• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
SuburbanTurkey said:
I assure you, those white kids in the first desegregated schools were sincerely and deeply uncomfortable with the presence of their black peers. The correct response was, and remains, "too bad".

The comfort of the majority is an anathema to the concept of individual human rights.
Click to expand...

Race and biological sex are not at all equivalent. For reasons I explained before, females have legitimate reason to fear men in certain circumstances, in a way that have never applied to race.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
I assure you, those white kids in the first desegregated schools were sincerely and deeply uncomfortable with the presence of their black peers. The correct response was, and remains, "too bad".

The comfort of the majority is an anathema to the concept of individual human rights.
Click to expand...


So desegregate locker rooms and make them all unisex ...
 
Olmstead said:
So desegregate locker rooms and make them all unisex ...
Click to expand...

As I've been reading this thread, that seems like the best option.

Sex segregated communal locker rooms don't really provide adequate privacy without making some broad assumptions about sexuality that we know aren't true.

Perhaps it's time for individual changing stalls.

ETA: It's been a while since I've seen locker rooms that don't have individual shower stalls, though it seems open communal showers were more common in the past. Seems we're trending towards individual privacy already.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
I'm thinking 99% of humanity probably disagrees with you.

Hell, I'm thinking 99% of transsexual humanity probably disagrees with you.
Click to expand...

Not sure which will happen first in these communities where trans-acceptance is codified into law.

Seems like either people will learn that trans people are not predators and they can stop crying about it, or they'll retrofit the existing facilities to provide personal privacy. Either strikes me as fine. Like most people, I've learned to accept public nudity in these spaces, but I'd be happier having a bit more privacy.

I doubt that would be unisex facilities, but it might mean privacy stalls installed into existing segregated restrooms.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
Not sure which will happen first in these communities where trans-acceptance is codified into law.

Seems like either people will learn that trans people are not predators and they can stop crying about it
Click to expand...

This is dishonest. Nobody is saying trans people are sexual predators. What some people *are* saying is that if certain forms of trans-acceptance are codified into law, sexual predators will use the new norms and legal protections to act in ways they are currently discouraged from acting.

And people are asking how can we codify trans-acceptance into law without increasing that risk?

Your answer to that question, so far, seems to be to ignore it, lie about the question being asked, and call people bigots.

That is not rational debate. It's not even good allyship.
 
theprestige said:
This is dishonest. Nobody is saying trans people are sexual predators. What some people *are* saying is that if certain forms of trans-acceptance are codified into law, sexual predators will use the new norms and legal protections to act in ways they are currently discouraged from acting.

And people are asking how can we codify trans-acceptance into law without increasing that risk?

Your answer to that question, so far, seems to be to ignore it, lie about the question being asked, and call people bigots.

That is not rational debate. It's not even good allyship.
Click to expand...

Individual changing stalls would address these concerns.

Discriminating against trans people is not an acceptable solution.
 
And some men who identify as trans are sexual predators. They exhibit predatory behaviour against females in a way that is vanishingly rare among women. The existence of some, even a majority of non-threatening trans-identifying men doesn't negate this point. The basic psychopathy which leads to autogynaephilia and trans-identification in men appears in some individuals to be inextricably linked with deeply problematic behaviour around women. I give you Jonathan Yaniv just for starters but there are plenty others.

Few women realised this five years ago. More and more are realising it now, as these individuals become emboldened by the near-universal capitulation to the trans agenda on the part of organisations and authorities, and the frankly bizarre tenet that a bunch of white middle-class men are "the most marginalised group on the planet", and reveal themselves on social media.

This is an aberration on a par with frontal lobotomies, recovered memories, Satanic abuse and even the tulip bubble. Sections of society and the medical profession have gone collectively mad. In time (and after a bunch of lawsuits) the people most fervently promoting the trans agenda are going to look back and be extremely embarrassed.
 
Manger Douse said:
So what? I should have kept my mouth shut?
Click to expand...

No. I'm just demonstrating that there is no possible way to make everyone happy in this and we need to stop pretending there is, so the arguments have to be if I can't please everyone why should I choose (g)you to please?

My choices are get transphobe screamed at me from one side or rape enabler from the other. Which one do I choose?
 
JoeMorgue said:
No. I'm just demonstrating that there is no possible way to make everyone happy in this and we need to stop pretending there is, so the arguments have to be if I can't please everyone why should I choose (g)you to please?
Click to expand...

That's far enough. I don't think people actually want women to be raped - I just don't think they care that much

My choices are get transphobe screamed at me from one side or rape enabler from the other. Which one do I choose?
Click to expand...

I just wanna grill for gods sake :D
 
JoeMorgue said:
No. I'm just demonstrating that there is no possible way to make everyone happy in this and we need to stop pretending there is, so the arguments have to be if I can't please everyone why should I choose (g)you to please?

My choices are get transphobe screamed at me from one side or rape enabler from the other. Which one do I choose?
Click to expand...

I think from an objective, utilitiarian standpoint, transphobe is obviously the better choice. But I'm not convinced that utilitarianism is a practical moral philosophy. And I'm not convinced that cold, logical objectivity is the best approach to public policy and humanitarian solutions. (Of course objectivity has to be part of it.)
 
Ziggurat said:
I wouldn’t necessarily say that. The old dudes at the Y who stand in front of the mirror shaving after their shower without bothering with a towel make me pretty discomfited. But it’s really, really not a sexual thing. It’s more I don’t like to see the gruesome details of the ravages of time.
Click to expand...

That's true for young women looking at grandmas with boobs whose nipples are looking at the floor too. But like you say, that discomfort is different - it's about the person looking at that person being uncomfortable on behalf of the perceived loss of attractiveness of the other person and the view of what the future holds for them. It's different in terms of object and subject than being discomfited because a person of the perceived opposite sex could be looking at you while you're naked.

I think it comes down to the same concepts involved in why "peeping toms" are considered socially unacceptable.
 
theprestige said:
A solution that 99% of people disagree with isn't an acceptable solution either.

Anyway, is that your proposal? Unisex changing rooms with individual stalls is the best solution?
Click to expand...

I don't think unisex is really that vital. Private changing rooms in the existing sex-segregated rooms seems adequate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom