Brooks wrote:

I consider any gender presentation a choice, and a fucking interesting one at that. I think I'd rather have the apparatus around to cope with bad choices than prevent those choice up front in this case, since they don't seem to have massive structural repercussions right now. Let 1000 gend0rs bloom.

Agreed.
I know why some doctors advocate to treat gender dysphoria pre puberty: they can begin hormone treatment before gender phenotype is set into stone. Body hair, manly cheekbones, breasts, a deep manly voice, secondary sex features in general, it makes for a more convincing sex transition. Phenotypic at least.

But like you mentioned, I too believe sexual presentation to be a choice and forcing a child to make that choice so early in life is a bit much. We don't trust kids to drive, we don't trust kids to vote yet we trust kids on gender identity when they want to switch?

By the by, I also know a trans guy. His family and my girls family have been friends for aeons. She used to play at his house when he was still a little girl. Nice chap and a very gentle soul.

That sounds like Jeremy Irons asking "Could a father not marry his son?"

davyK wrote:

What would the Wimbledon committee do if Andy Murray turned up in a dress, saying he identified as a woman?   That could extend his career a tad.

Sports in general could find this problematic I feel.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.wtatennis.com/sites/default/files/wta_gender_participation_policy.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi6zKLGvvLfAhUE1hoKHY2lBPoQFjACegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw14kwavbo-DKLRecYVzzXZy

I think competetive sports are probably the most difficult aspect of the debate. 

It's tricky because really it's not even about transgender people competing, it's the specific issue of post-puberty male athletes who identify as female.

I don't think anyone would have an issue if someone who is identifying as male wants to compete in male sports, nor presumably would anyone have an issue if someone had transitioned to female either during or by putting off puberty and was then taking female hormones as (someone page Dr Tin to confirm) they wouldn't have developed typical male musculature and bone density and the all other guff that gives males in most cases a a physical advantage. 

Testosterone in the blood would definitely be one way, but if you were already a big dude before you transitioned, then you're still going to have that muscle mass available for a bit even with the lowered testosterone. 

Maybe one workable method is that all trans athletes have to serve a specified amount of time after transitioning before they can compete, in addition to then meeting medical requirements for maximum levels of testosterone.

It all feels a bit horribly one sided though in it's weighting towards men who identify as women and still want to compete and it doesn't really help get rid of the RIDICULOUS notion some people have that there are people who being of sound mind, would choose to transition to female and take all of the societal bullshit that comes with that in order to win at sports.

EDIT: Just went and read up and apparently you already have to pass a year of hormone treatment before you can compete after transitioning to female at least for the NCAA, so that's already a thing. So, iunno.

Sadly Poppo, you are correct, also sadly, smdh for all the people who are still informed today by the things they heard nearly 40 years ago.

I can remember this lady from my teen years. She won the 400m and 800m in the 1st World Athletics Championships. 

Her 800m WR from 1983 still stands.

Jarmila Kratochvílová

https://l7.alamy.com/zooms/d6049e1e72db43be86f8ecc5bcb6e575/jarmila-kratochvilova-cze-competing-in-the-1983-world-athletics-championships-dgn1m0.jpg

That is quite the camel toe.

You'll note one of the links is to a FB post where he complains about immigrant women, who he doesn't seem to like much at all.

But he is ok with walking into a wax place and ask a Muslim female attendant for a wax, and suing her when she says no

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.dailycaller.com/2018/10/23/opinion-report-from-canada

Roujin wrote:

The problem appears to be users and moderators having shitty, poorly thought out reacts to events on social media.

There is always a tiny minority of people who either through mental illness or deliberate criminal intent will abuse a system. What are we saying here? That because people on Twitter just shoot their mouths off or get busy with the banhammer without thinking or reading properly when they see something that on the surface looks like transgender discrimination that there is a problem with trans access to female only spaces because poorly informed trans activitists on Twitter are erroneously shutting down debates?

I'm saying there should be careful consideration before accepting self-ID as the only test of gender for access to female only spaces. Men are more likely to predate on women and young girls.

There are people online who leap to defend people like this guy as a victim, btw. For them questioning = phobia.

This includes some people ITT who have decided that certain public figures are transphobes /terfs just for questioning.

https://youtu.be/50Sv5LpB1oE

A more accessible version of some of the weirder posts by this person.

I've not seen any misgendering ITT. Where is it?

nick_md wrote:

"This guy has mental health issues" - you're referring to someone who identifies as a trans woman, I thought? Whether you like this person or not, if they see themselves as a woman then I feel (for non official purposes such as referring to them) you may as well use the female pronouns etc. I mean, why wouldn't you? What difference does it make? This isn't determining whether they get access to xyz.

One of the articles you linked even states "misgendering" as "correctly identifying sex" when it's pretty widely accepted that gender is a construct and separate from sex.

I've been reading whilst I'm working though so apologies if I've mistaken something.

I mean, the article is tagged with 'autogynephilia' which is a pretty debated term in itself, I thought.

Well that's true, I generally use people's preferred pronouns and I would to this guy's face. (No need to be rude) But based on the evidence, (and unlike Stephanie what's her name, who while she is clearly a shyster I have no evidence of male predation and pathological abuse of gender identification), I, like terfs, decided to refer to him to make clear what I think of his claim to having transitioned. Im clear that this is a cross dressing guy who seems very interested in young women, tampons, and periods.

I just linked to a site which has all the links in one place. Do I need to say that isn't an endorsement of the views of the author? I don't know what they are.

Gender is indeed a construct. That is a central feminist message. Sex is not a construct, it is biological. It is entirely real, though biology is such that people can fall through dimorphic cracks, so to speak.

What terfs say is sex is real and society has developed cultural norms around it. We should be careful ditching them altogether. Because there are spaces where women feel safe around other women. A person who used to be a man and now says they're a woman should not, ipso facto, have unlimited access to those spaces. A GRC would work. Self ID is open to abuse. Agreed or not?

Does asking this question make one transphobic?

In sensible circles, no.

Probably don't ask it on Twitter.

Why isn't the money coming from central government for this given the size of the payment required???

Oh noes we fucked up pay, time to sell off revenue generating assets that could pay off the funds loaned from central govt over time???

Inb4 obvious link between the new operator and someone at the council

Roujin wrote:

How do TERFs square things like unisex toilets or changing spaces in their access to spaces debates?

Genuinely curious.

The Understudy bar at the NT for example has a pretty big unisex only toilet facility and it works really well as far as i can tell. No urinals, all cubicles are full height fully enclosed. Security are also able to easily pop in and keep an eye on it during peak times.

I imagine they don't object - customer decides. Unisex toilets tend to be single person places, right.

Don't generally have any time for toilet-based arguments. Some people say they're soundproofed and people don't feel safe... I dunno

Ditto women only shortlists etc ... Well, it's up to the electorate.

Swimming pools, gym changing rooms, women's spaces more generally, I have sympathy for social conservatives.

As for the more extreme forms of trans activism (eg lesbians who won't date trans are transphobes, that kinda thing) I think they clearly can fuck off

Thanks for that business clarification there ozno, ta! What a fucking shit sandwich. I presume most county councils are therefore corporations? What is the reasoning for that? Or is it something to do with devolved powers to Scotland from Westminster? Fucking sucks either way.