TERFs crash London Pride

[kellyb]

That's an interesting theory, possibly even correct, but should still not be asserted without evidence. Nor should it be asserted to bolster a claim that trans-people should be denied recognition as belonging to the gender of their choosing.

This is (preliminary) evidence:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202330

A 14-year-old natal female and three of her natal female friends were taking group lessons together with a very popular coach. The coach came out as transgender, and, within one year, all four students announced they were also transgender.

A 14-year-old natal female and three of her natal female friends are part of a larger friend group that spends much of their time talking about gender and sexuality. The three natal female friends all announced they were trans boys and chose similar masculine names. After spending time with these three friends, the 14-year-old natal female announced that she was also a trans boy.

eta:
And I would never intentionally misgender someone.

 

[kellyb]

I think we can leave it to sports organizations to decide for themselves what is or is not fair competition since that is what they do. The "fear button" comment was directed towards people who believe allowing trans-people to use the bathroom or dressing room that corresponds to their gender identity will open the door for sexual harassment or assault by people who are not legitimately trans.

Since I haven't seen anyone argue for forcing women to compete against trans-women, can we set that aside as a red herring and instead concentrate on the aspects that are fear mongering?

We're allowed to have opinions about what sports organizations should and should not do. I mentioned sports because that was part of Rolfe's quote you quoted.

Bathrooms are not a problem, but dressing rooms are.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...g-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html

Public policy should acknowledge and be based upon the minutiae of these issues.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

Bathrooms are not a problem, but dressing rooms are.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...g-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html

Public policy should acknowledge and be based upon the minutiae of these issues.

I notice that although the article states;

Just under 90 per cent of complaints regarding changing room sexual assaults, voyeurism and harassment are about incidents in unisex facilities.

What’s more, two thirds of all sexual attacks at leisure centres and public swimming pools take place in unisex changing rooms.

... it doesn't say anything about how many of those offenses were committed by men pretending to be transwomen.

If you are really interested in the minutiae as that relates to the topic we are discussing, don't you think that would be a helpful statistic?

We are, after all, discussing the threat presented by men who are pretending to be trans just so they can get into women's facilities and be aggressive perverts.

If the transwomen aren't guilty of anything, then why should they be punished for what the cis-males do?

 

[kellyb]

I notice that although the article states;

​

... it doesn't say anything about how many of those offenses were committed by men pretending to be transwomen.

If you are really interested in the minutiae as that relates to the topic we are discussing, don't you think that would be a helpful statistic?

We are, after all, discussing the threat presented by men who are pretending to be trans just so they can get into women's facilities and be aggressive perverts.

If the transwomen aren't guilty of anything, then why should they be punished for what the cis-males do?

I'm not worried about transwomen - I'm worried about creepazoid cis-dudes. Policy has to account for both.

When I let my 10 year old daughter go pee with her 12 year old bff at a national forest bathroom on a camping trip, I'm not worried about a transwoman or drag queen jumping out of the shadows to sexually assault them. I'm worried about the hypothetical rapist cis dude

I've always been incredibly modest/bashful/whatever and changed in a stall, so I don't really get the changing room dynamic, but I can see that it's different from the bathroom argument, which is a whole lot of nothing.

 

[Mycroft]

This is (preliminary) evidence:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202330

That's the same study you've brought up before. Others have expressed issues with the self-selected nature of the participants. How come that isn't an issue for you? I'm looking it over, and it seems like a huge issue to me.

If that in and of itself doesn't bother you, maybe reading it in depth should? For example, this passage:

The groups targeted for mocking by the friend groups are often heterosexual (straight) people and non-transgender people (called “cis” or “cisgender”). Sometimes animosity was also directed towards males, white people, gay and lesbian (non-transgender) people, aromantic and asexual people, and “terfs”. One participant explained, “They are constantly putting down straight, white people for being privileged, dumb and boring.”

To me it reads like it was written specifically to terrify conservatives by affirming their belief in a far left that literally hates everything they stand for. While I'm sure someone out there fits that description in attitude and beliefs, I just don't believe it's common enough to be a significant in teens deciding to transition to a different gender.

eta:
And I would never intentionally misgender someone.

Unfortunately in this conversation this needs clarification. I think if asked Rolfe, JihadJane and Caveman1917 would say the same, but they would also call transwomen men, and transmen women.

What does it mean to you to "misgender someone"?

 

[Mycroft]

We're allowed to have opinions about what sports organizations should and should not do. I mentioned sports because that was part of Rolfe's quote you quoted.

The irrelevant part? Again, is anyone here arguing about transgendered people in athletics? No, the argument (and fear mongering) is about transgendered people assaulting people in bathrooms and dressing rooms.

Bathrooms are not a problem, but dressing rooms are.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...g-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html

Public policy should acknowledge and be based upon the minutiae of these issues.

Putting this article forward as evidence that we, as a society, shouldn't let transwomen use the women's changing room is just stupid. The article doesn't mention transpeople at all, and is of zero evidential value in this discussion. So much so that I have to ask you, someone I would normally consider a fairly serious and intelligent person, are you kidding?!

 

[Mycroft]

I'm not worried about transwomen - I'm worried about creepazoid cis-dudes. Policy has to account for both.

It's already illegal for anyone to assault or harass your child. Denying transpeople access to the restroom of their choice will not make your child safer, it only discriminates against the transperson.

 

[kellyb]

That's the same study you've brought up before. Others have expressed issues with the self-selected nature of the participants. How come that isn't an issue for you? I'm looking it over, and it seems like a huge issue to me.

If you're looking at a specific subgroup, it's really standard. That's kind of the point. If you're doing a trial of an intervention in a subgroup, it's called the "inclusion criteria".

If the author was misrepresenting the subgroup as typical, or extrapolating the findings about the subgroup to the general population, THAT would be bad science, but she's not doing that.

If that in and of itself doesn't bother you, maybe reading it in depth should? For example, this passage:



To me it reads like it was written specifically to terrify conservatives by affirming their belief in a far left that literally hates everything they stand for. While I'm sure someone out there fits that description in attitude and beliefs, I just don't believe it's common enough to be a significant in teens deciding to transition to a different gender.

Did you ever hang out at the atheism+ forums? What she's describing was kind of their thing. It's the most toxic subculture I've ever encountered.

She's not a conservative or sympathetic to conservatism - all her previous research was about how to increase access to abortion. I'm honestly kind of glad that that phenomenon is being documented, and by someone like her.

What does it mean to you to "misgender someone"?

It means using a pronoun the person in question would object to, or referring to a transwoman as a man, etc.

 

[kellyb]

The irrelevant part? Again, is anyone here arguing about transgendered people in athletics? No, the argument (and fear mongering) is about transgendered people assaulting people in bathrooms and dressing rooms.



Putting this article forward as evidence that we, as a society, shouldn't let transwomen use the women's changing room is just stupid. The article doesn't mention transpeople at all, and is of zero evidential value in this discussion. So much so that I have to ask you, someone I would normally consider a fairly serious and intelligent person, are you kidding?!

The sports thing is a recent development, and it's forced me to add some nuance to my general (and vehement) trans-inclusive attitude towards policies I endorse. I preferred it when I could just say "transwomen are women" and that was the end of it.

Re: changing rooms, I likewise think that's an area where it's important for the space to be (and I'm cringing saying this) cis-exclusive. Creepy voyeuristic dudes do exist, and...being the peeping tom types they are ...of course they're going to abuse changing room policy wherever and however they can. There's no way they won't take advantage of a trans inclusive changing room policy.

I really wish everyone was just like me, though, and would shift towards only using stalls for changing. I will never understand how so many people are totally fine disrobing in front of a room of strangers. lol (That is so weird. What is up with y'all? I didn't understand it when I was 10 and in gym class, and I still do not understand it at 40. Don't get naked in front of strangers!)

 

[kellyb]

It's already illegal for anyone to assault or harass your child. Denying transpeople access to the restroom of their choice will not make your child safer, it only discriminates against the transperson.

AGAIN, I think the bathroom bills are both silly and nefarious nonsense. I'm in Memphis, one of the LGBTQI "Mecca" cities along with NOLA and San Francisco, and I've always peed harmoniously in peace alongside drag queens and transwomen in "the girl's room". It's a complete and total non-issue.

You're arguing with me over something I agree with you about.

 

[quadraginta]

I'm not worried about transwomen - I'm worried about creepazoid cis-dudes. Policy has to account for both.

And yet, while speaking about taking into account the minutiae while making policy, you cited an article which did nothing of the sort as some sort of argument about the dangers of allowing transwomen in changing rooms.

When I let my 10 year old daughter go pee with her 12 year old bff at a national forest bathroom on a camping trip, I'm not worried about a transwoman or drag queen jumping out of the shadows to sexually assault them. I'm worried about the hypothetical rapist cis dude

This is confusing, at the same time you allege your lack of concern about the purported dangers of transwomen being creepy perverts you talk about the dangers of rapist cis dudes who aren't transwomen, and what we are discussing is allowing transwomen into changing rooms, not rapist cis dudes

I've always been incredibly modest/bashful/whatever and changed in a stall, so I don't really get the changing room dynamic, but I can see that it's different from the bathroom argument, which is a whole lot of nothing.

You don't seem to be presenting much of an explanation about why it is different, though.

If anything you seem to be arguing against yourself.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

Re: changing rooms, I likewise think that's an area where it's important for the space to be (and I'm cringing saying this) cis-exclusive. Creepy voyeuristic dudes do exist, and...being the peeping tom types they are ...of course they're going to abuse changing room policy wherever and however they can. There's no way they won't take advantage of a trans inclusive changing room policy.

<snip>

I think we can see the crux of the issue here. It isn't about a realistic assessment of the danger. It's about some inchoate fear and a personal certainty that the worst must happen.

There are already laws in place to use against creepy voyeuristic anyone abusing changing room policies. There no evidence that allowing transwomen into changing rooms will increase the incidence of such episodes to any significant degree. Quite the opposite, in fact. In places where it is already being done there doesn't seem to be a sudden rash of creepy voyeuristic rapist cis dudes.

The only evidence you have offered is your conviction that it will.

 

[Lithrael]

There are already laws in place to use against creepy voyeuristic anyone abusing changing room policies. There no evidence that allowing transwomen into changing rooms will increase the incidence of such episodes to any significant degree.

Agreed. Kicking out trans people on the grounds that if you let them in, Bad Guys will get in too, seems like a wildly bad way to handle the problem of Bad Guys. It seems to me that the best way forward with this would be to nail down new accepted codes of conduct and escalation of grievance for anyone using a vulnerable public space. If someone is being creepy in the changing rooms it doesn't matter WHAT kind of person they are. Rules, customs, and etiquette need to be reasonably applicable to any people who make others feel unsafe. You don't call security because you suspect someone is in there who shouldn't be, but rather you call security because someone is staring like a weirdo, loitering when nobody else is, keeps hiding their cellphone, etc etc.

It seems to me like all this stuff really boils down to, people think it's easier to tell if someone's being a pervert in the changing room if everyone in there is supposed to be the same gender and have the same organs. Except for the mens' room, where there's probably gay male perverts being voyeurs or exhibitionists but all the straight men either got over it or stopped complaining very much in public (except for the ones who didn't stop complaining in public). And especially for the womens' room, because lesbian perverts don't exist and even if they did they wouldn't be scary or dangerous.

 

[kellyb]

And yet, while speaking about taking into account the minutiae while making policy, you cited an article which did nothing of the sort as some sort of argument about the dangers of allowing transwomen in changing rooms.

With transgenderism now being a matter of simple self-ID, which I support, by the way, the evidence about voyeurism in unisex changing rooms can very appropriately be extrapolated to the probable outcome in trans-inclusive changing rooms.

This is confusing, at the same time you allege your lack of concern about the purported dangers of transwomen being creepy perverts you talk about the dangers of rapist cis dudes who aren't transwomen, and what we are discussing is allowing transwomen into changing rooms, not rapist cis dudes

I was just explaining where I'm coming from on the two issues. Bathrooms? Totally should remain trans-friendly/inclusive. Changing rooms where people are getting naked in front of each other? That's a space which should probably remain exclusive to cis-women. I don't know why this is so confusing to you.

You don't seem to be presenting much of an explanation about why it is different, though.

If anything you seem to be arguing against yourself.

When you're in a stall peeing, there's nothing for a creepy voyeur to see. The stall provides privacy in women's restrooms. We don't have urinals. Everything "private" happens in a stall.

Changing rooms at pools, etc have a big, open communal space where people (people generally, not me!) change clothes in front of each other with no privacy. Those spaces should probably be segregated by biological sex. They all have bathrooms with stalls in there, too, (in my experience) so I don't see it being too onerous for the changing room policy and cultural norm to be that transwomen just change like I do, in a bathroom stall in there.

 

[quadraginta]

With transgenderism now being a matter of simple self-ID, which I support, by the way,

Begs the question.

One which you seem to think you have established beyond contradiction.

You haven't.

the evidence about voyeurism in unisex changing rooms can very appropriately be extrapolated to the probable outcome in trans-inclusive changing rooms.

Why?

There doesn't seem to have been any sign of this in places where transwomen have already been permitted to use women's changing rooms.

What makes you think that will change?

I was just explaining where I'm coming from on the two issues. Bathrooms? Totally should remain trans-friendly/inclusive. Changing rooms where people are getting naked in front of each other? That's a space which should probably remain exclusive to cis-women. I don't know why this is so confusing to you.

<snip>

Don't changing rooms generally have booths?

You don't seem to have a problem with booths.

 

[kellyb]

Don't changing rooms generally have booths?

You don't seem to have a problem with booths.

Some do, some don't. I think it's locker rooms specifically that often don't, but in my (limited) experience, they do have areas of bathroom stalls you walk by to get to the open changing area, so whenever applicable, a good policy should just encourage transwomen to change in there. I suspect that's actually what most transwomen already do.

 

[kellyb]

Begs the question.

One which you seem to think you have established beyond contradiction.

You haven't.




Why?

There doesn't seem to have been any sign of this in places where transwomen have already been permitted to use women's changing rooms.

What makes you think that will change?

It has happened, but we don't know how common it is, because there's no "reporting system" for this type of thing.

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinio...when-a-transgender-person-uses-a-locker-room/ (Warning, the author of the article seems to be some flavor of an anti-trans bigot, but the facts as reported stand.)

a man walked into the women’s and girls’ locker room to change at a public pool on Feb. 8.

When the man walked in to undress, the locker room was occupied by women and members of a girls’ swim team, presumably in various states of undress. Quite understandably, some of them “became alarmed” and complained to the Seattle Parks and Recreation staff. Although the man said “the law has changed and I have a right to be here,” the staff asked him to leave the women’s locker room, which he did.

So, was the man allowed to be in the women’s locker room or was he not? Seattle Parks and Recreation issued a statement suggesting that the man would not have been asked to leave if he had simply verbally identified as a woman.

Here's another article that goes into a little more detail:

http://mynorthwest.com/188993/man-caught-undressing-in-front-of-girls-at-green-lake-locker-room/

At around 5:30 p.m. on Feb. 8, an adult went into the locker room to change. Takami says that at “no time did he verbally ‘identify’ as female,” nor did he request to be treated as transgender.

At the time, a local youth swim team was using the facilities. Young girls and some of their parents “became alarmed” that the male was changing in the female locker room and alerted the front desk staff. Staff members then “asked the man to leave and offered the availability of a family changing room.”

He did not accept the offer.

After his swim, he “again entered the women’s locker room to change.” Front desk staff once again asked him to leave “and he eventually did.”

If this isn’t a “transgender issue” why didn’t staffers call the police? Critics of the failed transgender bathroom bill indicate there are already rules to punish people who break the law.

According to the law: “If another person expresses concern or discomfort about a person who uses a facility that is consistent with the person’s gender expression or gender identity, the person expressing discomfort should be directed to a separate or gender-neutral facility, if available.”

 

[caveman1917]

Unfortunately in this conversation this needs clarification. I think if asked Rolfe, JihadJane and Caveman1917 would say the same, but they would also call transwomen men, and transmen women.

What does it mean to you to "misgender someone"?

It means absolutely nothing. It's just a result from the genderists' strange belief that pronouns refer to someone's masculinity/femininity rather than someone's sex. It's not even possible to "misgender" someone because nobody is being "gendered" in the first place - at least not by me. People are being "sexed" though, so I guess you could "missex" someone.

 

[deadrose]

The man in that Seattle event appears to have been a right-winger trying to cause the sort of trouble they claim will happen, and the radio station that reported it is a right-wing talk radio station. I'm just doing this from memory, but I think one of their pundits had suggested the idea on-air.

Of course most people just heard or remembered the part that confirmed their suspicions, and not the rest.

 

[luchog]

It has happened, but we don't know how common it is, because there's no "reporting system" for this type of thing.

No, it hasn't see below. So far, there is not one documented of an actual transgender person predating on women in public restrooms or locker rooms.

The man in that Seattle event appears to have been a right-winger trying to cause the sort of trouble they claim will happen, and the radio station that reported it is a right-wing talk radio station. I'm just doing this from memory, but I think one of their pundits had suggested the idea on-air.

Of course most people just heard or remembered the part that confirmed their suspicions, and not the rest.

There have so far, to my knowledge, been two incidents of this sort. In both cases they have been far-right anti-trans jackasses doing it deliberately to "prove" the right-wing pundits' claims about transpeople.

But, of course anti-trans crusaders never let facts get in the way of a sensationalist story.