Trans women are not women (Part 8)

[acbytesla]

Reserved for women, or reserved for females?
Females.

I don't think you've actually thought this through.

Do you think you have? Do you think you didn't start with a bias against transgender individuals? Do you think you have enough credible data?

I admit I have a bias. I also admit to thinking there isn't enough credible evidence available. I get that some individuals are uncomfortable with the idea of trans individuals. So am I. That said, I think that is my problem not theirs.

I lead with live and let live. Be kind to others regardless of their differences. Let's build the best life for everyone.

Right now, I think the bigots out there are trying to stuff LGBTQ individuals back into the closet just like I think they are trying to snuff out the voice and lives of other minorities. They are doing everything possible to return to a bigoted racist America reserved for people who look like me.

Is it possible there are legitimate reasons that I haven't fully thought through? Absolutely.

My question to you is it also possible that bigoted individuals are making up red herring claims to return to the days of yesterday where everyone knew their place? Even if that place was awful?

 

[theprestige]

Do you think you have? Do you think you didn't start with a bias against transgender individuals? Do you think you have enough credible data?

I admit I have a bias. I also admit to thinking there isn't enough credible evidence available. I get that some individuals are uncomfortable with the idea of trans individuals. So am I. That said, I think that is my problem not theirs.

I lead with live and let live. Be kind to others regardless of their differences. Let's build the best life for everyone.

Right now, I think the bigots out there are trying to stuff LGBTQ individuals back into the closet just like I think they are trying to snuff out the voice and lives of other minorities. They are doing everything possible to return to a bigoted racist America reserved for people who look like me.

Is it possible there are legitimate reasons that I haven't fully thought through? Absolutely.

My question to you is it also possible that bigoted individuals are making up red herring claims to return to the days of yesterday where everyone knew their place? Even if that place was awful?

That's a lot of words to not answer the question.

Reserved for women, or reserved for females?

 

[Meadmaker]

Not sure what "IsThisTheLife's" opinion is, but my position is mixed.

I don't believe transgendered women should be able to participate in women's sports. But I do believe that they should be able to enter public spaces that are reserved for women, just as I think transgendered males should be able to enter public spaces for men.

I also believe employment should generally not be affected by gender ID. I say generally, since I doubt I have thought through every scenario which might present a reasonable exception.

I have yet to hear an argument with evidence that could change my mind on these positions.

Let me ask, first, what you mean by "transgenered women". I ask because sometimes people only use the term to mean people who have undergone hormone replacement therapy and/or surgery. Others mean anyone who declares themselves to be a woman.

Some people would have different opinions for the two different classes of people.

 

[acbytesla]

That's a lot of words to not answer the question.

Reserved for women, or reserved for females?

I already said femalrs.

 

[The Atheist]

How would we ever know the ratio?

Because someone in UK is both keeping statistics and can do simple maths.

The policy offers the women no protection from mischief made by other women.

What an excellent non sequitur!

We're talking about an easily-preventable and very obvious threat.

 

[acbytesla]

Let me ask, first, what you mean by "transgenered women". I ask because sometimes people only use the term to mean people who have undergone hormone replacement therapy and/or surgery. Others mean anyone who declares themselves to be a woman.

Some people would have different opinions for the two different classes of people.

I mean not for technical reasons, but practical reason individuals. Individuals who live their life as a particular gender.
Pre-op and post-op. Should every accommodation be made,? I don't know. Do I think bathroom laws be made restricting bathrooms only to individuals born of that gender? No, i think the recent movements made in Red states to do this is based not on actual problems but more part of the culture war. Another arrow of fear mongering hate. Do you think I am wrong?

 

[acbytesla]

Because someone in UK is both keeping statistics and can do simple maths.

Figures don't lie.

But liars figure.

 

[Meadmaker]

I mean not for technical reasons, but practical reason individuals. Individuals who live their life as a particular gender.
Pre-op and post-op.

Ok. There is also no-op and never intend to op. They live their lives as a particular gender, but have not taken any hormones or had any surgery, and never intend to take hormones or have surgery. That sort of transwoman has completely functional male anatomy, and is not taking any steps to change that, now or in the future. In this thread, we generally have referred to the term "Self ID" to describe such trans people, although that is contentious sometimes. In certain jurisdictions, that term is used in a different manner in some laws or policies.

Based on your answer of "live their life as a particular gender", I am assuming you are going to include the no-op in your set. You "believe that they should be able to enter public spaces that are reserved for women"

In answer to prestige's question, "Reserved for women or reserved for females", you replied "females".

So, I'm still not absolutely certain we are talking the same language, but that's a common feature in this thread. If I understand you, though, you are saying that a transwoman should be able to use a women's locker room, regardless of whether or not the transwoman has had any medical procedure to alter her body to appear more female, or whether or not she ever intends to have any such medical procedure.

So far so good.

Should every accommodation be made,? I don't know.

Ok. No problem. Stick around and I'm sure you will be pressed for answers about other things. I might do that myself. For right now, I'll state my assumptions based on my understanding of your positions. Correct me if I get it wrong.

Do I think bathroom laws be made restricting bathrooms only to individuals born of that gender? No,

For what it's worth, neither do I. I do, however, believe that people who still have functional male sexual anatomy should be restricted from changing rooms that are intended for use by the female (sex, gender, whatever....you know what I mean.)

i think the recent movements made in Red states to do this is based not on actual problems but more part of the culture war. Another arrow of fear mongering hate. Do you think I am wrong?

Because of the way the question is framed, I think it's difficult to answer, but I'll try.

I do believe that there is plenty of fear mongering used to support arguments on both sides. However, I do not believe taht fear mongering is necessarily required for the arguments of either side. I think the arguments on "my side" i.e. generally opposed to unlimited trans rights that would treat transwomen exactly as ciswomen, are motivated primarily by a desire of supporting females' wishes.

A couple of days ago I referred to a case where a teenaged girl who was in her underwear turned around and realized she was in the presence of a male individual. His (or whatever) maleness was evident because she could see a penis and testicles underneath the panties this person was wearing.

No rape. No attack. No lewd behavior. Just a couple of teenagers in their underwear.

She did not want the male person present when she changed her clothes. I support her desire. There's no fear mongering there.

 

[acbytesla]

Ok. There is also no-op and never intend to op. They live their lives as a particular gender, but have not taken any hormones or had any surgery, and never intend to take hormones or have surgery. That sort of transwoman has completely functional male anatomy, and is not taking any steps to change that, now or in the future. In this thread, we generally have referred to the term "Self ID" to describe such trans people, although that is contentious sometimes. In certain jurisdictions, that term is used in a different manner in some laws or policies.

Based on your answer of "live their life as a particular gender", I am assuming you are going to include the no-op in your set. You "believe that they should be able to enter public spaces that are reserved for women"

In answer to prestige's question, "Reserved for women or reserved for females", you replied "females".

So, I'm still not absolutely certain we are talking the same language, but that's a common feature in this thread. If I understand you, though, you are saying that a transwoman should be able to use a women's locker room, regardless of whether or not the transwoman has had any medical procedure to alter her body to appear more female, or whether or not she ever intends to have any such medical procedure.

So far so good.

Ok. No problem. Stick around and I'm sure you will be pressed for answers about other things. I might do that myself. For right now, I'll state my assumptions based on my understanding of your positions. Correct me if I get it wrong.



For what it's worth, neither do I. I do, however, believe that people who still have functional male sexual anatomy should be restricted from changing rooms that are intended for use by the female (sex, gender, whatever....you know what I mean.)



Because of the way the question is framed, I think it's difficult to answer, but I'll try.

I do believe that there is plenty of fear mongering used to support arguments on both sides. However, I do not believe taht fear mongering is necessarily required for the arguments of either side. I think the arguments on "my side" i.e. generally opposed to unlimited trans rights that would treat transwomen exactly as ciswomen, are motivated primarily by a desire of supporting females' wishes.

A couple of days ago I referred to a case where a teenaged girl who was in her underwear turned around and realized she was in the presence of a male individual. His (or whatever) maleness was evident because she could see a penis and testicles underneath the panties this person was wearing.

No rape. No attack. No lewd behavior. Just a couple of teenagers in their underwear.

She did not want the male person present when she changed her clothes. I support her desire. There's no fear mongering there.

It's one thing to still have a penis. It's another to expose females to male genitals in a woman's locker room. That is indecent exposure and it always has been. But if a person dresses like a female, looks like a female and maintains that facade I see no reason not to ignore it. The problem surfaces when it obviously is not.

 

[Meadmaker]

It's one thing to still have a penis. It's another to expose females to male genitals in a woman's locker room. That is indecent exposure and it always has been. But if a person dresses like a female, looks like a female and maintains that facade I see no reason not to ignore it. The problem surfaces when it obviously is not.

I'll let someone else ask the follow up questions.


For what it's worth, the typical trans rights activist would say that it is not indecent exposure to expose females to male genitals in a woman's locker room, and this thread has covered several examples of cases where male genitals were exposed to females in a woman's locker room, and not only were no charges made against the person who exposed the male genitals, but the females who complained were asked to leave.

I think you're behind the times on the state of trans rights in America.

ETA: Indeed, I think your position concerning display of male genitals in women's locker room would be considered transphobic today by trans rights activists.

Suburban Turkey, would you like to weigh in on the subject?

 

[The Atheist]

Figures don't lie.

But liars figure.

Translation:

"I am unable to refute the evidence, so I'll make an idiotic comment instead."

 

[acbytesla]

Translation:

"I am unable to refute the evidence, so I'll make an idiotic comment instead."

That's your opinion. Opinions are like rectums. We all have one.

 

[The Atheist]

That's your opinion. Opinions are like rectums. We all have one.

Evidence isn't opinion.

I am, however, amused by your inability to accept it.

 

[Darat]

I'll let someone else ask the follow up questions.


For what it's worth, the extremist typical trans rights activist would say that it is not indecent exposure to expose females to male genitals in a woman's locker room, and this thread has covered several examples of cases where male genitals were exposed to females in a woman's locker room, and not only were no charges made against the person who exposed the male genitals, but the females who complained were asked to leave.

I think you're behind the times on the state of trans rights in America.

ETA: Indeed, I think your position concerning display of male genitals in women's locker room would be considered transphobic today by trans rights activists.

Suburban Turkey, would you like to weigh in on the subject?

FTFY

 

[Rolfe]

That wasn't it.

It wasn't meant to be. That wasn't a reply to you, it was a stand-alone post.

 

[Rolfe]

That's a lot of words to not answer the question.

Reserved for women, or reserved for females?

Unless the second category is intended to allow mares, cows, ewes, bitches and so on in addition to females of the human species (women), it's the same thing. Let's not base any more arguments on unilateral forced redefinitions of common English words.

 

[Rolfe]

Bigoted. Biassed. Prejudiced.

There has to be a term for this debating tactic. Argument from opprobrium? Badmouth your opponent, make it clear you believe their position is abhorrent to you and should be abhorrent to any "right-thinking" person, and maybe you don't have to look at the evidence or examine the artuments. It often seems to work.

I'm inclined to say, just stop it, but it's been going on for several years so I don't suppose that's going to happen, so carry on.

I'll just carry on being bigoted against paraphilic, fetishistic men whose idea of a good turn-on is to LARP their pornified fantasy of woman and colonise and destroy all women's safe spaces. And against their appropriation of confused children and young people, grooming them into a cult of body-modification they themselves have decided to avoid.

 

[lomiller]

Greater privacy for all is something that is of course a worthy goal. As I said, though, I think you underestimate the difficulty in providing it. High schools are experimenting with it, like the one we were discussing in Long Beach. I think the experiment will fail.

Unisex private change rooms have been used on beaches since forever.

For a gym, add in unisex private showers and toilets seems like a fairly easy thing to do. The extra space requirements can easily be offset by having a shared locker area where people are required to remain clothed. It's not rocket science. Schools may also need some type of private team room for sporting events, though a nearby classroom would probably suffice.

 

[Rolfe]

Thank you for giving away our private women's spaces on our behalf. A man has spoken, we should submit, I suppose.

 

[Meadmaker]

Unisex private change rooms have been used on beaches since forever.

For a gym, add in unisex private showers and toilets seems like a fairly easy thing to do. The extra space requirements can easily be offset by having a shared locker area where people are required to remain clothed. It's not rocket science. Schools may also need some type of private team room for sporting events, though a nearby classroom would probably suffice.

I'll buy into it when I see the drawings.

When I've seen them, they either required a lot more space than traditional locker rooms, or they were more difficult to use than traditional locker rooms, or they did not deliver a level of privacy that women would consider adequate.

We'll see. There are tens of thousands of private gyms in the USA, and as far as I know there are zero that follow that construction pattern. I consider that fairly significant, but we'll see what the future holds.