Funkstain wrote:Appeals to expertise are completely irrelevant to my main point. Which is that bollocksing on about SCIENCE in all caps is missing the point.
Understand that people have forever felt this way and need to be accommodated if you believe in freedom of expression and ways of life. Deal with that first then deal with the consequences. Who gives a fuck about Dawkins
Funkstain wrote:FWIW my highly personal answers to the above are:
- who cares it's sports entertainment. maybe come up with a new classification if you have to? measure testosterone levels or something and classify athletes like that. be more nuanced: this surely affects some sports more than others (team vs individuals etc)
- this doesn't seem like the massive problem it's made out to be. how many predatory men, genuinely will go through with whatever steps they need to to transition (after all a legal declaration is more than a signed document: it has huge impacts on all areas of bureaucratic and personal life!)? what about the incredibly large amount of predatory men who, you know, don't transition in order to cause harm to women? is this really the biggest problem, or even a big problem, or even actually a problem for women? what are you imagining - thousands of men transitioning and then what, being allowed into refuges somehow?
- let anyone fancy anyone they like. no-one is under obligation to fancy someone who used to have a penis. don't be mean about it, but also do you
Let anyone say they are who / what they say they are. Now deal with the consequences
DrewMerson wrote:How many sexual assaults and rapes of trans women forced to use male spaces are you going to accept?
This is the actual, it’s really happening, consequences of your position.
Funkstain wrote:Haha polls now Jesus Christ
The fuckers in this country voted for brexit because they are retarded racists and somehow I need to listen to their opinions on something as alien to them as letting people live their lives??
Brooks wrote:This is the actual, it’s really happening, consequences of your position.
This is going to need a loooot of evidence that floats above and beyond the typical abuse of humans e.g. sticking them in fucking jail for a lot things, and then you're going to need to perform some interesting utilitarian aikido to demonstrate it's a worse outcome than the alternatives.
Brooks wrote:I do have a very serious question: Why are so many people being jailed at all? I don't accept the premise that We Must Solve This on the terms of a fucking dismal thing to do to people in the first place.
. And given you’re not going to change that in the next couple of months perhaps we should deal with the actual issue at hand.
Brooks wrote:. And given you’re not going to change that in the next couple of months perhaps we should deal with the actual issue at hand.
And so I just abandon my position because it's inconvenient for your framing? The fuck I will. The issue at hand is what I say it is.
You're not changing shit in the next couple months either so...
My question was what other areas of feminist struggle do you take such an interest (the same level of interest) in.Knight wrote:And to the person who asked me if my feminists concerns go beyond trans issues, feel free to read the book because that’s the last book by a feminist and about feminism I read.
JonB wrote:My question was what other areas of feminist struggle do you take such an interest (the same level of interest) in.Knight wrote:And to the person who asked me if my feminists concerns go beyond trans issues, feel free to read the book because that’s the last book by a feminist and about feminism I read.
Since the subject had moved to prisons now, for instance, what other aspects of women's safety in prisons bothers you as greatly as the trans issue? I'm surprised that you aren't more on board with Brooks' point, say, about prioritising prison reform in general.
Funkstain wrote:It's aaalllllmost like he wants to frame the conversation / discussion in a way which favours a particular argument (trans women aren't simply women by declaration, because here are some problems with that) rather than a wider discussion which looks at progressivism and positive change and removes many of those problems, because suddenly the argument isn't there to be won (I'm a feminist me)
like with the FFP stuff in the sports thread but in reverse: "no no what I MEANT was, it's not about Liverpool being abused by an upstart team taking advantage of laws and rules meant to protect vulnerable teams, it's about football should be completely re-invented and then stupid corrupt shit like FFP wouldn't be taken advantage of by abusive Chelsea"
apply the same thinking to trans rights Knight and you'll see the light
Knight wrote:I was answering your question by pointing you to an area of feminist thought I’d taken an interest in by reading a book. And the very reason to care about the trans issue for prisons is because female prisoners are the most vulnerable women in society who most struggle to have a voice for themselves. And yes, fewer female prisoners in prison would almost certainly be a good thing. But the actual issue would still remain - will the authorities house penis endowed individuals in female prisons. ‘Less prisoners’ doesn’t answer that question.My question was what other areas of feminist struggle do you take such an interest (the same level of interest) in. Since the subject had moved to prisons now, for instance, what other aspects of women's safety in prisons bothers you as greatly as the trans issue? I'm surprised that you aren't more on board with Brooks' point, say, about prioritising prison reform in general.And to the person who asked me if my feminists concerns go beyond trans issues, feel free to read the book because that’s the last book by a feminist and about feminism I read.
RedDave2 wrote:Can I request that the thread title is changed to "what about the penis?"
Yeah, exactly the point. You have to ask why isn't this a discussion about safety in women's prisons? You could include issues with trans prisoners in that (and as far as I've seen, trans people aren't arguing that someone with a penis convicted of rape should be placed in a female prison population anyway), but it would be a minor concern next to, say, the mental health problems and suicide rates which are a much larger issue.tin_robot wrote:The point though, as others have said, many times, is that the issue here is that we completely fail to protect prisoners - irrespective of genitalia - and that "what about the penis?" is a largely irrelevant distraction from "why aren't we keeping prisoners safe?". (One which is based on assumptions about predatory behaviours that aren't necessarily true.) If you have a prison in which people are able to readily sexually assault other inmates you've got a broken prison system irrespective of which part of their body they used to do it.
Still, I get it. Many women are understandably worried about what it means to be locked in a space with someone with a penis - usually because their own personal experience has given them bloody good reason to. But... It's probably worth stopping for a moment to consider that sexual violence against other inmates is higher in (biological) female prisons, than in male prisons.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!