Split Trans Issues, Split from Roe v Wade is on deck

[Emily Lake]

I still don't see how attacking trans women for things they didn't do is supposed to teach cis men who do bad things moral accountability. Do you also believe in shooting horses while they are eating grass, to teach wolves what happens when you steal chickens? Connect the dots for me. What man has ever learned an important moral lesson from passing an anti-trans policy? If anything, it just gives them more power and less accountability, since men usually get to enforce those laws, many of which require invading a woman's privacy to enforce. If the law says "arrest little girls for peeing in what you think is the wrong room", the arresting officer not only has the opportunity but the duty to terrify a little girl asking her questions about what she did in the bathroom.

Who the fuck in this thread is attacking trans women? Who is advocating for attacking trans women?

Are you seriously trying to pretend that the anti-trans lobby is not one of the most powerful and active forces in contemporary American politics?

Well, given the record-breaking speed with which the trans lobby managed to change laws, reinvent title IX and VII, and got fully intact males placed in women's prisons, and force-fed their belief that humans are clownfish into every level of education... I'm inclined to say that the trans lobby has a fuck ton more power.

At this point, reality is finally managing to rear its head, and people are waking up and realizing that the emperor really is butt naked, and we don't have to pretend he's in a new suit.

 

[Emily Lake]

There was a place/space until a few years ago.

When was that place ever peotected by authoritarian laws that give the state sole discretion in defining who is or isn't a woman? A general location and date range will do.

Until quite recently in history, everyone in western society pretty much agreed that woman was an adult female, with a karotype that was comprised of two X chromosomes.

The definition is expanding to include trans individuals because society has changed/progressed enough to recognize their presence in our society.

What makes you think that cis women have not always and do not still suffer under the weight of male dominated authoritarianism?

Instead of addressing authoritarianism, you wish women to forego their sense of modesty and safety.

That's a pretty fucked up sense of priorities.

Of course it's fucked up.

Regardless of how he identifies... Poli remains a male. And he demonstrates male behavioral traits and entitlement on a regular basis.

 

[Politesse]

And apparently you side with the majority USSC ruling that women have no such right to privacy with regards to their bodies.

No, I most certainly do not. The law has no place knowing, let alone deciding, who is allowed to express femininity or not, nor any biological fact about their bodies that they have not volunteered, unless at serious need. Especially not if the purpose of such inquiry is to facilitate discrimination under the law.

 

[Emily Lake]

I'm just over 5 ft and in my youth, under 100 lbs. I would beg to differ about a woman's ability to fight off a male attacker. Sure, usually the male is larger and stronger and often will win. I've successfully fought off someone a foot taller and twice my weight who was not fat but extremely fit. It helped that he did not expect resistance, true. Not as much as the fact that I was absolutely determined.

While often men will win in a physical fight against women, not always. Women are not helpless creatures.

Yeah, well, I've also fought off two would-be rapists. But neither of them wanted to actually injure or kill me. They were trying to force themselves on me, with the assumption that I would cower and give in. Neither of them expected me to fight back - but neither of them were actually willing to use their full force against me.

Your attacker also wasn't willing to use his full force against you. If he had desired to actually subdue you and have his way, I'm sorry Toni, but there's not a lot you could have done about it. Surprise works very well against an opportunistic man who doesn't want to bash your head in. It doesn't work so well against a man who is determined to harm you.

 

[laughing dog]

I still don't see how attacking trans women for things they didn't do is supposed to teach cis men who do bad things moral accountability. Do you also believe in shooting horses while they are eating grass, to teach wolves what happens when you steal chickens? Connect the dots for me. What man has ever learned an important moral lesson from passing an anti-trans policy? If anything, it just gives them more power and less accountability, since men usually get to enforce those laws, many of which require invading a woman's privacy to enforce. If the law says "arrest little girls for peeing in what you think is the wrong room", the arresting officer not only has the opportunity but the duty to terrify a little girl asking her questions about what she did in the bathroom.

Who the fuck in this thread is attacking trans women? Who is advocating for attacking trans women?

Are you seriously trying to pretend that the anti-trans lobby is not one of the most powerful and active forces in contemporary American politics?

How is that a relevant response to Toni’s question about who in this thread?

Because the thread isn't occurring in a vaccuum. We live in a time when women, both trans and cis, are under serious assault by an increasingly authoritarian government that does not have any woman's best interests at heart. That's the problem. Not someone on the internet getting their feelings hurt because they think "trans rights are human rights" is a personal attack on them.

I see. Your post was therapeutic in nature, not informative.

No, it's political in nature. This being a thread on politics, womanhood, and the law. More specifically the right to privacy under (and from) the law, the principle upon which Roe v Wade was decided.

Being political in nature does nit preclude therapy. If you demonstrate how it addressed Toni’s question, your explanation would be more convincing,

 

[Politesse]

There was a place/space until a few years ago.

When was that place ever peotected by authoritarian laws that give the state sole discretion in defining who is or isn't a woman? A general location and date range will do.

Until quite recently in history, everyone in western society pretty much agreed that woman was an adult female, with a karotype that was comprised of two X chromosomes.

The definition is expanding to include trans individuals because society has changed/progressed enough to recognize their presence in our society.

What makes you think that cis women have not always and do not still suffer under the weight of male dominated authoritarianism?

Instead of addressing authoritarianism, you wish women to forego their sense of modesty and safety.

That's a pretty fucked up sense of priorities.

Of course it's fucked up.

Regardless of how he identifies... Poli remains a male. And he demonstrates male behavioral traits and entitlement on a regular basis.

I am really and genuinely curious as to why you think you know what my biological sex is.

 

[Politesse]

Being political in nature does nit preclude therapy. If you demonstrate how it addressed Toni’s question, your explanation would be more convincing,

Toni is trying to make a personal issue out of a political and legal question that affects far more people thsn just her. My opinions on what rights should belong to a citizen have nothing to do with who said what and when in this thread.

 

[Emily Lake]

I have never suggested that trans women and girls do not belong in women only spaces.

I do.

You and I disagree on this, but not because I have any desire for trans people to be harmed. We disagree because I've been having this argument longer than you, and I've both witnessed and seen the documentation of the most abhorrent ways that women and girls are treated by males who claim to be women. There have been several cases of transgirls or transwomen sexually assaulting female women in bathrooms. There have been several cases of fully intact males who identify as transwomen exposing their dicks to women and girls who didn't consent to it. And repeatedly, the law has come down on the side of the males, protecting their feelings above the safety and dignity of women.

I started out much, much more willing to compromise and to try to dfind a reasonable accommodation. But every attempt was rejected. The only solution that transwomen and their allies will accept is the complete capitulation and submission of women. The only thing they'll accept is for every woman to pretend that they're just as much a female human being as we are, and that we can never ever tell the difference.

And the sheer vitriol, hatred, threats of rape and death aimed at women by transwomen is astonishing. It's frightening, and it's an entirely male behavior. Identifying as a transwoman doesn't make a male any less of a male, and it sure as hell doesn't alter their male aggression and threatening behavior.

So I'm done. I started out from a place of compassion and a desire to find some reasonable solution. But no more. There is no solution protects women from increased risk. And we already have more than enough risk. It's on men to find a way to be more accepting of gender non-conforming males.

It's not our problem to solve. We have enough on our plates already.

Sigh. Which makes trans women seem an awful lot like cis men.

A rather large portion of them ARE cis men. That's part of the problem . Due to policy and law changes that the trans lobby have pushed through - often without the public even being aware of it - what constitutes "trans" has become an ever-expanding umbrella. At this point, a rather large portion of the self-proclaimed transwomen out there are heterosexual men with a cross-dressing fetish. Many of them get sexual arousal out of fantasizing of themselves as women, being treated the way they think women should be treated - and the way they think women should be treated is degrading, because they view women as inherently degrading. They get off on invading women's spaces and making women uncomfortable, they get arousal from overriding women's boundaries.

Not all by any means, but a whole, whole, whole lot more than I'm comfortable letting into spaces where women are vulnerable or naked. I don't think women should be forced to become supporting actors in a man's sexual fantasy live action role play.

And since there's no way to tell which are which... the only reasonable course of action for the safety of women and girls is to exclude ALL males from female spaces, sports, and services, and to support separate unisex facilities that they can use instead.

 

[Emily Lake]

No, it's political in nature. This being a thread on politics, womanhood, and the law. More specifically the right to privacy under (and from) the law, the principle upon which Roe v Wade was decided.

Yeah... just not the privacy of actual female women. Only the privilege of male women to override women's privacy and safety.

 

[Emily Lake]

And apparently you side with the majority USSC ruling that women have no such right to privacy with regards to their bodies.

No, I most certainly do not. The law has no place knowing, let alone deciding, who is allowed to express femininity or not, nor any biological fact about their bodies that they have not volunteered, unless at serious need. Especially not if the purpose of such inquiry is to facilitate discrimination under the law.

The law also shouldn't fucking override the reality of sex and give men the special right to violate women's boundaries if they have special internal feelings.

It's not about femininity. Feminine males are still males, and males are still not females.

 

[Emily Lake]

I am really and genuinely curious as to why you think you know what my biological sex is.

Because you've been posting here for nearly a decade, and for the majority of that you didn't bother to try to hide your sex as a male. There's nothing curious about it.

Unless you want to now claim that you've always been an actual real female human being, and you merely spent a good long while pretending you were a male for grins?

Don't be daft, Poli. The fact of you being a male has never been a secret you tried to hide.

 

[Toni]

Being political in nature does nit preclude therapy. If you demonstrate how it addressed Toni’s question, your explanation would be more convincing,

Toni is trying to make a personal issue out of a political and legal question that affects far more people thsn just her. My opinions on what rights should belong to a citizen have nothing to do with who said what and when in this thread.

I thought you were first to resort to personal attacks,

The objection I have gotten to universal stalls from Loren and you is both that it would be expensive and people wouldn’t like it.

Your counter is that we should just have universal unisex facilities. Anyone who is uncomfortable using them or opposes your suggestion is either a silly religious nut or a bigot and certainly an anti trans zealot. Which you’ve accused me of being because I think the feelings and needs of all women should be considered. Not just cis women. All women. Btw, women are generally not thrilled when anyone of any sex, gender or sexual orientation invades their space or privacy or tells them what they must tolerate.

Having boundaries is healthy. You don’t have to like another person’s boundaries but you really should respect them.

This is not always easy or convenient. It’s an issue right now in my own family of siblings. But boundary is a boundary.

 

[Tigers!]

There was a place/space until a few years ago.

When was that place ever peotected by authoritarian laws that give the state sole discretion in defining who is or isn't a woman? A general location and date range will do.

You and Toni and Emily are involved in a long baseline rally that is generating much heat and very little light.
To simplify things you are at one end and Toni, Emily at the other.
To me it seems you (plural) are arguing at cross purposes - you want trans-women to access female 'spaces' without any regard to how many women may feel, react when they see what is to them, a man in an area that used to be a spot for them until a very few years ago.
They are have suggested a possible solution viz. doors on cubicles which does not seem to be acceptable to you.
Feel free to point out where my perception is faulty.

 

[Tigers!]

There was a place/space until a few years ago.

When was that place ever peotected by authoritarian laws that give the state sole discretion in defining who is or isn't a woman? A general location and date range will do.

Until quite recently in history, everyone in western society pretty much agreed that woman was an adult female, with a karotype that was comprised of two X chromosomes.

That was a very simple definition. Clear and concise. So of course it must be challenged.

The definition is expanding to include trans individuals because society has changed/progressed enough to recognize their presence in our society.

What makes you think that cis women have not always and do not still suffer under the weight of male dominated authoritarianism?

They still suffer too much.

Instead of addressing authoritarianism, you wish women to forego their sense of modesty and safety.

That's a pretty fucked up sense of priorities.

Yes indeed.

 

[Tigers!]

Being political in nature does nit preclude therapy. If you demonstrate how it addressed Toni’s question, your explanation would be more convincing,

Toni is trying to make a personal issue out of a political and legal question that affects far more people thsn just her.

Yes it affects all women.

My opinions on what rights should belong to a citizen have nothing to do with who said what and when in this thread.

And yet you have posted so many times about what is wrong with who said what and when in this thread.

 

[Politesse]

6.30To me it seems you (plural) are arguing at cross purposes - you want trans-women to access female 'spaces' without any regard to how many women may feel, react when they see what is to them, a man in an area that used to be a spot for them until a very few years ago.

Trans women already "access" those spaces, though neither very many nor very often due to the extreme danger they are in if they do, and need neither my nor Toni's permission to do so, because in most places that is not illegal. I don't think it should be, either, no. Not because I do not care what Toni or Emily think, but because what a few people feel in the moment is not and cannot be a sound basis for law.

They are have suggested a possible solution viz. doors on cubicles which does not seem to be acceptable to you.

I don't know why you think that. I have no problem at all with doored cubicles being available to anyone. I oppose discrimination and abuse, not freedom of choice. Or doors, as long as no one is locked inside them.

 

[Politesse]

Your counter is that we should just have universal unisex facilities.

I never said any such thing.

 

[Politesse]

Being political in nature does nit preclude therapy. If you demonstrate how it addressed Toni’s question, your explanation would be more convincing,

Toni is trying to make a personal issue out of a political and legal question that affects far more people thsn just her. My opinions on what rights should belong to a citizen have nothing to do with who said what and when in this thread.

I thought you were first to resort to personal attacks,

The objection I have gotten to universal stalls from Loren and you is both that it would be expensive and people wouldn’t like it.

Your counter is that we should just have universal unisex facilities. Anyone who is uncomfortable using them or opposes your suggestion is either a silly religious nut or a bigot and certainly an anti trans zealot. Which you’ve accused me of being because I think the feelings and needs of all women should be considered. Not just cis women. All women. Btw, women are generally not thrilled when anyone of any sex, gender or sexual orientation invades their space or privacy or tells them what they must tolerate.

Having boundaries is healthy. You don’t have to like another person’s boundaries but you really should respect them.

This is not always easy or convenient. It’s an issue right now in my own family of siblings. But boundary is a boundary.

Oh no. I would fucking LOVE it if you learned what a personal boundary was. Who the fuck ever gave you the right to tell anyone else what they are, or what their personal experiences have been? Who even are you? No one I know, and I do not pretend to. You have no right to characterize my genitals, my disposition, my mind, or my morality. None at all. You have the right to say who you are, if you must, but not a right to tell strangers who they are, uninvited and unwelcome.

 

[Politesse]

I am really and genuinely curious as to why you think you know what my biological sex is.

Because you've been posting here for nearly a decade, and for the majority of that you didn't bother to try to hide your sex as a male. There's nothing curious about it.

In other words, that's how I identify, so you assume it is true? Like any normal, decent person would do? Why then do you say "regardless of how you choose to identify"? That wouldn't make sense even if it were true that I had always identified as male.

But also, my little pronoun box has always said "nonbinary", I have never changed it, there's no pretending involved. You've just always misgendered me. Quite on purpose, as I have politely corrected you and you have been undeterred. For years.

 

[Toni]

6.30To me it seems you (plural) are arguing at cross purposes - you want trans-women to access female 'spaces' without any regard to how many women may feel, react when they see what is to them, a man in an area that used to be a spot for them until a very few years ago.

Trans women already "access" those spaces, though neither very many nor very often due to the extreme danger they are in if they do, and need neither my nor Toni's permission to do so, because in most places that is not illegal. I don't think it should be, either, no. Not because I do not care what Toni or Emily think, but because what a few people feel in the moment is not and cannot be a sound basis for law.

They are have suggested a possible solution viz. doors on cubicles which does not seem to be acceptable to you.

I don't know why you think that. I have no problem at all with doored cubicles being available to anyone. I oppose discrimination and abuse, not freedom of choice. Or doors, as long as no one is locked inside them.

Doored cubicles is what I’ve stated over and over and over.

I understand why trans women prefer/need/are e titled to women only spaces. I’ve never contested that at all.

The part you get hung up on is the absolute fact that some women are going to be traumatized IF they unexpectedly encounter a naked stranger with a penis in a women’s only space.

Trans person enters a cubicle/stall and closes door just as every other woman does= no problem. She is not traumatized by outrage or distressed expressed by other women who think a man has invaded their woman only space.

Because cis women cannot in any way shape or form be expected to know immediately in the moment that the naked stranger next to them with a penis is trans and not someone there for nefarious purposes.

Because throughout time, naked persons with penises appearing in women only spaces ARE there for nefarious reasons. Some men get off on just exposing themselves. Some are looking for someone to assault.

Women cannot be expected to not respond to a situation that can be and has almost always been a dangerous situation for them.

Just like little boys should not be expected to give their confession to priests exposing their penises. That’s clearly a violation.

So is a naked person with a penis in a women only spaces.

In a stall with a closed door = no problem.

Fully clothed adjusting hair or makeup? No problem.

I cannot believe you do not comprehend this as a genuine issue that can easily be solved by stalls/cubicles with doors.

Or why you are attacking me for stating the fact that a lot of women would be frightened or re-traumatized if they see what reasonably appears to them to ve a naked man in their space.

I don’t know or care why you have decided that I am a trans exclusionary feminist.

I’m not. That’s an invention in your own mind, not because of anything I’ve written.