Split Gendered spaces, split from Drag Shows

[Politesse]

Are you ever going to address why you believe that you speak for all women, and that civil rights advocates are men? It seems most unjustified and unjustifiable to me.

I'm certain she didn't claim that. I'm also certain that she's expressing opinions shared by the large bulk of people, black or white, male or female, whatever.

Yes, she most certainly is. No one here is denying that LGBTQ rights are a minority concern, a meaningful issue to only a small portion of the American public. So it has always been and so it still us. But "majority opinion rules" is not how civil rights are defined and allocated in a Constitutional system. And it remains the case that anyone claiming to represent "women" on any issue is quietly asking you to ignore the perspectives of any woman who does not agree with them. I would never dream of accusing someone of "ignoring male perspectives" because they disagree with me about a political issue.

I mean, Toni here is straight up saying to my face that I apparently have no idea what it is like to feel scared or endangered by naked men in locker rooms. Apparently, I would have to hold an imaginary conversation with my ex-wife to even begin to imagine what might feel like. No one who knows anything at all growing up as a gay male in a homophobic society could say something like that with a straight face. At least, so it seems to me. But that's coming from my experience. Perhaps your experiences were different. Maybe you enjoyed naked shower time with your conservative buddies, and never once worried that they might savagely beat you to death if they somehow realized you were gay. But that's also beside the point. I don't need or want her to empathize with me, because I am not "a man telling a woman what to do". I am Politesse, telling Toni that sex discrimination is wrong, and I refuse to represent anyone but myself in that opinion.

 

[Toni]

The entire key to this is naturally expected.

places where either are naturally expected.

There is absolutely not one single natural thing about our expectations.

This entire thread is a clash of differing expectations, made stupider and more adamant by the completely false but devoutly held belief that our expectations somehow derive from a fundamental and universal nature.

The weirdly puritanical American response to nakedness isn't natural at all, and nor is the segregation of bathrooms and changing rooms into two separate facilities.

Not only is in not "natural" to segregate such spaces, it's largely not rational. The vast majority of gender segregated spaces are spaces in which people have complete control over whether, and to what extent, their nakedness is seen by others. And so are different from non-segregated spaces only at a psychological level - these aren't "natural" divisions, they're ideological ones.

It's no more natural for people to have or want segregated bathrooms and changing rooms than it is natural for people to have or want Christian churches. In some places these things are so ubiquitous that the residents literally cannot imagine that they might not be universal, natural, and automatic desires shared by every human who ever lived. In other places, they never had them and don't even notice their absence.

And by the way, the comparison to religion isn't just an analogy. This idea that genders must be segregated in specific circumstances is very much a belief driven by, and caused by, religion.

Some people are naturally very uncomfortable at being seen naked by anyone. Some are naturally totally relaxed at being seen naked by anyone. Some are uncomfortable at being seen naked by strangers, but relaxed about being seen naked by certain known individuals.

Nobody is naturally comfortable being seen naked by some strangers but only if those strangers are from the right demographic group. That's learned behaviour. I have no doubt that you could have found plenty of support in 1980s South Africa for the claim that it was natural for white people to expect not to share facilities with blacks. That didn't make it a true statement about natural expectations.

Expectations are cultural. They're artificial. There's no "natural expectation".

It is 100% natural for women to feel startled and threatened by being confronted by a naked stranger with a penis in an area where they are not expected. I am 100% certain that any of the men on this board would be startled and at least somewhat alarmed if they saw me, naked, standing next to them in the showers at the gym. And hey, you all know me, right? Right?

Because it would be unexpected. I doubt any one would think that I was there to assault them —most of you have not been sexually assaulted by a female—but of course you would wonder why I was there. Probably in a very WTF kind of way.

Am I the only person who remembers the outrage at women sports reporters expecting to be in dressing rooms of male athletes, alongside their male counterparts? So everyone can get off their high horse here.

In a society where women did not have to be concerned about sexual assault, you would have a good point: why would there be any safety need for segregated spaces? We don’t live in such a society. Whether there is a need or simply social reason for spaces segregated spaces is a different question.

We do live in a society where men and women have separate public spaces for toileting, dressing and showering. I’m ok with that status quo, even though I’m quite ok with nudity in the right circumstances. Even if I would be happy to go skinny dipping with you, I would not want your naked ass on my sofa. Or my husband’s naked ass or my own, for that matter. I’m ok with my doctor seeing my body naked in the exam room. The practice accountant? Nope. And both the doctor and the accountant and no doubt their attorney and their other patients would not be happy and indeed would be very alarmed to see me naked in the waiting room,

 

[Politesse]

If a naked person, with or without a penis, were to walk into your classroom and take a seat in the front row, I am willing to bet that you would be startled, concerned and probably call whoever is in charge of safety on your campus. Because you would not expect to see a naked stranger in your classroom

You keep pretending that what these women are asking for is a special privilege. To be naked in a classroom, or someone's private home, or in line to see the bank teller, or whatever scenario you can think of. But a changing room is not that. It's a privileged space only the wealthy can afford, true, but it is still public space, and everyone should have the same access to it. The dress code of my college is legal because it applies to everyone, regardless of gender. If there was a rule that said cis people were welcome to attend class naked, but trans people could not, I would object to that rule on the exact same grounds. It is permissible and necessary to outlaw dangerous behavior, provided people are held to that law in the same way. It is not permissible to abuse the law to single out a persecuted class for further persecution via differential interpretation of their rights.

It's funny, I don't think it would ever have occurred to anyone to legislate who was or wasn't allowed to use the loo, before all of this atarted. But because conservatives started a fight, within twenty or thirty years the Supreme Court will be forced to rule in favor of a law requiring people not to discriminate in the bathroom. A decision that will not be popular, because most people feel like you do. What was voluntarily will become legal matter, and it will ultimately upset and inconvenience cis people a lot more than it will trans folks, most of whom already avoid zones of likely persecution whenever possible.

 

[Politesse]

Am I the only person who remembers the outrage at women sports reporters expecting to be in dressing rooms of male athletes, alongside their male counterparts?

I do remember that debate quite well, and my opinion on it was exactly the same: the law has no business discriminating on the basis of sex. Allow all reporters in, or none of them.

 

[Toni]

Are you ever going to address why you believe that you speak for all women, and that civil rights advocates are men? It seems most unjustified and unjustifiable to me.

I'm certain she didn't claim that. I'm also certain that she's expressing opinions shared by the large bulk of people, black or white, male or female, whatever.

Yes, she most certainly is. No one here is denying that LGBTQ rights are a minority concern, a meaningful issue to only a small portion of the American public. So it has always been and so it still us. But "majority opinion rules" is not how civil rights are defined and allocated in a Constitutional system. And it remains the case that anyone claiming to represent "women" on any issue is quietly asking you to ignore the perspectives of any woman who does not agree with them. I would never dream of accusing someone of "ignoring male perspectives" because they disagree with me about a political issue.

I mean, Toni here is straight up saying to my face that I apparently have no idea what it is like to feel scared or endangered by naked men in locker rooms. Apparently, I would have to hold an imaginary conversation with my ex-wife to even begin to imagine what might feel like. No one who knows anything at all growing up as a gay male in a homophobic society could say something like that with a straight face. At least, so it seems to me. But that's coming from my experience. Perhaps your experiences were different. Maybe you enjoyed naked shower time with your conservative buddies, and never once worried that they might savagely beat you to death if they somehow realized you were gay. But that's also beside the point. I don't need or want her to empathize with me, because I am not "a man telling a woman what to do". I am Politesse, telling Toni that sex discrimination is wrong, and I refuse to represent anyone but myself in that opinion.

I absolutely DO know that men are vulnerable to being assaulted and even raped and that the risk to any non-cis or non-straight men increases that risk exponentially.

Given your complete lack of empathy with women feeling uncomfortable being expected to share shower and locker room space with naked people with penises, yeah, I did think that maybe you should talk with women you know and trust and who know and trust you as well.

My goal is NOT to make any person feel stigmatized, threatened or uncomfortable or unsafe. Rather it is to make everyone feel safe and comfortable.

 

[Toni]

If a naked person, with or without a penis, were to walk into your classroom and take a seat in the front row, I am willing to bet that you would be startled, concerned and probably call whoever is in charge of safety on your campus. Because you would not expect to see a naked stranger in your classroom

You keep pretending that what these women are asking for is a special privilege. To be naked in a classroom, or someone's private home, or in line to see the bank teller, or whatever scenario you can think of. But a changing room is not that. It's a privileged space only the wealthy can afford, true, but it is still public space, and everyone should have the same access to it. The dress code of my college is legal because it applies to everyone, regardless of gender. If there was a rule that said cis people were welcome to attend class naked, but trans people could not, I would object to that rule on the exact same grounds. It is permissible and necessary to outlaw dangerous behavior, provided people are held to that law in the same way. It is not permissible to abuse the law to single out a persecuted class for further persecution via differential interpretation of their rights.

It's funny, I don't think it would ever have occurred to anyone to legislate who was or wasn't allowed to use the loo, before all of this atarted. But because conservatives started a fight, within twenty or thirty years the Supreme Court will be forced to rule in favor of a law requiring people not to discriminate in the bathroom. A decision that will not be popular, because most people feel like you do. What was voluntarily will become legal matter, and it will ultimately upset and inconvenience cis people a lot more than it will trans folks, most of whom already avoid zones of likely persecution whenever possible.

It is also not permissible or acceptable to expect women to instantaneously recognize that the naked stranger with a penis beside them in the shower or locker room is of no threat to them.

Because in almost every single circumstance and certainly in likely every single previous circumstance when a woman is confronted with a naked adult stranger with a penis, there IS an intended threat to her safety.

Refusing to recognize that reality is reprehensible.

Note: my position is to advocate for universal stalls with doors in all locker rooms and showers.

 

[Politesse]

My goal is NOT to make any person feel stigmatized, threatened or uncomfortable or unsafe. Rather it is to make everyone feel safe and comfortable.

You are failing in your goal. You demand empathy but extend none. You are spreading propaganda that gets trans women hurt.

 

[Toni]

Am I the only person who remembers the outrage at women sports reporters expecting to be in dressing rooms of male athletes, alongside their male counterparts?

I do remember that debate quite well, and my opinion on it was exactly the same: the law has no business discriminating on the basis of sex. Allow all reporters in, or none of them.

Exactly. My position was that NO ONE should be expected to tolerate press while they are showering or dressing.

 

[Toni]

My goal is NOT to make any person feel stigmatized, threatened or uncomfortable or unsafe. Rather it is to make everyone feel safe and comfortable.

You are failing in your goal.

Because I think that there should be private showers and dressing rooms with doors in all public gyms?

 

[Politesse]

My goal is NOT to make any person feel stigmatized, threatened or uncomfortable or unsafe. Rather it is to make everyone feel safe and comfortable.

You are failing in your goal.

Because I think that there should be private showers and dressing rooms with doors in all public gyms?

No, because you are portraying anyone born with a penis as a dangerous threat in need of control. In all caps, no less. Portraying changing at the gym before exercising, a privilege you take for granted, as a crime equivalent to a home invasion robbery or sexual molestation when a trans woman does it. Along the way, you dismissed the perspectives of all women who disagree with you, and just for fun I guess, also threw in the myth that little boys never get molested by the women who were supposed to be protecting them, never mind how traumatizing that might be for someone who knows all too fucking well how untrue that myth is, and how dangerous.

If you don't "mean" those things, please stop saying them. You can't plausibly backtrack to the one thing you've said that everyone actually agrees with already, and demand that we ignore all the other awful things you've said.

 

[Toni]

My goal is NOT to make any person feel stigmatized, threatened or uncomfortable or unsafe. Rather it is to make everyone feel safe and comfortable.

You are failing in your goal.

Because I think that there should be private showers and dressing rooms with doors in all public gyms?

No, because you are portraying anyone born with a penis as a dangerous threat in need of control. In all caps, no less. Portraying changing at the gym before exercising, a privilege you take for granted, as a crime equivalent to a home invasion robbery or sexual molestation when a trans woman does it. If you don't "mean" those things, stop saying them.

Au contraire: I remember quite well when females were not allowed to play sports at all, even on women’s teams—which did not exist and when women had few, if any options for gym space, at least after finishing high school. When any such space truly was the preview of the wealthy.

It is absolutely valid for women to react in fear when confronted with a naked stranger with a penis standing next to them in a female only locker room. It is NOT reasonable to expect women to instantaneously come to the conclusion that such a person is a trans woman if no threat to them.

In almost any other circumstance, women would have reason to believe that a naked stranger with a penis standing next to them in a shower or locker room meant them harm. Even now, it would be unusual to find a trans woman in the gym locker room.

 

[Politesse]

But I'm starting to get actually upset here, unusually for a forum discussion. So whatever you may choose to do, I think I'd better bow out.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

What about countries that have coed locker rooms? Are there some statistics on those?

 

[TomC]

My goal is NOT to make any person feel stigmatized, threatened or uncomfortable or unsafe. Rather it is to make everyone feel safe and comfortable.

You are failing in your goal.

Because I think that there should be private showers and dressing rooms with doors in all public gyms?

No, because you are portraying anyone born with a penis as a dangerous threat in need of control. In all caps, no less. Portraying changing at the gym before exercising, a privilege you take for granted, as a crime equivalent to a home invasion robbery or sexual molestation when a trans woman does it. Along the way, you dismissed the perspectives of all women who disagree with you, and just for fun I guess, also threw in the myth that little boys never get molested by the women who were supposed to be protecting them, never mind how traumatizing that might be for someone who knows all too fucking well how untrue that myth is, and how dangerous.

If you don't "mean" those things, please stop saying them. You can't plausibly backtrack to the one thing you've said that everyone actually agrees with already, and demand that we ignore all the other awful things you've said.

She didn't say any of those things.
That's you misrepresenting her.
Tom

 

[Toni]

What about countries that have coed locker rooms? Are there some statistics on those?

Here’s a discussion I found: https://www.quora.com/Has-anyone-ad...-like-a-public-pool-or-a-gym-What-was-it-like

And here’s this: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...oms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html?amp

And this: https://publications.aap.org/pediat...ool-Restroom-and-Locker-Room-Restrictions-and

None of this should be any surprise: where unisex facilities are the norm, there seems to be more comfort in using such facilities even fir those most accustomed to segregated sites

Non-fender confirming, transgender individuals and gay individuals are at significant risk of sexual assault.

Women and girls are at significant risk of sexual assault in coed facilities.

Which, to me, argues that universal individual stalls should be the norm.

And much, much, much more strongly argues that society must must must do much more to combat sexual assault and violence.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

What about countries that have coed locker rooms? Are there some statistics on those?

Here’s a discussion I found: https://www.quora.com/Has-anyone-ad...-like-a-public-pool-or-a-gym-What-was-it-like

From posts in your link, people don't seem to have a problem with it. This makes me wonder if it's an American worry or even a uniquely American difference in crime rate, like with guns. This is one reason I wondered about statistics. You would think that coed locker rooms make crime rate go up, but maybe the societies where they have them have more sex/sex is less taboo/or some other differences such that sex crimes are less. I think I read they have these in Japan and Netherlands. Both have low rates of sex crimes, for example. What is at play here?

 

[Toni]

If a naked person, with or without a penis, were to walk into your classroom and take a seat in the front row, I am willing to bet that you would be startled, concerned and probably call whoever is in charge of safety on your campus. Because you would not expect to see a naked stranger in your classroom

You keep pretending that what these women are asking for is a special privilege. To be naked in a classroom, or someone's private home, or in line to see the bank teller, or whatever scenario you can think of. But a changing room is not that. It's a privileged space only the wealthy can afford, true, but it is still public space, and everyone should have the same access to it. The dress code of my college is legal because it applies to everyone, regardless of gender. If there was a rule that said cis people were welcome to attend class naked, but trans people could not, I would object to that rule on the exact same grounds. It is permissible and necessary to outlaw dangerous behavior, provided people are held to that law in the same way. It is not permissible to abuse the law to single out a persecuted class for further persecution via differential interpretation of their rights.

It's funny, I don't think it would ever have occurred to anyone to legislate who was or wasn't allowed to use the loo, before all of this atarted. But because conservatives started a fight, within twenty or thirty years the Supreme Court will be forced to rule in favor of a law requiring people not to discriminate in the bathroom. A decision that will not be popular, because most people feel like you do. What was voluntarily will become legal matter, and it will ultimately upset and inconvenience cis people a lot more than it will trans folks, most of whom already avoid zones of likely persecution whenever possible.

I’m not pretending or asserting that trans women are expecting any special right or consideration.

I’m stating that many, probably the majority of women would be at the very least startled and uncomfortable If they unexpectedly saw a naked stranger with a penis standing next to them in the shower. I am assuming that the startled, uncomfortable reaction of the startled woman would also be upsetting to the trans woman—traumatic, even. FFS many women who have had mastectomies take a very long time to be comfortable showing their scars, even to intimate partners! A reaction of horror or disgust would be extremely upsetting to someone with such scars.

Which is why I am advocating for universal private stalls.

I am NOT advocating for trans women to be barred from any locker room or dressing room,

 

[Jarhyn]

Yes, exposing your naked self is legally considered assault. I have no idea what you are talking about with the Klan robe scenario unless you are talking about your own fantasies.

The Klan robe bit was showing a very offensive view. We have no legal protection against seeing things that offend us.

No, me seeing penises in random public places or in situations where I expected that there would be penises did not cause me any harm.

Yes, being surprised by a naked body with a penis in a women only space IS the issue.

No it is NOT reasonable to expect women to just assume that the naked stranger next to them in the shower is a trans woman and no threat to them.

No it is not reasonable to expect women to be ok with some naked stranger with a penis to see them undressed in a shower or locker room and to make the assumption that it’s only a trans woman and not someone who might be s threat.

You're still only showing that it's wrong because we don't do it.

What kind of obsession do you have with open dressing rooms and showers? Why are private showers and dressing rooms not perfectly reasonable?

I'm fine with private stalls. Where I have a problem is when the whole area is segregated--what is someone trans supposed to do? What is someone with an opposite-sex caregiver supposed to do? (I have experienced the latter. My in-laws ran into the problem repeatedly.)

Again: I certainly am NOT talking about being offended. I do not find anything about the human body offensive, although I do think that some things people might choose to do with their own human body to be offensive (crapping on the dinner table, for example is not just unhygienic but also offensive). Walking about with your genitals exposed (any genitals) is often but not always offensive, depending on the circumstances and sometimes is indicative of acute intoxication or acute mental illness. Not always, of course. Sometimes, walking around with your genitals exposed is perfectly acceptable and even expected. Context matters.

I'm talking about something that YOU do NOT have any experience with and apparently are incapable of having anything resembling empathy with: Women are constantly in some state of surveillance of their surroundings and of their own appearance and behavior, looking out for danger. Most of us can keep that need for surveillance to a minimum in most circumstances but yes, women are more attuned to signs of danger for themselves and for any offspring they might have. It's hardwired into us by nature and society has taught us that we must constantly monitor our surroundings, our dress, our behavior because if we make any kind of mistake, however innocent, we might be attacked and if we are attacked, every single thing about our dress, our behavior, our surroundings will be used against us in a court of law, if it gets that far. Most of the time, it does not get that far, even if it is reported, which most of the time it is not.

This is not a burden that you ever have to consider or bear and it is clearly a burden you do not have any ability to empathize with. You seem to conflate your feelings and your experiences and your beliefs and insecurities with universal and completely rational. You're wrong.

You seem to believe that all women should simply be OK with having to make the instantaneous evaluation of a naked stranger in a dressing room or shower while they, themselves, are naked and correctly coming up with the evaluation that this is obviously a trans woman who is of course no threat to them at all. I suppose in your POV, this would include if the naked individual was showing (however involuntary) signs of sexual arousal. Because of course women know that men never, ever, ever intrude on women when they are expecting privacy and are not fully clothed.* *Sarcasm because of course women know that they can be attacked anywhere at any time, whatever they are wearing or doing and even if there are other people around.

No one can make such judgments immediately and no one should be expected to do so. It is arrogant and callous for men to expect women to immediately accept any individual in their dressing rooms and showers and to know that they are in no danger whatsoever from naked strangers with penises and have no need to feel modest, either.

Thank you for bringing up a situation I had not mentioned when having private stalls would be extremely helpful: when one needs to aid someone who needs help dressing, toileting, showering.

Are you ever going to address why you believe that you speak for all women, and that civil rights advocates are men? It seems most unjustified and unjustifiable to me.

Who the fuck ever said that I think I speak for all women? Much less that civil rights advocates are men? AFAIK, women tend to be much more liberal with respect to gay rights, trans rights, and civil rights compared with men.

That said, I think I am much more well informed with how women in general feel about being confronted with a naked stranger with a penis in a space where they do not expect to see one.

If a naked person, with or without a penis, were to walk into your classroom and take a seat in the front row, I am willing to bet that you would be startled, concerned and probably call whoever is in charge of safety on your campus. Because you would not expect to see a naked stranger in your classroom.

Very few women expect to see naked strangers with penises in the women's locker room. Why is that hard to understand?

All you speak of when you speak of how people feel when they see people in a space who look some way they do not expect, is that you speak for people who are feel violated in the violation of their PREJUDICE. There is no running away from that while advocating for now people are violated by seeing something unexpected.

The prejudice is baked right into the expectation!

It is a judgement that this anatomy means they are going to act as a criminal.

It is not OK.

The holding of the expectation is prejudice. They are already prejudiced by the time they hold and have the expectation even before that expectation is violated.

Quit expecting trans people to be OK with prejudice.

 

[Bomb#20]

Sure, I might be mixing some terminology, but you seem to get where I'm going with it, so I'm uncertain why you need to even raise the issue to begin with, other than being hyper-technical and not wanting to actually talk about the biology.

I was trying to support Jarhyn in his dispute with Loren over Loren's apparently Platonistic approach to biology. I included you because I originally took you to be taking Loren's side in that dispute. If I got that wrong, sorry.

 

[Toni]

Yes, exposing your naked self is legally considered assault. I have no idea what you are talking about with the Klan robe scenario unless you are talking about your own fantasies.

The Klan robe bit was showing a very offensive view. We have no legal protection against seeing things that offend us.

No, me seeing penises in random public places or in situations where I expected that there would be penises did not cause me any harm.

Yes, being surprised by a naked body with a penis in a women only space IS the issue.

No it is NOT reasonable to expect women to just assume that the naked stranger next to them in the shower is a trans woman and no threat to them.

No it is not reasonable to expect women to be ok with some naked stranger with a penis to see them undressed in a shower or locker room and to make the assumption that it’s only a trans woman and not someone who might be s threat.

You're still only showing that it's wrong because we don't do it.

What kind of obsession do you have with open dressing rooms and showers? Why are private showers and dressing rooms not perfectly reasonable?

I'm fine with private stalls. Where I have a problem is when the whole area is segregated--what is someone trans supposed to do? What is someone with an opposite-sex caregiver supposed to do? (I have experienced the latter. My in-laws ran into the problem repeatedly.)

Again: I certainly am NOT talking about being offended. I do not find anything about the human body offensive, although I do think that some things people might choose to do with their own human body to be offensive (crapping on the dinner table, for example is not just unhygienic but also offensive). Walking about with your genitals exposed (any genitals) is often but not always offensive, depending on the circumstances and sometimes is indicative of acute intoxication or acute mental illness. Not always, of course. Sometimes, walking around with your genitals exposed is perfectly acceptable and even expected. Context matters.

I'm talking about something that YOU do NOT have any experience with and apparently are incapable of having anything resembling empathy with: Women are constantly in some state of surveillance of their surroundings and of their own appearance and behavior, looking out for danger. Most of us can keep that need for surveillance to a minimum in most circumstances but yes, women are more attuned to signs of danger for themselves and for any offspring they might have. It's hardwired into us by nature and society has taught us that we must constantly monitor our surroundings, our dress, our behavior because if we make any kind of mistake, however innocent, we might be attacked and if we are attacked, every single thing about our dress, our behavior, our surroundings will be used against us in a court of law, if it gets that far. Most of the time, it does not get that far, even if it is reported, which most of the time it is not.

This is not a burden that you ever have to consider or bear and it is clearly a burden you do not have any ability to empathize with. You seem to conflate your feelings and your experiences and your beliefs and insecurities with universal and completely rational. You're wrong.

You seem to believe that all women should simply be OK with having to make the instantaneous evaluation of a naked stranger in a dressing room or shower while they, themselves, are naked and correctly coming up with the evaluation that this is obviously a trans woman who is of course no threat to them at all. I suppose in your POV, this would include if the naked individual was showing (however involuntary) signs of sexual arousal. Because of course women know that men never, ever, ever intrude on women when they are expecting privacy and are not fully clothed.* *Sarcasm because of course women know that they can be attacked anywhere at any time, whatever they are wearing or doing and even if there are other people around.

No one can make such judgments immediately and no one should be expected to do so. It is arrogant and callous for men to expect women to immediately accept any individual in their dressing rooms and showers and to know that they are in no danger whatsoever from naked strangers with penises and have no need to feel modest, either.

Thank you for bringing up a situation I had not mentioned when having private stalls would be extremely helpful: when one needs to aid someone who needs help dressing, toileting, showering.

Are you ever going to address why you believe that you speak for all women, and that civil rights advocates are men? It seems most unjustified and unjustifiable to me.

Who the fuck ever said that I think I speak for all women? Much less that civil rights advocates are men? AFAIK, women tend to be much more liberal with respect to gay rights, trans rights, and civil rights compared with men.

That said, I think I am much more well informed with how women in general feel about being confronted with a naked stranger with a penis in a space where they do not expect to see one.

If a naked person, with or without a penis, were to walk into your classroom and take a seat in the front row, I am willing to bet that you would be startled, concerned and probably call whoever is in charge of safety on your campus. Because you would not expect to see a naked stranger in your classroom.

Very few women expect to see naked strangers with penises in the women's locker room. Why is that hard to understand?

All you speak of when you speak of how people feel when they see people in a space who look some way they do not expect, is that you speak for people who are feel violated in the violation of their PREJUDICE. There is no running away from that while advocating for now people are violated by seeing something unexpected.

The prejudice is baked right into the expectation!

It is a judgement that this anatomy means they are going to act as a criminal.

It is not OK.

The holding of the expectation is prejudice. They are already prejudiced by the time they hold and have the expectation even before that expectation is violated.

Quit expecting trans people to be OK with prejudice.

No. it is not prejudice that makes women fear for their safety at the hands of men, particularly in a space where the woman is unclothed. It’s experience.

I am NOT advocating for excluding trans women or gender non-conforming individuals from any space

I AM advocating for universal private stalls in all locker rooms and gyms. For the safety of ALL.

I AM advocating for society to address the roots of and to eliminate violent behavior of all kinds, including sexual assault.

If some of the gay or non-gender conforming people in this thread feel and have experienced being threatened or assaulted by persons with a penis in showers and locker rooms, why do you not understand that cis women feel threatened in showers or locker rooms by naked strangers with penises? Exactly HOW are cis women supposed to know, immediately, that there is no threat???