Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Rolfe said:
I've never seen any of that before. I don't know about ambiguity but surely the actual sex of the actress is blindingly obvious the entire time? It was to me.
Click to expand...
It's a joke. It's a comedy sketch. Everyone knows it's an actress in a fat suit. The comedy is in playing out the premise, not in delivering a truly androgynous appearance.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
I've made my position on this clear. Transsexuals do not get to choose their biological sex. Where biological differences are relevant, such as in some sports, they form a valid reason for grouping people into different categories to provide fairer competition.

Using a public toilet is an activity where biological differences are easily accommodated. This is not my opinion, it is a fact proven by the reality that many places such as small shops and cafes don't have the space for sex segregated toilet facilities and yet everyone manages to get along just fine.
Click to expand...
Why is such accommodation necessary? Or even desirable?

No medical justification has been presented.

No moral or ethical justification, for why women should give way to men in this, has been presented.

If men don't need to be in women's sports, then they don't need to be in women's restrooms. If there's no need, then why are you so invested in normalizing it?
 
theprestige said:
It's a joke. It's a comedy sketch. Everyone knows it's an actress in a fat suit. The comedy is in playing out the premise, not in delivering a truly androgynous appearance.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But in that case I'm completely baffled as to what Ivor's point was supposed to be.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
Using a public toilet is an activity where biological differences are easily accommodated. This is not my opinion, it is a fact proven by the reality that many places such as small shops and cafes don't have the space for sex segregated toilet facilities and yet everyone manages to get along just fine.
Click to expand...

This has been explained to you multiple times and still you come back with this fringe reset.
 
Manger Douse said:
So again, why did the inventor of this scheme say:

"signalling to trans+ individuals that they are safe to approach, especially when using
public toilets or navigating other gendered spaces."

and

“I want this to be everywhere At schools, in NHS settings, at festivals, in shops"

if this is regarding school toilets ?
Click to expand...
What on earth are you going on about?
 
theprestige said:
Why is such accommodation necessary? Or even desirable?

No medical justification has been presented.

No moral or ethical justification, for why women should give way to men in this, has been presented.

If men don't need to be in women's sports, then they don't need to be in women's restrooms. If there's no need, then why are you so invested in normalizing it?
Click to expand...
It's not about women giving way to men or men giving way to women. Women don't own public toilets. Men don't own public toilets. It's a hangover from a time when women wore skirts that didn't show their ankles and men stood outside the room or went down the pub while their wives gave birth. Nowadays most people don't care. Many places have unisex toilets that are more space efficient and provide comparable or better privacy compared to gendered toilets. Sex segregation is also a complete red herring as far as violence against women is concerned. For that we need to change attitudes.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
It's not about women giving way to men or men giving way to women. Women don't own public toilets. Men don't own public toilets. It's a hangover from a time when women wore skirts that didn't show their ankles and men stood outside the room or went down the pub while their wives gave birth. Nowadays most people don't care. Many places have unisex toilets that are more space efficient and provide comparable or better privacy compared to gendered toilets. Sex segregation is also a complete red herring as far as violence against women is concerned. For that we need to change attitudes.
Click to expand...
I get stuck on that angle too. But the anti-transers make a good point about women wanting a little privacy from men walking around when dealing with menstrual issues/accidents. I mean, I can see that.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
It's not about women giving way to men or men giving way to women. Women don't own public toilets. Men don't own public toilets. It's a hangover from a time when women wore skirts that didn't show their ankles and men stood outside the room or went down the pub while their wives gave birth. Nowadays most people don't care. Many places have unisex toilets that are more space efficient and provide comparable or better privacy compared to gendered toilets. Sex segregation is also a complete red herring as far as violence against women is concerned. For that we need to change attitudes.
Click to expand...

Unisex toilets are extremely space-inefficient. A single lockable cubicle for each person with all washing facilities enclosed within it as well, to be occupied for the entire time it takes to use the toilet and wash your hands. (And fix your makeup and pin that broken bra strap and change your laddered tights...) No more urinals, which most men don't mind using in an open space where only other men are present and which have a very fast turnaround time. Even for the women, no exiting the cubicle to let the next woman in while you go on to wash your hands in the communal area. It's crazy.

Women don't like them because men also use them. To quote my friend, "It was horrible, a man had been in there and it smelled and there was pee all over the seat and the floor. I had to find a different one." I refrained from saying she maybe should have swept the one she did use for bugs. It's well known that if men can get into toilet facilities that are also used by women, some of them will plant hidden cameras and upload the video clips to PornHub. I believe there is a dedicated category.

Women don't have the luxury of putting up with this until you build a better class of male human being.

In contrast a traditional ladies' loo can get a much faster throughput for the same floor space - cubicles can be smaller, the hand-washing and grooming area is communal, and more women can use the cubicles while the previous lot are washing their hands and powdering their noses. We also use that space to communicate with each other in a male-free environment, and to seek help from other women for pressing women's problems, such as menstrual or even wardrobe emergencies. In evening venues the space is used as a refuge from importunate men, and to recruit help to beat them off and extricate oneself from tricky situations.

A non-trivial number of miscarriages occur in the ladies' toilets of pubs. Men have absolutely no freaking idea. And frankly I am highly suspicious of the motives of any man who makes it his business to tell women that they should not have that space any more but should share all their facilities with men.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
Unisex toilets are extremely space-inefficient. A single lockable cubicle for each person with all washing facilities enclosed within it as well, to be occupied for the entire time it takes to use the toilet and wash your hands. (And fix your makeup and pin that broken bra strap and change your laddered tights...) No more urinals, which most men don't mind using in an open space where only other men are present and which have a very fast turnaround time. Even for the women, no exiting the cubicle to let the next woman in while you go on to wash your hands in the communal area. It's crazy.
Click to expand...
A well laid-out unisex cubical is of a similar size to a non-unisex one because your knees aren't where your hands are. Some unisex toilets have the wash basins in the communal area so there is practically no difference in size. I can only speak for myself, but I personally hate using urinals and the turn-around time is not significantly different. Unisex toilets provide women with a fair share of resources.
Rolfe said:
Women don't like them because men also use them. To quote my friend, "It was horrible, a man had been in there and it smelled and there was pee all over the seat and the floor. I had to find a different one." I refrained from saying she maybe should have swept the one she did use for bugs. It's well known that if men can get into toilet facilities that are also used by women, some of them will plant hidden cameras and upload the video clips to PornHub. I believe there is a dedicated category.

Women don't have the luxury of putting up with this until you build a better class of male human being.
Click to expand...
Paranoia and prejudice noted. By the way, how did your friend know it was a man who had been in there and left the mess? Oh, and my sister has told me about some messes left by women.
Rolfe said:
In contrast a traditional ladies' loo can get a much faster throughput for the same floor space - cubicles can be smaller, the hand-washing and grooming area is communal, and more women can use the cubicles while the previous lot are washing their hands and powdering their noses. We also use that space to communicate with each other in a male-free environment, and to seek help from other women for pressing women's problems, such as menstrual or even wardrobe emergencies. In evening venues the space is used as a refuge from importunate men, and to recruit help to beat them off and extricate oneself from tricky situations.

A non-trivial number of miscarriages occur in the ladies' toilets of pubs. Men have absolutely no freaking idea. And frankly
I am highly suspicious of the motives of any man who makes it his business to tell women that they should not have that space any more but should share all their facilities with men.
Click to expand...
I think the highlighted says it all.

Why do you want to maintain the fantasy that women are these beautiful little angels that don't have bodily functions and just exist to look pretty and be ◊◊◊◊◊◊ by men?

My wife has lived on two continents and what you describe as being commonplace in public toilets is alien to her.
 
theprestige said:
The problem is, and will continue to be, men who don't pass, but exploit self-ID policies to deprecate, harass, and assault women that would previously have been protected from such treatment.
Click to expand...
I don't know how many times you have repeated this, a lot IIRC, but it seems that even after all the times this has been said, @d4m10n is still no closer to getting it that he was the first time you said it.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
FYI: This thread is not your or anyone else's "safe space", though it is often very much an echo chamber. I will come and go as I please.

Soon enough the generation so enraged by this topic will be dead or in care homes where people will nod and smile and help them drink from beakers of squash to take their dementia pills with.

The younger generation appear to be more accepting of trans people and will hopefully be both more compassionate and pragmatic and less hysterical.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that worked great for racism in the USA, right?
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
It's not about women giving way to men or men giving way to women. Women don't own public toilets. Men don't own public toilets. It's a hangover from a time when women wore skirts that didn't show their ankles and men stood outside the room or went down the pub while their wives gave birth. Nowadays most people don't care. Many places have unisex toilets that are more space efficient and provide comparable or better privacy compared to gendered toilets. Sex segregation is also a complete red herring as far as violence against women is concerned. For that we need to change attitudes.
Click to expand...
Ah, the "abolish sex segregation" solution. Chalk it up to Anglo-American prudery, but the fact is, our women don't want to abolish sex segregation. The feminist movement has never advocated for unisex toilets. Nor for unisex changing rooms.

Never mind that transsexuals don't want to abolish sex segregation, either. They just want an entitlement to override sex segregation.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
A well laid-out unisex cubical is of a similar size to a non-unisex one because your knees aren't where your hands are. Some unisex toilets have the wash basins in the communal area so there is practically no difference in size. I can only speak for myself, but I personally hate using urinals and the turn-around time is not significantly different. Unisex toilets provide women with a fair share of resources.

Paranoia and prejudice noted. By the way, how did your friend know it was a man who had been in there and left the mess? Oh, and my sister has told me about some messes left by women.

I think the highlighted says it all.

Why do you want to maintain the fantasy that women are these beautiful little angels that don't have bodily functions and just exist to look pretty and be ◊◊◊◊◊◊ by men?

My wife has lived on two continents and what you describe as being commonplace in public toilets is alien to her.
Click to expand...

Rampant misogyny noted. By the way, it's obvious by the smell who has used a toilet previously. I could tell whether my mother or my father had been in the toilet at home previously before I even went to school. That's another reason we don't want you in our loos.
 
theprestige said:
Ah, the "abolish sex segregation" solution. Chalk it up to Anglo-American prudery, but the fact is, our women don't want to abolish sex segregation. The feminist movement has never advocated for unisex toilets. Nor for unisex changing rooms.

Never mind that transsexuals don't want to abolish sex segregation, either. They just want an entitlement to override sex segregation.
Click to expand...
Transgender sycophants (including those on this forum) really don't understand that the activism they support isn't about TIMs wanting somewhere to pee. If it was, then they would be happy to have unisex toilets, but the fact is, they violently object to that idea, just as they object to open categories in sports. No, its all about their deep-seated hatred for women. Its misogyny and jealousy. They know they can never be real women. Their whole shtick is to break the sex segregation boundaries so that they can wave their girl-dicks in the faces of people they hate... women!
 
smartcooky said:
Transgender sycophants (including those on this forum) really don't understand that the activism they support isn't about TIMs wanting somewhere to pee. If it was, then they would be happy to have unisex toilets, but the fact is, they violently object to that idea, just as they object to open categories in sports. No, its all about their deep-seated hatred for women. Its misogyny and jealousy. They know they can never be real women. Their whole shtick is to break the sex segregation boundaries so that they can wave their girl-dicks in the faces of people they hate... women!
Click to expand...

That was hammered home to me, during a dispute in Canberra, where trans 'women' were demanding to be serviced by lesbians.

You only have to see one: "Suck my Girl Dick!" sign to start to question the entire "I'm just a widdle girl" narrative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom