Transgender Actor Asserts Existence of ‘Biologically Female Penis’

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I don't see anything in the bill about jail. And I guess you think our own anti discrimination laws are hiding the truth?

And if you are a resident at a nursing home or a care facility, wouldn't you want the staff to address you with respect?

a reply to: aliensanonymous

True. Anything to keep things calm. You don't want mass hysteria there.

originally posted by: riiver
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

"What gives you the right to deny my lived experience? Why are you trying to delegitimize my existance?" These are two actual complaints I heard a trans woman make last week*. I think they can just as fairly be asked by biological women of trans women.

That's exactly right. Women are not trying to take anything away from trans women... they are the ones taking from women, starting with our very identity. For all the whining and crying by trans women about us not being "inclusive" enough, Trans Activists have done absolutely nothing for women. They have only imposed, taken and abused, insist on putting us in danger, and then mock, belittle and threaten us.

I couldn't care less if someone is trans on a personal level, it's the fact that we now have laws and such being made which, in the name of "non-discrimination," discriminate against biological women that burns my ass.

I think it's far more than discrimination against women, it is literally erasing women. Just think sports... if this insanity doesn't end, then there will only be men identifying as women playing in "women's" sports. This isn't sportsmanlike... this isn't sportsmanship... this isn't competition... it's shooting fish in a barrel! Girls in Wales are refusing to use mixed-sex bathrooms because of the taunting and bullying by boys... soon the only "girls" in any bathroom will be boys who identify as girls...

There is nothing transphobic about calling a trans woman a "trans woman." But it's definitely transphobic to refuse to own your identity as a trans woman and insist others deny your identity as a trans women.

We create so many problems for ourselves.

On the subject of Transgender sports, There is only one solution, Transgender ONLY sporting events. Sorry, but a male that changes to a female is NOT a female when it comes to the physical body. Have the TransOlympics. Separate, special and all the right pronouns can be used.

No one gets to rewrite the biological make up of the human race to fit their narrative. Its just hyperbole.

I realize people want to fit in and be comfortable in their skin and in the community. The first step is being truly comfortable with yourself. Be honest with yourself. Know who you are and what you want in life. Forget about what definition the mainstream wants to put on things. Quit trying to change the way people think. You don't need them and they are not going to change.

I am happy to be a friend to anyone. LGBT, I don't care. Just be a good person and love yourself and those you call friends. You will find that the larger group accepts you for who you are and only the small percentage fringe elements are the ones screaming the loudest (on both sides) and really don't deserve our attention.

originally posted by: Boadicea
Women are not trying to take anything away from trans women... they are the ones taking from women, starting with our very identity.

I think it's far more than discrimination against women, it is literally erasing women.

Yes. Erasing women is exactly it. If trans women are accepted as biological women (God, it hurts my brain to even form that thought) then what does that make actual biological women?

There is nothing transphobic about calling a trans woman a "trans woman." But it's definitely transphobic to refuse to own your identity as a trans woman and insist others deny your identity as a trans women.

This is the thing. We have a dozen different flavors of "X woman" as it is-- Latino woman, African-American woman, gay woman, blah blah blah. It's not as if we view those "X" descriptors as hateful in some way; women in different groups apply them to themselves, usually with some measure of pride. So what is wrong with keeping "trans woman" along with all the others? If the goal really is simply to be accepted and not to minimize real biological women, then why insist that they are real biological women? I have yet to hear any convincing argument.

In my opinion, this insistence that they are exactly the same as biological women is blatant delegitimization of women who are women, not because they chose to be, but because of biology and birth; it affects not just us but our daughters and granddaughters, colors the history of our mothers and grandmothers and great-grandmothers and beyond.

It minimizes every accomplishment of every woman throughout history. It's a slap in the face of women around the world, especially in places not so accommodating as the US.

It says to every woman who's ever been in a relationship with a man who hit her and who risked her safety or her children's safety to defy someone bigger, stronger, and more powerful in order to escape (or who failed) that her story is no longer valid.

It says to every woman who has faced an unwanted pregnancy, who has survived breast cancer or ovarian cancer or cervical cancer, who has had endometriosis or a hysterectomy or who lives with polycystic ovary disease that her "lived experience" is unimportant. Because hey, if people with a working penis and testicles can be women too, and they're "biological women," that means all the rest of us with our complex bodies and hormonal systems and natural-born sexual apparatus (yes, much more complex than men's--just look at how many more parts there are!)...what? If they're "biological women" too, then what are we?

They're not biological women. They're trans women. And that's ok; if you want to dress as a woman, act like a woman, change your body to look like a woman's, have sex with men (or with other women) like a woman, and be a woman in all outward respects, go for it. We don't care. We don't even object to calling you "she" if that's what you want. But don't claim you're not different than us, because you are. If you were born with a penis, testicles, and prostate, then you can have no more idea what being a biological woman is like than a virgin can know what giving birth is like.

If you're a trans woman, you have your own set of issues. Don't delegitimize ours by claiming you're no different than we are. And don't co-opt the issues real women face for yourselves and then cry victim. Stop denying OUR lived reality.

/end rant

It's ironic--for most of my life, I had no strong feelings about this issue. I just live and let live; I'd run into trans people every once in a while, and I just never thought too much about it one way or the other (except once, when I worked with a trans man, I was unsure if he was a guy or a girl at first and asking his name so I didn't get it wrong). It just wasn't a big deal. Even the bathroom issue was never an issue; as long as you looked like you belong in the bathroom you were in, nobody noticed or cared.

But this recent push to not only allow intact males into female-only spaces but to insist that they're no different from biological women has made me care. The growing trend of providing legal punishment for those who refuse to agree that trans women--and to be fair, trans men, though I have yet to hear of any issue related to trans men--are the same as biological women and men really bothers me. And the more I think about the whole issue, the more disturbing it is.

I am NOT a feminist. The only arena in which I think women are treated unfairly is in medical research (male and female bodies and physiology are different, and research seldom takes this into account). But this "trans women with intact, useable male genitalia are no different than you" is a blatant attack on womanhood.

a reply to: riiver

Just an opinion from experience but, I think one of the problems with "accepting" a man calling himself a woman, even after surgery, is that they still have a mans brain, still think like a man (whether they like it or not) some look like a man large hands feet etc and they will never be part of the female "inner circle". They can't chat about the woes of periods or childbirth because they have no experience of it, and many other things. This makes it very difficult for women to relate to these faux women....unpleasant perhaps but true.

I honestly believe a 3rd gender designation would be a damn good idea. This would hopefully stop the desperate need to be accepted by others as "real women" but with luck encourage acceptance of their preferred gender. Maybe it would also prevent trans women lying to men and being attacked as a result, maybe it would also give them an acceptable box to tick.

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
a reply to: riiver

Just an opinion from experience but, I think one of the problems with "accepting" a man calling himself a woman, even after surgery, is that they still have a mans brain, still think like a man (whether they like it or not) some look like a man large hands feet etc and they will never be part of the female "inner circle". They can't chat about the woes of periods or childbirth because they have no experience of it, and many other things. This makes it very difficult for women to relate to these faux women....unpleasant perhaps but true.

I honestly believe a 3rd gender designation would be a damn good idea. This would hopefully stop the desperate need to be accepted by others as "real women" but with luck encourage acceptance of their preferred gender. Maybe it would also prevent trans women lying to men and being attacked as a result, maybe it would also give them an acceptable box to tick.

I absolutely agree with all of that.

With regard to your first point: yes, that's one of the things I was attempting to say myself. Because they're not biologically, physically women, surgery or no surgery, there are a lot of things that they just don't...grok. "Understand" isn't even a big enough word. They haven't experienced it, will never experience it, and can't experience it even if they want to because they are fundamentally different from biological women even after surgery. (And keep in mind, I got off topic somewhat; the actual OP wasn't even about post-surgery trans women. It was about a trans woman saying his penis was "biologically female" once he said he was a woman.)

Now, we'll have some people come in here and say, "Well you can't define being a woman by whether you have periods or not 'cuz some women don't have periods." Or "Being at risk for cervical cancer doesn't make you a woman because men can get cancer too," or "you can't define womanhood by being able to give birth because all women can't have kids," etc. And that's true. You can't define womanhood by any of those things. BUT when you take this whole set of biologically-female-only things together, it means that real, biological women, no matter what age or race or nationality they are, have this common base of things that 99% of us have in common that NO male-- whether he wants to call himself a man, a trans woman, or a purple unicorn -- has the capacity to understand because the male body is fundamentally different, even when it's been altered with surgery and hormones.

And saying "I'm a real woman now because I have breasts and a vagina and I feel how I think a woman feels in my head" or "my penis is now a female penis because I feel like I'm a woman so it must be female too" is hands-down the most openly misogynist thing I've ever heard. It's far, far worse than saying "women are inferior to men," or "all women should be slaves," or whatever misogynist garbage anyone wants to come up with. Because dress it up in ribbons and lace, spray perfume on it, and call it Esmerelda if you like, what it's saying on the deepest level is "My (male) (mental) reality is more important than your actual, physical, female reality."

Like Boadicea says, it's not just discriminating against biological women. It's erasing them.

And to your second point: The fact that there isn't a movement to do this simply underscores my first point.

a reply to: riiver

Beautiful rant, riiver, and I agree with every single word.

So many of us say again and again that we didn't have a problem with transgender persons until the Trans Activists crossed a certain line... or lines. But we cannot even have a reasonable discussion about it, because anything that doesn't fit the Trans Activist narrative is shouted down or even subject to civil/criminal penalty!!! We are all dismissed as hateful transphobes for daring to deviate from their script.

And there are obviously differences between women and trans women. By definition.

But I truly think the tides are turning. The right was never going to jump on the transgender bandwagon. But they themselves have been turning their friends on the left against them, as more and more on the left are seeing red lines crossed as well. At this point, feminists, lesbians, transsexuals, academics and others are walking away. And it seems that the kids being treated with puberty blockers, etc., are a big catalyst for this.

I've been thinking about how to write a new thread for these "red lines." A thread to give folks the opportunity to say what we're saying here, basically that we're happy to live and let live, but (fill in the blank) crosses a line. If we're ever going to have a productive and proactive national discussion, we have to be able to get past the automatic "hater" and "transphobe" labels, and actually focus on the specific problems.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

I honestly believe a 3rd gender designation would be a damn good idea. This would hopefully stop the desperate need to be accepted by others as "real women" but with luck encourage acceptance of their preferred gender.

I think so too. For all the reasons you stated, and also for their own benefit. I'm thinking medical care specifically, especially in emergency situations where they would present opposite to their anatomy. I'm sure there are more situations where that information is vital.

If we move back from these danger zones, I do believe we can find a happy middle ground for all. Some may still grumble about this or that, no one will get all their druthers, but we can work together enough to give everyone what they need. And eventually, as everyone's needs are taken care of but no one's getting walked all over, folks will come to accept the new norm.

We all got used to women wearing pants and going to work, right?

a reply to: Boadicea

Thank you

There are two things I find really interesting about the whole debate. One, of course, is how vehemently lesbians — who should, according to the "rules," be pretty high in the social justice hierarchy since they not only gay but also women (and maybe minorities, depending on the woman) — are being shouted down and demonized by the oh-so-inclusive left from all sides. It boggles the mind. The other is how very often it's straight men* who want to jump in and attack us biological women for espousing the views that you, I, ketsuko, PhyllidaDavenport, etc, have put forward. I mean, why do straight men care? Like...who was it? TinySickTears? AProudLefty? I can't remember now, I've argued with both of them so much lately...but as one of them said, "it doesn't affect you" (in this case, straight men) "so why do you care?"

Hmmn. I'd really like to know the answer to that. Any deep thoughts on that question?

I'm also puzzled as to why, when the party line is that there are "unlimited genders" and the whole "gender-fluid" idea is a big thing, the trans/non-binary/gender-fluid/whatever other labels crowd aren't open to the idea of simply adding a third, neutral gender as PhyllidaDavenport said. It's even already mirrored in language, where we have male, female, and neutral. Why do we have to tear down the very concept of male and female?

Nevermind. For the vocal minority that's created the current climate, that's what it IS all about, I know — tearing down the notion of male and female, tearing apart the social fabric.

...But why?

In any case, thanks for the reply. I always enjoy reading your posts, and it's been interesting to follow along over the past months and sort of watch your thoughts and viewpoint unfold and expand. I know you've certainly made me think. If you start that thread, expect to see me there.

*Not that everyone who disagrees on these boards is a straight man, to be clear; I have no idea whether half the people who reply here on ATS are men or women. But some of the most vehement here, on other social media, and in real life have made it clear that they are straight men.

originally posted by: riiver
a reply to: Boadicea

Thank you

There are two things I find really interesting about the whole debate. One, of course, is how vehemently lesbians — who should, according to the "rules," be pretty high in the social justice hierarchy since they not only gay but also women (and maybe minorities, depending on the woman) — are being shouted down and demonized by the oh-so-inclusive left from all sides. It boggles the mind.

That was really a shocker for me as well. I admit that at first, I was pretty naive about it all, and didn't really understand, but I didn't see any harm, and I don't have much use for gender stereotypes anyway, so it was confusing but nothing to worry about. At first. Then I started hearing from lesbians I know, and researching on the internet, and I was wrong. It wasn't/isn't as innocent and harmless as I thought. Or lesbians. They were allies. They still are allies with transsexuals who understand they are not women. It's just the damn autogynephiles who can't take "no" for an answer that cause the trouble...

The other is how very often it's straight men* who want to jump in and attack us biological women for espousing the views that you, I, ketsuko, PhyllidaDavenport, etc, have put forward. I mean, why do straight men care? Like...who was it? TinySickTears? AProudLefty? I can't remember now, I've argued with both of them so much lately...but as one of them said, "it doesn't affect you" (in this case, straight men) "so why do you care?"

I think there are many reasons -- probably as many reasons as there are such men! For one, I think most people -- including men -- think of trans women as homosexual effeminates who pose no threat to women. They are not aware of the autogynephiles, nor their narcissism and violence. So they really don't see a problem. Also, I think part of it is that straight men don't want to own trans women as one of them... they want to believe that they aren't "real" men and kick them from their ranks. There is also the political schadenfreude, and so many enjoying watching the left "eat their own." Sadly, I also think there is a very misogynistic streak in some that just like screwing with women. The MGTOWs and Incels come to mind...

I'm also puzzled as to why, when the party line is that there are "unlimited genders" and the whole "gender-fluid" idea is a big thing, the trans/non-binary/gender-fluid/whatever other labels crowd aren't open to the idea of simply adding a third, neutral gender as PhyllidaDavenport said.

That's puzzling me as well. I don't get it. They contradict themselves! My best guess is that political factions are exploiting the narcissistic Trans Activists (who really want to believe they **are** women) for greatest chaos and destruction. I really don't understand the branch of feminists -- the so-called LibFems -- who support this destruction of women's rights. They're either really really stupid or they're getting paid damn well. That's the only thing I can figure.

Nevermind. For the vocal minority that's created the current climate, that's what it IS all about, I know — tearing down the notion of male and female, tearing apart the social fabric.

In any case, thanks for the reply. I always enjoy reading your posts, and it's been interesting to follow along over the past months and sort of watch your thoughts and viewpoint unfold and expand. I know you've certainly made me think. If you start that thread, expect to see me there.

Thank you. I really appreciate that. I have tried to dig into this and understand all the whys and wherefores -- and to share it here. I've learned much and I know my perspective and opinion has evolved. I don't want to cause any trouble for anyone just trying to live their life in peace -- and letting the rest of us live our lives in peace. I will gladly stand up for such people, transgender or otherwise.

But there is a very dangerous and perverted underbelly to the Trans Activist movement. Very very ugly. And that has to be addressed and removed from the equation.

that's the part I don't actually get, how can you say you feel like a woman if you have never been one biologically ?

it is an impossibility to say that you woke up on Monday and just felt like a woman more than a man that day so decided to become a woman ,

How can any natal male say they fee like a woman if they have never existed as a woman ?

Maybe they identify with female values and female aesthetic but surely they cannot say they feel like a woman having never experienced what that actually feels like to be a biological natal female !

I am all for people being able to express themselves as female or male if they don't agree with their natal birth , but when men and women can just declare they are a particular biological sex , then that's where we hit problems
as others have mentioned , this basically puts real women back under men who are transitioning into women , because they are now a minority group and more protected than women and so will benefit from the societal acceptance and determination for them to have equal rights etc

That to me is wrong.

especially the whole trans males in female prisons , sports well , they should have their own leagues etc, but then everyone would cry about equality. But how is it "sporting" to have a trans male compete against a natal female
when there are clear biological advantages.

as a liberal person I feel we should support trans males and females , but not when it means we sacrifice everything else as a result.

I think a lot of straight men are angry about the trans movement because it does take away from the hard work that women have been doing to get equality , as for the how does it affect you when you aren't trans or a female , well males who support women , and in general egalitarian people would want everyone to be treated equally and fairly , however it appears that we arent being fair or treating people equally
how is it fair to put a biological male in a womens prison ? there is no sense of justice there , especially if they had been charged with rape !
where is the sense of justice for female rape victims to share a prison with a man who thinks he is a woman and has raped women ?

We are basically throwing away that hard work when we allow men who think they are women to have even more protected rights than women already do !

Just thinking as well by the way , men transitioning to females , do they get to retire early like women and claim their pensions earlier as well ?
or do they still have to retire at the same age as men to claim their state pensions ?

Wow, they really DO make this sh** up as they go along...

a reply to: riiver

It's easy to say it doesn't affect you when they've never been put in a position, and this won't put them in a position where it will.

They're men. This won't affect them. They won't stand to lose their gender. I hate to put it that way, but they're the strong ones in society. They have the power, not in terms so much of political power -- I'm not going all Critical Theory. but in terms of physical power. Men have that knowledge that they have the sheer brute force on their side and always have. It does affect how they think to some degree, and they can afford to let it.

How many of them have truly been put in a position where they've been threatened by someone not of their own sex too? It's true that sometimes the battered spouse or boyfriend exists, but it's rare.

Unless you've been in a position where you've been really threatened by someone of the other gender in some way. I have a couple times. It's hard to think about how some of these changes can be such a big deal.

originally posted by: aliensanonymous
a reply to: AProudLefty

I work at a Nursing Home.

In our home resides a melting pot of backgrounds and cultures, for example. First nations people some tribal elders who have lived in the outback speaking and practicing ancient tribal culture. Others have been hard working taxpayers, artists, ex-vetrans, retired police and professors. Some are disadvataged ex-addicts or homless basically people from every walk of life. Suffering a myriad of illnesses from alzheimer's, dementia, and chronic illnesses.

We have a dedactaed ward for pshyco geriatrics some retirees from mental institutions or prisons. It is hard work and very challenging but rewarding.

Recently our organisation has started rolling out LGBT training and if I was a man of the church I would say this is a "god send". As we also have a melting pot of staff primarily Africans. They come from countries where their cultures do not act kindly to people who do not conform too the biblical texts.

So this training is thouroughly needed to maintain equality of care and proper practice towards those not conforming to their care givers social norms.

So basically the staff are more of a headache and challenging than the clients due to their insular view of the world resulting in a lack of care and respect towards their clients.

You just hit the nail on the head with your 'insular view of the world stemming from their cultures that do not act kindly to people who do not conform to the biblical texts/dogma" insight.

probably why women are treated the way they are still to do this day thanks to Monotheism!

originally posted by: sapien82
probably why women are treated the way they are still to do this day thanks to Monotheism!

Hmmmm... interesting theory, but I blame the Pharisees in general and Saul of Tarsus in specific... not monotheism. Women played a significant role in Jesus' ministry. Indeed, even before Jesus' ministry -- before Jesus himself -- his mother Mary was glorified and exalted and given a prominent and powerful role in Jesus' future ministry.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: WalterTilley

Maybe because they want respect for who they are and aren't getting it? I didn't realize that there was a minimum threshold of membership that a particular group needs to achieve to be treated like a human being.

Big difference between “respect” and “recognition”. Would I recognize the choice they made without judgement and ridicule? Yes. Respect is something you earn. And changing genders while having one biological makeup isn’t on my checklist to earn my respect. Sorry.

a reply to: Boadicea

well ok , I'll bump it forward a couple hundred years to Lutheran Reformation

A wife was expected to be a companion to her husband, but she was always his subordinate.

Women in the protestant reformation

Also don't even get me started on witch burning's in Europe
or women under Islam !

Monotheism subjects women to incredible hardships !