Cont: Trans Women are not Women 3

[Earthborn]

Nobody is born in the wrong body.

"Born in the wrong body" is just an expression. One that is going out of fashion quickly in favour of "Identify as"

Do we treat any of these delusional conditions by re-ordering all social norms to align with the delusion? We do not. Why is this one any different?

Mainly because transsexuals are tested for such delusional conditions and are only diagnosed as "transsexual" if they do not have them.

Men, make space for gender nonconforming men in male spaces, because they are male.

Translation: Men, force gender nonconforming men to conform to your gender.

Makes perfect sense.

 

[LondonJohn]

There is a difference to gay dudes in dudes locker rooms as there is no potential threat, and a trans woman waving their donger around in the same locker room as my young niece.

The second I am not going to be as easy going with and will stop.

Of course there's a potential threat (if one is looking to find a threat, that is).

To repurpose your example: how about a gay guy in the men's changing rooms coming on to your young nephew as he gets changed?


I find it somewhat difficult to understand how you can identify a perceived threat of "a trans woman waving their donger around (sensitively put...) in the same locker room as your young neice", yet at the same time cannot identify a perceived threat of a gay man coming on to your young nephew as he's getting changed?

In reality, of course, these perceptions of threats primarily exist within the imaginations of those who are looking to find a "threat". In reality, thousands and thousands of gay men use male locker rooms all over the world every day, without coming on to young boys; and likewise, I'm going to suggest that any perception of trans women "waving their donger around" in front of young girls is a somewhat hysterical (no pun intended...) notion, which in practice might only ever happen in a vanishingly small number of instances.


(And in any case, if either of those two situations ever DID arise in practice, you would obviously have the absolute right to ask the authorities to step in......)

 

[cullennz]

You appear to be trying to mix something I don't want my niece to have to deal with with at a young age. And some gay dude grooming adolescents for sex.

 

[theprestige]

Seani certainly does not "fit in" the ladies room, and probably realises that. If they were a transman, they would look practically identical and also not fit in. Many transwomen would fit in. I think if we are to have segregated restrooms, people should go to the place where they most fit in. You have repeatedly claimed that you disagree and expect people to segregate themselves based on other criteria.

"Where they most fit in" seems like a *terrible* criteria. Unless you really want to perpetuate cisnormativity, and make restroom harassment of transsexuals the de facto standard.

 

[d4m10n]

"Where they most fit in" seems like a *terrible* criteria.

Can you think of a better criterion to practically segregate bathrooms or locker rooms?

 

[Ziggurat]

"Where they most fit in" seems like a *terrible* criteria. Unless you really want to perpetuate cisnormativity, and make restroom harassment of transsexuals the de facto standard.

It's also meaningless. Different people will disagree about where someone most fits in. So how is this judged? At best it just kicks the can down the road, so we can argue about what it means to "fit in".

 

[The Atheist]

We don't have to.

There are women and trans women.

Call both she. Everyone happy.

Except for the ones who ask to be called "they".

Which bugs the hell of the Grammar Nazi in me.

 

[theprestige]

It's judged by the majority, which will always be cisnormative.

Or it's judged by trans fiat, which is exactly the problem we're trying to solve.

Hell, even Boudica's solution boils down to "papers please".

Honestly I think it would be a lot easier if gender dysphoria were recognized as a serious disability, with necessary concessions on that basis. Seeing eye dogs. Handicapped placards. Etc.

 

[Boudicca90]

Except for the ones who ask to be called "they".

Which bugs the hell of the Grammar Nazi in me.

Non-binary people are a good example of why "where they most fit in" works well.

Their gender presentation might not easily fit into one gender or another, so the best situation in that case would be to choose the restroom that best fits their gender expression at the time.

 

[Meadmaker]

It's also meaningless. Different people will disagree about where someone most fits in. So how is this judged? At best it just kicks the can down the road, so we can argue about what it means to "fit in".

As a purely practical measure, it's not bad, though, with a caveat.

So, someone needs to go to the bathroom. They're out and about, dressed like a woman. They go in, maybe another woman in the bathroom is a bit suspicious, but isn't sure so, when all is said and done, no big deal. If he had used the men's room, it would be very obvious. No telling what would happen, but it couldn't be good. Maybe it wasn't such a bad idea to use the ladies'.

On the other hand, high school transgirl - locker room. Gym class. Swim practice. Whatever.

Everyone knows who she is. Everyone knows she's a transgirl. It really doesn't matter what she looks like or how she behaves. She can't fit in, no matter what she does. The girls all know that there is a male person watching.


ETA: It's also difficult to turn into a policy, but perhaps that's not all that big of a problem.

 

[theprestige]

Non-binary people are a good example of why "where they most fit in" works well.

Their gender presentation might not easily fit into one gender or another, so the best situation in that case would be to choose the restroom that best fits their gender expression at the time.

"Best fits" according to whom?

And what happened to your proposal that crossover be restricted to people who have taken medical steps toward transitioning?

Now it seems like you've settled on a standard of whatever people think they can get away with at the time.

 

[cullennz]

Non-binary people are a good example of why "where they most fit in" works well.

Their gender presentation might not easily fit into one gender or another, so the best situation in that case would be to choose the restroom that best fits their gender expression at the time.

The "at the time" bit is one I personally find a bit silly.

 

[Boudicca90]

It's judged by the majority, which will always be cisnormative.

Or it's judged by trans fiat, which is exactly the problem we're trying to solve.

Hell, even Boudica's solution boils down to "papers please".

Honestly I think it would be a lot easier if gender dysphoria were recognized as a serious disability, with necessary concessions on that basis. Seeing eye dogs. Handicapped placards. Etc.

I'm not advocating checking drivers licences or birth certificates before using any restrooms or locker rooms, and it wouldn't be useful anyway, since someone with a driver's licence here in CA with the gender marker X instead of M or F wouldn't belong in either that way.

And gender dysphoria was already recognized as a mental illness before, when it was called Gender Identity Disorder. I don't want that at all. We have thankfully moved away from that, much like we did demonizing homosexuality.

 

[Boudicca90]

"Best fits" according to whom?

And what happened to your proposal that crossover be restricted to people who have taken medical steps toward transitioning?

Now it seems like you've settled on a standard of whatever people think they can get away with at the time.

Nobody has to medically transition if they don't want to, I've never supported that.

I meant at least begun transitioning as in living as the gender they see themselves as. Hormones and surgery aren't for everybody and aren't necessary.

 

[8enotto]

Carte blanc for the feelz of the moment, a truly flexible standard that even legal protection can't cover.
Not a solution.

 

[LondonJohn]

You appear to be trying to mix something I don't want my niece to have to deal with with at a young age. And some gay dude grooming adolescents for sex.

I'm comparing a) something you don't want your niece to have to deal with at a young age with b) something you don't want your (fictional) nephew to have to deal with at a young age.

And I'm purely setting up the comparison in order to illustrate the point: that in both instances, a hypothetical situation might arise which you might not want your niece or (fictional) nephew to be exposed to.

But since your hang-up seems to be over the (somewhat hyperbolic and unrealistic) scenario of a pre-op trans woman "waving their donger around" in the women's locker room in front of your young niece....

.... let's try another comparator. Suppose there was a woman with an ileostomy bag. Or a woman with an abnormally enlarged clitoris. Would you be similarly outraged by the idea of such women exposing their condition to your young niece as they undressed in the locker room? Because I can easily see how, in both cases, they might potentially cause some distress and/or confusion to a young person. Maybe - in your view - we should make such women remove their clothing in some other place, away from impressionable young eyes...?

 

[cullennz]

I'm comparing a) something you don't want your niece to have to deal with at a young age with b) something you don't want your (fictional) nephew to have to deal with at a young age.



And I'm purely setting up the comparison in order to illustrate the point: that in both instances, a hypothetical situation might arise which you might not want your niece or (fictional) nephew to be exposed to.



But since your hang-up seems to be over the (somewhat hyperbolic and unrealistic) scenario of a pre-op trans woman "waving their donger around" in the women's locker room in front of your young niece....



.... let's try another comparator. Suppose there was a woman with an ileostomy bag. Or a woman with an abnormally enlarged clitoris. Would you be similarly outraged by the idea of such women exposing their condition to your young niece as they undressed in the locker room? Because I can easily see how, in both cases, they might potentially cause some distress and/or confusion to a young person. Maybe - in your view - we should make such women remove their clothing in some other place, away from impressionable young eyes...?

No I wouldn't.

It isn't someone waving their thing around, who Boudicca90 said earlier can change their gender expression depending on mood "at that time"

Post: 2269

 

[LondonJohn]

No I wouldn't.

It isn't someone waving their thing around, who Boudicca90 said earlier can change their gender expression depending on mood "at that time"

Post: 2269

What is this ongoing concern with the somewhat extreme notional example of "a trans woman waving their donger around"? What if, say, it's (the far more realistic possibility of) a trans woman merely briefly exposing her "donger" as she changes? Or your young niece noticing a bulge in the swimming costume of a trans woman?

And as a general question: are you concerned about anything/everything that might alarm your young niece in the locker room - because I can't quite see the logic in the idea of being selectively concerned? And if so, then why wouldn't you be similarly concerned about a woman with an oversized clitoris "waving it around" in front of your young niece. Or a woman with an ileostomy "waving her half-filled faeces collection bag around" in front of your young niece?


Coupled to which, as has been pointed out several times in this thread: if anyone is acting in an inconsiderate manner in a locker room (including the notional example of "a trans woman waving their donger around"), other people using the locker room have the right to require staff to address the situation and to ask the person in question to desist or to leave the locker room.

 

[cullennz]

Erm, it was you who wrote the words:



"a trans woman waving their donger around"





Coupled to which, as has been pointed out several times in this thread: if anyone is acting in an inconsiderate manner in a locker room (including the notional example of "a trans woman waving their donger around"), other people using the locker room have the right to require staff to address the situation and to ask the person in question to desist or to leave the locker room.

Yes.

And I don't really want her to put up with witnessing arguments between staff and patrons either.

 

[Aber]

Before I transitioned I had a female gender identity

It would be useful if you could describe your "female gender identity" in more detail.