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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Elaedith said:
Merager claims the charges are discrimination against her as a transwoman. "If you go into an area where you’re expected to be nude, there has to be an indecent exposure exemption, " she added.
Click to expand...

hard to argue with that. Was this trans woman actually doing something indecent, or just using the facilities as normal?

The reporting is extremely vague about what the alleged offending behavior was.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
How exactly does someone get charged with indecent exposure for sitting in a locker room that state law allows them to use?
Click to expand...

"Darren Agee Merager, a group of women claimed was partially erect in the women’s section of Wi Spa"

Perhaps has something to do with it?
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Unfortunate side effect, or one component of a suite of body changes that are desired by the patient?

Perhaps instead of assuming what trans patients do or don't want from trans affirming care, those making bold claims could produce some data to support them.
Click to expand...

Who on earth wants to be weaker? There are plenty of women who do not want to look muscular, but I've never met a single one that wants to be weak. That's just a side effect of not looking muscular that they're willing to accept, it's not a goal in and of itself. It's an extraordinary claim that any significant number of people, trans or otherwise, prefer to be weak, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I submit that the burden of proof is on you.
 
Manger Douse said:
"Darren Agee Merager, a group of women claimed was partially erect in the women’s section of Wi Spa"

Perhaps has something to do with it?
Click to expand...

Perhaps. If Merager was sexually pleasuring herself in a public setting, that's absolutely criminal.

This would also be criminal for anyone, man or woman, cis or trans, to do in any locker room.
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
Who on earth wants to be weaker? There are plenty of women who do not want to look muscular, but I've never met a single one that wants to be weak. That's just a side effect of not looking muscular that they're willing to accept, it's not a goal in and of itself. It's an extraordinary claim that any significant number of people, trans or otherwise, prefer to be weak, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I submit that the burden of proof is on you.
Click to expand...

You said it yourself, many women do not want to look bulky with muscle. It's hard to be strong while also not having muscle mass. Slimming down muscle mass almost inevitably means a loss of strength.

I never claimed that trans women want to be weak. I contend that trans people seek hormone therapy to feminize/masculinize themselves as a treatment for dysphoria.

I'm still not sure what any of this has to do with prestige's comment about trans people only getting hormone therapy as a means for athletic compliance.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Perhaps. If Merager was sexually pleasuring herself in a public setting, that's absolutely criminal.

This would also be criminal for anyone, man or woman, cis or trans, to do in a locker room.
Click to expand...

Self ID gives women such as Darren may turn out to be, many more opportunities to sexually pleasure themselves at the expense of adult human females no?
 
Last edited:
Manger Douse said:
Self ID gives women such as Darren many more opportunities to sexually pleasure themselves at the expense of adult human females no?
Click to expand...

Considering this person has a rap sheet going back years before this law went into effect, it doesn't seem to have mattered much.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
hard to argue with that. Was this trans woman actually doing something indecent, or just using the facilities as normal?

The reporting is extremely vague about what the alleged offending behavior was.
Click to expand...

Yeah, get out the popcorn for this one.

It really could go either way. If all the sex offenses are related to exposure in situations where exposure is normal, then maybe this person lives as a woman, and is being perfectly normal.

I think we'll see some information about how Darren lives the rest of....uhhh...their life. In order to avoid jail time, I'm thinking their better be some name other than Darren involved.

If I were a betting man, though, I'm going to guess there isn't going to be a lot of feminity discovered. The LAPD took their sweet time bringing these charges. I'm guessing they checked out the story and decided Darren wasn't really a girl.

Stay tuned.
 
Manger Douse said:
What data would convince you?
Click to expand...

I suppose looking at localities, like Canada for example, that have passed such trans nondiscrimination laws and seeing if there were a significant rise in sex crime related to these spaces.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
Considering this person has a rap sheet going back years before this law went into effect, it doesn't seem to have mattered much.
Click to expand...

This person has a rap sheet as a sex offender (and apparently other offences) from before the law went into effect, meaning they were arrested and convicted.

Yet you just stated that the law now should make it impossible to charge the same person with what may be exactly the same behaviour as previous offences. In other words, according to you, a registered male sex offender with convictions for indecent exposure should now be able to exhibit exactly the same behaviour that previously constituted an offence and be immune from consequences.

It's like you can't even see the logical implications of what you say.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
I suppose looking at localities, like Canada for example, that have passed such trans nondiscrimination laws and seeing if there were a significant rise in sex crime related to these spaces.
Click to expand...

Define significant for me - just one would be pretty significant for the victim but how much is too much for you?
 
Manger Douse said:
Define significant for me - just one would be pretty significant for the victim but how much is too much for you?
Click to expand...

Are we talking about statistics or anecdotes?

The data I'm looking for is something that would prove that the number of these crimes increased as a result of these laws changing.
 
Elaedith said:
This person has a rap sheet as a sex offender (and apparently other offences) from before the law went into effect, meaning they were arrested and convicted.

Yet you just stated that the law now should make it impossible to charge the same person with what may be exactly the same behaviour as previous offences. In other words, according to you, a registered male sex offender with convictions for indecent exposure should now be able to exhibit exactly the same behaviour that previously constituted an offence and be immune from consequences.

It's like you can't even see the logical implications of what you say.
Click to expand...

If the accusations are true, the it doesn't seem like the law, as it stands now or as it was before, was ever much of a deterrent for Merager.

That's the unfortunate reality we live in that for some people, repeat criminals, laws don't stop them from doing whatever they like.

I don't see how a change in nondiscrimination law means much for these repeat criminals.

And if all Merager was doing is using the facilities as normal, then no crime at all occurred.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
Are we talking about statistics or anecdotes?

The data I'm looking for is something that would prove that the number of these crimes increased as a result of these laws changing.
Click to expand...

Yes but by how much, or is it your belief that allowing heterosexual males to self ID access to adult female changing spaces won't lead to increased voyerisim at the expense of said adult human females?
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
If the accusations are true, the it doesn't seem like the law, as it stands now or as it was before, was ever much of a deterrent for Merager.
Click to expand...

There are always some people who will violate pretty much any law. That doesn't mean that laws aren't deterrents. We don't see the people who were deterred, because they were deterred. We can expect that removing legal prohibitions will lead to more of that behavior as people who were previously deterred no longer are.

And if all Merager was doing is using the facilities as normal, then no crime at all occurred.
Click to expand...

I doubt that Merager was "using the facilities as normal". I think Merager was doing exactly what he was accused of doing: exposing himself for sexual pleasure.
 
Ziggurat said:
There are always some people who will violate pretty much any law. That doesn't mean that laws aren't deterrents. We don't see the people who were deterred, because they were deterred. We can expect that removing legal prohibitions will lead to more of that behavior as people who were previously deterred no longer are.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Data would prove it. Canada adopted this kind of law years ago. Surely there would be something measurable by now. Feel free to prove it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom