Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

smartcooky said:
I can answer that. If you were to present him with solid, irrefutable evidence that they do, his responses would be one or more of the following, in no particular order
Click to expand...
I'm trying to head in a different direction than that, which is why I phrased it as what he would think if he were convinced, NOT what he would think if he were presented evidence or what it would take to convince him. That's a subtle distinction which might be asking too much of him, though. My point is that other people are convinced that these measures would protect women. He may think them wrong on that point, but he made a claim about their motives, not just the merits of their position. And that claim of motives crumbles if you allow that people have different opinions about the efficacy of these measures.

Furthermore, may of us know that we aren't motivated by hate or homophobia (particularly the women). We know his claims about us are wrong. So what's the point of insulting our motives? It obviously isn't persuasive. Attacking someone's motives never is. It might intimidate (unlikely in this case), but it never persuades. Demonstrating that these measures aren't effective might persuade, but he shows no interest in doing that. Which further suggests persuasion isn't the goal.
 
Saying that "these people have been violating your boundaries for decades already" isn't the gotcha that some people think it is.

It is necessary to formally prohibit males from using female facilities so that those who try it on can be challenged and ejected. In decades past this wasn't an issue. A man in the Ladies room was either there by mistake and would leave with embarrassed apologies, or he was up to no good and would again leave before too many questions were asked. Men in dresses tried their utmost to get by unnoticed, and if they weren't entirely successful women (conditioned to "be kind") generally gave them the benefit of the doubt, or simply exited hurriedly themselves.

What did not happen back then was men (with or without dresses) flaunting their masculinity in the Ladies by masturbating, posturing in front of mirrors and offering tampons to random strangers. The obvious man behaving with absolute entitlement, who would push back against any challenge with accusations of transphobia and bigotry, didn't exist. They do exist now.

Women may still choose to turn a blind eye to a man in a dress who seems to be genuinely trying to pass unnoticed, and maybe what they don't know about the planting of hidden cameras, the masturbation in the stalls to the sound of a woman peeing and the fetishisation of used menstrual products won't hurt them. But the bottom line is that the man has no right to be there, and if he's making a woman uncomfortable then she has the right to request that he leaves, or call the staff to eject him. That's the difference, and it makes all the difference.
 
Ziggurat said:
Would it change your mind if you were convinced that these laws do make women safer?
Click to expand...
Only if it could demonstrate the safety increase wasn't marginal.

How many women in the US were assaulted in public bathrooms last year? How many by Trans? Almost 50,000 people are killed with firearms every year. About 7,000 are women. How do those numbers compare to your trans-scare? I'm sure you're in favor of outlawing guns because you're all about protecting the woman folk? AmIrite?
 
Last edited:
Ivor the Engineer said:
FFS people, the world is turning to crap around you and the most important issue you can think to talk seemingly endlessly about is this?

Unisex toilets and biologically female only toilets. Everyone has a "safe space" to piss in. For prisons the rule should be not to put predators in the same space as their prey no matter what their biological sex is. Binary biological sex classification is a very good approximation to reality for many animals including humans. Mentally ill people should be tolerated and helped but not pandered to.

I suggest each of you write down a list of the problems in the world that affect you and then rank them in order of how much of your attention they deserve. If this issue is top of your list then consider yourself either one of the most fortunate people alive or one of the most stupid, no matter what level of education you have.
Click to expand...
Edited: ninja'ed on the fallacy of relative privation
 
I think y'all are missing the most significant thing about Ivor's latest: He concedes the necessity for sex segregated spaces for women, and (by implication) rejects the principle of fiat self-ID.

His appeal to relative privation is as irrelevant as it is hypocritical.
 
Ziggurat said:
I explained in #1882. I don't expect you to actually engage with my effort honestly, but hey, I tried, and maybe you'll surprise me.
Click to expand...
No, you didn’t. What you did was suggest that the motives of those pushing these bigoted laws was based on a desire to protect women from the evil trans women. That it wasn't based on insecure hate. That people like yourself are truly worried that women need protection from the boogeyman. And I was wrong to fail to see that women are truly threatened by the boogeyman. I've asked over and over and over about assaults on women committed in public restrooms and all I have heard is crickets. The only evidence you have presented is a right wing article citing a documentary of a right wing Troglodyte by the name of Matt Walsh.

I know gays and transgender individuals. I associate with them. They are not freaks to me. They are human beings deserving of kindness and respect. Just as I believe everyone is. The only presumption I make is that we live in a shared reality. I do presume everyone is good and deserves kindness until it is demonstrated otherwise. Oh, and faith is the excuse people provide when they lack evidence.
 
It's weird that once a group is cast as "marginalized," that group becomes sacred and can behave awfully without consequence.

Parents Of Female Students Outraged After Boy Parades Around Girls’ Locker Room Naked, Exposing Himself At Westosha Central High School

A boy has been using the girls’ locker room to change at Westosha Central High School. He stares at the young girls while they change and that makes them feel very uncomfortable. Some of the girls began to use the stalls to change. When they would exit, the boy would be exposing his penis and rubbing himself with lotion. He claimed to the girls that the lotion was to “prevent chafing.”
Click to expand...

The boy changes in the full nude, often exposing his penis and testicles. Many girls, some or most, freshmen approached the gym teacher, Miranda Hopkins. Hopkins told the girls that the boy “identifies” as a girl, so they have to let him have access. (Miranda is of no relation to a local school board member and teacher, Brian Hopkins, nor his father, Salem Lakes Trustee Bill Hopkins.)

There is a family locker room in the school that the girls starting using, but Hopkins told the girls they can’t use it and to stop “stirring up drama.” The girls then stopped changing in the locker room and went to gym class without the proper gym clothes on. The school punished them by marking down their grades and handing out “unexcused absences.”
Click to expand...
 
acbytesla said:
No, you didn’t. What you did was suggest that the motives of those pushing these bigoted laws was based on a desire to protect women from the evil trans women. That it wasn't based on insecure hate. That people like yourself are truly worried that women need protection from the boogeyman. And I was wrong to fail to see that women are truly threatened by the boogeyman. I've asked over and over and over about assaults on women committed in public restrooms and all I have heard is crickets. The only evidence you have presented is a right wing article citing a documentary of a right wing Troglodyte by the name of Matt Walsh.

I know gays and transgender individuals. I associate with them. They are not freaks to me. They are human beings deserving of kindness and respect. Just as I believe everyone is. The only presumption I make is that we live in a shared reality. I do presume everyone is good and deserves kindness until it is demonstrated otherwise. Oh, and faith is the excuse people provide when they lack evidence.
Click to expand...
Why are you quibbling? You already agree that fiat self-ID is a bad idea.
 
acbytesla said:
No, you didn’t. What you did was suggest that the motives of those pushing these bigoted laws was based on a desire to protect women from the evil trans women. That it wasn't based on insecure hate. That people like yourself are truly worried that women need protection from the boogeyman. And I was wrong to fail to see that women are truly threatened by the boogeyman. I've asked over and over and over about assaults on women committed in public restrooms and all I have heard is crickets.
Click to expand...
You have been given multiple examples of that actually happening.
acbytesla said:
I know gays and transgender individuals. I associate with them. They are not freaks to me.
Click to expand...
So what? Most heterosexual men aren't freaks either, and most would never hurt a woman. Is that grounds to abolish sex segregation in restrooms? No, it isn't. And keeping heterosexual men out of women's restrooms isn't hate.
acbytesla said:
The only presumption I make is that we live in a shared reality.
Click to expand...
You once again presumed a motive. You can't even manage to live in your own reality, let alone a shared one.
acbytesla said:
I do presume everyone is good and deserves kindness until it is demonstrated otherwise.
Click to expand...
No you don't. You presume that the people who don't want men in women's restrooms are NOT good and kind, but instead are hateful, note because of anything they have actually done, but merely because they disagree with you.
 
Ziggurat said:
You have been given multiple examples of that actually happening.
Click to expand...
Anecdotes is not data. It isn't the number of assaults which I have asked for over and over.
Ziggurat said:
So what? Most heterosexual men aren't freaks either, and most would never hurt a woman. Is that grounds to abolish sex segregation in restrooms? No, it isn't. And keeping heterosexual men out of women's restrooms isn't hate.
Click to expand...
Most heterosexual men don't look female.
Ziggurat said:
You once again presumed a motive. You can't even manage to live in your own reality, let alone a shared one.

No you don't. You presume that the people who don't want men in women's restrooms are NOT good and kind, but instead are hateful, note because of anything they have actually done, but merely because they disagree with you.
Click to expand...
I presume it since I saw it regularly. I saw the ostracism. I saw the hate. I heard bigoted remarks about gays and transgender individuals. I've watched heterosexual men on a regular basis threaten, disparage and assault gays and transgender individuals. I was attacked multiple times by heterosexual men who assumed I was gay because I worked at a gay bar. Don't tell me that it isn't common.
 
acbytesla said:
Anecdotes is not data. It isn't the number of assaults which I have asked for over and over.
Click to expand...
Nobody tracks that, so you are asking for what you know cannot be provided, and then concluding that it must be negligible because it hasn't been provided. Which isn't rational. And how many assaults do you need before you think it's a problem?
acbytesla said:
Most heterosexual men don't look female.
Click to expand...
So what? Self ID means they can go into the women's restrooms regardless.
acbytesla said:
I presume it since I saw it regularly.
Click to expand...
Who here has expressed this hate you claim? You don't get to disparage posters here based on the actions of others.
 
Ziggurat said:
Nobody tracks that, so you are asking for what you know cannot be provided, and then concluding that it must be negligible because it hasn't been provided. Which isn't rational. And how many assaults do you need before you think it's a problem?
Click to expand...
So in other words, you have heard stories and that is a sufficient reason for bigoted laws that will turn a natural act into a criminal one.

Ziggurat said:
So what? Self ID means they can go into the women's restrooms regardless.
Click to expand...
Not if laws make it criminal.
Ziggurat said:
Who here has expressed this hate you claim? You don't get to disparage posters here based on the actions of others.
Click to expand...
I see little justifications for most of these laws. I see contrivances. I use to hear individuals say that racial segregation was necessary. Not that they were bigoted. This rings so similarly.
 
Trausti said:
It's weird that once a group is cast as "marginalized," that group becomes sacred and can behave awfully without consequence.

Parents Of Female Students Outraged After Boy Parades Around Girls’ Locker Room Naked, Exposing Himself At Westosha Central High School
Click to expand...
@acbytesla will be along soon to tell us all this is just boogeyman speak, and that none of this ever happened, or if it did, it doesn't matter anyway, or its not important, or he doesn't care because he was a barman and he knows different, something something trans rights something yada yada yada!
 
smartcooky said:
@acbytesla will be along soon to tell us all this is just boogeyman speak, and that none of this ever happened, or if it did, it doesn't matter anyway, or its not important, or he doesn't care because he was a barman and he knows different, something something trans rights something yada yada yada!
Click to expand...
What do you think this article tells you? Does it say that teen age girls were in danger? Nope. It says a girl was pushed and some girls were uncomfortable. And some parents are outraged. Do you really think this incident even if it happened warrants a total ban? And I question it's veracity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom