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

[ED] Discussion: Trans Women Are not Women (Part 6)

Status
Not open for further replies.
you've discovered the lie of "separate but equal". Sure, not that many buildings had redundant toilets. Instead, black people simply didn't have one they could use. It was very common for buildings to have only a "White's only" restroom.

I simply don't know what to tell you if you don't believe that racial segregation in public bathrooms was not rigorously enforced. This is a stunning ignorance of the relevant history.

You are correct that there were not redundant restrooms everywhere. Black people simply did not have access to public restrooms in white parts of society. This was a small facet of Jim Crow that intended to keep blacks in their place, by making simple existence outside the designated niche established by the white supremacist state impossible. Outside of the black parts of town, it would be very difficult indeed to perform the basic biological necessities of life, be it using toilets, buying food, using transit, and so on. That was the whole point, to prevent comingling of blacks and whites by building these barriers that made sharing the same spaces impractical.

Finding a place to take a piss was such a problem for black motorists that a popular guide book, the Green Book, was published listing restrooms, hotels, and other necessities that were available to black patrons.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Motorist_Green_Book

This is the only part that had anything to do with the post you replied to.

When someone claims "oh yeah, we have had three bathrooms in the States for just until the last few decades", it's kind of reasonable to call that out as made-up bull ****.
 
Looks like the ONS definitions that LJ gave are disputed by clinical researchers. So much for LJ's claims of the ONS representing the opinion of the medical experts.

There's nothing that says Trans women are Women and should be treated as such which was your claim

Yeah. LJ keeps telling us that all the important and vexing questions have been decisively answered by the medical authorities. But according to these citations, the medical authorities are stuck at exactly the same point as us laymen.
 
This is the only part that had anything to do with the post you replied to.

When someone claims "oh yeah, we have had three bathrooms in the States for just until the last few decades", it's kind of reasonable to call that out as made-up bull ****.

Apologies, I misunderstood your post.

An interesting historical oddity is that the Pentagon has twice as many restrooms as you might expect for exactly this reason.

The Pentagon was designed in accordance with the racial segregation laws in force in the state of Virginia at the time, with separate eating and lavatory accommodations for white and black persons; the sets of lavatories were side by side, and the dining areas for black persons were in the basement.[41][42] However, when Roosevelt visited the facility before its dedication, he ordered removal of the "Whites Only" signs, and the Pentagon became the only building in Virginia where segregation laws (which remained in force until 1965) were not enforced. The side by side sets of restrooms still exist, but are used by all.[42]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon
 
Last edited:
Even saying 'TRA' isn't fair really since activists argue vehemently amongst themselves about all this too. (and this is sort of new knowledge to me since a lot has been scrubbed/canceled from the internet and harder to find)

Labels are harder in this topic than in many. It isn't a left/right thing, at least not in ISFLand.

Saying, "People who generally think that biological sex is very important and support rights for female only spaces and activities." versus "People who generally think that in all social interactions people should be treated according to internal gender identity" just gets tedious.

So, "TRA" it is. And "TERF"? People use it as an insult, which is unfortunate, and most people who are called TERFs aren't radical feminists, so that's unfortunate, too.

Maybe I'll start saying, "biological segregationist" versus "psychological segregationist". Somehow I don't think that would work well, either.
 
I do see that term thrown around a lot, as if anyone that agrees is some card carrying sycophant. I have no such label for myself. Never been a feminist, or a 'radical' on anything. haha. I don't know anyone in my circle who would consider themselves any such thing.

Even saying 'TRA' isn't fair really since activists argue vehemently amongst themselves about all this too. (and this is sort of new knowledge to me since a lot has been scrubbed/canceled from the internet and harder to find)

Hmm, you are right that many transphobes like you may not really be feminists. But you certainly like to use feminist language and justifications a lot, in your case you use them to back up your "Won't somebody think of the children?!" arguments.

That's why I am coming around to the fact that TERF may not be as accurate as the alternative suggested acronym of FART - Feminism-Appropriating Reactionary Transphobe.

And I never really considered myself a 'TRA', since while I am an activist and organizer, I don't tend to focus on trans rights much in real life compared to other causes. Lately I've been more focused with mutual aid, Medicare For All in California, and improving free and affordable housing in my community. Trans rights are very important to me, but there is not too much locally to really do in a state like mine.
 
Yeah. LJ keeps telling us that all the important and vexing questions have been decisively answered by the medical authorities. But according to these citations, the medical authorities are stuck at exactly the same point as us laymen.

To be perfectly honest, when it comes to the question "what is a man", I'm not sure a PhD psychologist is more qualified to answer than a 17 year old girl.
 
I'd say there is no point in this much "Stop the discussion and let's label everything" but then I remember what the actual topic is...

Again "I have four fingers and a thumb!" screaming at "No I have five fingers!" wash, rinse, repeat is not an argument.
 
Last edited:
Hmm, you are right that many transphobes like you may not really be feminists. But you certainly like to use feminist language and justifications a lot, in your case you use them to back up your "Won't somebody think of the children?!" arguments.

That's why I am coming around to the fact that TERF may not be as accurate as the alternative suggested acronym of FART - Feminism-Appropriating Reactionary Transphobe.

.

What's a good word for someone who calls every sports woman in the world lazy because they can't admit men have a physical advantage over women? Misogynist maybe?
 
The same thing IGLYO is trying to do in the "liberal" direction. They're both an attack on trans rights.

Okay, I've wanted to address these falsehoods for a while now.

IGLYO and the other liberal/leftist organizations you have deemed as anti-trans rights are fully supportive of us and our goals. I'm not sure what game you are trying to play by painting our allies as anti-trans, but you are absolutely wrong.

And the fact that one of the only organizations you cite as being supportive of us are the Log Cabin Republicans?! A blatantly anti-LGBTQ group posing as a supporter of our rights but support anti-LGBTQ politicians and issues at every turn? They are sellouts who care more about paying less taxes than their own civil rights, and certainly don't support trans rights.
 
What's a good word for someone who calls every sports woman in the world lazy because they can't admit men have a physical advantage over women? Misogynist maybe?

As I said before, I only say that for sports women/girls who use their transphobia as an excuse for why they lost.

Like the girls who lost to Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller, and instead of losing gracefully, are trying to infringe on their rights to compete with their own gender/sex. And the bigots in this case (Selina Soule, Alanna Smith and Chelsea Mitchell) have partnered up with known hate group Alliance Defending Freedom in trying to discriminate against us.

I have no sympathy for people like that.
 
As I said before, I only say that for sports women/girls who use their transphobia as an excuse for why they lost.



Like the girls who lost to Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller, and instead of losing gracefully, are trying to infringe on their rights to compete with their own gender/sex. And the bigots in this case (Selina Soule, Alanna Smith and Chelsea Mitchell) have partnered up with known hate group Alliance Defending Freedom in trying to discriminate against us.



I have no sympathy for people like that.

But it's not just the women you've just now mentioned losing to men, it's ALL of them losing to men - are they all TERFS to?

Why do women not run as fast as men in your opinion, if not laziness?
 
I'm tempted to ask "why do you need the 'trans' qualifier if you assert you are a woman?" 'Trans' acknowledges that there is a real difference. But I'm pretty sure that must have been covered several thousand posts ago and also went nowhere.
 
Okay. Let's try a different approach here. Let's take the language off the table as much as possible and still be talking.

100 people consisting of people with both penises and vaginas (that's various people who have either a penis or vagina not people with both oh you know what I mean...) all enter an athletic competition. At the end of the competition the top 10% of people all have a penis. The people with vaginas feel they are not being represented in the sport and start a seperate league where they have a chance of being in the top 10%.

Without using the words man, woman, male, female, trans(X), or any other oblique referencing to the labeling of the sexes and genders answer the following the question.

Is the complaint and actions of the vagina havers valid? Why or why not?
 
Last edited:
I think personal privacy is the best way to ensure personal privacy. I don't necessarily believe sex-segregated spaces need to end, but there should be a general acknowledgement that our understanding of people who aren't cis and heterosexual exist and that sex-segregation alone is not adequate to provide an attraction free environment.


I don't see why trans people need to be thrown under the bus when the obvious solution of just adding privacy screens is available. Even beyond the trans debate, most people would probably prefer more, not less, privacy in these spaces. Just give it to them.

I have a sneaking suspicion that even if such personal privacy was guaranteed and modesty/safety were no longer a concern, the most virulent TERFs would still object to trans inclusion. It's as much about sending a message that trans people are the "other" than it is about any practical concerns

Bwahahaha! This kind of stupid statement tells me you have probably never been in a locker room! Perhaps you can show us all how these "privacy screens" will work in the situations below... I'm keen to see what you have in mind! :D

Locker-room1.jpg


Locker-room2.jpg
 
Last edited:
But it's not just the women you've just now mentioned losing to men, it's ALL of them losing to men - are they all TERFS to?

Why do women not run as fast as men in your opinion, if not laziness?

They didn't lose to men, they lost to women. Stop trying to muddy the conversation.

Sports women who lose to actual men aren't what we are talking about here, like the Williams sisters losing to a man. That's not the issue here and accusations of "TERF" would make no sense.
 
Okay. Let's try a different approach here. Let's take the language off the table as much as possible and still be talking.

100 people consisting of people with both penises and vaginas (that's various people who have either a penis or vagina not people with both oh you know what I mean...) all enter an athletic competition. At the end of the competition the top 10% of people all have a penis. The people with vaginas feel they are not being represented in the sport and start a seperate league where they have a chance of being in the top 10%.

Without using the words man, woman, male, female, trans(X), or any other oblique referencing to the labeling of the sexes and genders answer the following the question.

Is the complaint and actions of the vagina havers valid? Why or why not?

Identical to weight divisions in boxing, or age classes.
 
Bwahahaha! This kind of stupid statement tells me you have probably never been in a locker room! Perhaps you can show us all how these "privacy screens" will work in the situations below... I'm keen to see what you have in mind! :D

[qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/j50y2cirbwsnxzw/Locker-room1.jpg?raw=1[/qimg]

[qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/zq233w83kgiswxd/Locker-room2.jpg?raw=1[/qimg]

BREAKING UP THE GANG FOR GOOD?
For many architects, specification of traditional locker room gang showers has slowed to a trickle — even in varsity sports facilities. "I would say in the past 15 years, for every 95 showers we've designed, at most only five of those have been gang style," Patton says. "We've really moved to very privatized showering areas."

"Every guest has a different need when using a locker room," Heimmer says. "Uses range from guests who come dressed and are looking for a secure place to store their wallet and phone, to the pool user who needs a large accessible area to change, shower and prepare themselves for a day of work. Providing users with flexibility to have a personalized locker room experience that meets their needs is a key consideration for locker room design."

"It's all about inclusivity," says Ostertag. "If you have an all-gender locker room, it's really for those with disabilities, those with families and children, those who are transgender. It's really about making an area that's inclusive for everyone. And that's just what we try to achieve."

Modesty rules in 2017, no matter the user, according to Kocher. "You can say this is being driven to the forefront by the topic of providing transgender spaces, but the reality is everybody has some sense of privacy or level of shyness," he says. "If a person has the opportunity to use one space versus another, they're going to always migrate to the more private than the more public."

https://www.athleticbusiness.com/locker-room/designing-public-locker-rooms-with-an-eye-on-privacy.html

There's no need for privacy in areas where people aren't nude. People putting on their cleats or shoulder pads don't need privacy stalls.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

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