Destiny vs Arielle Scarcella (transgenderism)



Arielle Scarcella wanted to define sex according to secondary sex characteristics but she did not do a very good job at defending that (correct position) possibly due to her not actually believing in that. It is likely that she has a more extreme view (defining sex by chromosomes) but decided to abandon that becuase it's indefensible
what about abnormal (more masculine) cis females
They are closes to the masculine side on the bimodal distribution but unless they have been on testosterone or have some other medical abnormality (intersex) they are still biologically female. In the case of people in between it makes sense to simply let them remain in their original sex category meaning looking at their history.

You can have a stricter standard for becoming a citizen of a country than to remain a citizen, this is often required to prevent abuse, we do want higher standards to change your legal sex to female than to keep your female legal sex. This may seem unfair but nothing is fair in this world, if you are not born with something you might have to work hard to earn it.

Females without a vagina are indeed less female and from a biological perspective they are less important, this is of course not how our current society value people, instead today it's mostly about you being able to make males sexually satisfied.


Biological sex is bimodal, not binary
The fact that sex is bimodal means that some people are more biologically female than others, some people can get pregnant and give birth while other individuals are incapable of that despite having an overall feminine body, maybe it will be possible for them in the future with a womb transplant.

Some trans women have been able to breastfeed, the breasts you get from HRT are real female breasts.

HRT will affect all aspects of your body, the transition is biological and very real.

If we just look at strict biology we will have to draw the line somewhere if we are going to force everyone into 2 categories, some people will get kinda fucked over by this and this is impossible to avoid.

I can see where some individuals gravitate towards the gender identity concept where it's about feelings "i feel like a girl" rather than your physical features, i view that as nonsense and it will create social problems trying to make everyone pretend you are a girl.

In any case it is true that some people clearly benefit from medical transition and thus they should transition, we shouldn't force people to live as as male when it makes them miserable. You should decide over your own body, not politicians, judges, your parents or psychiatrists.

Another way to defend medical transition is that it is beneficial for society that some individuals change their sex and this can of course also justify forcing people to change their sex medically against their will "for their own good" and this happening in the future is a very real possibility.


Is a strict criteria required to protect females
Making it easy to become legally female will in theory put but cis and trans females at risk such as letting perverts use female locker room by claiming "i identify as a girl". While this is a legitimate concern so far very few men have been willing to abuse self-id rules.

Potential rapists will generally prefer to be alone with their victim so there will not be any additionan vitnesses, in addition these men tend to posses toxic masculinity that make them very unwilling to do anything feminine. In addition most people dont want to draw that type of attention to themselves and thus just go along with what is socially acceptible which is to use male locker room even while actually transitioning.

The biggest issue with self-id laws is that they tend to backfire against trans people by making a lot of people worried in addition to encouraging harmful early social transition (before your body is there biologically).