FSTDT Forums
Community => Politics and Government => Topic started by: dpareja on May 13, 2017, 11:50:10 am
-
http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/trans-rights-bill-1.4113455
It's almost a cliché, but nonetheless true: sometimes the left and the right, when they go far enough down their respective rabbit holes, wind up meeting in some strange common burrow and agree, as the wickedly ironic Dr. Frank'N'Furter put it, on the cause, but not the symptom.
...
Among the issues that remain, one of the most prominent is transgender rights. Granted, it's not as seismic as abortion, and it affects far fewer people – I'm not even sure I know a transgender person – but it's a hot topic.
Risibly, it was a prominent issue in last year's American presidential election. Republican so-cons cried in alarm about allowing transgender people to use the bathroom of their choice, which is the guidance former president Barack Obama gave the nation's schools.
In the view of social conservatives, that invites sinister, perverted men to simply declare themselves women, then waltz into girls' bathrooms and locker rooms and satisfy all manner of disgusting urges.
...
As Canada's new law on transgender rights — Bill C-16, which seeks to shield "gender expression" and "gender identity" from discrimination or hatred — makes its way through Parliament, some feminist activists are warning that it goes too far.
Hilla Kerner, of the Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter, basically told a Senate committee this week that transgender women really aren't women, and threaten the existence of exclusively "female-born" spaces, such as rape crisis centres.
Women who are not born with vaginas, she said, do not have to suffer the second-class existence of "female-born" women. Instead, they could theoretically choose to be a man if they like, which makes them much more privileged.
Those who are not "female-born," she added, cannot "know the embarrassment of having our clothes stained with blood from our period, the anxiety of facing an unwanted pregnancy and the fear of being raped, and we know the comfort of grouping with other women."
Meghan Murphy, a founder of the website Feminist Current, seconded Kerner's remarks, criticizing the proposed law because "it treats gender as a personal choice."
Well. Republicans Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum and Donald Trump together couldn't have expressed that thought more perfectly.
-
the fear of being raped
well, it's good to know we're apparently immune to rape.
-
The horse shoe theory in effect.
-
Bigots buddying up with bigots of other tribes, even if they can't stand each other on other occasions. There are precedents, like US Christian fundies buddying up with Islamist fundies to thwart international aid attempts to provide reproductive health care in third world countries.
-
Immune to pregnancy resulting from rape.
(as if that's the only problem with rape)
-
the fear of being raped
well, it's good to know we're apparently immune to rape.
Immune to "fear of being raped" to be specific.
-
the fear of being raped
well, it's good to know we're apparently immune to rape.
TERFs and incels would probably agree that women can't rape men.
-
the fear of being raped
well, it's good to know we're apparently immune to rape.
Immune to "fear of being raped" to be specific.
I think TERFs must think that Trans people are like Kender or Elves in a D & D game. Immune to fear, sleeping draughts and charm spells. I'm surprised they didn't add naturally proficient with bows.
-
Seriously I don't know about rape specifically but Transpeople are among the groups most likely to be victims of violence. Just because their experiences are different from ciswomen's doesn't make them the same as cismen's.
Also what about Transmen, they seem to get ignored in all this.
-
TERFs mostly don't care about transmen (they are pretty condescending and misgendery about them, but have nowhere near the same passionate hatred as for trans women). Also like a non-zero amount of them are dysphoric and not transitioning or detransitioned (I've heard a lot about how detransitioners fall in with TERFs because it's the only community they can find), so they have some empathy for them I guess.
Social conservatives don't talk about trans men because it's much easier to spin a threat narrative about men in dresses attacking girls in bathrooms.
-
Sighhhh... Good old horseshoe theory at work.
-
the fear of being raped
well, it's good to know we're apparently immune to rape.
TERFs and incels would probably agree that women can't rape men.
While oddly being in agreement with, oh I dunno, the LAW of most western countries.
For example, England and Wales
Rape
(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
So, a crime defined by ownership of a penis, basically. One wonders if there's a legal precedent where a rapist has tried to escape justice by pointing to the "he" pronoun [totally not a prejudicial definition or anything] and claiming their pronouns are "handflop"/"handflops"/"handflopself" and therefore according to the law they can't be guilty as the law prescribes one must use "he" pronouns to be considered a rapist...
-
That's what's in statutory law, but England has a long tradition of having crimes that are only at common law and nowhere in statutory law. For instance, I don't think murder was explicitly a crime at statutory law until relatively recently.
So while the statutory definition of rape may require that the perpetrator have a penis, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the common-law definition was more expansive.
-
That's what's in statutory law, but England has a long tradition of having crimes that are only at common law and nowhere in statutory law. For instance, I don't think murder was explicitly a crime at statutory law until relatively recently.
So while the statutory definition of rape may require that the perpetrator have a penis, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the common-law definition was more expansive.
You got me curious. A quick search on the internet revealed that women have been convicted of raping men or other women in Britain. And the Wikipedia article also mentions that the first time a man was sentenced for raping another man is actually quite recent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_males#United_Kingdom
-
TERFs mostly don't care about transmen (they are pretty condescending and misgendery about them, but have nowhere near the same passionate hatred as for trans women). Also like a non-zero amount of them are dysphoric and not transitioning or detransitioned (I've heard a lot about how detransitioners fall in with TERFs because it's the only community they can find), so they have some empathy for them I guess.
Social conservatives don't talk about trans men because it's much easier to spin a threat narrative about men in dresses attacking girls in bathrooms.
I remember this one TERF-type blogger that called herself "Dirtywhiteboi" and she really hated Transmen, but she seemed to have been the exception to the rule.
-
That's what's in statutory law, but England has a long tradition of having crimes that are only at common law and nowhere in statutory law. For instance, I don't think murder was explicitly a crime at statutory law until relatively recently.
So while the statutory definition of rape may require that the perpetrator have a penis, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the common-law definition was more expansive.
You got me curious. A quick search on the internet revealed that women have been convicted of raping men or other women in Britain. And the Wikipedia article also mentions that the first time a man was sentenced for raping another man is actually quite recent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_males#United_Kingdom
You need more wikiception. One link deeper in the one you posted leads to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_sex_in_chains_case
And one quotes
Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.
Ahem?
-
Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.
Ahem?
No extradition proceedings were instituted by Britain, and the English court sentenced McKinney in absentia to a year in jail.[15] Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.[16]
Ahem? Why did you leave out the part where the courts said that she did commit a crime and sentenced her of indecent assault?
She was declared guilty of assault. So even if this was not technically "rape" as defined in the law it is still what is commonly known as rape even if the law that she was sentenced for violation of is different.
Just as is explained in the reply to this petition:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124524
The laws of Britain state that for a crime to be "rape" it has to have "penile penetration" but there are other sexual assault crimes that can be committed by women and the sentences for those can also be heavy.
Kinda like how in Finland a "murha" (murder) is a specific type of homicide which fills 3 qualifications: a) It is premeditated. b) It is "exceptionally brutal." c) It has been committed by a person who is in their right mind.
So killing someone with one bullet to the head is not technically a "murder" but it is still illegal and carries a heavy punishment. (I think the term would be Tappo / manslaughter.)
-
Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.
Ahem?
No extradition proceedings were instituted by Britain, and the English court sentenced McKinney in absentia to a year in jail.[15] Under the then-Sexual Offences Act 1956, due to the victim's gender, there was no crime of rape committed, though indecent assault of a man applied.[16]
Ahem? Why did you leave out the part where the courts said that she did commit a crime and sentenced her of indecent assault?
She was declared guilty of assault. So even if this was not technically "rape" as defined in the law it is still what is commonly known as rape even if the law that she was sentenced for violation of is different.
Just as is explained in the reply to this petition:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124524
The laws of Britain state that for a crime to be "rape" it has to have "penile penetration" but there are other sexual assault crimes that can be committed by women and the sentences for those can also be heavy.
Kinda like how in Finland a "murha" (murder) is a specific type of homicide which fills 3 qualifications: a) It is premeditated. b) It is "exceptionally brutal." c) It has been committed by a person who is in their right mind.
So killing someone with one bullet to the head is not technically a "murder" but it is still illegal and carries a heavy punishment. (I think the term would be Tappo / manslaughter.)
Sentenced to a year in jail in absentia, shrugged and didn't give a fuck about extradition and applying said sentence.
Can you imagine the outcry if you reversed the genders and set it in the modern day?
"So what if it's basically rape except we've conveniently got an asterisk so that people of your demographic have legal immunity to that charge. We can give you a sentence equivalent to someone found guilty of driving without due care and attention and call it equality. It's not like the world's most famous 'equality movement' is going to give a shit since it favours them XD"
-
Also, bear in mind that in 1956 (when this law was written) the UK still had the death penalty.
Rape was a capital crime.
That only men could be found guilty of. By definition.
-
http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/women-only-spa-counterpoint-1.4170158
A woman-only spa came under fire for not allowing transwomen; naturally, it has defenders.
-
Trans activists would argue the distinction between women and trans women is an unimportant one — that people who identify as trans women are women like all other women. But the reality is that internal feelings don't change outward impressions. To some women and girls, the presence of a male body can leave them feeling uncomfortable, uneasy and even threatened.
And to some women and girls, being told that we are not real women can also leave us feeling uncomfortable, uneasy and even threatened. Given that, y'know, transphobic hate crimes are a thing. But that's only a problem when it happens to cis people, I guess