• 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

Mycroft said:
I don't know. Maybe you can't.

If you can't tell, does it matter?

I have an idea, you can ask the people standing guard at the door.
Click to expand...

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Of course I can't tell. I can tell who is male (and who is female), but that's it. Same for everybody.

If no males are allowed in the women's facilities, then when we see a male, we can ask him to leave, and if he doesn't, escalate the matter with management.

If any subset of males is allowed, then de facto all males are allowed. You might as well forget your categories because there's no way to know whether the man in front of you is in the category that is allowed or the category that isn't. And you're not allowed to ask for ID either.

And yes, this matters a lot.
 
Mycroft said:
Again, you imagine things happening in my head.

When did I say I care if a person had surgery or not?
Click to expand...

You said it was possible to tell who had had surgery because they would be wearing women's clothes.
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
I don’t think I have ever encountered an adult-only public restroom, so it seems kind of obvious how it might extrapolate.
Click to expand...
I might need to take you to some cooler bars.

Adults are not otherwise normally naked in public restrooms, I'm told.
 
Mycroft said:
If we assume only cis-women are allowed in the woman's room and cis-men are allowed in the men's room, how would we determine who is who without gender norms?
Click to expand...
Why would we assume that? The idea is that females are allowed in the women’s room and males are allowed in the men’s room. Gender has nothing to do with it, and so gender norms have nothing to do with it either. Gender norms of dress are a garbage method for determining sex. People are pretty good at determining sex regardless of dress.
 
Ziggurat said:
Why would we assume that?
Click to expand...

Just for the sake of argument.

Ziggurat said:
The idea is that females are allowed in the women’s room and males are allowed in the men’s room. Gender has nothing to do with it, and so gender norms have nothing to do with it either. Gender norms of dress are a garbage method for determining sex. People are pretty good at determining sex regardless of dress.
Click to expand...

How do you tell?
 
Thermal said:
I'm no lawyer, but the 9th's decision is based on some vague trauma that a transperson's presence may inflict on Idaho students being seen naked by the other sex. Children. I'm not sure how that extrapolates to adults in a public rest room, if it does at all.
Click to expand...
The argument from the plaintiffs/appellants was that "discrimination on the basis of transgender status is a form of sex-based discrimination prohibited by Title IX, and S.B. 1100 discriminates against transgender students by barring them from using sex-separated facilities that align with their gender identity." This argument is easily broad enough to cover both bathrooms and changing rooms, and hasn't yet persuaded the Circuit Court.

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited to make invisible text visible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
d4m10n said:
The argument from the plaintiffs/appellants was that "discrimination on the basis of transgender status is a form of sex-based discrimination prohibited by Title IX, and S.B. 1100 discriminates against transgender students by barring them from using sex-separated facilities that align with their gender identity." This argument is easily broad enough to cover both bathrooms and changing rooms, and hasn't yet persuaded the Circuit Court.
Click to expand...
Right, but the ruling was so kid-in-school specific that I'm not sure that broadness will scale.

As a matter of practicality, I think we all know sex segregation will have to prevail, if for no other reason than co-ed showers ain't flying in any school district full of minors in this country. I recall a story from my beloved Garden State where the presence of over 18 seniors and some 14 year old freshmen in a shower was causing some legal drama, and that was same sex.

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited quote to make invisible text visible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mycroft said:
Just for the sake of argument.
Click to expand...
Whose argument? Yours?
Mycroft said:
How do you tell?
Click to expand...
Humans are pretty good at detecting sex of other humans based on facial features and body proportions. Not perfect, but pretty good. Enough to tell that Bryson is male even when he wears a wig. Why do I need to tell you something so obvious? Are you not aware of this already?
 
Mycroft said:
We should take another break for a while. Give time for your emotions to cool.
Click to expand...
Laughable. Your takeaway from having it pointed to you that you are not up speed on any of this, is to criticise the emotions of the person telling you, instead of undertaking to do the reading so that you might actually learn something.
 
Pixel42 said:
The trans posters on the other forum I belong to have been assuring everyone that Starmer is not just a vile transphobe but a murderer who has the blood of trans children on his hands ever since he accepted the findings of the Cass report.
Click to expand...
Sounds like they really are in full meltdown mode, flailing and lashing out anyone they perceive as doing the slightest wrong by them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom