• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

What Is a Woman? The dispute between radical feminism and transgenderism.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Platy

Member

Wow !
Maybe because I already knew the trans side of each part ... the first time I read the article it was like "yeah ... interesting to see the history of those stupid ideas ..." and mixed with the TERFs being called a "hate group" in contrast to the fact that the Trans girl who lived with all those girls never had a problem painted me a "yeah ... terfs gonna terf" idea of the text more than it actualy is.

The text is MUCH worst than I imagined. My impression was that it was badly written, not that it was pushing a totaly pro terf agenda o_O

That is what I win for being optimistic, bad at english and reading texts while tired.
 

Amalthea

Banned
I think radicalism is a mental disease and as long as we act as if these people are healthy argumenters or respectable enemies (wheter they are Radfems, Jihadist, Nazis or Fundamentalists) the human race will continue to suffer. Why is it always that violent mentally ill people like psycho- or sociophats actually hold cultural power and exercise it by paradoxically calling minorities mentally sick and wrong?

This us not much different principally than how the most deranged and violent chimpanzee of its group rips out the weaker apes genitals and kills the young to prove his power. Yes we're apes too but aren't we better than this?
 

Yrael

Member

Thanks for posting this. The New Yorker piece really didn't write enough about this side of the story.

I don't want to come as rude but how is agender supposed to look like? Does the gender expression only goes by appearance like shoes or jeans? I am mean at some point you must have either a penis or a vagina, there are people with both but those are hermaphrodite, right?

My mind can't comprehend how a person with a neutral gender is supposed to look like. I know that in Christianity angels have no gender, but people don't consider themselves angels, right?

Or is the sex the part about the genitals but if someone is asexual this means that s/he is not feeling any sexual feelings, right? It's has nothing to do with the genitals. I am really confused by this picture.

So neither the sex, nor the expression have anything to do with the biological phenotypes? I think the biological part is where I am not sure.

For example: You can feel an asexual attraction to males, while yourself Identity as male but express yourself as female via dresses. But your genitals have no role? Your physical sex has no meaning for your gender? Did I understand that right?

Essentially, sex is meant to refer to your physical body. We typically assign labels "male" and "female" to people based on a set of characteristics like genitals, sex chromosomes and hormones (though in the strictest biological terms it's the size of gametes that determines the definition of "maleness" or "femaleness"), but this isn't black and white, and it's perfectly possible for people to be intersex. Gender identity refers to one's personal sense of being a man or a woman (or neither). This is different from gender expression, which refers to how one "acts" as a man or a woman, and tends to largely vary between cultures. For instance, it's possible for someone to be physically male and to identify as a man, but be very "feminine" in his behaviour, dress, etc.

I just wanted to say that I found this graphic to be extremely helpful, as I've always been confused at the notion of gender being both a societal construct and a biological one. If gender was just a societal construct, then do they just have a desire/need to have society respond to them a certain way? But then I've heard people here say that there is a physical discomfort with their body and it's biological sex, which is also hard to understand as a cis(?). Any way, this graphic was very helpful and I hope that this thread continues to deliver on interesting viewpoints.

Glad it was useful! :)
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
I call bullshit.

Either they don't know what they are doing and will regret this HUGELY later since they will get gender dysphoria, or they are having problems with their definition of choice and dysphoria.

The second might happend because of how it is not "omfg i am going to kill me NOW" for everyone as the media make people believe ... so a person with a lower dysphoria might think that the feeling must not be dysphoria


Edit : Also, if they do it by choice ... they are not trans, since kinda the DEFINITION of trans is being the gender you are not assigned ... so if they GET gender dysphoria by transitioning by choice ... that is where they become trans ?
*blue screen*

I mean I guess my various confusions over today are over how apparently a significant portion of the (okay, admittedly internet) trans community looks down on "truscum" who tie trans-ness to the physiological reality of dysphoria. That kind of threw me for a loop
 

Twiforce

Member
I mean I guess my various confusions over today are over how apparently a significant portion of the (okay, admittedly internet) trans community looks down on "truscum" who tie trans-ness to the physiological reality of dysphoria. That kind of threw me for a loop

Those people are a vocal minority that most of the trans community laughs at and hates.
 

Calibus

Member
In before Symphony of the -- nm.

But seriously, if you mentally identify yourself as a woman, you are a woman, regardless of what equipment you were born with. It amazes me how divisive (and violent) the feminist movement is within itself.
 

Mahadev

Member
Given that the only argument you've made so far is that you're deeply angry, and you say so, therefore it must be so, I don't think you have a lot of room to go picking at other people's sources. If you're going to make an argument, based on evidence, present some beyond your personal opinion, otherwise, you're just an angry guy with an axe to grind, who's wasting everyone's time. Mumei addressed you in a reasonable fashion, including producing actual external sources. If your anger and frustration makes it impossible for you to do the same, why would anyone take anything you say seriously? If you're correct, and the consensus is as overwhelming as you suggest, and neuroscience as robust as you believe, then proving your point should be child's play.

Please don't try to belittle my arguments by repeatedly calling me angry, I'm passionate about this particular subject, not angry. Mumei addressed my point with an extremely biased article that had terrible sources and imo I proved that, if anything the article proves what I was talking about regarding certain feminists and their relationship with science.

You can't prove that the science or technology in neuroscience is in infancy by quoting psychologists and you certainly can't ask me to prove a negative of something you're suggesting. If you have an actual study that suggests that neuroscience, especially neuroscience the last few years, is unable to find important differences between brains then I'll gladly concede my point.


Let's back up a bit. It's not clear to me what scientific research you think people here are denying. This all started when Yrael expressed skepticism of this: "Researchers concluded that when it comes to math, the brain of a 12-year-old girl resembles that of an 8-year-old boy."

So, first, it's not at all unreasonable to be skeptical of the results of a single study, absent replication, etc. But moving on, obviously that's not even a very science-y statement. This is at best the result of taking a good study and distilling it down to a very unhelpful sentence, and it's likely to be misleading for all kinds of reasons. If the study even talks in these terms, it's going to have some probably not terribly proven way of identifying the parts of the brain that are involved in doing math and an unintuitive metric for resemblance. Undoubtedly there's going to be a lot of variance within sexes. Some explanation is going to be needed for how, nevertheless, there doesn't appear to be a huge gap in actual mathematical ability between boys and girls of the same age (studies on this tend to be all over the place, suggesting that innate brain differences can't be making that big of a difference on something so broad as "math" in general). Of particular relevance to this topic, statements like the one above assume that boys and girls are natural groupings of similar children; it can be quite misleading to talk this way if it's possible that some children who look like girls actually have brains which are very typical of boys, even if it is the case that the brains of most girls differ from the brains of most boys in ways which are important to explaining gender identity.

But, really, I think it'd be helpful if you would point to specific instances of science denial which trouble you. Like, which statements in the article Mumei links do you find to be very unreasonable? As-is, you sort of come across as just wanting to rant about unspecified transgressions by unnamed feminists.


I don't see it that way and in my experience it isn't that way. There's a vast difference between being naturally skeptical of anything, even science, and purposely skeptical of science because it doesn't agree with certain ideals people have. What Yrael did imo is the usual casting of doubt against science like certain groups usually do when science reveals truths they don't like. In two consecutive posts he was talking about not taking it as gospel (which is the usual argument I hear from Christians, the incomprehensible "science is your religion") because there are flaws while mentioning the usual social conditioning argument as an alternative explanation. You might think this is just a poster being skeptical but I disagree, when a person is being particularly skeptical about a science that contradicts his ideology, he not really being skeptical he's just being biased. Similar "skepticism" exists amongst many Christians and climate change deniers but I rarely see people here agreeing with it.

This isn't just about the particular study or math, there have been multiple studies explaining the many differences. Even if this one was wrong I seriously doubt all the other ones are wrong too.

And I'm not ranting about the transgression of unnamed feminists, what Mumei posted in a prime and specific example of feminists trying to discredit neuroscience. The fact that the article tries to discredit neuroscience by quoting mainly psychologists a completely different and far less scientific field is proof enough that it's way too biased and has a specific purpose which is the casting of doubt just for the purpose of discrediting an entire science.

Sorry for the long post btw guys, I'm sure noone will read it but I had to make it.
 

Yrael

Member
What Yrael did imo is the usual casting of doubt against science like certain groups usually do when science reveals truths they don't like. In two consecutive posts she was talking about not taking it as gospel (which is the usual argument I hear from Christians, the incomprehensible "science is your religion") because there are flaws while mentioning the usual social conditioning argument as an alternative explanation. You might think this is just a poster being skeptical but I disagree, when a person is being particularly skeptical about a science that contradicts her ideology, she not really being skeptical she's just being biased. Similar "skepticism" exists amongst many Christians and climate change deniers but I rarely see people here agreeing with it.

You're being highly uncharitable and continuing to misread me. It's pretty insulting to be honest, especially when I've just explained that I have a background in science. By saying "don't take it as gospel," I meant "the studies on this aren't conclusive yet," not "science is a religion."

And you also haven't yet proven a single thing, but merely repeated over and over again that anyone who points out potential flaws in assumptions drawn from particular neurological studies, or expresses doubt on an assertion that a major skill gap exists between men and women, must be biased. I've already posted a link to one study that studied cross-national patterns of mathematical achievement and found no appreciable evidence for an innate difference in the mathematical ability of boys and girls. Here is another. Studies like these are a big reason why I'm sceptical of hard-wired difference in maths ability.
 

Mahadev

Member
You're being highly uncharitable and continuing to misread me. It's pretty insulting to be honest, especially when I've just explained that I have a background in science. By saying "don't take it as gospel," I meant "the studies on this aren't conclusive yet," not "science is a religion."

And you also haven't yet proven a single thing, but merely repeated over and over again that anyone who points out potential flaws in assumptions drawn from particular neurological studies, or expresses doubt on an assertion that a major skill gap exists between men and women, must be biased. I've already posted a link to one study that studied cross-national patterns of mathematical achievement and found no appreciable evidence for an innate difference in the mathematical ability of boys and girls. Here is another. Studies like these are a big reason why I'm sceptical of hard-wired difference in maths ability.

Although it's not updated with the latest studies who also agree with the consensus, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_sex_differences

I'm not talking about a "major gap" in specific skills, why are you focusing only in one study, I'm talking about multiple differences in many parts of the brain which make men and women think, perceive and act differently. Even if half the neuroscientists in the world are wrong the other half would still agree that this

Radical feminists reject the notion of a “female brain.” They believe that if women think and act differently from men it’s because society forces them to, requiring them to be sexually attractive, nurturing, and deferential.

is complete bullshit.
 

Yrael

Member
Although it's not updated with the latest studies who also agree with the consensus, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_sex_differences

I'm not talking about a "major gap" in specific skills, why are you focusing only in one study, I'm talking about multiple differences in many parts of the brain which make men and women think, perceive and act differently. Even if half the neuroscientists in the world are wrong the other half would still agree that this



is complete bullshit.

Well, I've already stressed that I'm well aware of physical differences in structure between male and female brains, and even pointed to research addressing the link between brain structure and gender identity in trans people:

Sure, but the conclusions of researchers may not always take into account social conditioning and neurological plasticity (or in some cases are methodologically flawed). The thread Mumei just linked to goes into more detail about the ways in which brain differences do not always correlate to behavioural differences. The idea that there is a four year gap between the "mental ages" of boys and girls when it comes to maths hasn't been rigorously confirmed, and stands at odds with numerous other studies, including this worldwide study which not only found very few gender differences in maths ability but also showed that when differences do occur they tend to correlate with disparities in opportunity and education between the sexes, which is hardly surprising. I don't really dispute that there are, on average, differences observed between male and female brains; that's pretty clear. But I'm very, very iffy about the claims that these are indicative of hard-wired sex-based differences in ability in maths, music, art, language, etc. That's the point I was really disputing (which is starting to go off topic from the subject of this thread).

To be honest, I don't know what in particular will lead to someone's unique gender identity, and I don't believe anyone does with 100% certainty at this stage. My guess is that the biological side of things doesn't come down to any one single factor, but would be the result of a rather more complex interplay between hormones and brain development. There was a study in 2008 by Swaab and Garcia-Falgueras that claimed to find a relationship between gender identity and the anterior hypothalamus, but this isn't the sole focus of research:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18980961

I've been discussing the issue of sex-based differences in maths ability in each of my responses because, well, that just so happened to be the focus of my skepticism in my first couple of posts and the reason why I'm cautious when I see a link posted that makes very bold claims like there being a four year gap in ability – in my view that's actually some pretty bad science. (I'm additionally mindful that in such a contentious field of research there's a strong potential for bias in the opposite direction that you claim, in the sense that researchers can favour explanations that fit their own worldview; there's an unfortunate history of supposedly impartial research being used to back up some rather racist and sexist ideas.)

Regarding that particular quote about being a female brain leading to someone being "nurturing" and "deferential," well, I certainly don't agree with the view that there's no such thing as an innate gender identity (and the way TERFs use that belief to harass and exclude trans people is really vile). Although I can't say with complete accuracy what is biological and what is cultural (no-one can, currently, as I said) though, I'm definitely inclined to think that a large part of the way men and women behave does come down to social factors (particularly the part about being "deferential," given the fact that discrimination against women is still alive and kicking!).
 

Moff

Member
I think it is hoped that an article expressed in a 'reasonable' fashion would sway minds better than being clear about what bigots they are.

This is what true hate looks like.

fascinating read, it looks lik their hate for transgender people simply stems from their extreme overall hate for men.
is it offensive so assume that many or most of terf are lesbians? because I cant imagine them having loving relations with a man.
this would weird me out even more, because I always assumed lesbians, gays and transgender people are somewhat connected. but obviously terf are extreme radicals.
 
I think it is hoped that an article expressed in a 'reasonable' fashion would sway minds better than being clear about what bigots they are.

This is what true hate looks like.
WhiteTiger: If we’re going that road, why not just cull boy babies for awhile? Re-establish a sane balance. Then we can start selective breeding programs for donor males… [To cull means to reduce the population of by selective slaughter.]

I see.
 

kirblar

Member
fascinating read, it looks lik their hate for transgender people simply stems from their extreme overall hate for men.
is it offensive so assume that many or most of terf are lesbians? because I cant imagine them having loving relations with a man.
this would weird me out even more, because I always assumed lesbians, gays and transgender people are somewhat connected. but obviously terf are extreme radicals.
Politically, gay/lesbians are aligned because they have the same issues. Socially/Culturally, they operate in two radically different spheres.
 
I read the whole OP, and got quite annoyed as my fiancee is a transwoman and I was getting ready to write an angry post, but then:

A MISERABLE LITTLE PILE OF SECRETS

BUT ENOUGH TALK, HAVE AT YOU!

Thank you Dracula, I can't stop laughing haha.


I think it is hoped that an article expressed in a 'reasonable' fashion would sway minds better than being clear about what bigots they are.

This is what true hate looks like.

How bad could this really be? let's se....

MaggieH: [Males are] Fucking mutants. When will there ever be a male-only deadly disease taking over the earth to put them out of their misery, huh?

MaggieH: There are times when I just want all men dead right now. Sometimes I really, really daydream about a virus that would suddenly take over the earth and that would kill all males (also that would make them well suffer before they die), as well as give us the possibility to reproduce through parthenogenesis… Oh, my Goddess, I want men to be So. Fucking. Dead. Right now!!!
HOOOOOOLLLY FUCK.
 
This is some seriously creepy shit. Those people should be locked up for the safety of society. They sound dangerous.

Luckynkl: So if we can come up with a biological weapon that can be ingested and kill off the Y Chromosome in a man’s sperm count, we’re almost home. We can all get hired as waitresses or chefs or work at McDonald’s and sprinkle it into the food or something… It’s not a quick solution. It will take about 2 generations to cull males. But it will work.

They sounds pretty dangerous to me.
 

Twiforce

Member
Which are the minority? I'm still curious about this

Ah, sorry. The minority are the people who believe in "truscum" and hate those who tie transness to physical dysphoria. There's a small (and insane) Tumblr culture of people who believe that being trans is a choice and that cis people are usually wrong for "choosing" to be cis. They have a tendency to make up fake genders unique to them to feel special, and they speak against typical trans people (like myself) for feeling physical dysphoria and recognizing i didn't choose this.
 
Those aren't even the worst ones. Check this shit.

Femitheist Divine:

All Men Should Be Castrated? – International “Castration Day”

Some Feminists have considered this as an option. It is highly controversial.

Allow me to introduce myself…

My name is Krista, otherwise known as “The Femitheist”. I am a female, a feminist, and someone who believes strongly in True Equality.

Now, I will begin explaining this entry before I post the actual article… for your discussion, of course.

Women MUST and WILL have equality, and this is the ONLY way to achieve TRUE equality. The testicles of all males, which produce the majority of their testosterone, are the primary cause of their violent behavior. The testicles also attribute greatly to many of the health problems men experience later in life (such as prostate cancer and, of course, testicular cancer).

~:The Solution… International Castration Day.:~

It is my belief (which I consider factual based on my research) that all men SHOULD be castrated. Not only for their own safety, but for the safety of all innocent women and children.

And, to achieve this…

The entire world should have an international holiday known as: “Castration Day”

Males of all ages will be brought to the public squares of their cities nude, to stand together in a circle, as they await castration by a woman known as “The Castrator”, who will be a woman chosen from the public much like a juror.

Girls of all ages will attend, lining the streets to cheer and applaud the males as they join the rest of civilized society.

It will be a free vacation for any working woman. And, young girls will be able to leave school to attend this glorious ceremony.

The males will then have one hour to get to know their Castrator. Their female “spouse” will also be able to choose whether or not they would like to milk the male in order to retain a sperm sample.

If the male is too young for a “spouse”, their mother or closest female relative will decide.

After this, the men will be given anesthetics. They will be placed on a table, where their Castrator will then slice open their ball-sack, remove their testicles, and the excess skin, stitch them up and clean them up.

They will be given thirty minutes to rest after the procedure.

Once the males have all been castrated, they will be grouped together again for one last look before walking nude back to their homes.

The women will then return to their jobs, schools, et cetera, and rejoice in the completion of yet another successful ceremony.

Any man who tries to evade this holiday, “Castration Day”, should be murdered wherever they
are found (treated as a criminal, as it will be a crime not to attend). Or, forced to attend.
Regardless of age.

Any woman who disagrees should be provided therapy in order to free her from misogynistic indoctrination.

This holiday should replace the day known currently as “Father’s Day”.

If this practice were adopted officially all across the world, all war, crime, and violence would end.

We would have a true Eutopia, where peace reigns, and men do only what they exist for…

This is some heavy fantasy shit for her right here.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Ah, sorry. The minority are the people who believe in "truscum" and hate those who tie transness to physical dysphoria. There's a small (and insane) Tumblr culture of people who believe that being trans is a choice and that cis people are usually wrong for "choosing" to be cis. They have a tendency to make up fake genders unique to them to feel special, and they speak against typical trans people (like myself) for feeling physical dysphoria and recognizing i didn't choose this.

Ah, okay, gotcha. I got my terms mixed around I think, which only added to the confusion. Thanks!
 

Moff

Member
Those aren't even the worst ones. Check this shit.



This is some heavy fantasy shit for her right here.
yeah I wanted to post that one, too. absolutely amazing. I read though the whole section laughing, really, what a bunch of psychopaths. there is nothing feminist about them.

they probably dont even realize how extremely violent, sexist and aggressive they are. wich are the reasons why they hate men in the first place.
 

Reishiki

Banned
Ah, sorry. The minority are the people who believe in "truscum" and hate those who tie transness to physical dysphoria. There's a small (and insane) Tumblr culture of people who believe that being trans is a choice and that cis people are usually wrong for "choosing" to be cis. They have a tendency to make up fake genders unique to them to feel special, and they speak against typical trans people (like myself) for feeling physical dysphoria and recognizing i didn't choose this.

These people really annoy me as well.

I did not 'choose' to be trans, and me transitioning is hardly 'upholding the gender binary'. Don't get me wrong here, I'm all for alternative expressions of gender, but that does not cover throwing slurs at people suffering from GID.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom