Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

StellaM

Single sex spaces and segregation - what do you think ? Needed or not ?

Recommended Posts

Trans women are MALE. Because, as you say, it's a question of gender not innate sex.

 

I do not believe it is bigotry to say so.

 

OK.

 

To me, that reads similar to "gay people are straight people choosing to be gay".

I know you it doesn't to you, because (if I understand right) you think sexual attraction is innate, but being trans is a choice.

And 20-30 years ago,when people used to compare bigotry against gay people to racial prejudice, we were told skin color was innate, but who you date is a choice.

The parallels to me are clear.

I do understand that you disagree. And I acknowledge your reasoning is not due to disgust, which is something often associated with bigotry. I have no doubt you want it to be a safer world for trans people than it is now, just like I do . We just have different paths.  I don't think trans people are going to go away, and I don't see the "separate but equal" working out long term.  We will see. I  do think we'll live in a different world in 20-30 years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I don't care if trans is a choice or not. I don't think about it in those terms at all.

 

I don't even care if being gay is a choice or not.

 

Consenting adults should be allowed to do anything that's legal to do, and within their own power to do, that they choose. ETA: including protect spaces for females.

 

I'm saying that if "male-bodied people" were not in fact males, there'd be no transwomen. There would just be men who like the trappings of societally-bestowed lady-things. Which is gender.

Edited by OKBud
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...  I do think sexual harassment (including males being harassed) in public transport, Greyhound buses, tour buses are something people are aware of.

 

If the concern in this thread is safety from sexual harassment or touching, that is something that needs to be addressed separately from who sleeps near whom.  Being with people of your own sex / gender / whatever does not prevent misbehavior.  In dorms for groups of girls or boys, whether they be boarding schools, orphanages, or other institutions, non-consensual (and consensual) sexual misbehavior is not uncommon and needs to be guarded against whether co-ed or not.

Edited by SKL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the concern in this thread is safety from sexual harassment or touching, that is something that needs to be addressed separately from who sleeps near whom. Being with people of your own sex / gender / whatever does not prevent misbehavior. In dorms for groups of girls or boys, whether they be boarding schools, orphanages, or other institutions, non-consensual (and consensual) sexual misbehavior is not uncommon and needs to be guarded against whether co-ed or not.

This is a tidy deflection. The huge majority of sexual impropriety is perpetrated upon females, by males. To say that physical access doesn't play into it at all is just incorrect. Access coupled with the sundry ways they get away with it afterward (and insure further access) is basically like the whole problem of sexual assault.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK.

 

To me, that reads similar to "gay people are straight people choosing to be gay".

I know you it doesn't to you, because (if I understand right) you think sexual attraction is innate, but being trans is a choice.

And 20-30 years ago,when people used to compare bigotry against gay people to racial prejudice, we were told skin color was innate, but who you date is a choice.

The parallels to me are clear.

I do understand that you disagree. And I acknowledge your reasoning is not due to disgust, which is something often associated with bigotry. I have no doubt you want it to be a safer world for trans people than it is now, just like I do . We just have different paths. I don't think trans people are going to go away, and I don't see the "separate but equal" working out long term. We will see. I do think we'll live in a different world in 20-30 years.

Poppy, in a medical study of how a new blood pressure drug works in males vs females, which group should a trans woman be in? Male, female, third group, or excluded from the study?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a tidy deflection. The huge majority of sexual impropriety is perpetrated upon females, by males. To say that physical access doesn't play into it at all is just incorrect. Access coupled with the sundry ways they get away with it afterward (and insure further access) is basically like the whole problem of sexual assault.

 

Sure, access plays in, but they need to have security measures to prevent it.  Someone gave an existing example of an alarm going off when certain borders were crossed.  With modern technology, that might be the best solution in a setting where the population is somewhat higher risk and/or individuals are less able to protect themselves.

 

I don't think it's satisfactory to have no solution for same sex attacks just because they are in the minority.  (Also, they may not be in the minority in institutionalized settings, though many would not be reported.)

Edited by SKL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poppy, in a medical study of how a new blood pressure drug works in males vs females, which group should a trans woman be in? Male, female, third group, or excluded from the study?

 

I don't know.  Medically speaking, it's tricky. I'd include sports eligibility in that too.   I really don't know much about physiology, or what impact artificial hormones have, or any of that. Like I said upthread, it's not simple, and there will be bumps.

 

I care about social inclusion.  I am a Girl Scout leader. Girl Scouts lost lots of families because we allow anyone who identifies as a Girl to participate in our troops and activities, with their families support. I'm OK with that loss. It's a principled stance. We also had girls doing "boy" things like camping and learning leadership skills way before it was normal.  And we were racially and ethnically diverse way before it was normal. And we welcomed LGBT leaders and girls earlier than a lot of other groups, too.  I think it's a good thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, access plays in, but they need to have security measures to prevent it. Someone gave an existing example of an alarm going off when certain borders were crossed. With modern technology, that might be the best solution in a setting where the population is somewhat higher risk and/or individuals are less able to protect themselves.

 

I don't think it's satisfactory to have no solution for same sex attacks just because they are in the minority. (Also, they may not be in the minority in institutionalized settings, though many would not be reported.)

Obliterating facets of m on f violence "solutions" (NOTHING is solved) does nothing to add to the m/m or f/f violence.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know. Medically speaking, it's tricky. I'd include sports eligibility in that too. I really don't know much about physiology, or what impact artificial hormones have, or any of that. Like I said upthread, it's not simple, and there will be bumps.

 

I care about social inclusion. I am a Girl Scout leader. Girl Scouts lost lots of families because we allow anyone who identifies as a Girl to participate in our troops and activities, with their families support. I'm OK with that loss. It's a principled stance. We also had girls doing "boy" things like camping and learning leadership skills way before it was normal. And we were racially and ethnically diverse way before it was normal. And we welcomed LGBT leaders and girls earlier than a lot of other groups, too. I think it's a good thing.

I also care about social inclusion. I support the Girl Scouts' stance on this. But to say "trans women are women. Period." overrides areas where physiology does matter. Not just for the individual's own medical care either. When a person is in a car crash gender/sex (some forms use one term, some the other) is one of the elements collected on the crash report. That information goes into a state-wide database that would be used by researchers studying, for example, whether there is a difference in the effectiveness of seatbelt and airbag designs for men vs women.

 

Now maybe as a society we will decide that the effect on the data is small enough that it's an acceptable price to pay for full inclusion of trans people with their identified gender. I'd rather see some actual research before making that call, and I don't think that makes me a bigot.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't support all sex-neutral bathrooms, for a number of reasons.

 

A couple of those reasons - sharing a space with men, even if not at the same time, allows opportunity for predators. When Target went gender inclusive, incidents of voyarism rose https://womanmeanssomething.com/targetstudy/

 

Women already have less equitable access to public toilets, men have more space by way of urinals as well as quicker use. Women have sex-specific toiletting needs, disrobing more, sitting & menstruation are some examples, which take longer.

http://time.com/3653871/womens-bathroom-lines-sexist-potty-parity/

 

When did Target "go gender inclusive" in a way that impacted bathroom access?  I am in and out of many different Target stores more than I care to admit and all of them have a women's room, a men's room and usually there's a family restroom with a locking door that anyone or any combination of people can use.  As the mother of a 9-year-old autistic son who can't use the toilet entirely alone, I know where I can find those family restrooms.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also care about social inclusion. I support the Girl Scouts' stance on this. But to say "trans women are women. Period." overrides areas where physiology does matter. Not just for the individual's own medical care either. When a person is in a car crash gender/sex (some forms use one term, some the other) is one of the elements collected on the crash report. That information goes into a state-wide database that would be used by researchers studying, for example, whether there is a difference in the effectiveness of seatbelt and airbag designs for men vs women.

 

Now maybe as a society we will decide that the effect on the data is small enough that it's an acceptable price to pay for full inclusion of trans people with their identified gender. I'd rather see some actual research before making that call, and I don't think that makes me a bigot.

I never said that trans woman are women, “period.†Medically, it’s complicated . But the other stuff is less so than me. For facets of my life where I might run into a trans woman or man, I treat them with dignity and don’t “debate†their right to coexist with me. Or require anyone to disclose .

 

What I’m thinking of is, a couple years ago there was a (trans) man on Survivor who played without revealing that he’d been born a woman . He got really far . Another character ‘outed’ him in order to expose him as a deceitful person. (This was someone who recognized some scars from other trans people he knew). It was a really painful moment to watch. The guy who was outed never meant for his trans status to be a part of the game. He luckily got support on this from the other players who agreed a forced “outing†was inappropriate.

 

When we debate against bathroom or dorm or hospital room a person has the right to stay in, we are saying ‘we reject you’ to people who really can’t, or shouldn’t have to, live with the alternative . It puts them in a really tough position. And the arguments for doing so seem really weak to me....unless you buy into the idea that trans people are dangerous liars, I guess?

 

Like someone else said upthread, I really do think most people are good and are just trying to live their authentic lives.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What I’m thinking of is, a couple years ago there was a (trans) man on Survivor who played without revealing that he’d been born a woman . He got really far . Another character ‘outed’ him in order to expose him as a deceitful person. (This was someone who recognized some scars from other trans people he knew). It was a really painful moment to watch. The guy who was outed never meant for his trans status to be a part of the game. He luckily got support on this from the other players who agreed a forced “outing†was inappropriate.

 

 

 

This is quite sucky.  I often wonder why contestants on TV mention their trans status on day one (because I often think who cares). Well, this is why.  Which I think stinks. 

 

Of course I guess we are talking about TV and a cut throat show called "Survivor". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When did Target "go gender inclusive" in a way that impacted bathroom access? I am in and out of many different Target stores more than I care to admit and all of them have a women's room, a men's room and usually there's a family restroom with a locking door that anyone or any combination of people can use. As the mother of a 9-year-old autistic son who can't use the toilet entirely alone, I know where I can find those family restrooms.

In the link it says "their gender-identity access policy made public in April 2016"

 

That's not about unisex facilities, it's about allowing anyone to choose whichever facility they identify with.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the link it says "their gender-identity access policy made public in April 2016"

 

That's not about unisex facilities, it's about allowing anyone to choose whichever facility they identify with.

 

People have been doing that for years.   If someone is doing something in a bathroom that they shouldn't, that should be addressed. 

 

If someone isn't comfortable with a transgender person using the same restroom as them, that someone can use the locking family restrooms at Target and elsewhere, can they not?  

 

I'm not going to devote a lot of time to it, but the link you furnished is at first glance, not one I would call reliable or neutral.  

Edited by LucyStoner
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely believe you are genuinely worried about the effects on (cis)women. But I also think that you are a textbook bigot and I'm not going to sugarcoat that.

Look, I just don't think the tactic of ignoring questions and calling questioners names convinces anyone. I think you're hurting your own cause. You side step real questions with 'I don't know, it's complicated' and rely on appeals to emotion. That's propaganda, not discussion.

 

You're right though, we don't know everything about this and it is complicated. Which is partly why discussion and consultation with all parties is so important.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People have been doing that for years. If someone is doing something in a bathroom that they shouldn't, that should be addressed.

I agree.

 

But with self identification laws I have no right to tell a creepy, leery guy who has followed my daughter into the bathroom to get lost. None. Trans women will have no right to tell a creepy, leery guy who has followed them into the bathroom to get lost.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree.

 

But with self identification laws I have no right to tell a creepy, leery guy who has followed my daughter into the bathroom to get lost. None. Trans women will have no right to tell a creepy, leery guy who has followed them into the bathroom to get lost.

 

I have, and exercise, the right to tell creepy, leery persons to get lost.  I don't care what sex and gender that person is.  It is the creepy, leery part that allows me to do that.  Self-identification laws do not change that.  What becomes an issue is when people think that trans=creepy and leery.  IME, that is far more common than people pretending to be trans.   

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see my request wasn't honored. That's a shame.

 

Because it's hard to talk about single SEX spaces when other people want to talk social constructs of gender; not the same thing at all.

Edited by StellaM
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I just don't think the tactic of ignoring questions and calling questioners names convinces anyone. I think you're hurting your own cause. You side step real questions with 'I don't know, it's complicated' and rely on appeals to emotion. That's propaganda, not discussion.

 

You're right though, we don't know everything about this and it is complicated. Which is partly why discussion and consultation with all parties is so important.

I called you a bigot because you said you aren’t one , and I don’t see any evidence to support that. You actively argue against transgendered people, as a category , over and over again. I guess you don’t see that as bigotry because that would be acknowledging their identity as legislate ? I don’t know. I just think the term accurately describes your stance. If someone said I was a bigot because I have zero tolerance for neo nazi philosophy , I might quibble with their definition of bigotry , but I’d own up to my views.

 

The only question I’ve ‘sidestepped’ is about data gathering for medical research (two questions on that topic) because I don’t feel qualified to answer. Do you? It’s the internet , i don’t know if you are a physician or research scientist. I do think it’s a complex — not simple — issue .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have, and exercise, the right to tell creepy, leery persons to get lost. I don't care what sex and gender that person is. It is the creepy, leery part that allows me to do that. Self-identification laws do not change that. What becomes an issue is when people think that trans=creepy and leery. IME, that is far more common than people pretending to be trans.

You can still tell them to get lost, but you won't have legal backing. The store won't have legal backing. You'll be asked to leave, not the technically legal but creepy person.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have, and exercise, the right to tell creepy, leery persons to get lost.  I don't care what sex and gender that person is.  It is the creepy, leery part that allows me to do that.  Self-identification laws do not change that.  What becomes an issue is when people think that trans=creepy and leery.  IME, that is far more common than people pretending to be trans.

Self ID laws do kind of change that, because it lets the kind of idiot who declares his penis is a lady penis use single sex facilities.

 

Sorry, but in contrast to actual transsexual people, who suffered from extreme gender dysphoria and transtioned fully to relieve it, and live full time 'as women' for many, many years.. these type of male people ARE creepy.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I called you a bigot because you said you aren’t one , and I don’t see any evidence to support that. .

 

 

That's a truly amusing thing to say in a conversation about whether men can just say they're women and then BE, literally, women, or not  :laugh:

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see my request wasn't honored. That's a shame.

 

Because it's hard to talk about single SEX spaces when other people want to talk social constructs of gender, and then get het up when some people don't hold the same beliefs.

Single sex spaces rarely exclude by gender , though. Women’s college , for example, usually allow trans women students . So the topic was always going to come up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I called you a bigot because you said you aren’t one , and I don’t see any evidence to support that. You actively argue against transgendered people, as a category , over and over again. I guess you don’t see that as bigotry because that would be acknowledging their identity as legislate ? I don’t know. I just think the term accurately describes your stance. If someone said I was a bigot because I have zero tolerance for neo nazi philosophy , I might quibble with their definition of bigotry , but I’d own up to my views.

 

The only question I’ve ‘sidestepped’ is about data gathering for medical research (two questions on that topic) because I don’t feel qualified to answer. Do you? It’s the internet , i don’t know if you are a physician or research scientist. I do think it’s a complex — not simple — issue .

Where have I actively argued against transgender people?

 

I have argued that the legal sex category 'woman' has meaning and protections that should also be respected.

 

Are you saying that the legal sex category of woman has to be changed/removed - #nodebate - or else I'm a bigot arguing against transgender people?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poppy, did you have something to add about single sex spaces ? If not, would you mind hopping off my thread. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Self ID laws do kind of change that, because it lets the kind of idiot who declares his penis is a lady penis use single sex facilities.

 

Sorry, but in contrast to actual transsexual people, who suffered from extreme gender dysphoria and transtioned fully to relieve it, and live full time 'as women' for many, many years.. these type of male people ARE creepy.

If someone is doing something they shouldn't be doing in a single-sex facility, that person can be dealt with.  

 

Most of the people I know whom you seem to now define as "transsexual" reject that label and call themselves transgender or trans.  I think it's creepy to try and decide what is "fully transitioned".  

 

My brother transitioned years ago and doesn't need you or any other intrusive person challenging his right to be "him" and use the men's restroom.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poppy, did you have something to add about single sex spaces ? If not, would you mind hopping off my thread. Thanks.

 

You don't own the discussion in a thread you start.  I'm sure there are message boards where you can, if you wish, discuss these issues only with people who agree with you.  This place though doesn't seem the place.  

Edited by LucyStoner
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a truly amusing thing to say in a conversation about whether men can just say they're women and then BE, literally, women, or not :laugh:

Is that truly how you feel about transgender woman? They are who just say ‘I’m a woman!’ I am not sure I believe that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone is doing something they shouldn't be doing in a single-sex facility, that person can be dealt with.  

 

Most of the people I know whom you seem to now define as "transsexual" reject that label and call themselves transgender or trans.  I think it's creepy to try and decide what is "fully transitioned".  

 

My brother transitioned years ago and doesn't need you or any other intrusive person challenging his right to be "him" and use the men's restroom.

Tbh, I don't think transmen will be challenged...it's that whole being biologically female thing. Transmen are not a risk, generally speaking, to men.

 

There are plenty of transwomen in the UK who are against self ID (it's a live issue there) and call themselves transsexuals to distinguish their journery from those who fit under the transgender umbrella. I feel totally comfortable using the term as a result.

 

Penises are not female and do not belong in single sex female spaces (or at least not over the age of 10) whether they are attached to a man, a transwoman or anyone else who happens to possess one.

 

It's post modern nonsense to call a male organ female, and claim that your internal gender essence makes it so.

 

If gender is privileged over sex, same sex spaces cease to exist. Perhaps you'd like to comment on the actual topic of the thread - same sex spaces ? It seems that people so far think there is a need for single sex spaces - some people think that need is very narrowly defined, others think it is more broadly defined - what do you think ?

Edited by StellaM
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't own the discussion in a thread you start.  I'm sure there are message boards where you can, if you wish, discuss these issues only with people who agree with you.  This place though doesn't seem the place.

It's a request and not a demand. I'm making it because Poppy has form for plopping and yelling 'bigot', and will end up getting my thread locked. And honestly, I'd rather hear from her what she thinks about same sex spaces, which is the actual topic of the thread.

 

Obviously, she was free to ignore the request.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh, I don't think transmen will be challenged...it's that whole being biologically female thing. Transmen are not a risk, generally speaking, to men.

 

There are plenty of transwomen in the UK who are against self ID (it's a live issue there) and call themselves transsexuals to distinguish their journery from those who fit under the transgender umbrella. I feel totally comfortable using the term as a result.

 

Penises are not female and do not belong in single sex female spaces (or at least not over the age of 10) whether they are attached to a man, a transwoman or anyone else who happens to possess one.

 

It's post modern nonsense to call a male organ female, and claim that your internal gender essence makes it so.

 

How do you know if a person you see in a single-sex place has a penis or not unless that's a space where people are naked? Personally, I don't go to places at all where I am supposed to be naked around anyone besides my husband or, partially, my doctor.  

 

Plenty of people who have not had "lower surgery", both MTFs and FTMs, pass for their post-transition gender and sex.  Some people don't pass for their post-transition gender and sex even if they have had lower surgery.  

 

The reasons a trans person might opt to not have genital surgery are many and they are quite often good reasons.  A desire to not replace a functioning sex organ for a non-functioning one.   Financial resources.  A desire to preserve their fertility.   

 

Short of inspecting people's genitals, there's no way to know.  

Edited by LucyStoner
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poppy, did you have something to add about single sex spaces ? If not, would you mind hopping off my thread. Thanks.

Yes, i think women’s and men’s spaces are great. I went to a women’s college , I lead a Girl Scout troop , I am President of my local Woman’s Club (civic volunteer organization).

 

My son is in Boy Scouts. My husband is in a men’s hockey league.

 

I think , in general, trans-exclusive single sex spaces are intolerant. I do not want to force trans men into women’s spaces , nor do I want to force trans women into men’s spaces.

 

 

This thread made me think of an episode of Designing Women I saw as a kid. There was an all male golf club , and Julia Sugarbaker was determined to be invited in. Which was a trend in the 80s. I don’t remember all the details, this was decades ago, but it’s a safe bet to think she succeeded. It’s funny to think of that now. Why didn’t she respect men’s need for their own space? Was it a feminist triumph or was it a blow to males? Both? Neither? Not sure. But it’s interesting to look back on that era.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you know if a person you see in a single-sex place has a penis or not unless that's a space where people are naked? Personally, I don't go to places at all where I am supposed to be naked around anyone besides my husband or, partially, my doctor.  

 

Plenty of people who have not had "lower surgery", both MTFs and FTMs, pass for their post-transition gender and sex.  

 

The reasons a trans person might opt to not have genital surgery are many and they are quite often good reasons.  A desire to not replace a functioning sex organ for a non-functioning one.   Financial resources.  A desire to preserve their fertility.   

 

Short of inspecting people's genitals, there's no way to know.

You're making the mistake of just thinking about toilets. Personally, loos are not a big issue for me, though they are for many other women.

 

Absolutely transwomen should not have to have any surgery they do not wish too. Total agreement. It's a very intrusive surgery.

 

However, those transwomen then need to consider if they should be in single sex spaces. Unisex spaces, definitely. Gender neutral ? Sure. Let's create more options for everyone's safety and dignity.

 

Let's keep preop transwomen safe from men, let's maintain the integrity of single sex spaces to keep women safe from blokes in those tiny instances of extra vulnerability women face.

 

You still haven't mentioned what your thoughts are on single sex spaces ? I'm genuinely interested to hear.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, back out in the real world, a woman union leader just got attacked on her own picket, on IWD, for the crime of having attended a meeting to discuss the legal ramifications of self ID law. Luckily police intervened.

 

I understand why people want to protect vulnerable individuals, and I agree they should be protected, and have a right to safety and dignity also. BUT SO SHOULD WOMEN!

 

I really don't understand why women don't wake up to the violent misogyny that is transactivism, the movement.

Edited by StellaM
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, back out in the real world, a woman union leader just got attacked on her own picket, on IWD, for the crime of having attended a meeting to discuss the legal ramifications of self ID law. Luckily police intervened.

 

I understand why people want to protect vulnerable individuals, and I agree they should be protected, and have a right to safety and dignity also.

 

I don't understand why people don't wake up to the violent misogyny that is transactivism. Be a woman, talk about self ID in the context of single sex spaces, and get attacked. Nice.

 

Yeah there is some strange stuff going on with some transactivists.

 

I've met one in particular and let me just say I ran the other way.  I could not get on board.  I'm not sure they are necessarily doing transpersons any favors.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that truly how you feel about transgender woman? They are who just say ‘I’m a woman!’ I am not sure I believe that.

Well, that's what the activists are saying. Literally.

 

'I'm a girl so my penis is female, just like an enlarged clitoris really' - paraphrased from Sophie labelle.

 

'I can get pregnant. Not right now. Which is true of many women.' <--- literal quote. 19 year old, male born, UK labour women's officer.

 

'Biological sex is a social construct' - Riley J Dennis.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that truly how you feel about transgender woman? They are who just say ‘I’m a woman!’ I am not sure I believe that.

How I feel about it is irrelavent. It happens.

 

I think way less than sincerely gender dysphoric trans. But it happens.

 

But the POINT is that words mean things. Why is that you can tell LMD that she's a bigot and think it's true, even though she doesn't identify as a bigot? But also hold, in the same conversation, that it's bigotry to call a male person with a penis who is making no attempt to pass (as problematic as that is) a man because he self identifies as being of the female sex?

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah there is some strange stuff going on with some transactivists.

 

I've met one in particular and let me just say I ran the other way.  I could not get on board.  I'm not sure they are necessarily doing transpersons any favors.

It absolutely isn't doing people with gender dysphoria any favors at all.

 

The same meetings this woman was attacked for attending, have transwomen attending, and also speaking against self ID.

 

The activists call those transwomen lovely names like 'truscum'.

 

These are the people arguing for self ID, and a wholesale disintegration of same sex spaces in favor of same gender spaces. Color me bigoted, but I kind of don't trust the type of person - no matter their identify - who attacks women to be in my same sex space. Weird, that.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're making the mistake of just thinking about toilets. Personally, loos are not a big issue for me, though they are for many other women.

 

Absolutely transwomen should not have to have any surgery they do not wish too. Total agreement. It's a very intrusive surgery.

 

However, those transwomen then need to consider if they should be in single sex spaces. Unisex spaces, definitely. Gender neutral ? Sure. Let's create more options for everyone's safety and dignity.

 

Let's keep preop transwomen safe from men, let's maintain the integrity of single sex spaces to keep women safe from blokes in those tiny instances of extra vulnerability women face.

 

You still haven't mentioned what your thoughts are on single sex spaces ? I'm genuinely interested to hear.

 

I'm not thinking just about toilets.  

 

If someone never plans to have lower surgery, they aren't "pre-op".  

 

I support single-sex spaces generally and have just not run across REAL TO MY LIFE situations where there is a need for those spaces to have a penis specific litmus test.  I generally find that my views don't make folks like you OR those who would label any single-sex space as exclusionary happy.  

 

Feminists who are opposed to including transgender people in "their spaces" often seem to have, ironically, a paternalistic view of the protections that women need.  I don't think that I need to be protected from men or as you distill them down to, those who were born with penises.  I need to be protected from those who would commit crimes against me. 

 

I'm a heterosexual woman with only sons.  Separatist, I am not.  I absolutely wouldn't want what you said you long for- a female only island where you spend most of your time.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with everyone.  It's like being stuck between a rock and a crazy place.

Oh, on the ideology, yes. It's a totally loopy set of theories that tells us gender is biological and innate, but biological sex is a social construct. That's just idiotic.

 

Practically ? I think transwomen and women of good will can come to an understanding of what single sex space is for, who uses it and in what circumstance, and what other spaces can add to each others safety and dignity.

I absolutely believe that. It's a shame there's so much noise that gets in the way.

 

I really like what one transwomen said, that she identifies with women, as much as she identifies as a woman. That position allows her to engage with women productively on these issues.

Edited by StellaM
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It absolutely isn't doing people with gender dysphoria any favors at all.

 

The same meetings this woman was attacked for attending, have transwomen attending, and also speaking against self ID.

 

The activists call those transwomen lovely names like 'truscum'.

 

These are the people arguing for self ID, and a wholesale disintegration of same sex spaces in favor of same gender spaces. Color me bigoted, but I kind of don't trust the type of person - no matter their identify - who attacks women to be in my same sex space. Weird, that.

 

Disgusting.  I don't even understand this weirdness.  So to the transactivits you can be the wrong kind of trans simply by not being willing to drink their KoolAid.  They aren't about supporting transwomen in general.  They are just scary.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not thinking just about toilets.  

 

If someone never plans to have lower surgery, they aren't "pre-op".  

 

I support single-sex spaces generally and have just not run across REAL TO MY LIFE situations where there is a need for those spaces to have a penis specific litmus test.  I generally find that my views don't make folks like you OR those who would label any single-sex space as exclusionary happy.  

 

Feminists who are opposed to including transgender people in "their spaces" often seem to have, ironically, a paternalistic view of the protections that women need.  I don't think that I need to be protected from men or as you distill them down to, those who were born with penises.  I need to be protected from those who would commit crimes against me. 

 

I'm a heterosexual woman with only sons.  Separatist, I am not.  I absolutely wouldn't want what you said you long for- a female only island where you spend most of your time.

How would you feel about a self ID'ed transwomen who has had no surgery being in the same 8 bed mixed sleeping and showering ward as my dd? OK? You are privileged not to have had to consider any real life ramification.

 

I think it's interesting, the hostility to women who prefer to be with other women in spaces where they are vulnerable. I haven't come across that before.

 

I don't consider myself a separatist, given as how I live with a husband and a son, except in those vulnerable situations. But I totally understand and support women who are separatist, and can't see why I wouldn't.

Edited by StellaM
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would you feel about a self ID'ed transwomen who has had no surgery being in the same 8 bed mixed sleeping and showering ward as my dd? OK? You are privileged not to have had to consider any real life ramification.

 

I think it's interesting, the hostility to women who prefer to be with other women in spaces where they are vulnerable. I haven't come across that before.

 

I don't consider myself a separatist, given as how I live with a husband and a son, except in those vulnerable situations. But I totally understand and support women who are separatist, and can't see why I wouldn't.

 

That would be uncomfortable.  VERY uncomfortable.  I don't even want to be in this situation period let alone add that factor to the mix.

 

ALTHOUGH I can fathom some extremely complicated situations (intersexed persons for example). 

 

No easy answer to that..nope. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can still tell them to get lost, but you won't have legal backing. The store won't have legal backing. You'll be asked to leave, not the technically legal but creepy person.

 

Actually the store would.  An establishment can ask anyone to leave if they believe their behavior is unacceptable or crossing a line.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would you feel about a self ID'ed transwomen who has had no surgery being in the same 8 bed mixed sleeping and showering ward as my dd? OK? You are privileged not to have had to consider any real life ramification.

 

I think it's interesting, the hostility to women who prefer to be with other women in spaces where they are vulnerable. I haven't come across that before.

 

I don't consider myself a separatist, given as how I live with a husband and a son, except in those vulnerable situations. But I totally understand and support women who are separatist, and can't see why I wouldn't.

 

Why does it matter if they have had surgery or not provided they are there for the same thing and are not doing anything specific that harms your child? 

 

Would you be ok with it if they had undergone surgery?  Or would you find another reason to complain about them?

 

Would a transwoman be better off in an 8 bed mixed sleeping and showering ward with biological men? 

 

Should a trans person not be able to get inpatient treatment when they need it?  

 

Why not advocate for private bathrooms and sleeping spaces?  For all people?  I can't sleep in a group setting, so I don't go where I would be required to do so.  This creates certain limitations but that's 

 

Before you call someone out as privileged, you should consider that perhaps I have had the same or equivalent experiences but didn't feel the same as you about the presence of a transperson?  I don't feel entitled to know what anyone's genitals look like.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can still tell them to get lost, but you won't have legal backing. The store won't have legal backing. You'll be asked to leave, not the technically legal but creepy person.

 

I don't need legal backing to ask someone to leave my child alone.  If they are a threat to my children in any way, the law is on my side.  

 

Trans people are not immune to the law.  If a person, either trans or claiming to be trans, behaves inappropriately or criminally, they can be asked to leave or even be arrested.  

Edited by LucyStoner
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there actually 8 bed mixed sleeping and showering wards? 

 

I'm assuming that it's a real-life example.  So I guess there are where Sadie is.  Here, there are not in psychiatric facilities I am familiar with.  There are in criminal justice detention facilities.  I definitely support single-sex criminal detention where I support detention at all and overhauling such spaces to increase everyone's safety.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...