Thermal
August Member
That's a mighty subjective barometer. Is that typically how public policy is codified? "Y'all just wing it based on your Butch Paper Bag Test"? What could go wrong?
Transwomen are not Women - Part 15
- Thread starter d4m10n
- Start date
Matthew Best
Penultimate Amazing
Maybe I'm being silly and it's staring me in the face, but can you quickly explain how trans-women being in male prisons puts prison guards in danger?
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
Our culture embraces it all even if you personally dismiss it as sexist nonsense.
I bet when you go shopping with the women in your life and whey want to go to the woman's department or the woman's clothing store, you don't tell them it's sexist nonsense and refuse to go with them.
Not sure what you're on about, but whatever.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
It goes back to
Which led into a back and forth where you said you don't base how you interact with people based on their genitals (implying their body type actually), but on how they present. Pixel42 responded by saying that if society were to allow people to dress and adorn themselves however they please, without any sex-based hang-ups about it, then your approach would be meaningless. You then responded :
You described your interaction based on personality traits and behavioral attributes that you associate with each sex, and you insisted that their actual biological sex isn't relevant. I challenges that by pointing out that if you met an obviously physically male person who exhibited the behavioral characteristics you describe, you wouldn't actually perceive them as being female, you'd still see them as male albeit perhaps an effeminate male. Your response to that was:
And that brings us back to the most recent couple of interactions, so hopefully that synopsis is sufficient.
The overarching point I'm trying to make here is that with a very, very few exceptions*, I don't think you actually think of transwomen as being women - you think of them as men who wish they were women, and you're willing to treat them the way you treat women out of courtesy. It's politeness from you, it's not actually perception.
*The exceptions are few, because it's pretty much limited to the Blair Whites of the world - the few naturally small-statured males who have had a LOT of cosmetic procedures done that allow them to effectively mimic the physical indicators of female humans. And there are some out there, no dispute. But they're not actually the majority of people who currently claim to be transgender, and they're not actually the ones who are vocal about demanding access to female spaces. The reality is that if they successfully pass, then females don't clock them as males, and they get away with it. We might not wish that to be the case, but it's the reality. If they can get away with it by mimicking the actual facial and body-shape and gait and vocal and behavioral traits that are fairly common to females, then they pass. And just in case there's any lack of clarity here, passing ceases the moment we see a penis. If Blair White whipped out a dick, they would no longer pass.
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
She said it starts fights and the guards get hurt breaking up the fights.
Thermal
August Member
I'm sure they do. But their argumentation goes rather radically beyond that self defensive goal, and is blatantly demonizing whole swaths of the trans population.
Want
me to pull a few choice quotes? Rolfe alone has a rather impressive portfolio of mind numbingly stupid twitterer posts to choose from.
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
Okay, but is that really a denial?
You said "[t]hey have zero obligation to play dress up for you" and "[t]heir looks, and if they meet whatever standard you are setting, is not on my radar" when I was asking about access to female spaces, and then you framed this as a matter of rights.
True or false:
Males who look just like everyday cisgender males ought to have a right to access female spaces so long as they think of themselves as women.
(Not asking whether it's a moral right or a legal right, at the moment.)
For the record, I'd go with FALSE.
Last edited:
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Something to consider...Betting window is open.
Eta: 5 seconds on Google and I've got 271 murdered, not just assaulted. I can probably do much better with better quality stats if given incentive. What's your bet?
Violence against transgender people in the United States - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Still feeling confident Rolfey? Here's a stat on violence against dem.pervs in your own UK(linked downthread):
"Hate crimes against transgender people in England, Scotland and Wales, as recorded by police, increased 81% from the 2016–17 fiscal year (1,073 crimes) to the 2018–19 fiscal year (1,944 crimes)"
From your link:
Contrast that with:
Violence against women in the United States - Wikipedia
So violence against transgender people includes "emotional violence", but violence against females does not.
In addition, there's this bit that I personally think is rather an important element of this discussion:
And that brings us back around to noting that concerted effort to protect a small subset of males from being subjected to danger and discomfort from males... by shifting even more violence and sexual boundary violations onto females.
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
Pretty much.
The same standard should be used on cis-women. The ones who could pass as trans should be shown the door regardless of what's between their legs.
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
Calculated to make trans-people feel uncomfortable in public.
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
It's not my role to tell females what to do with female spaces, obviously, but I'd suggest that it's a decent standard and even a traditional one which was in operation for decades before we (Americans) tried to codify these matters in state and local laws.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
This isn't exactly true. At a minimum, you're missing some nuance.
There are two possible explanations (and variations between them). One is that males who identify as transgender in their daily lives are more likely to be sexual offenders than males who do not. The other is that sexual offenders are more likely to claim to be transgender in hopes that it will gain them different treatment in prison. Take your pick of which you think makes a better argument for why males who claim to be transgender ought to be housed in female prisons. Personally, I'm inclined to say that either of those explanations is a really good reason to exclude males of any type from female prisons, regardless of whether they say magic words or not.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Technically, Thermal has said that single-sex spaces should remain single-sex.
On the other hand, Thermal has put a lot of effort into stridently defending transgender identified males as being women just like any other woman.
I can't reconcile those two positions, and I observe that many other posters can't either. It's really hard to hold onto single-sex being retained when the definition of sex keeps getting blurred by gender identity.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Why do you think this matters? Generally speaking, females don't want to have to see ANY penises in our showers and changing rooms - why do you think someone being "lowkey" about showing their dick is better?
Thermal
August Member
It is sufficient to establish that you made it the ◊◊◊◊ up. You had a goddamned Ouija board out or tarot cards or something, divining messages from the spirits about what I really meant when I typed those words.
And it's not to bust your chops specifically; 90% of the argumentation here is at that level. The only difference is that you are honest and didn't change the subject when confronted directly, and I thank you for that. Your cohorts, however, are enough to piss off the Pope.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Dude, this is why you're getting the responses you keep getting. You seem to be either forgetting or disregarding the fact that the people who are made uncomfortable are almost entirely females. You're essentially arguing, as a male, that you don't give a ◊◊◊◊ if females are made uncomfortable by males giving males the right to invade spaces where females are naked or vulnerable.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Not a single ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ one of the females in this thread falls into your careless and insulting description.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Wi Spa controversy - Wikipedia
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
The women in this thread strongly oppose that, but the women I meet out and about don't.
Do you think majority rules? Or do we need a significant portion of women to agree with that?
As a man I understand if you don't feel it's your role to tell women what to do in women's spaces, so feel free to ask your wife.
Last edited:
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
There are things happening that you probably don't see, Thermal. Like... what percentage of females that used to use the showers at their local gym no longer do? What portion of female middle and high schoolers avoid drinking liquids during the day so they don't have to use the bathroom? How many females have ended up self-excluding from full participation in society? How many have altered their behavior so that they're never alone in a bathroom or changing room or shower or locker room, just to be safe?
And how many of them just won't talk about it, or report it, or make any noise at all specifically because your state is so clearly trans-friendly, and they're pretty sure they'll get harassed and potentially censored or hounded out of a job if they spoke up?