• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

I accept the conclusion that trans-identifying men should not be put in women’s jails. Same goes for sport and women’s toilets.
Which raises the question: If you don't think transwomen need women's sports, jails, or toilets, do you think there's anything they do need? Preferred ponouns? An "F" on their driver's license?

What's the point of identifying as a woman, if you don't even get to do woman stuff?
 
Which raises the question: If you don't think transwomen need women's sports, jails, or toilets, do you think there's anything they do need? Preferred ponouns? An "F" on their driver's license?

What's the point of identifying as a woman, if you don't even get to do woman stuff?
I think it's been pointed out they don't tend to get around in barefeet jeans and a t shirt in public like most real women (and men) are happy with when the mood takes.
 
It shouldn't be that hard of a struggle. Just start with "What constitutes a transsexual, and how do you tell that they're transsexual?"

Does Alex Drummond count as a transsexual? What about Eddie Izzard? What about Darren Meragee? Jessica (Jonathan) Yaniv?

Where do you draw the line? Does a male only count as transsexual if they've had a complete penectomy and orchiectomy, and if so... who does the checking? What if they've had facial feminization surgery but have a fully intact and functional penis and testicles - do they count as transsexual? What if they have a full beard and haven't taken any estrogen at all?

At some point you end up with a situation where literally any male who puts on some chapstick and says the magic phrase "I'm trans" has to be counted as being transsexual.

And at that point, you've opened up the female facilities to any man who wants to be there, and you've simultaneously removed the ability of females to object to this gross violation of our boundaries and consent.
This topic has way too much fantastical rhetoric and way too little reality.

Is this an issue in countries where unisex nakedness is commonplace, or only in those which have lingering cultural awkwardness/shame about the human body and sexuality?
 
Because the latter is orders of magnitude more significant a risk than the former. Violent males are a small proportion of all males. Transsexual males are a very small percentage of all males.

If TERFs were serious about wanting to protect women from violent males they would spend far more of their time campaigning for interventions that lead to fewer violent males in society rather than strict public toilet enforcement.

Perhaps the TERFs would feel safe if an officer from the Met police was placed outside public toilets to make sure the weirdos don't get in?
 
Because the latter is orders of magnitude more significant a risk than the former. Violent males are a small proportion of all males. Transsexual males are a very small percentage of all males.

If TERFs were serious about wanting to protect women from violent males they would spend far more of their time campaigning for interventions that lead to fewer violent males in society rather than strict public toilet enforcement.

Perhaps the TERFs would feel safe if an officer from the Met police was placed outside public toilets to make sure the weirdos don't get in?
If they shared a male toilet would you object?
You are suggesting females should look after them.
I say their fellow males should look after them, or is there a counter argument I haven't thought of.
Many females object to having them in their common areas, but I never heard of men objecting.
If there are, it is a straightforward matter of telling them they pose no danger, just as women are told.
And it is not just physical danger they object to if you read the thread.
 
Last edited:
If they shared a male toilet would you object?
You are suggesting females should look after them.
I say their fellow males should look after them, or is there a counter argument I haven't thought of.
Many females object to having them in their common areas, but I never heard of men objecting.
If there are, it is a straightforward matter of telling them they pose no danger, just as women are told.
And it is not just physical danger they object to if you read the thread.
I'm not suggesting women "look after" anyone. I'm saying whatever is behind "no transsexuals in the women's toilet" is more to do with cultural and individual hang-ups than an interest in the safety of women.

What's the position of the TERF lobby on trans men in the women's toilet? E.g., what if they were wearing really good "manface" but needed to use the tampon machine?
 
I'm not suggesting women "look after" anyone. I'm saying whatever is behind "no transsexuals in the women's toilet" is more to do with cultural and individual hang-ups than an interest in the safety of women.

What's the position of the TERF lobby on trans men in the women's toilet? E.g., what if they were wearing really good "manface" but needed to use the tampon machine?

Considering the problem is male, not trans due to the whole patriarchy thing and how its males that overwhelmingly commit sexual assault, how about you take a guess what the opinion of the "TERF lobby" is on females in male safe spaces?
 
I'm not suggesting women "look after" anyone. I'm saying whatever is behind "no transsexuals in the women's toilet" is more to do with cultural and individual hang-ups than an interest in the safety of women.

What's the position of the TERF lobby on trans men in the women's toilet? E.g., what if they were wearing really good "manface" but needed to use the tampon machine?
On your first point, do you not see the solution is to make men's toilets open to all comers and restricting women's toilets to their biological sex?
They are the ones with the comprehensively argued issue, not men, and in a chivalrous world the obligations to bend to their requests are crystal clear to me.
We can get this done.
 
The danger for women is not transsexuals in public toilets, it's their husbands and boyfriends.
It's all males who want to assault or harrass us. Abolishing female safe spaces, which were established to give us extra security in circumstances where we are particularly vulnerable, can only increase that danger.
 
Gays have been exposed to violence by men for centuries. So have been transsexuals. Especially in male bathrooms.

Maybe we can look at some statistics on how much threat trans women are to cis women in save spaces before we just assume that they are as dangerous as cis males or other cis women?
 
Transwomen could be zero threat to women and it wouldn't change the fact that opening female safe spaces to any male willing to claim to be trans if challenged would mean that there are no longer any such things as female safe spaces. How many more times does this need to be pointed out?
 
Gays have been exposed to violence by men for centuries. So have been transsexuals. Especially in male bathrooms.

Maybe we can look at some statistics on how much threat trans women are to cis women in save spaces before we just assume that they are as dangerous as cis males or other cis women?
Are you saying that gay males should be allowed to use women's spaces because they aren't safe in the male ones? Even though that means women losing the right to object to any male in any female space because there is no way to tell if a man is gay or not? And we have to prove that this poses a danger to women before we are allowed to object? That seems to be the only logical inference.
 
On your first point, do you not see the solution is to make men's toilets open to all comers and restricting women's toilets to their biological sex?
They are the ones with the comprehensively argued issue, not men, and in a chivalrous world the obligations to bend to their requests are crystal clear to me.
We can get this done.
I like this idea. Let's have unisex public toilets and toilets for biological females.
 
Transwomen could be zero threat to women and it wouldn't change the fact that opening female safe spaces to any male willing to claim to be trans if challenged would mean that there are no longer any such things as female safe spaces. How many more times does this need to be pointed out?
Or perhaps groups who run safe spaces could make a judgement call as to whether a person requesting access should be let in given who is currently in that safe space. There's no need to bring sex into it at all.
 
Or perhaps groups who run safe spaces could make a judgement call as to whether a person requesting access should be let in given who is currently in that safe space. There's no need to bring sex into it at all.
What on earth are you talking about? Nobody "requests permission" to enter the female changing room at the gym. The privacy, dignity and safety of the women who use it depends entirely on their being confident that if, say, a male joins them in the female showers and starts masturbating whilst ogling their naked bodies they need only raise the alarm, and the staff will eject the offending male and quite possibly call the police. That's all that keeps the flashers, voyeurs and other undesirables out - the possibility of being arrested. If TRAs get their way, women will know that the offending male only has to claim to be trans and the staff (and the law) will take his side - and they are the ones who might end up being arrested for hate crimes. And there will no longer be any such thing as female safe spaces, and a lot fewer women going to the gym.
 

Back
Top Bottom