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

[Playball40]

It is. One doesn't choose to be harassed, marginalized, disrespected and murdered. The chances of a woman being attacked by a transgendered woman is so infintesimal there is NO reason to bar them from a public restroom of their choice

How many women must be attacked by a transgendered woman before it considered not to be infinitesimal?

Can you provide me with a number legitimate cases where a woman was attacked by a transgendered woman? Not a cis-man, but a tg woman.

 

[Toni]

Bullshit. Possessing a "penis" doesn't automatically make one "pervy rapey" and if that is indeed the case, then why should a transgendered woman be forced to use a restroom with the "pervy rapey MEN". Sorry, but my analogy stands. They are not SEPARATE but equal (as "men's room" often do NOT offer private stalls).

I do not know what the situation is like in the USA but in Aust. I have never found a men's room without doors on the stalls (except for acts of vandalism).
They are added automatically. No nonsense about cost, area taken up etc.

In the US, there are far fewer private stalls in men's rooms if there are urinals present.

Yes, I’m aware. I think that would be difficult for trans men.

I would hope extending closed stalls in all locker rooms would help all trans individuals as well as other who have modesty concerns or scars, etc. that they prefer not to be much on display.

 

[Playball40]

This whole thing comes down to being cis men are the problem. Cis men faking a trans identity to gain access to women's spaces and cis men who beat up trans in the "wrong" bathroom.

Agree. But allowing tg women in a women's only space is not going to stop, nor invite, cis men faking a trans identity. There is NOTHING stopping that now.

 

[Playball40]

Bullshit. Possessing a "penis" doesn't automatically make one "pervy rapey" and if that is indeed the case, then why should a transgendered woman be forced to use a restroom with the "pervy rapey MEN". Sorry, but my analogy stands. They are not SEPARATE but equal (as "men's room" often do NOT offer private stalls).

I do not know what the situation is like in the USA but in Aust. I have never found a men's room without doors on the stalls (except for acts of vandalism).
They are added automatically. No nonsense about cost, area taken up etc.

In the US, there are far fewer private stalls in men's rooms if there are urinals present.

Yes, I’m aware. I think that would be difficult for trans men.

Exactly, so separate but equal restroom space does NOT exist for TG individuals.

 

[Jarhyn]

In the context of a women only space, an individual with a beard is going to arouse suspicion of not really belonging in that space. It may not be fair to your niece anymore than it is fair to assume that a tall person is good at basketball. A lot of people will assume that a tall mane can sink more baskets from the few throw line than a short woman—and they might be very wrong. But for women in a women’s only space, they absolutely will make a snap judgement t about that stranger with a beard if there is nothing else to indicate that she is a she who belongs in the space.

I'm very confused by this statement. So a person with a full beard is expected to use the MEN'S room even if they have a vagina, but a TG woman from all outward appearances, but happens to have a penis, is expected to use the MEN'S room too? Do you not see the infringement of rights here? Specifically against TG women?

Which is quite my point. At some point it becomes an unacceptable enforcement of gender essentialism.

The only way out I am currently seeing is accepting an ID marker being sufficient, because it presages an extraordinary amount of work and treatment and handling and discussion getting to that point.

I will reiterate for Toni that this work is exactly one of those aforementioned "ways to tell".

Emily Lake has outright said she believes MOST trans-women are doing so for the sake of wanting to be vouyers.

This logically goes to follow that she thinks that the measures trans people actually must go through cannot possibly be sufficiently burdensome and probing to discourage, identify, and prevent the transposeur.

This is a level of whipped up foaming-at-the-mouth hysteria* that I will get someone killed, and possibly my own niece.

*I hate this word for the inappropriate tie to gender and sex, when the opposing population as indicated by the root produces similarly equal amounts of people with this trait, if not worse examples still. Please, someone offer a better word that carries the same cultural charge of overwhelming senseless neurotic panick?

 

[Toni]

Bullshit. Possessing a "penis" doesn't automatically make one "pervy rapey" and if that is indeed the case, then why should a transgendered woman be forced to use a restroom with the "pervy rapey MEN". Sorry, but my analogy stands. They are not SEPARATE but equal (as "men's room" often do NOT offer private stalls).

I do not know what the situation is like in the USA but in Aust. I have never found a men's room without doors on the stalls (except for acts of vandalism).
They are added automatically. No nonsense about cost, area taken up etc.

In the US, there are far fewer private stalls in men's rooms if there are urinals present.

Yes, I’m aware. I think that would be difficult for trans men.

Exactly, so separate but equal restroom space does NOT exist for TG individuals.

I did update my post: I advocate for universal stalls in locker rooms, etc. for everyone

Other people who might have issues in men’s spaces would be some gay individuals or intersex individuals or any non-gender conforming persons—and probably people I have t thought of at this moment.

IMO, no one should have any issue accessing and being comfortable and safe in restroom, dressing room/locker facilities. Everyone should be safe, comfortable, welcome. Stalls with doors seem to be the best solution at this time.

It’s almost as though the real issue is not stalls, doors, etc. but male violence towards women, LGBTQIA+ people, other men or just anyone they don’t think is ok.

Yet any time I suggest that men need to address these issues of male violence, I’m either ignored or insulted.

 

[Jarhyn]

This whole thing comes down to being cis men are the problem. Cis men faking a trans identity to gain access to women's spaces and cis men who beat up trans in the "wrong" bathroom.

Agree. But allowing tg women in a women's only space is not going to stop, nor invite, cis men faking a trans identity. There is NOTHING stopping that now.

Lots of things are stopping it, namely the large procedural and medical hurdles that actually exist to establishing a trans identity in most jurisdictions.

The problem here is that our culture is still, sadly, on "reefer madness" levels of propaganda being leveled at TG people, and not only TG people but those who do not conform to gender essentialism, such as my niece (and kudos to you for figuring it out!)

 

[Toni]

In the context of a women only space, an individual with a beard is going to arouse suspicion of not really belonging in that space. It may not be fair to your niece anymore than it is fair to assume that a tall person is good at basketball. A lot of people will assume that a tall mane can sink more baskets from the few throw line than a short woman—and they might be very wrong. But for women in a women’s only space, they absolutely will make a snap judgement t about that stranger with a beard if there is nothing else to indicate that she is a she who belongs in the space.

I'm very confused by this statement. So a person with a full beard is expected to use the MEN'S room even if they have a vagina, but a TG woman from all outward appearances, but happens to have a penis, is expected to use the MEN'S room too? Do you not see the infringement of rights here? Specifically against TG women?

Which is quite my point. At some point it becomes an unacceptable enforcement of gender essentialism.

The only way out I am currently seeing is accepting an ID marker being sufficient, because it presages an extraordinary amount of work and treatment and handling and discussion getting to that point.

I will reiterate for Toni that this work is exactly one of those aforementioned "ways to tell".

Emily Lake has outright said she believes MOST trans-women are doing so for the sake of wanting to be vouyers.

This logically goes to follow that she thinks that the measures trans people actually must go through cannot possibly be sufficiently burdensome and probing to discourage, identify, and prevent the transposeur.

This is a level of whipped up foaming-at-the-mouth hysteria* that I will get someone killed, and possibly my own niece.

*I hate this word for the inappropriate tie to gender and sex, when the opposing population as indicated by the root produces similarly equal amounts of people with this trait, if not worse examples still. Please, someone offer a better word that carries the same cultural charge of overwhelming senseless neurotic panick?

We ( but mostly men) need to address male propensity towards violence toward women, anyone in the LGBTQIA + community or anyone else they deem not ok.

 

[TomC]

I came out as gay back in the 80s, just as the AIDS disaster got underway. I spent a LOT of time in various support groups and such. I wound up having a fair number of conversations with trans women.

They generally didn't have much trouble with women's restrooms. Stay out of dangerous establishments, serious efforts at presenting, and appropriate behavior. That's no more complex than "Do your business, wash your hands, and get out". No talking, no looking, no anything. The worst reaction they generally got was a raised eyebrow.

The combination of trans activism and the right making a big issue I'm sure has greatly messed things up for them.
Tom

 

[Jarhyn]

Yet any time I suggest that men need to address these issues of male violence, I’m either ignored or insulted.

"Men" in this response are a religion. It is not "male" violence but the violence of Men. Not in the way my husband is a "man", or my crush at work is a "man" or presumably in the way Loren is a man, but of those who seek to be "one of the Men".

This works, sadly, like any religion: if you are a heretic to them, you will not be heeded.

Its like saying "Christians need to address their issues of religiously motivated violence", and them ignoring and insulting you.

They exist to empower not any man, but to empower Men.

Nobody has said it to me in these terms before, but it is the result of seeing the 'blob' of Men operate, sometimes from thinking for a moment like I would want to or should want to belong inside of it, and perhaps for a time I was, though am glad I reject it now.

Men are fucking awful, and it's dreadfully hard to know, sometimes, until they try to test you.

I heard one of the Men yelling on the phone to someone yesterday and thinking "the person on the other end of that phone, why are they not hanging up on him?"

And if I challenged him for being one of those Men, he would have lashed out at me, possibly accusing me of being some kind of asshole for telling him he deserves to be alone for their threats and abuse and declarations of another person's powerlessness under him.

I fully acknowledge there is an issue with Men, but this particular issue is one which nobody you are talking to has any particular levers on which to effectively push.

 

[Toni]

This whole thing comes down to being cis men are the problem. Cis men faking a trans identity to gain access to women's spaces and cis men who beat up trans in the "wrong" bathroom.

Agree. But allowing tg women in a women's only space is not going to stop, nor invite, cis men faking a trans identity. There is NOTHING stopping that now.

Right notice I am AGAINST banning transwomen from women only spaces.

In the interests of safety for all, I’ve pointed out that it’s not realistic to expect women to immediately be able to discern threat( sex pest/from no -threat ( trans woman).

I’ve said: universal stalls doors for all spaces, male only female only all gender family : whatever.

The real solution is addressing violence in our society, largely perpetuated by male persons.

Since men by and large don’t want to address that: stalls with doors for all.

 

[Toni]

Yet any time I suggest that men need to address these issues of male violence, I’m either ignored or insulted.

"Men" in this response are a religion. It is not "male" violence but the violence of Men. Not in the way my husband is a "man", or my crush at work is a "man" or presumably in the way Loren is a man, but of those who seek to be "one of the Men".

This works, sadly, like any religion: if you are a heretic to them, you will not be heeded.

Its like saying "Christians need to address their issues of religiously motivated violence", and them ignoring and insulting you.

They exist to empower not any man, but to empower Men.

Nobody has said it to me in these terms before, but it is the result of seeing the 'blob' of Men operate, sometimes from thinking for a moment like I would want to or should want to belong inside of it, and perhaps for a time I was, though am glad I reject it now.

Men are fucking awful, and it's dreadfully hard to know, sometimes, until they try to test you.

I heard one of the Men yelling on the phone to someone yesterday and thinking "the person on the other end of that phone, why are they not hanging up on him?"

And if I challenged him for being one of those Men, he would have lashed out at me, possibly accusing me of being some kind of asshole for telling him he deserves to be alone for their threats and abuse and declarations of another person's powerlessness under him.

I fully acknowledge there is an issue with Men, but this particular issue is one which nobody you are talking to has any particular levers on which to effectively push.

Worse: no recognition or desire to change.

Many years ago, there e as a thread in w high I postulated that the world did not actually need men. And that if we were to save the human race by colonizing another planet, the most practical thing to do would be to send women along with a diverse set of frozen sperm from as many healthy makes as possible and to artificially inseminate the women.

Men of course thought it was like be better to harvest female eggs and have artificial wombs. Which is only more practical if you care more about men and the fragile make ego than the survival of the human race.

I believe the heads of a lot of men actually exploded at the idea that men themselves were unnecessary: just their sperm.

But it’s true.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I mean, technically true, but if artificial wombs could be developed, the same argument could be made in the opposite direction. Regardless, I tend to think the human race has a too high opinion of itself.

 

[Toni]

I mean, technically true, but if artificial wombs could be developed, the same argument could be made in the opposite direction.

It is far more difficult and complicated not to mention invasive to harvest eggs from women. Ova themselves do not freeze well. Fertilized ova do. There is still the issue of artificial wombs and care and feeding of neonates, babies, toddlers, etc.

Very few men seem interested in this. They do, however, enjoy ejaculation. Irrelevance? Not so much.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I mean, technically true, but if artificial wombs could be developed, the same argument could be made in the opposite direction.

It is far more difficult and complicated not to mention invasive to harvest eggs from women. Ova themselves do not freeze well. Fertilized ova do. There is still the issue of artificial wombs and care and feeding of neonates, babies, toddlers, etc.

Very few men seem interested in this. They do, however, enjoy ejaculation. Irrelevance? Not so much.

Well I was born with a genetic condition, so my sperm is pretty useless anyway. Hey, you were talking about sperm, so...

 

[Derec]

Many years ago, there e as a thread in w high I postulated that the world did not actually need men.

And then you are surprised when people think that you are a man-hating radical feminist.

And how exactly did this thread devolve from trans issues to "men bad, mkay"?

 

[Toni]

Many years ago, there e as a thread in w high I postulated that the world did not actually need men.

And then you are surprised when people think that you are a man-hating radical feminist.

And how exactly did this thread devolve from trans issues to "men bad, mkay"?

Were the men who suggested that colonization would best be carried out by sending make crews with frozen eggs or embryos, the only impediment t being the lack of a good artificial wombs women hating misogynists?

Men started the discussion. I just pointed out that artificial wombs were unnecessary with female crews and frozen sperm. My idea was much more practical.

Women don’t keep men around because we can’t take care of ourselves.

We keep you around because you’re cute!

 

[Toni]

I mean, technically true, but if artificial wombs could be developed, the same argument could be made in the opposite direction.

It is far more difficult and complicated not to mention invasive to harvest eggs from women. Ova themselves do not freeze well. Fertilized ova do. There is still the issue of artificial wombs and care and feeding of neonates, babies, toddlers, etc.

Very few men seem interested in this. They do, however, enjoy ejaculation. Irrelevance? Not so much.

Well I was born with a genetic condition, so my sperm is pretty useless anyway. Hey, you were talking about sperm, so...

Yeah, just sperm.

I’m too old to make that crew myself so I would not be going.

Btw, I don’t find men useless or bad or anything like that. I quite like men. Misogyny not so much.

 

[Derec]

Were the men who suggested that colonization would best be carried out by sending make crews with frozen eggs or embryos, the only impediment t being the lack of a good artificial wombs women hating misogynists?

What are "make crews"?
I think barring development of a warp drive colonization would best be carried out without human crews, since the travel to even nearby stars would take over a century even at a significant fraction of the speed of light. E.g. travelling to a star system 20 light years away at 20% of the speed of light would take exactly 100 years. Impractical for either "make" or "femake" crews, unless you make it a huge generational ship.

So yes, that would require artificial wombs, and also AI guardians who would raise the first generation of colonists without adult human input. But it's not "misogynist".

Men started the discussion.

In this thread, it is you and Jarhyn pushing the "men bad", or at least "cis-men bad" discussion. Women can also be transphobic and violent.

 

[TomC]

In this thread, it is you and Jarhyn pushing the "men bad", or at least "cis-men bad" discussion. Women can also be transphobic and violent.

Nevertheless, when it comes to matters of sex and assault males are the biggest problem by far.
Toni and I disagree a lot, but putting her in a category with Jarhyn is just ridiculous and insulting.
Tom