Trans Women are not Women

[GlennB]

nm

 

[Rolfe]

Somebody shared this with me.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/letter-woman-called-terf/

 

[Francesca R]

Here's another example of a well-designed unisex bathroom, this time from Houston, TX.

Pardon my hate if I don't wish to use it.

 

[d4m10n]

Pardon my hate if I don't wish to use it.

It's a free country. Hate away.

 

[Belz...]

Once again Western society is so far behind. Time to switch over to Asian squat toilets. They're all inclusive, so much better for your body, and far more hygenic than our outdated flush toilets.

And lots of fun if you have diarrhea!

No thanks. I'll stick to the regular stuff.

Squat toilets are terrible for the elderly and infirm. And the most advanced toilets in the world are not Asian squat toilets, they're the Japanese sit-down toilets. They've got built-in heating, retractable bidet, air freshening... they're amazing.

They also have water squirts to clear your bottom!

 

[DragonLady]

Pardon my hate if I don't wish to use it.

I don't like it much, either. But, I do have to admit it's the best solution proposed so far that accommodates everyone to some extent.

 

[Meadmaker]

ETA: Here's another example of a well-designed unisex bathroom, this time from Houston, TX.

Do you happen to know what sort of place this is installed? I notice that there are still "M" and "W" on the doors. I wonder why. Government regulation? Do the patrons actually pay attention to the marks, or just use whichever is convenient?

The obvious solution is to try them out in the private sector, and if people prefer or are neutral to these sorts of systems, then they will start rolling out everywhere. What I fear would be a government regulation mandating a change to facilities, but in such a way that no one or almost no one actually desires. If the market accepts the modifications, then why not use them? If the market rejects them, that means that whatever is happening is decidedly unpopular with at least some segment of the target users.

 

[IsThisTheLife]

It's difficult not to see "trans-women" as rather like 'method actors' staying 'in character' at all times, hoping that the [stereo]typical women's attire and adornment they put effort into will cause people to, er, assume their gender. The "conundrum" about which toilets/changing rooms they should be allowed to use is entirely a consequence of their refusal to ever be 'out of character', as if the revelation (lol) to onlookers that they're biologically male would either be such an affront, or so terrifying as to be unthinkable. That said, were I a 'trans woman' I think I'd feel pretty ridiculous standing at a urinal in the men's while 'in character', and maybe that's what this really boils down to for many of them. But what was it someone called this kind of thing? Oh yeh - "First World Problems".

 

[Meadmaker]

It's difficult not to see "trans-women" as rather like 'method actors' staying 'in character' at all times, hoping that the [stereo]typical women's attire and adornment they put effort into will cause people to, er, assume their gender. The "conundrum" about which toilets/changing rooms they should be allowed to use is entirely a consequence of their refusal to ever be 'out of character', as if the revelation (lol) to onlookers that they're biologically male would either be such an affront, or so terrifying as to be unthinkable. That said, were I a 'trans woman' I think I'd feel pretty ridiculous standing at a urinal in the men's while 'in character', and maybe that's what this really boils down to for many of them. But what was it someone called this kind of thing? Oh yeh - "First World Problems".

To be fair to the transwomen, there was a time in the not too distant past where a male wearing a dress in a men's bathroom would be a very likely target of violence, and would certainly be a target of harassment and threats.

We really have reduced our acceptance of low-level violence in society today. This is, in my opinion, a good thing. We have also increased our acceptance of homosexuality and of a variety of statistically unusual sexual practices. I think more and more people are of the opinion that what you do on your own time is your own business, and while doing it in public is still frowned upon, dressing for it isn't that big of a deal. I think a male in women's clothing in the men's room would still be the target of some harassment, and in some places of likely violence, more people today are likely to shrug their shoulders and figure it takes all kinds to make a world.


Transwomen in the women's room, though, is a completely different issue. It has nothing to do with "tolerance" or any synonym of the word.

And to reiterate, it really isn't about bathrooms very much at all. Locker rooms, though, are a lot bigger deal. For bathrooms, see Rolfe's repeated descriptions of women's tolerance of transwomen in their bathrooms for decades, and the reasons for growing less tolerant.

 

[d4m10n]

Do you happen to know what sort of place this is installed? I notice that there are still "M" and "W" on the doors. I wonder why. Government regulation? Do the patrons actually pay attention to the marks, or just use whichever is convenient?

It was a restaurant when this pic was taken, but it is not the original restaurant anymore. I haven't been to Houston in a couple years, cannot verify firsthand. I wouldn't be surprised if Texas law requires designated spaces, but I'm not going to look it up b/c their laws are even more nonsensical than ours here to the immediate north.

The obvious solution is to try them out in the private sector, and if people prefer or are neutral to these sorts of systems, then they will start rolling out everywhere.

Agreed. I believe cultural change should precede legal reform, at least most of the time. All I ask of the legal regime is a certain flexibility in commodal accommodations.

 

[The Atheist]

He's just found out about James Caspian's detransitioning study being blocked and that girls of 13 are having mastectomies and he's appalled about both developments. He's shouting down someone who doesn't want research done into transgender issues.

Predictable.

Anyone not wanting research is clearly not interested in facts.

ETA. Good Lord, somebody just called him a terf.

Even more predictable.

 

[The Atheist]

If you feel demonized because of this just blame evolution.

No, I'm like Melania Trump - I really don't care. I'm not threatened by anyone in my bathroom space.

In terms of whether modesty is evolutionary or psychological, if you want to go down that track, we should start a new thread, because I disagree with your statement entirely - the Koori alone prove the point wrong, as do other naked tribes. There is also a lot of other evidence to the contrary, so if you think it's worth discussing, let me know.

 

[Francesca R]

The airline lounge I was just in (“United Polaris”, Chicago O’Hare Terminal 1) had unisex “restrooms”, they are lockable rooms along a corridor with wash-basin and additional space all inside each room. That place is sufficiently far away from being open to the public that I doubt any law reaches them. It’s also just a couple of years old the previous lounge had separate restrooms. If I don’t want to use their facilities I can exit to the concourse and use the segregated much more public ones.

 

[EHocking]

The airline lounge I was just in (“United Polaris”, Chicago O’Hare Terminal 1) had unisex “restrooms”, they are lockable rooms along a corridor with wash-basin and additional space all inside each room. That place is sufficiently far away from being open to the public that I doubt any law reaches them. It’s also just a couple of years old the previous lounge had separate restrooms. If I don’t want to use their facilities I can exit to the concourse and use the segregated much more public ones.

Airline lunges and restaurants are quite different environments to public toilets in shopping malls or on a street / in a public park or at a public pool etc.

I thought, yeah unisex toilets/changing rooms are the obvious solution too.

I may be wrong, “Unisex toilets put women in danger of sexual assault”.
Of 134 complaints over 2017-2018, 120 reported incidents took place in gender-neutral changing rooms and just 14 were in single-sex changing areas.

I can see how this wouldn’t work in schools either. Sure at kindergarten level children really aren’t that self aware, but in later years they are more conscious of being exposed to others in such a setting.

I’m not a percent, but my great nieces used to have no issue with stripping off and changing in front of anyone when using our backyard pool. They are 8 & 9 now and are not comfortable doing it around adults. Similarly with showering themselves etc. to be frank, I would am comfortable with their nudity around me now that they are older either.

I walk around the house nude quite often, sod the neighbours, so I don’t think I’m that prudish. It’s not about being ashamed of them/me being nude, it is a matter of personal privacy.

Solution? Provide gender neutral bathrooms separate from others just as men’s/women’s are.

Many of the arguments for unisex use the gender-neutral/sensitivity argument to promote their use, but frankly their are just cheaper to build. It would not surprise me at all that the bottom line for city councils and public amenities etc are that they merely use the inclusion argument as a cynical justification for cost cutting in many cases

 

[GlennB]

Everyone reading along can easily see that I'm advocating for redesigned integrated spaces (such as the one mentioned upthread) rather than simply changing out the signs on existing sex- or gender-segregated spaces. Maybe someone here is arguing for just changing around the signs, and you are of course welcome take it up with them.

ETA: Here's another example of a well-designed unisex bathroom, this time from Houston, TX.

[qimg]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190510/4f902f8ae9b8b7c876337dcda8d1c4a4.jpg[/qimg]

In the context of this discussion, in what way is that better than any other modern women's bathroom?

 

[d4m10n]

In the context of this discussion, in what way is that better than any other modern women's bathroom?

Here in the States, typical multiuser restrooms have metal partitions which don't go floor to ceiling, providing significantly less privacy and somewhat less security. The bathroom cubicles shown in post 1833 and further upthread at post 1623 have fully private individual toilet stalls with secure locks, and a unisex common area for washing up.

On the downside, you may well encounter a male-bodied person while washing your hands or touching up your makeup.

On the upside, people who are transitioning, nonbinary, androgynous or otherwise sexually ambiguous have an obvious place to go.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It's difficult not to see "trans-women" as rather like 'method actors' staying 'in character' at all times, hoping that the [stereo]typical women's attire and adornment they put effort into will cause people to, er, assume their gender. The "conundrum" about which toilets/changing rooms they should be allowed to use is entirely a consequence of their refusal to ever be 'out of character', as if the revelation (lol) to onlookers that they're biologically male would either be such an affront, or so terrifying as to be unthinkable. That said, were I a 'trans woman' I think I'd feel pretty ridiculous standing at a urinal in the men's while 'in character', and maybe that's what this really boils down to for many of them. But what was it someone called this kind of thing? Oh yeh - "First World Problems".

If you've followed Rolfe's posts, trans women have been using women's toilets for ages. What's new is that "trans women" is not one thing and now includes people with obviously male physiology who make no effort to look, dress or act in feminine fashion and simply declare themselves to be women.

<edit to add> I suppose the point I'm trying to make is whether there is a line to be drawn on what is reasonable for women to expect of trans women who wish to pass for women and use women-only spaces. For some, the reaction appears to be that the very idea of a line is sinister, others seem to ignore the category of people Rolfe is most alarmed about or even imply they just don't exist.

 

[d4m10n]

I may be wrong, “Unisex toilets put women in danger of sexual assault”.
Of 134 complaints over 2017-2018, 120 reported incidents took place in gender-neutral changing rooms and just 14 were in single-sex changing areas.

Toilets and changing rooms are not the same thing. In the former, you use a toilet. In the latter, you get fully nude in order to put on a swimsuit. It should come as no surprise that this might lead to instances of voyeurism, given male fascination with the female form.

 

[GlennB]

Here in the States, typical multiuser restrooms have metal partitions which don't go floor to ceiling, providing significantly less privacy and somewhat less security. The bathroom cubicles shown in post 1833 and further upthread at post 1623 have fully private individual toilet stalls with secure locks, and a unisex common area for washing up.

Cubicle doors already have secure catches/locks and better doors can easily be retrofitted. Common areas for washing etc are already present in public bathrooms.

All that the pictured bathroom really achieves, afaics, is to add a level of inconvenience when, say, 3 Ws arrive and find that the M cubicle is unoccupied but are deterred (banned?) from using it. It also fails to save the space that a line of urinals saves.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

If you've followed Rolfe's posts, trans women have been using women's toilets for ages. What's new is that "trans women" is not one thing and now includes people with obviously male physiology who make no effort to look, dress or act in feminine fashion and simply declare themselves to be women.

<edit to add> I suppose the point I'm trying to make is whether there is a line to be drawn on what is reasonable for women to expect of trans women who wish to pass for women and use women-only spaces. For some, the reaction appears to be that the very idea of a line is sinister, others seem to ignore the category of people Rolfe is most alarmed about or even imply they just don't exist.

I think there is a huge amount of confusion about what is new, what is existing and what is being objected to. And it varies from country to country no doubt as law will differ.

The idea that transpeople don't need surgery or hormones is not new in the UK Gender Recognition doesn't require it currently.

What is required is an evidenced process of living as your preferred gender for 2 years and a medical report which states you have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

What is proposed to change is a move to international best practice by making this a self-declaration process rather than a medical one.

This doesn't affect access to toilet or changing rooms or whatever because this is covered by a different law - the Equality Act - which already states that transpeople should have access to facilities of their chosen gender UNLESS there is a specific reason why they can't be (and these are quite strictly limited by law)

Incidentally, there are plenty of cis-women who make no effort to dress, look or act in a 'feminine' fashion either but I don't think that's any reason to try to stop them peeing in the ladies' room.