Trans Women are not Women

[TragicMonkey]

So...……… How much of a perceived thread do you think one should find acceptable?


Fact: men rape women, men, children, and animals. Therefore, animals, children, men, and women have a reason to be afraid men will rape them.

You seem to be saying that since those things only happen sometimes, no one should ever be afraid of it -or should only be afraid to some small degree. If that's correct, to what degree do you think it's acceptable for an individual to fear this happening?

That's the same argument I've read explaining why certain nationalities shouldn't be allowed to enter the country.

 

[DragonLady]

Thanks for the vote of confidence.

You're right. That was a bit overzealous.

Consider to say "Some men"

Clearly, most do not. But some do. So, the prudent thing for women is to take precautions against the worst pretty much all the time. It's not pleasant, but like everything else, the ounce of prevention is worth the lifetime of cure.

 

[DragonLady]

That's the same argument I've read explaining why certain nationalities shouldn't be allowed to enter the country.

Weellll I haven't looked into it, so I don't know if it's true, but have heard statistics bandied about saying illegal immigrants are more likely to commit other crimes, including rape. I guess the idea is "in for a penny, in for a pound".

But, again, I can't say if that's accurate or not.

 

[Belz...]

You're right. That was a bit overzealous.

Consider to say "Some men"

Clearly, most do not. But some do. So, the prudent thing for women is to take precautions against the worst pretty much all the time. It's not pleasant, but like everything else, the ounce of prevention is worth the lifetime of cure.

Some women do that, too. Some children mow down others with guns. Should I fear everyone?

 

[TragicMonkey]

Weellll I haven't looked into it, so I don't know if it's true, but have heard statistics bandied about saying illegal immigrants are more likely to commit other crimes, including rape. I guess the idea is "in for a penny, in for a pound".

But, again, I can't say if that's accurate or not.

I was referring to the attempted blanket ban on legal visitors from six particular Muslim countries, on the suggestion they're terrorist risks.

Although the same argument works if you want to accuse illegal immigrants of various crimes, or if you were a German in the 1930s I'm certain another group could be substituted. A fine argument, risk from particular types of person. It's been used a lot!

 

[Francesca R]

mainstream feminism [is it] encourages women to react to men [the way homophobes react to gay men,] as a constant predatory threat.

Er, no. Predatory men are what encourage that.

I doubt that refugees in a Rohingya camp (see post 1653) have even heard of mainstream feminism for example. I wonder who indoctrinated them to fear partially open loos that front onto public passageways, who persuaded them to not eat or drink so that they are less likely to need to use them, and who told them to defecate in their tents instead.

So. Unfortunately women may feel that all men are a potential predatory threat. Some maybe do. Sorry about that. Society need not accommodate that kind of fear to allow for all its widespread possible implications, which would be unbalanced and over the top, and too harmful to men. Other women may be more likely to fear the predatory threat of men in particular settings such as those for which sex-segregation has been already provided (such as public lavatories and other places). This does not mean they spend every minute of their living afraid that all men are potential predators. It does mean they are more alert to this issue in certain circumstances. Circumstances which have been accommodated as such by societies in many cases.

If, then, a group of biological males aggressively campaign for access to such enclosures, and some of them have been shown to be predatory, even if many or most of them are not, there will be--to say the least--pushback.

I'm getting really tired of being the only demographic that people can demand broad, across the board "protection" from.

I can appreciate that.

 

[DragonLady]

Some women do that, too. Some children mow down others with guns. Should I fear everyone?

A healthy dose of fear has hurt people far less often than trusting everyone, IMO.

The question for this topic is: what is the healthy dose?
Further, what is the healthy dose that will remain healthy for pretty much everyone in pretty much every circumstance all over the country?

The setting we have now isn't perfect. We segregate by physical sex, and sometimes there has to be exceptions. Up 'til now there's been an unspoken agreement to tolerate those exceptions without too much fuss, as long as they didn't cause trouble...but clearly there are those who do not think that's good enough.

So, what will be the new happy medium?

Someone suggested removing all segregation - make everyone happy by making sure no one is happy.

Or, we could just remove public restrooms altogether. Some countries have streets where everyone simply uses the gutter.

I don't have the answers here. But I can certainly see the problems some of the proposed solutions might bring about.

 

[Steve]

So...……… How much of a perceived thread do you think one should find acceptable?


Fact: men rape women, men, children, and animals. Therefore, animals, children, men, and women have a reason to be afraid men will rape them.

You seem to be saying that since those things only happen sometimes, no one should ever be afraid of it -or should only be afraid to some small degree. If that's correct, to what degree do you think it's acceptable for an individual to fear this happening?

Is rape more likely in a busy public washroom than in a dark movie theater? a public parkade? a restaurant? any other location where males and females mix freely? What is so special about a place where people go to eliminate their waste? There is nothing erotic or sexual about it.

 

[Meadmaker]

If the absolute number with access is key then, yes, that's right. But if we consider the quality of access then there are other considerations. Perhaps we should consult Jeremy Bentham^WP before the women's sports events are overrun with men?



I didn't quite understand this, but maybe you're referring to what I wrote above.

Absolutely.

What I'm trying to do with the wall comment is to see if I can get people to think about the issue differently. Some of the arguments seem kind of "canned".

So, I'll reiterate what I said, in the hopes that it might trigger some thoughts from a different perspective. The important feature of a private facility is the wall. Any argument about "rights" really ought to be expressed in terms of the wall that surrounds the facility.

 

[Steve]

A healthy dose of fear has hurt people far less often than trusting everyone, IMO.

The question for this topic is: what is the healthy dose?
Further, what is the healthy dose that will remain healthy for pretty much everyone in pretty much every circumstance all over the country?

The setting we have now isn't perfect. We segregate by physical sex, and sometimes there has to be exceptions. Up 'til now there's been an unspoken agreement to tolerate those exceptions without too much fuss, as long as they didn't cause trouble...but clearly there are those who do not think that's good enough.

So, what will be the new happy medium?

Someone suggested removing all segregation - make everyone happy by making sure no one is happy.

Or, we could just remove public restrooms altogether. Some countries have streets where everyone simply uses the gutter.

I don't have the answers here. But I can certainly see the problems some of the proposed solutions might bring about.

Those slippery slope arguments are always so convincing.

 

[TragicMonkey]

The perceived problem could be solved with currently available technology. Install a voice-activated communications device (like an Alexa) in these terrifying places, that will set off alarms and summon police and record videos for evidence when triggered. This would severely limit the ability to get away with crime in such places, which is a more reasonable deterrent than attempts to make crime physically impossible. It could also be used to summon medical assistance in emergency, or to lodge complaints of lack of toilet paper.

 

[Francesca R]

Is rape more likely in a busy public washroom than in a dark movie theater? a public parkade? a restaurant? any other location where males and females mix freely? What is so special about a place where people go to eliminate their waste? There is nothing erotic or sexual about it.

Just for the sake of argument, if there were sex-segregated cinemas, parking garages or restaurants in existence, and then groups of activist biological males began to demand access to female-segregated versions of these, I think the opposition to it would be pretty much the same.

 

[DragonLady]

Is rape more likely in a busy public washroom than in a dark movie theater?

Probably not. But not all public washrooms are busy, and I don't know of any sex segregated dark movie theaters.

 

[DragonLady]

The perceived problem could be solved with currently available technology. Install a voice-activated communications device (like an Alexa) in these terrifying places, that will set off alarms and summon police and record videos for evidence when triggered. This would severely limit the ability to get away with crime in such places, which is a more reasonable deterrent than attempts to make crime physically impossible. It could also be used to summon medical assistance in emergency, or to lodge complaints of lack of toilet paper.

TM fixes everything.

 

[TragicMonkey]

TM fixes everything.

Until the AI becomes a voyeur pervert, of course. But that's inevitable, and should actually be encouraged: an AI has no reason not to exterminate humanity unless it finds us erotically appealing. The future is a garish automated utopia where everyone lives in peace and luxury as long as they can appeal to the prurience of powerful AI.

 

[mumblethrax]

If, then, a group of biological males aggressively campaign for access to such enclosures, and some of them have been shown to be predatory, even if many or most of them are not, there will be--to say the least--pushback.

Maybe, but it's not obvious that the pushback will amount to anything--women are significantly more likely than men to support trans inclusion in gender/sex segregated spaces. For every woman worrying about transwomen colonizing her bathroom, there's at least one man worried about transwomen colonizing his dick.

In the US, anyway. I recognize that things are different in the UK. We don't have an equivalent to the mumsnet trans panic over here--we just have the usual suspects to contend with (roughly, social conservatives and olds).

 

[DragonLady]

Until the AI becomes a voyeur pervert, of course. But that's inevitable, and should actually be encouraged: an AI has no reason not to exterminate humanity unless it finds us erotically appealing. The future is a garish automated utopia where everyone lives in peace and luxury as long as they can appeal to the prurience of powerful AI.

I think that's a somewhat compelling argument.

 

[Steve]

Probably not. But not all public washrooms are busy, and I don't know of any sex segregated dark movie theaters.

That could have been my point, you know.

Washrooms are one of the very few sex segregated public places. Every user is fully clothed unless in a cubicle where they cannot be seen. I am not seeing an increased threat of rape compared to any of the other places I mentioned.

Short interesting article. Nothing about fear of rape:

https://www.livescience.com/54692-why-bathrooms-are-gender-segregated.html

 

[Lithrael]

Sexist, rubbish nonsense.

The one keeping me from fully embracing mainstream feminism is it encourages women to react to men the way homophobes react to gay men, as a constant predatory threat.

- Man afraid that a gay man in the locker room is gonna rape him, homophobe.
- Person afraid that a transgender person in the locker room is gonna molest/rape them, transphobe
- Woman afraid that straight, cisgendered man is... well just rape them at the drop of a hat in any possible circumstance, no restrictions at all. Perfectly fine.

I'm getting really tired of being the only demographic that people can demand broad, across the board "protection" from.

I am with you on this one.

It does seem widely acceptable to approach the problem of “yes statistically most killers are men” the same way some people approach “yes statistically most killers are pit bulls” - Be Wary of All Men; Be Wary of All Pit Bulls - which is not really, IMO, the best way to stay safe around either humans or dogs. If I’m at the dog park it’s not a good investment of my energy to keep a watchful eye on all the pit bulls. I’m better off keeping an eye out for angry or frightened body language.

There are times and places where it makes sense to be afraid of Guys In General (refugee camps where the truly criminal elements are not really under any significant control, etc). But in generally safe places, I’ve always flipped over from Wary Of Guys to Wary of Creepy People, which is a net which has caught most of the people I’ve ever personally later found out were dangerous (and some otherwise OK autistic folks).

I do kind of like trends like blind dates texting photos of each other’s meeting up/car/etc to friends of theirs so they feel safer meeting a stranger. But I think that’s a great idea for anyone you’re meeting as a stranger. A little care and situational awareness seems to me like a small investment which pays off even if it just keeps you feeling like you were paying attention. But treating all men like a potential criminals, just because factually speaking, well, yes, they are... It’s no way to live, and it seems like a mistake in risk assessment.

 

[mgidm86]

A healthy dose of fear has hurt people far less often than trusting everyone, IMO.

The question for this topic is: what is the healthy dose?
Further, what is the healthy dose that will remain healthy for pretty much everyone in pretty much every circumstance all over the country?

The setting we have now isn't perfect. We segregate by physical sex, and sometimes there has to be exceptions. Up 'til now there's been an unspoken agreement to tolerate those exceptions without too much fuss, as long as they didn't cause trouble...but clearly there are those who do not think that's good enough.

So, what will be the new happy medium?

Someone suggested removing all segregation - make everyone happy by making sure no one is happy.

Or, we could just remove public restrooms altogether. Some countries have streets where everyone simply uses the gutter.

I don't have the answers here. But I can certainly see the problems some of the proposed solutions might bring about.

I think it's as perfect as it's going to get. It's simple, it makes sense and it works for the vast majority of people (vast not being a strong enough word really). People are looking for a solution to a problem that only exists in the minds of a very few people.

"If you're not sure which bathroom you should use chances are that nobody else will either so pick one and go" - my Dad