Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[theprestige]

If we accept that "women" (in general) deserve a "safe space" (again I hate how much baggage that term has picked up but I think it's valid in this context) from "men" (in general) but then turn around and don't let them define the parameters what are we really even doing?

Basically as it stands now we're telling women they aren't smart enough to know who they want to be protected from but still telling them they have a right to be protected.

Either drop the idea that women have some inherent right to male-free spaces (which for the record has always been my answer) or let them actually define the male-free space.

I don't think it makes sense for women alone to define such things. Males and females are not separate species. We don't occupy separate societies. There is no "female brain" that is inscrutable to males. There is no "male reasoning" that is inaccessible to females.

This kind of discrimination necessarily affects males, too. As fully-fledged members of society, I think men have just as much standing as women to debate the definition of such spaces, and just as much standing to contribute to public policy about such spaces.

 

[theprestige]

Answer: you don't allow trans women unchallenged access to women's shelters.

Simples.

(Didn't take all that long to answer - not sure why you thought it might)

Fair enough. So here's my followup question:

What form should the challenge to transwomen take, so that they are likely to gain access to women's shelters by passing the challenge, but cis-males are not?

 

[LondonJohn]

My approach for bathrooms for transmen and transwomen is the same: Use the bathroom that a random observer is most likely to assume you should be in.

So wait - what? You're saying that, for example, trans women who dress and look - to the random observer - quite like a woman, but who have undergone no medical or surgical transition, and who thus still have the demon penis....

.... should use the women's bathrooms?

Is that what you're saying here? Because that's what you appear to be saying here. Unless of course your definition of the information about the transgender person to whom your "random observer" has access... includes the ability to inspect the transgender person's genitals...?

I'm not sure if you're aware of all the internal contradictions you're creating with respect to your position. But hey ho - that's par for the course I guess.

I will also point out, that the discussion keeps getting dragged back to bathroom usage over and over, even though that is an area with the least conflict and the least impact on anyone involved. So even though the vast majority of people on both sides of this thread have repeatedly said that bathrooms aren't really an issue, use whatever you wish to... that's where it keeps getting reframed.

Uhhh I think quite a lot of discussion is (rightly) concerned with the matter of where transgender people are and are not allowed to go. And it's certainly a huge issue for you, as you've not been shy of pointing out loudly and repeatedly.

And in any case, this latest reference was due to Abaddon saying that his transgender son now uses the men's bathrooms. I say a blanket "good" to that. But you apparently would like to inspect Abaddon's son to see if he passes the test of "looking like a man" before he qualifies for entry to the men's bathrooms. I see.

It doesn't do your position any good when you consistently tap-dance around sex-based issues, dismiss the dynamic of actual biological sex, and constantly replace the term "sex" with the term "gender". It doesn't do your position any good when you just avoid any discussion of sex-based discrimination and inequity as if it doesn't exist at all.

No, it wouldn't do my position any good if I actually did any of those things. But of course I didn't.

 

[abaddon]

I'm glad to say this isn't the case where I live (London) - I pick up my daughter from school most days and nobody gives me (or any of the many other dads there) a second glance.

Lucky you. I was made to feel like a stalker. It was more than a little creepy to me.

 

[LondonJohn]

Fair enough. So here's my followup question:

What form should the challenge to transwomen take, so that they are likely to gain access to women's shelters by passing the challenge, but cis-males are not?

Ah a leeetle beeet of goalpost shifting to while away a Tuesday evening


That's a question for the professional and experienced people who run women's shelters to figure out, and not me. But, given the very particular and extreme sensitivities attached to women's shelters, I'd suggest something along the lines of a combination of a) the experience and wisdom of the staff on duty, b) the ability to request proof of gender on demand (with entry denied to all those - including any cis women who happen to be asked - who cannot provide such proof), and c) vigilance and security measures within the women's refuge to minimise the risk of danger to any of those using the shelter.

 

[JoeMorgue]

So wait - what? You're saying that, for example, trans women who dress and look - to the random observer - quite like a woman, but who have undergone no medical or surgical transition, and who thus still have the demon penis....

.... should use the women's bathrooms?

*Shrugs* Why not. If the penis is evil does it matter who it's attached to?

I'm sorry I still don't get why "I don't want that cis-male and his penis in my women's bathroom because he might rape me!" and "I don't want that transwoman and her penis in my women's bathroom because she might rape me" are so radically different.

 

[LondonJohn]

Clarification on the "unchallenged" part?

(100% honest, no snark, no setup, no gotcha)

Well, I think you'd be better off asking theprestige: it was he who set up the premise in the first place.

But speaking purely for myself, I interpreted theprestige's "unchallenged" to mean something along the lines of "being able to enter the shelter without being required to produce any form of proof of gender".

 

[theprestige]

Ah a leeetle beeet of goalpost shifting to while away a Tuesday evening : D

It's weird that you would call this goalpost shifting. This has been one of the central themes of this debate since the beginning of the thread. I didn't complain about goalpost shifting when you simplified it down to the restroom question. Why do you make a gesture of bad faith here?

That's a question for the professional and experienced people who run women's shelters to figure out, and not me. But, given the very particular and extreme sensitivities attached to women's shelters, I'd suggest something along the lines of a combination of a) the experience and wisdom of the staff on duty, b) the ability to request proof of gender on demand (with entry denied to all those - including any cis women who happen to be asked - who cannot provide such proof), and c) vigilance and security measures within the women's refuge to minimise the risk of danger to any of those using the shelter.

This sounds like you think that

a) There should be no laws passed that dictate how shelter administrators handle the matter; and

b) As a society we should normalize acceptance of shelter admins' authority as paramount in controlling access to their shelters.

Is that correct?

 

[theprestige]

Well, I think you'd be better off asking theprestige: it was he who set up the premise in the first place.

But speaking purely for myself, I interpreted theprestige's "unchallenged" to mean something along the lines of "being able to enter the shelter without being required to produce any form of proof of gender".

I endorse this clarification.

 

[LondonJohn]

*Shrugs* Why not. If the penis is evil does it matter who it's attached to?

I'm sorry I still don't get why "I don't want that cis-male and his penis in my women's bathroom because he might rape me!" and "I don't want that transwoman and her penis in my bathroom because she might rape me" are so radically different.

Erm, my use of the term "evil penis" was sarcastic.


I'm trying to establish here whether it might perhaps be the view of people such as Emily's Cat that

The men's bathroom must be used by:
- all cis men;
- all trans men;
- those trans women who still have penises*

while

The women's bathroom must be used by:
- all cis women;
- only those trans women who no longer have penises*.


And if that were the case, I'd invite people such as Emily's Cat to consider the repurcussions of this asymmetric consideration of transgender rights.



* Though quite how any gatekeeper could/would go about establishing which trans women had penises and which did not..... is somewhat above my pay grade in both philosophical and practical terms.

 

[Meadmaker]

So wait - what? You're saying that, for example, trans women who dress and look - to the random observer - quite like a woman, but who have undergone no medical or surgical transition, and who thus still have the demon penis....

.... should use the women's bathrooms?

Is that what you're saying here? Because that's what you appear to be saying here. Unless of course your definition of the information about the transgender person to whom your "random observer" has access... includes the ability to inspect the transgender person's genitals...?

I'm not sure if you're aware of all the internal contradictions you're creating with respect to your position. But hey ho - that's par for the course I guess.

She has been saying that for a long time. Well, except for the hyperbole and bizarre parts (e.g. "demon penis").

Uhhh I think quite a lot of discussion is (rightly) concerned with the matter of where transgender people are and are not allowed to go. And it's certainly a huge issue for you, as you've not been shy of pointing out loudly and repeatedly.

And she, and darned near everyone else in this thread, say that locker room access presents different issues than bathroom access.

I don't know why that is ignored so often, but c'est la vie.


ETA: Emily's Cat has never addressed this point to my recollection, but I'll bring up that high school bathroom access has different issues than movie theater bathroom access.

 

[LondonJohn]

It's weird that you would call this goalpost shifting. This has been one of the central themes of this debate since the beginning of the thread. I didn't complain about goalpost shifting when you simplified it down to the restroom question. Why do you make a gesture of bad faith here?



This sounds like you think that

a) There should be no laws passed that dictate how shelter administrators handle the matter; and

b) As a society we should normalize acceptance of shelter admins' authority as paramount in controlling access to their shelters.

Is that correct?

No.

Just as supermarket assistants in the UK have the authority to a) sell alcohol to anyone whom they judge to be well over 18, yet b) require proof of age from anyone whom they suspect might conceivably be under 18 before selling them alcohol...

.... so I'd suggest that suitably trained and qualified staff at women's shelters should be given the authority to a) allow unchallenged access to anyone whom they judge to be clearly a woman, yet b) require proof of gender from anyone whom they suspect might conceivably not be genuinely identifying as a woman.


What would YOUR system look like, and why?

 

[JoeMorgue]

Erm, my use of the term "evil penis" was sarcastic.

And I understand that but let's cut to the chase here. We both know when a man walks into a women's room it's not his brain structure or chromosome pairing that women are scared of.

No it's not as overly simple as "penis equals bad" but to pretend we can take the schlong out of the equation entirely is a bit unreasonable.

 

[LondonJohn]

She has been saying that for a long time. Well, except for the hyperbole and bizarre parts (e.g. "demon penis").

I think you'll find she's been saying that no trans women with penises should be allowed to enter the women's bathrooms*. Do you think her position on this is different from that?


* And as a reminder, her last argument on this was that people should use those bathrooms which marry with the bathroom that a bystander would assume they should use. In other words, anyone looking like a man should use the men's bathroom, and vice versa. But as I pointed out, that would automatically imply that trans women who look like women (i.e. superficially, in matters such as hair, makeup and clothing) should use the women's bathroom - even if they still actually possess a penis.

 

[abaddon]

Ah a leeetle beeet of goalpost shifting to while away a Tuesday evening


That's a question for the professional and experienced people who run women's shelters to figure out, and not me. But, given the very particular and extreme sensitivities attached to women's shelters, I'd suggest something along the lines of a combination of a) the experience and wisdom of the staff on duty, b) the ability to request proof of gender on demand (with entry denied to all those - including any cis women who happen to be asked - who cannot provide such proof), and c) vigilance and security measures within the women's refuge to minimise the risk of danger to any of those using the shelter.

How can that happen when many turn up with nothing but the clothes they have on their backs?

 

[LondonJohn]

And I understand that but let's cut to the chase here. We both know when a man walks into a women's room it's not his brain structure or chromosome pairing that women are scared of.

No it's not as overly simple as "penis equals bad" but to pretend we can take the schlong out of the equation entirely is a bit unreasonable.

But Emily's Cat herself just stated that in her view, anyone who "looks" like a woman should be able to use the women's bathrooms.

And it should go without saying that it's entirely possible for a male - whether a trans woman or a cis man, for that matter - to look like a woman (i.e. in terms of superficial visual appearance: hair, makeup, clothes) while still being in possession of a fully-functioning penis.

So Emily's Cat is now apparently arguing against her own previously-stated position, by stating that males with penises should be allowed to enter and use the women's bathrooms, so long as they look like women......

 

[JoeMorgue]

But Emily's Cat herself just stated that in her view, anyone who "looks" like a woman should be able to use the women's bathrooms.

And it should go without saying that it's entirely possible for a male - whether a trans woman or a cis man, for that matter - to look like a woman (i.e. in terms of superficial visual appearance: hair, makeup, clothes) while still being in possession of a fully-functioning penis.

So Emily's Cat is now apparently arguing against her own previously-stated position, by stating that males with penises should be allowed to enter and use the women's bathrooms, so long as they look like women......

I think you and Emily are not using the same definition (or same standards depending on how you want to look at it) of "obviously this gender or that gender."

 

[d4m10n]

Either drop the idea that women have some inherent right to male-free spaces (which for the record has always been my answer) or let them actually define the male-free space.

I think the operative question (here) is whether human females ovarians ought to be allowed to have a male-free spaces at all, either in the legal or moral sense. The answer seems obvious to me, but then it also seems obvious to Boudicca—in the other direction.

p.s. I’d be interested to hear AGG’s take on it.

 

[d4m10n]

No it's not as overly simple as "penis equals bad" but to pretend we can take the schlong out of the equation entirely is a bit unreasonable.

Especially when we're talking about ovarians who grew up reading Brownmiller.

Man's discovery that his genitalia could serve as a weapon to prehistoric times, along with the use of fire and the first crude stone axe. From prehistoric times to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function. It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think you'll find she's been saying that no trans women with penises should be allowed to enter the women's bathrooms*. Do you think her position on this is different from that?

Yes.