The witchhunt continues...

[SkepticThinker]

????? Good morning? Is this a strawman effort?

Yes, I'm pointing out your strawman effort.
Do you have a response?

 

[icehorse]

"Hirsutism, defined as excessive terminal hair growth, affects between 5 and 10 percent of women of reproductive age. Hirsutism may be the initial and possibly only sign of androgen excess, the cutaneous manifestations of which may also include acne and male-pattern balding (androgenetic alopecia). The pathophysiology and causes of androgen-mediated hair growth are reviewed here."

This is a good challenge for a utilitarian!

First off, I did a small amount of research, and it seems clear that hirsutism occurs across a wide spectrum. So for some it would be very subtle and for others it would be quite pronounced, correct? So let's say a subtle / minor case is a 1 out of 10 and a severe / extreme case is a 10 out of 10.

Next, we have to remember that modern society already makes a lot of difficult public policy decisions based on statistics, correct?

We have to acknowledge that often there are no perfect solutions that maximize everyone's well being. If we're being honest, we see that we've all decided (consciously or not), that we'll use statistics and that we'll accept imperfect solutions. For example, we agree that ALL young drivers should pay more for car insurance, even though SOME young drivers are very safe and are being unfairly lumped in with less safe young drivers. There are many such examples, correct?

==

You've showed us that hirsutism exists in 10% of the female population. Let's look at two extreme ways that could break down in detail. So of those 10%:

1 - Perhaps 90% have subtle, 1 of 10 conditions, and only 10% have extreme cases.
2 - Perhaps 10% have subtle cases, and 90% have extreme cases.

In the first case about 1% of the entire population have extreme cases.
In the second case, almost 10% of the entire population have extreme cases.

The utilitarian wants to know which is true, because they would have different solutions based on the reality.

We know that trans people are a tiny percentage of the population. Of the rest of the population, only 1% have extreme hirsutism, than we would probably not want to enact policies that adversely affect the vast majority of the population. If OTOH 10% have extreme hirsutism, our aggregate well being calculations would change and we'd come up with different solutions.

Again, we make these sorts of hard decisions all the time. Tall people suffer many inconveniences, so do short people, so do obese people. We usually make policies that work for "most".

 

[metis]

I think that person has no business being in the women's bathroom.

How about a unisex bathroom?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I clarified that.

So your definition was incomplete?

So am I white because I identify as white or because it is true?

Actually, depending on your background and the broader social context, you might not be considered white.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So is not using pronouns that are inconsistent with their anatomy harassment?

In what way can pronouns be "consistent with anatomy"? What does that even mean?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I am following science. You are not.

Those sorts are following the science as well, but more like as a Societ or Nazi would. Amd as "we" all know, the Soviets and Nazis didn't have science, they had a malignantly twisted, ideology approved, highly amd heavily bastardized form of science that, much like today's RW Conservative Christians, takes in what they like but rejects anything and everything that isn't congruent withthe party platform.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

That is not what I said at all. We are what is in our brains. I said that if my brain was in a woman's body I would be a woman.

Read the coloured statements -- they contradict one another. If you "are what is in your brain," and if that brain is then transferred to another body, what happened to who you were in that brain while it was in transit? Did it undergo a sex change?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Read the coloured statements -- they contradict one another. If you "are what is in your brain," and if that brain is then transferred to another body, what happened to who you were in that brain while it was in transit? Did it undergo a sex change?

No, but it will know being creeped out like never before and scream and plead for a way out once men start staring at him and treating him like a piece of meat, cry over having periods, shudder of feeling his breasts and resent them for getting in the way, and feel the depression of gender dysphoria as his male brain attempts to cope with a world that has summarily wrote him off as female and treats him that way.
But, that's for those of is who didn't recently hear a few terms and concepts that were misrepresented on the opinion driven "news" channels.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The utilitarian wants to know which is true, because they would have different solutions based on the reality.

No, the Utilitarian wants to maximize liberty and social wellbeing. They aren't splitting hairs to justify discrimination based on things people can't help.
Try staying with what you actually know because you keep misusing utilitarian.

 

[icehorse]

No, the Utilitarian wants to maximize liberty and social wellbeing. They aren't splitting hairs to justify discrimination based on things people can't help.
Try staying with what you actually know because you keep misusing utilitarian.

I think that between you and @ImmortalFlame you know just about everything about everything! You should give classes !

(Also, nice job of editing to change context! Superb!)

And finally, when I search on utilitarianism, here's the first definition I get:

1. the doctrine that actions are right if they are useful or for the benefit of a majority.
   • the doctrine that an action is right insofar as it promotes happiness, and that the greatest happiness of the greatest number should be the guiding principle of conduct.

That definition is quite different than yours. Perhaps you ought to go out and fix the internet?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think that between you and @ImmortalFlame you know just about everything about everything! You should give classes !

(Also, nice job of editing to change context! Superb!)

Yes, I sometimes edit posts to help clarify things. What of it?
And so what if I know more about this than you? Utilitarianism is the precursor to modern liberal and libertarian* philosophies. Knowing more than you doesn't make me a know it all. It just means there's a reason people have referred to me as a walking dictionary and encyclopedia (a common trait for those with Aspergers).
*Not to be confused with the American Libertarian party.

 

[icehorse]

Yes, I sometimes edit posts to help clarify things. What of it?
And so what if I know more about this than you? Utilitarianism is the precursor to modern liberal and libertarian* philosophies. Knowing more than you doesn't make me a know it all. It just means there's a reason people have referred to me as a walking dictionary and encyclopedia (a common trait for those with Aspergers).
*Not to be confused with the American Libertarian party.

See edits i just made to my earlier post, #450. (in this case, our posts were ships crossing in the night )

As for being a walking dictionary... perhaps you have a photogenic memory (spoonerism(?) intended). That would seem to be a wonderful gift, congrats.

But remembering what a book says, is not the same as understanding what the words mean.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But remembering what a book says, is not the same as understanding what the words mean.

No ****?!

 

[SomeRandom]

To be clear, I'm not advocating for a particular solution. I suspect the best answer is separate, individual "unisex" bathrooms, but I'm not sure.

My apologies, I must have misunderstood your position.

What I'm first trying to do is establish that we have a problem. You say I'm jumping at shadows? This isn't an idea I cooked up out of thin air. This is an issue I've had women tell me they're having. So whenever anyone on this thread says anything along the lines of "not a problem", my ears are deaf to that response, because it IS a problem for some women.

Okay, that is a fair point.
However, this really only started being an issue when hysteria was fuelled by political talking heads.
Trans folk have been using the facilities according to their gender identity for literally decades at this point. No one really seemed to notice. Until it became a political red button issue as of late. Hmm, strange that, no?

Obviously all concerns should be addressed and I’m not saying there aren’t valid concerns on both sides. But we should not be stoking the fires.
Women are already taught to be hyper aware of their public safety. And I think this can cause slight paranoia forming by default. And I think we need to implement more steps to curb this
It will take a hell of a long time, but younger Generations, hell even my generation (millennial) were trying to raise more awareness around such issues.

I remember going out with friends in my younger clubbing days. We would always rely on our girlfriends to keep an eye over us and block guys who might want to “make moves” on us.
Sometimes relying on a guy friend or an adjacent boyfriend for a bit of “muscle.” A bit of extra security, if you like.
This, I think, is largely the product of social conditioning. Is it logical behaviour? That’s up for interpretation, but it is a realistic reaction to our circumstances nonetheless.

Are clubs inherently dangerous places?
No, in and of themselves, they are merely meeting places where drinks and music are shared. Troublemakers are dealt with by security and usually things don’t get too out of hand.
Does this environment encourage bad behaviour and assaults?
Perhaps one could blame the alcohol on loosened liberations that may cause conditions that allow for this to occur. Should we ban alcohol at these clubs as a result? It does cause unnecessary drama, arguably.
Or perhaps we could try another solution. It might not work 100% of the time. But it could be more helpful in the long run

Teaching appropriate alcohol limits to minors, allowing them to openly discuss and flesh out issues relating to consent in such circumstances and try our best to create a more open and honest environment.

I won’t pretend that my culture (Aussie) is particularly great at alcohol etiquette. But I’m often astounded by some of the talks I’ve had with some Americans about this kind of thing. Because a lot of what I learnt in high school relating to such issues were foreign concepts to the other person. Perhaps this differs state to state, I don’t know. That’s my impression from other talks I’ve had with folks
Either way, like damn. The US makes us look like civilised people in comparison. No small feat lol

My point that I’m trying to make is that doing anything in public is technically dangerous. Women should arm themselves or go out with groups, if that makes them feel safer. But all of society should also be pitching in to make things better. It will never be a paradise, but we can at least try to implement nuanced strategies that address these things. And I don’t know if not allowing trans people to use the gender appropriate facilities is necessarily an overall good approach. Like I’ve already stated, there are all sorts of detrimental affects that have been recorded already. To cis people not even trans people (yet.)

 

[Kenny]

Uh, no. Same subject, Kenny. It was a direct response to your claim of "science XX XY - we follow the science."

That was in response to my question about how you know it's a "lie."

The only way you could know "it's a lie" is:

Do you check the chromosomes of every person you meet?
Do you take brain scans and analyze their DNA?
Do you measure their hormone levels?
Do you check their genitals?
Can you read peoples' minds?
If not, how are you determining it's a "lie?"

It's not all that surprising to me that you have zero response to that.

Change of subjects. I'm not surprised at all. But you set the record straight below... thank you.

I am following science. You are not.

So, you are saying that an XX is a female and an XY is a male. GREAT!

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Yes, you've said all of that already, and I responded with a few questions, all of which you ignored:

"How is that a lie to say you feel black?

I never said it was a lie to say I feel black. It would be a lie for someone to say I was black, or at least untrue.

And why would I disagree with you when you tell me how you feel? If you told me you were black knowing that you had no knowledge of any black ancestry, perhaps to fraudulently reap some benefit, that would be a lie. But telling me you feel black is different. Why are you so wedded to this word lie? Who's lying?"

I am not. It is untrue that I am black and it is untrue that transgender men are men. If you prefer untrue to lie, then ok. BUt it would be a lie for someone to say I am black when they know I am not black.

Here's my best guess why (and guessing people's motives out loud causes many to bristle, but I don't see why; apologies in advance if that's you, too). Answering them undermines your claim that these people are lying. If you care to modify that best guess, please do. It's just a best guess based on my understanding of human nature and your choice to answer none of it and repeat yourself, but if it's wrong, it's helpful to me to know why you think so.

I never said they were lying. Where did I say that? I said I would be lying if I said that a transgender woman is a woman. I never said how they feel is a lie. I have said that twice now.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

So your definition was incomplete?

Sure, but that is how conversations go, at least ones that are not all about gotcha.

Actually, depending on your background and the broader social context, you might not be considered white.

Not the point.

 

[Father Heathen]

science XX XY - we follow the science

...except when it comes to climate change, vaccinations, evolution, spherical earth, etc.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

In what way can pronouns be "consistent with anatomy"? What does that even mean?

Two X chromosomes = female, XY = male. Even if I don't know what a person is they are still one or the other (special cases aside).

 

[Subduction Zone]

I never said it was a lie to say I feel black. It would be a lie for someone to say I was black, or at least untrue.


I am not. It is untrue that I am black and it is untrue that transgender men are men. If you prefer untrue to lie, then ok. BUt it would be a lie for someone to say I am black when they know I am not black.


I never said they were lying. Where did I say that? I said I would be lying if I said that a transgender woman is a woman. I never said how they feel is a lie. I have said that twice now.

You do not seem to realize that the meaning of words can change over the years. The definition of man and woman has changed over the years. No one can force you to use the new definitions, but that does not make them lies