• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Male flasher confronted in LA Spa

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,718
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
An interesting situation;

The tony Koreatown health club became the scene of a showdown over nudity in gendered spaces after a customer confronted spa staff about a trans woman with male genitals being allowed to disrobe in the spa’s female section. The ruckus was caught on camera and quickly went viral on Twitter on Sunday, fueling a furious online debate—with threats of a boycott against the spa—about the rights of trans people to use women’s spaces versus the rights of cisgender females to not be exposed to male anatomy.

LAMAG

Step forward a virtue signaling wokester who must come to the defense of the "trans gender" person who is the subject of the objections. Now, in these situations, shouldn't a "trans gender" person do the courteous thing and keep their dick and balls under wraps ?
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,718
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
That's one way of looking at it. You would think just out of courtesy that the "trans gender" person would keep the dick and balls under wraps.
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
8,142
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist
For me it would depend on whether they were being obnoxious about it, like those guys in men's locker rooms who practically shove their junk in your face while you're sitting there trying to tie your shoes. But that lady was being just a teeny tad dramatic. "That's traumatizing to see that," really?

But I would agree that trans persons and locker rooms pose a more legitimate issue than with bathrooms.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
1,346
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Basic Beliefs
Vedanta. Many worlds physics, Environmentalism, Socialism.
Meh...
There's something new, remarkable or shocking about ordinary anatomy? I'm not seeing any actual harm here.
Ie: Who cares?
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,779
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Meh...
There's something new, remarkable or shocking about ordinary anatomy? I'm not seeing any actual harm here.
Ie: Who cares?

Yeah, that.

Anatomy exists. Nobody has the "right" not to be exposed to this fact.

Anatomy isn't sexual. Nudity isn't sexual. Humanity isn't sexual.

But even if they were, sexuality isn't remarkable. Unless you're sexually interested by it, in which case, enjoy!
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,718
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Meh...
There's something new, remarkable or shocking about ordinary anatomy? I'm not seeing any actual harm here.
Ie: Who cares?

Some women in the female changing rooms care, they are complaining about naked men flashing them.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,235
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Meh...
There's something new, remarkable or shocking about ordinary anatomy? I'm not seeing any actual harm here.
Ie: Who cares?

Yeah, that.

Anatomy exists. Nobody has the "right" not to be exposed to this fact.

Anatomy isn't sexual. Nudity isn't sexual. Humanity isn't sexual.

But even if they were, sexuality isn't remarkable. Unless you're sexually interested by it, in which case, enjoy!

For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal? What about peeping?
 

thebeave

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
3,508
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Meh...
There's something new, remarkable or shocking about ordinary anatomy? I'm not seeing any actual harm here.
Ie: Who cares?

Yeah, that.

Anatomy exists. Nobody has the "right" not to be exposed to this fact.

Anatomy isn't sexual. Nudity isn't sexual. Humanity isn't sexual.

But even if they were, sexuality isn't remarkable. Unless you're sexually interested by it, in which case, enjoy!

For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal? What about peeping?

Yeah, good question. What about the guy in the trenchcoat showing his junk to schoolgirls through the chainlink fence? It has been standard practice to report and arrest those guys, but maybe we should rethink that (not really).
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
1,346
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Basic Beliefs
Vedanta. Many worlds physics, Environmentalism, Socialism.
What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.


Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal? What about peeping?

Yeah, good question. What about the guy in the trenchcoat showing his junk to schoolgirls through the chainlink fence? It has been standard practice to report and arrest those guys, but maybe we should rethink that (not really).

Trenchcoat flashing is definitely a sexual act directed at a non-consenting individual. It's not the same thing as simply being naked.

What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Exactly. The flashers would have no power if we took a sane view of the human body.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.

And even the places where full nudity is legal have no bedlam in the streets.

Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

Exactly. You coming up to my windows and looking in is wrong regardless of what I'm wearing.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Exactly. I should be allowed to walk around inside my house naked if I want. (In practice it's completely safe during daylight hours, but at night there's a window in the bedroom we will leave open if the weather is suitable and there is one window in another house that has a view if we have a light on. Local law considers that indecent exposure.)
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,718
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.


Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Really, so when a man walks into the female changing rooms at the spa, Macy's or whatever with his cock out women should not complain, they and their daughters should learn from that ? There's nothing creepy about it ?
 

thebeave

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
3,508
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Trenchcoat flashing is definitely a sexual act directed at a non-consenting individual. It's not the same thing as simply being naked.

What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Exactly. The flashers would have no power if we took a sane view of the human body.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.

And even the places where full nudity is legal have no bedlam in the streets.

Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

Exactly. You coming up to my windows and looking in is wrong regardless of what I'm wearing.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Exactly. I should be allowed to walk around inside my house naked if I want. (In practice it's completely safe during daylight hours, but at night there's a window in the bedroom we will leave open if the weather is suitable and there is one window in another house that has a view if we have a light on. Local law considers that indecent exposure.)

Not sure I agree that trenchcoat flashing would be considered a sexual act. And what about women who protest bare breasted about <insert non-nudity related cause> in public? Is that a sexual act too? Perhaps in some legal sense. Many of these guys are just exhibitionists and attention whores. As far as consent, I don't think the women in the spa consented to being shown the guys penis, either. I believe he was pretty blatant about showing the goods....not discreet.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
1,346
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Basic Beliefs
Vedanta. Many worlds physics, Environmentalism, Socialism.
What about women walking down the street with their knees exposed? That was shocking, too, at one time.

What if the schoolgirls just laughed at Mr trenchcoat, and went back to their games. What's shocking is learned. A century ago parents would have covered their children's eyes at the sight of today's beach attire. Today it's a yawn, and the kids just ignore it.
It's the unconventional that's shocking, not nudity per se.

Toplessness is legal in New York City. Predictions of bedlam in the streets failed to materialize. In fact, pretty much nothing happened.


Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Really, so when a man walks into the female changing rooms at the spa, Macy's or whatever with his cock out women should not complain, they and their daughters should learn from that ? There's nothing creepy about it ?
If the changing room rules require sexual segregation, and women prefer it, then the men should stay out.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
1,346
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Basic Beliefs
Vedanta. Many worlds physics, Environmentalism, Socialism.
Has nobody ever been to a German sauna?
No sexual segregation. A single locker room. Total nudity. Whole families are there: kids, parents, grandparents -- everyone, all naked. Some saunas are really big, with multiple rooms of different temperatures, bars, even cafés.
There's nothing sexual about it, though, oddly, when you sit down at a table the (naked) waiter/ess is shocked if you don't, at least, throw a towel over yourself. Wierd....

Many Finnish schools have saunas. The whole class goes there, little kids and their teachers, both sexes, all naked. All perfectly normal.

In parts of Micronesia women walk/drive around bare-breasted, but try wearing shorts and you'll get arrested. Bare thighs are obscene.

In parts of the New Guinea highlands, men wear only a penis-sheath, leaving the scrotum exposed. If the sheath is accidently dislodged, a man is terribly embarrassed, covers up immediately and replaces his sheath.

It's all cultural. What is shocking is learned, not innate.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Not sure I agree that trenchcoat flashing would be considered a sexual act. And what about women who protest bare breasted about <insert non-nudity related cause> in public? Is that a sexual act too? Perhaps in some legal sense. Many of these guys are just exhibitionists and attention whores. As far as consent, I don't think the women in the spa consented to being shown the guys penis, either. I believe he was pretty blatant about showing the goods....not discreet.

The trenchcoat guys go up to a specific person and flash them. That's a very different thing than simply walking down the street with the part(s) exposed.

Since this was a trans person I very much doubt they were being blatant about it--trans people don't like their wrong body parts.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Has nobody ever been to a German sauna?
No sexual segregation. A single locker room. Total nudity. Whole families are there: kids, parents, grandparents -- everyone, all naked. Some saunas are really big, with multiple rooms of different temperatures, bars, even cafés.
There's nothing sexual about it, though, oddly, when you sit down at a table the (naked) waiter/ess is shocked if you don't, at least, throw a towel over yourself. Wierd....

Many Finnish schools have saunas. The whole class goes there, little kids and their teachers, both sexes, all naked. All perfectly normal.

In parts of Micronesia women walk/drive around bare-breasted, but try wearing shorts and you'll get arrested. Bare thighs are obscene.

In parts of the New Guinea highlands, men wear only a penis-sheath, leaving the scrotum exposed. If the sheath is accidently dislodged, a man is terribly embarrassed, covers up immediately and replaces his sheath.

It's all cultural. What is shocking is learned, not innate.

This. There's nothing that is innately offensive, people have to learn to be offended.
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,676
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal?

I don't know enough about spa behavior or this particular spa. Do adult females typically flash others including children because you consider disrobing to be flashing? If it is typically done by disrobing, then it appears to be an issue in general, not particular to the trans person. If on the other hand, disrobing is not a thing done under normal circumstances ever by cis women at that place in that room for that purpose, then it would appear the trans person is in error.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal?

I don't know enough about spa behavior or this particular spa. Do adult females typically flash others including children because you consider disrobing to be flashing? If it is typically done by disrobing, then it appears to be an issue in general, not particular to the trans person. If on the other hand, disrobing is not a thing done under normal circumstances ever by cis women at that place in that room for that purpose, then it would appear the trans person is in error.

I would be very surprised if this wasn't a situation where it would be perfectly acceptable had she had the "right" parts down there.
 

Angra Mainyu

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Buenos Aires
Basic Beliefs
non-theist
Since this was a trans person I very much doubt they were being blatant about it--trans people don't like their wrong body parts.

Do you have evidence to support that claim?
Sure, some trans people are like that. But surely not all, and I do not know whether most trans women have those feelings. I do not see any statistics. But in any case, here is an activist website: https://www.stonewall.org.uk/truth-about-trans#gender-reassignment

But for other trans people surgery isn’t something they want. Being trans isn’t about having (or not having) particular body parts. It’s something that’s absolutely core to a trans person’s identity and doesn’t alter - whatever outward appearances might be.


Funnily, they also say "And frankly, it’s no one else’s business: you wouldn’t dream of asking someone else what they’ve got going on under their clothes, so why would anyone think it’s appropriate to ask a trans person?!", as if the debate did not include cases like the one in the OP.
 

zorq

Veteran Member
Joined
May 9, 2002
Messages
1,731
Location
Republic of Korea
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, Moderate
Personally, in the current political environment, I side with liberals most of the time, but I will diverge a little bit here and say that I think it's okay to have "No penises allowed" areas. Especially in private enterprises and especially areas where penises are almost guaranteed to be observed.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
We still have no confirmation that the incident even took place. It's probably just a setup, them screaming about something that didn't actually happen.
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
8,142
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist
Not sure I agree that trenchcoat flashing would be considered a sexual act. And what about women who protest bare breasted about <insert non-nudity related cause> in public? Is that a sexual act too? Perhaps in some legal sense. Many of these guys are just exhibitionists and attention whores. As far as consent, I don't think the women in the spa consented to being shown the guys penis, either. I believe he was pretty blatant about showing the goods....not discreet.

Did you read something besides the OP story? Because, there you just hear the one lady's version, and she doesn't even get that specific.

For people saying other countries are fine with coed nudity, that doesn't really solve anything now in places where it is not currently accepted. There would have to be a cultural shift on the issue before you can expect people to not be bothered by it.
 

ideologyhunter

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
4,800
Location
Port Clinton, Ohio
Basic Beliefs
atheism/beatnikism
Yeah. We're not Finland, if that comment was accurate. Where I swim, there's a man who walks his 6- or 7-year-old daughter into the men's changing room. When they're leaving the pool at the end of their swim, that means walking directly through the shower room to get to the lockers. Call me super old-fashioned, but I'm not up for standing under the shower and suddenly having a 2nd grade girl walk past. These are gang showers without dividers. I wouldn't dream of going up to a young child I don't know, out on the street, and talking to her. This day & age? No way. There's no conceivable point in that -- unless, I guess, she was lost and sobbing or some scenario similar to that. And kids are told and told and told about Stranger Danger. But somehow the walk-through is okay? I guess I'll have to visit Finland and get enlightened.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
9,044
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
This is a good discussion. Sounds like the person is a perv.

But it got me to thinking about women nursing their infants in public and how so many people think this is indecent. Makes you wonder about people. And I gotta admit that when I see a nursing mother I get an instant erection and just want to suck on those tits too.

It's infuriating actually to know that such shameless behavior as nursing an infant in public is even considered decent in some circles, and that I have to take special precautions to shield my children from seeing such a thing.

Mercy!
 

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
8,752
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
You mean there actually was an incident? The initial reporting looked far more like a setup.

I don't see indecent exposure here, anyway.

There's still no actual evidence that she was even there, a claim that the facility itself has always denied. There's just the word of the LAPD, which was not present at the scene, and the solemn word of anti-Trans activist and tabloid "reporter " Andy Ngo, who also wasn't present at the scene. I believe that they are showing their hand when they describe Agee Melager as a "known sex offender". What they mean is that they've arrested her before for allegedly very similar offenses, making her a convenient target for further harassment on their part. Once you're in their rolodex, you're never safe again.

To say nothing of the NY Post, which is preposterously claiming that the accused, who has refused to grant interviews to anyone, gave them a self-incriminating exclusive in conversation with a reporter that most trans folks in the country would immediately recognize as a dangerous interlocutor. Really? If you were accused of a crime, would you give an exclusive interview to a tabloid, and to no other entity?
 

thebeave

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
3,508
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
You mean there actually was an incident? The initial reporting looked far more like a setup.

I don't see indecent exposure here, anyway.

There's still no actual evidence that she was even there, a claim that the facility itself has always denied. There's just the word of the LAPD, which was not present at the scene, and the solemn word of anti-Trans activist and tabloid "reporter " Andy Ngo, who also wasn't present at the scene. I believe that they are showing their hand when they describe Agee Melager as a "known sex offender". What they mean is that they've arrested her before for allegedly very similar offenses, making her a convenient target for further harassment on their part. Once you're in their rolodex, you're never safe again.

To say nothing of the NY Post, which is preposterously claiming that the accused, who has refused to grant interviews to anyone, gave them a self-incriminating exclusive in conversation with a reporter that most trans folks in the country would immediately recognize as a dangerous interlocutor. Really? If you were accused of a crime, would you give an exclusive interview to a tabloid, and to no other entity?

Rarely is the police or a reporter actually present at the scene when an "incident" takes place. Police rely on witness interviews and physical evidence (video cameras, cell phone tracking data, etc). So, I don't know why you think its a problem in this case because the police and reporter weren't there. :confused:

Plus, there is this article from LGBTQNation, where Melager admits to being at the facility:

lgbtqnation.com/2021/09/discreet-arrest-sex-offender-made-wi-spa-case-months-right-wing-outrage/

“Everything about the Wi Spa was a bunch of garbage and lies,” Merager told the Post, according to Ngo. Referring to Cubana Angel, Merager says, “She never saw me naked. I was underwater with water all the way up to my chest.”

Also this, from Andy Ngo:

“The truth here is that four women and a minor girl, all people of color, came forward to authorities, despite the pressure that they were facing from the public.”

So, it seems settled that they have the right guy, but it remains somewhat under question as to how much genital exposure there was.

One thing that bugs me about all of this is the pejorative labeling of people as "right wingers" or "transphobics" who object to the idea of male genitalia being exposed in a female only facility. It is a reasonable position in this country at this time for people (left, right and center) to have an expectation that you will not be exposed to male genitalia if you are in a female only facility/section. Perhaps someday we will all be comfortable with coed nude facilities , or that trans people will have have their own facilites, but until that time it is problematic.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
This is a good discussion. Sounds like the person is a perv.

But it got me to thinking about women nursing their infants in public and how so many people think this is indecent. Makes you wonder about people. And I gotta admit that when I see a nursing mother I get an instant erection and just want to suck on those tits too.

It's infuriating actually to know that such shameless behavior as nursing an infant in public is even considered decent in some circles, and that I have to take special precautions to shield my children from seeing such a thing.

Mercy!

I'm not sure they are a perv. It sounds to me like they consider themselves female and have a right to be naked where females have a right to be naked, but the law disagrees.
 

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
8,752
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
Rarely is the police or a reporter actually present at the scene when an "incident" takes place. Police rely on witness interviews and physical evidence (video cameras, cell phone tracking data, etc). So, I don't know why you think its a problem in this case because the police and reporter weren't there.
Because there is no such evidence. :realitycheck:

Plus, there is this article from LGBTQNation, where Melager admits to being at the facility:

She admitted nothing to LGBTQNation, as they did not speak with her. They rightly attribute the alleged quotation to the "reporting" of Andy Ngo, an anti-trans activist who works for one of the most notorious tabloids in the nation. Believing this quote means believing that an individual who has refused to talk to any media at all since the alleged incident, out of the blue contacted a guy she knew hated her on a fundamental level and offered him an exclusive interview. If you believe that, I've got a bridge for sale in Brooklyn that you might be interested in.
 

thebeave

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2001
Messages
3,508
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Rarely is the police or a reporter actually present at the scene when an "incident" takes place. Police rely on witness interviews and physical evidence (video cameras, cell phone tracking data, etc). So, I don't know why you think its a problem in this case because the police and reporter weren't there.
Because there is no such evidence. :realitycheck:

Plus, there is this article from LGBTQNation, where Melager admits to being at the facility:

She admitted nothing to LGBTQNation, as they did not speak with her. They rightly attribute the alleged quotation to the "reporting" of Andy Ngo, an anti-trans activist who works for one of the most notorious tabloids in the nation. Believing this quote means believing that an individual who has refused to talk to any media at all since the alleged incident, out of the blue contacted a guy she knew hated her on a fundamental level and offered him an exclusive interview. If you believe that, I've got a bridge for sale in Brooklyn that you might be interested in.

First of all, where is it written that Melager talked directly to Andy Ngo? Ngo wrote the article for the NY Post, but that doesn't mean he was the interviewer of Melager. If I understand you correctly, you're basically claiming Melager never talked to the NY Post, Any Ngo made the whole thing up out of whole cloth, the LAPD has fabricated evidence about Melager, and the so-called witnesses at the spa (4 women and a child) didn't exist and never talked to the LAPD? THAT, to me, is quite the tall tale.

On a side note, I wonder if Melager gets convicted does he get sent to a women's prison? It will be his dream come true.
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
8,142
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist
You mean there actually was an incident? The initial reporting looked far more like a setup.

I don't see indecent exposure here, anyway.

There's still no actual evidence that she was even there, a claim that the facility itself has always denied. There's just the word of the LAPD, which was not present at the scene, and the solemn word of anti-Trans activist and tabloid "reporter " Andy Ngo, who also wasn't present at the scene. I believe that they are showing their hand when they describe Agee Melager as a "known sex offender". What they mean is that they've arrested her before for allegedly very similar offenses, making her a convenient target for further harassment on their part. Once you're in their rolodex, you're never safe again.

To say nothing of the NY Post, which is preposterously claiming that the accused, who has refused to grant interviews to anyone, gave them a self-incriminating exclusive in conversation with a reporter that most trans folks in the country would immediately recognize as a dangerous interlocutor. Really? If you were accused of a crime, would you give an exclusive interview to a tabloid, and to no other entity?

How do you know any of this?

LAPD seeking registered sex offender in June Wi-Spa incident - LA Blade

A total of five women have filed reports with the Los Angeles Police Department regarding a June 23 incident at Wi Spa, all of them claiming to have seen male genitals exposed in the women’s section of the Wilshire Boulevard health club.

One of the reports states that a woman “observed [the suspect] exit a jacuzzi fully nude. Victim observed male genitals on the suspect and became scared and upset.”
/////
Merager has a lengthy criminal history which includes nearly a dozen felony convictions for crimes ranging from sex offenses to burglary and escape. In December of 2018, investigators from the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department’s West Hollywood substation arrested Merager on seven felony indecent exposure counts, stemming from allegations of indecent exposure in front of women and children at West Hollywood Park.

LASD-Sex-Offender-453x600.jpg

This doesn't sound like a sincere trans person. Even if they are, they are still doing this after previous multiple incidents. They are going out of their way to go to public facilities and be nude in view of women. You have to make an effort to do this, you don't have to be nude in a jacuzzi.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
This doesn't sound like a sincere trans person. Even if they are, they are still doing this after previous multiple incidents. They are going out of their way to go to public facilities and be nude in view of women. You have to make an effort to do this, you don't have to be nude in a jacuzzi.

Or the police are going out of the way to persecute a legitimate trans person. We do not have enough to decide which scenario is right.
 

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
8,752
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
How do you know any of this?

LAPD seeking registered sex offender in June Wi-Spa incident - LA Blade

A total of five women have filed reports with the Los Angeles Police Department regarding a June 23 incident at Wi Spa, all of them claiming to have seen male genitals exposed in the women’s section of the Wilshire Boulevard health club.

One of the reports states that a woman “observed [the suspect] exit a jacuzzi fully nude. Victim observed male genitals on the suspect and became scared and upset.”
/////
Merager has a lengthy criminal history which includes nearly a dozen felony convictions for crimes ranging from sex offenses to burglary and escape. In December of 2018, investigators from the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department’s West Hollywood substation arrested Merager on seven felony indecent exposure counts, stemming from allegations of indecent exposure in front of women and children at West Hollywood Park.

View attachment 35192

This doesn't sound like a sincere trans person. Even if they are, they are still doing this after previous multiple incidents. They are going out of their way to go to public facilities and be nude in view of women. You have to make an effort to do this, you don't have to be nude in a jacuzzi.

No one is disputing that the police have accused this person of misdeeds.
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
8,142
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist
Oh brother, they have several witness statements, there's a quote from them in the article. This isn't police making it up out of whole cloth.
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,323
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
An interesting situation;

The tony Koreatown health club became the scene of a showdown over nudity in gendered spaces after a customer confronted spa staff about a trans woman with male genitals being allowed to disrobe in the spa’s female section. The ruckus was caught on camera and quickly went viral on Twitter on Sunday, fueling a furious online debate—with threats of a boycott against the spa—about the rights of trans people to use women’s spaces versus the rights of cisgender females to not be exposed to male anatomy.

LAMAG

Step forward a virtue signaling wokester who must come to the defense of the "trans gender" person who is the subject of the objections. Now, in these situations, shouldn't a "trans gender" person do the courteous thing and keep their dick and balls under wraps ?

When I was young flashers were a problem in Stockholm society. You don't hear about it anymore. I somehow doubt this behaviour has gone away. I suspect it's been normalised and is accepted. And if you object you're transphobic.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,235
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I'm not sure they are a perv. It sounds to me like they consider themselves female and have a right to be naked where females have a right to be naked, but the law disagrees.

They can consider themselves to be female... but that doesn't change the objective fact that they are male.

And their belief certainly shouldn't obligate any other person to pretend that reality doesn't exist.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,235
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I find myself constantly flabbergasted at the willingness of males to discount and ignore threats to the safety, dignity, and privacy of females. Seriously. Merager has a lengthy criminal history going back a decade, including several prosecutions for indecent exposure. So far as I can tell, Merager hasn't been engaged in any kind of transition whatsoever.

So I'll toss out the obvious question:
If a cisgender male goes into the female-only section of a nude spa and exposes his genitals, is it indecent exposure?
 

Playball40

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
1,997
Location
Gallifrey
Basic Beliefs
Non-religious
Meh...
There's something new, remarkable or shocking about ordinary anatomy? I'm not seeing any actual harm here.
Ie: Who cares?

Yeah, that.

Anatomy exists. Nobody has the "right" not to be exposed to this fact.

Anatomy isn't sexual. Nudity isn't sexual. Humanity isn't sexual.

But even if they were, sexuality isn't remarkable. Unless you're sexually interested by it, in which case, enjoy!

For both of you to consider: Do you disagree with flashing being illegal? What about peeping?
This has zero to do with the OP since no one "flashed" anyone. Why was the woman checking out the other woman's junk anyway?
 

Playball40

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
1,997
Location
Gallifrey
Basic Beliefs
Non-religious
I'm not sure they are a perv. It sounds to me like they consider themselves female and have a right to be naked where females have a right to be naked, but the law disagrees.

They can consider themselves to be female... but that doesn't change the objective fact that they are male.

And their belief certainly shouldn't obligate any other person to pretend that reality doesn't exist.

Wrong. They are NOT male. Penis /= male
 

Playball40

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
1,997
Location
Gallifrey
Basic Beliefs
Non-religious
Trenchcoat flashing is definitely a sexual act directed at a non-consenting individual. It's not the same thing as simply being naked.



Exactly. The flashers would have no power if we took a sane view of the human body.



And even the places where full nudity is legal have no bedlam in the streets.

Peeping? -- a violation of personal privacy. I'm agin' it.

Exactly. You coming up to my windows and looking in is wrong regardless of what I'm wearing.

There's aggression, and there's casual nudity. I've no objection to the latter.

Exactly. I should be allowed to walk around inside my house naked if I want. (In practice it's completely safe during daylight hours, but at night there's a window in the bedroom we will leave open if the weather is suitable and there is one window in another house that has a view if we have a light on. Local law considers that indecent exposure.)

Not sure I agree that trenchcoat flashing would be considered a sexual act. And what about women who protest bare breasted about <insert non-nudity related cause> in public? Is that a sexual act too? Perhaps in some legal sense. Many of these guys are just exhibitionists and attention whores. As far as consent, I don't think the women in the spa consented to being shown the guys penis, either. I believe he was pretty blatant about showing the goods....not discreet.

trenchcoat flashing is absolutely a sexual act. Look it up.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,235
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Wrong. They are NOT male. Penis /= male

Do you understand reproductive biology at all?

Yes, actually, Penis = Male in 99.99% of cases, with the remaining 0.01% being disorders of sexual development. But those DSDs are completely irrelevant to this case, as well as to pretty much all discussions of transgender activism. Because DSDs are NOT gender identity. And the male person in question has made no claim to having a DSD.

Their gender identity does not trump evolutionary biology.
 

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
8,752
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
I find myself constantly flabbergasted at the willingness of males to discount and ignore threats to the safety, dignity, and privacy of females. Seriously. Merager has a lengthy criminal history going back a decade, including several prosecutions for indecent exposure. So far as I can tell, Merager hasn't been engaged in any kind of transition whatsoever.

So I'll toss out the obvious question:
If a cisgender male goes into the female-only section of a nude spa and exposes his genitals, is it indecent exposure?

If a cisgender male goes into a female-only section and ostentatiously, intentionally, exposes their genitals to others beyond what is necessary to use the facility, he would be subject to a potential charge of indecent exposure. But so too would be a cisgender female who did the same thing. Your personal opinion about what you think might be someone's birth assignation of gender might be cannot be the criterion that defines indecent exposure, and indeed it is not. It is not indecent to simply exist, or to use public facilities for their intended purpose.

I note that transgender laws of the kind you usually support would actually require a person with a penis to use the female locker room if they were assigned male at birth but are now post-transition, since trans people who use a room not matching their birth certificate are subject to formal legal persecution in states that have such laws (in which category, thankfully, California does not yet belong). So, what's the deal here anyway? Aren't penises in female locker rooms a natural outcome of strictly legislating who can use which bathroom on the basis of birth assignment, in a world where post-natal physical transformation of apparent sex is common?
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,730
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I find myself constantly flabbergasted at the willingness of males to discount and ignore threats to the safety, dignity, and privacy of females. Seriously. Merager has a lengthy criminal history going back a decade, including several prosecutions for indecent exposure. So far as I can tell, Merager hasn't been engaged in any kind of transition whatsoever.

So I'll toss out the obvious question:
If a cisgender male goes into the female-only section of a nude spa and exposes his genitals, is it indecent exposure?

We have no evidence one way or the other at this point.

Simple test: Look at their closet.

If it's full of female clothes this is a nothing. If it's full of male clothes this is a form of flashing and should be prosecuted. (I won't say "indecent exposure" because I don't believe the concept should exist. There's nothing wrong with the body.)
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,235
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I find myself constantly flabbergasted at the willingness of males to discount and ignore threats to the safety, dignity, and privacy of females. Seriously. Merager has a lengthy criminal history going back a decade, including several prosecutions for indecent exposure. So far as I can tell, Merager hasn't been engaged in any kind of transition whatsoever.

So I'll toss out the obvious question:
If a cisgender male goes into the female-only section of a nude spa and exposes his genitals, is it indecent exposure?

If a cisgender male goes into a female-only section and ostentatiously, intentionally, exposes their genitals to others beyond what is necessary to use the facility, he would be subject to a potential charge of indecent exposure. But so too would be a cisgender female who did the same thing. Your personal opinion about what you think might be someone's birth assignation of gender might be cannot be the criterion that defines indecent exposure, and indeed it is not. It is not indecent to simply exist, or to use public facilities for their intended purpose.

I note that transgender laws of the kind you usually support would actually require a person with a penis to use the female locker room if they were assigned male at birth but are now post-transition, since trans people who use a room not matching their birth certificate are subject to formal legal persecution in states that have such laws (in which category, thankfully, California does not yet belong). So, what's the deal here anyway? Aren't penises in female locker rooms a natural outcome of strictly legislating who can use which bathroom on the basis of birth assignment, in a world where post-natal physical transformation of apparent sex is common?

Lol, "the kind I usually support"? WTF are you on about? Do you actually even know my position, or are you just making whatever assumptions allow you to stick me into a nice neat box where you can condescend to your heart's content from up there on your high horse?
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,235
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I find myself constantly flabbergasted at the willingness of males to discount and ignore threats to the safety, dignity, and privacy of females. Seriously. Merager has a lengthy criminal history going back a decade, including several prosecutions for indecent exposure. So far as I can tell, Merager hasn't been engaged in any kind of transition whatsoever.

So I'll toss out the obvious question:
If a cisgender male goes into the female-only section of a nude spa and exposes his genitals, is it indecent exposure?

We have no evidence one way or the other at this point.

Simple test: Look at their closet.

If it's full of female clothes this is a nothing. If it's full of male clothes this is a form of flashing and should be prosecuted. (I won't say "indecent exposure" because I don't believe the concept should exist. There's nothing wrong with the body.)

So... "woman" is defined by how well a person conforms to fashion trends?

Does that make me a "man" because I like boots and loafers, trousers, button-up shirts, and I don't shave my legs and armpits? Oh hey, I'm also good at math, I *must* be a man!!!!
 
Top Bottom