• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Meadmaker said:
I am doing no such thing. The mobs at those meeings were indeed reactionary.

What I am suggesting is that you somehow think the mob is part of the story that I'm commenting on. It isn't. You keep coming back to it, but it has nothing to do with the invasion of privacy that (I'm inferring) occurred at the high school.
Click to expand...

Seems like a really, really long road to walk to get to "this school lets trans girls use the women's toilet". I mean, why use this particular example at all given all the heavy baggage and outright lies attached to the story?

Yes, some schools have policies that allow trans people to use toilets according to their self-professed gender. I suppose you could characterize this as an "invasion of privacy" if you wanted to. Clearly these schools don't see it that way.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
The article you linked in the daily mail has the mother claiming the child identified as "Pan sexual", which for all intents and purposes is some variant of vague nonbinary.
Click to expand...

As opposed to "transgender", which for all intents and purposes is vague binary.

The ambiguity is exacerbated by the fact that "-sexual" is often used to indicate sexual attraction, not gender identity.

Heterosexual doesn't mean you identify as your biological sex. It means you're sexually attracted to the binary complement of your biological sex. And of course homosexual means you're sexually attracted to your same biological sex rather than the complement. Bisexual obviously means sexual attraction to both your own sex and its complement. The pattern extends to asexual, which as one would expect from knowing languages means attracted to neither sex.

If we extend the pattern to pansexual, we'd expect it to mean roughly the same thing as bisexual, but implying either some misguided belief in sex-as-a-spectrum, or else sexual attraction other things as well as to humans.

The gender identity corresponding to the "pansexual" sexual attraction would be better indicated by terms like "pangender" or "agender" or even "transgender" (though that last would be confusing for other reasons).

Talking about a heterosexual male as being "pansexual" just indicates to me that the people involved aren't really thinking clearly or consistently about these issues. Which is not surprising in a 15 year old, but disappointing coming from the adults in his life who are responsible for teaching and encouraging clear thinking for the children in their care.
 
Last edited:
So maybe I'm showing my libertine ass, but would have really been a big deal if these two were happily shagging in the toilet?

I mean, I know the school isn't going to like it, but teens sneaking off to bang is a pretty common story and at best a moderate discipline concern (pretty unhygienic imo)

The real problem here is that the kid is a rapist, and an especially persistent one given the quick repeat attack at the new school.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Seems like a really, really long road to walk to get to "this school lets trans girls use the women's toilet".
Click to expand...

Close. The actual policy would be more like "this school lets anyone who claims to be a trans girl use the women's toilet."

The difference is significant.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Close. The actual policy would be more like "this school lets anyone who claims to be a trans girl use the women's toilet.

The difference is significant.
Click to expand...

So back to bathroom panic. Data for this being a real problem is still lacking.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
So maybe I'm showing my libertine ass, but would have really been a big deal if these two were happily shagging in the toilet?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, no.

ETA: Let me correct that. The shagging would not be a problem but they would still have been violating the privacy rights of other students.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
ETA: Let me correct that. The shagging would not be a problem but they would still have been violating the privacy rights of other students.
Click to expand...

Because one is male or because it's kinda gross to subject other people to public-ish sex?

For me, shagging in a public toilet is probably the larger transgression.
 
France bans conversion therapy, including no exemption for religious institutions.

The bill, voted in on Tuesday, bans all “practices, behaviours, and repeated statements with the intent of modifying or repressing a person’s real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, and having the effect of a material alteration to their mental or physical health”.
Click to expand...

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/12/16/france-conversion-therapy-ban/

UK still dithering

The UK still has not passed a ban on conversion therapy, despite Theresa May’s government first promising to outlaw the barbaric practice in 2018.
Click to expand...
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
yes, this has been repeatedly asserted here without a lick of evidence...
Click to expand...
What sort of evidence would you accept in support of the proposition that it is easier for males to enter spaces formerly reserved for females once we've done away with the cultural norm that they may be challenged for doing so?

This seems so straightforward that I'm a bit confused as to why it's considered to be in doubt here.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
France bans conversion therapy, including no exemption for religious institutions.



https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/12/16/france-conversion-therapy-ban/

UK still dithering
Click to expand...

Here;s the wording: (in English translation)

The bill, voted in on Tuesday, bans all “practices, behaviours, and repeated statements with the intent of modifying or repressing a person’s real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, and having the effect of a material alteration to their mental or physical health”.


The problem I see is that a therapist in France is now required, by law, to accept any self diagnosis of transgenderism. Failure to do so risks a two year prison sentence. I foresee an awful lot of therapists refusing to treat gender non-conforming individuals. And if someone seeks counseling when they are considering detransitioning, I can't imagine a therapist even allowing the person into their office. It's just too risky.


If the law were not so broad, targeting people who actually advertise therapy whose purpose was "conversion", I would think it was a good law.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Seems like a really, really long road to walk to get to "this school lets trans girls use the women's toilet". I mean, why use this particular example at all given all the heavy baggage and outright lies attached to the story?

Yes, some schools have policies that allow trans people to use toilets according to their self-professed gender. I suppose you could characterize this as an "invasion of privacy" if you wanted to. Clearly these schools don't see it that way.
Click to expand...

I think you took a wrong turn on Meadmaker's road.

That's not what he was saying, I think. What I think he is saying is more like: " This person, who according to his mother is a cis-boy, not a trtans-girl, was using the women's toilet. The principal thought this person to be a trans-girl. School policy allows trans-girls to use the women's bathroom, so this person was not prevented from using the women's bathroom. The school's policy allowing trans-girls to use the women's bathroom made it easier for a cis-boy to access the women's bathroom."

Leaving the rape out of the equation, the policy allowing trans-girls to use the boys bathrooms made it easier for a cis-boy to access that space. The presence of a cis-boy in the women's bathroom is a problem in and of itself, unless you are an advocate of gender neutral bathrooms.
 
TomB said:
The presence of a cis-boy in the women's bathroom is a problem in and of itself, unless you are an advocate of gender neutral bathrooms.
Click to expand...

Specifically, unless you are an advocate of backdooring de facto gender neutral bathrooms into communities that aren't expecting them, aren't prepared for them, haven't been asked about them, and may not actually want them.
 
TomB said:
I think you took a wrong turn on Meadmaker's road.

That's not what he was saying, I think. What I think he is saying is more like: " This person, who according to his mother is a cis-boy, not a trtans-girl, was using the women's toilet. The principal thought this person to be a trans-girl. School policy allows trans-girls to use the women's bathroom, so this person was not prevented from using the women's bathroom. The school's policy allowing trans-girls to use the women's bathroom made it easier for a cis-boy to access the women's bathroom."

Leaving the rape out of the equation, the policy allowing trans-girls to use the boys bathrooms made it easier for a cis-boy to access that space. The presence of a cis-boy in the women's bathroom is a problem in and of itself, unless you are an advocate of gender neutral bathrooms.
Click to expand...

Yeah but was this kid using the woman's toilet? All the reporting mentions that the two students were regularly meeting up in the restroom, but nothing mentions that this student was regularly identifying as a girl and using the girl's restroom for anything except clandestine meetings.

I dont see anyone in a position to know asserting that the rapist student actually identified as a girl, it seems a lot of people just assumed it based on his androgynous clothing. Maybe just another assumed element in this circus of speculation.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Here;s the wording: (in English translation)

The bill, voted in on Tuesday, bans all “practices, behaviours, and repeated statements with the intent of modifying or repressing a person’s real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, and having the effect of a material alteration to their mental or physical health”.


The problem I see is that a therapist in France is now required, by law, to accept any self diagnosis of transgenderism. Failure to do so risks a two year prison sentence. I foresee an awful lot of therapists refusing to treat gender non-conforming individuals. And if someone seeks counseling when they are considering detransitioning, I can't imagine a therapist even allowing the person into their office. It's just too risky.


If the law were not so broad, targeting people who actually advertise therapy whose purpose was "conversion", I would think it was a good law.
Click to expand...

You seem to be assuming a lot. I don't see any reason to believe that any shrink operating within established standards of care would have anything to worry about, which would prevent helping any patients explore whatever feelings of gender dysphoria they might have, regardless of the ultimate outcome.
 
d4m10n said:
What sort of evidence would you accept in support of the proposition that it is easier for males to enter spaces formerly reserved for females once we've done away with the cultural norm that they may be challenged for doing so?

This seems so straightforward that I'm a bit confused as to why it's considered to be in doubt here.
Click to expand...

I dunno, any evidence to suggest that such an assumption is even relevant to this case would be nice.
 
JihadJane said:
Let's hope "TERF Island" holds firm. Banning conversion therapy means banning any other approach to gender dysphoria besides affirming delusions.
Click to expand...
Probably not bad odds considering the right wing swing the cursed isle is going through right now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom