No, it vanishes because doctors are actively prescribing endocrinological and surgical treatments to help people pass as the opposite sex. This is a problem which has to be accommodated somehow, and my answer is to query the males about the disposition of their spaces and query the females about theirs, because they really are different spaces serving different constituencies with different needs. My answer is not for the men to step in and protect the women whether they like it or not, as much as that might be emotionally appealing deep down in my gonads.
They pass as the opposite sex, they don't become the opposite sex, because medical intervention can only mask sexual dimorphism, not eliminate it or actually change to the other sex. Furthermore, lots of trans identifying people don't even use any of these medical interventions. And since the TRAs want self ID, you cannot limit the conversation to how to deal with people who have had medical intervention.
But you didn't actually want to query the females who use those spaces. You only wanted to query the Congresswomen.
There are women who want to be protected. Your argument is basically to NOT protect those women because some other women don't want those women to be protected. Perhaps that's emotionally appealing to you. I'm a bit more interested in whether there's actually a threat to be protected from. And there is.
It doesn't vanish even with that. "Sticking feathers up your ass doesn't make you a chicken."
I disagree with d4m10n's take on this... but for different reasons than you do. I disagree because consent isn't transferable. Males shouldn't be deciding whether or not some special males get a pass to invade female-only spaces... but females shouldn't be deciding it either.
abcnews.go.com
We have an expression at my day job, "Good enough for government work." Regarding men's spaces (and only men's spaces) the trans men I've met pass well enough for most guys to shrug and not care.
My argument isn't that we may never reconsider those spaces. My point is that a vote to allow Robert to use the female restroom because Robert wants to and a lot of people think Robert is a nice guy is fundamentally dishonest in its framing.There will inevitably be a vote when the GOP introduces a new bathroom bill:
Republican to introduce transgender bathroom ban at the US Capitol
The bill would come as Rep.-elect Sarah McBride prepares to take office as the first transgender member of Congress.
My argument is that they ought to allow women to decide on women's spaces, and men decide on men's spaces, because the spaces are not equivalent and do not serve the same needs. I do not find EC's argument that we may never reconsider those spaces compelling, but I also don't think a majority of one sex should be making decisions for the other sex.
It's not a bill, it's a resolution, meaning it's a rule adopted by the House governing how the House handles things within the House. And you're out of date, it's already been adopted.
It isn't one sex deciding for the other sex. It's the House deciding for the House. And they made the right decision.
And? There is no symmetry between trans men and trans women. Why would men care about trans men? They are typically physically weaker even with hormones, and even more importantly, predatory females don't try to pass themselves off as men. But predatory males do try to pass themselves off as women. So the risk profiles don't look anything like each other. You can't take how men treat trans men and say that women should just do the same, because it's not the same.
It was also followed by a bunch of advocates, transgender, and plain old male people storming the capitol and making videos of themselves flouting the rule in the female restroom. I believe it resulted in several arrests.
Cool story. Now how about you work on your fellow males to be more accepting and caring toward males that dress in traditionally female attire and wear lipstick, so that those males won't be scared of males in male single-sex spaces? That would be even cooler.
More than that, it resulted in a trans advocate physically assaulting Mace.
Did you miss the part in parentheses?
Is there some evidence that would persuade a skeptic males are insufficiently accepting at the moment?
The claim by the TRAs is that trans women have to use the women's bathroom because they aren't safe in the men's bathroom. If you want to reject that claim, I for one am quite happy to, no further argument needed.
One of the most common arguments made in support of transgender identified males being granted access to female single-sex spaces is that they don't feel safe in male single-sex spaces, and they need to be in the female spaces for their own safety.
I thought it was just Speaker Johnson laying down the new rule?
