Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[d4m10n]

There is no injustice in well designed unisex toilet facilities. All the problems being brought up are either no more difficult to deal with in unisex toilet facilities than they are under sex segregated toilet facilities, or are just ridiculous whataboutism.

You are dismissing her concerns rather than addressing them, and that doesn't inspire any confidence in your position here.

Here is what you missed:

1. Women use the communal space "to communicate with each other."
2. Women use the communal space "to offer and seek help with feminine emergencies."
3. Women use the communal space "to escape from importunate men."

Would you care to try again, perhaps frankly admitting that these benefits would be lost in your redesign?

 

[Rolfe]

Also the danger introduced when men are permitted in the communal space outside the cubicles. The scenario where a man loiters until there's nobody else around but a lone woman entering a cubicle, pushes her in and locks them both inside has happened even in single-sex toilets. However it's a lot harder for a man to loiter without exciting remark in a space where men are not supposed to be, and when the manoeuvre is accomplished the cubicle has space both below and above the walls and door and is nowhere near soundproof. Where you have men permitted in the communal space, plus cubicles with floor-to-ceiling walls and door, plus some soundproofing, it's a lot more dangerous. It becomes much more possible to avoid detection even if someone else comes in to use another cubicle.

This has nothing to do with trans people. Nothing at all. If trans people didn't exist and there was for some other reason a push to have these mixed-sex facilities, the objections would be exactly the same. It would destroy the women's amenity as described above, and make it much easier for predatory men to do their predation. (It would also destroy the convenience of urinals for men.)

It's quite ironic really. Trans-identifying men don't want mixed-sex facilities. They want sex-segregated facilities, but to be permitted on the women's side. That's where they get their kicks, that's what validates them and sexually excites them. Nevertheless, in a desperate attempt to remake the world for the convenience of trans people, we still get this suggestion. Destroy the female-only space that women value, make women's lives less safe, and the trans-identifying men won't be happy either.

 

[d4m10n]

Also the danger introduced when men are permitted in the communal space outside the cubicles. The scenario where a man loiters until there's nobody else around but a lone woman entering a cubicle, pushes her in and locks them both inside has happened even in single-sex toilets.

The unisex designs which I've seen in real life wouldn't make a loitering predator particularly unnoticeable. For example, the ones at my local Detroit-style pizzeria open off a north-south running hallway which has floor-to-ceiling windows along the west-facing side, windows which look out upon an outdoor seating and play area which is typically bustling.

This has nothing to do with trans people. Nothing at all.

Are you not counting non-binary folx under the trans umbrella? I'd say that modern gender ideology has directly lead to the creation of a class of people who are not eager to sort themselves into single-sex spaces.

 

[Rolfe]

My meaning is that the dangers and disadvantages of such a move have nothing to do with the presence of trans people, of any flavour. They are to do with making women share mixed-sex spaces with men.

 

[smartcooky]

There is no injustice in well designed unisex toilet facilities. All the problems being brought up are either no more difficult to deal with in unisex toilet facilities than they are under sex segregated toilet facilities, or are just ridiculous whataboutism. I get it, you're scared of and/or dislike transsexuals, and because you believe yourself to be rational are trying to come up with reasons why all of them need to be kept away from females and ideally eradicated from society altogether by being "treated". Ironically you are just as extreme and irrational as the other side who wants every child to be bombarded with transsexual propaganda with its rapidly-approaching-infinity number of pigeonholes (and corresponding flags).

The vast majority of transsexuals are no more dangerous to women than anyone else. Smartcooky's completely inaccurate one line response to the blog I linked to indicates there is little point trying to use facts or statistics to better inform his opinion. He doesn't understand the point being made in the blog, so just claimed it was what he wants it to be. Extremist TRA's do the same. I was curious and did a little bit more analysis on the data referred to in the blog I posted a link to. Taking the geometric mean of the last group (9-50 rapes = ~21 rapes) gives an estimate of 9% of male rapists committing 45% of rapes by males.

Sex segregation does not deal with the problem of sexual predators in any useful way. If you do want to make the environment safer for females then you would spend less time campaigning for sex segregation and more time on things that improve the detection and removal from society of predators, as well as things that result in fewer being created in the first place.

World salad and Gish gallop. You dodge the statistics, you dodge the facts, and you are not interested in honest debate. You have taken an anti-female stance, and you are doubling down on it when criticised for it.

Let me repeat this for you:

Transgender self-indentified men are over five times more likely to commit sexual assault on women than NON-transgender self-indentified men

This is NOT wrong, this is truth.
This is NOT flawed application of statistics, it is correct application of statistics
This is NOT opinion, it is fact.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18973/pdf/

​

MOJ stats show 76 of the 129 male-born prisoners identifying as transgender (not counting any with GRCs) have at least 1 conviction of sexual offence. This includes 36 convictions for rape and 10 for attempted rape. These are clearly male type crimes (rape is defined as penetration with a penis).​

​

Here is the number compared with figures for sex offending rates in men and women over the same period.​

​

Comparisons of official MOJ statistics from March / April 2019 (most recent official count of transgender prisoners):​

76 sex offenders out of 129 transwomen = 58.9%​

125 sex offenders out of 3812 women in prison = 3.3%​

13234 sex offenders out of 78781 men in prison = 16.8%​

Also, as for your earlier anecdotal bull-**** about females being just as bad when it comes to harassing others...

The researchers state:​

‘male-to-females . . . retained a male pattern regarding criminality. The same was​

true regarding violent crime.’​

MtF transitioners were over 6 times more likely to be convicted of an offence than female​

comparators and 18 times more likely to be convicted of a violent offence. ​

 

[smartcooky]

You're a grandfather right? Shall I start a thread in which I post links to stories about grandfathers who fiddle with their children's kids to make a case that all grandfathers should be segregated from children? Would that convince you to stop seeing your grandchildren as an example to all elderly men for the good of society?

1. This is a gross misrepresentation of the argument... but not unexpected, given your track record here

2. Can you back this up with statistical evidence to support your claim?

 

[Pixel42]

A reminder that we're not talking about permanently segregating men and women. We're talking about a temporary segregation, during very particular circumstances, which has been the norm for a long time and accepted as reasonable by both sexes. Ivor's attempts to imagine scenarios which are both analogous and unreasonable are frankly ridiculous.

 

[Rolfe]

We might also note that the difficulties with his plan that he realises can't just be handwaved away as "no more difficult to deal with in mixed-sex toilet facilities than they are under sex segregated toilet facilities"(do tell, how are we going to manage these prams, or seek help for feminine emergencies, in this brave new world) as "just ridiculous whataboutism."

I'm actually unclear which is which. Are the prams, or the miscarriages, or the need to get away from an importunate man, easy to deal with in mixed-sex facilities, or "ridiculous whataboutism"? Inquiring minds want to know.

The danger of being trapped in a closed cubicle with a rapist may seem not to be present in some set-ups, but it certainly is in others. And what about the spy cameras? Bugging toilet cubicles to get footage of women peeing or changing sanitary towels (or even better, tampons) is a lucrative hobby. It's fairly difficult to set the bug if men aren't allowed in the women's facilities, dead easy if the cubicles are mixed sex.

I'd quite like to know how these things are envisaged as being handled.

And for what? Trans-identifying men don't even want mixed sex toilets. They get their validation and their sexual thrills from being in the women's toilets.

 

[smartcooky]

Let me try to parse this from his point of view. I have gleaned these responses directly from the types of things he has said here, in this very thread.

...how are we going to manage these prams, or seek help for feminine emergencies, in this brave new world

He doesn't give a crap about any of this.

I'm actually unclear which is which. Are the prams, or the miscarriages, or the need to get away from an importunate man, easy to deal with in mixed-sex facilities, or "ridiculous whataboutism"? Inquiring minds want to know.

You won't get an answer to this, well, not an honest answer anyway.

The danger of being trapped in a closed cubicle with a rapist may seem not to be present in some set-ups, but it certainly is in others. And what about the spy cameras? Bugging toilet cubicles to get footage of women peeing or changing sanitary towels (or even better, tampons) is a lucrative hobby. It's fairly difficult to set the bug if men aren't allowed in the women's facilities, dead easy if the cubicles are mixed sex.

I'd quite like to know how these things are envisaged as being handled.

He will never have any of these impact on him personally, and since he totally lacks any empathy whatsoever for members of the female 50% of the population, he won't care about any of it.

And for what? Trans-identifying men don't even want mixed sex toilets. They get their validation and their sexual thrills from being in the women's toilets.

He does not accept that either of these things are true, and even if he did, he wouldn't give a fat rat's arse about it anyway

 

[smartcooky]

The unisex designs which I've seen in real life wouldn't make a loitering predator particularly unnoticeable. For example, the ones at my local Detroit-style pizzeria open off a north-south running hallway which has floor-to-ceiling windows along the west-facing side, windows which look out upon an outdoor seating and play area which is typically bustling.


Are you not counting non-binary folx under the trans umbrella? I'd say that modern gender ideology has directly lead to the creation of a class of people who are not eager to sort themselves into single-sex spaces.

There are also now a crapload of people involved in the LGTBQ+ community who are want the "T" out of it, particularly the "L" part, who do not want biological men invading their spaces.

 

[Pixel42]

And for what? Trans-identifying men don't even want mixed sex toilets. They get their validation and their sexual thrills from being in the women's toilets.

This is it. TRAs don't disagree with the long practised and accepted norm - that the sexes should be segregated in certain very specific circumstances. What they are demanding is that their personal belief (that they really are a different sex to the one they objectively appear) be unquestioningly accepted. If you're looking for analogies, look for other cases of people wanting their unevidenced beliefs to be imposed on those who do not share them.

 

[Rolfe]

I was at a Zoom party last night. The hostess, a married woman with a daughter whom I have known for many decades, was sporting (She/her) after her name. Interestingly, her husband wasn't participating in the pronoun performance art.

Another woman I didn't know was (they). Another large-built man, balding and with a full beard, was (they/them). And an obvious man was sporting the name "Sandra" but with no pronouns showing.

Since there was no call to use third person pronouns it's hard to know what the point of any of it is. But (they/them) and Sandra are as aware of what sex they are as anyone else was.

 

[theprestige]

I was at a Zoom party last night. The hostess, a married woman with a daughter whom I have known for many decades, was sporting (She/her) after her name. Interestingly, her husband wasn't participating in the pronoun performance art.

Another woman I didn't know was (they). Another large-built man, balding and with a full beard, was (they/them). And an obvious man was sporting the name "Sandra" but with no pronouns showing.

Since there was no call to use third person pronouns it's hard to know what the point of any of it is. But (they/them) and Sandra are as aware of what sex they are as anyone else was.

The point is to normalize the declaration of pronouns. If we all do it, it's not weird and obvious when trans folks do it too.

 

[Ziggurat]

The point is to normalize the declaration of pronouns. If we all do it, it's not weird and obvious when trans folks do it too.

That's the goal. But trans folks who pass don't need to declare their pronouns, and when they don't pass, it's weird and obvious anyways.

 

[Rolfe]

"Trans folk who pass..." Oh my aching sides. The amusing part was that Caroline, who is quite definitely a woman and always has been, felt the need to label herself with (She/her), while "Sandra", whoever he was, didn't have any pronoun declaration at all. At one point I was listening to the chat without the Zoom screen showing and heard a man describe his job delivering prescriptions from a pharmacy to patients who couldn't get out. Definitely a man, I had no doubt about this. Later, when I had the screen showing and was participating in the chat, I realised that the person with the drug courier job was "Sandra".

 

[Rolfe]

The point is to normalize the declaration of pronouns. If we all do it, it's not weird and obvious when trans folks do it too.

I don't really think so. Quite a lot of trans people don't like the compulsory pronoun ritual because it draws attention to them, or because they're not "out" as trans at work. I think it's to force a concrete declaration of allegiance to the trans agenda on everyone.

 

[d4m10n]

Quite a lot of trans people don't like the compulsory pronoun ritual because it draws attention to them, or because they're not "out" as trans at work.

I'd be rather surprised if it's over 5% of them.

I think it's to force a concrete declaration of allegiance to the trans agenda on everyone.

This feels vaguely conspiracy theorish, given that they aren't declaring that goal openly.

 

[theprestige]

That's the goal. But trans folks who pass don't need to declare their pronouns, and when they don't pass, it's weird and obvious anyways.

I've said before and I'll say it again: If transwomen were women, they wouldn't need preferred pronouns. They'd just use pronouns.

 

[d4m10n]

I've said before and I'll say it again: If transwomen were women, they wouldn't need preferred pronouns. They'd just use pronouns.

Trans folks who pass for their chosen sex don't need to state their preferences, of course.

The whole pronoun thing is mostly a concession to the NBs and the even more bespoke genders, so far as I can see, since it's usually obvious when a male is trying to pass as a woman or a female is trying to pass as a man.

 

[Rolfe]

I'd be rather surprised if it's over 5% of them.

This feels vaguely conspiracy theorish, given that they aren't declaring that goal openly.

OK, maybe you're right about the proportion. I have heard about cases where people "questioning their gender" outwith the work environment were very uncomfortable about being required to state their pronouns.

Sometimes conspiracies actually happen. There's no doubt that Stonewall have been pushing this declaration of pronouns for all it's worth. It's part of the requirement for their special awards that staff must be pressurised to put pronouns in their email signatures and declare them when introduced to new people.

Trans folks who pass for their chosen sex don't need to state their preferences, of course.

The whole pronoun thing is mostly a concession to the NBs and the even more bespoke genders, so far as I can see, since it's usually obvious when a m

"Trans folk who pass for their chosen sex." Bwahahahaha. It is, as you say, usually obvious when a male is trying to pass as a woman or a female is trying to pass as a man. That's actually the point. They want to force people to use the pronouns that are the opposite of what their eyes and ears are telling them about the sex of that person.