Sorry, which incident? Where my friend was attacked? It did hit the media, in a way which is resulting in a defamation lawsuit. I'm in Australia, and I can link a bunch of proof if you want. But I wonder what 'greater context' you think you'll find...

Sorry to pick on you but I had to come back to this. I believe that most people are in a similar space. I believe that a lot of the 'heat' in this discussion is due to forgetting this, and assuming that a different perspective = attack/hate. Somewhere along the way this board lost its goodwill.

Okay, re your first paragraph, I don't feel like I should be asked to 'but also' another demographic when speaking for women's rights. And I feel like the trans rights side is pretty well represented in this discussion. Having to phrase every post with an 'but also trans' assumes an anti-trans bias and feels less clarifying imo. re second paragraph, from my perspective, I'm using my limited time to focus on those points where the clash of rights is obscured and not letting it be waved away. Yeah, it's not comfortable but I don't see another way. Maybe we do need some bridge building about the things we agree on, but I feel like they've already been said? Anyway, yes my priority is the rights women have already lost in law here, including when my friend was actually physically assaulted and blamed as the bad guy, instead of the many violent male bad guys to choose from. My focus is the intact male rapist right now sitting in the women's prison down the road. There is a lot of violent rhetoric spilling over and it's not only the right wing reactionaries, and it's not only trans people who deserve boundaries.

I have repeatedly said that I want a respectful compromise that works for all parties. If people think that standing for women's rights is 'anti trans'... honestly it says a lot more about their biases than mine. But if there's something I've said that is actually anti trans please point it out, I'll be happy to rephrase (within my own boundaries of being truthful), retract and apologise, or explain. Eta - I know I'm coming off as... brash maybe? Or maybe you feel like I'm jumping on you/picking on you? Please know that my intention isn't personal, my intention is clarity. I do believe this can be solved but not by obscuring, ignoring, hyperbole or downplaying.

I said it's going that way. Not that the whole thread has been that way. If you think I have said something not in good faith, please point it out so I can explain. I may be a bit blunt, that's partly because ~dealing with baby~ and partly because I believe honesty and clarity is important, and this issue has been very confused for a long time.

This discussion is going the way it always goes. 1. Too difficult, ignore difficult questions (so let males get their way). 2. Name calling. Bigot/hysterical "white" women (so let males get their way). 3. Emotional blackmail (so let males get their way). No debate is over and none of the above is good enough if you actually care about finding solutions for trans people.

Interesting that this is your response. What are you implying exactly? Or are you just trying to get the thread locked? Again, just be honest and say that you think violation of women's boundaries are an acceptable compromise.

That link shows there isn't much data of crimes. What percentage of voyeuristic harassment is reported, do you think? Did the mom, who posted above, who had a man follow her and her baby into the shared bathroom and expose himself next to her report it? How do you know that 'man' wasn't a transwoman early in 'her' journey? That mom overrode her own instincts due to how the space was designated. How do you measure the women who self excluded?

Hang on, do you mean a transman with xx chromosomes? Yes, that's why we're suggesting a neutral 3rd option. Your last paragraph is just not true. But, if it was, would you suggest that a male be required to have that medical treatment before entering women's only spaces? I bet not. Also, if it was true, it still doesn't respect the boundaries of the women who will end up being excluded. Again, just be honest and say that's an acceptable price to you.

It's an expression to describe a 'something is off' feeling. I don't mean revulsion or fear at all but perhaps that's my bad choice of phrase. Human brains are coded for pattern recognition, and one pattern we are exceedingly good at is within species sex differentiation. Our brains automatically do a little hiccup when the pattern is off. When the pattern is a close copy then the 'off' parts are more glaring. None of this means that trans people don't deserve respect or love, I have never said that. I actually think being honest about this is more respectful than happy clappy lies about perfectly stealth passing. And I was the one who said bathrooms are relatively easy... IF all parties are respectful and reasonable AND a third space/unisex space was made available. Same with sports, female and male and/or open category. Not perfect, not a comment on current laws/spaces. Buck is an interesting character, was married to the dominatrix who force femmed one of the wachowski twins. Out of curiosity, which prison do you think Buck or Aydian should be incarcerated in, if they were convicted of a crime?

My point was that using pictures from the internet is not an accurate representation, mammals sharing space in real life can tell sex with extreme accuracy, even with *some* characteristics disguised. I just think it's really quite cruel to pretend this isn't true. I wouldn't support a law forcing transmen into female bathrooms. I would support a law protecting female only spaces, with an opt out option. The bad laws described sound like a reactionary blunt instrument. I can't help but think that discussion instead of 'no debate!!!' 5-10 years ago would have helped..

Yeah, post a picture of Buck angel amongst a group of males and the difference is *stark.* I do accept that most people will just see ~beard + no boobs~ and think man. I wasn't familiar with Aydian but after looking up, sorry, ditto to Buck.

I do know that some pass well, but come on, the internet is not real life and there are real life tells. Even if one can't articulate it there is an uncanny valley effect, things like gait, proportions, hand size etc. And it's not just one trait (tall woman), it's the constellation of traits. I've met the most lovely transwoman who passed better than most, this person still immediately triggered an uncanny valley effect in at least 3 adults. I don't think it's a kindness to pretend that humans can't recognise sex extremely effectively, or gaslight women to ignore that uncanny valley feeling.

His intact pen!s should have precluded him. Full stop. You really should hear from the incarcerated Californian women. It's not good. Amie Ichikawa does good work with incarcerated women (she was incarcerated in California herself)

I've got one and it does work well! I have dark hair and fair skin which is it is the most effective on. I haven't been the most consistent lol but the patches I did consistently at first are still smooth, years later at this point.

I'd love to see the receipts of a tall woman wearing pants facing legal repercussions

So you can surely understand why the women in my state are upset that a male rapist is locked in with them...

Women aren't rape shields for vulnerable men.

Not Dana Rivers, for one. He murdered a lesbian couple and their son and is today in a female prison. In fact, there's quite a few in California. Those incarcerated women are terrified.

My bold - that was me. I've seen it many times, even here on this board over the years, that a gender neutral option is 'outing and othering' I don't know the ins and outs of American politics, but there are certainly some very rich and powerful pro trans lobby groups in the US. These sound like reactionary laws that aren't well thought out, though I haven't read the actual text. I notice that 'potential for harassment and violence' makes using the bathrooms of their sex unfeasable, but can't you see that opening up women's bathrooms to any self id male creates *exactly the same* unfeasable risk to women (and stealth transwomen)?

Triple post

Double post

I can 100% assure you that here & other places it turns out they are. Have you been watching the UK fallout with mermaids & tavistock? Activists. My best friend is a member of parliament, I know what's in that particular sausage. And so we have laws against talk therapy for 'trans' kids - affirmation only or you could face 10 years in prison. We have many many mostly women being fired and slandered (and worse) for bringing it up. We have a literal male rapist in our local female prison and that decision was made without the women's blessing - on the contrary, their pleas are being ignored and punished. I'm sorry, but this has gone further than the poor confused kids.

Thank you It's only difficult if you don't believe women have the right to their hard won boundaries. If you opt out of those boundaries, okay then, I wish you well, I'll still be here saying that women are allowed to have their boundaries.

You are wrong.