Naked man walks in on naked woman; sues her

[Rhea]

As such, my reaction would be to want to verify for my own sake that the person is actually identifying as a woman and is not some self-righteous bigot trying to make a point.

Rhea, would it be very cheeky of me to suggest that we apply the standard of innocent until proven guilty, at least until we establish that the rate of false claims of transgender identity are anything other than very low?

Not at all. That is indeed my stance. Wherein I would let it go and seek to verify for my own sake, through non-aggressive observation, that she is indeed a she, with no need to involve authorities or make a stink. Woman until something makes me think otherwise.

Identifying as a woman would not necessarily be obvious as many cis women do not appear feminine or have any desire to. However, based only on my experience with a handful of non-cis gender teenagers, they do not clearly identify with their cis gender, once their trans or fluid state is brought up, one can see the efforts they make to dress as themselves. What I mean is, the teens I know who have female parts and identify as men do not dress soft feminine. And the teens with male parts who identify as women do not dress rugged masculine. Therefore once someone has told me they are trans, I can see from their appearance that it is not a surprise. I don't always pick it out ion the first place (perhaps because I don't care?) but once they tell me, as their chaperone, it's not hard to remember.

I'm not one who actually has a huge problem with public nudity, so my replies here are quite academic and the wording of the OP simply surprised me as no trans person I know would have done that. And I don't think that most guys are willing to present as a women to get a peep show, so my most likely assumption would be that she is telling the truth.

Really, creeper guys often have their own "look" and if my bells went off I would check for that appearance cue as well.
And there's the other kind of creeper guy who is not after a peep show at all, he's after making a point and causing trouble and placing blame.

Which is why the lawsuit rang my bells on this one.

 

[dismal]

As such, my reaction would be to want to verify for my own sake that the person is actually identifying as a woman and is not some self-righteous bigot trying to make a point.

Rhea, would it be very cheeky of me to suggest that we apply the standard of innocent until proven guilty, at least until we establish that the rate of false claims of transgender identity are anything other than very low?

How can there even be a “false” claim of a gender identity. If you claim you are it, you are it.

 

[ruby sparks]

How can there even be a “false” claim of a gender identity. If you claim you are it, you are it.

One of these days, you're going to say something sensible, even if only by accident.

 

[Rhea]

As such, my reaction would be to want to verify for my own sake that the person is actually identifying as a woman and is not some self-righteous bigot trying to make a point.

Rhea, would it be very cheeky of me to suggest that we apply the standard of innocent until proven guilty, at least until we establish that the rate of false claims of transgender identity are anything other than very low?

How can there even be a “false” claim of a gender identity. If you claim you are it, you are it.

It's what all the religionists are afraid of. Predator men in dresses and heels walking into women's bathrooms to steal the little girls.

 

[TSwizzle]

The man then attempted to sue the woman for insinuating that his male genitalia made him less of a woman.

What an absurd world we live in.

 

[J842P]

Not according to the wiki page on transgender:

"Transgender people are sometimes called transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another."

I personally have no axe to grind. I admit to being slightly confused.

It seems you are correct.

 

[Rhea]

Not according to the wiki page on transgender:

"Transgender people are sometimes called transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another."

I personally have no axe to grind. I admit to being slightly confused.

- - - Updated - - -

Letting your dick hang there uncovered in a woman's changing room is swaggering it around.

Eek. I've been swaggering my dick around in male changing rooms my whole life and never realised.

It seems you are correct.

About which one?

 

[J842P]

Whoops, forgot to cut out the other quote.

 

[ruby sparks]

As such, my reaction would be to want to verify for my own sake that the person is actually identifying as a woman and is not some self-righteous bigot trying to make a point.

Rhea, would it be very cheeky of me to suggest that we apply the standard of innocent until proven guilty, at least until we establish that the rate of false claims of transgender identity are anything other than very low?

Not at all. That is indeed my stance. Wherein I would let it go and seek to verify for my own sake, through non-aggressive observation, that she is indeed a she, with no need to involve authorities or make a stink. Woman until something makes me think otherwise.

Identifying as a woman would not necessarily be obvious as many cis women do not appear feminine or have any desire to. However, based only on my experience with a handful of non-cis gender teenagers, they do not clearly identify with their cis gender, once their trans or fluid state is brought up, one can see the efforts they make to dress as themselves. What I mean is, the teens I know who have female parts and identify as men do not dress soft feminine. And the teens with male parts who identify as women do not dress rugged masculine. Therefore once someone has told me they are trans, I can see from their appearance that it is not a surprise. I don't always pick it out ion the first place (perhaps because I don't care?) but once they tell me, as their chaperone, it's not hard to remember.

I'm not one who actually has a huge problem with public nudity, so my replies here are quite academic and the wording of the OP simply surprised me as no trans person I know would have done that. And I don't think that most guys are willing to present as a women to get a peep show, so my most likely assumption would be that she is telling the truth.

Really, creeper guys often have their own "look" and if my bells went off I would check for that appearance cue as well.
And there's the other kind of creeper guy who is not after a peep show at all, he's after making a point and causing trouble and placing blame.

Which is why the lawsuit rang my bells on this one.

Yeah. I have no axe to grind here either. Part of me is even thinking, 'whatever happened to us after we came down from the trees that we got so obsessed with not seeing bits of each other's bodies?' (which could be an interesting discussion all of itself).

In all seriousness, I agree with you. That the person sued (I think the tribunal report also says they prior to that went to the newspapers too) might suggest...dare I use the word...dickhead.

Fwiw, the tribunal seems to have believed her:

"B was registered with male sex at birth. After the law regarding change of legal sex came into place in 2016, B changed legal sex to woman. B has female sex identity. B has not completed sex reassignment treatment."
https://womenwhosayno.blogspot.com/...3FPc6_K17trdilbn2R1FF7vlB3D3qVrBKgdv6qPDFFUmU

Not that that's conclusive. For all we know the fact that she had not completed surgery might have been because she (really he) had no intention of doing so. They were probably obliged to believe her, unless there was evidence to the contrary. I wonder what that sort of evidence would be? Maybe if they trawled her computer and found that she'd recently bought one of those penis-enlargement things that I someone I know keeps getting ads for when I'm he's watching porn.

 

[ruby sparks]

It seems you are correct.

About which one?

Rhea, I'm not one to brag, but let's just say that with some penises, it's very hard to stop them from full-on swaggering all by themselves, even if one wanted to.

 

[Rhea]

Fwiw, the tribunal seems to have believed her:

"B was registered with male sex at birth. After the law regarding change of legal sex came into place in 2016, B changed legal sex to woman. B has female sex identity. B has not completed sex reassignment treatment."
https://womenwhosayno.blogspot.com/...3FPc6_K17trdilbn2R1FF7vlB3D3qVrBKgdv6qPDFFUmU

Not that that's conclusive.

That's actually pretty persuasive to me. I just don't see cis men willing to call themselves women very often let alone sign up as one, so I'm inclined to take that as indicator of genuine female identity. Still a little confused about the aggression, but personality strikes, I guess. Maybe she's had a tough road and is defensive. I hope she is able to communicate successfully to being accepted in the future. But whatever it seems like would help to me probably isn't enough for most of society. So I dunno. If she's going for surgery, that will be a big help.

For all we know the fact that she had not completed surgery might have been because she (really he) had no intention of doing so. They were probably obliged to believe her, unless there was evidence to the contrary. I wonder what that sort of evidence would be? Maybe if they trawled her computer and found that she'd recently bought one of those penis-enlargement things that I someone I know keeps getting ads for when I'm he's watching porn.

Maybe woman-hating diatribes and intent to disrupt and harm. That's be evidence.

But it doesn't seem to apply here.

 

[ZiprHead]

I said a few years ago when the SC ruled that gay marriage was okay that the trans issue was going to be a much stickier problem than gay marriage. I wish I knew the answer to it.

 

[Jarhyn]

This thread, and most posting in it, deeply disappoint me. We have someone throwing about "tranny" as if they don't understand that it is as inflammatory and disgusting as calling black people "nigger". We have people instantly assuming the gender of the person in the shower. The sheer amount of "othering" in here is staggering; it's no wonder that the group being cleaved from normal society has taken issue with those they have been cleaved from

In the following scenario, I have added some hypothetical information. Imagine this as a sort of ethical transform; at any rate, it is possible that these same events play out in ways that some here may judge differently, even though all actors in my hypothetical do, say, think, and act in what is ostensibly identical ways. This is to show that 'identity' politics is something not being played on the left:

In July 2016, the woman was showering in the female only facility when a completely naked woman entered, who had a penis. The woman questioned the other woman, thinking she unintentionally walked into the wrong change room. The woman with a penis claimed she had a right to use the women’s facilities because she was born with a penis through pure medical accident, and lacked breasts because her puberty had not given her large breasts.

The woman later contacted management who reportedly told her individuals with 'male genitalia' do not have access to female only facilities. The other woman, however, continued to use the women’s change rooms.

In February 2017, the woman questioned the other woman again, asking if she had spoken with management about her use of the female showers.

“What the f-ck is your problem?” the woman man allegedly responded. “This is none of your f-cking business!”
The woman then attempted to sue the woman for insinuating that her 'male genitalia' made her less of a woman. Of course she said this, because all her life she has been belittled by women and men alike who each reject her for not being 'enough' of a woman.

So, if the person in the post was a 'woman' as those on the 'right' would 'identify', would that change anything? A woman was still exposed to a penis, and the woman owning said penis is still entirely within her medical rights to not disclose her prognosis or condition to someone who does not know her. Does the mere fact of an invisible chemical buried deep in her cells change all that much about the case? I don't think it does. She would still need a place to shower.

Personally, I think this is a failure of our society as a whole, for our readiness to divide us from each other on the basis of 'they have a penis' or 'they have a vagina'.

Of course this COULD just really be some asshole trolling people for whatever reason.

But regardless, there is a simple solution that solves it no matter who might fit into whatever ginned up identity the conservatives throw at society: arrange the showers so that there are individual changing partitions immediately outside individual shower stalls. Yes, that costs money, to fix a problem that was created by humans attempting to needlessly categorize things.

 

[ruby sparks]

Maybe she's had a tough road and is defensive.

I was thinking that too. Things can't be easy for transgender people in society, in many ways.

 

[Jarhyn]

I said a few years ago when the SC ruled that gay marriage was okay that the trans issue was going to be a much stickier problem than gay marriage. I wish I knew the answer to it.

The same thing solves the trans thing as would have solved the gay thing: stripping all mention of gender from the law. All law. And then "any category not explicitly created within the law is not a valid or legal basis for discrimination of any kind in any public accomodation or business".

 

[dismal]

How can there even be a “false” claim of a gender identity. If you claim you are it, you are it.

One of these days, you're going to say something sensible, even if only by accident.

I think the logic is pretty tight on this one.

There are two kinds of people.

1) people who identify as X
2) people who do not identify as X

When someone says: “I identify as X” they have instantly satisfied all the criterion for belonging in the first group.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

How can there even be a “false” claim of a gender identity. If you claim you are it, you are it.

One of these days, you're going to say something sensible, even if only by accident.

I think the logic is pretty tight on this one.

There are two kinds of people.

1) people who identify as X
2) people who do not identify as X

When someone says: “I identify as X” they have instantly satisfied all the criterion for belonging in the first group.

Let me test that theory. The easiest part would be as follows: Suppose A - who has female sexual organs and general appearance - asserts 'I'm a man', takes testosterone, etc. But later, A asserts 'I'm a woman, and I have never been a man. I was confused. I'm a survivor of testosterone poisoning' (side note: I'm not quoting verbatim, but cases like this have actually happened). Going by what you say above, A was a man, but now A is a woman, who is making the false claim that she was never a man. Am I getting your (sarcastic) classification correct?
If so, should one conclude that people's gender can change? (contrary to a frequent belief among activists)

Now, you might think this isn't much of a challenge. It depends on where your sarcasm is going, but this is the easy part. I'll raise a much tougher problem later, depending on your reply.

 

[dismal]

I think the logic is pretty tight on this one.

There are two kinds of people.

1) people who identify as X
2) people who do not identify as X

When someone says: “I identify as X” they have instantly satisfied all the criterion for belonging in the first group.

Let me test that theory. The easiest part would be as follows: Suppose A - who has female sexual organs and general appearance - asserts 'I'm a man', takes testosterone, etc. But later, A asserts 'I'm a woman, and I have never been a man. I was confused. I'm a survivor of testosterone poisoning' (side note: I'm not quoting verbatim, but cases like this have actually happened). Going by what you say above, A was a man, but now A is a woman, who is making the false claim that she was never a man. Am I getting your (sarcastic) classification correct?
If so, should one conclude that people's gender can change? (contrary to a frequent belief among activists)

Now, you might think this isn't much of a challenge. It depends on where your sarcasm is going, but this is the easy part. I'll raise a much tougher problem later, depending on your reply.

I think if you identify as a woman then you identify as a woman, regardless of whether you used to identify as a man or a ham sandwich. And once someone identifies as a woman it’s incumbent upon others to treat them as a woman, unless others are some sort of hateful bigot.

If someone says “I identify as a woman” before you answer “didn’t you used to identify as a ham sandwich” you should ask yourself “do I typically ask women if they used to identify as a ham sandwich?” and if the answer is “no” then you aren’t treating them as you would treat a woman.

 

[Rhea]

Let me test that theory. The easiest part would be as follows: Suppose A - who has female sexual organs and general appearance - asserts 'I'm a man', takes testosterone, etc. But later, A asserts 'I'm a woman, and I have never been a man. I was confused. I'm a survivor of testosterone poisoning' (side note: I'm not quoting verbatim, but cases like this have actually happened). Going by what you say above, A was a man, but now A is a woman, who is making the false claim that she was never a man. Am I getting your (sarcastic) classification correct?
If so, should one conclude that people's gender can change? (contrary to a frequent belief among activists)

Now, you might think this isn't much of a challenge. It depends on where your sarcasm is going, but this is the easy part. I'll raise a much tougher problem later, depending on your reply.

I do think a claim of gender identity can change, yes. Because I believe there is a spectrum even though generally people are not near the middle, a middle does exist. Moreover, since people have often been forced to deny their truth for decades, it would appear to be changing, when in fact it is merely being exposed and the "change" is superficial. So yes I imagine that is true. I have met anyone who changes, but I expect it's true.

 

[repoman]

Let me test that theory. The easiest part would be as follows: Suppose A - who has female sexual organs and general appearance - asserts 'I'm a man', takes testosterone, etc. But later, A asserts 'I'm a woman, and I have never been a man. I was confused. I'm a survivor of testosterone poisoning' (side note: I'm not quoting verbatim, but cases like this have actually happened). Going by what you say above, A was a man, but now A is a woman, who is making the false claim that she was never a man. Am I getting your (sarcastic) classification correct?
If so, should one conclude that people's gender can change? (contrary to a frequent belief among activists)

Now, you might think this isn't much of a challenge. It depends on where your sarcasm is going, but this is the easy part. I'll raise a much tougher problem later, depending on your reply.

I do think a claim of gender identity can change, yes. Because I believe there is a spectrum even though generally people are not near the middle, a middle does exist. Moreover, since people have often been forced to deny their truth for decades, it would appear to be changing, when in fact it is merely being exposed and the "change" is superficial. So yes I imagine that is true. I have met anyone who changes, but I expect it's true.

I would think that the natural hormones of puberty, medical intervention (hormone tinkering by trans people) and the hormone drop off from aging would have some effect on gender identity processes in the brain.