Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

d4m10n said:
It's not the sign, it's the knowledge that people (e.g. "Cubana Angel") can raise a ruckus with the facility staff and expect support when someone who looks like a man barges into one of the spaces reserved for females.

This has been explained over and over and over upthread.
Click to expand...
Do you need an in depth explanation and link to the term 'violent criminal'? You seemed to overlook that.
 
d4m10n said:
Only you can get you up to speed, and you already know how to do so.
Click to expand...

I'm good. Discussing the spa is long past, and if you feel the need to show me more information, you're welcome to do so. Either way, it's of little importance.

d4m10n said:
ETA: Am I insane or is it basic courtesy to bring at least a wiki-level familiarly with the basic facts to an ongoing discussion in a forum dedicated to people who claim to extol empiricism?
Click to expand...

In order to have an opinion on trans-rights I must have at least a wiki-level familiarity with the facts of an incident at a spa from four years ago?

Yeah, that's another paradigm I don't accept. If you want to show me some information, do it. If not, please stop wasting everyone's time.
 
d4m10n said:
Surely the transformation would've added at least a couple inches... ;)
Click to expand...
Lol! Well for the serious version, even four inches would put me at 5'6 and still just on the high side of average for a woman, and short for a man.

I guess I would have to worry more about getting caught havin a pee outdoors by anybody besides another guy. As a lady, a woman or kid spotting you back in the bushes is usually more just 'oh whoops! oh how uncouth' even though you have your whole ass out. I have to admit that's the one bit of penis envy I've actually got - not having to take your pants down for a whizz. (I've heard of workarounds for that but haven't tried any.)
 
d4m10n said:
Reported for personal attack.

Next time I misunderstand your meaning, please try a little courtesy.
Click to expand...
After a point, there is no credible room for constantly misunderstanding simple words in the English language.

If it was a legit misunderstanding, my apologies. But surely you can see the blatant ignoring of actual words going on here, page after page? No one here is so challenged by the language in other threads.
 
d4m10n said:
Do you need crime statistics on which sex is much more likely to produce violent criminals?
Click to expand...
You referred, by name, to a nonviolent incident. Now you suddenly move the goalposts to violent crime stats?

See what I mean about 'misunderstandings'?
 
Thermal said:
I have been in men's rooms my whole life, and used to frequent bars more than I should have. Each and every night, women would grow tired of waiting in a line at the ladies room, and jump into the men's. It's a pretty universal experience over here, not 'my opinion'. Guys don't care if it is neutral or men's only. It makes no difference to our usage.

If you don't like that obvious parallel drawn, mebbe you shouldn't rely on it so much? And with how blatantly insulting you are being to me (foolishly asserting that I am a men's rights advocate being a recent one), you have no moral high ground there for indignation there, ducky.

Obviously. I do.

Which is why I am trying to close that door tight, within law, practicality, and reason.

See above. That's why I think we have to reframe it a little, to acknowledge the need for female privacy (as I think EC lobbied well), but without violating our own principles and laws.

What do you think about a gender neutral rest room, and a female only. Could that work, if we codified the gender/sex line? I think it could. Or is that too 'male centric', for whatever goddamned loopy reason you are concocting?
Click to expand...

Here you go again, imagining that your own perspective is the only one that matters. I have observed the same look of disgust and embarrassment on many men's faces when the subject of mixed-sex toilets comes up. Some guys do care. As with the situation with women's spaces, stop giving away things that people have, or had until recently, because you personally don't think it matters.

I have never once relied on any argument relating to apartheid in my defence of women's rights. That's your position. I'll say it again. A woman, a member of the oppressed group, wanting a space free from the oppressor, is in no way comparable to white people, the oppressors, demanding that black people should not be permitted in certain spaces.

I'm assuming you're American? Kindly remember that other countries exist, and don't want to adopt your laws. You could also remember that laws can be changed and there is no requirement to lie down and accept oppression just because it has been written into the law.
 
Thermal said:
What do you think about a gender neutral rest room, and a female only. Could that work, if we codified the gender/sex line? I think it could. Or is that too 'male centric', for whatever goddamned loopy reason you are concocting?
Click to expand...

As Rolfe just reminded you in post #4824, this solution is not acceptable to TRAs.
 
Lithrael said:
Lol! Well for the serious version, even four inches would put me at 5'6 and still just on the high side of average for a woman, and short for a man.

I guess I would have to worry more about getting caught havin a pee outdoors by anybody besides another guy. As a lady, a woman or kid spotting you back in the bushes is usually more just 'oh whoops! oh how uncouth' even though you have your whole ass out. I have to admit that's the one bit of penis envy I've actually got - not having to take your pants down for a whizz. (I've heard of workarounds for that but haven't tried any.)
Click to expand...

In that situation, you do your best, then you remember, "if he's a gentleman he won't see you, if he isn't a gentleman, it doesn't matter."
 
Ita very simple: as long as you have a penis and testicles you should not be allowed in private female spaces. The End.
 
Rolfe said:
Here you go again, imagining that your own perspective is the only one that matters. I have observed the same look of disgust and embarrassment on many men's faces when the subject of mixed-sex toilets comes up. Some guys do care. As with the situation with women's spaces, stop giving away things that people have, or had until recently, because you personally don't think it matters.

I have never once relied on any argument relating to apartheid in my defence of women's rights. That's your position. I'll say it again. A woman, a member of the oppressed group, wanting a space free from the oppressor, is in no way comparable to white people, the oppressors, demanding that black people should not be permitted in certain spaces.

I'm assuming you're American? Kindly remember that other countries exist, and don't want to adopt your laws. You could also remember that laws can be changed and there is no requirement to lie down and accept oppression just because it has been written into the law.
Click to expand...
Rolfe forgot to read again. Quelle surprise.

What I think would work is a gender neutral rest room, and a female only rest room, citing as justification the well-known personal female-specific needs for privacy as justification. Guys who don't like it can suck it up, it ain't that big a deal, and we want to be fair to all. Do you think that would work?

I imagine you will start yapping about how I am being a MRA yet again, demanding females yield their spaces to men yet again (despite the obvious absurdity) but I am asking you to be honest, just once. Does my proposal tick all the reasonable accommodations?
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
Ita very simple: as long as you have a penis and testicles you should not be allowed in private female spaces. The End.
Click to expand...

Also, if you EVER HAD a penis and testicles, ditto. Cutting these off doesn't turn you into a woman. (This restriction only applies from about the age of eight.)
 
Thermal said:
Rolfe forgot to read again. Quelle surprise.

What I think would work is a gender neutral rest room, and a female only rest room, citing as justification the well-known personal female-specific needs for privacy as justification. Guys who don't like it can suck it up, it ain't that bib a deal, and we want to be fair to all. Do you think that would work?

I imagine you will start yapping about how I am being a MRA yet again, demanding females yield their spaces to men yet again (despite the obvious absurdity) but I am asking you to be honest, just once. Does my proposal tick all the reasonable accommodations?
Click to expand...

Guys who don't like it should not have to "suck it up". They have modesty and dignity to be considered too.

Also, since we have already observed, time and time again, and it has been explained to you time and time again, trans-identifying men don't want any sort of "gender-neutral space". When these are provided they nevertheless insist that it is discriminatory for them to be required to use them, and transphobic not to allow them to join the "other women" in the female space. There's you forgetting to read again.
 
Clutch Cargo said:
They shouldn't have any rights in the first place. That's the whole problem. Lecherous behaviour should be punished. Period. None of this, "I identify as a woman so I should have the right to expose my gasakus in the women's loo". The whole point of such discussions is not if transvestites can dress as they like. The question is whether or not they should be exempt from exiting laws.
Click to expand...
Hercules56 said:
So which rights do you want to take away from them? The right to vote? Freedom of Speech?
Click to expand...
I wrote it in English. I suggest you read it in English
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom