Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

We already covered that upthread; the people for whom the space was designed and designated are a specific sex class.

Trans men aren't part of that class. So no, you haven't really covered that upthread.

And you're also making another mistake, which is that the space isn't designed for women to just do whatever they want. It has a specific purpose. Women can use it for other purposes so long as those other purposes don't interfere with its primary purpose. But they can't set up a disco in there, they can't turn it into a food prep area, because that would interfere with the purpose for which it is designed. And letting males into that space just because the males say they are female interferes with the purpose of that space.

You are bringing consent into this as if we're talking about individual bodily integrity rather than the disposition of collectively owned property.

Gee, I wonder why individual bodily integrity might be implicated in this issue. Can you puzzle that one out?

And it's collectively owned by Congress as a whole, not by congresswomen. It's allocated to women (not just congresswomen) for a specific purpose. Not just to do whatever they want with it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

It can be serious without being practical. I certainly do not expect the party of unabashedly retrograde masculinity to give up their ability to tell women what to do with themselves.

At this point, that kind of describes both parties.

 

[d4m10n]

Trans men aren't part of that class.

Of course trans men are part of the sex class (female) for whom women's spaces were originally designed and designated. They just happen not to look like it, much of the time, because cross-sex hormone therapy is highly effective when going from F to M.

And you're also making another mistake, which is that the space isn't designed for women to just do whatever they want. It has a specific purpose.

It has many purposes (listed out here) several of which you cannot possibly have had experience of yourself.

Women can use it for other purposes so long as those other purposes don't interfere with its primary purpose.

You must be a wise man, to tell all these women what the singular primary purpose must be.

It is good that they are not made to function without a man explaining such things to them.

...letting males into that space just because the males say they are female interferes with the purpose of that space.

It does if they say it does, it does not if they say it does not.

It's allocated to women (not just congresswomen) for a specific purpose.

Again, you have presumed to tell them what that purpose is, and again, it is not your place to do so.

 

[Ziggurat]

Of course trans men are part of the sex class (female) for whom women's spaces were originally designed and designated.

We're talking about trans women, not trans men.

Under the current rules, trans men are supposed to use the women's restroom.

It has many purposes (listed out here) several of which you cannot possibly have had experience of yourself.

My personal experience isn't relevant, because none of my arguments depend upon personal experience. And this isn't about counting. Whether we want to call it one multi-part purpose or many purposes, the point is, it ISN'T meant for anything and everything.

It does if they say it does, it does not if they say it does not.

Who exactly is "they"? And no, that's not how it works.

Again, you have presumed to tell them what that purpose is, and again, it is not your place to do so.

I'm not the one telling anyone the purpose. Congress is. And it's kind of obvious that Congress is telling people the purpose. That's inherent in the designation of the space as a restroom, and not as a general purpose room. I somehow don't think women actually feel patronized by such a designation, so your attempt to white knight this is rather absurd.

 

[d4m10n]

We're talking about trans women, not trans men.

You said "trans men" so I replied accordingly.

 

[d4m10n]

Who exactly is "they"? And no, that's not how it works.

The sex class for whom these spaces were designed and designated. Thankfully, there are quite a few who are allowed to vote.

I'm not the one telling anyone the purpose. Congress is.

Congress consists of individuals who can easily be classified into two sex classes. Should this bill come to a vote in the 119^th Congress, the sex class traditionally associated with masculinity will have their way, overriding the preferences of the other one. This doesn't strike me as a particularly sensible way to solve the problem, given that the uses of the female space do not overlap with the uses of the other space (aside from elimination and washing up) and also given that we have no evidence that the Congressmen are aware of these differences.

 

[Ziggurat]

The sex class for whom these spaces were designed and designated. Thankfully, there are quite a few who are allowed to vote.

And they voted already. And this is the result of that vote. Either you take voting seriously, or you don't. But you're playing this weird game where you want some votes to matter and some votes to not matter, with no actual rhyme or reason dictating which is which.

Congress consists of individuals who can easily be classified into two sex classes. Should this bill come to a vote in the 119^th Congress, the sex class traditionally associated with masculinity will have their way

You seem to want to segregate voting by sex. That's... weird.

, overriding the preferences of the other one.

I'm OK with that. Because I'm OK with some preferences being overridden on matters of principle. Some things shouldn't be ceded to simple majority opinion. I believe this is one of those cases. And many women agree. Despite your constant appeals to what women want, you seem intent on ignoring this group of women.

This doesn't strike me as a particularly sensible way to solve the problem

You don't seem to want to solve the problem at all. You seem to just want to pass the buck.

 

[d4m10n]

And they voted already. And this is the result of that vote.

Wait, what?

 

[Ziggurat]

Wait, what?

How do representatives get selected? By the public voting. The public already voted, including all the women that YOU don't actually want to get a voice in this issue. Except they do, by who they voted for for Congress. And the current makeup of Congress is the result of that vote.

 

[d4m10n]

How do representatives get selected? By the public voting. The public already voted, including all the women that YOU don't actually want to get a voice in this issue. Except they do, by who they voted for for Congress. And the current makeup of Congress is the result of that vote.

And that result is overwhelming biased in favor of one sex.

 

[Ziggurat]

And that result is overwhelming biased in favor of one sex.

So what? Why do you really care what genitals your representative has? Do you have a problem with women who vote for men? Do you think a man cannot represent a woman's interests? Do you think women can't represent men's interests? Do you think sex is the most important quality a person possesses?

 

[novaphile]

That was what seemed to bring my pro-trans friend up short when I pointed it out. I'd had half an hour of "how many would it be anyway" when I said I didn't think males should be sent to women's prisons,* and all about how she didn't mind if there were males in any women's toilets she was in. I said (trying not to have a row about it), "I don't think women who are OK about this have the right to surrender women's single-sex spaces on behalf of the women who aren't." Her face completely changed and she seemed to see the point, and dropped the subject.

I thought of a lot more that might have been more persuasive, such as the women who aren't OK about it including Moslem women who have to remove their hijab to perform the ritual wash before prayer, and need a male-free space to do that in, and orthodox Jewish women (not sure about the exact theology of that) and women who have been traumatised by a man and have a panic reaction to discovering a man in a space they believe to be female-only, but when she didn't pursue the point I left it alone for the sake of peace.

*Adam "Isla" Bryson happened about two weeks later.

The equivalent for orthodox Jewish women is the Sheitel, a wig to cover their natural hair (if they are married).

Their hair remains covered at all times in the presence of anyone other than their husband (and God).

 

[Matthew Best]

This is the first time I've really started to think that this thread is ridiculous. The current discussion is fatuous.

 

[Rolfe]

I don't want to turn into Samson, exhorting people to listen to hour-long podcasts for enlightenment, but this is really interesting. A new perspective to counter "it's all AGP".

https://twitter.com/x/status/1869147637271912933

 

[d4m10n]

So what?

So they aren't generally aware of many of the factors which make women's spaces unique.

Do you think a man cannot represent a woman's interests?

Not when they are ignorant of what makes women's spaces unique.

Do you think women can't represent men's interests?

Not when they are ignorant of what makes men's spaces unique.

Do you think sex is the most important quality a person possesses?

When we are talking about sex-segregated spaces, experience matters.

 

[Ziggurat]

So they aren't generally aware of many of the factors which make women's spaces unique.

Again, so what?

Not when they are ignorant of what makes women's spaces unique.

And now we're back to yet another inconsistency in your own position. You made a judgment call based not on the merits of the issue itself, but only on the preferences of a group (and your selection of which group you want to listen to is itself problematic, as I previously described). Politicians are capable of doing the same with their constituents. In fact, they're very good at doing that, it is arguably their primary function. They don't need to know why their constituents have the preferences they have, they only need to know what those preferences are. Arguing that they don't understand the why of those preferences is completely irrelevant.

When we are talking about sex-segregated spaces, experience matters.

In what way? Not in order to represent the interests of other people it doesn't.

And as far as experience, I don't know why you're appealing to that when you keep ignoring the experience that women in this thread are describing to you. Again, there's no consistency in the positions that you are taking.

 

[d4m10n]

You made a judgment call based not on the merits of the issue itself, but only on the preferences of a group (and your selection of which group you want to listen to is itself problematic, as I previously described).

I didn't make a judgement call, except where men's spaces are concerned. Unlike yourself, I don't believe men ought to be telling women what do with their spaces or their bodies.

Not in order to represent the interests of other people it doesn't.

They cannot possibly represent interests of which they are unaware; they cannot possibly know what the experience of feminine modesty feels like as a member of the weaker and more vulnerable sex.

 

[Ziggurat]

I didn't make a judgement call

Yes you did. You think that transwomen should be permitted because congresswomen think they should. That's a judgment call. Who you want to defer to is a judgment call that you're making, even if you aren't deciding on the issue itself.

Unlike yourself, I don't believe men ought to be telling women what do with their spaces or their bodies.

First off, who the hell is talking about bodies? Don't pull that bull ◊◊◊◊ here. Go pretend to be a white knight somewhere else.

Secondly, women don't own that space. Congress owns that space. Congress can allocate that space as Congress sees fit. Congress has chosen to make this space available to women for a restroom. The space still belongs to Congress, Congress still properly controls it. A subset of women, by dint of being given access to that space, do not then have the authority or the right to re-allocate that space to men over the objections of other women.

They cannot possibly represent interests of which they are unaware

They are aware that some women have an interest in not allowing men into that space. That suffices.

; they cannot possibly know what the experience of feminine modesty feels like as a member of the weaker and more vulnerable sex.

They don't need to, because that's not how representative democracy works. And it's really, really strange for you to appeal to feminine modesty in order to justify allowing males into women's spaces.

 

[d4m10n]

You think that transwomen should be permitted because congresswomen think they should.

They haven't been asked yet, but I have argued that they should be given a say regardless of outcome.

Congress can allocate that space as Congress sees fit.

Yes, they can. When they do, I'm willing to bet that the stated preferences of the men will override the stated preferences of the women who actually use those spaces.

And it's really, really strange for you to appeal to feminine modesty in order to justify allowing males into women's spaces.

As I said . . . regardless of outcome.

Feminist have an old saying on point: Trust Women.

 

[Ziggurat]

They haven't been asked yet, but I have argued that they should be given a say regardless of outcome.

They have been given a say.

Yes, they can. When they do, I'm willing to bet that the stated preferences of the men will override the stated preferences of the women who actually use those spaces.

Which women? The only women you've references are congresswomen, but congresswomen are not the primary users of those spaces.

Feminist have an old saying on point: Trust Women.

Yet you don't trust the statements of women in this thread that say they don't want males in the bathroom, and that this will make the unsafe.

Never trust a male feminist.