• 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

acybytesla, it's already been pointed out that this clarification of the law doesn't criminalise anyone. Nor does it reduce any existing rights. In fact it clarifies that trans-identifying females have all the rights of females in terms of maternity leave. Why do you keep asserting that this clarification, not change, of law has somehow changed the law in the UK? And I too would welcome your comments on your assertion that you are "being kind to all" when your arguments have shown an astonishing level of misogyny, and a contempt for Muslim and Jewish women in particular who are not permitted by their religion to be unclothed in any space where males are.

If - as has been stated - males feel unsafe in the male facilities, why is that? Is it because males are inherently more violent, or what? If they do feel unsafe, then a (third) unisex space solves the problem, surely? Allowing any male (including the violent ones) into a female space because males are violent is inherently absurd - It's not a women's problem to solve. It's male violence, and women are not a shield for violent men.
 
Last edited:
I agree that if it's practical to provide a unisex facility alongside existing men's and women's facilities, this should be encouraged. I have also seen the opinion that if a male person has a phobia about going into the male facilities then this is obviously a mental health problem, a disability, and people with mental health problems that prevent them from sharing a toilet space are of course free to use the disabled facility.

What I very much hope is that providers will not label the existing women's toilets as mixed sex to accommodate trans demands. That would probably constitute sex discrimination anyway.
 
Last edited:
I hadn't quite thought of it this way, but this meme has been going the rounds for ages.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1913881033604235623

Really, we do have to emphasise the masculine nature and behaviour of these people. Why should women be forced to put up with them?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914225434285244525

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914182869498339654

I don't know whether the allegedly typical shrinking frightened flower of a "transwoman" even exists, or if it's a hangover from the Coronation Street transwoman character who was played by a 5' 3" woman for pity's sake, or maybe some people are putting on an act of being frightened. But the fact is that they're male, not slight, diminutive women, with a man's strength. Why can't they cope with going in the male facilities?

In contrast the bullying, entitled boundary-violating obnoxious trans-identifying male is very very real and currently on a front page near you. (And one of them is quite likely to be on a front page near you in relation to criminal charges, too, often of a sexual nature.) How about we talk about actual observable reality, and make policies that deal with actual observable reality, rather than living in a 1990s dream world where Hayley Cropper (a deliberate, calculated piece of propaganda) is the only notion we have of what transwomen are like.
 
Last edited:
As usual, Wings says it better and more comprehensively.

wingsoverscotland.com

The Peacemaker

Regular readers of Wings won’t need any reminding that Dani Garavelli of the Herald is, among some very stiff competition, one of the most contemptible pieces of nightsoil currently operating…
wingsoverscotland.com wingsoverscotland.com
 
Rolfe said:
The most vulnerable and marginalised people on the planet. The people above all we must show kindness and humanity to.
Click to expand...
At least these social justice activists have stated a clear goal: No gatekeeping in bathrooms, whether via policy or social norms.

I think that is a potentially viable solution for Gen Z spaces—wherein few been conditioned to expect to see only members of their own sex—but they've really got to work on their pitch to elder generations; we tend to vote in much higher numbers.
 
Last edited:
It's their SOP. There were similar demos all over the country. Women have been putting up with this behaviour every time we try to have a meeting since at least 2017, to my certain, first-hand knowledge.
 
Thermal said:
In the future when quoting me, I'll thank you not to delete all my words and insert someone else's. It's actually less work for you too.
Click to expand...
My mistake. It was a result of the way the new forum handles quotes, unfinished posts, and my own sloppiness. I had started a reply to a different post of yours, never finished it, then tried to respond to acbytesla. My earlier draft plus your post hung around in the response box, and when I tried to delete that, it ended up merging his quoted post and yours but keeping your attribution and not his. And I didn't pay close enough attention to notice. There was no intention behind the misattribution, just a failure to notice. And now it's too late for me to edit the post myself.
 
Ziggurat said:
My mistake. It was a result of the way the new forum handles quotes, unfinished posts, and my own sloppiness. I had started a reply to a different post of yours, never finished it, then tried to respond to acbytesla. My earlier draft plus your post hung around in the response box, and when I tried to delete that, it ended up merging his quoted post and yours but keeping your attribution and not his. And I didn't pay close enough attention to notice. There was no intention behind the misattribution, just a failure to notice. And now it's too late for me to edit the post myself.
Click to expand...
NP, thanks. I was mostly just poking to alert you to redirect your response to acbytesla, so he knew it was intended for him .
 
Thermal said:
Aside from the whole trans issue, that's just not an environmentally friendly solution. The cool thing about urinals, in addition to their speed factor, is that they use significantly less water.
Click to expand...
Little idea how to do progressive stack moral calculus on this problem, but I must presume NBs are more oppressed than individuals who identify as thirsty. 🤷‍♂️

More seriously, I've argued for the efficiency of single-use rooms (typically with both urinals and stools) somewhere upthread, but those really only work when the building capacity is low enough that you only need a handful of bathrooms, typically around three rooms servicing ⪅ 100 patrons in the new builds I've seen.

The strongest case for multiuser segregation-by-sex is the trough urinal with motion detector flushing, which is such a marvel of efficiency that you can process hundreds of male bladders (including those of highly motivated transwomen) with a relatively small amount of water over the course of a single 7th inning break.
 
Last edited:
I think that the elimination of the urinal (of whatever design) would be met with a lot of resistance from men. And yet it's clear that this would be absolutely necessary if all facilities were to be made mixed-sex. Women have a perfectly reasonable objection to going into a room where men are using urinals and men have a perfectly reasonable objection to women coming into a room where they are using urinals.

And pause for a moment to imagine the state of the cubicles in a mixed-sex facility where men are urinating into a water closet designed to be sat on. Sure, that's how private houses are. And women are always complaining about it. I imagine men will be a lot less careful in a public bathroom.

It's a huge upheaval which disadvantages a lot of people, just to pander to this group we're always being told is a tiny minority. Who won't be happy about it anyway, since they don't want mixed-sex anything, they want segregated facilities with them allowed to be in with the women.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Little idea how to do progressive stack moral calculus on this problem, but I must presume NBs are more oppressed than individuals who identify as thirsty. 🤷‍♂️

More seriously, I've argued for the efficiency of single-use rooms (typically with both urinals and stools) somewhere upthread, but those really only work when the building capacity is low enough that you only need a handful of bathrooms, typically around three rooms servicing ⪅ 100 patrons in the new builds I've seen.

The strongest case for multiuser segregation-by-sex is the trough urinal with motion detector flushing, which is such a marvel of efficiency that you can process hundreds of male bladders (including those of highly motivated transwomen) with a relatively small amount of water over the course of a single 7th inning break.
Click to expand...
In a particularly dive bar in an inexplicably uppity town nearby, they have a prehistoric galvanized steel trough, rusted near through, with no mechanical flushing mechanism. Seems they let displacement through the trap do it's thing all night, then at closing time, give the whole thing a brief hose down. I can't imagine how any of this flies with the county Board of Health, but I suspect they are afraid to actually enter.
 
Rolfe said:
I think that the elimination of the urinal (of whatever design) would be met with a lot of resistance from men. And yet it's clear that this would be absolutely necessary if all facilities were to be made mixed-sex.
Click to expand...
This is clear enough if the urinals are open-bay (as was the case at the Skepticon with the covered urinals) rather than individually encubicled by design.
 
There may be ways round, but honestly, why even bother? Use the facility that matches the sex you are, and if you're so screwed-up that you can't do that, use the disabled.
 
d4m10n said:
This is clear enough if the urinals are open-bay (as was the case at the Skepticon with the covered urinals) rather than individually encubicled by design.
Click to expand...
If there was north of 6feet of space in front of those urinals, a partition could be put in front of them to isolate them from other restroom occupants. Seems like a unisex restroom could function like that if there was enough available floorspace?
 
Rolfe said:
There may be ways round, but honestly, why even bother? Use the facility that matches the sex you are, and if you're so screwed-up that you can't do that, use the disabled.
Click to expand...
You know what? You've convinced me. But men don't want those violent weirdos either. All we need is Men's rooms, where men can be men and apparently twirl their dicks around like propellers, and women's rooms, with the angelic sisterhood being modest and dignified, and the Violent Weirdos room.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
WE don't know that they've had surgery. And neither do men. Men's toilets have cubicles. All they have to do is use a cubicle and leave, same way as anyone else, however they're dressed.
...
Click to expand...
In practice, and depending on the venue, it's not necessarily practical. Without going into too much detail, the condition of the cubicles is not always pristine, and it may not be a very good idea to sit down, which post-ops may need to, due to a combination of factors - broken or missing toilet seats, broken door locks, lack of aim by previous user. And I'm not saying that means they should use the women's facilities, just that it's not as simple as you might think. (I speak as someone who does usually use the cubicles, due to a combination of a shy bladder and the fact I'm frequently wearing a couple of thousand pounds of camera gear round my neck and would prefer to limit my vulnerability.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom