Split Gendered spaces, split from Drag Shows

[Jarhyn]

It is disgusting to insist that asserting a woman’s right to privacy is equivalent to Jim Crow.

I cannot get over the number of males in this thread telling females that our boundaries and our insistence upon consent is bigotry against males who want to violate our boundaries and disregard our consent.

And what about all of those telling you you can't exclude black people from white spaces?

Are you under the assumption that non-white women want random naked men in the gym shower?

I said "white" and "black", not "men" and "women". It's the same reasoning.

No it isn't. Sex and race are two wildly different categories. Or is this where we're headed?

Some jackass troll saying shit for shock value doesn't get you anywhere.

Nobody in the adult ageplay community will support that kind of bullshit. The actual consensus even of people that do participate in age play and lifestyling is "you touch a kid, you're a fucking pedophile. Don't fuck with kids."

Age of consent is a function of symmetry, and children simply do not have the time on this earth to parse the game theory around sex that evolves between adults, even remarkably fucking stupid and childish adults.

You just can't keep away from trying to paint folks as "like pedophiles".

You do realize that in comparing this to protecting children from molesters, you paint women as incapable of making sexual decisions as children are? Well, I don't think you understand that, no.

Maybe while we're at it we can have a nice discussion, maybe start a new thread on age of consent laws in the south for you to pointedly avoid saying anything in? Maybe an awkward discussion about child marriages in the deeply transphobic regions of the country?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Furthermore, the comparison to excluding blacks from white-only spaces has only been ridiculed, not rebutted at all.

Because it's stupid. This argument is used by trans folk to shame everyone else for excluding them from their dating pool, e.g., to have a "genital preference" is racist. Race and sex are not in the same category. At all.

Which is getting it backwards. It is not racist to have preferences about appearance even if those preferences align with racial patterns. The test shouldn't be "would you date one?", but "would you object to your child dating one?"

But what does that have to do with random naked men in the woman's gym shower?

Random?

today we secretly switched one female exerciser for this random male... let's watch the fun. *Benny Hill music*

One thing that all human races share is the male/female binary.

One thing?

 

[Politesse]

. The question is how can we allow access for Trans to an opposing locker room without causing alarm or sense of threat, etc... This goes well beyond 'feelings' and well into the Instictive category of fight or flight.

Gay Panic Defense

 

[Toni]

. The question is how can we allow access for Trans to an opposing locker room without causing alarm or sense of threat, etc... This goes well beyond 'feelings' and well into the Instictive category of fight or flight.

Gay Panic Defense

. The question is how can we allow access for Trans to an opposing locker room without causing alarm or sense of threat, etc... This goes well beyond 'feelings' and well into the Instictive category of fight or flight.

Gay Panic Defense

I realize that it was an inadvertent error on your part but the text you quoted is NOT something that I wrote. Please see post 1,111 for clarification.

That said: JimmyHiggins has a point: seeing a naked stranger with a penis in the shower next to you would definitely trigger a fight or flight reflex for many women. NOT because (most) women are afraid of gay people or trans people or men. It's because most women have some degree of fear of being sexually assaulted. So far, no one has suggested any way that a woman in her gym shower can immediately and with 100% accuracy identify the naked stranger with a penis next to her as a non-threat.

 

[TomC]

So far, no one has suggested any way that a woman in her gym shower can immediately and with 100% accuracy identify the naked stranger with a penis next to her as a non-threat.

Ironic isn't it?
The argument seems to be "Males are inherently dangerous. So much so that even other males sometimes don't want to share a restroom because they feel threatened. To mitigate the threat, let's allow males into the women's room."
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

. The question is how can we allow access for Trans to an opposing locker room without causing alarm or sense of threat, etc... This goes well beyond 'feelings' and well into the Instictive category of fight or flight.

Gay Panic Defense

This is taking the statement (mine, not Toni's) out of context. Firstly, I wasn't suggesting that a woman was legally within her right to drop an anvil on a naked male standing next to her in the locker room shower at all. I was addressing what I feel is the minimization of a woman's concern as merely being "feelings", when, in fact it is much more about instinct and reaction. Secondly, if the woman was to feel panic, it wouldn't be because she thought the male was trans or gay, which renders your response rather inert.

Handwaving something as feelings is minimizing their interpretation of the situation as the woman just thinking "eww gross". When in reality, the woman is going into a fight or flight mindset thinking "am I at risk of sexual assault".

So far, no one has suggested any way that a woman in her gym shower can immediately and with 100% accuracy identify the naked stranger with a penis next to her as a non-threat.

Ironic isn't it?
The argument seems to be "Males are inherently dangerous. So much so that even other males sometimes don't want to share a restroom because they feel threatened. To mitigate the threat, let's allow males into the women's room."
Tom

That isn't irony. Irony would be a pre-surgical male trans going into the women's locker room to be safer than in a male locker room, only to end up having an anvil dropped on him by a woman who mistook their intention.

 

[Oleg]

Some jackass troll saying shit for shock value doesn't get you anywhere.

Nobody in the adult ageplay community will support that kind of bullshit. The actual consensus even of people that do participate in age play and lifestyling is "you touch a kid, you're a fucking pedophile. Don't fuck with kids."

I wish that were so. But when the post-modernist argument is that traditional boundaries are oppressive and should end, and that self-ID is all that matters, on what basis is transage wrong?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Some jackass troll saying shit for shock value doesn't get you anywhere.

Nobody in the adult ageplay community will support that kind of bullshit. The actual consensus even of people that do participate in age play and lifestyling is "you touch a kid, you're a fucking pedophile. Don't fuck with kids."

I wish that were so....

Well, you might want to enter the real world and discuss about real positions instead of hyperbole and bullshit you find on Twitter with no idea what the posters' actual intent is.

 

[TSwizzle]

There was fury today after a transgender rapist attacked two women as a man then changed gender before the trial. Isla Bryson was a shaven-headed Adam Graham with a Mike Tyson-style face tattoo when she carried out the violent sex attacks in 2016 and 2019 after abusing the victims she originally met online. Bryson, who claimed to have had gender issues since the age of four, began transitioning from a man to a woman in 2020 after being charged with the rapes. She denied the accusations, telling jurors any sex was consensual - although she insisted she did not like sleeping with women and they made the 'first move'. There was no reference to the 31-year-old having a gender recognition certificate during the trial. It is understood she is being held in a segregation unit at Cornton Vale women's prison, where she will be risk assessed ahead of sentencing to see where she will serve her term. Today Bryson was found guilty of the two rapes. She denied the charges, saying in evidence she 'would never hurt another human being'. Her defence KC Edward Targowski even told High Court in Glasgow: 'If you accept that evidence, that she is transitioning, that she is aiming to continue on that path to becoming female gender, that goes a long way to acquitting her of these charges'.
Tory MP Miriam Cates told MailOnline: 'It is almost impossible to believe that in a civilised society a man convicted of raping two women can be remanded in a women's prison. 'I am also concerned that journalists are using the pronouns 'she' and 'her' to refer to this male criminal - the public has a right to understand the facts in these cases and not be misled into believing that violent sex offences are being committed by women.'

Daily Mail

There is a similar case in California, a male rapist suddenly discovering he is really a woman. "Hannah" Tubbs sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl in a Denny's restroom in 2004. By the time "Hannah" was convicted "she" was 26 years old but was sentenced to two years in juvenile detention.

DA Gascón previously told The Times that the victim, who has moved away from California and remains in therapy, did not want to testify at a trial. He also expressed concern that as a transgender woman, Tubbs could be victimized in a jail for adults. In a youth facility, he said, she could receive treatment and therapy.

Gascon doesn't give a shit about the victims of crimes.

 

[Oleg]

There is a similar case in California, a male rapist suddenly discovering he is really a woman.

What’s interesting about “marginalized” groups is that we all know you get more privilege if you identify as one.

 

[TomC]

There is a similar case in California, a male rapist suddenly discovering he is really a woman.

What’s interesting about “marginalized” groups is that we all know you get more privilege if you identify as one.

If I weren't so lazy I'd start a thread on this subject.

Like "What is a woman?", only "What is a transgender?".

Trans might be the most poorly defined word in the Woke lexicon. It includes everyone from Hannah Tubbs to Caitlyn Jenner.

Like almost every other group, most trans people are just trying to get through life. They're just playing the cards they were dealt. Trying not to cause any problems for anybody. But not all of them are so innocuous. I know someone, here in southern Indiana, who is altogether too much like Hannah Tubbs.

Sex segregation in restrooms and such does cause problems for a tiny percentage of people. I don't like that part. But while it's crude it's effective.

Males attacking females is a much bigger problem than males feeling uncomfortable in the Men's facilities.
Tom

 

[Toni]

There is a similar case in California, a male rapist suddenly discovering he is really a woman.

What’s interesting about “marginalized” groups is that we all know you get more privilege if you identify as one.

If I weren't so lazy I'd start a thread on this subject.

Like "What is a woman?", only "What is a transgender?".

Trans might be the most poorly defined word in the Woke lexicon. It includes everyone from Hannah Tubbs to Caitlyn Jenner.

Like almost every other group, most trans people are just trying to get through life. They're just playing the cards they were dealt. Trying not to cause any problems for anybody. But not all of them are so innocuous. I know someone, here in southern Indiana, who is altogether too much like Hannah Tubbs.

Sex segregation in restrooms and such does cause problems for a tiny percentage of people. I don't like that part. But while it's crude it's effective.

Males attacking females is a much bigger problem than males feeling uncomfortable in the Men's facilities.
Tom

But it’s not just males attacking females, is it?

Men also attack other people with some male features especially those they find ‘different.’ Gay, trans, not sufficiently macho looking. Those perceived as weaker or threatening or scary in some way.

I don’t want trans people to be unsafe or to feel unsafe. I don’t want that for men or women or children or any person of any gender, anywhere in the LGBTQIA community.

Loren has a point: If everyone were raised to casually accept nudity around any other person (in specific places) this would not be an issue. There would be little need for segregating locker rooms or rest rooms by gender. I think there will always be individuals who prefer privacy. And they deserve to have that privacy.

But we are not there yet. We’re an even longer way from a world where people don’t have to worry about being assaulted.

We have got to do better.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A bit dated, but this indicates maybe we should exclude males from locker rooms in general.

 

[TomC]

A bit dated, but this indicates maybe we should exclude males from locker rooms in general.

Bullshit.

Those kids don't need to be excluded. They need adult supervision and discipline. Apparently, the adults there need that as well.

I hated high school gym class. I especially hated the obligatory shower afterwards. But my Catholic school had discipline. Nobody would get away with the crap described in that story. Not even once.

The big difference between my school and the public schools was simple.
Parents. Parents who took it all very seriously.

It's not the kids who are the problem here.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

g MtFs into female spaces does not cause risk. You're completely disregarding anything that happens to your outgroup, which apparently includes both the MtFs and the FtMs.

FFS, you're looking at data from an era where the number of MtFs was very small, and they were still recorded as crimes committed by males, and they required clinical diagnosis and treatment before being granted legal recognition of their acquired gender, and they were under strict requirements to NOT cause problems or they could have their gender recognition revoked.

The issue is not who committed the crimes, but where they were committed.

That is not what is going on right now. Right now, if a man who SAYS he is trans - with no diagnosis, no treatment, no requirement for presentation, nothing at all except he said so - actually does leer at a woman, it's NOT considered voyeurism, because "he's a woman too". If he does rape someone, it's recorded as a rape committed by a woman against another woman!

Women are Human

So, fix the system instead of throwing it out.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It is disgusting to insist that asserting a woman’s right to privacy is equivalent to Jim Crow.

I cannot get over the number of males in this thread telling females that our boundaries and our insistence upon consent is bigotry against males who want to violate our boundaries and disregard our consent.

And what about all of those telling you you can't exclude black people from white spaces?

Are you under the assumption that non-white women want random naked men in the gym shower?

I said "white" and "black", not "men" and "women". It's the same reasoning.

Sure, but you keep running this analogy as if "white is synonymous with "females" and "black is synonymous with "males". You keep painting females as the powerful oppressors who are mistreating the vulnerable males. It's stupid.

This has nothing to do with oppressors/oppressed. You are just avoiding addressing the actual issue.

 

[TomC]

, fix the system instead of throwing it out.

We have a system.

Sex segregated spaces for personal business. A space for everyone is available.

If you can find a way to improve it, feel free to explain. I don't just mean ideological purism. Find a way to make female women as comfortable and secure as the current system.
Tom

 

[Toni]

, fix the system instead of throwing it out.

We have a system.

Sex segregated spaces for personal business. A space for everyone is available.

If you can find a way to improve it, feel free to explain. I don't just mean ideological purism. Find a way to make female women as comfortable and secure as the current system.
Tom

The system is clearly not working for everyone. What I've read here is that segregated male spaces are sometimes very uncomfortable and even hazardous to men, especially to queer men or non-gender conforming persons.

That's true of society at large as well and needs to be seriously addressed.

Fear of assault (any type) isn't just a cis-woman's issue.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

OMG! Someone made a sign. Someone with a POV has a radical POV... (maybe, if they aren't there trolling) therefore all trans are just like that!

It's more the fact that two well known Scottish MPs - ones who have been instrumental in demolishing women's rights in Scotland in their effort to protect the vulnerable transwoman - are standing directly in front of those signs and seem quite happy to be high-profile politicians who support threats against women.

You mean the signs behind them? Now, while I'm not 100% in the know in the abilities of women... I was pretty certain seeing behind them wasn't an ability. One of the signs was off center in a previous photo and that person photobombed their pic. And we don't even know if that person actually believes it or not.

The one on the right looks like a photobomb, but in any case, ought one live their lives and political philosophy based on anecdotes of the extreme tail of humanity? Or develop their general political and social policies on such extreme anecdotes? It's easy for people like TSwizzle to be trapped inside a conservolibertarian bubble when he is fed extreme anecdotes through conservative media and Daily Mail and it becomes confirmation bias. And such people listening only to anecdotes of extremists can also be on "the left."

Right now, the thread has devolved into personal accusations and ridiculous anecdotes and has veered away from both its original intent and sensible discussion of policy. I had asked about statistics earlier because statistics may inform our decisions regarding policy and this was answered with at least some statistics, but only in regard to UK and coed locker rooms there. It would be interesting to also see the Netherlands and Japan for this. That said, while coed locker rooms is a somewhat different question than trans mtf in female locker rooms I do expect that that there are some people out there who would want to take advantage of it. How many and getting back to anecdotal basis for policy, there are some unknown, but I think it's reasonable that we would expect crime statistics to go up because locker rooms present crimes of opportunity and persons being left alone, possibly vulnerable.

The next post I had made was in regard to coed dorms, but it was skipped over. I provided a link to an article that itself linked a study or two and statistics. It turns out that coed dorms are also a risk. I think it is reasonable to think coed EVERYTHING presents risks. Yet here we are in society choosing freedom and accepting risks, quite often--to include the vast majority of college-attending females wanting to live in coed dorms. Since we are presenting slippery slope arguments, do we want society completely segregated, like say, the radical Muslim world that conservatives scream about? Some of those conservatives are parallel to the radical Muslims and so might agree that there needs to be more segregation everywhere so they can control things--next stop, arranged marriage by Christians.

There are a couple of additional nuanced differences there. One, college-attending young ladies are generally making a choice to live in coed dorm or all-female dorm (except when they can't). This parallels Emily Lake's post that she was willing to compromise to allow trans persons post-op in the locker room but with too much negativity and emotional caveats thrown in. Wow, that got scary quickly, but could have been better. Secondly, there is discussion of also the risk to trans persons if they are not permitted to be in the opposing locker room.

So, this ought to be a cost-benefit discussion of both the policy and the absence of the policy for all groups of affected persons and how we want to operate as a society without appeal to anecdotes and photobombs.

 

[Toni]

It is disgusting to insist that asserting a woman’s right to privacy is equivalent to Jim Crow.

I cannot get over the number of males in this thread telling females that our boundaries and our insistence upon consent is bigotry against males who want to violate our boundaries and disregard our consent.

And what about all of those telling you you can't exclude black people from white spaces?

Are you under the assumption that non-white women want random naked men in the gym shower?

I said "white" and "black", not "men" and "women". It's the same reasoning.

Sure, but you keep running this analogy as if "white is synonymous with "females" and "black is synonymous with "males". You keep painting females as the powerful oppressors who are mistreating the vulnerable males. It's stupid.

This has nothing to do with oppressors/oppressed. You are just avoiding addressing the actual issue.

What do you think the 'actual issue' is, Loren?

From where I am sitting, it appears to be primarily male aggression and violence.