Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Interested to see what you could find. When we present actual incidents we're accused of cherry-picking. Then Thermal just blithely assumes that trans identifying men are being "habitually harassed and beaten" in men's bathrooms without a shred of evidence to support this, and we're just supposed to accept this.
 
Mycroft said:
According to your data, on the single issue of letting a person use the bathroom that matches their gender identity, the public in general favors my point of view 53% with 23% who are unsure, to 31% who opposes,
Click to expand...
Are you sure about that?

Purple = support; Red = oppose

YouGov.PNGYougov2.PNG
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
Your question keeps asking about rights, which are not determined, and at this time don't interest me much. To keep it mo meaningless, you ask not to make a distinction between moral and legal rights. So nah, it wouldn't be helpful at all to reanswer.
Click to expand...
We're done here; it is not remotely collegial for you to pose questions to me if you refuse to answer mine.
 
Rolfe said:
Thermal just blithely assumes that trans identifying men are being "habitually harassed and beaten" in men's bathrooms without a shred of evidence to support this, and we're just supposed to accept this.
Click to expand...
In the past, you've repeatedly hypothesized an attack scenario by which a male pushes a female into a single-use cubicle (either WC or changing room) and then locks her in there with him, without a shred of evidence to suggest that this scenario ever actually happens.

I think it's a relatively plausible hypothesis, but my point is that sometimes people make up scenarios about what might happen without citing to evidence that they ever do.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
Interested to see what you could find. When we present actual incidents we're accused of cherry-picking. Then Thermal just blithely assumes that trans identifying men are being "habitually harassed and beaten" in men's bathrooms without a shred of evidence to support this, and we're just supposed to accept this.
Click to expand...
Here's some evidence for you. It comes from a journalistic source called Reuters, which is well respected. You may not recognize it, because it is not some random twitrer twat that you seem to take as your primary media.


In the survey of over 27,000 trans people in the US, about 2% or 540 reported being physically or sexually assaulted in a bathroom over their gender, just in the last year of the survey. Extrapolating that to the US transgender population of 1.6 million, that's about 32,000 assaults. Keep in mind, this doesn't even factor in verbal harassment, which 12% experienced, and another 9% who were denied access to a rest room. All in the previous year.

Let me guess: all dem trannys is liars?
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
We're done here; it is not remotely collegial for you to pose questions to me if you refuse to answer mine.
Click to expand...
If you will only have a discussion if it follows your structuring, that's probably for the best.

Keeping in mind, your question, by your own parameters, is nonsensical.

ETA: but with the caveat that you structured the question as meaningless, I'd say 'false'. I'm not, as I said, interested in declaring rights, so much as sussing out what exactly those rights should be first.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
Are the people here who equate being trans to a mental disease in favor of conversion therapy to cure trans-people?
Click to expand...

No amount of transition releaves the anxiety and distress that trans people have. That suggests it is in fact an illness.
 
Mycroft said:
Are the people here who equate being trans to a mental disease in favor of conversion therapy to cure trans-people?
Click to expand...
What's with the non-sequitur? Are you in favor of conversion therapy for schizophrenia or factitious disorder?

What I am in favor of for prepubescent children is what's called "watchful waiting". There's good evidence that a lot of what appears to be trans inclination in children resolves itself as they pass through puberty. Conversely, there's not really any good evidence that irreversible trans-affirming treatment of prepubescent children is ever warranted.

As for adults... Some percentage of trans-identifying adults do de-transition, and are happier for it. I don't think this means we should go full HAM on conversion therapy for all trans-identifying individuals. But I do think it means they should be given the option of de-transition as a possible outcome of examining their condition over time.

In that way, "being trans" is much luckier than being schizophrenic. Trans identity in children often turns out to be a misdiagnosis or a passing phase. Trans identity in adults appears to be a reversible condition in at least some cases. Are you *not* in favor of keeping reversal on the table, when considering how to proceed with a trans diagnosis?
 
Thermal said:
I'm not, as I said, interested in declaring rights, so much as sussing out what exactly those rights should be first.
Click to expand...
It might actually help to suss out "what exactly those rights should be" if you'd deign to answer my question at #4,567.

Your call though. Until then, good day!
 
varwoche said:
What was the operative definition of transwoman? Someone who has physically transitioned? Or anyone who self-declares?

Do you distinguish?
Do you consider anyone who self-declares as a woman?
Click to expand...
@Mycroft This went unanswered. Maybe that was due to the many pages of activity. I assume the answer to the highlighted question is yes.

This raises the amusing(?) scenario of people who vacillate. He was a man last month, she became a woman for a couple weeks, but now they're unsure.
 
d4m10n said:
It might actually help to suss out "what exactly those rights should be" if you'd deign to answer my question at #4,567.

Your call though. Until then, good day!
Click to expand...
I literally just did, in the post you quoted. You may have not noticed while you were taking the extra time to literally snip it out.
 
Thermal said:
...See, you keep forgetting that we think of them as women, not men. You are being hateful to women, from our POV.
Click to expand...
Wait a sec. I'm surprised to see you advocate self ID. Is this specific to public toilet access (I get that) or do you buy into self ID more generally (which I think is absurd).
 
Thermal said:
The opposite, actually. Men are wondering why you are so hateful and ostracizing against one of your own, and why you are so happy to discriminate against them.

See, you keep forgetting that we think of them as women, not men. You are being hateful to women, from our POV.
Click to expand...
When you say "women", are you referring to gender or sex?
 
Thermal said:
Your question keeps asking about rights, which are not determined, and at this time don't interest me much. To keep it mo meaningless, you ask not to make a distinction between moral and legal rights. So nah, it wouldn't be helpful at all to reanswer.


You sure? Can I be nude in my home, alone, on my private property? I think we could agree on that.

Now can I pull the window blinds open and throw the lights on at night in front of a busy sidewalk?
Click to expand...
The law is pretty well settled on the public aspect of displays to the public from private property.

You'd have been much better off using a sexual harassment on private property scenario, than a public display from private property scenario.

Of course, that scenario brings us squarely back to the matter at hand: Is it sexual harassment when a man presents his genitals to a woman who runs a women-only beautician service out of her home?
 
varwoche said:
Wait a sec. I'm surprised to see you advocate self ID. Is this specific to public toilet access (I get that) or do you buy into self ID more generally (which I think is absurd).
Click to expand...
How I personally think of someone is entirely independent of how I would expect them to be treated in and by the wider culture, if that makes it clearer.
 
theprestige said:
The law is pretty well settled on the public aspect of displays to the public from private property.
Click to expand...
That was the point. d4m1on thought you could not be charged with indecent exposure if you had a right to be naked where you were. I pointed out he knew damn right well that was well established to not be the case.
theprestige said:
You'd have been much better off using a sexual harassment on private property scenario, than a public display from private property scenario.

Of course, that scenario brings us squarely back to the matter at hand: Is it sexual harassment when a man presents his genitals to a woman who runs a women-only beautician service out of her home?
Click to expand...
I think it is. It's one of those 'your right to punch stops at my nose' kind of things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom