The Logical Fallacy of Transgender

In all of the silliness that has gone on today, what with Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's complete meltdown, and Mr."Cristan" Williams comment on it, I saw something that I should have commented on.  And that was the central issue that I am trying to get people to see.

Sandeen was carrying on because I commented that he would not respond to challenges.  I have seen Williams try to use logical fallacies and intellectual dishonesty to avoid dealing with real issues.  And I realized, they have no choice.

At the core of the transgender paradigm is "self identification."  A transsexual who posts as Aunty Orthodox confronted Sandeen over this.  She was debating Sandeen about MWMF and the issue of who is and is not a woman...

After some back and forth, I asked specifically about Kirk Sneade, a college student who published a manifesto which included this bullet:

• Kirk Sneade has self defined as a woman ever since he realised it gave him legal access to the women’s changing rooms at the Bloomsbury gym.

Does Autumn Sandeen support Kirk Sneade, a self-identified woman, as an attendee to MWMF? Seems crazy, doesn’t it? Autumn would not address the question, instead choosing to talk about equality, and yadda yadda.

Autumn avoided two pointed questions. The first is, what is a self-identified woman? Her refusal to answer suggests that we both agree that Kirk Sneade is not a woman, even though he meets the criteria for self-identifying as one.

The second is whether women can define who is allowed to be a part of women’s-only space. An organizer may want to exclude male-bodied persons, or even female-bodied trans women from their space (e.g., MWMF, Radfem 2013). That’s their right. Autumn disagrees

But what is a woman? Is Kirk Sneade a woman? See how circular this is? If Kick Sneade, a self-identified woman, can enter women’s space, who can’t? Shouldn’t women decide who gets to be included in women’s space?

I have to say, this was absolutely brilliant.  I would challenge any who wish to defend transgender politics to answer this simple paradox.  Clearly, Kirk Sneade is not a woman.  Right?  Well, if he isn't, and you claim someone like Sandeen is, how can this be?  Sandeen's ONLY claim to being a woman is, after twenty years of successful service as a man, in a man's role, in the US Navy, he decided he wanted to be a woman and started self-identifying as one.  Now, he will, of course, claim that he was always a woman, and such, but I call foul on that.  Trust me, I know.  I had a miserable life before I transitioned. I would not have lasted 20 minutes in the Navy, let alone 20 years.  

If all it takes to be a woman is to self-identify as one, then by that standard, Kirk Sneade is a woman.  But clearly Kirk Sneade is not a woman.  No one, except a true fanatic, would say he is.  But if he is not, where is the line?  And who gets to draw it?  Sandeen would not answer this, because Sandeen cannot answer this.  Would Sandeen insist that people MUST use female pronouns to refer to Kirk Sneade?  After all, Sneade says he is a woman?  That is the same standard as Sandeen claims.  Would Sandeen demand that Kirk Sneade be admitted to MWMF?  Probably...  But that is a bit different matter.  And here is the real kicker.  Would he insist that be allowed in the women's changing rooms?  If not, Sandeen's entire paradigm falls apart.  If so, then Sandeen has shown he has no concept of how women think or feel. And with that the transgender house of cards collapses...

Women, quite frankly, don't "self-identify" as women.  We just are.  Sandeen will call foul, perhaps, or someone else might, and they are welcome to do so.  But ask any woman to really explain what makes her a woman, and that is the answer you will ultimately get.  It is not an identity.  It is a reality.  A reality that Kirk Sneade, and let's be honest, Sandeen, have never, and will never, experience.  So. all they can claim is, "I self-identify" as a woman.  And I am sorry. but that just doesn't cut it.

So, what is the moral of all this?  It is simple. One is a woman, if, and really only if, one is able to actually life in society as a woman.  Not a transwoman, not as transgender, but just as a woman.  I do, and so do a lot of transsexuals who have completed transition and moved on.   

Crowing Like Banty Roosters....Again

Well, the transgender kooks are beside themselves with joy at the prospect that a group of radical feminists may lose the venue in London, England where they plan to hold a conference called RadFem2013. Now, the article about this blames the problem on "men's rights activists." It is not clear if this actually refers to a group of men, who identify as men, and who object vehemently to feminism, or if this is a rather apt description of a bunch of transgender kooks, of the same ilk as Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, and Mr. "Cristan" Williams who have been having a high old time, crowing about this on Twitter.

 Apparently these kook are just overjoyed at the threats, as well as the criminal acts that have been engaged in to stop this event from taking place. I think that says a lot about the real nature of so-called "trans women."

 To be clear, again, there is a lot of places where I disagree with the radical feminists, but one point where I do agree is that they should not be subjected to harassment, in particular, violent harassment, by a bunch of men.

 If you want to speak out against this outrageous behavior, there is a link at article site above. I sent a message, pointing out that while I have many disagreements with radical feminism, being neither radical, nor particularly feminist, that I do support their right to meet in peace, and to admit who they choose. And, for the record, I would support that same right for kooks like Williams and Sandeen.

Update: I just did a bit of research, and I found out something very interesting.... This year RadFem2013 is not limited to women born women. Of course, men are still not welcome. So, I guess that explains why Williams and Sandeen are still all bent out of shape.... And yes, there really are some rather nasty fellows, who are not trans, who have been harassing the radical feminists.

Another update:  Well, now the transgender banty roosters are crowing ever louder.  There is a claim, supposedly only verifiable by reading an article that is behind a paywall on an English paper's website, that the Irish Center has booted RadFem2013.  So, of course, Mr. "Cristian" Williams is strutting about like a proud rooster, even though the facts are still unclear.  Now, this is classic Williams.  Look at his article, and one would get the impression, which he deliberately gives, that he has a quote that he has obtain directly from David Barlow who is the Irish Center’s Director.  Instead, this is actually a quote that Mr. Williams has pulled from a web site by another transgender kook.  This whole mess is rather silly.  Again, I vehemently disagree with many, if not most of the views of the radical feminists.  But, I do share their disgust at the antics of men like Sandeen and Williams who delight in harassing women, even as they claim, quite falsely to be such.

Yet, Another update:

Mr. "Cristan" Williams remarked of this from Cathy Brennan:

Cathy Brennan ‏@bugbrennanAutumn, getting your balls cut off doesnt make you qualified to talk about feminism #radfem2013 @AutumnSandeen @transadvocate

RadFem 2013 organizer, Cathy Brennan responds to this post in a totally rational, non-hateful way.

Actually, given what Mr. Sandeen said to Cathy Brennan over coffee, about wanting to carry his balls around in a jar, so he could take them to meeting, I would say that yes, that is totally rational, and non-hateful.