Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Emily's Cat]

They do matter. There are personal and social consequences if I walk into the ladies' room.

What are the personal and social consequences if you say "Oh, I'm trans" when you walk into the female restroom?

 

[mumblethrax]

Okay, I think we're making progress. Eddie Izzard believes they are a woman, but Eddie Izzard is NOT.

I know what you mean by it, and it isn't false in that sense. It's not a bizarre thing to say, in other words.

You're overgeneralizing in an effort to support a very specific instance. Yes, everyone has a concept of self. That doesn't, however, mean that everyone has a gender identity. If that were the case, then you could also say that everyone has a soul because some people view the concept of a soul as an important aspect of their self-identity.

I made it clear that I was not talking about gender identity. I am making no overgeneralization (?), to support any kind of point.

I am merely noting that someone, in his zeal to deny the existence of gender identity, denied that there was such a thing as a self-concept at all, and mocked the very idea of it. It's remarkable when people go off the rails that badly.

Sometimes, when I point out that something isn't true, it's just because it isn't true. I don't need to always have a reason to correct a wildly wrong statement.

 

[Emily's Cat]

We all know what you mean by 'women'. Having a forum idiolect is weird and performative, particularly if you (and I) find it distasteful.

I find it the preferable course when several people view the word "women" as including some males. There are quite a number of people on this forum who 100% think that some women have penises, and some men have vaginas. Heck, you only have to go back about 30 pages or so to find p0lka being pretty clear that the word "woman" means gender identity and does NOT mean sex.

I've elected to be explicit about what I'm saying and cut off any opportunity for stupid language games. It's awkward and I don't like it, but if that's what I need to do to exclude ALL MALES, then that's what I'll do.

Sure, but peering into a stall or exposing yourself are both criminal acts. So that expectation seems to be addressed to the degree it can be.

But apparently walking fully nude into a female only spa area with your dick hanging out is perfectly fine as long as you say the magic words. Walking around the female shower with the danglies dangling is somehow *not* indecent exposure as long as you use the special passphrase.

I think there are empirical problems with this idea. Like, it's hard to square with the significantly greater support expressed by women for permitting
transwomen in the ladies' room. Even after the erosion of support in recent years.

What do you mean by "greater support"? Greater support than shown by males? Because the majority of females do not support allowing males with transgender identities to use female restrooms.

 

[smartcooky]

You mean other than the differences that have been shared with you as personal experiences, and the ones that you've rejected as "not real trans so it doesn't count"?

His problem is that he thinks all of HIS personal experiences and anecdotes are the Holy Truth, while the personal experiences and anecdotes of anyone who disagrees with him are all Unholy Lies.

 

[mumblethrax]

You might. But nobody can stop you, if self ID is the controlling policy. Which makes it unisex, with extra steps.

No, it makes it a policy that governs behavior. The "extra steps" doesn't explain why people don't treat gender-segregated bathrooms as gender-neutral.

Maybe for you. Some people get anxious about going into any public bathroom. So what?

So they would probably like to avoid that if they could. I can, by not going in there.

If self-ID is the controlling policy, anyone doing that would get fired and criminally charged.

I'm not always at work. Sometimes I'm in a dive bar.

And, y'know, I don't want to get beat up even if the person who beats me up suffers consequences, even if lots of people are deterred. Does me no good at all, once I've been beat up.

 

[smartcooky]

... MOST PEOPLE respect sex-based boundaries and dignity, and aren't so arrogant that they place their own happy feelings above the comfort and dignity of everyone else.

But transgender identified males absolutely do not respect ANY sex-based boundaries and dignity.

 

[mumblethrax]

I've elected to be explicit about what I'm saying and cut off any opportunity for stupid language games. It's awkward and I don't like it, but if that's what I need to do to exclude ALL MALES, then that's what I'll do.

Ok. Well, I don't think you really have to do this, as evidenced by the fact that nobody else does. I understand what you mean by 'women', 'he', 'she', etc. But I'm also not here to stop you, and at least we both don't like it.

But apparently walking fully nude into a female only spa area with your dick hanging out is perfectly fine as long as you say the magic words. Walking around the female shower with the danglies dangling is somehow *not* indecent exposure as long as you use the special passphrase.

It's definitely fraught, but I would like to keep the focus on bathrooms for now, since I'm only trying to point out that we have not seen the disastrous outcome with respect to bathrooms here in NYC.

What do you mean by "greater support"? Greater support than shown by males?

Yes.

Because the majority of females do not support allowing males with transgender identities to use female restrooms.

In some polls they do (including recent polls, including the UK). I'm confident that in NYC the majority do. But more to the point, it's a bit weird to be chastised for being a misogynist, a mansplainer, having male privilege, when if all men deferred to women on this issue, it would move the needle towards greater trans rights, not away from it.

 

[Thermal]

The abhorrent thought that males, regardless of how they identify, should stay out of female-only intimate spaces? The abhorrent thought that some males, regardless of how they identify, have sexual paraphilias that represent an increased risk of offending to others? The abhorrent thought that cross-dressing males have a well documented higher tendency to sexually offend, and that it's a known correlate with voyeurism, exhibitionism, and rape, as well as significantly over-represented among serial killers?

No, not those.

Great. Do you also know a black person who refers to themselves with the n-word, and therefore think it's okay for you to refer to black people in general in the same way?

Yes, quite a few.

 

[Thermal]

They are. At this point, it's nothing more than fiction to pretend they aren't. They're not evenly mixed, only because most males respect that most females don't want them in their restrooms, and most females respect that most males don't want them in their restrooms. But legally, they're all unisex now.

They are not.

So they're entirely male except for the females that use them... and entirely female except for the males that use them. Kind of sounds like they might be unisex, hmm?

No. In fact, police can and do deny claims of transgenderism at their discretion.

Half no. Because MOST PEOPLE respect sex-based boundaries and dignity, and aren't so arrogant that they place their own happy feelings above the comfort and dignity of everyone else.

Great! So not unisex, where the users would be split 50/50. We're on a roll with dialing back the fear mongering.

So what is the real ratio in these "unisex" restrooms in my state, that I and everyone i know has daily experience with versus your dead zero? Please, enlighten me.

 

[Thermal]

It's you, buddy. YOU keep arguing that "self-id" doesn't mean that any male can just declare themselves to be trans and therefore gain access to female intimate spaces. But when YOU walk through it, there's no way at all to keep out males of any sort - all they have to do is say that they're trans. There's literally no way to determine who is and who is not trans. Such a way does not exist. Therefore, when you give males who declare themselves to be transgender the *right* to enter female intimate spaces, you are giving ANY MALE WHO WANTS TO the exact same right.

You are not. You are noting that some people might lie and deceive, and you think that's super insightful.

So why don't we see it in real time? Where are all the cis guys in cis guy clothes using this cop out and having their mugs plastered all over twitter? Where are they, EC? Can you at least show us a thousand or so, for a start? 100? 10? Any?

Because ANY male at all who says they're trans is, by definition trans.

But please, go on and once again tell us that we're all wrong, and that it only applies to males with transgender identities again. Even though nobody at all can tell whether or not someone has a transgender identity other than them saying words out loud. It's ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ magic, pal.

No more speculation. Your speculation is not observed in the real world. Show your examples and data, and we can consider them. No more posturing and rhetoric. Show it.

Yell loudly for help, with the reasonable expectation that someone is going to show up and have my back.

You want a surprise? You'd get it, in any policy scenario.

The reasonable expectation that the obvious male can't just say the magic words "oh, I'm trans" and then suddenly I get treated like I'm the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊.

A court or cop might. The guys who would have your back, like yours truly, are not the cops or courts, who are far, far away. Like I keep saying, I want police out of the whole matter. We have always been able to handle it ourselves.

You mean other than the differences that have been shared with you as personal experiences

Haven't heard one yet. As far as I've heard, I'm the only one on this thread to have been assaulted by transwomen in rest rooms.

, and the ones that you've rejected as "not real trans so it doesn't count"?

Never happened. Please stop making ◊◊◊◊ up

 

[d4m10n]

[L]egally, they're all unisex now.

They are not.

Unisex means suitable for both sexes.

It is my understanding that people of both sexes are legally permitted in any bathroom in New Jersey, on account of applicable antidiscrimination laws.

Am I misunderstanding?

 

[mumblethrax]

Unisex means both sexes are allowed, right?

Sure. "Both sexes are allowed" does not mean "One sex, and a subset of another sex are allowed." As evidenced by the fact that unisex bathroom is treated synonymously with gender-neutral bathroom, and all-gender bathroom. These all entail that everyone is allowed--the obvious intention behind the concept of a unisex bathroom.

I don't know who this broken robot cosplay is for, but it doesn't matter in any case. Whether or not a bathroom is legally unisex is just down to statutory definitions.

 

[d4m10n]

"One sex, and a subset of another sex are allowed."

The subset in this case is literally anyone who says they ought to be allowed—and it's considered rude to ask.

It shouldn't require a broken robot to explain this, but here we are.

 

[Ziggurat]

And, y'know, I don't want to get beat up even if the person who beats me up suffers consequences, even if lots of people are deterred. Does me no good at all, once I've been beat up.

What you're describing is social forces that prohibit self ID even when it's official policy.

Those forces will decay over time if official policy contradicts them.

 

[mumblethrax]

The subset in this case is literally anyone who says they ought to be allowed—and it's considered rude to ask.

No, but let's stipulate that it is. That's less than the whole set. So...not unisex bathrooms.

Would have been a lot easier just to understand the concept of a unisex bathroom, rather than try to cram the square peg into the round hole.

What you're describing is social forces that prohibit self ID even when it's official policy.

They don't prohibit self ID. They're just reasons not to falsely self ID. Apart from that, there's the fact that I just have nothing to gain by misrepresenting myself and going into the wrong bathroom.

Those forces will decay over time if official policy contradicts them.

It's been over 20 years. I see no sign that the generation that has grown up entirely under the aegis of this policy has a different attitude than I do. When does the decay start?

 

[smartcooky]

The subset in this case is literally anyone who says they ought to be allowed—and it's considered rude to ask.

It shouldn't require a broken robot to explain this, but here we are.

And how do you allow the subset of one sex in, while keeping the the remainer of the set out?

I'm thinking someone STILL doesn't understand what "Self-ID" means, let alone understand it's implications.

 

[Thermal]

Unisex means suitable for both sexes.

By that definition, just about anything is unisex. When you whittle things down to definitions that reach being meaningless, y'ain't getting too far.

It is my understanding that people of both sexes are legally permitted in any bathroom in New Jersey, on account of applicable antidiscrimination laws.

Am I misunderstanding?

Seems to me it never says that. Maybe I am misunderstanding?

There is a lot of talk about gender identity and expression, not a peep about the sex of restroom users. Could you direct me to the words you are seeing but I am not?

 

[smartcooky]

No, but let's stipulate that it is. That's less than the whole set. So...not unisex bathrooms

No, you are still not getting this.

{Transgender Identified Men} are permitted to use the bathrooms assigned to {Women} = TRUE
{Transgender Identified Men} ⊆ {men} = TRUE
{Cis Men} ⊆ {men} = TRUE
Any member of {men} can become a member of {Transgender Identified Men} by fiat = TRUE

Therefore

ANY member of {Men} may use bathrooms assigned to {Women} also = TRUE

Therefore, bathrooms assigned to {Women} are in every way but name Unisex bathrooms.

 

[mumblethrax]

Any member of {men} can become a member of {Transgender Identified Men} by fiat = TRUE

Therefore

ANY member of {Men} may use bathrooms assigned to {Women} also = TRUE

Why are you bothering to (partially) ape mathematical notation here? To give yourself the imprimatur of learnedness? You can just use English.

Anyway, the error lies in the potentiality confusion in the quoted step. That someone can do something does not imply that they will.

 

[Thermal]

Therefore, cis and trans are synonymous.

Once you realize it's all a Poe, you can appreciate it more.