• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trans Women are not Women

Status
Not open for further replies.
The spectacle of a bunch of men self-righteously agreeing that women have no right to protected spaces free of any male presence, and that any objection is equivalent to colour prejudice, is pretty nauseating.
 
Rolfe said:
The spectacle of a bunch of men self-righteously agreeing that women have no right to protected spaces free of any male presence, and that any objection is equivalent to colour prejudice, is pretty nauseating.
Click to expand...

What theory of rights are we talking about here?

ETA: Like, constitutional rights? Metaphysical god-given rights? Natural rights? Democratically validated socially constructed rights?
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
... the idea that we base one groups rights on the comfort level of another group is patently false.
Click to expand...

It happens all the time. Try blasting out AC/DC at high volume through an open window at 2 a.m. in a residential street and you might soon find out that the rights of the majority to get some sleep override your right to listen to loud music in the early hours.

If that's too 'physical' for you and doesn't compare with the subject here then paint your conservation area house dayglo pink and wait for the response. Or just walk down a busy high street naked.
 
GlennB said:
It happens all the time. Try blasting out AC/DC at high volume through an open window at 2 a.m. in a residential street and you might soon find out that the rights of the majority to get some sleep override your right to listen to loud music in the early hours.

If that's too 'physical' for you and doesn't compare with the subject here then paint your conservation area house dayglo pink and wait for the response. Or just walk down a busy high street naked.
Click to expand...

That sounds like one of my student-days weekends.
 
Arcade22 said:
]
Being a heterosexual male while surrounded by potential homo/bisexual males must be utterly mortifying. This is truly a hellish existence.
Click to expand...
No idea

But since it has nothing to do with the issue of males entering female only spaces I see no relevance either.
 
Arcade22 said:
And my scenario was such an obvious extreme exaggeration that there's no way anything even remotely close to that is considered acceptable behavior anywhere.
Click to expand...

Well of course it is, which is why your post was really nothing but trolling. It had nothing to do with reality. It had no real worth. It was a mere distraction.

Sadly, it was not nearly as exaggerated as you might have thought. It really is possible these days for men to go into locker rooms, watch women and girls undress, and walk around naked in front of women and girls, and if the women and girls complain, they will be informed that it is his right to do so, because he is really a woman since he says so. I usually cite the case of Colleen Brenna at this point, but that one is several years old by now. I could look up another one, but I'm disinterested at the moment. I know there have been others. Rolfe linked to a bunch.


It occurred to me that I hadn't read about a bunch of high school locker room incidents lately. Had the problem gone away? Off to google news. No. The problem hadn't gone away. It just wasn't considered newsworthy by the media companies who get front page coverage. It was more of a local story now. Searching for it, I found lots of cases where girls were protesting that they had to take off their clothes in front of a guy. Oh...and, I say guy, but that's really just a convenience because that's what the teenagers might say. You know those crazy teenage girls. They see a penis and they just automatically assume there's a guy attached to it. Darned kids these days.

So, how about we stick to what's really happening? In my opinion, what's really happening is pretty bad. We don't need to make up stuff about things that are not happening.
 
Ziggurat said:
Obviously yes, since trans vs. cis. is a fixed-sum game. It's a simple mathematical fact that if trends affect trans rates, they also affect cis rates. It's not a blind spot in by reasoning, it's not a bias I have, I'm not in denial about that. I didn't bother mentioning it because it's blindingly obvious, and it's not the focus of what we're talking about.
Click to expand...

It seems to be the opposite. In times of increased gender sentiment you'd see both trans-gender identity and cis-gender identity increase, and people who either don't have or don't bother with gender identity decrease. The same way that in times of increased nationalist sentiment you'd see both trans-national identity and cis-national identity increase and the people who either don't have or don't bother with national identity decrease.

The recent rise in cis-gender identity would then be consistent with the recent rise in trans-gender identity being a social phenomenon since one could hardly argue that the people with cis-gender identity were too oppressed to come out openly before.
 
Rolfe said:
The spectacle of a bunch of men self-righteously agreeing that women have no right to protected spaces free of any male presence, and that any objection is equivalent to colour prejudice, is pretty nauseating.
Click to expand...

If you find someones presence so objectionable that you can't endure it then the onus is generally upon you to remove yourself from the area. Instead of showering and changing at the gym do that at home, or even use a bathroom. That's what normal people do. Often schools will have a separate private changing room/shower/bathroom for people like that.

If anything it's you who want to forcibly separate others from these areas, against the wishes of the majority of people. I'm sure most people can endure their presence without becoming nauseous or experincing whatever problems you exhibit. So stop acting like you are some kind of victim.
 
Last edited:
Arcade22 said:
If you find someones presence so objectionable that you can't endure it then the onus is generally upon you to remove yourself from the area.
Click to expand...
No it isn't. Not in the case of services and spaces provided for a single sex. The onus is on someone who does not fit the criterion (is not that sex) to remove themself. Or be removed.

You have it backwards.
 
GlennB said:
It happens all the time. Try blasting out AC/DC at high volume through an open window at 2 a.m. in a residential street and you might soon find out that the rights of the majority to get some sleep override your right to listen to loud music in the early hours.

If that's too 'physical' for you and doesn't compare with the subject here then paint your conservation area house dayglo pink and wait for the response. Or just walk down a busy high street naked.
Click to expand...

Causing a disturbance to others is not the same as not being comfortable sharing a space with them. And none of these single out particular groups.

Now there may welĺ be legitimate arguments on the topic but not being comfortable sharing a space with people of a certain designation isn't one of them.
 
Meadmaker said:
Well of course it is, which is why your post was really nothing but trolling. It had nothing to do with reality. It had no real worth. It was a mere distraction.

Sadly, it was not nearly as exaggerated as you might have thought. It really is possible these days for men to go into locker rooms, watch women and girls undress, and walk around naked in front of women and girls, and if the women and girls complain, they will be informed that it is his right to do so, because he is really a woman since he says so. I usually cite the case of Colleen Brenna at this point, but that one is several years old by now. I could look up another one, but I'm disinterested at the moment. I know there have been others. Rolfe linked to a bunch.


It occurred to me that I hadn't read about a bunch of high school locker room incidents lately. Had the problem gone away? Off to google news. No. The problem hadn't gone away. It just wasn't considered newsworthy by the media companies who get front page coverage. It was more of a local story now. Searching for it, I found lots of cases where girls were protesting that they had to take off their clothes in front of a guy. Oh...and, I say guy, but that's really just a convenience because that's what the teenagers might say. You know those crazy teenage girls. They see a penis and they just automatically assume there's a guy attached to it. Darned kids these days.

So, how about we stick to what's really happening? In my opinion, what's really happening is pretty bad. We don't need to make up stuff about things that are not happening.
Click to expand...

Inappropriate or illegal behaviour in any space remains inappropriate or illegal regardless of the gender of the people involved.

This simple fact appears to get forgotten.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Now there may welĺ be legitimate arguments on the topic but not being comfortable sharing a space with people of a certain designation isn't one of them.
Click to expand...

I was going to take you at your word that you wanted legitimate debate on the subject, but with this post, you have kind of made it obvious that you do not. You are saying that any argument based on discomfort in sharing space is not legitimate. Well, you have correctly deduced that discomfort is indeed the issue that so many people, especially women, have when it comes to sharing space while undressed. However, you have simply declared that their discomfort is illegitimate. Unless you are at least willing to allow that declaration to be questioned and for that to be part of the debate, then there is no room for debate.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Inappropriate or illegal behaviour in any space remains inappropriate or illegal regardless of the gender of the people involved.

This simple fact appears to get forgotten.
Click to expand...

And here you provide further evidence that you are not interested in a legitimate debate. Most people, and until recently our society's laws, declared it inappropriate for people to take off their clothes in front of the opposite sex, or to venture into a space where the opposite sex may be undressed.

Those laws have changed recently. Instead of the "opposite sex", our new laws are based on "opposite gender", and "gender" which used to be synonymous with sex, has been redefined as......something.....I'm not sure what, because every definition I have seen is a circular, and therefore meaningless, definition.

So, you are declaring that inappropriate behavior remains illegal, and since what is going on now, with men* sharing locker rooms with women and girls by declaring themselves to be women, is legal, must, by your definition, be appropriate.

It's not an honest debating position. The honest position would be to debate whether or not the behavior is appropriate, and whether it ought to be legal. My answer to both of those questions is "no". If you were inclined to debate, we could do so, but you seem more inclined toward pronouncement than debate.

*Disputed definition. I mean "post-pubescent biological males". I'm willing to be flexible on that if surgical alteration has taken place.
 
Arcade22 said:
That's what normal people do.
Click to expand...


No.


The word "normal" is defined by majority behavior, by what is typical, usual.


Until recently, the behavior we are discussing, in which a biological male entered and disrobed in a space designated for women, would have been considered very, very, abnormal. Objecting to such behavior would have been considered normal.

Indeed, it still is normal, but there are a large number of people trying to convince us that it is abnormal. It isn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom