• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Oh, I've seen plenty of these. These ones seem quite quiet. Usually they have pans and hooters and anything they can find to drown out women's voices.
 
Thermal said:
Well linking to a 403 Error page wasn't particularly illuminating, nor was a link to a high school vocabulary word.
Click to expand...
Both links work just fine on my end.

www.uua.org

Gender Neutral Bathrooms

As Unitarian Universalists we believe every person is born with dignity and humanity, and that includes their gender expression. We practice that belief by
www.uua.org

Standpoint theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Are you sure we're on the same internet?
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
I'm not sure why original intent matters. It's a benefit, one which women want to have and don't want to lose. So what's the logic for taking it away?
Click to expand...
Because this is not a survey of what people might like. It's a matter of law and discrimination.

I'd sure as hell like those primo parking spots with the blue stripes right up front. But no one's asking me what I'd like.
Ziggurat said:
The removal of such spaces absolutely should NOT be codified into law. It's enough if the law allows them, people can figure out the rest.
Click to expand...
Ya if we could figure out the rest on our own, this discussion wouldn't be happening.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Both links work just fine on my end.

www.uua.org

Gender Neutral Bathrooms

As Unitarian Universalists we believe every person is born with dignity and humanity, and that includes their gender expression. We practice that belief by
www.uua.org

Standpoint theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Are you sure we're on the same internet?
Click to expand...
Addressed already. Chromebook didn't accept the load, but android did. I dunno.

Not your bad, either way. But while you're here, what did that church site linked have to do with anything? Did they run or host Skepticon?
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
Did they run the Skepticon thing that d4m1on was talking about or something?
Click to expand...
Skepticon was run by secular people who believed much the same things about the utility of gender neutral bathrooms to promote equity and inclusivity, at least at the time. They wrote down their own justification, but it may well be lost to history at this point.
 
d4m10n said:
Skepticon was run by secular people who believed much the same things about the utility of gender neutral bathrooms to promote equity and inclusivity, at least at the time. They wrote down their own justification, but it may well be lost to history at this point.
Click to expand...
Ok, same question still on the floor: so what did the church website have to do with Skepticons choice of bathroom layout?

Or let me rephrase: in the discussion asking specifically about why Skepticon did so, and the reasoning was as you say 'lost to history', why post a church's website which almost certainly had dead nothing to do with the reasoning?
 
Last edited:
They "believed much the same things about the utility of gender neutral bathrooms to promote equity and inclusivity," as I recall.

While @theprestige claims that the "clear through line in trans rights activism...does not pass through 'unisex bathrooms for gender dysphorics'," I can actually recall seeing that line pass right through those very bathrooms, only around ten years ago.
 
Thermal said:
Maybe they examined it critically and determined it was the right thing to do?
Click to expand...
Whatever their rationalization, they were probably just trying to be good allies, without having to think too hard about it.

"Just make the bathrooms unisex" is a familiar refrain around here, from trans allies trying to square the circle on the fly.
 
d4m10n said:
They "believed much the same things about the utility of gender neutral bathrooms to promote equity and inclusivity," as I recall.

While @theprestige claims that the "clear through line in trans rights activism...does not pass through 'unisex bathrooms for gender dysphorics'," I can actually recall seeing that line pass right through those very bathrooms, only around ten years ago.
Click to expand...
Ok, so short answer is the church had nothing to do with anything, except as a random spokesperson for what inclusivity meant? OK.

We actually have some self IDed asexual / option 4 or 5 or whatever people on this very forum, as I recall. How do you feel about talking them they can shove their feelings about inclusivity and get with the Cis-het program like normal people? Cuz I feel funny about that.
 
theprestige said:
Whatever their rationalization, they were probably just trying to be good allies, without having to think too hard about it.

"Just make the bathrooms unisex" is a familiar refrain around here, from trans allies trying to square the circle on the fly.
Click to expand...
Is that wrong?
 
Thermal said:
Ok, so short answer is the church had nothing to do with anything, except as a random spokesperson for what inclusivity meant? OK.

We actually have some self IDed asexual / option 4 or 5 or whatever people on this very forum, as I recall. How do you feel about talking them they can shove their feelings about inclusivity and get with the Cis-het program like normal people? Cuz I feel funny about that.
Click to expand...

If I wanted to get involved in the rainbow nonsense, I could very genuinely identify as asexual. I have better things to do with my time. I diagnose a bunch of performative narcissists.
 
theprestige said:
Whatever their rationalization, they were probably just trying to be good allies, without having to think too hard about it.
Click to expand...
Certainly the former, no comment on the level of effort.

Thermal said:
Ok, so short answer is the church had nothing to do with anything, except as a random spokesperson for what inclusivity meant?
Click to expand...
I was looking for an example of the initial justification for converting restrooms to gender neutral, and the UUA provided.

You can forget about the church, though, because I finally found the justification from the skeptical activists in their own words.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Certainly the former, no comment on the level of effort.


I was looking for an example of the initial justification for converting restrooms to gender neutral, and the UUA provided.

You can forget about the church, though, because I finally found the justification from the skeptical activists in their own words.
Click to expand...
Great! So to answer your own question... ot reask it... do you think Skepticon was caving under pressure, or just being cool, or what? Seems to me they were just trying to be cool. I do think see anything in there about being cowed by activists?
 
d4m10n said:
Certainly the former, no comment on the level of effort.


I was looking for an example of the initial justification for converting restrooms to gender neutral, and the UUA provided.

You can forget about the church, though, because I finally found the justification from the skeptical activists in their own words.
Click to expand...

If there were also single-sex facilites that were reasonably convenient to access, then I can't see the problem. I have been at a convention where the toilets on the main floor were all labelled mixed-sex, but when I asked at hotel reception I was directed to toilets on the floor below which were entirely adequate. Not an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom