Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[d4m10n]

Clever reply, but disingenuous.

I can assure you that I am being perfectly ingenuous here.

My intuition is that members of each sex finds sex-specific problems to be more embarrassing in front of members of the opposite sex, that is, people who've no idea what it is like to experience those same problems and (for heterosexuals) people whom one might want to impress favorably rather than memorably. And that's before we even get into the question of whether sexual modesty is inborn, to at least some degree.

And I really really do think you should try asking women.

 

[d4m10n]

transgender people are asking for a return to the status quo, where historically, they have always been afforded access for generations, with no force of law stopping them

You honestly don't think they are asking for anything more than this, such as antidiscrimination laws affording access rather than mere social norms?

On a related note, have you heard of the ACLU?

 

[p0lka]

It's not descriptors, it's the definition.

Horse is the word that means a member of the equine species. It does not distinguish on any characteristic other than species.
Foal is a word that means a juvenile member of the equine species; it distinguishes both species and reproductive maturity.
Filly is a word that means a juvenile female member of the equine species; it distinguishes species, reproductive maturity, and sex.
Colt is a word that means juvenile male member of the equine species; it distinguishes species, reproductive maturity, and sex.
Mare is a word that means adult female member of the equine species; it distinguishes species, reproductive maturity, and sex.
Stallion is a word that means reproductively capable adult male member of the equine species; it distinguishes species, reproductive maturity, reproductive capability, and sex.
Gelding is a word that means reproductively incapable adult male member of the equine species; it distinguishes species, reproductive maturity, reproductive capability, and sex.

These are all terms that convey a whole lot of information in a clear and concise way. We don't always incorporate all of the same meaning into our terminology - for example, we have a word specifically for a juvenile female bovine (heiffer), but not for a juvenile male bovine, which are just referred to by the general term "calf", although often modified as either a bull calf or a steer calf, depending on whether they've been castrated.

The point is that opinion has nothing to do with this. The terms aren't about feelings, they're about observable objective fact.

ok i will rephrase it
Humans are the only one in that list that can communicate an opinion about the definitions?

 

[Thermal]

You honestly don't think they are asking for anything more than this, such as antidiscrimination laws affording access rather than mere social norms?

On a related note, have you heard of the ACLU?

Talking broad brush and origin story. Things have obviously amped up from there.

 

[theprestige]

the transgender people are asking for a return to the status quo, where historically, they have always been afforded access for generations, with no force of law stopping them.

No. The status quo ante was that transgender people were allowed in opposite-sex restrooms based entirely on the goodwill of the other people in the restroom. The other people were entitled to object, and if they did, the transgender person had to leave.

What transgender people are asking for is an entitlement to enter cross-sex restrooms over the objections of the other people there. It's an inversion of the status quo ante.

#notalltransgenderpeople, of course. Remember, when it comes to restrooms, we're actually talking about a very small cohort of men, who are demanding an entitlement to enter women's restrooms whenever they want, regardless of what women would prefer.

Unfortunately, this small cohort includes a disturbingly high number of men who are sexual predators of some kind. In particular, their forms of predation are opportunistic, and are enabled by the entitlement they're demanding. This is unfortunate, because it means that any man making this demand is immediately suspect. He's suspect not because all men are likely predators, but because this particular subset of men includes a lot of likely predators.

A return to the status quo would give women back some social and legal protections against such predators. What transgender people are asking for is a permanent elimination of those protections. This is objectively misogynistic.

 

[Ziggurat]

You must have been appalled when they switched from blue to red fluid on adverts for sanitary towels!

I don't think I've even noticed. But you know what else I don't want to see? Toilet paper ads showing how well it absorbs brown stuff.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

No. The status quo ante was that transgender people were allowed in opposite-sex restrooms based entirely on the goodwill of the other people in the restroom. The other people were entitled to object, and if they did, the transgender person had to leave.

What transgender people are asking for is an entitlement to enter cross-sex restrooms over the objections of the other people there. It's an inversion of the status quo ante.

#notalltransgenderpeople, of course. Remember, when it comes to restrooms, we're actually talking about a very small cohort of men, who are demanding an entitlement to enter women's restrooms whenever they want, regardless of what women would prefer.

Unfortunately, this small cohort includes a disturbingly high number of men who are sexual predators of some kind. In particular, their forms of predation are opportunistic, and are enabled by the entitlement they're demanding. This is unfortunate, because it means that any man making this demand is immediately suspect. He's suspect not because all men are likely predators, but because this particular subset of men includes a lot of likely predators.

A return to the status quo would give women back some social and legal protections against such predators. What transgender people are asking for is a permanent elimination of those protections. This is objectively misogynistic.

Explain what additional protection a woman has against a sexual predator by having the full force of the law behind her to tell him to get out of the toilet while he's sexually assaulting her?

 

[Thermal]

No. The status quo ante was that transgender people were allowed in opposite-sex restrooms based entirely on the goodwill of the other people in the restroom. The other people were entitled to object, and if they did, the transgender person had to leave.

Where did you get that? I can't find any precedent for having force of law in ejecting a transperson? Or do you mean like the Jedi Mind Trick?

 

[smartcooky]

With the exception of they/them as pronouns, which is grammatically wrong, confusing on the radio and comes across as pretentious, why not?

I think this is the big issue for a lot of people, particularly some members of this forum. I would suggest that most of us do this naturally. It's called theory of mind, and we adjust how we behave based on our mental models of other people's mental models. Usually people try to give others a clue about what's in their head by, for example, behaving or dressing in a particular way.

I don't believe the majority of transsexuals want females to allow any male into female-specific spaces at their whim.

What do you think the chances of success are? I think about the same as men demanding that all women put realistic photos of how they look now on their dating profiles.

There is a solution for this. See below.

There is a solution for this. See below.

Isn't it taking part and trying your best that counts? Or is that just a lie we tell children?

In professional sports where biology matters they're all genetic freaks and/or taking performance enhancing drugs. In sports where biology doesn't matter, who cares? If you want to see some real fine-grained arguments about who should be in and who should be out, check out the Paralympics.

There should be restrictions in place for sports where physical contact takes place for safety that are based on size and weight.

That's a crime where I live.

There's a perfectly workable solution that reflects reality: Men, Women, Transmen and Transwomen. For normal day to day interactions, men and transmen and women and transwomen can rub along together and maybe try to understand each others points of view. I know, what a crazy idea! In interactions that are likely to be physically intimate, traumatic or where physical biology matters, everyone gets to seek out or request a person or group or service they feel most comfortable with or is most appropriate.

As expected, no honest response, just more of the same TRA talking points.

 

[smartcooky]

There’s so much ◊◊◊◊ in this.

Firstly why are you talking about transsexuals?

Because he wants to reframe the debate to include transgender identified females (transmen) to leverage his arguments to allow transgender identified males to access women's spaces.

 

[smartcooky]

Have you tried asking a woman?

It wouldn't make and difference - plenty of women here have explained it, it's just that transgender advicates don't care .. they have no empathy for women.

 

[smartcooky]

ok i will rephrase it
Humans are the only one in that list that can communicate an opinion about the definitions?

Was irrelevant before.
Is still irrelevant now.

 

[Ziggurat]

Explain what additional protection a woman has against a sexual predator by having the full force of the law behind her to tell him to get out of the toilet while he's sexually assaulting her?

You... don't really understand how sexual predation works, do you?

It's largely opportunistic. It's not Ocean's 11. Rather, they take advantage of opportunities when they find them. But simply being in a bathroom with a woman isn't necessarily an opportunity. For example, if they are in a bathroom with multiple women, that's generally not an opportunity.

One of the things that allowing women to eject males from their spaces does is it reduces opportunities. If they are allowed to go in whenever they want, a predatory male can spend a lot of time in a bathroom doing nothing in particular until he finds an opportunity. And it's a lot harder to find those opportunities if he gets ejected.

In military terms, you're focusing on the boom, and you're failing to realize that keeping males out acts left of boom.

 

[p0lka]

Hang on. You literally just said that you will treat anyone expressing the woman's gender role as a woman - i.e., different from how you treat men. Now you're saying you wouldn't treat men and women differently, except in matters of sex, because gender roles are irrelevant to you?

The highlighted was your addition as I don't think I said that.
I will treat anyone that feels they have to take on a gender role as the gender role they want, equally. It would seldom come up in conversation though to be honest, dunno about you.

And you also predicated this on making a distinction between men's and women's gender roles. Now you're saying you have no clear idea what those distinctions look like?

So which is it? Can you distinguish between the gender roles or not? Do you treat men and women differently, based on your perception of their gender roles, or not?

I wish gender roles and the importance that has become of them in today's society with people trying to conform to them didn't exist, it's messing up peoples lives.
But it does, so my opinion is that at this time gender is a thing that people are rallying behind, annoyingly.

 

[smartcooky]

Remember, when it comes to restrooms, we're actually talking about a very small cohort of men, who are demanding an entitlement to enter women's restrooms whenever they want, regardless of what women would prefer.

Unfortunately, this small cohort includes a disturbingly high number of men who are sexual predators of some kind. In particular, their forms of predation are opportunistic, and are enabled by the entitlement they're demanding. This is unfortunate, because it means that any man making this demand is immediately suspect. He's suspect not because all men are likely predators, but because this particular subset of men includes a lot of likely predators.

To paraphrase Sall Grover...good men don't demand access to women's spaces. When you do find a man trying to demand access, you know you are not dealing with a good man, you're dealing with a bad one.

A return to the status quo would give women back some social and legal protections against such predators. What transgender people are asking for is a permanent elimination of those protections.This is objectively misogynistic.

Exactly!

 

[theprestige]

Explain what additional protection a woman has against a sexual predator by having the full force of the law behind her to tell him to get out of the toilet while he's sexually assaulting her?

Exhibitionism and voyeurism are both kinks/fetishes that often lead to involving other people without their consent. Voyeurism can be difficult to prove, and exhibitionism is effectively displaced by fiat self-ID. Under the status quo ante, women could simply evict men for being men, without having to argue the point first.

So that's the additional protection. You may not agree with the principle of evicting men from sex-segregated restrooms, but at least we can be clear that that principle was better protected before the advent of fiat self-ID.

I might be more dismissive of the concern about opportunistic exhibitionists and voyeurs, exploiting fiat self-ID, except that the cohort of men actually demanding fiat self-ID as a right have a demonstrably large number of such predators within their population. The ones that want this access, no questions asked, with legal cover, are exactly the ones that are most suspect here.

 

[theprestige]

Where did you get that? I can't find any precedent for having force of law in ejecting a transperson? Or do you mean like the Jedi Mind Trick?

Indecent exposure, public disturbance... And really, an explicit law is always a last resort. Social pressure can often be enough. Was often enough, prior to the advent of fiat self-ID in public policy. But yeah, it probably has to be a law now, because we've reached a critical mass of predators and jackasses, and can no longer have nice things.

 

[p0lka]

Was irrelevant before.
Is still irrelevant now.

How so?

 

[theprestige]

I don't believe the majority of transsexuals want females to allow any male into female-specific spaces at their whim.

That's good news if true.

But that doesn't change the fact that what trans rights activists are pushing for, as public policy, is exactly an entitlement for any male to enter any female-specific spaces at their whim. Even if a majority of transsexuals don't want this, it's still the case that this is what women are being asked to give up, in the name of trans rights. So it's not entirely good news. If true, it means that there's a silent majority who don't want this outcome, but are choosing to keep silent anyway. That's bad news.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

You... don't really understand how sexual predation works, do you?

I seem to have a much better idea about it than you. My wife, like many women, is very interested in real-life crime, so we often discuss actual predators.

It's largely opportunistic. It's not Ocean's 11. Rather, they take advantage of opportunities when they find them. But simply being in a bathroom with a woman isn't necessarily an opportunity. For example, if they are in a bathroom with multiple women, that's generally not an opportunity.

Yes. They could wait in a stall, or follow a woman in when they know she's the only one in there.

One of the things that allowing women to eject males from their spaces does is it reduces opportunities.

No, it probably just moves the scene of the crime.

If they are allowed to go in whenever they want, a predatory male can spend a lot of time in a bathroom doing nothing in particular until he finds an opportunity. And it's a lot harder to find those opportunities if he gets ejected.

In military terms, you're focusing on the boom, and you're failing to realize that keeping males out acts left of boom.

An alternative title for this thread: Rules To Protect People From People Who Don't Obey Rules.