Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Regarding naked women public places, which seems to be the bulk of the threat of perving concerns: if a place of public accommodation is big enough for multiple showers and lockers and stuff, would it be conceptually simple to require stalls to be large enough to actually get changed in? They apparently have the available real estate. Most locker/changing areas seem overbuilt anyway, with lots of unused space. Would that be practical to keep bare asses out of common view?
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
I don't think most people would classify the two males who tried to rape me as the most violent of criminals. They were arguably less violent overall than many other non-rapey males that I know.

But both of them were opportunistic, and one of them argued that they didn't do anything wrong by pinning me down in their dorm room when we were supposed to be working on a class project and trying to force their hands into my pants and prevent me from getting up until I hit them in the throat. The other merely thought I was passed out drunk (I was just tired at a friend's party) and figured it would be a great time to go explore the back door without having to bother to ask first.
Click to expand...
Jesus ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ Christ, EC. One pinning you down and you had to punch him in the throat to make him get off you, and the other trying to sodimize you when he thought you were unconscious? Yes, they were very violent. Both of them. Definitionally. Horrifically so.
 
Thermal said:
Regarding naked women public places, which seems to be the bulk of the threat of perving concerns: if a place of public accommodation is big enough for multiple showers and lockers and stuff, would it be conceptually simple to require stalls to be large enough to actually get changed in? They apparently have the available real estate. Most locker/changing areas seem overbuilt anyway, with lots of unused space. Would that be practical to keep bare asses out of common view?
Click to expand...
Hasn't that already been tried in the UK?

www.thetimes.com

Unisex changing rooms put women in danger

Unisex changing rooms are more dangerous for women and girls than single-sex facilities, research by The Sunday Times shows. Almost 90% of reported sexual assaults, harassment and voyeurism in swimming pool and sports-centre changing rooms happen in unisex facilities, which make up less than half
www.thetimes.com www.thetimes.com
 
d4m10n said:
Hasn't that already been tried in the UK?

www.thetimes.com

Unisex changing rooms put women in danger

Unisex changing rooms are more dangerous for women and girls than single-sex facilities, research by The Sunday Times shows. Almost 90% of reported sexual assaults, harassment and voyeurism in swimming pool and sports-centre changing rooms happen in unisex facilities, which make up less than half
www.thetimes.com www.thetimes.com
Click to expand...
No. I mean keep single sex, but with adequately sized privacy stalls so there is no nudity exposure. That's not unisex.
 
Thermal said:
Regarding naked women public places, which seems to be the bulk of the threat of perving concerns: if a place of public accommodation is big enough for multiple showers and lockers and stuff, would it be conceptually simple to require stalls to be large enough to actually get changed in? They apparently have the available real estate. Most locker/changing areas seem overbuilt anyway, with lots of unused space. Would that be practical to keep bare asses out of common view?
Click to expand...
At some point, don't you just sort of step back and say "this isn't a reasonable accommodation"?

I mean, your talking about placing a material financial burden on every company that has changing rooms or showers in order to make everyone change inside the showers, all so that some very few males won't feel "left out" of the female-only spaces? And that still doesn't address the fact that females don't want males in those spaces even if there's enough room to change inside the showers.

Seriously, how much do you think females should be expected to give up of our own privacy, dignity, and modesty in order to avoid hurting the feelings of a handful of males?
 
Thermal said:
Jesus ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ Christ, EC. One pinning you down and you had to punch him in the throat to make him get off you, and the other trying to sodimize you when he thought you were unconscious? Yes, they were very violent. Both of them. Definitionally. Horrifically so.
Click to expand...
Neither of them so much as bruised me in the process, and neither had (so far as I know) any history of violence in any other situation.

Also, just for clarity - my experiences were extremely minor compared to those of a great many females I know. Pretty much every female in my dorm in college had a similar situation of a lab/study partner trying to force themselves on them.

Not all males... but probably a lot more of them than most males assume.
 
Emily's Cat said:
At some point, don't you just sort of step back and say "this isn't a reasonable accommodation"?

I mean, your talking about placing a material financial burden on every company that has changing rooms or showers in order to make everyone change inside the showers, all so that some very few males won't feel "left out" of the female-only spaces? And that still doesn't address the fact that females don't want males in those spaces even if there's enough room to change inside the showers.

Seriously, how much do you think females should be expected to give up of our own privacy, dignity, and modesty in order to avoid hurting the feelings of a handful of males?
Click to expand...
None. That's why I'm shooting for some kind of compromise that protects everyone with minimal impact.

It wasn't long ago that people could smoke on planes and in restaurants and even bars and casinos. A lot of people though that a global smoking ban would be unworkable. Yet it worked.

I'm reasoning that the pervy guys will have minimal incentive to be creepy if there's really nothing to see. A couple dividers and a handful of stainless steel screws and it might actually be enough of a damper.

And trans or not, if someone behaves creepy, they can be shown the door and banned by management. There's no "sorry we are accommodating to perverts" argument that flies. If some places do now, they need to be sued into oblivion.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
Neither of them so much as bruised me in the process, and neither had (so far as I know) any history of violence in any other situation.

Also, just for clarity - my experiences were extremely minor compared to those of a great many females I know. Pretty much every female in my dorm in college had a similar situation of a lab/study partner trying to force themselves on them.
Click to expand...
Again, Jesus ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ christ. It a guy tried to shoot or stab you, but you held them off and so they "didn't even leave a bruise", that doesn't make them less violent. It just means there is more room at the right end of the spectrum for more physical damaging acts that they were maybe too weak to stomach. They were still horrifically violent. If they did what they did to you with a child, would you be saying they are not so bad or they could have been worse?
Emily's Cat said:
Not all males... but probably a lot more of them than most males assume.
Click to expand...
So I hear, by women I know as well. I would feel awful if it was one in ten men, but I gather that even that is an unrealistically low estimate.
 
Thermal said:
Again, Jesus ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ christ. It a guy tried to shoot or stab you, but you held them off and so they "didn't even leave a bruise", that doesn't make them less violent. It just means there is more room at the right end of the spectrum for more physical damaging acts that they were maybe too weak to stomach. They were still horrifically violent. If they did what they did to you with a child, would you be saying they are not so bad or they could have been worse?
Click to expand...
Oh, no Thermal - don't get me wrong, they were both absolute pieces of ◊◊◊◊ that I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire. Absolutely detestable. I'm just drawing a distinction between "harmful and wrong" versus "violent", and I clearly draw it in a different place than you do. I'm not excusing them in any fashion, but they weren't injurious. The first was frightening, the second was honestly mostly infuriating for sheer "wtf" nature of it. Let's say... No Harm, SUPER Foul.

ETA: One of my frequently-used LetterKenny lines is "Are you hurt buddy, or are you injured"?

There's a reality here that if I step back it really bothers me: Sexual assaults of the sort I faced are common enough experiences among females that sometimes they don't even really register. I know far too many people who have experienced much, much, much worse. Thing is... if you ask females if they've been sexually assaulted, most will envision someone physically attacking them and hurting them - and a fair number will say "no". But if you get more specific, the answers change. "Have you ever had a complete stranger cop a feel in a crowded venue?" That one will get a "yes" from like 90% of females over the age of 15... and far more between 12 and 15 than seems remotely reasonable.
Thermal said:
So I hear, by women I know as well. I would feel awful if it was one in ten men, but I gather that even that is an unrealistically low estimate.
Click to expand...
I would guess that it might be as high as one in ten at any point throughout their whole life... but likely lower. But those who do commit those assaults 1) get away with them and 2) repeat them. And that's not considering voyeurism or exhibitionism, or up-skirting strangers on the bus, or any number of other things that a few males do with so much frequency that there's a very good reason we want single-sex spaces to escape the need to be constantly vigilant.
 
Courtesy of the 'Daily Fail', this is one legal case I'd like to track down.

Parents at a high school in California have claimed their daughter was told that 'transgenders have more rights than cisgenders' after she lost a spot on the varsity cross country team to a transgender transfer student.

Ryan Starling, the father of Taylor Starling who lost her place on the team, has claimed the loss has 'disrupted his entire family emotionally' and has now started legal proceedings against the school district over the controversy.

Multiple parents at Martin Luther King High School in Riverside, California, have also voiced their opposition to the decision and have claimed the athlete was allowed to compete despite missing practices for academic reasons.

Mr Starling told Fox News: The fact that the athlete was able to compete while attending less than 25 per cent of the practices is not fair. In what era, on what team, in what sport can you barely show up to practice and still compete?'
Click to expand...

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/aust...ave-more-rights-in-sport-team-row/ar-AA1x2f5T
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom