Really? I have been waiting for a word, and i sure didn't expect this one.
Then let's let it stand that gender dysphoria is a mental illness, despite what it says in black and white.
And that it is okay to keep circulating a myth which has been disproven by organizations which work in the field of sexual assault.
If this is where we are at I have better things to do with my time, and I am out.
I'vw been following this thread - great discussion. However, Smith, while your language is respectful, you continue to challenge Pondering to repeat her position. This, to me, is bullying and cannot continue. Thanks.
You shouldn’t hang your purse on the hook in a bathroom stall because a man might grab it???? Are you fucking serious? Sorry, that’s utter nonsense. If you’ve got time to be that unreasonably paranoid, you aren’t busy enough.
It was happening in downtown Montreal at the Eaton's department store when it was still permitted to have an apostrophe. Ever since then I have not put my purse on the hook or when I do it crosses my mind. I'm not paranoid about it. I remember thinking at the time how impossible it is to be on guard for all the things men might do.
When something has happened it is not a myth. That something has happened it doesn't mean it happens at a significant frequency.
For example, planes crash. It isn't a myth. It happens. It doesn't happen so often that it prevents people from flying but it does happen. Meteors big enough to cause the ice age could hit us. It has happened.
It is one thing to say it isn't a threat because it happens so infrequently, it is another to call men dressing up as women to invade our spaces a myth. Even if it happened only once in the entire world in all of known history it would no longer be a myth.
Unless you think these mythical men in disguse waiting to break into every bathroom all wear neon signs so that we can identify them. Do you have some pictures maybe so we can tell the difference and not be harrassing the wrong people?
Obviously you are not reading my posts.
1) YES. The answer is YES. We can tell men dressed up as women apart from trans women. Trans women are NOT men dressed up as women. I live in Montreal. I have seen quite a few trans women who still have strong masculine features that they are unable to conceal. I can still tell the difference between a trans woman and a man, even if that man wore women's clothing and a wig. It isn't any one thing that makes it obvious the man isn't trans, but it is still obvious. In the way they move, the lack of manicure, hairy hands, attitude, even facial expression, something gives them away as faking it.
2) As I said in a previous post, nowadays women can't be trusted not to try and get pictures or videos for their boyfriend. We have double privacy in women's restrooms. In the open area there is nothing to see. In stalls, it is noticable if someone slips anything even a little into your cubicle regardless of their sex. Therefore this is something to guard against regardless of who is in the next stall.
OF COURSE it isn't a reason to confront trans women. I have stated in every single post that trans women must have the right to use whichever facilities they feel most comfortable with. I don't even want them relegated to a "third" option because that in itself would be humiliating. Trans women belong in the women's washroom.
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/colorado-peeper-hid-portable-t...
BOULDER, Colo. — A Colorado man who hid in the tank of a portable toilet at a yoga festival to spy on women has been sentenced to three years in prison and 10 years of probation.
A man literally hid in a tank of shit to spy on women but you are telling me that men draw the line at dress-up. (At a yoga festival! You can't make this shit up.)
And you have a case where someone is violating a parole condition, and another which involves something illegal no matter who does it - taking photos. So that means it is open season to challenge anyone you think doesn't belong?
NO it doesn't mean it's open season to challenge trans women. It is reassurance that while predators might try to use the tactic it is unsuccessful and such men get caught because they do not pass as women trans or otherwise and their behavior gives them away.
Even though I know that men will go so far as to get into a porta-potty I'm not going to start checking for men in the porta-potty when at festivals. Peering into porta-potty tanks for men strikes me as hyper-vigilant. It still isn't a myth. It has happened.
Arguments rooted in fact are more convincing than exagerations. Saying that it is a myth that a man might dress up as a women to gain access to our spaces is an obvious exageration to anyone who appies the least bit of logic.
It is not justification to bar trans women. It is not justification to confront trans women. It is justification for treating the natural fears of women with respect and countering those fears with information rather than militant mocking.
.1) YES. The answer is YES. We can tell men dressed up as women apart from trans women. Trans women are NOT men dressed up as women. I live in Montreal. I have seen quite a few trans women who still have strong masculine features that they are unable to conceal. I can still tell the difference between a trans woman and a man, even if that man wore women's clothing and a wig. It isn't any one thing that makes it obvious the man isn't trans, but it is still obvious. In the way they move, the lack of manicure, hairy hands, attitude, even facial expression, something gives them away as faking it.
Interesting statement pondering. Would it be acceptable then for me to say that I can tell when someone is gay by how they act/dress/look? And I could tell when someone was actually gay vice faking being gay?
Offs paladin piss off.
Offs paladin piss off.
Please enlighten me.
Okay, back to the purse thing - it happened in Eaton’s, before removing the apostrophe.
So, the no apostrophe is a Quebec thing. According to the link below, apostrophes were removed from Eaton’s stores in the 1960s.
https://www.copyediting.com/the-legend-of-quebecs-war-on-apostrophes/#.XA_ePKTF2Ec
Now, let’s say you’re misremembering the apostrophe thing. Eaton’s went out of business in 1999.
You propose that a thing that happened once, somewhere between 20 and 50 years ago requires vigilance to this day, but a thing like a guy hiding in a portapotty once doesn’t. Because logic.
Since both circumstances appear to be vanishingly rare, I might suggest you spend your energy worrying about other things. Hanging on to the former worry would, IMO, reasonably be described as paranoia. If it isn’t, we need a new definition.
I think Pondering clarified herself quite well and that she is not being paranoid. Some would even consider it a wise precaution not to hang ones purse on the door hook. Awareness and paranoia are two totally different matters.
some would refer to it as"once bitten, twice shy".
Okay, there’s some prime shark-jumping in this thread.
You shouldn’t hang your purse on the hook in a bathroom stall because a man might grab it???? Are you fucking serious? Sorry, that’s utter nonsense. If you’ve got time to be that unreasonably paranoid, you aren’t busy enough.
I know very few women who are genuinely concerned about trans people being predators in disguise. If you are, you’re buying a bullshit line from Bigots R Us. Note I’m not calling the buyer of the line a bigot, just the nasty pieces of work who invented it. You’ll remember some of their other hits, like the Barbaric Practices Hotline.
And please note that I’m someone whose questioning of the biological basis for transgender would likely have me hounded as a TERF.
If we want to be taken seriously, we need to put this reactionary shit away.
There was a thread started by quizzical when Bill c 16 was being debated in the HoC where women and children's safety in public places was discussed extensively. Sineed was a solid contributor regarding arguments of concern around the safety and rights of women to refuse entry of men in women's spaces. There was specific reference to men in women's public washrooms, men in women's prison s, public changerooms, women's shelters, and women's spas.
These are very real issues. I do believe that quiz mentioned in this thread that she survived an attack herself in a woman's washroom.
so I don't think you need to start attacking these discussions as bigotry and shark jumping. At no time in that other thread on this topic did you make that claim that these issues are "paranoia" and "shark-jumping". Maybe it is more important to you who is raising these concerns rather than the subject itself. In fact, I find your attack on pondering to be most hypocritical.
from the thread tthat quizzical started:
bill c16 what say you?
Post #19 Sineed wrote:
"The trouble with this argument is it suggests that if gender non-conforming men say that they don't want to go to the bathroom with other men because they fear for their safety, they are victims of bigotry, and require legislative protection. But when women say they don't want men in their bathroom because they fear for their safety they are bigots.
This is how gender is a hierarchy, and how the fears of men are taken more seriously because they are the dominant sex caste. Men are massively more violent than women, and it's a trait linked to sex, not gender identity. This is not to say that all men are rapists and murderers - just that some are, and women have a right to women-only spaces as a consequence of this gendered pattern of violence. "
You had ample time to bring up this opinion in the other thread and yet you were conspicuous silent despite your contributions to that thread as well.
Interesting studies on toy preferences in (non-human) primates.
https://animalwise.org/2012/01/26/born-this-way-gender-based-toy-prefere...
In humans, studies have shown that boys gravitate strongly to stereotypically “masculine” toys such as trucks and other vehicles, while girls are less rigid, spending relatively equal amounts of time playing with boy-favored toys and with more traditionally “feminine” toys such as dolls. One hypothesis put forward to explain this difference has been that boys face greater societal discouragement when they play with “girl toys” than girls do in the reverse situation. The researchers figured that by looking at rhesus monkeys, who don’t face comparable social pressures to conform to gender roles, they might be able to illuminate biological influences on toy selection as well....
The results closely paralleled those found in human children. As with human boys, male rhesus monkeys clearly preferred wheeled toys over plush toys, interacting significantly more frequently and for long durations with the wheeled toys. Also mirroring human behavior, female rhesus monkeys were less specialized, playing with both plush and wheeled toys and not exhibiting significant preferences for one type over the other....
The researchers noted that these similarities show that distinct male and female toy preferences can arise in the absence of socialization pressures and hypothesized that “there are hormonally organized preferences for specific activities that shape preference for toys that facilitate these activities.”
Okay, there’s some prime shark-jumping in this thread.
You shouldn’t hang your purse on the hook in a bathroom stall because a man might grab it???? Are you fucking serious? Sorry, that’s utter nonsense. If you’ve got time to be that unreasonably paranoid, you aren’t busy enough.
I know very few women who are genuinely concerned about trans people being predators in disguise. If you are, you’re buying a bullshit line from Bigots R Us. Note I’m not calling the buyer of the line a bigot, just the nasty pieces of work who invented it. You’ll remember some of their other hits, like the Barbaric Practices Hotline.
And please note that I’m someone whose questioning of the biological basis for transgender would likely have me hounded as a TERF.
If we want to be taken seriously, we need to put this reactionary shit away.
There was a thread started by quizzical when Bill c 16 was being debated in the HoC where women and children's safety in public places was discussed extensively. Sineed was a solid contributor regarding arguments of concern around the safety and rights of women to refuse entry of men in women's spaces. There was specific reference to men in women's public washrooms, men in women's prison s, public changerooms, women's shelters, and women's spas.
These are very real issues. I do believe that quiz mentioned in this thread that she survived an attack herself in a woman's washroom.
so I don't think you need to start attacking these discussions as bigotry and shark jumping. At no time in that other thread on this topic did you make that claim that these issues are "paranoia" and "shark-jumping". Maybe it is more important to you who is raising these concerns rather than the subject itself. In fact, I find your attack on pondering to be most hypocritical.
from the thread tthat quizzical started:
bill c16 what say you?
Post #19 Sineed wrote:
"The trouble with this argument is it suggests that if gender non-conforming men say that they don't want to go to the bathroom with other men because they fear for their safety, they are victims of bigotry, and require legislative protection. But when women say they don't want men in their bathroom because they fear for their safety they are bigots.
This is how gender is a hierarchy, and how the fears of men are taken more seriously because they are the dominant sex caste. Men are massively more violent than women, and it's a trait linked to sex, not gender identity. This is not to say that all men are rapists and murderers - just that some are, and women have a right to women-only spaces as a consequence of this gendered pattern of violence. "
You had ample time to bring up this opinion in the other thread and yet you were conspicuous silent despite your contributions to that thread as well.
i was likely in Australia, I just recently got back. This may surprise you, but I don’t monitor every thread on the board and may or may not post, depending on whether I have time or the desire to engage.
I stand by my comment. Something that happened once at least twenty and possibly 40 or more years ago that makes you afraid to hang your purse because an abnormally tall man may enter the bathroom and steal it is frankly ridiculous.
Actually no. It was reported in the news more than forty years ago but that does not mean that it only happened once. Most thefts and crimes do not make it to the media.
Also, Pondering does not strike me as being paranoid about it. She is merely aware of what can happen.
About 45 years ago, my sister was walking across the university bridge in Saskatoon. She noticed people canoeing on the river. They were moving towards her. As they got closer, she leaned over the bridge to get a better look. As they made their way under the bridge she leaned so far forward to look down that she felt her glasses fall from her head. As she panicked to catch her glasses before they landed in the river she knocked her purse over and all the contents of her purse fell into the river along with her glasses. She lost her wallet, money, ID,everything including her expensive camera. Mom and Dad were angry with her.
Every time I walk the bridge, I remember my sister's experience. And anytime I lean over the railing to look down, I always check to make sure that my glasses are off my head and my belongings are securely clutched.. Maybe I overreact and some may think that I am paranoid. I simply think that I am being cautious and wise.
if a thief wanted to steal, a shopping mall washroom would be the ideal place. Until Pondering had mentioned it, it never occurred to me how easy it is to steal. Women in the stalls are in a vulnerable position. If they are busy, they are unable to just sit up an run out the stall. They have to finish what they are doing, then stand up and realign their clothing properly before they can leave. That delay factor makes the washroom an ideal place for thieves to target.
as Pondering already mentioned, it is not common but it does happen.
But what does the ease of theft in public washrooms have to do with people who are transgendered? And what does it have to do with the title of this thread, the biological differences between male and female brains?
[Supposedly zombies like eating brains?!?!?]]
Misfit, I admire your flexibility, but your story has some large differences to Pondering’s.
First of all, even most men can’t reach over a stall to take a purse off a hook. You would have to be well over 6 feet tall.
A stall is not that vulnerable. There’s a door, for pity’s sake.
Putting your purse on the floor is not only unhygienic, it makes it easier for anyone to reach under and grab.
The whole scenario is utterly stupid. If it isn’t an urban legend, it’s pretty much a one-off.
But what does the ease of theft in public washrooms have to do with people who are transgendered? And what does it have to do with the title of this thread, the biological differences between male and female brains? [Supposedly zombies like eating brains?!?!?]]
Absolutely nothing. Much like the worry that men are actively infiltrating women’s toilets.
Gee, I wonder how Quiz got assaulted by men in a woman's washroom!
@JKR, yes this is thread drift. This topic was covered extensively in another thread and as I said before that people were not dismissed as paranoid in that thread.
i encourage other people to comb back through that discussion rather than carry on with this thread drift.
Bull C 16 what say you?
PS.
it would be interesting to be a forensic scuba diver to see what all they find at the bottom of the river...
not just once.
ne time was at a rest area with lots of cubicles and showers for truckers. was in a cubicle not by the door entrance even when i heard outside door open. next thing I knew there was a pair of running shoes standing at my door and dude was peering in through crack. i just sat there. a waiting game ensued for about 20 mins then he left. i never stop at big rest areas anymore. would rather stop on side of road
another time a guy came into a bar bathroom cubicle right behind me and shut the door. i backed up against the wall by the toilet and kicked him everytime he tried to get close. screaming the whole time. no one could hear as there was a band. finally someone came in heard me screaming and went and got the bouncer.
another time happened when young and was with mom at Vancouver bus depot bathroom and a guy followed us in and tried to grab me. all i remember was my mom freaking and swinging her purse at him security came in and took him away.
if these things have happened to me they've happened to others. we just don't hear of them.
Can we, perhaps, lose the thread drift and get back to the actual topic? If no one has anything substantial to add on the actual subject, I'll close it.
I personally do not believe that there is a female and a male brain. I personally do not believe that it has anything to do with our brains at all. Indigenous cultures have referred to gay people as "two spirit". Whether we are religious, atheist, or anything else, no one can deny that we are living beings with a living energy. Transgender people would not be two-spirit but likely "other-spirit". I think that our gender identity is tied more to our soul or spirit which cannot be measured or touched by science in any way.
Transgender perceptions are very real and contrary to some radical feminist insight I do not believe that it is a delusion. I also object to the notion that it is a mental illness. The mental illness ideology is rooted in bias that non-transgender people are normal and that they are not. It is an unhealthy power dynamic that leaves transgender people in a vulnerable position that they are in need of "treatment" to remedy their "infliction" in any way when the real problem lies in our bigotry and hatred and refusal to accept them on equal terms.
Whenever there is medical labelling there is an underlying bias that is not healthy or safe for those who are on the receiving end of those medical labels.
For instance, there are some African cultures where when a loved one dies, the deceased person's soul enters the family member's body. White cultures do not have these rituals. Western based medicine is white and male dominated that when a psychiatrist would hear of these experiences they would dismiss it as schizophrenia or a delusion in need of chemical intervention. People have lost their jobs, reputations, and have been locked away in mental institutions and subjected to forced drugging and other treatments because of simple cultural insensitivity and ignorance.
Western based medicine is primitive, barbaric, and too narrow in scope. It is out of its league when dealing with diversity and matters like transgender issues.
The thing about "Western" medicine as opposed to the alternatives is that it actually works a good proportion of the time for a wide variety of things. We could have a long debate about where the line between what works and what's culturally insensitive, where that line blurs and where both loop into the other's territory, but that's not this thread.
Psychiatry has its issues. That, again, is another long thread to debate. Certainly, they know more and are much more effective than they were in decades past. Looking at it as the medical specialty dealing with the behavioural effects of neurological problems, it involves an organ we're just now learning a lot about. It's no surprise it's not as prosaic as going to visit the podiatrist.
I think any of the guff about souls and spirits just gets in the way of figuring out what to DO. We don't, at this point, know why some people are transgender. Maybe we will someday, but right now we don't. Maybe it's biological. Maybe it's psychological. Ultimately, though, that's less important than recognizing that some people are transgender, and that they deserve to be treated with dignity and have their human rights respected.
North American rigidity (and the resulting pearl-clutching) over toilets is a cultural thing and it needs to adapt to the realities that gender is not as hard and fast a concept as it once was. I'm fine with co-ed toilets. I've been in places where they have them, and it's fine. There hasn't been an upswing in assaults or over-the-door purse snatching. We can, really, just let people piss in peace without debating the merits of nature or nurture in regard to their identity vs their junk.
Interesting statement pondering. Would it be acceptable then for me to say that I can tell when someone is gay by how they act/dress/look? And I could tell when someone was actually gay vice faking being gay?
Some people do claim to have gaydar. I'm fairly certain gay people do have subtle means of recognizing each other. Nothing obvious like mentioning 420, just small things they pick up on then test until they are sure. So yeah, I think gay people can tell the difference between the real thing and a fake.
Assuming you are a straight male you can be fooled (as could a straight woman) because they aren't gay.
As a woman, I recognize women. I don't necessary consciously pick up on every detail but an example of what makes a man not look like a trans woman is eyebrows. Sure any man can pluck his eyebrows but if he is just dressing up to invade women's spaces, and otherwise living as a man, he probably won't. Not shaving your armpits and sometimes legs is a fad right now because some famous young stars aren't shaving and some feminists have always been that way. Unlikely a trans woman already dealing with masculine features she can't hide is going to have hairy armpits. It isn't just stuff like that. It's a collection of things not the least of which is the impact of hormones.
In one of the examples I used the woman called police because she thought he was wearing a disguise to rob a bank. She could tell he was wearing a wig. Like most women trans women usually don't wear wigs but if they do they wear them properly. The police didn't find him in the bank they found him loitering in the women's bathroom. Women, trans or otherwise don't loiter in the bathroom. They do their business, wash their hands and leave. Maybe do a lipstick check. He got caught because of appearance and behavior that is not consistent with women.
In the other case the man put down a bag in such a way that he could take pictures of a woman in another stall. No woman, trans or otherwise, is going to accidently put her bags down in such a way that intrudes on the next stall. It would be weird. Women don't normally put anything on the floor in a public toilet stall. His behavior was the tip off.
Men can walk right in woman's restrooms so if one wants to expose himself he doesn't have to pretend to be a woman to do it. If he is dressed up as a woman he doesn't intend on exposing himself because that would be a dead giveaway. Likewise if a woman's restroom is private enough to complete a rape without getting caught there is no need to dress up as a woman to get in.
An added point is that trans women have had the right to use women's restrooms for many years without leading to a noticable uptick in men playing dress-up to invade our facilities.
So I maintain there is good reason for women to have initial concern that men could take advantage, but when the subject is explored further concerns can be put to rest because there are major identifiable differences between men and trans women in appearance and behavior.
Many women have never knowingly met a trans woman so don't realize that they would be able to tell. Of course there are also women who are right wing or hyper-religious who will never come around to trans women or anyone else that doesn't conform. There are radical feminists that are extreme and rigid. But for women who can be swayed, reasoned argument is a better approach than attack.
I actually walked into a womens bathroom in Chapters once, thinking it was the mens. Went to a stall (not even noticing there were no urinals) did my buesiness came out, washed the hands then noticed a woman coming in and another leaving a stall. I remember thinking thats weird until I left and noticed the sign on the door
Thank you for the support everyone. Especially Meg. I really do appreciate it.
Thread drift on babble! Tell me it isn't so! I do want to get back to the link Cody provided but before that...
The following has nothing to do with trans people, it's just a general observation.
A lot of the harm done to women is psychological. We are usually not physically wounded even if we are raped. Peeping toms don't even touch us. What men do can make us feel like prey and lead to various degrees of hypervigilance. We are justifiably suspicious of the lengths some men will go to and how clever they can be. Most of us are warned about men from a young age and regularly read about men abusing women in various ways. Even if nothing has happened to us personally we can experience a lot of anxiety.
Running through a washroom grabbing purses has nothing to do with trans women so was not the best example. All I was saying is that it was a clever idea.
Getting into a porta-potty boggles the mind. What did he do? Wear a hazmat suit? He would have to go home after. I should think a person would stand out quite a bit after spending some time in a porta-potty tank. I can't understand it happening anywhere but I would expect a rock concert if anywhere (stoner pervert?), not a yoga festival, although I guess they are more flexible than most.
I don't even like being in the upper half of a porta-potty unless it's my only choice and nature calls. I can't imagine getting into the bottom of one. Come on, you have to laugh. While I maintain that men will go to extreme lengths this was beyond extreme and while it is certainly an original idea I wouldn't call it clever. I don't think even perverts will read that and think "Good idea!"
You think reaching over a stall door is perposterous but you don't wonder about the physical challenges of getting into a porta-potty tank? If I were asked as a triva question "which of these three things didn't happen" no matter what the other two choices were this would be high on the list of "didn't happen".
While I do remember reading/hearing about it for the sake of argument let's say you are right and a man would have to be freakishly tall. There is still no need to scoff as though I am posting in bad faith. People can be honestly wrong and hypervigilance is cause for reassurance not mocking.
Google tells me standard stall doors are 58". No information on installation but they are no more than about 14" off the ground by my guess. That brings us to 72" or 6 feet. If I raise my arm my elbow is several inches above my head. A man would have to be tall but not freakishly so to reach over the door. The hooks are installed quite high dead centre and a strap is easy to grab.
Co-ed bathrooms might be safer for everyone but I wouldn't want to use a stall or see men using urinals. Depending on how they are designed I have no problem with co-ed bathrooms.
Social-conditioning to cultural norms happens in all human groups. In Ontario it is legal not to wear a top. I agree in principle. I'm still not going to whip off my top in public no matter how hot it is. In isn't something worth investing effort into "getting over it".
The acceptance of trans women is a process that has made great strides and that is worth the effort of changing cultural norms and educating people in general regardless of the cause of transgenderism. I understand that such a radical change requires some millitancy to achieve. It doesn't have to include attacking other women whose life experience and cultural conditioning has led them to be worried about people with penises.
Whatever gender identity ends up being it is likely it is "all in our heads". Whatever prompts us to form attachments happens in the brain. Many mental disorders are neurological. They might all be. Neurological is physical.
All my life I have really wanted to be a believer and at times convinced myself intelligent design makes sense. Didn't work. I still think humans are animals, highly evolved, but still animals. We are born and we die. We get one life. It's on Earth. No such thing as a soul or indentity that exists separate from the body. If we are born with a gender identity there must be a physical cause and it most likely has to do with whatever is getting sent along neural pathways.
If someone is convinced that we do have a soul or something like that and that gender identity is attached or similar to it then proving gender identity is like proving God exists. It's a matter of faith.
Google tells me standard stall doors are 58". No information on installation but they are no more than about 14" off the ground by my guess. That brings us to 72" or 6 feet. If I raise my arm my elbow is several inches above my head. A man would have to be tall but not freakishly so to reach over the door. The hooks are installed quite high dead centre and a strap is easy to grab.
Six feet to the top of the door, then over the door, elbow is usually at or just over the top of your head with arm raised. Then bent, down again several inches with the aim of grabbing the purse. You're not going to reach the purse unless you're at least 6 feet tall, and probably over.
Average height for a man is 5'9".
And even then, you're going to have to have extremely good aim and move quickly - because I don't know about you, but nobody is grabbing my purse out of a stall without some resistance.
This is just such a dumb scenario to bother spinning in the first place, give it up already.
Anyway, your extreme examples are nothing but senseless fearmongering. We need to do better than that.
TB,
i see what you are saying to a point, but the white male bias is so pervasive. Susan Faludi twenty years ago addressed mysogynistic bias in psychiatry and how unscientific these mostly men were/are in conjuring up new disorders for the DSM.
maybe some day the medical community will find a part of the brain that regulates perception of gender, but for the time being I remain skeptical that they ever will.
Perhaps part of acceptance of transgenderism entails realizing hat some things may be innate within us and not due to some chemical disorder or malfunctioning part of the brain.
See, there's the problem. You assume they're looking for a "malfunction" of the brain. That's not it. It's whether that's a physical/chemical difference or not. It's not necessarily malfunction but a better understanding of the ways we function.
Is there a white male bias in psychiatry? Probably. And it's likely less pronounced now than it was when Susan Faludi was writing about it. Things don't change overnight - but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
It's also worth noting that women outnumber men in the number of graduates coming out of medical school. (although not necessarily among specialists)
Pondering wrote:
"If someone is convinced that we do have a soul or something like that and that gender identity is attached or similar to it then proving gender identity is like proving God exists. It's a matter of faith."
i do not want this to digress into a pseudo religious discussion about faith or souls or is there a god, and I am sorry if that is what people think that I said.
Indigenous cultures referred to gay people as "two-spirit". It is simple, it is concise, and it quite effectively explains what it really could be. Transgender identity could follow along those same lines. It is just a way of trying to convey that something is innate within us and doesn't really need a cause or a medical explanation. It just is.
In Quebec many men are shorter than 5'9". It still isn't freakish to find men over 6'. Boots add a couple of inches. I was in Alberta for awhile and on average men are taller, or were back then. It is no more freakish to be 6'4" than 5'2".
I really don't see how I am fear monguering when I have made it really clear that:
1) There are distinctive differences between trans women and men that are readily identified.
2) If a fake were to slip by their behavior would give them away.
3) The only "risk" would be of peeping Toms because there is no reason for a man to try to pass if his plan is more violent. (and again, the behavior is a dead giveway.)
4) Trans women have had access to women's bathrooms for years without any noticable impact.
Therefore barring trans women from women's bathrooms does not contribute to women's safety.
Why are you so invested in the claim that we don't need to fear men invading women's washrooms? Quizz has had bad luck in that regard but her experiences aren't weird or unusual.
I could understand your vehemence if I were arguing against trans women using women's facilities but I am not. I am arguing in favor of trans women, without question, using women's restrooms.
I am arguing that while women's fears are understandable they can be dispelled with information about the physical differences that exist without any surgery and by thinking more specifically about male behavior and what would prompt them or not prompt them to attempt impersonation.
I don't believe that men impersonating trans women is a threat because I thought it through in detail not because my fears were mocked or dismissed as ridiculous.
If what you are defending is the notion that trans women that haven't taken any hormones nor had any surgery can change their clothes and say "I am woman" then you are going too far (in my opinion).
Pondering wrote:
"If someone is convinced that we do have a soul or something like that and that gender identity is attached or similar to it then proving gender identity is like proving God exists. It's a matter of faith."
i do not want this to digress into a pseudo religious discussion about faith or souls or is there a god, and I am sorry if that is what people think that I said.
Indigenous cultures referred to gay people as "two-spirit". It is simple, it is concise, and it quite effectively explains what it really could be. Transgender identity could follow along those same lines. It is just a way of trying to convey that something is innate within us and doesn't really need a cause or a medical explanation. It just is.
No I didn't mean to infer that. I do like the two-spirit approach. Now we have gender fluid, gender queer, and androgynous too. Gender fluid in particular suggests to me we are not born gendered.
Trans women as I understand them do not consider themselves "two-spirit". They consider themselves women. I won't "believe" something like this as a condition at birth without science behind it but I have no trouble accepting trans women living fully as women.
https://animalwise.org/2012/01/26/born-this-way-gender-based-toy-prefere...
The researchers noted that these similarities show that distinct male and female toy preferences can arise in the absence of socialization pressures and hypothesized that “there are hormonally organized preferences for specific activities that shape preference for toys that facilitate these activities.”
Experiment 1
Ahhh, pop science, here we go again. When I first saw the chart I thought the monkey stats and human stats were reversed. It appears male monkeys are smarter than men, female humans are smarter than men and male monkeys, and female monkeys are the smartest of all!
Female monkeys are the least limited. They spend the closest to equal time on both types of toys. Female humans are next but they tend to favor the plush toys more than monkeys. Then male monkeys, and finally human males at the bottom of the heap. Here are the numbers.
Obviously I think male humans are smarter than monkeys so what is going on here? Humans were the most rigid in boys playing with trucks and girls with dolls. More so than monkeys. I would expect to discover the opposite. That human children would diversity more than monkeys because we are less subject to our instincts and have inquiring minds. In my opinion, the reason humans limit themselves more than monkeys is societal pressures and this experiment shows it.
Our human brains allow us to reject primal instincts. We spend far more time seated than our instincts would allow for. We eat differently than our instincts would guide us to.
The trucks are just things with moving parts, the wheels. Stick a wheel on top of a dolls head they would be just as interested. Levers, whatever. The attraction is moving parts. Males and females are both interested. The female reproductive system probably comes with the instinct to carry and to breast feed. It's a survival of the species thing. Male monkeys must have seen adult monkeys tending babies so are emulating them. The stuffed toys are primate shaped and have faces. If they were hard dolls or anything shaped like a primate with a face on it the results would probably be the same.
The problem arises when we try to extrapolate that into because women have natural instincts that means they must be best at it or they are supposed to do it. Men obviously have the same capacity to love and form attachments. The lack of instinct is easily overcome by intelligence because the act of caring for babies is not rocket science. It is easily learned. Our primal instincts in this regard are a vestige of our past as simpler primates in the time before baby formula.
My takeaway from this study is we should be encouraging boys more toward dolls to encourage development of their nurturing caring side creating a more balanced character that is more suited to modern life. We should stop pushing girls towards dolls and allow them to specialize less like female monkeys. Primal instincts don't need to be reinforced.
P.S. They are not gender based differences as the article states. They are sex based differences. They are not culturally influenced.
https://animalwise.org/2012/01/26/born-this-way-gender-based-toy-prefere...
Experiment 2 is even more startling suggesting female primates are the ones who introduced tool use and males emulated them.
The researchers hypothesized that “sex differences in stick-carrying are related to a greater female interest in infant care, with stick-carrying being a form of play-mothering (i.e. carrying sticks like mother chimpanzees carrying infants).” In support of this proposition, they pointed to several factors. First, they never observed stick carrying by any female who had already given birth; that is, stick-carrying ceased with motherhood. Also, the chimps regularly carried sticks into day nests where they “were sometimes seen to play casually with the stick in a manner that evoked maternal play.” Finally, nurturing behavior towards objects like sticks had previously been reported in captive chimps and documented on a couple of occasions in the wild.
I think that stick carrying is a primal instinct that is part of the female reproductive system connected with female monkeys carrying their young eventually. Because they carry a stick around so much eventually they poked something with it just because it was in their hand, not because they thought it was a good idea. It worked. Animals do what works.
Studies like these appear to be designed to reinforce cultural norms and popular theories through simplistic analysis. To me they indicate that we can easily overcome these gendered norms by helping children diversity their interests. We are doing the opposite. Human children are diversifying their activity less than monkeys.
These studies show that while females are instinctively roleplaying the nurturing role males also have the capacity to perform the same behaviors and do so without urging.
Studies like these appear to be designed to reinforce cultural norms and popular theories through simplistic analysis. To me they indicate that we can easily overcome these gendered norms by helping children diversity their interests.
To me it's saying we should send human children to the moon instead of monkeys.
