Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Darat]

Two points I was mulling over - a bearded man with bulging biceps, shaved head and all the signifiers of a very "brutish" style of masculinity could "now" enter a women's toilet and loiter around and if challenged say "I'm a trans man". How are the women users of that toilet going to know if that is the case or not? Considering that one of the objections to trans women using the women's toilet was that it allowed male predators to simply say "I'm a trans woman" and enter, now they can still lie and say "I'm a trans man".

The second point is that the new ruling may mean that more establishments will have to switch over to unisex toilets, such as many small businesses already have so that they are not discriminating based on gender reassignment. It will be interesting to see the court cases over the next few years as this all again has to get legislated.

Actually a third point just came to me seeing some media comments - this is a narrow judgment, it only refers to the wording in the Equality act, this doesn't settle how courts determine what a woman or man is in other legislation, that would still be up to legal challenges.

 

[d4m10n]

Women in their restrooms are not 'oppressed'.

Women were so oppressed in terms of restroom availability that there are actually academic terms of art about it, such as urinary leash.

Feminist activists fought for the right to have this oppression lifted and replaced with sex equality, a longstanding solution now being deprecated in favor of self-i.d. outside of the U.K.

 

[Thermal]

And we're back to this again.

Thermal: can you please try to remember for more than a couple of minutes at a time that most females do not want any males in their intimate spaces. Not even nice, well behaved ones like you. For the reasons explained at length, many many times. So even if the number you're trying to establish is zero, which it most certainly is not, it's irrelevant.

Yes, we are back to this again.

I don't want females or transwomen or cats or iguanas or a lot of creatures around me, pretty much all the time without my explicit consent. So what? This concept of a Holy and Inviolate Public Bathroom is largely silly and entitled.

 

[Thermal]

Women were so oppressed in terms of restroom availability that there are actually academic terms of art about it, such as urinary leash.

Feminist activists fought for the right to have this oppression lifted and replaced with sex equality, a longstanding solution now being deprecated in favor of self-i.d. outside of the U.K.

Yes, yes, a lot of things have been fought since in the Victorian era. The one in 200 occasional transwoman use of facilites is not forcing women back on a 'urinary leash'. You could argue that women's rest rooms in general need to be larger, as there is more often a line at the ladies' room and not at the gents', but that's hardly what we are talking about.

What we are talking about, restroom-wise, is this odd concept of a public toilet being Holy Ground, when unisex and open access men's rooms are the norm.

 

[Hercules56]

I don't think the view that sex segregation in a few very specific contexts is not comparable to racial segregation is a 'unique worldview'.

Racial segregation was instituted for one single purpose: to separate the "superior" race from the "inferior" one.

Is anyone actually going to argue that sex segregation in bathrooms, locker rooms, and changing rooms is for the same purpose?

Is that why we have men and women's separate sporting events?

Come on now.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

I don't think the view that sex segregation in a few very specific contexts is not comparable to racial segregation is a 'unique worldview'.

Not in this corner of the Internet.

It's disappointing that the entrenched positions have resulted in better solutions for everybody being dismissed because they are perceived as giving up territory.

 

[Thermal]

Two points I was mulling over - a bearded man with bulging biceps, shaved head and all the signifiers of a very "brutish" style of masculinity could "now" enter a women's toilet and loiter around and if challenged say "I'm a trans man". How are the women users of that toilet going to know if that is the case or not? Considering that one of the objections to trans women using the women's toilet was that it allowed male predators to simply say "I'm a trans woman" and enter, now they can still lie and say "I'm a trans man".

The data suggests that this doesn't happen. My US state is wide open gender free for all. No increased incidence of this theoretical violence.

 

[acbytesla]

What a superb argument. I have entirely revised my opinion. (Not.)

Did you think for one second I expected to?

@acbytesla, I note that this issue is plastered across every front page in Britain this morning. The most straightforwardly informative was the Daily Telegraph.

However the first prize, red rosette and gold medal goes to The Sun, of all things. I may actually have to pop up to the shop and buy a copy.It dominated all the major news programmes last night. I am reliably informed that it is being discussed on news and current affairs programmes around the world.

Do you still think it's a nothing-burger that affects almost nobody?

Absolutely. Hate won out. Not the first time. It wasn't that long ago, your nation was castrating gay men.

 

[Hercules56]

I think you have the terminology backwards. A transman is a woman that transitioned to a man's presentation.

To respond to the threat, yes he could. He could also still be arrested under slightly modified laws.
The data suggests that this doesn't happen. My US state is wide open gender free for all. No increased incidence of this theoretical violence.

Wait a second, so now transition IS required for a trans person to honestly claim to be trans?

No more "all that matters is what's between your ears"?

Interesting.

 

[Darat]

Wait a second, so now transition IS required for a trans person to honestly claim to be trans?

No more "all that matters is what's between your ears"?

Interesting.

Not in the UK. That's one of the things this not-new new ruling did that isn't getting much attention, it clarified who the Equality act's class of "gender reassignment" applies to, and it does not require someone to have a GRC to be protected from discrimination. See from paragraph 200 in the ruling for the details of the court's reasoning. The ruling has in effect said "self id" is all that the Equality act requires. Different legislation may use different definitions and have different requirements.

 

[Rolfe]

You know nothing, @acbytesla.

Not all of these trans identifying men committed their attacks on women in single sex spaces. Although some of them did. Rather a lot of names though.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1912646859719602497

Allowing these men to access women's single sex spaces is a good idea, why?

The tweet with the list has been deleted for whatever reason, but the list has been re-posted.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1912847912234524836

Just in case it gets deleted again, here goes.

 

[Rolfe]

Did you think for one second I expected to?

Absolutely. Hate won out. Not the first time. It wasn't that long ago, your nation was castrating gay men.

Bitter, much?

 

[theprestige]

Here you go making unsupported assertions again.

No. I'm giving you the null hypothesis to your assertion. It's up to you to support your claim that sex is analogous to race, such that a conclusion about race logically means the same conclusion about sex.

As for being able to argue the thing itself in its own terms, before being able to argue by analogy, I take that as axiomatic.

I also take as axiomatic that arguing the thing in its own terms is always better than trying to argue by analogy. I've belabored the many reasons why I adopt this axiom elsewhere, and won't reprise it here. I will simply say that nobody here will accept your analogy as valid, so if you want to change minds, or just make a good counter-case, you're probably going to have to figure out how to argue trans rights in their own terms.

We can start with your answer to these questions:

Should men be entitled to override sex segregation any time they want to?

Is there a sound scientific basis for affirming trans indications in minors, with irreversible medical treatments such as puberty denial and plastic surgery?

 

[Thermal]

The tweet with the list has been deleted for whatever reason, but the list has been re-posted.

Ya prob someone started fact checking it, as I did.

I saw Tiffany Aching at the bottom, and thought...wut? So I googled the name. Seems a transgender woman split up with her partner and non-violently semi-stalked her, as so many hetero people do. Not accused of any kind of assault whatsoever, private space or otherwise.

Your bigoted tweeter is a liar.

ETA: jesus christ, it's like every one I search turns out to be bull ◊◊◊◊. I hit another at random, Jody Mathew Burke. Turns out he is a full tilt male, locked up, who then attempted to self mutilate in lockup and even the prison didn't buy it. He didn't claim to be trans, and dead certainly wasn't when he committed his crimes against his ex wife.

Montreal judge sentences repeat sex offender to 15 years in prison

A former mixed martial arts instructor has been sentenced to 15 years in prison and was declared a dangerous offender after he was convicted of a violent sexual assault on his ex-wife.

www.ctvnews.ca

ETA2: and yet another, Ash Cooper. A teen who shot a 12 year old girl in his trailer park, then suddenly became trans while in jail.

ETA3: and the very next one I tried, Rachel Queen Burton. Attacked two young children when he said he was a male. Afterwards, comes out as trans, some would assume as a disguise, as the police were after him.

Rolfe Rating for this new 'data' tweet: pants on fire.

 

[theprestige]

Ya prob someoe started fact checking it, as I did.

I saw Tiffany Aching at the bottom, and thought...wut? So I googled the name. Seems a transgender woman split up with her partner and non-violently semi-stalked her, as so many hetero people do. Not accused of any kind of assault whatsoever, private space or otherwise.

Your bigoted tweeter is a liar.

When you say "transgender woman", do you mean a female who identifies as a man? Or do you mean a male who identifies as a woman?

Also, when I google "Tiffany Aching", all I get is a Terry Pratchett character.

 

[Paul2]

For the postmodern view on gender and sex, Judith Butler is entertaining (unless you happen to be writing a dissertation on performance and need to actually understand what she's saying). https://www.amherst.edu/system/files/media/1650/butler_performative_acts.pdf

I found her use of italics particularly entertaining.

 

[d4m10n]

The one in 200 occasional transwoman use of facilites is not forcing women back on a 'urinary leash'.

Aside from the women who'd rather avoid public restrooms than encounter (obvious) males therein, this is correct.

What we are talking about, restroom-wise, is this odd concept of a public toilet being Holy Ground

No need to deprecate the cross-cultural need for modesty by comparing it to faith-based nonsense.

 

[Thermal]

When you say "transgender woman", do you mean a female who identifies as a man? Or do you mean a male who identifies as a woman?

It means transwoman. Only if you throw in that extra 'identified' to reverse the sex and cause confusion does it mean otherwise.

Also, when I google "Tiffany Aching", all I get is a Terry Pratchett character.

Yeah, that's what made me say wut? I add the word 'trans' into the searches, as it should narrow down the field to who the lying-ass tweeter is referring to

 

[Thermal]

Aside from the women who'd rather avoid public restrooms than encounter (obvious) males therein, this is correct.
No need to deprecate the cross-cultural need for modesty by comparing it to faith-based nonsense.

Modesty is a valid concern, especially when we get to changing rooms. A plain old rest room with privacy stalls, I'm thinking is in fact being quasi-religiously argued.

Do you think the Portland school's restroom area linked upthread is an immodest affront to dignity? I'm not seeing it.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

No. I'm giving you the null hypothesis to your assertion. It's up to you to support your claim that sex is analogous to race, such that a conclusion about race logically means the same conclusion about sex.

No, you are (as usual) trying to reframe the debate in a particular narrow way.

Sex is a characteristic of humans. Skin colour is a characteristic of humans. Both (and many others) have been and still are used to discriminate against groups and individuals.

As for being able to argue the thing itself in its own terms, before being able to argue by analogy, I take that as axiomatic.

I also take as axiomatic that arguing the thing in its own terms is always better than trying to argue by analogy. I've belabored the many reasons why I adopt this axiom elsewhere, and won't reprise it here. I will simply say that nobody here will accept your analogy as valid, so if you want to change minds, or just make a good counter-case, you're probably going to have to figure out how to argue trans rights in their own terms.

It may be axiomatic for you, but it has been shown that humans can often figure a problem out when it is framed in a way they are more familiar with. However, this isn't about finding solutions or enlightenment or better use of resources, it's about emotions such as disgust and fear.

We can start with your answer to these questions:

Should men be entitled to override sex segregation any time they want to?

There should be very good reasons for segregation. E.g., violent humans should be segregated from non-violent humans.

Is there a sound scientific basis for affirming trans indications in minors, with irreversible medical treatments such as puberty denial and plastic surgery?

I do not believe there is.