Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

[JoeMorgue]

I don't see how the arguments for excluding trans people couldn't be used in the exact same way to argue for segregation by citing black crime rates.

I'm not comparing black people to transpeople, I'm comparing them to men.

Again remember this entire argument exists only because "Men" as predatory monsters that women need a "safe space" from exists.

I'm not arguing who gets into the women's safe spaces.

 

[LondonJohn]

That is logically sound.
I reject the argument that segregating bathrooms is a "safety" issue.

It is a Privacy issue, based upon community standards.

A man who exposes his penis in the presence of a woman or girl outside of very specific sexual or medical circumstances is a pervert in any context. This has been and remains to be the community standard of indecent behavior throughout the lifetimes of every poster on this forum.

Changing the womens' name from Ellen to Ellis does not magically transform this behavior into something acceptable.

Wow. Straight out of the playbook of Reefer Madness. Reactionary bollocks intended to scaremonger and demonise. For shame.

(And the final sentence completes the picture: transgender people are apparently nothing more than people who "choose" to identify as a gender other than that they've been assigned at birth. Oh, plus all transwomen who want to use women's changing/bathroom facilities are "perverts". Jesus.)

 

[Distracted1]

I'm not comparing black people to transpeople, I'm comparing them to men.

Again remember this entire argument exists only because "Men" as predatory monsters that women need a "safe space" from exists.

I'm not arguing who gets into the women's safe spaces.

Why not Women-only elevators, offices, restaurants, alleyways, etc...?
The arguments, as ST points out, are based upon the same logic.

 

[LondonJohn]

I'm not comparing black people to transpeople, I'm comparing them to men.

Again remember this entire argument exists only because "Men" as predatory monsters that women need a "safe space" from exists.

I'm not arguing who gets into the women's safe spaces.

Then go tell your own legislators - who, I'm very confident, understand this issue an awful lot better than you do, and who will have sought expert advice and consultation from all interested parties - who are indeed granting transgender people these rights (with caveats attached, of course).

Or would you just handwave that inconvenient truth away with the ridiculous "policy capture" mantra?

 

[Distracted1]

Wow. Straight out of the playbook of Reefer Madness. Reactionary bollocks intended to scaremonger and demonise. For shame.

(And the final sentence completes the picture: transgender people are apparently nothing more than people who "choose" to identify as a gender other than that they've been assigned at birth. Oh, plus all transwomen who want to use women's changing/bathroom facilities are "perverts". Jesus.)

Actually, the penis I had in mind when I wrote that post was my own.
Is there any reason I should not have the privlidge of showering at my local Gymnasium without risk of exposing my penis to a woman or girl whom I do not know?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I'm not comparing black people to transpeople, I'm comparing them to men.

Again remember this entire argument exists only because "Men" as predatory monsters that women need a "safe space" from exists.

I'm not arguing who gets into the women's safe spaces.

It's a bit of an off topic tangent, but I often find myself thinking about the "women's only" railcars seen in some countries, and other more extensive forms of gender/sex segregation in the name of safety from male aggression.

I wonder how much of this is simply a cope to deal with a society that is totally unwilling and/or unable to deal with male sexual violence and misbehavior. To my mind, the obviously superior solution is to have a society that sufficiently punishes or otherwise discourages subway groping that such separation is not necessary, but in the absence of such a rigorous cultural expectation, I suppose you have to make other arrangements.

That's a long way to say I often see these sex segregated places not so much as a triumph of feminism, but rather a sign of failure. They are a resignation to the fact that nothing really can be done about routine sexual violence/harassment, so instead society has to use these crutches.

I suppose this is somewhat on topic, but not really. It's not really a question, thanks for letting me dump out my brain here.

 

[LondonJohn]

Actually, the penis I had in mind when I wrote that post was my own.
Is there any reason I should not have the privlidge of showering at my local Gymnasium without risk of exposing my penis to a woman or girl whom I do not know?

Then you should have written clearly that you were only talking about your own penis (wow, we're in weird territory here).

And there are so many nested negatives in that sentence where you talk about "having the privlidge" (privilege?) that it's very difficult indeed to figure out what you actually mean to say. Would you be able to re-phrase it in simpler terms?

 

[JoeMorgue]

It's a bit of an off topic tangent, but I often find myself thinking about the "women's only" railcars seen in some countries, and other more extensive forms of gender/sex segregation in the name of safety from male aggression.

Okay. Do you see the definition of "woman" to be anywhere in the solution to these railcars?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Okay. Do you see the definition of "woman" to be anywhere in the solution to these railcars?

Not really.

 

[Distracted1]

Then you should have written clearly that you were only talking about your own penis (wow, we're in weird territory here).

And there are so many nested negatives in that sentence where you talk about "having the privlidge" (privilege?) that it's very difficult indeed to figure out what you actually mean to say. Would you be able to re-phrase it in simpler terms?

The statement (sans misspelled word) is clear enough.
What compelling argument do you have for insisting that women be allowed into a mens' showering area? Other than rebranding Women as Men?

 

[LondonJohn]

By the way, it appears to me that an awful lot of the scaremongering taking place within this thread is predicated on the breezy belief that if/when transwomen are granted access to certain women-only spaces, this will open the door to hetero cismen masquerading as transwomen in order to do their filthy business in those women-only spaces.

Among many in this thread, this seems to be pretty much an automatic assumption of what will happen. But, again, what does the real-world evidence show? Well, in countries such as canada and (in a limited manner) the UK, there's no evidence at all of cismen trying to "game the system" in this manner. On top of that, I suspect that psychiatrists and psychologists might point out that it's rather unlikely that a hot-blooded hetero cisman would want to undergo the perceived (and, most likely, internalised) emasculation of declaring himself to be a transwoman.

Of course, it's an easy (and lazy) weapon to use in a fact-lite debate: "Oh, I'm concerned enough about "genuine" rolleyes transwomen accessing these facilities; but in a self-ID regime the far greater menace will come from hetero cismen declaring themselves to be transwomen - meaning that in practice every single male will be able to access these spaces if he so desires". It's just rather a shame for that argument that the real-world data (so far) suggests otherwise...

 

[JoeMorgue]

Not really.

*Makes the 'Get There Faster' motion with my hand"

 

[LondonJohn]

The statement (sans misspelled word) is clear enough.
What compelling argument do you have for insisting that women be allowed into a mens' showering area? Other than rebranding Women as Men?

Ah there you go again with "rebranding". You don't believe that transmen are experiencing a valid condition, do you?

And, by the way, my answer is: as a hetero cisman I would have no problem whatsoever with a transman using a men-only space in my presence. I would expect the transman in question to take as much care as possible to show consideration - eg to have a towel round genital areas when changing and walking around, to use the end shower cubicle if at all possible, and so on. And I would without doubt report the transman to the management of the facility if he was behaving in an inconsiderate/provocative/inappropriate manner wrt his transgender identity. Otherwise, absolutely fine.


ETA: Oh I see - in your original post, where you wrote "...to a woman or girl whom I do not know", you meant to write "...to a transman or transboy whom I do not know". Right?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

*Makes the 'Get There Faster' motion with my hand"

I don't get it.

Like I said in my long post, it's an off topic tangent. There's no point really. I'm not working towards one here, at least, beyond the basic notion that gender segregated spaces generally strike me as a tacit acknowledgement that a given society has generally failed to address root causes of violence/harassment.

 

[Ziggurat]

I don't get it.

Like I said in my long post, it's an off topic tangent. There's no point really. I'm not working towards one here, at least, beyond the basic notion that gender segregated spaces generally strike me as a tacit acknowledgement that a given society has generally failed to address root causes of violence/harassment.

The ultimate root cause of violence is human nature. There is no solution to that. It can be mitigated, and sex segregation (not gender segregation) is one of the tools to do that, but it cannot be eliminated.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I don't get it.

Like I said in my long post, it's an off topic tangent. There's no point really. I'm not working towards one here, at least, beyond the basic notion that gender segregated spaces generally strike me as a tacit acknowledgement that a given society has generally failed to address root causes of violence/harassment.

Women Restrooms = Women's Railcars.

And it's not "off topic." You just want to keep the discussion on the one arbitrary level where you think you don't have the burden of proof.

Your argument is

"We have to discuss this one arbitrary point of segregation!"
"What about the points of segregation above and below that point?"
"THOSE ARE OFF TOPIC!"

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The ultimate root cause of violence is human nature. There is no solution to that. It can be mitigated, and sex segregation (not gender segregation) is one of the tools to do that, but it cannot be eliminated.

There seems to be an awful lot of variation. Some places an unattended woman showing a bit of ankle is open invite to be mob raped, in other places it's not uncommon for there to be coed nude spaces. Hard to chalk that all up to human nature.

 

[Meadmaker]

There seems to be an awful lot of variation. Some places an unattended woman showing a bit of ankle is open invite to be mob raped, in other places it's not uncommon for there to be coed nude spaces. Hard to chalk that all up to human nature.

Actually, it's pretty easy, if you understand human nature.

 

[Ziggurat]

There seems to be an awful lot of variation. Some places an unattended woman showing a bit of ankle is open invite to be mob raped, in other places it's not uncommon for there to be coed nude spaces. Hard to chalk that all up to human nature.

And like I said, it can be mitigated. Western countries do a reasonable job in that respect, showing ankle won't get a woman raped.

But some of the cultural rules necessary to make something like a coed nude space safe require a kind of cultural uniformity and cohesion that, frankly, large multicultural countries like the US cannot achieve. There is no path from here to there. There is no way to create such a unified culture in a country like the US without doing stuff that, quite frankly, is a cure far worse than the disease. Given that reality, maintaining sex segregated spaces makes a lot of sense.

 

[Meadmaker]

hell, the crime and race statistics actually exist, which is more than the trans bathroom panic mongers ever had.

I must admit that I was among those who thought there would be a lot more voyeurism following the liberalization of trans access laws. I thought a lot more men would be caught dressing up as women to gain access for peeping. Some of that has, indeed, happened, but not much.

A much bigger problem has been in cases where institutions have introduced unisex facilities, with minimal individual private spaces.

Be that as it may, I think it's wrong to say, or imply, that there is no harm if there is no crime. I think the loss of modesty/privacy constitutes harm in and of itself.

The degree of harm is debatable. I think there are a lot more people willing to compromise on bathroom access than changing rooms due to the perception that the degree of privacy lost is smaller.