Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Rolfe]

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

Many many more women are being made unhappy than there are trans identifying men at even the most generous estimates.

 

[Clutch Cargo]

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?

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!

That's right. If you're in a stall who is going to see you with your britches down? I guess Americans imagine a basketball court with nude people running around and jumping up and down in veiw of everyone else.

 

[Mycroft]

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

I feel I don't need to run someone else's errand to prove I was wrong about something that wasn't important to me or my point.

Is that unreasonable? I don't think so.

I think if someone else wants to prove me wrong, they can go bring the evidence themselves and not hint at where I might find it.

Is that unreasonable? I don't think so.

So yeah, someone who wants to prove me wrong has the responsibility of presenting the evidence themselves and not sending me on an errand to find it myself.

 

[Aber]

Aw, that's so disappointing!

So disappointing in fact, if you were hoping I would be disappointed, I'm even more disappointed than that!

I'm melting, melting...

You lied about the evidence; please do better.

 

[smartcooky]

I feel I don't need to run someone else's errand to prove I was wrong about something that wasn't important to me or my point.

Is that unreasonable? I don't think so.

I think if someone else wants to prove me wrong, they can go bring the evidence themselves and not hint at where I might find it.

Is that unreasonable? I don't think so.

So yeah, someone who wants to prove me wrong has the responsibility of presenting the evidence themselves and not sending me on an errand to find it myself.

Aber summarizes my position nicely

You lied about the evidence; please do better.

 

[dann]

All-user gender-neutral bathrooms causing controversy in Portland schools (KGW News on YouTube, Feb 7, 2020 - 2:48 min.)
Some grandparents had worried about bullying, sex harassment, and drugs but Campbell says these bathrooms are actually easier to supervise and the new design hasn't led to more trouble.

Looks very ... Scandinavian!

 

[d4m10n]

I often change my mind after being shown new evidence.

Does linking to the relevant Wikipedia page count as "being shown new evidence" or do I have to paste it all in here?

I think if someone else wants to prove me wrong, they can go bring the evidence themselves and not hint at where I might find it.

I don't want to "prove you wrong," I want you to get up to speed on the basic facts of the case so as to avoid wasting everyone's time with bogus claims which we already covered in these threads several years ago, back when @LondonJohn was still participating.

 

[Lithrael]

(...) I don’t know that it would feel wrong to me (...) I don’t know that it would cause undue feelings of distress. (...)
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.

Same here. But to be fair it's not the only commonly described experience I cannot vibe with at all, so I decided to take most people at their word on that kind of thing. It does make me wonder about dysphoria as a prerequisite for being trans though, cause if I woke up with a guy's body I would definitely be the incorrect sex, but I am pretty sure nobody (besides my partner) would be upset.

Also agreed on gender, it feels like religion to me. And as far as how I vs many other people relate to religion, see point 1.

I guess I'm culturally, but not a practicing, woman.

 

[d4m10n]

...if I woke up with a guy's body I would definitely be the incorrect sex, but I am pretty sure nobody (besides my partner) would be upset.

If that magically happened, which bathroom would you use?

 

[smartcooky]

Duplicate

 

[smartcooky]

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?

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.

Here's the thing you are missing.

Transgender activists DO NOT want unisex toilets, or "open" sport leagues. They are opposed to these things, and have actually stated as much. They WANT sex-segregated toilets because so that they can wave their lady dicks in the faces of females who object to their presence; they WANT sex-segregated sports leagues to that they can win against females and shove that fact in their faces

 

[varwoche]

You're not the only one to have assumed that. It seems this fancy that if I don't accept one extreme then I must adopt the other is common.

I shared my operative assumption hoping you'd share your operative definition. But you've opted not to.

Participating in this thread tends to be frustrating.

 

[Lithrael]

If that magically happened, which bathroom would you use?

Hm, well, I wouldn't feel like getting all new clothes, I'm 5'2 and I've been passing ok as my nominal gender up to that point so probably the ladies' room, unless I forgot to shave, cause that 'cultural gender' thing for me means a woman is only allowed facial hair if it's wispy ladybeard or hirsutism.

 

[dann]

Here's the thing you are missing.

Transgender activists DO NOT want unisex toilets, or "open" sport leagues. They are opposed to these things, and have actually stated as much. They WANT sex-segregated toilets because so that they can wave their lady dicks in the faces of females who object to their presence; they WANT sex-segregated sports leagues to that they can win against females and shove that fact in their faces

I can see that you are now speaking on THEIR behalf. It requires an awful lot of EMPATHY from you to be able to do so.
Or maybe the OPPOSITE of empathy ...

I have seen no objections to unisex toilets in Denmark from transgender activists, but I haven't seen much of anything from Danish transgender activists. I'll see if I can find anything.

 

[Thermal]

Here's the thing you are missing.

Transgender activists DO NOT want unisex toilets, or "open" sport leagues. They are opposed to these things, and have actually stated as much. They WANT sex-segregated toilets because so that they can wave their lady dicks in the faces of females who object to their presence; they WANT sex-segregated sports leagues to that they can win against females and shove that fact in their faces

Here's the thing YOU are missing:

We are all forum members discussing an interesting issue. We are not representative of the extreme views, that you dishonestly keep insisting we are. We are just kicking the ideas around, among a group of self proclaimed skeptics. You and Rolfe and the others who clutch pearls over and over reacting to strawman misrepresentations are exactly why no progress is made.

 

[Thermal]

Everyone is "they/them" on ISF. I will not use sexed pronouns for anyone here.

I know. I was kidding.

 

[theprestige]

Here's the thing YOU are missing:

We are all forum members discussing an interesting issue. We are not representative of the extreme views, that you dishonestly keep insisting we are. We are just kicking the ideas around, among a group of self proclaimed skeptics. You and Rolfe and the others who clutch pearls over and over reacting to strawman misrepresentations are exactly why no progress is made.

We're discussing trans rights in public policy. The discussion necessarily centers around the rights being demanded, not the reasonable accommodations society has already settled on.

You're kicking around every idea except the ones that actually matter:

What to do about the anti-social demands for male entitlement to override sex segregation whenever they want; and

What to do about the anti-science demands for irreversible trans-affirming medicine for minor children.

 

[Rolfe]

Here's the thing you are missing.

Transgender activists DO NOT want unisex toilets, or "open" sport leagues. They are opposed to these things, and have actually stated as much. They WANT sex-segregated toilets because so that they can wave their lady dicks in the faces of females who object to their presence; they WANT sex-segregated sports leagues to that they can win against females and shove that fact in their faces

I don't know how many times this is now that someone has parachuted into the thread to tell everyone that investing millions in ripping out existing facilities and rebuilding them into mixed-sex facilities is the answer to everything. And I don't know how many times it has been explained that this would result in women losing their communal single-sex facilities, which they value. Plus explanations of what we use these facilities for and why we value them. Plus statistics about the increase in assaults where mixed-sex facilities have been installed. Plus these millions that would need to be invested.

Sigh.

 

[d4m10n]

Hm, well, I wouldn't feel like getting all new clothes, I'm 5'2 and I've been passing ok as my nominal gender up to that point

Surely the transformation would've added at least a couple inches...

 

[Thermal]

You want everybody to be happy. But if any woman indicates that she isn't at all happy with the unilateral change in the fundamental rules of society that has been imposed on her, your only retort is, suck it up bigot. There are certainly a lot more women who are extremely unhappy about men intruding into their single-sex spaces than there are men who actually want to do this, so if it's the happiness of the greatest number you're aiming for, you seem to be aiming in the wrong direction.

I am not, and have said so. Repeatedly. What I am trying to do is balance law with practicality. As I said... repeatedly... I want women to have safe spaces for their modesty, comfort, and privacy. But our courts have said with one voice that it violates our laws. So I am looking for a workaround. It doesn't take much mental horsepower to understand that.

Until about five minutes ago, women's single-sex spaces excluded males. That was the entire point and it was regarded as entirely reasonable, indeed proper.

That's exactly what segregationists used to say when justifying white-only spaces. Not your best argument.

If the occasional male tried it on, women might tacitly let it pass, but they had the ability to protest and have him removed if they didn't. A change was made without consulting women.

Your solution to women's happiness appears to be that women should give up what they had and self-exclude. Why shouldn't the men self-exclude, I ask?

Laws and civil rights principles. We have them. And not to keep sledgehammering this over your head, but I am not proposing a solution. I am still looking for the ideal that works better than the legally required inevitability.

In large places, a gender neutral area combined with individual privacy areas seems doable, much like the Portland school setup described above. But some women have pointed out that getting a little help from other women is a real thing in women's rest rooms. I asked my wife about that, and she concurred- especially when being 'dressed up', she might ask for help with zippers breaking and stuff, which as a guy, we don't deal with, so we overlook that sometimes.

And admittedly, as a guy, a lot of this stuff slips my mind. We don't generally get naked with the guys. We go into a rest room, do our business, wash out hands, and leave. It's a gender neutral experience, but we might at most find it a little foreign to see someone we are not familiar with in the rest room. I've had women and trans people in rest rooms with me, and.. it just didn't register as much. Little odd, but a shoulder shrug, mostly.

So again, mostly for the benefit of you and cooky: I'm like 90% with you, but trying to torque out that last 10% fairly and staying within our discrimination laws. It's a tough needle to thread. I think the key is to make a hard line distinction between sex and gender. If they are the same, all is lost. Discriminating against gender is the same as discriminating against sex, and that's a no-go. If we legally acknowledge the difference, we have a loophole to maintain practical sex segregation. That keeps Lia Thomas as an average male swimmer, not a record holding female swimmer, and keeps women-only spaces sex segregated.

If you and the cooky and others don't get it this time, and continue with your dishonest reframing of my position, I give up with you. There's no intelligent wiggle room for you to claim you misunderstand.

You asked earlier what the harm was that you weren't seeing, in letting males into formerly female spaces. I pointed out that self-exclusion was a huge harm, that women were not able to make use of the facilities that had previously been theirs, because they didn't want to be confronted by a cosplaying man. You seemed not to understand, but now we see that you do understand. It's the outcome you want.

Yet again, no. I think the resolution is going to be in there somewhere, but I am confident a resolution can be found that works.

One thing that might work is a female only space, and a gender neutral in place of a dedicated men's, because the men don't really care if a woman or transwoman or transman is in the restroom. But females do, just as a practical concern. Then we have to make that 'non-discriminatory', which is why we need to sharpen that sex/gender line.