Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

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.

First off, there's more to it than just stories. There's also a basic understanding of human nature, which you seem to lack. Second, there is nothing natural about men in the women's bathroom. Nor is it bigoted. I don't consider that I am entitled to enter those spaces. Am I bigoted against myself? And lastly, you're a hypocrite. You demand statistics, but you provide none of your own. What harm do you allege is caused by males not being allowed in? Where are your statistics to back up those claims?

Not if laws make it criminal.

But you don't want such laws. You want self ID. You want males to be able to enter female spaces.

I see little justifications for most of these laws. I see contrivances.

Safety isn't a contrivance. You ignore actual harm, because you claim it doesn't reach some arbitrary threshold which you can't even define.

I use to hear individuals say that racial segregation was necessary. Not that they were bigoted. This rings so similarly.

Sex and race are not remotely similar. And this is just another fringe reset. You're trying to claim the virtue from other people in other fights that you don't actually have.

 

[Matthew Best]

And you STILL haven't provided any evidence for your earlier assertion. Just as I predicted.

 

[acbytesla]

First off, there's more to it than just stories. There's also a basic understanding of human nature, which you seem to lack. Second, there is nothing natural about men in the women's bathroom. Nor is it bigoted. I don't consider that I am entitled to enter those spaces. Am I bigoted against myself? And lastly, you're a hypocrite. You demand statistics, but you provide none of your own. What harm do you allege is caused by males not being allowed in? Where are your statistics to back up those claims?

What statistics? Statistics for non or almost non-existent assaults? I don't mostly care and believe that instead of creating laws that make individuals criminals for mostly nothing burger incidents, we address the individuals.

But you don't want such laws. You want self ID. You want males to be able to enter female spaces.

I want self identified females treated as females with certain caveats. I don't believe we need to turn trans gender individuals into criminals.

Safety isn't a contrivance. You ignore actual harm, because you claim it doesn't reach some arbitrary threshold which you can't even define.

You haven't demonstrated there is an actual safety concern.

Sex and race are not remotely similar. And this is just another fringe reset. You're trying to claim the virtue from other people in other fights that you don't actually have.

Bigotry and discrimination are though. That you refer to transgender individuals as "fringe" says a lot.

 

[smartcooky]

What do you think this article tells you?

Not what it tells you, obviously, but I'm not the one wearing the far-left blinders.

Does it say that teen age girls were in danger?

Why does it just have to be danger? Is causing distress and anxiety to children not on your radar of things that are unacceptable?

Nope. It says a girl was pushed and some girls were uncomfortable.

So violence is acceptable to you as long as the boy gets to flash his genitals in front of all those non-consenting girls. Good to know that's where you stand... right alongside the nasty little creep.

And some parents are outraged.

And rightly so! If my girls were exposed to this little creep at their age, I would be apoplectic. I would demand his permanent expulsion, and if that didn't happen, I would be pulling my girls out of that school.

Do you really think this incident even if it happened warrants a total ban?

It warrants expulsion, and severe consequences.

And I question it's veracity.

Oh, of course you do. As I said earlier, you will attack the source when you can't find arguments in support of your position.

 

[Pixel42]

In most places self ID is not yet sufficient for any male to enter any female safe space, so we are mostly speculating about the likely impact on it on women's privacy, dignity and safety should it become the norm. To quantify that impact we would need to collect data before and after self ID becomes law not only on incidents of violence in toilets, gyms, prisons etc, but also on other consequences (e.g. female attendance in such places, as women simply choose not to go to anywhere they would need to undress or shower where they know there is no longer a safe space for them to do so).

But before we did that, we would also have to establish what the baseline is for an acceptable level of impact. How many additional women would need to be attacked in what were formerly female safe spaces for self ID to be considered a mistake? How much business would need to be lost by gyms and similar establishments?

My own threshold for the number of attacks on women that are acceptable in return for sparing the feelings of a tiny percentage of males who would prefer to use the sex segregated spaces of females would be none. And the anecdotal data we already have is sufficient to determine that that threshold has already been exceeded.

Incidentally it is simply not credible that someone who has been a member of this forum for 12 years and has made 36,000 posts doesn't know what a fringe reset is.

 

[Rolfe]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1870087412988133546

 

[Ziggurat]

What statistics? Statistics for non or almost non-existent assaults?

Indeed, assaults on trans women in men’s bathrooms are non or almost non existent. So why can’t they use men’s bathrooms?

I don't mostly care

That’s rather the problem. You have repeatedly indicated that you do not care about women who say they are threatened by the presence of males in bathrooms. You don’t even care about women who have actually been assaulted by males in bathrooms.

and believe that instead of creating laws that make individuals criminals for mostly nothing burger incidents, we address the individuals.

Nice idea. But that is impossible under self ID.

I want self identified females treated as females with certain caveats.

Self identified females means males.

I don't believe we need to turn trans gender individuals into criminals.

That isn’t what this does.

You haven't demonstrated there is an actual safety concern.

Sure we have. Your only objection is that it’s not enough of a safety concern, but again, you won’t say what level of harm becomes a safety concern.

Bigotry and discrimination are though.

Is it bigotry and discrimination to not allow cis men into female bathrooms?

Well, it is discrimination, but so what? That doesn’t make it bigotry. It isn’t, because sex isn’t equivalent to race, and discrimination on the basis of sex in matters like bathrooms or sports isn’t anything like discrimination on the basis of race.

That you refer to transgender individuals as "fringe" says a lot.

You don’t know what the term “fringe reset” means, do you? It’s not a reference to trans individuals being fringe.

 

[Trausti]

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

Ya see? Sacred. Immune from criticism.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

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?

True, at least for the UK:

Sexual assault cases 2016 to 2021 - Office for National Statistics

 

[HansMustermann]

CIS males are 100 times the threat to women than transgender individuals.

Even accepting that for the scope of this exercise, how do you tell who's actually identifying as a woman, and who's just saying so for the sake of going to the women's bathroom? Because self-id means someone can say whatever they want. They don't even have to put any effort into actually transitioning or anything. I've seen plenty of the new generation of "trans" online, who don't even bother shaving their beard or anything.

Even "better", now we have the idea of "gender fluid", so someone's sexual expression could be male all day and only female while passing through the women's toilet door.

But anyway, your argument would hold some water if you knew that everyone who says they're trans is actually 100% honestly identifying as a woman and trying to be a woman. As opposed to, you know, actually some cis perv just saying whatever it takes to go into the women's bathroom. Sorry to break it to you, but a lot of people lie.

 

[Rolfe]

And that's not even mentioning that what we actually know is that trans-identifying men are FIVE TIMES the threat to women that other men are.

 

[HansMustermann]

Yes, well, I did say I was accepting his premise only for the purpose of that ad-absurdum, to show that it still wouldn't support anything he seemed to think it does. Doesn't mean I still accept it after the end of that message.

 

[acbytesla]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1870087412988133546

Seriously? You reference the epitome of disinformation? Another Murdoch rag.

 

[Matthew Best]

And that's not even mentioning that what we actually know is that trans-identifying men are FIVE TIMES the threat to women that other men are.

Don't worry - acbytesla is going to present his evidence that CIS males are 100 times the threat to women than transgender individuals any minute now.

 

[acbytesla]

And that's not even mentioning that what we actually know is that trans-identifying men are FIVE TIMES the threat to women that other men are.

BULL! RIght out of your ass.

 

[Matthew Best]

.... any minute now.......

 

[acbytesla]

You bigots keep railing about safety and never mention what the crime statistics are. You throw out article after article from conservative publications. C'mon. Tell us about the wave of violence in public restrooms. 7,000 women were killed by firearms last year. Are you concerned with that?

What are you doing to safeguard women's health? Are you standing up for their sexual reproductive health? How many women are dying because of a lack of access to health services? No, you're freaked out there are men with breasts and a penis. And God forbid a woman might see one.

I find this faux concern about women's safety for what it is. Bigotry and male insecurities.

I see ABSOLUTELY NO SAFETY CONCERN until one is presented with credible evidence.

 

[Matthew Best]

.l.. any minute now....

 

[Rolfe]

Seriously? You reference the epitome of disinformation? Another Murdoch rag.

The Times, dismissed on the basis of a crude ad hominem. You're really on fire here.

 

[Rolfe]

BULL! RIght out of your ass.

Right out of an analysis of the imprisoned population in England and Wales, compared to the census results for the same country. With similar results produced by similar analyses of two other jurisdictions. Sources referenced multiple times in this thread. (Five times greater a threat compared to other men, and over FIVE HUNDRED TIMES GREATER compared to women.)

Meanwhile, what about the source for your own competing claim?