Cont: Transwomen are not women - part XI

[Ziggurat]

Or maybe no misbehavior occurred. Hard to say until the evidence is presented at trial, dont ya think?

No, I don't, because that's stupid. Evidence is already available for examination. A trial is necessary before we use the coercive power of the state to punish people, but there is no logical requirement to wait for a trial before we reach our own personal conclusions. Particularly if the question we're examining isn't even the same one the trial examines.

 

[TomB]

I think it will go uncontested at trial that Merager was in fact nude at the all nude spa. That leaves only the question of who had a legal right to be there on the women's floor.

If you believe self-i.d. is the best public policy, then you're sort of backed into a corner here. Merager has self-identified as a woman, so it's open and shut. Natal females will just have to get used to the new normal.

To take it further, it means that I can be nude on the women's floor as long as I say that I identify as a woman. Tomorrow, of course, I may identify as a man. So tomorrow I could not legally be there. But today I can. Unless you think I'm lying about how I identify. But how do you go about demonstrating that I'm lying about my identity today?

If a male could conceivably lie their way into a segregated space and there is no legal way to say "Nope. We don't believe you. Get out." the space is no longer really segregated except by voluntary custom. The space is in effect co-ed nude, but mostly used by females.

It is more honest to advocate the elimination of segregated spaces. But that's not what either side seems to want.

 

[d4m10n]

It is more honest to advocate the elimination of segregated spaces.

I'd be content with a lesser level of honesty from the reformists who want to tear down sex-segregated spaces: Just say what you want to see implemented instead. What criteria should a place which used to do sex segregation (e.g. women's colleges or sports leagues) implement going forward?

Sent from my JAQ-2600 using Tapatalk

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I think it will go uncontested at trial that Merager was in fact nude at the all nude spa. That leaves only the question of who had a legal right to be there on the women's floor.

If you believe self-i.d. is the best public policy, then you're sort of backed into a corner here. Merager has self-identified as a woman, so it's open and shut. Natal females will just have to get used to the new normal.

There's more to it than that. The claim is that Merager was engaged in some sort of lewd self-gratification, which Merager denies.

The question of whether she had a legal right to be there is not in question. California law is quite clear. Masturbating in locker rooms is a crime still regardless of your sex or gender.

 

[d4m10n]

Masturbating in locker rooms is a crime still regardless of your sex or gender.

Who alleged masturbation? I don't recall seeing that in any of the news stories or the original viral video.

California law is quite clear.

Among the questions we've discussed here in this thread is whether it was sensible for California to grant folks like Merager the legal right to enter spaces previously reserved to females in a state of undress.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Who alleged masturbation? I don't recall seeing that in any of the news stories or the original viral video.

The allegation is that Merager was sporting an erection. I can't find a copy of the arrest warrant, but reports seem to indicate "signs of sexual arousal" as being an important factor in the arrest decision.

That's more than just being in the locker room. Walking around with a hard-on and leering at men in the men's locker room could easily result in such an arrest.

 

[d4m10n]

The allegation is that Merager was sporting an erection.

Being aroused by nude females is very common for people with penises and is not same thing as lewd behavior in the criminal code. If Merager had a right to be there, then his erection is of no legal consequence without something more such as leering or self-stimulation. If a natal female woman has the legal right to be physically present and aroused, so does a natal male woman.

ETA: Also, who exactly made the allegation you mention here? I'm not yet convinced.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Being aroused by nude females is very common for people with penises and is not same thing as lewd behavior in the criminal code. If Merager had a right to be there, then his erection is of no legal consequence without something more such as leering or self-stimulation. If a natal female woman has the legal right to be physically present and aroused, so does a natal male woman.

ETA: Also, who exactly made the allegation you mention here? I'm not yet convinced.

Look man, if you're going to make such specific claims about the nature of the arrest warrant maybe you can find a copy. My googling was unsuccessful. I'm not interested in speculating about what exactly meets the definition of lewd conduct absent the actual accusations made to justify the arrest.

The best I found was highly dubious second hand claims by the NYPOST:

Sources with knowledge of the case but not authorized to speak publicly say four women and a minor girl came forward to allege that Darren Agee Merager was partially erect in the women’s section of Wi Spa.

https://nypost.com/2021/09/02/charges-filed-against-sex-offender-in-wi-spa-casecharges-filed-against-sex-offender-in-notorious-wi-spa-incident/

Again, I'll restate that this is a bad example to cite because the case is currently unresolved and poorly reported. Far too much potential to project your own wishful thinking to the lack of facts in the public record. Find a better posterchild.

 

[d4m10n]

Look man, if you're going to make such specific claims about the nature of the arrest warrant maybe you can find a copy.

You made those claims, not me. It is telling that you made up the bit about masturbation, though.

Again, I'll restate that this is a bad example to cite because the case is currently unresolved and poorly reported.

For the sake of our discussion here, it should be enough to ask whether other states ought to follow the example of California, which has (as you have said) made it perfectly clear that males have a right to enter spaces previously reserved to females in a state of undress. What's your take on that?

 

[LondonJohn]

LOL

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...w-cultural-mafia-free-speech-cease-exist.html


If the Daily Hate's Sarah Vine is advocating for a certain position/POV.... then you can be fairly certain that the diametrically opposite position/POV is the correct one.


(For background: a few years ago, Vine tweeted a photo of her bookcase, which she presented "as a special treat for my trolls"; the bookcase included a book by one of the foremost Holocaust deniers, David Irving, and a book which promotes the hypothesis that intelligence has an inheritance/genetic characteristic (and that, by implication, black people are statistically less intelligent than white people). Lovely stuff.)

 

[d4m10n]

Imagine a world in which arguments are evaluated on their merits instead of guilt by association. [emoji289]

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[lionking]

Imagine a world in which arguments are evaluated on their merits instead of guilt by association. [emoji289]

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Not to mention that before his notoriety as a holocaust denier, Irving wrote some highly regarded history books.

 

[LondonJohn]

Not to mention that before his notoriety as a holocaust denier, Irving wrote some highly regarded history books.

Not this book though. This book was "The War Path". An attempt to rewrite history and to rehabilitate Hitler as both hero and victim.

 

[lionking]

Not this book though. This book was "The War Path". An attempt to rewrite history and to rehabilitate Hitler as both hero and victim.

Fair enough. Don’t know what this has to do with gender though….

 

[LondonJohn]

Imagine a world in which arguments are evaluated on their merits instead of guilt by association. [emoji289]

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Imagine a world in which such stupid "rebuttals" were seriously proposed.


(To illustrate: if a hard-right Christian fundamentalist bigot wrote an article opposing transgender rights, would it be fair and reasonable to consider the person's reputation & prior beliefs/acts when assessing his POV in that article? "Of course not", you exclaim in your "rebuttal"....)

 

[d4m10n]

To illustrate: if a hard-right Christian fundamentalist bigot wrote an article opposing transgender rights, would it be fair and reasonable to consider the person's reputation & prior beliefs/acts when assessing his POV in that article?

Nope. If their arguments didn't appeal to their own reputation and prior beliefs, I'd be forced to address the arguments as they stand, on their own merits. How is this not obvious?

p.s. Have a gander at the Wikipedia entry on Bulverism^WP.

 

[LondonJohn]

Fair enough. Don’t know what this has to do with gender though….

Ah well, I can help you out on this one. See: pretty much the only public figures coming out with an anti-transgender stance are reactionary, extreme-right-wing figures - including hard-right politicians, extremist religious figures, bigoted right-wing journalists, and individuals representing extreme hard-right causes (such as Nazis and Proud Boys).

I mean, I think that's highly noteworthy and instructive. Your mileage may, of course, vary....

 

[LondonJohn]

Nope. If their arguments didn't appeal to their own reputation and prior beliefs, I'd be forced to address the arguments as they stand, on their own merits. How is this not obvious?

Note that I neither said nor implied (either in my original or subsequent post) that an article should purely be assessed according to political/ideological stance or prior proclamations. Merely that it should form part of the overall assessment. How is this not obvious?

 

[d4m10n]

...pretty much the only public figures coming out with an anti-transgender stance are reactionary, extreme-right-wing figures - including hard-right politicians, extremist religious figures, bigoted right-wing journalists, and individuals representing extreme hard-right causes (such as Nazis and Proud Boys).

Seems like someone has completely failed to notice left wing radical feminists, despite their tradition of writing polemics for decades in the UK.

 

[d4m10n]

Note that I neither said nor implied (either in my original or subsequent post) that an article should purely be assessed according to political/ideological stance or prior proclamations. Merely that it should form part of the overall assessment. How is this not obvious?

Because it is obviously wrong. An argument is (in)valid and/or (un)sound regardless of who wrote it down. There are a number of named fallacies denoting the process of judging arguments based on who made them.