Cont: Transwomen are not women part XII (also merged)

[Ziggurat]

I don't accept your prior assumption. You can call that playing dumb, but I am being quite sincere when I say I don't accept that improving bathrooms and such is prohibitively expensive.

You're still playing dumb because you're simply wrong. And this isn't limited to bathrooms.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You're still playing dumb because you're simply wrong. And this isn't limited to bathrooms.

Feel free to provide some examples and real figures.

 

[TomB]

I dispute how frequently it is the case that improving personal privacy is unreasonable.

In the case of schools, building gang showers is probably more wasteful than not building any showers at all, because absent being compelled to use them (which comes with obvious legal liability), students are opting not to use showers that don't provide personal privacy.



https://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0203/p12s01-legn.html

I can't remember the last time I saw a private gym that didn't have personal shower stalls, including a few examples where existing gang showers where retrofitted for privacy.

It's more than just shower stalls.

I'll use my local planet fitness as an example. But this holds true for the school facilities as well.

In the locker room (men's...I assume the same for womens) there are two aisles with lockers and a bench on three sides. then there is an area with the showers, a couple toilet stalls, sinks and urinals. There are four shower stalls (one larger for handicapped access).

The shower stalls are indeed individual. Each is divided into a changing dry area and a wet area. there is a curtain between the wet/dry areas and a curtain between the dry area and the common area. It would not be prohibitive to put up more solid doors to make these more private.

But that doesn't really address the issue.

Not everyone uses the showers. In fact, I think most people don't. That's why four showers is sufficient and there is never a queue. Those who don't shower change in the common area, not in the showers. There are no private changing booths. Nor is there anywhere to build more than a couple.

The privacy question has two parts: First, what the person changing feels comfortable letting others see. Second, what it is appropriate to show to others.

We live in a society where mixed sex nudity is discouraged. We are conditioned to be uncomfortable in the presence of opposite sex nudity (not just when nude ourselves). I'm not sure that's changing soon. I think the discomfort would be just as triggered by the male body of a trans woman as by the male body of a cis man.

Privacy booths for those who don't want to display their body doesn't address that socially trained response.

So maybe no one can get below a certain level of dress in the common area? Great! Problem solved! Just need more privacy booths...for which we do not have space.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

It's more than just shower stalls.

I'll use my local planet fitness as an example. But this holds true for the school facilities as well.

In the locker room (men's...I assume the same for womens) there are two aisles with lockers and a bench on three sides. then there is an area with the showers, a couple toilet stalls, sinks and urinals. There are four shower stalls (one larger for handicapped access).

The shower stalls are indeed individual. Each is divided into a changing dry area and a wet area. there is a curtain between the wet/dry areas and a curtain between the dry area and the common area. It would not be prohibitive to put up more solid doors to make these more private.

But that doesn't really address the issue.

Not everyone uses the showers. In fact, I think most people don't. That's why four showers is sufficient and there is never a queue. Those who don't shower change in the common area, not in the showers. There are no private changing booths. Nor is there anywhere to build more than a couple.

The privacy question has two parts: First, what the person changing feels comfortable letting others see. Second, what it is appropriate to show to others.

We live in a society where mixed sex nudity is discouraged. We are conditioned to be uncomfortable in the presence of opposite sex nudity (not just when nude ourselves). I'm not sure that's changing soon. I think the discomfort would be just as triggered by the male body of a trans woman as by the male body of a cis man.

Privacy booths for those who don't want to display their body doesn't address that socially trained response.

So maybe no one can get below a certain level of dress in the common area? Great! Problem solved! Just need more privacy booths...for which we do not have space.

I would guess the biggest factor is time. Changing occurs relatively quickly (except for the disproportionately old geezers at my gym that seem to like lounging around nude) compared to showering. I suspect there's a certain element of "just get it over with quick" at play here to changing that allows for people to find lack of privacy acceptable compared to taking a shower.

I don't really understand your point about space. Privacy doesn't need to be huge cubicles and it could easily fit into an existing footprint. Ever been to a small clothing shop? Often the changing "room" is just skinny, curtained off spots of floor. Hanging curtains in an existing changing room seems an inexpensive and fast way to improve existing infrastructure.

 

[JoeMorgue]

//Point of order//

I wonder if SOME (some, I said some) of the confusion is that in America bathrooms are pretty open while in Europe they tend to have a lot more privacy.

"Accidently seeing something" is more likely in American style bathroom with things like stalls that have huge gaps at the top and the bottom and wide door gaps and all that.

Again not saying this proves one side right or wrong, just throwing data points out there.

I'm also curious if just general overall societal hangups about nudity being different from country to country matter.

 

[d4m10n]

The anti-discrimination knife cuts in all directions.

If surely does, assuming the wielder of the knife cannot see the difference between (1) allowing oppressed groups to organize and maintain their own spaces and (2) systemic racism or sexism forcing minority groups out of public life.

When I see an all-female space such as https://femalefightclubnyc.com/ I say to myself, "Good for them!" rather than "Regulators, mount up!" Unlike some posters here, I do not feel the need mansplain which membership criteria women should use to run their own gym. It's enough for me that they choose for themselves what to do with their own bodies and spaces.

 

[lobosrul5]

If surely does, assuming the wielder of the knife cannot see the difference between (1) allowing oppressed groups to organize and maintain their own spaces and (2) systemic racism or sexism forcing minority groups out of public life.

When I see an all-female space such as https://femalefightclubnyc.com/ I say to myself, "Good for them!" rather than "Regulators, mount up!" Unlike some posters here, I do not feel the need mansplain which membership criteria women should use to run their own gym. It's enough for me that they choose for themselves what to do with their own bodies and spaces.

For private groups, "this is the way."

Want to have a gym for just obese (non-trans)women under 30? Go for it. A spa that allows nudity for anyone, but only if you are under 5'10"? Go for it. A boxing club for non-binary people with only one arm? Its a free country, go for it.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

If surely does, assuming the wielder of the knife cannot see the difference between (1) allowing oppressed groups to organize and maintain their own spaces and (2) systemic racism or sexism forcing minority groups out of public life.

When I see an all-female space such as https://femalefightclubnyc.com/ I say to myself, "Good for them!" rather than "Regulators, mount up!" Unlike some posters here, I do not feel the need mansplain which membership criteria women should use to run their own gym. It's enough for me that they choose for themselves what to do with their own bodies and spaces.

I'm not seeing anything on their website about whether trans women would or would not be welcome, but I suppose the broader point of being "women only" (however defined) is adequate enough for an example.

The thriving market for women's only gyms is a depressing testament to the abysmal culture of regular gyms, where, at the very least, the perception is that sexual harassment is rampant. A total failure of these unsegregated gyms to take action to make their businesses free from problem-causing individuals (who are, almost certainly, overwhelmingly cis men)

I have no idea how this squares with NY anti-discrimination law. It's entirely possible that these simply skirt the issue because nobody reports them or makes an issue of it.

 

[d4m10n]

I'm not seeing anything on their website about whether trans women would or would not be welcome, but I suppose the broader point of being "women only" (however defined) is adequate enough for an example.

Doesn't really matter to me which path they choose (sex or gender) only that they get to choose for themselves.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[JoeMorgue]

Okay but it's not unfair or bigoted to ask what the point is of all these terms if every time we ask for clarification on what they mean or how they work we just get a glib "LOL don't worry, it's not your concern" style retort.

"It doesn't have to make sense to you" isn't a dump stat that will work forever.

 

[lobosrul5]

I'm not seeing anything on their website about whether trans women would or would not be welcome, but I suppose the broader point of being "women only" (however defined) is adequate enough for an example.

The thriving market for women's only gyms is a depressing testament to the abysmal culture of regular gyms, where, at the very least, the perception is that sexual harassment is rampant. A total failure of these unsegregated gyms to take action to make their businesses free from problem-causing individuals (who are, almost certainly, overwhelmingly cis men)

I have no idea how this squares with NY anti-discrimination law. It's entirely possible that these simply skirt the issue because nobody reports them or makes an issue of it.

Or, its a private club, and the laws you are referring to, do not apply.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Doesn't really matter to me which path they choose (sex or gender) only that they get to choose for themselves.



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

This article is an interesting perspective of the benefits and drawbacks of a women's only gyms:

https://www.vox.com/22709598/women-only-gyms-curves-gender-trans

The benefits are obvious, freedom from male sexual harassment. The article points out that in the worst run mixed-sex public gyms, men seem to feel entitled to act like absolute pigs

And Sade Adebayo, a 29-year-old powerlifter from Virginia, complained that she faced sexual harassment when working out in a co-ed gym. Men would make comments about her body, telling her not to work out her upper body and to focus on her glutes and legs. Other times, men would strike up inappropriate conversations with her. Some would even go as far as inappropriately spotting her by putting their genitals on her. Adebayo also says men would use their size and stature to intimidate her and make her feel uncomfortable at the gym.

The drawbacks seem to be that many of these "women's only" gyms seem to subscribe to a very particular view of what the ideal women's body should be and have less variety than a regular gym. Lots of cardio and low weights for a particular slim aesthetic that may not be every woman's goal. The article also points out that many studio fitness classes are often nearly de-facto gender segregated based on the type of exercise being offered, which eats into the popularity of a women's only gym.

As a result, Kast thinks of gyms like Curves as less intense. While Curves workouts can be pretty effective, Kast says Curves has marketed itself in a way that differentiates it from more challenging programs. It may be the case that in an attempt to seem more feminine, the marketing made Curves workouts seem less difficult.

And even though Tenz, the copywriter, fell in love with her gym in Boston, for her the women-only gyms in Germany left something to be desired. “I tried one for a few months, but it mostly felt like a place where retirees went to socialize, so it didn’t feel as powerful to work out there. It was great for them, though, just not enough for me,” she says.

Sade used to work out at a local Gold’s Gym that offered a section called “Lady Gold’s.” Even though Sade doesn’t have any complaints about the environment there, the lackluster equipment made it impossible to stay in that section. “If I did want to work out exclusively in Lady Gold’s, I would have limited equipment available to me,” she says. To Sade, the variety and quality of the equipment just weren’t comparable to that of the gym’s co-ed area.

I have also generally noticed this, specialist gyms often have their own unique culture that is often much better than the general use gym. Probably a result of their smaller, more closely knit community of fellow hobbyists (powerlifting, martial arts, climbing, etc)

Now Sade works out in a specialized powerlifting gym, which she says definitely has its perks: There’s a camaraderie that you get from exercising in a space where people have similar goals, and she’s never experienced sexual harassment at her powerlifting gym.

That said, Planet Fitness is pretty well known for their "anti-gym chode" policy, where staff are supposedly more vigilant for people engaging in breaches of etiquette and will discipline offending gym users.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Or, its a private club, and the laws you are referring to, do not apply.

I've already covered this, but it usually takes more than "membership required" to be considered a private club in the context of being exempt from anti-discrimination law.

Being a women's only gym, even one that requires membership, is probably not exclusive enough to count as a true private club in the eyes of the law.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Questions of what is socially tolerated don't being or end at "what is technically illegal and enforced" and I'm tired of so much of this discussion pretending it does.

If people could talk about what THEY want the end result of all of this to be rather then playing the whole "Tee hee coyish giggle am I talking about what should be or what is? What is legal or what is right? I'll never tell tee hee coyish giggle" that would just be super.

 

[smartcooky]

Darts are projectiles in motion; males are better at judging that than females because they have so much experience aiming their urine at the toilet. In snooker height does matter to a point and then becomes a problem again. On chess, I know people hate hearing it but Lawrence Summers was right; one of the consequences of males having greater standard deviations in their intelligence is that they tend to be clustered at the top end of intellectual endeavors, whether we're talking about the faculty at Harvard or chess grandmasters or the final table at the World Series of Poker.

Alison Fisher - 61 WPBA titles, four time world 9-Ball champion, 11-time world snooker champion. In 2005 near the beginning of the peak of her playing career, she earned nearly US$250,000 on the circuit, more than any other player, male or female in that year. She both regularly played against and beat top male players. Fisher is 5ft 4in, a lot shorter than most male snooker and pool players.

Karen Corr - 19 WPBA titles, three time world snooker champion, two time world billiards champion. Also regularly competed against and beat top male players. Corr is 5ft 5in.

Height didn't seem much of a barrier to these two women. Of course, the real issue is not things like darts, snooker/pool and chess. These are non-physical games, not sports that demand physical strength, speed and stamina. Chess players get no tangible advantages by going through male puberty, football players, track and field athletes, cyclists and swimmers do - and those advantages are huge. As I pointed out earlier, Brian Gagner, the miler who ran the 5359th fastest mile time in the world will beat the fastest woman by 12 seconds.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Questions of what is socially tolerated don't being or end at "what is technically illegal and enforced" and I'm tired of so much of this discussion pretending it does.

If people could talk about what THEY want the end result of all of this to be rather then playing the whole "Tee hee coyish giggle am I talking about what should be or what is? What is legal or what is right? I'll never tell tee hee coyish giggle" that would just be super.

I don't know if this is directed at me, but in the interest of speaking directly:

I wish anti-discrimination policies were rigorously enforced, including against women's only gyms, which wouldn't be necessary if sexually harassing gym chodes were treated appropriately by said rigorous enforcement of anti-discrimination policy.

I understand and am sympathetic for the desire for women's only gyms, but the need for them is a pretty unambiguous sign of societal failure to enforce the reasonable norm that women should be able to exist in public without being sexually harassed.

 

[smartcooky]

TG has already answered this in the negative with respect to sex, saying that women should be sued (or otherwise sanctioned) for attempting to create all female accommodations.

Yup... Women's Refuges and Rape Shelters should be sued into dust and the people who run them should be prosecuted for discriminating against any biological males who want access to them.

 

[d4m10n]

I wish anti-discrimination policies were rigorously enforced, including against women's only gyms

Can we safely assume that it doesn't matter what place or service we swap in here?

Gyms or swimming ponds or music festivals or golf leagues or locker rooms or sleeper cars or Jjimjilbang^WP or what-have-you?

Is there any place in society where females ought to be allowed to hold space for themselves?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Yup... Women's Refuges and Rape Shelters should be sued into dust and the people who run them should be prosecuted for discriminating against any biological males who want access to them.

I don't know about prosecution, but Canada pulling public funds from the TERF shelter that dug in their heels and refused to follow anti-discrimination law strikes me as the correct public response to a bad situation. These losers weren't sued into dust, but they weren't able to continue operation without public funding and chose closing their shelter as the best option.

https://www.thestar.com/vancouver/2019/03/14/vancouver-rape-relief-would-rather-lose-city-funding-than-include-trans-people.html

 

[JoeMorgue]

Yup... Women's Refuges and Rape Shelters should be sued into dust and the people who run them should be prosecuted for discriminating against any biological males who want access to them.

I get this is supposed to be some level of mic drop shocking suggestion that all our jaws are supposed to drop at but... sorta. Kinda. Yes with a no. No with a but...

I mean "I have to be away not from the person who hurt me but their entire demographic in order to heal" would be seen as somewhere on the scale between obviously wrong to just weird in literally any other scenario.

We don't have all white shelters (yes I'm using the comparison again, die mad about it everyone) for people who were mugged by black people. We don't kick Muslims out of support groups for 9/11. We don't keep all adults always from children who have been victimized by adults.

In literally every other case dealing with a victim a crime assuming the victim is capable of understanding that a person hurt them and not a whole demographic is not seen as shocking or callous.

At lot of discussion (and this is going to be hard to put into words so actually read for context and don't just hover over the "how can you even say such a thing" shortcut on your keyboard) does seem to treat women as having some special kind of victimhood that nobody else gets and that's... weird.

Think I'm wrong? Okay. Name me one other context in which we separate, long term, victims of crimes from the entire demographic of the person who assaulted them so they can heal. I bet you can't/

Replace the woman in "Woman's Shelter" with any other vaguely comparable demographic noun, repeat it back to me, and then look eye with honesty and integrity and tell it doesn't sound a little weird.