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

[Distracted1]

I'm scoring these as one on the "how dare I expect compromise from trans women" side of the slate, and one on the "how dare I expect compromise from females" side.

It is reasonable for either gender to expect to not be seen nude by members of the opposite gender. Not only Females.
Or are you suggesting that I just get comfortable pulling my cock out in the presence of teenaged girls?

 

[Myriad]

It's a valid critique, because such a solution is likely not going to be lawful if SCOTUS rules that gender identity discrimination is unconstitutional.

Requiring special concessions from trans people is likely not a viable solution if this is a constitutional issue, which it likely will be.

Have you seen SCOTUS lately? Do you really want the entire resolution to depend on the outcome of one throw of those (currently loaded somewhat against you) dice?

And it's not a special concession, as I've already made quite clear. It's the absence of a special dispensation. No one has established a right to show a penis in a women's room.

 

[Myriad]

It is reasonable for either gender to expect to not be seen nude by members of the opposite gender. Not only Females.
Or are you suggesting that I just get comfortable pulling my cock out in the presence of teenaged girls?

You do you, man, but you're likely to get arrested.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Have you seen SCOTUS lately? Do you really want the entire resolution to depend on the outcome of one throw of those (currently loaded somewhat against you) dice?

And it's not a special concession, as I've already made quite clear. It's the absence of a special dispensation. No one has established a right to show a penis in a women's room.

Whether or not it happens is an open question. The Bostock decision shows that our conservative SCOTUS is not as hostile towards trans rights as you might expect. How far this reasoning will go with the current court remains to be seen. My point remains, in many parts of this country, trans acceptance will only come if backed by a court order. In such a scenario, making trans women jump through special hoops will likely be a non-starter, because of the ruling that would have to exist for such a court order to occur.

It's clearly a discriminatory requirement that some population of the women's changing room, trans women, will be required to change behind some barricade, while other women are free to view as many naked girls as they would like.

Why fight so hard for the rights of women to leer at other naked women? Are women losing something important if they no longer can see each other strip naked in the locker rooms? I really don't see much downside to actually providing people with personal privacy in these places, even if that just means a cheap curtain. Again, bodily autonomy and consent are often considered important lessons to teach people in order to fight sexual abuse. Providing people in changing rooms meaningful personal privacy seems like a great way to practice these principles.

 

[Distracted1]

You do you, man, but you're likely to get arrested.

Not if she is standing next to me at the urinal.

 

[ponderingturtle]

It is reasonable for either gender to expect to not be seen nude by members of the opposite gender. Not only Females.
Or are you suggesting that I just get comfortable pulling my cock out in the presence of teenaged girls?

You are aware whipping your cock out around teenage boys is also legally exposing yourself and carries rather the same criminal penalties right?

 

[Distracted1]

You are aware whipping your cock out around teenage boys is also legally exposing yourself and carries rather the same criminal penalties right?

Yet I do it several times a month.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Yet I do it several times a month.

Then it is unfortunate that you have not been caught by the police yet.

 

[Myriad]

Whether or not it happens is an open question. The Bostock decision shows that our conservative SCOTUS is not as hostile towards trans rights as you might expect.

Is showing a penis (by a transwoman) in a women's changing facility a trans right?

 

[Distracted1]

Then it is unfortunate that you have not been caught by the police yet.

On occasion, there are police officers in the same room while I do it.
What a country!

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Is showing a penis (by a transwoman) in a women's changing facility a trans right?

Using public accommodations, without special burdens, is often the subject of civil rights litigation, and has been specifically in respect to trans rights.

 

[Myriad]

Not if she is standing next to me at the urinal.

Is she peeking? If so, then maybe you'd want to shuffle away uncomfortably, just as you might if it were a guy peeking.

If not, what's the issue again?

And what does any of that have to do with my suggestion that males not be permitted to expose themselves in a women's room?

 

[Myriad]

Using public accommodations, without special burdens, is often the subject of civil rights litigation, and has been specifically in respect to trans rights.

That's nice. But is showing a penis (by a transwoman) in a women's changing facility a trans right?

 

[JoeMorgue]

Basically the argument is whether or not looking at a penis attached to a woman should be held to a different standard to looking at a penis attached to a man.

And Jesus Christ does anyone get how absurd that sounds when you say it out loud?

 

[Distracted1]

Is she peeking? If so, then maybe you'd want to shuffle away uncomfortably, just as you might if it were a guy peeking.

If not, what's the issue again?

And what does any of that have to do with my suggestion that males not be permitted to expose themselves in a women's room?

I thought that was clear from my initial response. It is addressing such a small part of the problem (in the case of some men) that it is functionally no solution at all.

It fails to address the expectation of the women in the room to not be viewed by a man/boy, and it does not address the situation in the other sex segregated private areas (the mens' room) at all.

 

[Emily's Cat]

When it comes to discussing whether or not certain people have rights, the stakes are high. That's just the way it is. Either your someone opposing the civil and human rights of trans people, or your someone endangering women and children by being hoodwinked by the great trans hoax. There's not much middle ground here. When it comes to recognizing civil rights, there's not many ways to split the baby that make much sense with our current legal structure.

Pearl clutching about the nature of the beast is a waste of effort. People who were wrong about gay rights were homophobic. A lot of them came around, but that doesn't change that they were homophobic, making decisions largely driven by uniformed bigotry towards gay people.

Much is the same now with trans people. I suspect it will follow a similar course, where many people now will conveniently forget how stridently transphobic they were should trans rights become law of the land in the next few decades.

By your logic, that would mean that your pro-trans stance means that you're misogynistic.

Does that seem like a reasonable way to frame this discussion? Or do you admit to being misogynistic?

 

[Myriad]

I thought that was clear from my initial response. It is addressing such a small part of the problem (in the case of some men) that it is functionally no solution at all.

It fails to address the expectation of the women in the room to not be viewed by a man/boy, and it does not address the situation in the other sex segregated private areas (the mens' room) at all.

Okay, so you're affirming via a roundabout analogy that my suggested compromise, which I predicted would make no one happy, does not make you happy. In that, you're in complete agreement with ponderingturtle and SuburbanTurkey.

I can't be sure, but I think you might be underestimating the importance of compliance with the no-showing rule, in addressing some portion of women's concerns. It's not necessarily the sight of the penis, nor the mere knowledge that a penis is present, that seems to alarm most of the women who have posted here the most. It's the self-centered aggression exhibited by those trans women who deliberately expose themselves just because they're circumstantially allowed to, despite knowing full well that the females present are disturbed and frightened by it. And also knowing that they're taking advantage of, and in some cases appear to be reveling in, the females' powerlessness to prevent it.

Male-bodied people who are behaving in a self-centered aggressive manner, knowing that it's disturbing and frightening to females present, and taking advantage of and reveling in the females' powerlessness, should not be welcome in women's rooms. Duh. (Tell me what a transphobe I am.)

On the other hand, male-bodied people adhering to a rule of discretion intended to help allay women's fears and make the best of a difficult situation affecting their gender identity, should be given a chance, even if that fails to assuage all discomfort on everyone's part. (Tell me what a misogynist I am.)

 

[TurkeysGhost]

That's nice. But is showing a penis (by a transwoman) in a women's changing facility a trans right?

No. You've thoroughly thrashed that strawman, well done.

If gender identity were considered a protected class by the SCOTUS, policies that were specifically discriminatory to people of that protected class would not be lawful. It's a fairly simple point, and one I suspect you understand quite well.

 

[Emily's Cat]

So am I... although my political opinions run the gamut of left-to-right and authoritarian-to-libertarian.

Then we're probably pretty close then. I tend to call it the "common sense" position.

 

[Belz...]

Assuming that I do have it correct... this means that Belz... for example, could wake up tomorrow, declare themselves to be a transwoman, and go out in jeans and a t-shirt, with a beard... and becaues Belz... has declared themself to be a transwoman, they would now have a *right* to go get naked in front of nonconsenting females, and to view naked females against their will.

That's why there has to be a better definition of 'trans' than 'it's why I feel right now'. That's why gender dysphoria makes sense as a prerequisite because with it comes a diagnosis and a transition that makes objective determination (and passing) much easier.

Is there any way that Belz...'s claim to be a transwoman can be challenged? I don't see that there is.

I'm sure the ideologues assembled here will have a silly buggers radar that allows them to know who's being sincere or not.

@Belz... - sorry to use you as the example here, but I trust that you have the mental and emotional fortitude to bear it

You know I don't!