Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[Meadmaker]

I hope at least that the people who say penises are shocking to women...

Name one.

Is that a straw man, or are you clueless? i.e. are you deliberately confusing the issue, or do you genuinely not get it?

Hint: "Can she put the towel over her eyes?"

 

[Emily's Cat]

I don't think there are any other viable solutions.

Do you? If so, what are they? Because trans women prisoners need to be housed somewhere within the prison stock.

Not very imaginative are you? How about a separate wing for "at risk" prisoners? Rotate meal, shower, and yard times, so that those prisoners aren't put in with the rest of the male population. That wing could even be co-ed if feasible. And there could be more consideration put into who shares rooms with whom.

Or how about a case-by-case evaluation, looking at the types of crimes committed, the circumstances in which those crimes occurred, and the actual physicality of the prisoner involved? A small male, who has been jailed for a non-violent crime or for a defensive* crime, and who identifies as a woman... okay, maybe they get a pass. A large physically strong male who has been jailed for an aggressive violent crime and who identifies as a woman? Yeah, probably not.

The large majority of women imprisoned for violent crimes are being punished for killing their abusers after years of being a victim of violence. There are very few that are imprisoned for being an aggressor in a violent crime.

(And obviously I disregard your final paragraph out of hand)

Why? Why do you feel that you should dismiss that suggestion out of hand? What is your reasoning for it? It's true that transwomen would be at less risk of assault if house in a juvenile detention center. Why would that be inappropriate?

 

[Aber]

UK driving licences don't clearly and explicitly list gender, no. But your gender status IS reported (albeit somewhat covertly) within your driving licence number: from memory, it's to do with the second digit (your licence number always starts with the first five letters of your family name IIRC) - if that second digit is a 0, it denoted man; if it's 1, it denotes woman.

I might be slightly out with my precise description, but it's at least something close to this, and a gender marker definitely does exist.

No

https://ukdriving.org.uk/licencenumber.html

 

[shuttlt]

For some reason the original Independent article doesn't seem to exist anymore, but below is a Google Cached version:

https://webcache.googleusercontent....-risk-a8519086.html+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

It seems like you get much higher incidents of sexual assault, voyeurism etc in Unisex changing rooms. I recall a similar finding in Germany, but I can't find an article mentioning it.

 

[Aber]

Even self-identification (in England & Wales at least) has never consisted solely of (eg) a biological male simply declaring themselves to be a woman (and then being able to send off for a certificate showing that they are a woman). Rather, it's only after someone has legally declared their new gender identity in front of a judge and a witness that they can properly identify as that new gender.

So even in the case of Self-ID, the issue of their gender would be clear-cut and binary* - and provable.

Evidence that this has ever happened?

To apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate under the Standard Application Process the person needs to demonstrate that:

• They are at least 18 years old;
• They have lived fully for the last two years in their acquired gender and that they intend to live permanently in their acquired gender for the rest of their life;
• They have, or have had, gender dysphoria. They are required to provide two medical reports (one from their GP and one from their Gender Specialist) confirming the diagnosis and detailing any transition-related medical treatment (such as psychological counselling, hormones and/or surgical procedures) that they have received. It is not necessary for the person to have undergone any surgery but if they haven’t then one of the reports should indicate whether they are waiting for any surgery or give any reason for the person deciding not to have any surgery.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Well that too is unlikely to be viable, for a number of reasons. Firstly, the absolute number of inmates at any given time who are trans women - even when considering (say) the entire English prison population - is going to be very low (maybe no more than a couple of dozen maximum).

Please stop making assumptions about items for which actual data has already been provided. IIRC, there are on the order of about 120 self-declared transgender prisoners in England and Wales, of which nearly all are transwomen. And that is ONLY counting the ones who are self-declared but without a gender-recognition certificate, AND are on long-term sentences.

 

[Paul2]

I'm interested in having conversations with people who are capable of having interesting conversations. I'm not that bothered if they are the picture of civility to me personally. On the other hand if people want to be bigoted then I am not really interested in trying to persuade them out of it with polite conversation. I'm only interested in countering their bigotry.

Everyone gets to decide what they're interested in. For myself, I'm interested in possibly learning something from someone who thinks differently than I do. I don't mean I'm interested in learning how to be bigoted from from a discussion with a bigot, but, rather, even a bigot might be able to show me something I'd never considered. Rarely is anyone 100% wrong about 100% everything.

Closing yourself off from different ideas is also a way to let those times that oneself is wrong (rarely is anyone 100% right about 100% everything) remain and become more strongly embedded within oneself. Especially when the conversation takes place on a skeptics forum. The first place to be skeptical is with oneself.

For someone who appears to be against bigotry as much as you do, it's sounds strange that you wouldn't want to try to persuade someone to not be bigoted. Now, of course, something like that doesn't happen overnight, and many times it won't happen at all. But I would hope everyone chip away where they can, and, like water dripping on a rock, change *can* happen, albeit slowly. Of course, that type of change is much less likely unless we engage.

One might also find that areas of agreement are possible. I have years of experience as a small claims court mediator, in which I have settled small claims cases just by taking the parties into a room and helping them figure something out, rather than wasting the judge's time. At the beginning of a mediation, it can seem even to mediators that there is no way these two sides will agree on anything, they are so angry at each other. But talking things out, especially with a mediator who understands how these things have to go when they do work, succeeds far more often than one might expect.

Civility is not so much a personal need as it is a necessary foundation for having a conversation in which one might learn from someone else, or be successful in chipping away.

I'm also interested in countering bigotry, and talking civilly is one way to do that. When you are uncivil, you've lost pretty much all hope of your message getting through. Defenses rise up in the other party pretty quickly. It's hard enough when you are civil to try to break through, but it's pretty much impossible otherwise.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Why does everyone avoid the real world in discussions like this?

As a separated Dad of two daughters, I got stressed about this whenever I brought them to a restaurant or whatever.

When one of them needed to go, which bathroom do I bring them to? The men's or the ladies? I know I can't simply stand at the door, I have to enter with them because they find public bathrooms scary. So which should I use?

Anyone have an answer? Because I do.

There's a fairly well established social convention here. If your daughters are too young to go in by themselves, you take them into the men's room until they are old enough to go to the ladies by themselves.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

But of course, it doesn't matter whether or not the transwoman is checking anyone out. That's not the point. The presence of a man in the women's locker room is considered offensive, and many people, I think most people, consider the transwoman to be a man.

I don't care what you or many people find offensive. Or what you or many people think about transwomen. Your personal preferences are no justification for discrimination.

And my evidence about this being the way most people feel could come from that survey posted earlier about UK voters, or it could come from the fact that Betsy DeVos is the American Secretary of Education.

The survey that showed the MAJORITY of women in favour of transwomen having access to female spaces or the fact that Betsy was appointed by a President that got a MINORITY of the votes?

Great evidence.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Some cultures see children who haven't reached sexual maturity as essentially genderless.

A "girl" in a men's space and a "woman" in a men's space are radically different things to some people.

 

[Meadmaker]

I don't care what you or many people find offensive.

Clearly.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I don't know if its worth added this sort of baggage to it but it does seem like there is a tendency (TENDENCY, not absolute) that men and women see public bathrooms somewhat differently.

You're right, and that has been brought up a few times. For the most part, males see public restrooms as a place to pee or poop. Females see public restrooms as a place to pee, poop, change feminine products, adjust clothing, have private-ish conversations with other females, and frequently as a place to escape the attention of males and take a moment in a male-free zone.

The fact that a great many females have a different social use for restrooms than males do, however, is deemed to be unimportant and not worthy of consideration by some of the activists in this thread.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Evidence that this has ever happened?

Self-ID is not the law in England and Wales so presumably no it has never happened.

 

[Meadmaker]

There's a fairly well established social convention here. If your daughters are too young to go in by themselves, you take them into the men's room until they are old enough to go to the ladies by themselves.

Abaddon isn't living in the US. Maybe things are different in Ireland?

And Ireland has undergone some truly radical changes in the last few decades, even more so than the US or UK, so the difference in time might be relevant as well.

To me, it is surprising that anyone would follow any other procedure than the social convention you described, but that might be cultural bias. I don't know.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I don't care what you or many people find offensive. Or what you or many people think about transwomen.

And that is the problem. You seem to think you and you alone have been granted the concept of being offended (or related concepts like bothered by) and no one else is allowed to use it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Seems what would be expected.

Since the advent of sex segregated public toilets, women have taken their small children, boys and girls, into the ladies' rooms. No screams of outrage ensued by the presence of a six year old boy in the ladies' room. I'm guessing, but have no real experience on the subject, that as the boys got older, there were some mean glares as moms who thought it was ok to bring the eight or nine year old in, from moms who didn't agree.

I remember seeing one sign saying "Children over six years of age must use the appropriate restroom."

Some ladies might get bent out of shape about it, but my personal observation is that the cut-off is somewhere around 12-ish. Puberty is pretty much the dividing line for sex-segregation.

Prior to the onset of puberty, there's not really a material difference between boys and girls, and the issue of sexuality, sexual interest, and titillation isn't really a concern.

 

[d4m10n]

I am an actual real human female!

Does anyone have a working definition of "female" close to hand? It feels like now that we've given up "woman" we need some (polite) way to refer to uterus-havers / menstruators / individuals with cervices.

ETA: URL

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Clearly.

I'm glad you finally realised. Be interesting to see if you stop using your prejudices as justification for discrimination going forward then. But I doubt it.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'm glad you finally realised. Be interesting to see if you stop using your prejudices as justification for discrimination going forward then. But I doubt it.

Then what possible point is there in talking to us?

Do you want to even have a discussion or are just wanting people to focus your anger on?

Despite how much you deny it there are people in this discussion who disagree with you who aren't hateful bigots.

 

[Meadmaker]

Some ladies might get bent out of shape about it, but my personal observation is that the cut-off is somewhere around 12-ish. Puberty is pretty much the dividing line for sex-segregation.

Prior to the onset of puberty, there's not really a material difference between boys and girls, and the issue of sexuality, sexual interest, and titillation isn't really a concern.

12ish?

I know I wouldn't dream of taking a ten year old into the ladies' room. Well, I wouldn't go into the ladies' room, but that's not the point. I would think it very odd for a ten year old boy to be taken to the ladies' room.

Although the issue would be less of a sexuality related issue than a "helicopter mom" issue.