Transnegation Roundup/2020/08/06

forwomen.scot newsletter

Legal action, Speakers' Corner and Schools action (archive.org) (via)

This one is a cesspit...

Item 1

The embedded letter argues that the Scottish government is trying to "redefine 'woman'", and that they have no authority to do so.

“

Speaking for For Women Scotland, Marion Calder said: “It beggars belief that the Scottish Government has introduced new legislation that contravenes the very essence of what a ‘woman’ is in law. This is just the introduction of self-identification of sex by the back door.”
”

—2020-07-31 News Release – Pre-Action Letter

• I'm not sure this is an accurate representation of what we're asking for. Mainly, we want some aspects of gatekeeping to be reduced or eliminated.
  • The evidence supports the idea that this does less harm than forcing trans people to go through the levels of gatekeeping that presently exist.
  • The only counterpoints the faux "women's rights" advocates have offered is a few examples of violent crime being committed by trans women, not any statistics about rates of violence by trans women vs. cis women and cis men or studies on the likely effects of easing the gatekeeping restrictions.
    • It's also unclear whether the violent trans women had already been through the gatekeeping process, meaning that (as with many forms of punishment favored by the right) it's pretty much useless at accomplishing the stated goal.
• Note the absence of any link to the legislation being criticized, so we can see what it's really about. sourceless interpretation
• She says "the very essence of what a ‘woman’ is" – but declines to explain what that is ( semantic chameleon) or how the legislation is redefining it ( sourceless interpretation), so we can evaluate her argument for ourselves. This keeps happening.

Follow-up: https://twitter.com/tristangrayedi/status/1374334208710217731

Item 2

“

I am autistic, and I want to talk about the transitioning of children as the latest eugenics attack on our community.
”

—2020-08-02(?), unnamed speaker at Speakers' Corner

Wow, this is the abortion is black genocide argument all over again. No, autistic children are not being forcibly transitioned. Any child who wants to transition is likely to face deep opposition from all corners, fueled by bullshit like this; they are lucky if they at least have parental support.

They're right about Autism Speaks being problematic, however. They're also correct in observing the high overlap between autism and gender dysphoria -- which they paint, unambiguously, as evil transition clinics selecting out autistic kids for sterilization. hatemongery demonization

Item 3

“

It has been over a year since the Scottish Government announced that the transgender guidance in schools, produced by LGBT Youth, was to be replaced. We think it's disgraceful that this was not done by the promised date of Dec 2019, and it is unacceptable that the schools will returning next week with many still using guidance which the government acknowledges is not legal and risks excluding girls.
”

—forwomen.scot

At last, a link!

I don't really have time to dig into this properly, but at first glance it seems like the Scottish government agreed to update its Gender Recognition laws so as to better keep up with international progress, while still recognizing the need for women to be safe -- and forwomen.scot is praising this and asking why it is taking so long.

That doesn't seem like a bad thing. I've been fooled before...

...but I could probably spend a whole day trying to map this out. For now, I don't have time.

Nonexistent People Are Denying My Existence

13:55 @Alliewhowrites “Gah! I’m a woman - crew cut, lifelong lesbian. I could easily declare that what I am, and have always been, is something other, but that would be handing patriarchy the victory. Nah. I’m a woman. Expand your idea of what a woman is until it fits me too. Cos that’s what I am.”

Who and what is she arguing against? sourceless interpretation I keep seeing this argument in anti-trans threads, and I don't know what it is referring to. On what basis is someone denying she's a woman? I suspect it's a response to some straw man version of trans advocacy, but of course they love to keep things vague so they can always reinterpret themselves if cornered.

14:16 @ClaraenSc “They are all for expanding woman to embrace really feminine males while celebrating how many females want to escape from it. Of course, it makes perfect sense. Either you think of man/woman as the words to describe the human sexes or you colapse those into masc/fem."”

Who is "they"? What did they actually say? sourceless interpretation It certainly doesn't refer to trans people or trans activists. It's implied, yet again, that trans women are just "really feminine males", which is patently false.

14:26 @ClaraenSc “By saying being a man or a woman is a matter of a gender id they are forcing young ppl with no clear sense of identity to either identify or desidentify. In their quest for inclusivity, they are kicking young females out instead of allowing them time to find their footing.” This is blatantly counterfactual. Trans activists are trying to prevent exactly this – and this kind of hatemongery encourages it.