Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Emily's Cat]

He was far more a threat when living cis anyway, when he actually committed his crimes.

Are you kidding me? This sounds like you think that Bryson's new-found identity somehow removes their propensity for violence. As if saying "I'm trans" is actually a for-realsies magic spell that makes the utterer completely safe and delicate.

 

[Thermal]

WHY do you think that some males should be in female intimate spaces?

I'm not sure they should.

Or more to the point, WHY do you think that some males should not be in male intimate spaces?

If they are not transwomen, I don't think they have any argument to be in one at all.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Not so.long ago, white people wanted black people out of their spaces, for exactly the reasons you give now. 'They're dangerous! It's improper! They make me uncomfortable! They are rude and obnoxious!"

Yes, I know you have to push back hard against that particular comparison. If I were in your role in it, I'd push back hard too, with any bull ◊◊◊◊ argument I could conjure up. No one is fooled.

You know what? If the rates of violent offenses and sexual offenses were even within spitting distance of each other on the basis of sex, you might have a point. But they aren't. It's not even remotely ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ comparable!

For your racial analogy to hold water at all, you would need 1) females to commit sexual and violent offenses at the same rate as males and 2) females to be the group in power treating males as an oppressed group.

 

[Thermal]

I'm going to ask a question that I suspect you'll want to scoff at and hand-wave away. I'm asking you to please don't do that, please give it real serious consideration, and respond.

What if a male who does not claim to be transgender says that it feels natural to them to use the female restroom?

I'd say no. The women's room is for women. Whether transwomen are close enough on the man-woman spectrum is largely the sticking point.

Should that male be given the right to access female restrooms so that they feel more comfortable?

No. We determine policies based on reason. No reason presented, no argument.

Would you use as support the fact that restroom attacks are very rare, so any objection to said male using female restrooms for their own comfort is just fearmongering?

Nope. I would use the support above.

 

[smartcooky]

For 'over a century', there have been no laws or policies preventing men from entering women's rest rooms.

That is because we never needed them. We didn't have obvious misogynistic, mentally ill men laboring under the delusion they were women who demanded access to women's toilets.

You want them now,

Because they are needed now thanks to the fad of gender ideology and violent trans activism, and the misogynistic sycophants who support transgender identified males using women's toilets.

and want to be able to Police for Penises on your own, with theoretical legal support.

There you go with your obsession again.

Without an actual cop there, I don't know how you think that's going to work, unless you assume (as you clearly do) that they pose no actual threat whatsoever and you think you are just going to humiliate someone who is docile and harmless.

Again, it hasn't been a problem for the last century or so.

 

[Thermal]

Are you kidding me? This sounds like you think that Bryson's new-found identity somehow removes their propensity for violence. As if saying "I'm trans" is actually a for-realsies magic spell that makes the utterer completely safe and delicate.

I don't know that. Do you? Bryson "coming out" may have alleviated his inner turmoil, and acknowledging that he is a woman may remove his hostility towards them.

In Brysons' case, I don't think so. I think he was playing the "I'm totally trans" card to hide and/or get into a women's prison.

Of all the potential trans threats, though, Bryson is not a good example, for as much as he is held up as the poster boy. He committed his attacks as a full on cis guy. Not even accused of anything as trans.

 

[Thermal]

You know what? If the rates of violent offenses and sexual offenses were even within spitting distance of each other on the basis of sex, you might have a point. But they aren't. It's not even remotely ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ comparable!

For your racial analogy to hold water at all, you would need 1) females to commit sexual and violent offenses at the same rate as males and 2) females to be the group in power treating males as an oppressed group.

"Females" don't factor into that analogy.

You know how analogies work. I've seen you argue the exact point I am making right now. When you try to 1:1 every element to disprove it, that's a transparent cop out.

Eta: the Natl Domestic Abuse database says over 1 in 3 momen are victimized, and over 1 in 4 men. Spitting distance may be a little closer than you imagine.

It's perfectly true that radically more men (virtually all) commit SAs though. But we see what data there is. Assault rates don't increase under open gender policies. What you insist happens... doesn't.

And that's why I keep getting stuck. I viscerally agree with you. But the data doesn't bear those fears out. I live right in the middle of the petri dish of the entire TRA wish list come true. There is no difference whatsoever between before the laws and after, as every female I know has told me. There are no reports of "unreported offenses" filling Twitter feeds. No pages of women "self excluding" out of fear. Just... nothing. Biz as usual, before and after.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Changes nothing of what is being suggested. Go ahead, stop a man jaywalking in the middle of the street and tell him to get back on the curb under your command. Pick up your teeth afterwards and get back to me on what a great idea it is to confront random men on the street.

"Hey ladies, that dude is going to beat you up if you don't let him have his way, so you should totally just comply and quit complaining about it... "?

Of course that's an exaggeration, I know it is and so does everyone else. But you're still essentially saying that females should just submit to voyeurism and exhibitionism for fear of being physically assaulted by a sex offender, instead of trying to prevent the offenders from having access to nonconsenting females in the first goddamned place.

ETA:

And this is even a new argument in favor of fiat self-ID: If a man demands access to a women's restroom whether you like it or not, you should just let him in, because he'll probably knock your teeth out if you object.

Damn straight. You think someone's actually dangerous? Get the ◊◊◊◊ out of there, or throw down. "Give him a piece of your mind" ain't one of your prudent options.

I take it back. Apparently you ARE saying females should just submit to sex offender's wishes or else.

 

[Myriad]

I take it back. Apparently you ARE saying females should just submit to sex offender's wishes or else.

Not just the female victims. Anyone who might do anything to get in the sex offender's way! Even cops should back off if they know what's good for them!

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'm sure. And then there's the other very predictable outcome: off duty cop working security confronts a suspected voyeur (not trans) and the guy tackles the cop, bloodies him up, steals his taser and uses it on some other vigilante as he escapes, assaulting a woman on his way out.


This was an actual trained cop with weapons that got his ass handed to him by one of those timid criminals. Don't underestimate people, man. My advice is to not pick confrontations with people you won't fare well against if things go south.

"Shush up ladies, and just let the voyeur peep at you. And well, if he wants to have non-consenting lovemaking with you, you should assume the position or else... "

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'm not sure they should.

If they are not transwomen, I don't think they have any argument to be in one at all.

Two follow up questions:

1) Do you believe that males with transgender identities are NOT males?
2) How do you tell whether or not a given male has a transgender identity or not?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'd say no. The women's room is for women. Whether transwomen are close enough on the man-woman spectrum is largely the sticking point.

No. We determine policies based on reason. No reason presented, no argument.

Nope. I would use the support above.

I know you don't want to recognize this, but your entire position breaks down to magic words. It all ends up hinging on blithely accepting what someone says about their unverifiable and completely subjective feelings about their gender soul in a way that allows that individual's sacred gender feels to override objective reality.

What you're doing, even if unintentionally, is assuming that if a male says that they "feel like a woman" they actually for realsies are a real woman. You give absolutely no consideration to the reality that some males will lie about how they feel if it gets them access to females who don't want them there. You ignore that a male's internal feelings inside their mind do NOT change their bodies, and that most females can tell that a male is a male. You end up essentially demanding that females must oblige the desires of any male who says the magic phrase.

 

[Thermal]

"Hey ladies, that dude is going to beat you up if you don't let him have his way, so you should totally just comply and quit complaining about it... "?

Of course that's an exaggeration, I know it is and so does everyone else. But you're still essentially saying that females should just submit to voyeurism and exhibitionism for fear of being physically assaulted by a sex offender, instead of trying to prevent the offenders from having access to nonconsenting females in the first goddamned place.

ETA:



I take it back. Apparently you ARE saying females should just submit to sex offender's wishes or else.

JFC, NO!!! You are not this dense, EC. I'm saying if you see someone you think is a literal, physical threat to you, don't go wag your finger in their face. Get the ◊◊◊◊ out of there! I do, whenever possible.

There's no way you "misunderstood" that to think I meant you should stay in there with them. Knock it off.

 

[Thermal]

Two follow up questions:

1) Do you believe that males with transgender identities are NOT males?
2) How do you tell whether or not a given male has a transgender identity or not?

Same answers that I've given to you repeatedly. Bored to death with rinse and repeat.

 

[Matthew Best]

Woman jailed after exposing herself to group of children in park

A woman who exposed herself to a group of children in a Lancaster park has been jailed.

www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk

"A woman who exposed herself to a group of children in a Lancaster park has been jailed.

...A child who was playing on the monkey bars in the park saw Mart holding her penis and wiggling it at her, and she immediately told her friends and father."

 

[Emily's Cat]

Same answers that I've given to you repeatedly. Bored to death with rinse and repeat.

Humor me, I've been on vacation for a couple of weeks and my brain is all full of work stuff.

Do you believe that males with transgender identities are NOT males?
How do you tell whether a given male does or does not have a transgender identity?

 

[smartcooky]

There is no difference whatsoever between before the laws and after, as every female I know has told me. There are no reports of "unreported offenses" filling Twitter feeds. No pages of women "self excluding" out of fear. Just... nothing. Biz as usual, before and after.

For every unverified personal anecdote you can come up with as evidence for your position being correct, I can come up with an unverified personal anecdote to counter it.

Every woman I know tells me they would self-select out of using public toilet and changing facilities if males were routinely allowed right of access. Indeed, some already have. For example, a few years ago, an independent fitness centre opened in my town. It had no competition in the area, the nearest one at that time was a franchised "City Fitness" gym seven miles away in the city. The independent one had made the decision to only have unisex changing facilities - and the result of this is that they could not get women to join - local women would travel into the city instead. That fitness centre was financially on the brink until they changed their policy and spent the money to install seperate facilities for men and women. They are still open, but barely now, because "City Fitness" has opened a gym in my town.
Allowing men to access women-only spaces DOES have an undesirable impact on women's rghts. The fact that all the women you know your neck of the woods are compliant enough to allow themselves to be cowed into acceptance doesn't change what happens in the wider world.

 

[theprestige]

For 'over a century', there have been no laws or policies preventing men from entering women's rest rooms.

And yet the men who wanted in, over the objections of women, by and large knew to stay the ◊◊◊◊ out anyway.

 

[Thermal]

Humor me, I've been on vacation for a couple of weeks and my brain is all full of work stuff.

Ordinarily, I'd be happy to but you've demonstrated a long long track record ITT of firehosing a dozen replies, not listening to the responses, disappearing for weeks, returning and asking the same goddamned questions again.

Guess what is likely to happen if I answer them again during this firehosing session?

Do you believe that males with transgender identities are NOT males?

Fine. Since I've answered this directly to you several times, go back in the thread for multiple paragraphs of fleshing out. The short answer is: no.

How do you tell whether a given male does or does not have a transgender identity?

Same caveats as above: if they say they do, they probably do. The impostor trannys theorized here do not materialize in the real world when we look at the available data.

If you or anyone else has data that suggests the imposter hordes go off the leash under open gender policies, I'm all ears. Been asking fot many months now, only to hear the crickets chirping away.

If it happens, as you claim, let's consider the evidence. If the only evidence is "aw come on man, just imagine there is some", I'm going to direct you to a dictionary with the word "skeptic" highlighted.

 

[d4m10n]

The impostor trannys theorized here do not materialize in the real world when we look at the available data.

No idea what this phrase is even supposed to mean.

If a guy says to me "Man, sure wish I was a gal" then I'm going to believe them.

I mean, they could be lying about their own desires but there is no way to check that.

Some people (e.g. medical providers working in pain management) have to worry about people misrepresenting their own mental states, but I'm not one of them.