Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

They don't prohibit self ID. They're just reasons not to falsely self ID.

The policy of self ID means that you cannot falsely claim an identity. Whatever you say your identity is, IS your identity.

Apart from that, there's the fact that I just have nothing to gain by misrepresenting myself and going into the wrong bathroom.

That’s merely your preference. That has nothing to do with your ability.

It's been over 20 years.

No, it hasn’t. Self ID as an official policy is much younger than that, and is not in place everywhere either.

 

[smartcooky]

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

It was YOU who brought up sets and subsets to "give yourself the imprimatur of learnedness"... I am simply aping your lead

And learnedness? Really? Pffft! The last time I used set theory in maths was at high school... that was 53 years ago

Anyway, the error lies in the potentiality confusion in the quoted step.

These are not errors, these are facts...

FACT: ANY man may become a Transgender Identified Man by fiat (simply by saying they are a woman)

FACT: ANY man may use the women's bathroom (simply by saying they are a woman)

The fact that you think these are errors clearly shows your ignorance of what Fiat Self-ID means.

That someone can do something does not mean that they will.

That someone can do something does not mean that they won't.

 

[mumblethrax]

The policy of self ID means that you cannot falsely claim an identity. Whatever you say your identity is, IS your identity.

This is incorrect. I can falsely identify. I do not have a gender identity that would allow me to use the ladies' room. If I say that I do, I am falsely identifying myself.

In other words, there is a fact of the matter about whether I am permitted to use the ladies' room. People are confusing "Who is permitted?" with "How can you tell?"

That’s merely your preference. That has nothing to do with your ability.

But it has a great deal to do with whether I would exercise that ability. I wouldn't. Because I have no desire to.

No, it hasn’t. Self ID as an official policy is much younger than that, and is not in place everywhere either.

It has. You have never (since the 2002 addendum to the Human Rights Law) been required to show ID in NYC to use the bathroom matching your gender identity, and I'm talking about NYC.

 

[smartcooky]

Therefore, cis and trans are synonymous.

Another one who doesn't truly understand what Self ID means (even though you keep telling everyone you do, its pretty clear that you don't)

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

Poe: Impersonation of an extreme viewpoint or write a post in a way that is difficult to tell hard to tell if it's sincere or a parody (referencing Poe's Law).

The viewpoint that biological males should not be allowed to use women's toilets is hardly an extreme one.
The viewpoint that women should give up their safe spaces to that a minuscule number of biological males can enter at will is the extreme viewpoint in play here... and that the viewpoint is held by YOU and the rest of your transgender-sycophant allies.

 

[smartcooky]

No, it hasn’t. Self ID as an official policy is much younger than that, and is not in place everywhere either.

Correct, and in some places where it WAS official policy, self-ID has been revoked... for example, in the UK by their Supreme Court
transgender identified males are banned from using women's bathrooms in nine US states...

Florida
Utah
Montana
South Dakota
Wyoming
Indiana
Nebraska
Kansas
Texas

And another 10 states are in the process of developing bans

There is also a federal ban on transgender identified males using women's bathrooms. It applies to all federal facilites and buildings.

 

[mumblethrax]

It was YOU who brought up sets and subsets to "give yourself the imprimatur of learnedness"... I am simply aping your lead

I asked you why you were using this bodged notation, not why you used the concept.

And learnedness? Really? Pffft! The last time I used set theory in maths was at high school... that was 53 years ago

Yeah, I can tell.

These are not errors, these are facts...

I'm not contesting their factuality.

I am saying the inference was invalid because actually saying you are a woman is a vital step to being considered a transwomen if your facts are correct.

That someone can do something does not mean that they won't.

Yes. Which means this is a separate determination.

I can think of at least two men who aren't going to say they're women.

Which means that not all men can use the ladies' room.

 

[lionking]

It's definitely fraught, but I would like to keep the focus on bathrooms for now,

Of course you do, because change rooms are where the most egregious invasions of women’s privacy and safety occurs.

But not surprising as you show little, if any, regard for women who feel anxious or threatened by the presence of transwomen in their previously safe places.

 

[mumblethrax]

Of course you do, because change rooms are where the most egregious invasions of women’s privacy and safety occurs.

No, that's not why.

And it was a spa, not a changing room.

 

[smartcooky]

Of course you do, because change rooms are where the most egregious invasions of women’s privacy and safety occurs.

But not surprising as you show little, if any, regard for women who feel anxious or threatened by the presence of transwomen in their previously safe place

That is very generous of you. I regard men who support the idea that transgender identified men should be allowed access to ANY women's spaces to have NO regard for women.... there is a name for people like that.

 

[lionking]

No, that's not why.

And it was a spa, not a changing room.

No difference. Why are you not concerned with change rooms/spas where men can parade naked (and even erect) if they say magic words?

 

[mumblethrax]

No difference. Why are you not concerned with change rooms/spas where men can parade naked (and even erect) if they say magic words?

I didn't say I wasn't concerned. I explicitly said it was fraught.

I'd prefer to stay focused on one topic, because I don't want to sprawl out into every topic.

 

[Pixel42]

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?

There have been links to videos in this thread and its predecessors that males have posted on social media of themselves happily strolling around what were previously female only spaces, proudly displaying the erection it is giving them. Are you saying that all of them were genuinely trans? I don't think that's the argument in favour of giving them access to what were previously female only spaces you think it is.

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

OK, how about this. Female only spaces are only female only spaces as long as only females are permitted to use them. As soon as any males are permitted to access them they instantly cease to be female only spaces and become mixed sex spaces. Allowing any males (including ones who claim to be female in their head) to access female only spaces therefore requires the abolition of female only spaces.

I avoid the use of unisex because here it usually means individual lockable cubicles which contain a complete set of facilities (toilet and washbasin) that anyone can use with no shared space. Those have their own pros and cons. Mixed sex facilities are something else, and are what we are usually discussing.

 

[mumblethrax]

OK, how about this. Female only spaces are only female only spaces as long as only females are permitted to use them. As soon as any males are permitted to access them they instantly cease to be female only spaces and become mixed sex spaces. Allowing any males (including ones who claim to be female in their head) to access female only spaces therefore requires the abolition of female only spaces.

Yeah. But then that's also necessarily true if you let mothers bring their sons into the ladies'.

 

[smartcooky]

Yeah. But then that's also necessarily true if you let mothers bring their sons into the ladies'.

Perfect is the enemy of good... amirite?

 

[mumblethrax]

Perfect is the enemy of good... amirite?

Good reason not to understand the question in overly formal terms.

 

[Pixel42]

Yeah. But then that's also necessarily true if you let mothers bring their sons into the ladies'.

If you want to be unreasonably pedantic, yes. Being unreasonably pedantic is rarely the best way to solve a genuinely vexing issue.

 

[smartcooky]

Good reason not to understand the question in overly formal terms.

Correct. You do not understand the question.

 

[smartcooky]

I asked you why you were using this bodged notation, not why you used the concept.

To make it easier for the less educated to understand. It worked, didn't it?

Yeah, I can tell.

First thing you've correctly understood in this whole thread.

I'm not contesting their factuality.

You did. You said "the error lies in the potentiality confusion". This means that in actuality, you dismissed their factuality.

I am saying the inference was invalid because actually saying you are a woman is a vital step to being considered a transwomen if your facts are correct.

Nope, that is not what the position was at all.

Its pretty obvious that you STILL do not understand the meaning of self ID.

Yes. Which means this is a separate determination.

I can think of at least two men who aren't going to say they're women.

Which means that not all men can use the ladies' room.

Wrong.

If I assert that anyone can learn to carry out a particular task, your saying that you "can think of at least two" people who aren't going to carry out that task does not negate my assertion.

 

[Aber]

In some polls they do (including recent polls, including the UK).

Up to a point.

Transwomen should not/should be allowed to use womens toilets 55/29
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/artic...-public-stand-on-transgender-rights-in-202425
Split of opposition is 57 male, 53 female; so not a significant difference.

When question clarified, transwomen who have not had surgery should not/should be allowed to use womens toilets 63/19

 

[lionking]

I didn't say I wasn't concerned. I explicitly said it was fraught.

I'd prefer to stay focused on one topic, because I don't want to sprawl out into every topic.

Up to a point.

Transwomen should not/should be allowed to use womens toilets 55/29
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/artic...-public-stand-on-transgender-rights-in-202425
Split of opposition is 57 male, 53 female; so not a significant difference.

When question clarified, transwomen who have not had surgery should not/should be allowed to use womens toilets 63/19

Bang!