Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[acbytesla]

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I have pointed out, twice now, that you yourself do not practise this admirable doctrine which you affect to preach. Your posts are brimming with unkindness and inhumanity towards human beings who happen to disagree with you on this issue. Or perhaps people who disagree with you aren't human beings in your eyes?

That you disagree with me that I believe the trans-panic is based on hate, hardly suggests that I don't treat people with kindness and humanity.

 

[Rolfe]

You keep waffling on your criteria for entitlement.

You say it's not self-ID, but when asked how you distinguish, you say you don't, and leave the claimants alone to do their thing.

So I'm going to keep pressing you on self-ID, until you finally settle on a clear and consistent alternative criteria.

What do you think legitimizes male access to female spaces, if not self-ID?

This is the question I came into this thread with. This is the question nobody has been able to answer, ever since.

If you have the answer, please share. If not, please stop vilifying everyone who concludes you don't have an answer.

If there's one thing I thought we'd worked through as nauseam in this thread, it's this. That there is no way at all to divide men into "those who are allowed to use women's facilities" and "those who are not allowed to use women's facilities" that is even remotely practical. Genital inspections at the door are out, and "papers please" is not only intrusive and embarrassing, but papers can easily be faked.

The Supreme Court agrees, though on legalistic grounds before practical ones. Legally, it is discriminatory to treat one group of male people differently from another in this respect. If one group of males is allowed in but not another, the second group has a valid claim for discrimination. I'd like to see any jurisdiction come to a practical solution that isn't either "no men allowed" or "any man who wants to is allowed".

 

[Rolfe]

That you disagree with me that I believe the trans-panic is based on hate, hardly suggests that I don't treat people with kindness and humanity.

You are certainly not treating people who disagree with you with kindness and humanity. The sheer nastiness of many of your posts is quite remarkable. Unless of course we don't count as "people" to you.

You see, I live my life attempting to be kind and fair to others.

Where's the jaw-drop smilie when I need it?

 

[novaphile]

Why would anyone need to do that?

At the places I've been to where normally single-sex toilets were designated as gender-neutral, they were labelled according to the plumbing they contained, so anyone choosing that particular facility was aware what was in there. (And single-sex options were also available.)

I've only had one experience of this, and it wasn't good.

I briefly lived in a hotel that was originally created as male-only worker accommodation in a 'company town'.
(AKA single quarters.)

The facilities on my floor were designated as shared male/female, as the 'hotel' had expanded to provide accommodation for the general public.

(The internal layout was: shower and toilet cubicals opposite each other in one area, separated by a row of mirrors and sinks, and urinals screened off in another area at the opposite end of the floor.)

One morning, I was using the urinal, fully clothed, and a woman and her daughter walked past several partitions, in a cattle run structure, all of which said "MEN ONLY BEYOND THIS POINT" until they reached the urinals, and proceeded to do the 'invasion of the body snatchers, point and screech'.

The woman made formal complaints to the police, the hotel and my employer.

I was very fortunate that the complaint was not upheld, due to the many, many signs, in place, and I didn't end up with a permanent record as a 'sex offender'.

(NB. Many people, typically drunks, have ended up on a sex offenders' register for the twin charge of: indecent exposure/urination in public and it affects them for life.)

As I'm sure you can imagine, this experience makes me very uncomfortable with using urinals, and doubly so about shared facilities.

 

[Brainster]

You are certainly not treating people who disagree with you with kindness and humanity. The sheer nastiness of many of your posts is quite remarkable. Unless of course we don't count as "people" to you.

Apparently calling people bigots and hate-filled is kindness and humanity.

 

[Rolfe]

Apparently calling people bigots and hate-filled is kindness and humanity.

As is refusing to allow women to have any space that excludes men, because some men don't want to use the space for men. No matter how much they try to explain how embarrassing and uncomfortable and downright degrading this is for them.

I thought it was particularly rich that he boasted that his kindness and humanity applied "regardless of ... religion", when one thing we know for certain is that Moslem women are forbidden from sharing a sanitary facility with men, and if they don't have access to a single-sex facility they are not able to go out. This is particularly important if they are out at a time they are obliged to pray, as they must perform a ritual wash first, and must remove their hijab to do this, and they are forbidden from doing that in the presence of a man.

The usual trans-ally response to this point is to switch on rampant Islamophobia and deny that anyone adhering to a religion like that (often any religion at all) is unhinged and deserves no special accommodations for their insanity, but as Myriad particularly specified treating people "with kindness and humanity" irrespective of their religion (among other attributes), he must have some other excuse.

 

[Elaedith]

That you disagree with me that I believe the trans-panic is based on hate, hardly suggests that I don't treat people with kindness and humanity.

Asserting that people who disagree with you on issues you clearly know nothing about are motivated by hatred and disgust is not 'treating people with kindness and humanity'. It is arrogant, self-righteous and nasty.

 

[acbytesla]

You are certainly not treating people who disagree with you with kindness and humanity. The sheer nastiness of many of your posts is quite remarkable. Unless of course we don't count as "people" to you.

No I'm disagreeing with them. I don't dislike you. I do however dislike the attitude and treatment of other human beings.

 

[Rolfe]

I've only had one experience of this, and it wasn't good.

I briefly lived in a hotel that was originally created as male-only worker accommodation in a 'company town'.
(AKA single quarters.)

The facilities on my floor were designated as shared male/female, as the 'hotel' had expanded to provide accommodation for the general public.

(The internal layout was: shower and toilet cubicals opposite each other in one area, separated by a row of mirrors and sinks, and urinals screened off in another area at the opposite end of the floor.)

One morning, I was using the urinal, fully clothed, and a woman and her daughter walked past several partitions, in a cattle run structure, all of which said "MEN ONLY BEYOND THIS POINT" until they reached the urinals, and proceeded to do the 'invasion of the body snatchers, point and screech'.

The woman made formal complaints to the police, the hotel and my employer.

I was very fortunate that the complaint was not upheld, due to the many, many signs, in place, and I didn't end up with a permanent record as a 'sex offender'.

(NB. Many people, typically drunks, have ended up on a sex offenders' register for the twin charge of: indecent exposure/urination in public and it affects them for life.)

As I'm sure you can imagine, this experience makes me very uncomfortable with using urinals, and doubly so about shared facilities.

This discomfort is very common. In fact the only men I've encountered who say they don't care are on the internet. Recently there has been an upsurge of interest in this issue, and I have been party to a number of conversations where men have been asked what they think about having women walk into their single-sex facilities. The almost identical expression of disgust and revulsion has appeared on every single face. Usually there is a concession that in an emergency they will put up with a temporary invasion, but even that seems mostly reluctant.

 

[Rolfe]

No I'm disagreeing with them. I don't dislike you. I do however dislike the attitude and treatment of other human beings.

You do not treat people who disagree with you with kindness and humanity. That is absolutely obvious in every post you make. And would you care to read this post of mine, which you may have skipped over?

As is refusing to allow women to have any space that excludes men, because some men don't want to use the space for men. No matter how much they try to explain how embarrassing and uncomfortable and downright degrading this is for them.

I thought it was particularly rich that he boasted that his kindness and humanity applied "regardless of ... religion", when one thing we know for certain is that Moslem women are forbidden from sharing a sanitary facility with men, and if they don't have access to a single-sex facility they are not able to go out. This is particularly important if they are out at a time they are obliged to pray, as they must perform a ritual wash first, and must remove their hijab to do this, and they are forbidden from doing that in the presence of a man.

The usual trans-ally response to this point is to switch on rampant Islamophobia and deny that anyone adhering to a religion like that (often any religion at all) is unhinged and deserves no special accommodations for their insanity, but as Myriad particularly specified treating people "with kindness and humanity" irrespective of their religion (among other attributes), he must have some other excuse.

 

[smartcooky]

People with DSD's absolutely exist. But they are still either male or female. And the trans debate isn't about them anyways. Trans people don't claim to be suffering from DSD's, and people with DSD's don't claim to be trans.

Quoted for truth... Especially the following...

These are separate issues, and the attempt to conflate them is always proof of dishonesty.

 

[acbytesla]

Asserting that people who disagree with you on issues you clearly know nothing about are motivated by hatred and disgust is not 'treating people with kindness and humanity'. It is arrogant, self-righteous and nasty.

You're suggesting I turn a blind eye to hateful acts and laws and pretend that hate has nothing to do with it?

I suppose saying NAZIs didn't hate Jews when they took their property and made them wear stars on their clothes. How about when they gassed them? Was that motivated by hate? Or was it something else? Should I treat people with kindness and humanity who refuse to treat others that way?

 

[Rolfe]

The most vulnerable and marginalised people on the planet. The people above all we must show kindness and humanity to.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914015345536541177

 

[Graham2001]

Some more corrosive commentary on the issue from the contrarians at Spiked.

Rejoice! For the They / Thems have risen. After being legally crucified by the Supreme Court last Wednesday, the trans faithful marched from Parliament Square in London yesterday in a display of devotion and defiance. It was a tantrum disguised as a protest over the court’s heresy – that the word ‘woman’ refers to a biological category, not a personal sense of gender.

Chanting ‘◊◊◊◊ JK Rowling’ and ‘◊◊◊◊ Wes Streeting’, the mob wailed over the apparent injustice of women having legally defined boundaries. Banners held included ‘The only good TERF is a dead one’; as legal commentator Dennis Kavanagh pointed out, there are currently people in prison for saying less.

A trans-activist temper tantrum

Women have penises. Men can grow cervixes. Babies aren’t born with a biological sex. Show me a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ take on transgenderism and I’ll show you a high-profile Labour Party figure who has gladly spouted it. Like those Thai cave boys a few years ago, Keir Starmer and his mob became so lost down the gender rabbit hole they needed some external miracle to break them free.

Well now they’ve got it. The landmark Supreme Court ruling yesterday is surely Labour’s opportunity to slowly back away from the crime scene. In a unanimous decision, the court found that sex in UK equality law means, well, sex. If you’re a man you’re a man, if you’re a woman you’re a woman, if you’re a lesbian you shouldn’t be expected to treat Belinda – with his beard and his balls – as one of your own. Sex is not a feeling, nor a matter of having the right paperwork. Otherwise, sex-based rights cannot exist. It couldn’t be clearer.

What happened to all those female penises, Keir?

 

[acbytesla]

I suppose people should just accept that the majority hates them and they have no place in society. Any such objections is a temper tantrum. I get it.

In the deep South they say those people are just uppity ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. They need to learn their place.

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited for rule 10. Do not incompletely mask swear words outside the public sections.

 

[Rolfe]

Like you want women to accept that they have no right to modesty or privacy and no place in society unless they give these things up.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914010288963150162

But you never saw a women's rights rally behaving like that. Our placards say things like "No males in women's jails". You won't find swear words and you won't find death threats and you won't find people peeing in the street and you won't find women assaulting those who disagree with them

You also won't find convicted sex offenders being given a platform to incite listeners to violence.

Funny that.

 

[acbytesla]

Like you want women to accept that they have no right to modesty or privacy and no place in society unless they give these things up.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914010288963150162

But you never saw a women's rights rally behaving like that. Our placards say things like "No males in women's jails". You won't find swear words and you won't find death threats and you won't find people peeing in the street and you won't find women assaulting those who disagree with them

You also won't find convicted sex offenders being given a platform to incite listeners to violence.

Funny that.

I agree, people shouldn't threaten anyone with violence. Still doesn't justify the discrimination committed by JK Rowling. Doesn't justify the hate that inspired their reaction.

 

[Rolfe]

This discomfort is very common. In fact the only men I've encountered who say they don't care are on the internet. Recently there has been an upsurge of interest in this issue, and I have been party to a number of conversations where men have been asked what they think about having women walk into their single-sex facilities. The almost identical expression of disgust and revulsion has appeared on every single face. Usually there is a concession that in an emergency they will put up with a temporary invasion, but even that seems mostly reluctant.

Seeing this post right above my sig line brought on a moment's nostalgia. In the dim and distant past, when the gender wars had not impinged on my consciousness, there was a big rally for Scottish independence on Glasgow Green. I drove there with some friends, and spent the afternoon there. The organisers hadn't bothered to arrange for any portable toilets. "Just use the toilets at the People's Palace" they said, although they hadn't actually asked anyone involved with this small museum and arboretum on the Green. Of course the huge numbers of attendees massively overwhelmed the small facilities. I wandered over but decided I could make it home rather than get involved in that undignified scramble.

Apparently there had eventually been a unilateral decision to designate the Gents "mixed sex" for the duration, and the men more or less had to put up with it. The urinals were still being used. I heard the full tale from the late poet Aonghas MacNeacail, he who is quoted in my sig line, who had no choice as he had a prostate problem. He was fairly philosophical about it. "It was OK, the women got the cubicles and we still had the standy-uppy bit", he said. But nobody was the slightest bit happy about it, and it's hard to say whether it was the men or the women who were more embarrassed.

 

[Rolfe]

I agree, people shouldn't threaten anyone with violence. Still doesn't justify the discrimination committed by JK Rowling. Doesn't justify the hate that inspired their reaction.

Discrimination? Do tell? Quotes of her saying something discriminatory, please. (I won't ask you to demonstrate "hate", because we all know by now that you class all disagreement with your extreme men's rights position as hate.)

What about the discrimination you favour against Moslem women, who are not permitted to use mixed-sex sanitary facilities, and in particular cannot perform the obligatory prayers if they can't access single-sex washing facilities?

 

[acbytesla]

Discrimination. Singling out a group of people and making their lives harder. Turing them into outcasts.