Male flasher confronted in LA Spa

[Emily Lake]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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!!!!

 

[Politesse]

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?

You say this as though this were the first time we've discussed trans rights on this forum.

Are you saying, here, that you now oppose legislative attempts to police who can use which bathroom, locker areas, and so forth on the basis of their birth assignation? What you would call their "biological sex"?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

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!!!!

Some garments are androgynous and say nothing about the wearer. Many garments are clearly feminine and will only be present in the closet of a transwoman or crossdresser. A few garments are explicitly masculine and will only be present in the closet of a transman or crossdresser. If you do not find garments of explicit gender the check yields no information. If you find feminine but not masculine it's pretty clear they are living as a woman.

This has nothing to do with fashion. Neither my wife nor I care about fashion, but you would have no problem figuring out whose closet is whose and you wouldn't need to cheat and look at sizes.

 

[Emily Lake]

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?

You say this as though this were the first time we've discussed trans rights on this forum.

Are you saying, here, that you now oppose legislative attempts to police who can use which bathroom, locker areas, and so forth on the basis of their birth assignation? What you would call their "biological sex"?

I t may come as a surprise to you, but given that I have a fully functional brain, I am capable of holding nuanced positions on this issue, depending on the situation and the level of risk that arises in those situations. Public restrooms aren't the same as locker rooms, which aren't the same as prisons. None of that should require me to pretend that sex isn't real or that sex doesn't have a material impact in some areas of life. I shouldn't be expected to deny reality and dismiss science to prove my purity to you.

 

[Emily Lake]

Some garments are androgynous and say nothing about the wearer. Many garments are clearly feminine and will only be present in the closet of a transwoman or crossdresser. A few garments are explicitly masculine and will only be present in the closet of a transman or crossdresser. If you do not find garments of explicit gender the check yields no information. If you find feminine but not masculine it's pretty clear they are living as a woman.

This has nothing to do with fashion. Neither my wife nor I care about fashion, but you would have no problem figuring out whose closet is whose and you wouldn't need to cheat and look at sizes.

Which garments are explicitly masculine? Can you name some that are clearly feminine?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Some garments are androgynous and say nothing about the wearer. Many garments are clearly feminine and will only be present in the closet of a transwoman or crossdresser. A few garments are explicitly masculine and will only be present in the closet of a transman or crossdresser. If you do not find garments of explicit gender the check yields no information. If you find feminine but not masculine it's pretty clear they are living as a woman.

This has nothing to do with fashion. Neither my wife nor I care about fashion, but you would have no problem figuring out whose closet is whose and you wouldn't need to cheat and look at sizes.

Which garments are explicitly masculine? Can you name some that are clearly feminine?

High heels. Only women are crazy enough to wear them. Why?! The fuck I know. I’ve never looked at women’s footwear. Most guys don’t. Corset. Yeah, that is another thing. Bra. Pretty feminine. Hard to wear without gear.

Masculine clothing? Probably a derby, or do hats not count?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

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.

Is it? Why is a guy not allowed in a woman’s locker room, but a lesbian is? Is it merely the gear?

Also, you may be in the wrong place if guys are shoving their junk in your face.

 

[Politesse]

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?

You say this as though this were the first time we've discussed trans rights on this forum.

Are you saying, here, that you now oppose legislative attempts to police who can use which bathroom, locker areas, and so forth on the basis of their birth assignation? What you would call their "biological sex"?

I t may come as a surprise to you, but given that I have a fully functional brain, I am capable of holding nuanced positions on this issue, depending on the situation and the level of risk that arises in those situations. Public restrooms aren't the same as locker rooms, which aren't the same as prisons. None of that should require me to pretend that sex isn't real or that sex doesn't have a material impact in some areas of life. I shouldn't be expected to deny reality and dismiss science to prove my purity to you.

That wasn't a very specific answer. You can't complain about misunderstood positions if you refuse to do more than imply what your positions on particular issues might be.

Lay it out plainly. What should be the legal standard for who should be allowed or compelled to use a given changing facility, and how should it be enforced?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I t may come as a surprise to you, but given that I have a fully functional brain, I am capable of holding nuanced positions on this issue, depending on the situation and the level of risk that arises in those situations.

Holding nuanced positions, yes. Being capable of expressing what they are, you don't seem as capable.

 

[Emily Lake]

Some garments are androgynous and say nothing about the wearer. Many garments are clearly feminine and will only be present in the closet of a transwoman or crossdresser. A few garments are explicitly masculine and will only be present in the closet of a transman or crossdresser. If you do not find garments of explicit gender the check yields no information. If you find feminine but not masculine it's pretty clear they are living as a woman.

This has nothing to do with fashion. Neither my wife nor I care about fashion, but you would have no problem figuring out whose closet is whose and you wouldn't need to cheat and look at sizes.

Which garments are explicitly masculine? Can you name some that are clearly feminine?

High heels. Only women are crazy enough to wear them. Why?! The fuck I know. I’ve never looked at women’s footwear. Most guys don’t. Corset. Yeah, that is another thing. Bra. Pretty feminine. Hard to wear without gear.

Masculine clothing? Probably a derby, or do hats not count?

So... fashion then.

 

[Emily Lake]

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.

Is it? Why is a guy not allowed in a woman’s locker room, but a lesbian is? Is it merely the gear?

Also, you may be in the wrong place if guys are shoving their junk in your face.

It is absolutely the gear. A post-op transwoman would likely not get any opposition. Post-op transwomen have been in our locker rooms for quite some time, even though they're rare. It's the current crop of transgender identified males who are non-HRT, non-OP and 100% look like males who feel entitled to parade their junk around in front of women and girls that are a problem.