I can call it a woman who used to have a penis or a woman who used to be a man if you want me to be pedantic about it. Nothing to do with hair colour, or skin colour, or anything else except previously being a biological male and now identifying as a woman.
‘adult human female’ is not a dog whistle. It’s a legal and common-sense definition that you clearly understand but are trying to make out to be hate for some reason. I am not denying the legitimacy of transwomen; nor is Keir.
Transwomen and (cis) women are different things. And Transmen and (cis) men are different things. They have different names, which you yourself use for a reason. That reason being they are not the same thing. This is exactly the same as saying transwomen are not women, because they are not. They are transwomen.
It’s pretty simple.
A trans woman, and a cis woman are both subtypes of women. One used to be physically male, the other didn’t. Both are women and should be afforded the same treatment under law unless actually there’s actually reasonable issues created by that.
I didn’t actually, I wrote that to probe out what you actually meant because I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.
And trans/cis is a descriptions of whether a woman was assigned female at birth or not. Woman is not synonymous with cis woman.
You give them different names, I’m using adjectives because the distinction matters in this context.
It really isn’t. When you meet someone irl, you brain doesn’t decide if it thinks they are a man or woman based on their chromosomes or some bioessentialist bs, it does it based of social ques because man/woman are social categories.
But also:
I’ll probably fuck my terminology up here, forgive me, I try. Questions I have:
Are there a lot of people who look at other people’s genitals in public toilets?
Can these people be arrested because I think they might be perverts and I don’t want them looking at my kids?
Are people going to have to start showing their genitals to security guards?
Has someone given security guards the right to demand to see people’s genitals?
How the fuck does that even work when someone’s had gender reassignment surgery?
Presumably trans men must now use the women’s toilets?
Does someone who’s had gender reassignment surgery need to bring their full medical history with them in order to prove they’re using the “correct” toilet?
Not aimed particularly at you flamingos - just questions that are coming to mind reading this thread.
Seems to me this would be a lot simpler if people would just stop looking at other people’s genitals in toilets uninvited.