Split Gendered spaces, split from Drag Shows

[thebeave]

I wouldn't say that everyone completely agrees--we all agree that stalls would be good but she wants them mandated and some of us disagree with that.

Loren, why is it so important to you that male-bodied people have access to naked women whenever they wish, and that women have no say in the matter?

Or, why should everyone else, the rest of society, do a 180 on separate sex spaces to affirm a few men’s body dysphoria?

Yep. A wise, logical man once said, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or the one)." It would behoove some people on this forum to consider the wisdom of that philosophy."

 

[Politesse]

How do we tell the difference?

When you're asking for rights to be taken away from the disadvantaged, you've stepped over the line. It's not complicated.

 

[Toni]

How do we tell the difference?

When you're asking for rights to be taken away from the disadvantaged, you've stepped over the line. It's not complicated.

As soon as someone does that, I will be there protesting, or telling them off, right beside you.

 

[Tigers!]

I wouldn't say that everyone completely agrees--we all agree that stalls would be good but she wants them mandated and some of us disagree with that.

Loren, why is it so important to you that male-bodied people have access to naked women whenever they wish, and that women have no say in the matter?

Or, why should everyone else, the rest of society, do a 180 on separate sex spaces to affirm a few men’s body dysphoria?

Yep. A wise, logical man once said, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or the one)." It would behoove some people on this forum to consider the wisdom of that philosophy."

That wisdom is not that wise when used unwisely. It can lead to the tyranny of the 51%. (I do like your use of behoove)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Loren, what is wrong is to expect women to simply accept one of the things they have been conditioned to see as a threat in a space that they regard as safe and private and to do so immediately. BTW, at zero inconvenience to cis men who don't give a shit about women anyway.

And you still haven't explained how this is any different than allowing black women into white women's restrooms.

 

[Toni]

Loren, what is wrong is to expect women to simply accept one of the things they have been conditioned to see as a threat in a space that they regard as safe and private and to do so immediately. BTW, at zero inconvenience to cis men who don't give a shit about women anyway.

And you still haven't explained how this is any different than allowing black women into white women's restrooms.

Black women don’t sexually assault white women.

Black women don’t have a history of being violent towards white women.

There is no history of white women being told by society that they should be modest and not show ( name body part and don’t forget hair) in front of black women they are not related to.

White women are not told that they should not lead black women on.

Same thing as above—all points—only reverse the colors.

 

[Arctish]

Loren, what is wrong is to expect women to simply accept one of the things they have been conditioned to see as a threat in a space that they regard as safe and private and to do so immediately. BTW, at zero inconvenience to cis men who don't give a shit about women anyway.

And you still haven't explained how this is any different than allowing black women into white women's restrooms.

What were the potential consequences of allowing black women into white women's restrooms?

 

[Oleg]

Loren, what is wrong is to expect women to simply accept one of the things they have been conditioned to see as a threat in a space that they regard as safe and private and to do so immediately. BTW, at zero inconvenience to cis men who don't give a shit about women anyway.

And you still haven't explained how this is any different than allowing black women into white women's restrooms.

Black women are women?

 

[Toni]

Loren, what is wrong is to expect women to simply accept one of the things they have been conditioned to see as a threat in a space that they regard as safe and private and to do so immediately. BTW, at zero inconvenience to cis men who don't give a shit about women anyway.

And you still haven't explained how this is any different than allowing black women into white women's restrooms.

What were the potential consequences of allowing black women into white women's restrooms?

During Jim Crow, bathrooms were separated into white and not white. A Black woman in a White Restroom may have risked arrest.

 

[bilby]

Black women don’t sexually assault white women.

Black women don’t have a history of being violent towards white women.

Yeah, they do.

I mean, obviously only a tiny proportion of them, but that tiny proportion do sexually and/or violently assault white (and black) women.

Oddly, that's also true of transwomen. Most don't sexually assault cis-women. Most don't have a history of being violent towards cis-women (or, indeed, anyone).

 

[Toni]

Black women don’t sexually assault white women.

Black women don’t have a history of being violent towards white women.

Yeah, they do.

I mean, obviously only a tiny proportion of them, but that tiny proportion do sexually and/or violently assault white (and black) women.

Oddly, that's also true of transwomen. Most don't sexually assault cis-women. Most don't have a history of being violent towards cis-women (or, indeed, anyone).

As a group? No. Black women do not have a history of being violent towards white women. Most violence between any two people happens within a group: white on white, black on black, male on male. Except that almost all rapes of women are committed by males.

Again, I'm not worried that a transwoman will rape anybody. I'm not even terribly worried that someone will lie and claim to be a transwoman in order to gain access to the women's locker room. Emily Lake has expressed that concern. I'm not worried that anybody will be so overcome by lust at the sight of my naked body that they will rape me. Rape is not a crime of lust but a crime of rage and hate.

I'm not a prude and I'm not afraid of or repulsed by the sight of a penis or naked bodies however the genitalia is configured.

I'm not interested in stigmatizing any LGBTQA individuals or groups that exist. People are people are people. End of.

I even said that I think that locker rooms with stalls will probably be the best solution for everybody. I think they need to be universal because I have seen the need for specific accommodations for girls and women to be the exact reason not to provide access to girls and women. If they are universal, no one can use that excuse.

Eventually someone actually said they agreed so I'm not sure why anyone, including me still thinks this is a controversy.

I will not back down from my assertion that there are plenty of women who would be upset, confused or frightened to be confronted with a naked stranger with a penis in the women's locker room. Many women have been sexually assaulted and whether anybody likes it or not, it is not hard for most people to see why the unexpected experience of finding a naked stranger with a penis in a space that is dedicated for women would be upsetting or more than upsetting. This is not because the upset rape victim sees a naked woman with a penis and thinks: she's trans and she's never going to be a threat. It's because there could easily be a fight/flight reflex and everybody could be traumatized. And a lot of women are modest by nature or by indoctrination. They might also be upset to be confronted by the unexpected sight of a naked stranger with a penis while they are also not fully clothed in a space where they do not expect to see one.

I'm pretty sure that being confronted by a screaming or defensive or even attacking woman would be upsetting for a transwoman. I would not want such an experience to upset or traumatize her. I think everybody should be able to feel safe and comfortable.

I'm pretty sure that if I were to walk naked into the men's locker room, more than one of the males present would be upset by the intrusion.

I've been told that women just need to get over it. I've been told that I am an anti-trans bigot, looking to further stigmatize an already marginalized population.

However men are not expected to just get over whatever it is inside them that makes them harass, threaten, assault, ridicule individuals they do not find sufficiently masculine or whatever the hell it is that makes men go after other men. And of course, no one is interested in dealing with the general propensity towards violence that seems to infect far more men than women.

 

[bilby]

As a group? No. Black women do not have a history of being violent towards white women.

As a group, trans-women do not have a history of being violent towards cis-women.

In both cases, violent behaviour is a rare exception.

But you apparently only think it's an important thing to consider in one of the cases.

almost all rapes of women are committed by males

Indeed. Specifically, by cis-males. But a minuscule (but non-zero) number are committed by females, or by transsexuals.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Black women don’t sexually assault white women.

Black women don’t have a history of being violent towards white women.

Yeah, they do.

I mean, obviously only a tiny proportion of them, but that tiny proportion do sexually and/or violently assault white (and black) women.

Oddly, that's also true of transwomen. Most don't sexually assault cis-women. Most don't have a history of being violent towards cis-women (or, indeed, anyone).

Which is generally why the concern being raised isn't about trans women being a threat at all.

In general, right now, if male genitalia appears in a women locker room, there is a problem. That person does not belong there. Very binary condition. And easy for women.

The modification makes things instantly more difficult to judge. Are women supposed to leer at a trans woman for a certain number of seconds before turning away and going back to business once they are satisfied the person is a trans woman and not there inappropriately? I'm certain that isn't good for anyone in that locker room.

Why is it so difficult for people to even accept that this is a thing? That there is implied risk in the ambiguity created when the dichotomy is disrupted.

 

[Toni]

As a group? No. Black women do not have a history of being violent towards white women.

As a group, trans-women do not have a history of being violent towards cis-women.

In both cases, violent behaviour is a rare exception.

But you apparently only think it's an important thing to consider in one of the cases.

almost all rapes of women are committed by males

Indeed. Specifically, by cis-males. But a minuscule (but non-zero) number are committed by females, or by transsexuals.

I absolutely do not fear that transwomen will be violent towards...anybody.

 

[bilby]

Why is it so difficult for people to even accept that this is a thing? That there is implied risk in the ambiguity created when the dichotomy is disrupted.

Because that's the very essence of bigotry.

It's not different in any way from the reasoning that apartheid is necessary, because blacks commit crimes, and letting those blacks that don't commit crimes into white areas, disrupts the dichotomy that made arresting criminal blacks so easy and straightforward.

 

[bilby]

As a group? No. Black women do not have a history of being violent towards white women.

As a group, trans-women do not have a history of being violent towards cis-women.

In both cases, violent behaviour is a rare exception.

But you apparently only think it's an important thing to consider in one of the cases.

almost all rapes of women are committed by males

Indeed. Specifically, by cis-males. But a minuscule (but non-zero) number are committed by females, or by transsexuals.

I absolutely do not fear that transwomen will be violent towards...anybody.

Then... what?

Do you seriously believe that cis-male criminals posing as transwomen are a sufficiently common occurrence as to warrant any action specific to that scenario, given that we already have plenty of protections in place to deal with violent and/or sexual assaults?

If a cis man (posing as a transsexual) assaults a woman in a women's locker room, how is this different from a cis man (who is NOT posing as a transsexual) assaulting a woman in a women's locker room?

The problem in need of prevention is the assault. Not the perpetrator's sexuality.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why is it so difficult for people to even accept that this is a thing? That there is implied risk in the ambiguity created when the dichotomy is disrupted.

Because that's the very essence of bigotry.

Bigotry is founded on malice. Toni isn't saying a trans woman is a danger (or saying trans women shouldn't be allowed in the women's locker room). The danger is in not knowing if the person is a trans woman. In a perfect world, this isn't an issue, anyone inside the women's locker room belongs there, all is well.

It's not different in any way from the reasoning that apartheid is necessary, because blacks commit crimes, and letting those blacks that don't commit crimes into white areas, disrupts the dichotomy that made arresting criminal blacks so easy and straightforward.

Apartheid was about massive scale segregation of populations, relegating native South Africans to a caste of remedial labor and poverty so they could serve the white upper class people. Toni has not suggested banning trans women from the locker room. So no, it isn't remotely similar at all. Just because Apartheid isn't the Holocaust, doesn't make references to it not hyperbole.

The question is, how long should women leer at a person before being satisfied that they are a trans women? Or should they simply ignore it and just hope?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Just, not by victimizing an even more marginalized group.

I don't think that expecting someone to use the facility in the next room counts as"victimizing" them.
Tom

Or their own, "special" fountain?

Dayum.
The air up there in your ivory tower is thin.
Tom

ETA ~Have you any idea how ridiculous this sort of post looks to those of us who aren't as cis-phobic as you are? ~

Again and again we make the comparison to what used to happen to blacks--and again and again it's deflected, not addressed.

Is it too inconvenient a reality to actually address?

 

[Oleg]

Again and again we make the comparison to what used to happen to blacks--and again and again it's deflected, not addressed.

Why would you make that comparison? It makes no sense. Do you think black women are all okay with naked guys in the locker room?

 

[TomC]

Again and again we make the comparison to what used to happen to blacks--and again and again it's deflected, not addressed.

Is it too inconvenient a reality to actually address?

We have. Multiple times.

There's no inherent difference between races. There are very big inherent differences between the two sexes. Comparing sex segregation in restrooms and such(and only there) to Jim Crow laws is ridiculous.

Let me repeat a question that @Toni has asked and never gotten an answer for. What does trans even mean, in objective practical terms? Sex is readily identifiable, usually even fully dressed. Gender and threat are not. How is a female supposed to gauge either one in a stranger?
Tom