I watched all of it. Hard work. I don’t know who I feel more sorry for, these men or those who think their lives are valid lived conditions.
The hatred of women was a common theme.
Transwomen are not women - X (XY?)
- Thread starter Rolfe
- Start date
- Status
I watched all of it. Hard work. I don’t know who I feel more sorry for, these men or those who think their lives are valid lived conditions.
The hatred of women was a common theme.
You can say that again.
At this point it is not worth taking you seriously.
You have arrived at this thread with a range of attitudes; they are not detailed enough to be called beliefs; they are not supported with any evidence, so they cannot be arguments.
Last edited:
Civil Rights was forced in by the national guard, wasn't it?
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
Somehow I don't see the National Guard being used to force women's bathrooms to allow men in.
No indeed. I'm just saying that, for good or ill, this is being pushed far more softly than previous social changes that curtailed freedom of association.
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
The Civil Rights movement started long before Federal troops were enforcing it.
Rolfe
Adult human female
lionking said:
I think it's important to point out that a large part of the urgency behind women's attempts to block self-ID is to keep people like that out of female intimate spaces. They creep us out. They're disgusting. They're colonising our lives in order to use us as unwilling extras in their sex fantasies.
What we get from the TRA brigade when we point this out is usually a version of "but that's only a tiny minority of trans people!" (really? how do you know? it's a very visible minority, if so) and "but what about the poor tortured transsexual who just wants to pee in peace?!"
Well, get this. I don't care about that person. Find some other way to make him comfortable. I don't consent to opening our intimate spaces to a crowd of weird AGP perverts, nappy fetishists and menstruation fetishists because some man somewhere might be sad if he has to go to the Gents'. These sad men are not our problem and stop trying to push them on to us and guilt-trip us into giving the weirdos and the fetishists free rein on their account.
I was visiting a friend earlier this week who was a GP in Bradford, where there is a large Moslem community. She said (almost spontaneously, I certainly didn't mention this thread or indeed the trans issue at all) that in (some?) Moslem societies women are regarded as not quite human. Even living in England the men will try to keep the women from contact with the outside world and finding out that women out there are treated as being fully human. They set up dedicated schools to keep their girls in ignorance. She said she'd seen it time and time again in her medical practice, dealing with these women.
I ventured to suggest that the same could be said for our own society until relatively recently. Women couldn't vote, when they married their property became their husband's and so on. Dorothy Sayers (1893-1957) wrote an essay about it, The human-not-quite-human, in 1947 - which is actually post the 2nd World War. It still happens to some extent, with female politicians and business leaders being endlessly assessed in terms of their appearance and grooming, while this seldom happens to their male equivalents.
We'd just about got ourselves out from under this, when we find ourselves attacked on a new front, which is as old as the hills when one realises its underlying misogyny.
(I've remembered the context of the conversation with my friend. I had remarked that in the Gaelic language there isn't an actual word for "man". Man is the default, the assumed state, and only departures from that state have to be specified. That sparked her musing about the Moslem women she had met who seemed to consider themselves not fully human in the way the men were.)
Rolfe
Adult human female
It's being done in a much more subtle way than that.
But back to your original point. There are men's bathrooms. Men are not denied bathroom provision. Allowing (some) men into women's bathrooms is not equality, it is granting these men a special privilege at the expense of the rights of women.
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
I disagree. Many Conservatives make the same argument about racial/religious/nationality anti discrimination laws and that is also false.
Protecting ALL people against discrimination doesn't afford anyone "special privileges".
Equality claims like this only work when you control the frame and reduce everything down to single issues and single metrics. When you have two competing frames, equality between males and females, or equality between trans and non-trans, equality perceived by you, or equality as perceived by the trans-activists, then it doesn't work. Each side is just demanding that the issue should be seen through the lens of their pet issue. The side who has more institutional support wins and it is recorded as a great victory for equality, since it is seen through the frame of the winning side. Who ever wins, it will be a victory for equality.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Protecting ALL people against discrimination is a stupid idea. Sometimes "special privileges" are necessary.
Women's prisons discriminate against male convicts. Women in those prisons have the "special privilege" of not being housed with males.
Female suspects have the "special privilege" of being allowed to discriminate against male police officers when submitting to a physical search. Female air travelers have a similar "privilege" when submitting to a physical search by the TSA.
Female athletes have the "special privilege" of discriminating against males and only competing against other females.
Etc.
Who decides what discrimination is, what discrimination to measure, what to prioritise? Do these people have a God's Eye perspective that sits outside ideology, politics and culture? Both the gender critical feminists and the trans activists complain they are being discriminated against by the other sides demands for equality.
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
Indeed.
Rolfe
Adult human female
I thought we had knocked this "women are like racists for wanting to keep men out of their intimate single-sex spaces" false analogy on the head several iterations of this thread ago.
One of these things is not like the other.
If you want to argue that there should be no sex segretation whatsoever in situations where people are getting undressed and performing intimate tasks, that is probably something for a different thread. Where the women can explain to you once again the violation they feel at being forced into intimate contact with a male against their will.
If on the other hand you accept that sex-segregated showering, changing and sleeping accommodation is reasonable and indeed required, you have to explain why you want to give a particular subset of men the privilege of invading the female-segregated spaces. Particularly given that when you do this you have made these spaces mixed-sex by your action, and deprived women of the single-sex spaces you originally accepted were reasonable and required.
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
Society has decided that certain things that are out of peoples' control and should not have to be changed, should not be subject to discriminatory policies.
Some of them are: race, gender, age, nationality, ethnicity, religion, veterans status.
I think these things are fair and just. Don't like it? Move to Russia.
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
I do not support businesses being gender discriminatory. Women-only bars should not be allowed. Nor women-only gyms. IMHO.
Bathrooms however, I am cool with.
It also assumed God like powers. One can't protect ALL people from ALL discrimination. Some people and some discrimination has to be at the front of the queue. You then have the utilitarian measurement problem if you want to rationally decide who should be at the front of the queue.
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
God like powers? Not sure what you're talking about.
Society has the right to make rules, we have decided banning discrimination in housing, employment, education and public accomodations is one such rule.
And btw, it is illegal to discriminate against white male Christians.
When you said this:Society has decided that certain things that are out of peoples' control and should not have to be changed, should not be subject to discriminatory policies.
Some of them are: race, gender, age, nationality, ethnicity, religion, veterans status.
I think these things are fair and just. Don't like it? Move to Russia.
It looked like you were saying there was a way of telling if people have special privileges. Now it seems to be a matter of who ever has cultural power getting to decide that what ever privileges they hand out are not special, and are just fair. I agree that that is how it works, it just doesn't seem to answer claims to unfairness beyond saying that the people complaining lack cultural power and they had better just suck it up. By that metric, whites didn't have special privileges in South Africa 50 years ago.
- Status