Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Clutch Cargo]

"Transwomen are not Women"​

Still not considered women? Perhaps it is we (heterosexual and normal people) who ought to be forcibly transitioned. Maybe then we'll understand?

 

[Mycroft]

Maybe you should get up to speed on the Wi Spa controversy^WP over at Wikipedia?

Or you can just tell me what you found there? I'm not running errands for you.

 

[Hercules56]

So is conversion therapy a go or no?

That's like asking should we use conversion therapy against people who are bipolar. Or people who are schizophrenic.

No we should simply use the best medicine we can find to help them with their condition.

If somebody believed they were a dog in the body of a human, would we allow them to surgically attach a tail?? And then allow them to run around the dog park??

 

[Thermal]

I know it's challenging to keep it straight, and the discussion lends itself to some contradictory positions, but Thermal has been clear that support sex-separated intimate spaces.

And I do, mostly as a matter of modesty, comfort and privacy for women.

The problem, as I'm seeing it, is that it is legally unsustainable. If gender and sex are interchangable, as some insist, then they already lost. We cant discriminate based on gender, and if gender and sex are interchangable, then you cant discriminate based on sex. Somethings gotta give. That's why I favor the hard line distinction between the two; it gives us room to play around, and keep Lia Thomas out of the girls showers.

 

[Mycroft]

I'm not seeing it. We get this anguished "But I only want everybody to be happy," but when it inevitably turns out that giving the trans lobby what it wants makes women unhappy, somehow that isn't important. It's actually only trans-identifying men he wants to ensure are happy.

Makes some women unhappy. Not every woman agrees with you.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

I'm not seeing it. We get this anguished "But I only want everybody to be happy," but when it inevitably turns out that giving the trans lobby what it wants makes women unhappy, somehow that isn't important. It's actually only trans-identifying men he wants to ensure are happy.

Exactly.

 

[Trausti]

Makes some women unhappy. Not every woman agrees with you.

LOL. Not every women is against the burka!

 

[Mycroft]

I guarantee that penises in the female-only section of the spa would NOT go unnoticed.

Do you believe that females should be required by law to share intimate spaces with males against their will?
Do you believe that males should have the protected right to enter spaces where females are naked or vulnerable, over the objections of the females in those spaces?

Gawd, I still don't agree transwomen are males, so you're framing the question incorrectly. As I told you earlier, I don't accept your paradigm.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

LOL. Not every women is against the burka!

Wearing it will save them from a beating and it is very effective in hiding the beating they've already had. When I am in Arab countries I wear a keffiyeh if I want to be left alone. The burka is worn when their husbands want their wives to be left alone.

 

[bruto]

Wearing it will save them from a beating and it is very effective in hiding the beating they've already had. When I am in Arab countries I wear a keffiyeh if I want to be left alone. The burka is worn
when their husbands want their wives to be left alone.

The highlighted statement above does not in any way indicate what the woman's feeling or inclination is. It implies the supremacy of the husband's decision, and at least implies that the decision to wear the burka would prevail whatever she wishes. That is true even if it is also true that the wife prefers the burka and welcomes the decision.

 

[d4m10n]

Or you can just tell me what you found there? I'm not running errands for you.

You came up with the (bogus) hoax claims and I'm just trying to politely spare you the sort of embarrassment which naturally follows from being years behind in the middle of an ongoing discussion.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

LOL.
Not every women is against the burka!

The highlighted statement above does not in any way indicate what the woman's feeling or inclination is. It merely implies that wearing it avoids the consequences of not wearing it.

 

[bruto]

The highlighted statement above does not in any way indicate what the woman's feeling or inclination is. It merely implies that wearing it avoids the consequences of not wearing it.

Indeed, which is why I did not mention it. Culture and relationships and relative merits cannot always be known, but at least some women have expressed their support of the burka, and other traditional wear, quite enough to make Trausti's statement uncontroversial, because whatever the motivation and whatever one might think of it, it is the choice of some women. They may imagine a world in which such measures are unnecessary, but when one says they are not against it, their acceptance of the custom is willing.

I cited your response, which is different. As stated, you attribute not only the presumed reason for the custom, but the choice itself, to the husband. You may not consider that an important difference, but some would.

 

[Mycroft]

No. Absolutely not. You lie. You lie. You lie.

Don’t throw a tantrum, you’re not two. If you didn’t communicate your ideas clearly that’s on you. Use your words.

It seemed to me you were declaring some common gender indicators as “sexist nonsense”. If that wasn’t your intent, then you need to make your intent clear.

I dismiss women's clothing as a definition of womanhood, as sexist nonsense.

And yet it works, mostly.

You're smart enough to have grasped this. You're wise enough to understand how evil it is, to call a woman a man, if she puts on trousers, or to call a man a woman if he wears his hair long.

Evil? Hyperbole much? Do you hear yourself?

And yet you still put forward stereotypical attire as the hallmark of gender identity.

Stereotypical of what?

Trans rights activism depends heavily on lies perpetuated by useful idiots against their better judgement. I just didn't expect to see you on that side of the line. What happened to your better judgement?

What happened to yours?

 

[Clutch Cargo]

Indeed, which is why I did not mention it. Culture and relationships and relative merits cannot always be known, but at least some women have expressed their support of the burka, and other traditional wear, quite enough to make Trausti's statement uncontroversial, because whatever the motivation and whatever one might think of it, it is the choice of some women. They may imagine a world in which such measures are unnecessary, but when one says they are not against it, their acceptance of the custom is willing.

I cited your response, which is different. As stated, you attribute not only the presumed reason for the custom, but the choice itself, to the husband. You may not consider that an important difference, but some would.

I do not agree with you. A bank robber might not be intent on murder but put into certain circumstances he might aim at someone and pull the trigger. It does not in any way indicate what the robber's feeling or inclination was. That decision might have been made in an "either him or me" scenario. The consequences of a married woman not wearing a burka in a fundamentalist setting are obvious.

 

[Mycroft]

You came up with the (bogus) hoax claims and I'm just trying to politely spare you the sort of embarrassment which naturally follows from being years behind in the middle of an ongoing discussion.

No, feel free to embarrass me. Or try to, I don't generally think being shown new evidence in a discussion is embarrassing. Not even when it directly contradicts my main point, and certainly not if it contradicts my wishy-washy "may be" in this case.

I often change my mind after being shown new evidence. I think everyone should and if we were to take the embarrassment away, maybe these discussions would be a bit less ugly.

 

[Horhang]

Exactly like if I felt the way I do right now, and I looked down and saw a woman's body. It would be intuitively jarring. That's why I relate to a trans person more easily than, say, a gay person. I can't 'picture' being gay, because a man is no more sexually arousing to me than a goat. But I can picture being out of synch with that ever-so-ambiguous self-ID.

Here is where this breaks down for me. If I suddenly had a female body I don’t know that it would feel wrong to me except for the fact that I have had a male body my entire life and something was suddenly different. Even so I don’t know that it would cause undue feelings of distress. Wow things have changed but oh my god feelings of distress? I don’t know.
This is part of why I simply reject gender as a real thing. It can’t be defined. When definitions are attempted they are too malleable.

 

[smartcooky]

Or you can just tell me what you found there? I'm not running errands for you.

That's almost a MAGA... "I don't need no stinkin' education" argument.

 

[smartcooky]

Makes some women unhappy. Not every woman agrees with you.

I've never yet met a woman who would gleefully accept the appearance of a fully intact, male, random stranger in a private safe space, and in my nearly 70 years on the planet, if there were so many of these women around, you would think I would at least have met some of them.

Maybe I'm just lucky!?

 

[dann]

Yes, yes, unisex bathrooms in one Scandinavian nightclub has totally solved the issue of trans rights to override sex segregation in sports and prisons whenever they want. /s
Pull the other one. It's got twigs and berries on.

My post was a reply to Emily's Cat's "On the topic of making policies that allow transgender people to use bathrooms that match their gender identity" in post 4,741.

Yes, yes, but that is still just the one example! What about the other thousands of public toilets in the Scandinavian countries and the rest of the world?

Besvarelse vedrørende omdannelse af alle toiletter i Københavns Kommune til kønsneutrale toiletter (Municipality of Copenhagen, Feb 27, 2024)
Spørgsmål
Hvad ville det koste at omdanne alle toiletter i Københavns Kommune til kønsneutrale toiletter?
Svar
Teknik- og Miljøforvaltningen har fokus på at tilgodese alle borgeres behov uanset alder, køn og funktionsevne. Når forvaltningen etablerer nye toiletter, er det med henblik på tilgængelighed og inklusion for alle borgere. Nye toiletter etableres som udgangspunkt som unisextoiletter.
Teknik- og Miljøforvaltningen drifter aktuelt 174 offentlige toiletter fordelt over hele byen. Af de 174 toiletter er 111 unisextoiletter, hvoraf 54 stk. er unisexhandicaptoiletter. De resterende 63 toiletter er fritstående pissoirs (9 stk.) eller toiletter i ældre bygninger, som har adskilt dame- og herreafdelinger, hvor nogle har urinaler.

Answer to a question about making all public toilets in the Municipality of Copenhagen gender-neutral
Question
What would it cost to turn all toilets in the Municipality of Copenhagen into gender-neutral toilets?
Answer
The Technical and Environmental Administration focuses on accommodating the needs of all citizens regardless of their age, gender and functional ability. When the administration introduces new toilets, it is in order to make them accessible and inclusive to all citizens. As the main rule, new toilets will be unisex toilets.
The Technical and Environmental Administration currently operates 174 public toilets throughout the city. Of the 174 toilets, 111 are unisex toilets, of which 54 are unisex disabled toilets*. The remaining 63 toilets are free-standing urinals (9) or toilets in older buildings that have separate women's and men's sections, some of which have urinals.

* A unisex disabled toilet is a toilet that can be accessed by a disabled person in a wheelchair. We had one of those at the highschool that I worked at most recently. I never saw a disabled person use it, i.e. enter or leave it. To my knowledge, it was only ever used by the rest of the staff when the other toilets were occupied.
- - -

'Yes, yes, but that's just the one capital in one Northern European region ... '

You see, it's a 'problem' that's pretty easy to solve if your main purpose hadn't been to imagine ways to make it impossible for one group of people to use a public bathroom and get them arrested whenever they do. The bigoted American way of looking at this doesn't try to find solution to a problem that is not any more of a problem than it was then the problem of racially segregated toilets was solved. The bigots still found the 'unirace' solution preposterous and they will continue to do so with the unisex solution.
By the way, there was a whole thread about this one issue where I presented more examples of primarily Danish solutions and the feminists who advocated them, so please stop the idiotic but-that-is-just-one-example argument.


If it had been the RNC, I bet the whole convention would have had just one theme.

This is a problem created by people who want the problem to remain unsolved even when technical solutions are so bloody easy to come by.
As for prisons and sports, there are also solutions if you are seriously interested in solutions. As for the latter, sports, I have already recommended John Oliver's most recent edition of Last Week Tonight:
Trans Athletes: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (on YouTube, April 7, 2025 - 42:20 min.)
Trump’s Tariffs & Trans Athletes: 4/6/25: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (on YouTube, April 7, 2025 - 48:10 min.)
I think the one without Trump's tariffs can be accessed in most countries. It's bound to enrage any and all bigots. Already did!