Cont: Transwomen are not women - part XI

[smartcooky]

Thanks for the link.

Maybe I'm not reading it correctly, but even in the best case scenarios it seems there was an error rate in identifying gender of about 5 to 6%. The error rate goes way up with the 3d models, and the paper discusses how small details could be the difference. Seems only fair to speculate that gender cues like clothing, makeup, grooming standards, etc could make a huge difference.

That seems like quite a bit of error compared to the approx 2% of the population that identifies as transgender ( or 5% including nonbinary).

I'm not sure a study of people wearing bald caps is a good proxy for whether the bathroom police can tell a lesbian with short hair and baggy pants is a woman or a man.

Made even more difficult when people like this lot identify as women...

Simply allowing men to access women's safe spaces merely because the say they are women opens the door for the scummiest of the scum to take full advantage of society's stupidity.

 

[Emily's Cat]

To some extent I can go along with this thinking. The effects of drugs such as puberty blockers are mostly reversible, the effects of getting your junk cut off are not. Teenagers often need to be protected against themselves because fads and peer pressure are real things that happen to them.

What do you mean by "mostly reversible"? Are you assuming a specific period of use for blockers?

People keep saying blockers are reversible... but most people are just parroting what someone else said. In reality, it's extremely dependent on how long the child was taking the blockers for, as well as what specific stage of puberty they took them during.

Puberty isn't a smooth linear event. While the entirety of puberty takes several years to complete, there are stages of it that happen over the course of just a few months.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Except in localities where they are, in fact, not segregated by sex, but rather gender.

Such as... where? Where are they separated by how a person feels inside their brains?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Such as... where? Where are they separated by how a person feels inside their brains?

Isn't this the whole complaint about the Wi Spa thing or the Canada women's shelter?

There are places where it's legal for trans women to use women's restrooms or other women's facilities. This is not a controversial statement for ****'s sake, why are you being so obtuse about this?

 

[TomB]

That's very much the crux of the issue, isn't it. I wouldn't generalize so freely, there seems to be a lack of consensus as of right now.

The origins of segregated bathrooms are complicated. (https://www.livescience.com/54692-why-bathrooms-are-gender-segregated.html) But if we were to start from scratch, what arguments can you find in support of bathrooms segregated by gender vs. segregated by sex?

Just thinking this through a bit...

I don't see any logical reason to segregate bathrooms by gender.

I can see arguments for segregation by sex, though I'm not sure they necessarily make more sense than a unisex design with more privacy. Bringing that out of the hypothetical and into the real world, however, would likely involve architectural changes that are expensive. Still, the other solutions seem to be arguing over who gets a urinary leash or who gets relegated to a few special single occupant spaces.

Locker rooms and showers are more complicated still. Again, I can't see a gender-based reason for these to be segregated. I can see sex-based reasons. If I were to disagree with those reasons, it would not be an argument in favor of gender-based segregation, but rather in favor of no segregation. Which, absent changes in our attitudes towards mixed nudity among strangers, would be extremely expensive to implement.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The origins of segregated bathrooms are complicated. (https://www.livescience.com/54692-why-bathrooms-are-gender-segregated.html) But if we were to start from scratch, what arguments can you find in support of bathrooms segregated by gender vs. segregated by sex?

Just thinking this through a bit...

I don't see any logical reason to segregate bathrooms by gender.

I can see arguments for segregation by sex, though I'm not sure they necessarily make more sense than a unisex design with more privacy. Bringing that out of the hypothetical and into the real world, however, would likely involve architectural changes that are expensive. Still, the other solutions seem to be arguing over who gets a urinary leash or who gets relegated to a few special single occupant spaces.

Locker rooms and showers are more complicated still. Again, I can't see a gender-based reason for these to be segregated. I can see sex-based reasons. If I were to disagree with those reasons, it would not be an argument in favor of gender-based segregation, but rather in favor of no segregation. Which, absent changes in our attitudes towards mixed nudity among strangers, would be extremely expensive to implement.

Group showers, even sex segregated ones, aren't exactly the most comfortable thing either. Last time around I pointed out numerous local news articles discussing how students, in the absence of any authority figure demanding it, would simply opt not to shower after gym class rather than use the gang type showers. You may as well not build these showers if you're not going to put in private stalls.

Increasing personal privacy is probably worth the cost because it directly provides people with what they actually want, which is individual bodily autonomy.

 

[Ziggurat]

Evidence for this claim has, historically speaking, been extremely poor.

Historically speaking, there was no policy of self ID. There's plenty of evidence that predators are now taking advantage of self ID, some of which other posters here have provided. If you can't see why self ID would lead to predators exploiting it, you don't understand human nature. There's no mystery here.

 

[d4m10n]

Increasing personal privacy is probably worth the cost because it directly provides people with what they actually want, which is individual bodily autonomy.

Sometimes personal privacy isn't the end goal. There are a number of venues in which females can recreate in the nude, such as traditional Korean spas and MichFest and (perhaps) parts of Hampstead Heath. Should these nude women be pressured to accept bepenised individuals who identify as women into these spaces?

 

[TomB]

Group showers, even sex segregated ones, aren't exactly the most comfortable thing either. Last time around I pointed out numerous local news articles discussing how students, in the absence of any authority figure demanding it, would simply opt not to shower after gym class rather than use the gang type showers. You may as well not build these showers if you're not going to put in private stalls.

Increasing personal privacy is probably worth the cost because it directly provides people with what they actually want, which is individual bodily autonomy.

I see you completely skipped over the primary point:

But if we were to start from scratch, what arguments can you find in support of bathrooms segregated by gender vs. segregated by sex?

Let me try to phrase the question a little differently. Ignore sex for a moment. What about gender differences suggests a need for separate facilities?

Based on gender (not sex), why are seperate sports leagues needed?

What is the gender based justification for any of the various areas in which we segregate facilities, sports or any of the other things discussed in this thread?

 

[Aber]

Thanks for the link.
Maybe I'm not reading it correctly, but even in the best case scenarios it seems there was an error rate in identifying gender of about 5 to 6%. The error rate goes way up with the 3d models, and the paper discusses how small details could be the difference. Seems only fair to speculate that gender cues like clothing, makeup, grooming standards, etc could make a huge difference.

That seems like quite a bit of error compared to the approx 2% of the population that identifies as transgender ( or 5% including nonbinary).

This study covered faces only; there are a few more clues to sex when you look at the whole body.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I see you completely skipped over the primary point:


Let me try to phrase the question a little differently. Ignore sex for a moment. What about gender differences suggests a need for separate facilities?

Based on gender (not sex), why are seperate sports leagues needed?

What is the gender based justification for any of the various areas in which we segregate facilities, sports or any of the other things discussed in this thread?

The reasoning for separate facilities are rooted in desires for modesty. People generally don't want to be leered at with lusty eyes while in states of undress or other position of vulnerability. Sex segregation makes sense if you discount the existence of trans people or of homosexuality, but us modern people have to grapple with the existence of both. Personal privacy seems a decent solution that attacks the root of the issue without having to make sweeping assumptions about heteronormativity.

Separation of sporting is more about the athletic ability differences of the sexes, an entirely different concern. There are legitimate concerns about fairness in competition (but these are not the only concerns, especially in educational contexts), which is why certain restrictions for trans people are often seen as reasonable.

Sports is a special case and is not actually that closely linked to the other concerns, despite efforts by transphobes who try to use it as a wedge issue to justify sweeping trans exclusion.

 

[lionking]

Sports is a special case and is not actually that closely linked to the other concerns, despite efforts by transphobes who try to use it as a wedge issue to justify sweeping trans exclusion.

Will you please stop with this ****** This whole thread started because of sport. A lot of women make a living out of sport. Some are denied their livelihoods because selfish transwomen who have been through male puberty and have intact male bodies are insisting on competing against them and taking their places in representative teams (Lia Thomas is one of many).

Asking that women athletes not be disadvantaged is not transphobic or bigoted. Insisting they are says more about you I’m afraid.

Now if you can come up for a decent reason for transwomen to compete with women in sports in a blatantly unfair way, fire away (and I do not accept “because they want to and it makes them feel good”).

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Will you please stop with this ****** This whole thread started because of sport. A lot of women make a living out of sport. Some are denied their livelihoods because selfish transwomen who have been through male puberty and have intact male bodies are insisting on competing against them and taking their places in representative teams (Lia Thomas is one of many).

Asking that women athletes not be disadvantaged is not transphobic or bigoted. Insisting they are says more about you I’m afraid.

Now if you can come up for a decent reason for transwomen to compete with women in sports in a blatantly unfair way, fire away (and I do not accept “because they want to and it makes them feel good”).

I don't think you understand the meaning of the phrase "wedge issue".

Come on now, you clipped out the part of my post in which I concede that there are legitimate fairness concerns in sport. Spare me the pearl clutching.

 

[lionking]

I don't think you understand the meaning of the phrase "wedge issue".

Come on now, you clipped out the part of my post in which I concede that there are legitimate fairness concerns in sport. Spare me the pearl clutching.

What I understand is that some people posting here have no regard for women’s sports.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

What I understand is that some people posting here have no regard for women’s sports.

 

[d4m10n]

If sports is just a transphobic wedge issue, trans activist groups could make the wedge go away tomorrow by retracting their claim that Lia Thomas is exemplifying "trans rights are human rights" by competing and disrobing with females. If, on the other hand, transwomen in sports is an issue on which trans rights groups want to change public policy to favor their preferred approach, then we would see a world much like the one in which we live.

 

[Ziggurat]

The reasoning for separate facilities are rooted in desires for modesty.

No. That is only part of it. Safety is a major part as well, one which you continue to ignore.

People generally don't want to be leered at with lusty eyes while in states of undress or other position of vulnerability.

True. But why? Why do we not like that?

One major reason, particularly for females, is because we recognize it as a sign of danger.

Sex segregation makes sense if you discount the existence of trans people or of homosexuality

No. It makes sense even if you include that. All you need to do is recognize that the sexes are not the same. The situation isn't symmetric. Male-on-female predation is different from other forms of sexual predation. That is a biological reality that you cannot dismiss as being socially constructed.

Personal privacy seems a decent solution that attacks the root of the issue without having to make sweeping assumptions about heteronormativity.

It's a solution to some of these issues, though it comes at an economic cost. It is far from a universal solution.

Sports is a special case and is not actually that closely linked to the other concerns, despite efforts by transphobes who try to use it as a wedge issue to justify sweeping trans exclusion.

No, it is not a special case, it is inseparable from the radical trans activist agenda. The assertion that transwomen are women, that there is no meaningful difference between transwomen and women, requires that transwomen be able to compete in sports against women.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

No. That is only part of it. Safety is a major part as well, one which you continue to ignore.



True. But why? Why do we not like that?

One major reason, particularly for females, is because we recognize it as a sign of danger.



No. It makes sense even if you include that. All you need to do is recognize that the sexes are not the same. The situation isn't symmetric. Male-on-female predation is different from other forms of sexual predation. That is a biological reality that you cannot dismiss as being socially constructed.



It's a solution to some of these issues, though it comes at an economic cost. It is far from a universal solution.

It's a strange view of this situation that these segregated spaces only exist to protect women's interests. I assure you most men would be uncomfortable disrobing in front of a crowd of women. The fact of sex segregated communal spaces being acceptable privacy is one entirely socially conditioned. Given the opportunity many would prefer individual privacy.

Modestly is absolutely the driving concern. Would people be comfortable in a unisex, communal changing area that guaranteed safety with armed guard? Of course not, because modesty is important.

 

[Ziggurat]

It's a strange view of this situation that these segregated spaces only exist to protect women's interests.

Only? No, not only. I never said only. But it's a really important reason, and it's the reason that's being compromised by the trans activists. And it's one you haven't really come to grips with. Even your armed guard scenario wasn't said to address safety concerns, but to dismiss them.

I assure you most men would be uncomfortable disrobing in front of a crowd of women.

Sure, but that's not happening, is it? There aren't crowds involved. What happens if it's just one person? Yeah, a lot of men would feel uncomfortable, but they wouldn't feel threatened.

Again, a key component here is that female sexual predators aren't the same as male sexual predators. Female sexual predators do not have an incentive to pose as trans men in order to access male spaces. Male sexual predators do have an incentive to pose as trans women in order to access female spaces. That's why the trans men in male spaces isn't really much of an issue, but trans women in female spaces has become a major one. And again, all you've done is dismiss safety concerns, you've never tried to address them.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Only? No, not only. I never said only. But it's a really important reason, and it's the reason that's being compromised by the trans activists. And it's one you haven't really come to grips with. Even your armed guard scenario wasn't said to address safety concerns, but to dismiss them.



Sure, but that's not happening, is it? There aren't crowds involved. What happens if it's just one person?

Again, a key component here is that female sexual predators aren't the same as male sexual predators. Female sexual predators do not have an incentive to pose as trans men in order to access male spaces. Male sexual predators do have an incentive to pose as trans women in order to access female spaces. That's why the trans men in male spaces isn't really much of an issue, but trans women in female spaces has become a major one. And again, all you've done is dismiss safety concerns, you've never tried to address them.

You may not care about trans men, but I would not be so comfortable assuming your blase attitude about them is universally shared. Even among the broader group of transphobes, the narrow focus on women only seems to mostly be a preoccupation of TERFs.