Trans rights: a perspective

[Nearly Sane]

Joan Smith on a deeply lazy stupid Onion article


https://unherd.com/thepost/the-onions-j-k-rowling-interview-isnt-satire/

[Nearly Sane]

'Transgender rapist Isla Bryson jailed for eight years for attacks on two women when she was a man' - and he still is a man


https://news.sky.com/story/transgender-rapist-isla-bryson-jailed-for-eight-years-for-attacks-on-two-women-when-she-was-a-man-12821513

[Nearly Sane]

Amanda Abbington gets accused of being 'transphobic' for commenting on a mother and baby drag show.


https://archive.vn/0DK82

[Walt Zingmatilder]

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/feb/27/maths-teacher-accused-of-misgendering-pupil-on-religious-grounds

[Aruntraveller]

A difficult one. I personally don't have a problem with his calling a person by their original gender. However, the briefest of looks at his website Here:

https://www.joshuasutcliffe.com/about

gives me pause to think that maybe I would not want him educating children, as his case is about much more than that.

It would be ok if he stuck to teaching Maths but he does according to reports attempt to spread his version of religion. Which comes closer to hatred than it does religion.

More details here:  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11623315/Christian-maths-teacher-accused-misgendering-trans-pupil-denies-misconduct.html

Also from his website:

will also preface my remarks with this statement which proposes my position. The homosexual act itself is an abomination and should not be condoned by our society. People who commit such acts should face a fine or even prison. Equally, heterosexual sex outside of marriage is an abomination and should be punished with a fine or imprisonment. Both are punishable in line with rape or paedophilia.

You'll note that not only am I to be treated the same as a rapist or paedophile, but so are many of you if you ever dared to eat that fruit outside of wedlock.

Apart from all that he sounds thoroughly lovely though.

His video clips are fun though, everybody giving absolutely zero fucks about him.

[ProfessorDavey]

A difficult one. I personally don't have a problem with his calling a person by their original gender. However, the briefest of looks at his website Here:

https://www.joshuasutcliffe.com/about

gives me pause to think that maybe I would not want him educating children, as his case is about much more than that.

It would be ok if he stuck to teaching Maths but he does according to reports attempt to spread his version of religion. Which comes closer to hatred than it does religion.

More details here:  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11623315/Christian-maths-teacher-accused-misgendering-trans-pupil-denies-misconduct.html

Also from his website:

You'll note that not only am I to be treated the same as a rapist or paedophile, but so are many of you if you ever dared to eat that fruit outside of wedlock.

Apart from all that he sounds thoroughly lovely though.

His video clips are fun though, everybody giving absolutely zero fucks about him.

Individuals are entitled to their personal views.

They are not, however, entitled to bring those personal views into their professional roles where those views contravene their professional obligations. From what I can see this individual has activity and deliberately using his professional role as a teacher to promulgate his own personal view - that isn't right.

In addition, I imagine that the school will have taken a decision on the pronoun that should be used when referring to the student in question. That will be a decision that the school will expect all teachers to comply with. It would appear that Sutcliffe failed to comply with that decision as a deliberate action. That again would be to fail to comply with his professional obligations, but is also simple discourteous and likely to result in distress on the part of the student. And, of course, the interests and well-being of the pupil should take precedence over an individual's personal opinions when they are acting in a professional capacity as a teacher.

[Gordon]

Moderator.

A separate thread called 'As if we've got maths teachers to spare.' has been merged into this thread since the subject matter (involving the use of pronouns) is appropriate in this thread.

[Nearly Sane]

Individuals are entitled to their personal views.

They are not, however, entitled to bring those personal views into their professional roles where those views contravene their professional obligations. From what I can see this individual has activity and deliberately using his professional role as a teacher to promulgate his own personal view - that isn't right.

In addition, I imagine that the school will have taken a decision on the pronoun that should be used when referring to the student in question. That will be a decision that the school will expect all teachers to comply with. It would appear that Sutcliffe failed to comply with that decision as a deliberate action. That again would be to fail to comply with his professional obligations, but is also simple discourteous and likely to result in distress on the part of the student. And, of course, the interests and well-being of the pupil should take precedence over an individual's personal opinions when they are acting in a professional capacity as a teacher.

Is it a professional obligation to have to state a political position which pronouns are in our society?




If a teenage Rachel Dolezal said they should be referred to as black, would you say it was discourteous not to do so?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal

[ProfessorDavey]

Is it a professional obligation to have to state a political position which pronouns are in our society?




If a teenage Rachel Dolezal said they should be referred to as black, would you say it was discourteous not to do so?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal

My comment was a rather broader response than just trans issues - you will note that this reply has been moved into this thread. Indeed the teacher is also alleged to have stepped over the line of their professional obligations in other areas too, notably religion in apparently signposting his students to videos where he denigrated islam and also promulgating anti-gay views during a maths class.

The point is that there are things which are expected of you as a professional which sometimes may not align with your own personal opinion. If that is the case it is your professional responsibility to park you personal views at the door.

On your straw man - it is unlikely that a teacher would be in a position where they would need to refer to a particular pupil's ethnicity, nor is it likely that the school would have taken a view, so there isn't an equivalence. That isn't the case for pronouns - you might think it bonkers that an individual might wish to be referred to by a different pronoun, but if that is something that has been agreed by the school in a professional manner then those working within that school have a professional obligation to act in a similar manner.

A better example might be where a school has a policy which allows certain religious dress to be worn in school. If a teacher disagreed with that on the basis of their personal viewpoint that would be up to them (e.g. because they thought it wrong to allow opt-outs to uniform on religious grounds). What they wouldn't be permitted to do would be to discipline that child or act towards them in a manner that caused distress on the basis of something that was school policy (for example telling the child to remove a head scarf). To do so would be acting counter to their professional responsibilities.

[Nearly Sane]

My comment was a rather broader response than just trans issues - you will note that this reply has been moved into this thread. Indeed the teacher is also alleged to have stepped over the line of their professional obligations in other areas too, notably religion in apparently signposting his students to videos where he denigrated islam and also promulgating anti-gay views during a maths class.

The point is that there are things which are expected of you as a professional which sometimes may not align with your own personal opinion. If that is the case it is your professional responsibility to park you personal views at the door.

On your straw man - it is unlikely that a teacher would be in a position where they would need to refer to a particular pupil's ethnicity, nor is it likely that the school would have taken a view, so there isn't an equivalence. That isn't the case for pronouns - you might think it bonkers that an individual might wish to be referred to by a different pronoun, but if that is something that has been agreed by the school in a professional manner then those working within that school have a professional obligation to act in a similar manner.

A better example might be where a school has a policy which allows certain religious dress to be worn in school. If a teacher disagreed with that on the basis of their personal viewpoint that would be up to them (e.g. because they thought it wrong to allow opt-outs to uniform on religious grounds). What they wouldn't be permitted to do would be to discipline that child or act towards them in a manner that caused distress on the basis of something that was school policy (for example telling the child to remove a head scarf). To do so would be acting counter to their professional responsibilities.

  You made specific comments, I questioned whether they worked generalised.

As to a strawman, you mean a hypothetical.

[Nearly Sane]

My comment was a rather broader response than just trans issues - you will note that this reply has been moved into this thread. Indeed the teacher is also alleged to have stepped over the line of their professional obligations in other areas too, notably religion in apparently signposting his students to videos where he denigrated islam and also promulgating anti-gay views during a maths class.

The point is that there are things which are expected of you as a professional which sometimes may not align with your own personal opinion. If that is the case it is your professional responsibility to park you personal views at the door.

On your straw man - it is unlikely that a teacher would be in a position where they would need to refer to a particular pupil's ethnicity, nor is it likely that the school would have taken a view, so there isn't an equivalence. That isn't the case for pronouns - you might think it bonkers that an individual might wish to be referred to by a different pronoun, but if that is something that has been agreed by the school in a professional manner then those working within that school have a professional obligation to act in a similar manner.

A better example might be where a school has a policy which allows certain religious dress to be worn in school. If a teacher disagreed with that on the basis of their personal viewpoint that would be up to them (e.g. because they thought it wrong to allow opt-outs to uniform on religious grounds). What they wouldn't be permitted to do would be to discipline that child or act towards them in a manner that caused distress on the basis of something that was school policy (for example telling the child to remove a head scarf). To do so would be acting counter to their professional responsibilities.

  I've read this a few tines now and haven't seen any answer to the question:


Is it a professional obligation to have to state a political position which pronouns are in our society?

[ProfessorDavey]

As to a strawman, you mean a hypothetical.

Nope I mean a strawman. This from wiki (with my emphasis):

'The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.
Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X.'

You have argued against an example which differs is several key respects as I pointed out - hence it isn't similar at all, merely superficially similar. Hence yours is a straw man.

[Nearly Sane]

Nope I mean a strawman. This from wiki (with my emphasis):

'The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.
Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X.'

You have argued against an example which differs is several key respects as I pointed out - hence it isn't similar at all, merely superficially similar. Hence yours is a straw man.

It's similar in the way that you argued that you shouldn't disregard a statement of self id because it was discourteous. You have made no case that there is a difference.

Why do you think it is necessary to accept the self of a teenager as a sex but not a race? And if you want to exchange 'gender' for sex, define gender.

[ProfessorDavey]

Is it a professional obligation to have to state a political position which pronouns are in our society?

I don't really understand what you are asking, but there are times when there will be a professional obligation which applies to those in a professional position which might not accord with personal views.

So a GP may have a professional obligation to provide a pregnant woman with impartial advice regarding termination of a pregnancy even if they oppose abortion.

A solicitor may have a professional obligation to act in the best interests of a client in a divorce case even if they personally oppose divorce.

A teacher in a pastoral position may have a professional obligation to act in a manner that is respectful and understanding where a pupil was come out as gay even if they personally think homosexuality is sinful.

The point being that the professional obligation are set by that profession with an expectation that everyone, during the time they are practicing that profession, should adhere to those obligations.

What they do, say or think in their free time is up to them, albeit with the proviso that publicly voicing certain private views may undermine your ability to act in a professional capacity or even bring your profession into disrepute.

[Nearly Sane]

I don't really understand what you are asking, but there are times when there will be a professional obligation which applies to those in a professional position which might not accord with personal views.

So a GP may have a professional obligation to provide a pregnant woman with impartial advice regarding termination of a pregnancy even if they oppose abortion.

A solicitor may have a professional obligation to act in the best interests of a client in a divorce case even if they personally oppose divorce.

A teacher may have a professional obligation to act in a manner that is respectful and understanding in a pastoral position where a pupil was come out as gay even if they personally think homosexuality is sinful.

The point being that the professional obligation are set by that profession with an expectation that everyone, during the time they are practicing that profession, should adhere to those obligations.

What they do, say or think in their free time is up to them, albeit with the proviso that publicly voicing certain private views may undermine your ability to act in a professional capacity or even bring your profession into disrepute.

The question which is both general and specific is one I would expect anyone with a basic grasp of ethics to understand.

The general one is 'Are you saying because a something you deem as 'professional' statement is made, people should follow that, and that any challenge they make is wrong?'

And specifically 'Do you think that given gender is a political issue that a teacher should not be able to express their disagreement?'

[Stranger]

...given gender is a political issue...

Gender has been turned into a political issue by the extremists on both sides. What it should be is a grown-up discussion about ethics (human rights) informed by science.

Trying to pretend that somebody self-identifying with a different racial background is the same sort of thing and transgender is just silly.

Male and female brains are not identical, and the differences are determined at a later stage of development than the genitals, so unless you happen to think that biology gets everything perfectly right every time, which it quite clearly doesn't because there are cases of very obvious ambiguity (intersex), then some cases of less obvious mismatch between brain and genitals, are pretty much inevitable. There is also direct evidence that the brains of transgender people are, in some ways, more in line with their gender identity than their biological sex. For example:

Sexual differentiation of the human brain: relation to gender identity, sexual orientation and neuropsychiatric disorders
A sex difference in the human brain and its relation to transsexuality
Cortical thickness in untreated transsexuals
Hypothalamic Response to the Chemo-Signal Androstadienone in Gender Dysphoric Children and Adolescents
Male-to-female transsexuals have female neuron numbers in a limbic nucleus

Of course, there is pretty much as much stupidity on the other side of the 'debate' as well, such as trying to pretend that biological sex doesn't matter and that we should simply accept unlimited self-identification in every situation.

The absurd, pointless, culture war that this has been turned into, by extreme views on both side, is not only ignorant and stupid, but is causing real harm to real, and often very vulnerable, people. I have spoken to trans people (both MtF and FtM) on other forums and heard some of their experiences and some of the shit they have to put up with, and I can only feel sympathy.

[Nearly Sane]

Gender has been turned into a political issue by the extremists on both sides. What it should be is a grown-up discussion about ethics (human rights) informed by science.

Trying to pretend that somebody self-identifying with a different racial background is the same sort of thing and transgender is just silly.

Male and female brains are not identical, and the differences are determined at a later stage of development than the genitals, so unless you happen to think that biology gets everything perfectly right every time, which it quite clearly doesn't because there are cases of very obvious ambiguity (intersex), then some cases of less obvious mismatch between brain and genitals, are pretty much inevitable. There is also direct evidence that the brains of transgender people are, in some ways, more in line with their gender identity than their biological sex. For example:

Sexual differentiation of the human brain: relation to gender identity, sexual orientation and neuropsychiatric disorders
A sex difference in the human brain and its relation to transsexuality
Cortical thickness in untreated transsexuals
Hypothalamic Response to the Chemo-Signal Androstadienone in Gender Dysphoric Children and Adolescents
Male-to-female transsexuals have female neuron numbers in a limbic nucleus

Of course, there is pretty much as much stupidity on the other side of the 'debate' as well, such as trying to pretend that biological sex doesn't matter and that we should simply accept unlimited self-identification in every situation.

The absurd, pointless, culture war that this has been turned into, by extreme views on both side, is not only ignorant and stupid, but is causing real harm to real, and often very vulnerable, people. I have spoken to trans people (both MtF and FtM) on other forums and heard some of their experiences and some of the shit they have to put up with, and I can only feel sympathy.

I think your analysis of 'both sides' is a lazy argument that assumes it is merely a matter of some ephemeral compromise. You say the it's a pointless culture war which I doubt you mean seriously since that would imply that you think the questions of single sex spaces for women is pointless.

The possible differences in brains based on sex is a little researched area and has little to do with the industry around surgical and medical treatment of people, especially given that there is little or no evaluation based on the science when it comes to treatment.

You say you have talked with trans people on other forums, how many detransitioners have you talked to?

ETA  The reference to 'intersex', both a scientifically inaccurate term and one which tmany with Differences in Sexual Development abhor, is I would suggest irrelevant to a lot of the debate since, as mentioned above, the science is not driving the medical and surgical treatment. There are also no studies that I am aware of that cover any lunk bwteen DSDs and the idea of 'trans'.

[Stranger]

I think your analysis of 'both sides' is a lazy argument that assumes it is merely a matter of some ephemeral compromise. You say the it's a pointless culture war which I doubt you mean seriously since that would imply that you think the questions of single sex spaces for women is pointless.

You completely misunderstand. What I mean is that the issues are too serious for a culture war, i.e. the two extremes, that both think they have absolute truth on their side, just slagging each other off, to ever do them justice or offer proper solutions.

On the one hand, trying to pretend that transsexuals don't exist or, on the other, that biological sex just doesn't matter, isn't going to help anybody or resolve anything.

I'm not for a moment pretending that I have a neat set of answers to all the issues this raises, I'm just making the point that as long as the two groups are just yelling abuse at each other, the whole thing will remain unnecessarily toxic and harmful.

[Nearly Sane]

...
so unless you happen to think that biology gets everything perfectly right every time

...

Just highlighting this as I don't really understand the idea of biology getting things right or wrong. You seem to imply that there is an idea of 'right' - could you expand?

[Nearly Sane]

You completely misunderstand. What I mean is that the issues are too serious for a culture war, i.e. the two extremes, that both think they have absolute truth on their side, just slagging each other off, to ever do them justice or offer proper solutions.

On the one hand, trying to pretend that transsexuals don't exist or, on the other, that biological sex just doesn't matter, isn't going to help anybody or resolve anything.

I'm not for a moment pretending that I have a neat set of answers to all the issues this raises, I'm just making the point that as long as the two groups are just yelling abuse at each other, the whole thing will remain unnecessarily toxic and harmful.

And again, I think that's a lazy argument which potrays any comment on what you see as one side or the other as just shouting. And again I doubt you mean that - I should point out that I didn't 'completely misunderstand' your point since I said that I doubted that you meant it that way.

I note you use the term 'transexuals', I would suggest that that's a term very few people who are 'trans' would use to describe themselves.

EtA Indeed one of the issues here is the lack of definition of what 'transgender' or gender means in this context.

[Stranger]

And again, I think that's a lazy argument which potrays any comment on what you see as one side or the other as just shouting.

Unfortunately much of what I see on the subject is about as much use as just shouting.

And again I doubt you mean that - I should point out that I didn't 'completely misunderstand' your point since I said that I doubted that you meant it that way.

Okay, point taken.

I note you use the term 'transexuals', I would suggest that that's a term very few people who are 'trans' would use to describe themselves.

Transsexual refers to people who want to "permanently transition to the sex or gender with which they identify, usually seeking medical assistance" (Transsexual) so in the context, transgender would probably have been more accurate, but getting too worked up about words seems to be part of the problem. That being said, I'd never deliberately use language that I knew would cause people unnecessary distress - which seems to be a deliberate part of the culture war, on both sides.

[Nearly Sane]

Unfortunately much of what I see on the subject is about as much use as just shouting.

Okay, point taken.

Transsexual refers to people who want to "permanently transition to the sex or gender with which they identify, usually seeking medical assistance" (Transsexual) so in the context, transgender would probably have been more accurate, but getting too worked up about words seems to be part of the problem. That being said, I'd never deliberately use language that I knew would cause people unnecessary distress - which seems to be a deliberate part of the culture war, on both sides.

Given the importance of language to legislation, I think it's inevitable that it's something that people will get worked up about, and I would suggest rightly so.

As for not deliberately using language that would cause people 'unnecessary' distress, not sure that's achievable here specifically or in the general.

[Nearly Sane]

On Intetnational Women's Day, a man who says he's a woman is given a platform to explain what a woman is.


https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/international-womens-day-jordan-gray-trans-b2295599.html

[Nearly Sane]

Meet the new homophobia...


https://www.vice.com/en/article/neq9zx/whats-wrong-with-the-no-trans-dating-preference-debate

[jeremyp]

  Do you have any idea how someone who says they are Napoleon feels? How do you know they are wrong?

It's trivially easy to tell if somebody is Napoleon or not. Not so so easy to verify a claim to be "born in the wrong body".