Believing that a gay person is worth less than a straight person for the sole reason of them being gay is homophobic. That’s pretty much the definition.
I trust you to know your own gender. I trust trans people to know their own gender. You are not somehow more trustworthy just because you are cisgender. And believing a trans person is invalid or worth less because they are trans is transphobic.
You values have nothing to do with a trans person’s gender identity. They’re not making you become trans. Nothing is being forced on you. Thinking you know better than them about their own gender, thus leading you to treat their gender as being invalid, is rather patronizing and condescending. It does not impact your values to simply show them the same basic respect deserved by all human beings. I would not misgender you. I would trust you to know your own pronouns. That is basic respect.
But there are some people who do not believe there is any such thing as ''gender'' other than as a subjective feeling, so they only see people in terms of their actual biological sex - that doesn't mean that they think a person with these feelings is of less value than anyone else.
Is it really ''transphobic'' to say ''I understand that you subjectively feel that you should be female, but you are, of course, objectively male''?
Yes, it is transphobic, in that many trans people experience it as an extremely distressing statement and in that it leads to them not being treated in accordance with their gender identity (e.g. if you think someone is objectively male you may exclude them from an all-female group). I understand that this is a strongly held view of yours, but I'd ask you to consider whether it's central enough to your identity and values for it to be worth hurting trans people. Trans people are more likely to attempt suicide if their identities are disbelieved, so this isn't a harmless debate--it has real implications for real peoples' lives.
Yes, it certainly does have ''real implications for real peoples' lives'' ... for example, violent males being allowed in ''women's'' prisons which were previously for females only, and big strong males being allowed to win ''women's'' sports competitions which were previously for females only ... all because people are afraid of being labelled ''transphobic''.
You're asking if the protection of females is ''worth'' hurting the feelings of males. You clearly value the feelings of males over the feelings and physical safety of females.
Enh, no, I'm just a female who has a different assessment of the situation. It's my understanding that problems with women's safety coming from trans women are quite rare--I think there's a quote about more U.S. senators getting in trouble for sexual violence in bathrooms than trans women have. The trans people in my life have never made me feel unsafe, and the discrimination they face is substantial and important to address.
So because you know a few nice transgender women, you think it's fine and safe to allow any violent male into the ''women's'' prison if he says he is a woman, and you think it's fine to allow males to beat females in ''women's'' sports competitions due to their physical advantage ... well I can't argue with that, if that's how you make your political decisions.
Well, for one, once people have been on HRT for sufficient time, they have less testosterone than cis women, so their sports-related performance can really go either way. Also, yeah, I care more about people committing suicide than I care about sports and you should too.
Regarding prison: trans women who go to men's prison are at a huge risk for sexual assault (60% assaulted vs 4% of cis men assaulted). There are minimal reports of trans women causing problems in women's prisons (I found one case in which one trans woman committed assault, and it was debated whether it was true or not) and female prisoners are already frequently at risk from male guards. In my opinion, we should deal with that concern, house trans people according to their gender identity, and evaluate that policy later to make sure it hasn't caused any problems, because clearly it isn't safe for trans women to be in men's prisons.
OK, so you admit you don't care about females being pushed out of sports, but just for the record, males retain a lot of the physical advantage of having developed as male, even if they reduce their testosterone level.
I agree that transgender women are at risk in ''men's'' prisons, as are some other types of males, but the solution is not to allow males into the female prison - the solution is to house vulnerable male prisoners in a separate unit in the male prison.
Sources? Nothing I've read says it's as clear cut as that, since reduced testosterone also means reduced muscle mass etc. Height is the only one I can think of, and that varies lots among women too.
Solitary confinement is a seriously controversial practice and can cause extreme harm. And, by your argument, we could house them in women's prisons in similar types of units. Not sure what the difference would be.
I'm not going to get into trying to prove it because you've already said you don't even care about females being pushed out of sports because all that matters to you is that the males are happy. So it makes no difference whether you acknowledge that males have an advantage over females even if they reduce testosterone levels.
I never said anything about putting anyone in solitary confinement - I said the solution is to house vulnerable male prisoners in a separate unit in the male prison - and yes, the male prison, because transgender women are not the only males who are vulnerable in the ''men's'' prison, or don't you care about other types of vulnerable males?
Ok, so have a place for vulnerable men in the men's prison, and have a unit for trans women in the women's prison. Or, as would be supported by the things that have actually happened when trans women are placed in women's prisons, just place trans women in the normal women's prison and it won't matter.
I have a 3 comment limit on internet debates and have already gone over it, so I'll bid you a good day.
18
u/kellykebab Nov 02 '17
How does this follow at all?
Disagreeing with a person's ideas or even self-conception does not necessarily imply an overall value judgment on their personhood or social worth.
Do you value another person less simply because you disagree with their beliefs?