Viral Video: Nude man enters women's locker room.

[Clarita]

2 hours ago, LucyStoner said:

But who is sexually assaulting men and boys?  It’s largely biological males. It’s almost never biological females.

My very limited experience actually, biological females. Anywhere from inappropriate touching all the way to rape. I don't know and I'm not sure if anyone really knows largely who is doing what, because all the men who have told me these stories have never reported these events. 

[Sneezyone]

7 hours ago, Clarita said:

My very limited experience actually, biological females. Anywhere from inappropriate touching all the way to rape. I don't know and I'm not sure if anyone really knows largely who is doing what, because all the men who have told me these stories have never reported these events. 

I don’t think the sexual violence of men is in doubt but the sexual violence of women is definitely underreported, often because boys are supposed to be grateful for the attention. Both my spouse and my brother experienced sexual violence/abuse at the hands of women. ETA: Geeze, now that I think about it, even my dad. He had three kids with a woman 3/4 years older than him by the time he was 18. Back then, it was considered "getting lucky" not predatory.

Edited June 30, 2021 by Sneezyone

[maize]

10 hours ago, Joker2 said:

The problem is these conversations always end up like this one, which is all or nothing for all sides. I do think there needs to be more conversations about transwomen in sports, some women’s spaces, and self ID but this turned into no transwomen in women’s spaces (not for all posters but for many it reverted to the basic bathroom issues). It turned ugly and we all need to find a better way to talk about because doing it this way isn’t ever going to get us anywhere. 

At least conversation is happening here, with only minimal attempts to shut it down by crying "transphobia!" (not by you). No-one benefits when differing points of view are silenced, or when a black-and-white approach (my side is virtuous and good and the other side is evil incarnate) is taken.

We have to be able to talk about different points of view and about concerns that are legitimate and significant to many people.

For what it is worth, I appreciate your contributions to these conversations and what you have shared of your family's experience.

 

[BusyMom5]

We should not be pitting womens safety against transgender safety, and right now that is where we are at.  If a law designed to protect transgender people puts women in harms way, we ALL need to demand better.  It is not transphobic to point out that current laws allow abuse and tie the hands of businesses and law enforcement.  These laws make places unsafe for women.  Its not just an opinion, its a fact (research transgender rape in women's prison).  When we complain, it is dismissed, or WE are called bigots. 

The most upsetting part of this clip for me is the gaslighting of the women by men.  I posted on p2 about this, but it really bothers me that no one is concerned about the women or girls who are obviously uncomfortable.  I don't care if the person was transgender or not, the attitude of the spa worker and the mansplainer are so.... misogynistic. THEY don't care if this man is a threat or not.  For all we know, he could be a sex offender using the law to touch infiltrate women's spaces- and the LAW is allowing it. As women we need to stand up loud and clear and say NO.   

 

[pinball]

3 minutes ago, BusyMom5 said:

We should not be pitting womens safety against transgender safety, and right now that is where we are at.  If a law designed to protect transgender people puts women in harms way, we ALL need to demand better.  It is not transphobic to point out that current laws allow abuse and tie the hands of businesses and law enforcement.  These laws make places unsafe for women.  Its not just an opinion, its a fact (research transgender rape in women's prison).  When we complain, it is dismissed, or WE are called bigots. 

The most upsetting part of this clip for me is the gaslighting of the women by men.  I posted on p2 about this, but it really bothers me that no one is concerned about the women or girls who are obviously uncomfortable.  I don't care if the person was transgender or not, the attitude of the spa worker and the mansplainer are so.... misogynistic. THEY don't care if this man is a threat or not.  For all we know, he could be a sex offender using the law to touch infiltrate women's spaces- and the LAW is allowing it. As women we need to stand up loud and clear and say NO.   

 

I remember your post from page 2, bc I thought your list was dead on.

so dead on, in fact that the same things you listed as happening in the video had begun happening in the thread.

The dismissiveness and the deflection and then the lashing out.

it’s sickening

[SlowRiver]

14 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

In the circumstances, there was a mixed sex spa. Transmen who look visibly male could use it. People with a micro penis could use it. 

Everyone is so keen to think about the needs of everyone EXCEPT females. 

I don't think that's how the spa is set up, in this case. There are three sections. Male and female with pools are two of them, everyone is nude. The third section is clothes, mixed sex, but no pools, it's other things like the cafe, games areas, etc.

I don't see how a system like that can be divided by gender, or why anyone would want it to be. When it says women and men what it means is male and female. 

Trans people are either going to need to use the section for their sex, or if that really makes them very uncomfortable, or they think they have changed their bodies enough that it will really make others uncomfortable, it might not be a place they are going to be able to use. Which is too bad, but not a deep horrible too bad. If there is enough demand, maybe the spa, or some spa in all of LA, would consider having a time set aside for trans people, on a weekly or monthly basis. (LA might have enough population to have a spa like this that caters to trans people.)

Sometimes there is a sense when people talk about this that it will be some kind of shock to trans people that their gender presentation and their sex are not the same. I think that's really kind of disingenuous, trans people know this. And that being the case they also should be able to understand that sometimes sex is the relevant factor, not gender presentation. 

People who don't seem to understand that fall into two categories IMO. Either they are deliberately pushing buttons, whether or not they are really trans or just being exploitative. Or they are really naive and not being served by activists who keep telling them that gender is more important and real than sex.

[Dmmetler]

Honestly, the trans folks who are really uncomfortable would be unlikely to be able to use a nude spa at all, because seeing their own bodies is uncomfortable. If you were comfortable enough to use a nude spa with other nude folks, I'd think you could handle the changing room. 

 

Similarly, there are a lot of non-trans folks who would never use such a facikity-I'm one. I don't like seeing other people's bodies, nor do I want them seeing mine. 

 

I have zero problems making a nude spa divided by physical anatomy. 

[SlowRiver]

And also, I don't think having times set aside is always understood as unreasonable.

In my city we have a population of mostly Muslim, but also a few Jewish women, who can't swim with men. So in a lot of cases, they can't swim in public pools, and they can't depend on lake swimming areas to be single sex either.

There are a few pools that have times set aside for all female swims and they are ver popular with that population. I don't think there are any completely female only pools but there could be if someone wanted to open one, or a women only beach.

No one thinks that there should be no mixed sex pools or every pool needs to have single sex only swims. 

 

[LucyStoner]

9 hours ago, Clarita said:

My very limited experience actually, biological females. Anywhere from inappropriate touching all the way to rape. I don't know and I'm not sure if anyone really knows largely who is doing what, because all the men who have told me these stories have never reported these events. 

All rapes are underreported.  

The study that came to the largest numbers on sexual assault of males by females found that less than 30% of sexual assaults on males were committed by females not acting in concert with a male.  The journalist Hanna Rosin wrote a good long form piece on this focused on research specifically about females sexually assaulting males.  

If the male survivors you know have all had exclusively female perpetrators, they are not fully representative of male survivors. 

While I absolutely don’t want to minimize the experiences of male survivors, I will admit that when looking at the sheer magnitude of the issue of sexual violence committed by biological male people, the tendency of some people to mention what about female sexual violence does feel a little bit like, well, whataboutism.  

Edited June 30, 2021 by LucyStoner

[LucyStoner]

1 hour ago, SlowRiver said:

And also, I don't think having times set aside is always understood as unreasonable.

In my city we have a population of mostly Muslim, but also a few Jewish women, who can't swim with men. So in a lot of cases, they can't swim in public pools, and they can't depend on lake swimming areas to be single sex either.

There are a few pools that have times set aside for all female swims and they are ver popular with that population. I don't think there are any completely female only pools but there could be if someone wanted to open one, or a women only beach.

No one thinks that there should be no mixed sex pools or every pool needs to have single sex only swims. 

 

There used to be women only times at some local public pools so that women with religious or cultural restrictions could swim with their children without having to cover up quite as much.  I haven’t seen those advertised in quite a long time.  I learned that in some cases these events have shifted from public to private pools.  Honestly if these times were being offered now I would expect that someone would make an issue of a public pool having a time that was restricted to a smaller group.  I don’t know if that is why the events here seem to have moved from public to private pools.  There are a number of reasons that seem plausible to me.  ETA- I did some digging and there’s still one public pool here with women’s only times.  It could be that there are others that will add it back as we open up after Covid but the times I was thinking of faded away around 10 years ago.  To avoid discrimination complaints (which they have received), they also have a men’s only time which as of an older news story was very sparsely attended.  The objections that were raised to this some time ago were about gender equality and if women only times marginalizes women more. 

Edited June 30, 2021 by LucyStoner

[SlowRiver]

4 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

There used to be women only times at some local public pools so that women with religious or cultural restrictions could swim with their children without having to cover up quite as much.  I haven’t seen those advertised in quite a long time.  I learned that in some cases these events have shifted from public to private pools.  Honestly if these times were being offered now I would expect that someone would make an issue of a public pool having a time that was restricted to a smaller group.  I don’t know if that is why the events here seem to have moved from public to private pools.  There are a number of reasons that seem plausible to me.  

If it were where I live the fuss would be about them not allowing transwomen in. 

I wonder though - I can see people making a fuss of women or men's only swims on the grounds that they are not inclusive. But at the same time there seems to be pressure to break groups up, for example in workplaces, according to various identity characteristics, so they can address their specific needs. But there seems to be an element of all animals are equal but some are more equal than others.

[Dmmetler]

12 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

There used to be women only times at some local public pools so that women with religious or cultural restrictions could swim with their children without having to cover up quite as much.  I haven’t seen those advertised in quite a long time.  I learned that in some cases these events have shifted from public to private pools.  Honestly if these times were being offered now I would expect that someone would make an issue of a public pool having a time that was restricted to a smaller group.  I don’t know if that is why the events here seem to have moved from public to private pools.  There are a number of reasons that seem plausible to me.  

Here it's very common for Moslem and Conservative Christian women who want all women swim times to join the Jewish Community Center, which has specific times reserved for women and their pre-pubescent children. S. works there and regularly works those times because they need all female staff-she often is teaching mixed level swim to kids so their moms can swim without children (which she says is swimming babysitting because it is far less instructional than the other classes she teaches due to being mixed level). And I doubt the JCC gets pressure about being trans inclusive. 

Edited June 30, 2021 by Dmmetler

[LucyStoner]

2 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

Here it's very common for Moslem and Conservative Christian women who want all women swim times to join the Jewish Community Center, which has specific times reserved for women and their pre-pubescent children. S. works there and regularly works those times because they need all female staff-she often is teaching mixed level swim to kids so their moms can swim without children (which she says is swimming babysitting because it is far less instructional than the other classes she teaches due to being mixed level). 

The JCC here has done I think a lot of outreach and scholarships for families in need.  They do great work.  

[Dmmetler]

1 hour ago, LucyStoner said:

The JCC here has done I think a lot of outreach and scholarships for families in need.  They do great work.  

We had a membership there for years that DH's company paid for (they were located right next door, and the owner of the company was Jewish). Losing the membership was one of the worst parts of being bought out. I used the heck out of it when L was little. 

 

They have also been very supportive of S, including keeping her on the payroll for her part time job following her stroke last fall, and phasing her back in as she can (right now, they have her teaching, but always have a second person with her group) and will do the same after her surgery next month. 

[Melissa Louise]

6 hours ago, Dmmetler said:

Here it's very common for Moslem and Conservative Christian women who want all women swim times to join the Jewish Community Center, which has specific times reserved for women and their pre-pubescent children. S. works there and regularly works those times because they need all female staff-she often is teaching mixed level swim to kids so their moms can swim without children (which she says is swimming babysitting because it is far less instructional than the other classes she teaches due to being mixed level). And I doubt the JCC gets pressure about being trans inclusive. 

If the only way women can preserve some single sex space is under the umbrella of religion...that's a significant problem for secular women, and women whose abuse is related to religion. 

 

[Clarita]

 

8 hours ago, LucyStoner said:

The study that came to the largest numbers on sexual assault of males by females found that less than 30% of sexual assaults on males were committed by females not acting in concert with a male.  The journalist Hanna Rosin wrote a good long form piece on this focused on research specifically about females sexually assaulting males.

So I found this article by Hanna Rosin on sexual assault against men. Male rape in America: A new study reveals that men are sexually assaulted almost as often as women. (slate.com) I hope I found the one you are referring to. That article says 46% of male victims report (of I assume sexual assault - actual study is behind a paywall) or even 30%. That is not almost never, even if it isn't the majority. 

This all comes after the article discusses that the FBI up until 2012 only defines rape as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” After that they focused it as  "focused on penetration, with no mention of female (or force)." In a separate study which widen the definition of rape to include "being made to penetrate" then "nonconsensual sexual contact basically equalized, with 1.270 million women and 1.267 million men claiming to be victims of sexual violence." 

How Often Do Women Rape Men? - The Atlantic This article does talk about the follow-up research to the one Hanna Rosin wrote about. 

[LucyStoner]

51 minutes ago, Clarita said:

 

So I found this article by Hanna Rosin on sexual assault against men. Male rape in America: A new study reveals that men are sexually assaulted almost as often as women. (slate.com) I hope I found the one you are referring to. That article says 46% of male victims report (of I assume sexual assault - actual study is behind a paywall) or even 30%. That is not almost never, even if it isn't the majority. 

This all comes after the article discusses that the FBI up until 2012 only defines rape as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” After that they focused it as  "focused on penetration, with no mention of female (or force)." In a separate study which widen the definition of rape to include "being made to penetrate" then "nonconsensual sexual contact basically equalized, with 1.270 million women and 1.267 million men claiming to be victims of sexual violence." 

How Often Do Women Rape Men? - The Atlantic This article does talk about the follow-up research to the one Hanna Rosin wrote about. 

It remains a false equivalency to say or insinuate that males and females navigate life with even somewhat similar risk factors for sexual violence, plain and simple.  The pattern of meeting female concerns with “but what about males” is common enough but it’s tiresome.  

ETA- I’ve deleted a lot of this post because there’s no real point.  

 

Edited July 1, 2021 by LucyStoner

[TravelingChris]

On 6/29/2021 at 6:24 PM, LucyStoner said:

We have found it to be worth it.  We can only afford one lesson a week so we supplement that with practicing at non-lesson times.  It was cost prohibitive for us for a long time.  It’s crazy butt expensive.  ETA:  when my son wanted to skip a lesson, I was like “think again dude, think again…if I am paying someone that much, he needs to show up.  🤣

I had to do individual lessons with 2 of mine.  Fortunately, they did learn to swim with those lessons.

[Dmmetler]

How hard is it to change gender on your ID? Because it just hit me that I might be thinking of this as uncommon because I live in a state where it's hard (requiring either a medical statement that transition is completed or a court order to change a driver's license, and birth certificates cannot be amended at all), and the public rec center requires ID showing local residency to get a membership or a day ticket (and at least one person over 16. And I think you have to have ID to get a membership at the JCC, too. So maybe I feel safer because we don't have complete self ID here? Most arguments I've heard locally are over, say, allowing 6 yr olds to play on the same rec basketball team, or trans teens to use an individual stall in a school restroom-and that's not quite the same thing. 

[1234]

29 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

How hard is it to change gender on your ID? Because it just hit me that I might be thinking of this as uncommon because I live in a state where it's hard (requiring either a medical statement that transition is completed or a court order to change a driver's license, and birth certificates cannot be amended at all), and the public rec center requires ID showing local residency to get a membership or a day ticket (and at least one person over 16. And I think you have to have ID to get a membership at the JCC, too. So maybe I feel safer because we don't have complete self ID here? Most arguments I've heard locally are over, say, allowing 6 yr olds to play on the same rec basketball team, or trans teens to use an individual stall in a school restroom-and that's not quite the same thing. 

It depends on the state. Ds was able to change all of his documents because he was born in California. So, once his birth certificate was changed, everything else had to be as well (even in our much more conservative state). He needed a doctor’s statement verifying social transitioning but he’s had no surgery. 

Youngest can’t change their birth certificate because the state they were born in won’t allow it and our state won’t allow NB as an option on ID. So, they can only change name.

[LucyStoner]

1 hour ago, Dmmetler said:

How hard is it to change gender on your ID? Because it just hit me that I might be thinking of this as uncommon because I live in a state where it's hard (requiring either a medical statement that transition is completed or a court order to change a driver's license, and birth certificates cannot be amended at all), and the public rec center requires ID showing local residency to get a membership or a day ticket (and at least one person over 16. And I think you have to have ID to get a membership at the JCC, too. So maybe I feel safer because we don't have complete self ID here? Most arguments I've heard locally are over, say, allowing 6 yr olds to play on the same rec basketball team, or trans teens to use an individual stall in a school restroom-and that's not quite the same thing. 

In Washington State, with a simple visit to the DMV you can change your gender marker to M, F or X.  You do not need any verification of social and/or medical transition to do this.  Currently, it is harder to get an appointment at the DMV to get a Real ID Act compliant ID (so that you can travel by airplane after the deadline) than it is to change your gender marker.   You fill out this form: https://www.dol.wa.gov/forms/520043.pdf

You may also change your sex designated on a Washington State birth certificate by filling out this form.  https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/Pubs/422-143-SexDesignationChangeAdult.pdf

For school, you don't need to change your ID to change your gender at school - in the local districts that I am familiar with, you can do it from the same app you look up a kid's grades and attendance on.  

That was not the case when my brother transitioned.  He had to send documentation to the state (it was not very much documentation- IIRC, it was a letter from his HCP stating he'd socially transitioned and started medical transition), then he received a letter back from the state and simply took that letter to the DMV. 

As a practical matter, most businesses and other entities aren't checking IDs WRT this anyways. 

Edited July 1, 2021 by LucyStoner

[KSera]

38 minutes ago, Plum said:

Transgender Rights Supporters Attack Protesters at LA Spa

A number of confrontations took place at Wi Spa at 2700 Wilshire Blvd., where a protest of the spa’s policy was scheduled for 11 a.m. and trans rights supporters with the group SoCal Antifa showed up two hours earlier for their own “No Bigotry in L.A.” counter-rally.

Video from the scene showed the trans rights supports clad in black assaulting protesters from the other side, spraying them with an unidentified substance, pushing them, punching them and demanding that they leave the area.

Several of the black-clad demonstrators could be heard cursing at the protesters to “get the (expletive) out.”

One man in a blue T-shirt that said “Obey Jesus” was sprayed with something from a can. A few seconds later, a handful of trans rights supporters grabbed a large sign that said “God Does Not Make Mistakes” out of the hands of two protesters. Someone lightly shoved the man in the blue shirt in the back. He then lightly shoved a woman clad in black and was set upon by a group of men, who punched him and hit him twice in the head with a skateboard.

They followed the wounded man down a sidewalk taunting him to fight back until he reached the safety of a police officer.

Black-clad demonstrators could also be seen pushing and beating at least two other protesters while they were on the ground.

A man with no shirt and holding nunchuck-type weapons in both hands appeared to be arrested after swinging the weapons at a group of the black-clad demonstrators later.

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2021/07/03/la-spa-transgender-rally-lgbtq/

 

Nothing about any of this is good 😞. Obviously the violent counter protestors are a bad thing, and, while totally within their rights, the protestors protesting the policy on the basis of obeying Jesus are doing more harm than good to highlighting the actual issues with the current policy. We don’t legislate or make policies for public places based on religious beliefs, so that’s not a compelling reason and now it looks like the concern is only a matter of religious bigotry (and makes the religion look bad to boot). 

[catz]

Other places reported violence on both sides, I will see if I can find my link on that again.  I learned from the Minneapolis riots and from attending some peaceful protests to not to buy too much into initial clickbait reports of these events and  stereotype entire groups based on the actions of a few.  Violence should be unacceptable wherever it comes from, I agree with that absolutely.  And in terms of protests, often a small group of opportunists will show up to take advantage of a situation to play out their anarchy fantasies whether or not they actually care at all about the actual issue at play.  

So last week I went and looked at this spa's website.  These are quotes from their website https://www.wispausa.com/about/about-wi-spa/

"A Korean spa is not for the modest. To enter the spa and sauna on gender segregated floors, we ask that no clothing be worn. Bathing suits are not allowed in the spas. Please shower prior to entering the spas. Most guests wrap themselves in the towels provided."

Equal Access

"We at Wi Spa want everyone to experience our incredible spa experience. We also do not deny or restrict access to our facilities or services to any customer on the basis of age, color, national origin, citizenship status, physical or mental disability, race, religion, creed, gender, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression, marital status or any other characteristic protected by federal, state or local law."

Could they be more explicit about expectations? Probably.  But  the info is there and they are operating within legal guidelines.  Not a destination for me personally.  But I also don't really care what consenting adults and businesses do within legal guidelines either.  

 

[Melissa Louise]

The problem with not caring about the law is that the law excludes a % of women from services statewide. 

It basically aligns with the position that if you can't use mixed sex spaces, well, you stay home. 

A recent legal judgement in the UK made clear that at times, rights are indeed pie. Where rights conflict, one group will be prioritized, and one group will be expected to accept disadvantage, even if that disadvantage is directed towards a group still experiencing inequity. 

And it's true, access to a spa is not a right. But these are the same laws that allow, for example, male prisoners to be held with females. 

People ok with these laws, that pit vulnerable or minority women against trans people, really need to be honest about the implications, and the fact that they have chosen to advantage (especially male) trans people over females, including vulnerable females.

People need to be honest that they are ok with a social and legal change that ends up asking, say, female prisoners, to 'accept reasonable fear and anxiety, and an increased risk of sexual assault', in favour of Self ID male offenders.

Self ID isn't confined to the spa. Sure, it doesn't matter if a woman in LA can never go to the spa. First world problems, am I right? (And yet...it's existential if a male must not expose his genitals in a female space?...I don't get that.)

 

[Melissa Louise]

57 minutes ago, KSera said:

Nothing about any of this is good 😞. Obviously the violent counter protestors are a bad thing, and, while totally within their rights, the protestors protesting the policy on the basis of obeying Jesus are doing more harm than good to highlighting the actual issues with the current policy. We don’t legislate or make policies for public places based on religious beliefs, so that’s not a compelling reason and now it looks like the concern is only a matter of religious bigotry (and makes the religion look bad to boot). 

Everyone's entitled to protest...without violence. All I see is a bunch of men hijacking a women's issue. They're all as bad as each other, antifa or religious. 

This entire story is just one of male dominance. From d*ck' swinger in the spa, to mansplaining white man to idiot blokes seizing the moment to feel like big men by fighting on the street. 

 

[KSera]

35 minutes ago, FuzzyCatz said:

To enter the spa and sauna on gender segregated floors, we ask that no clothing be worn.

 I think it’s understandable that a large number of people would have interpreted this to mean that the no clothing allowed places were separated by sex. I know it says gender, but it’s still a pretty recent change that sex and gender didn’t meant the same thing in this context, and I would expect a lot of people who aren’t up on these things would have had a reasonable expectation they were sharing the space with people with the same general body configuration as themself. Now it’s clear that’s not how they meant it, but I do think it’s understandable up until the point of this episode that women would have expected not to see male genitals in that area. Now they know (and it will mean a lot of women no longer feel comfortable there—society will have to decide how much that matters and what to do about it). 

[Melissa Louise]

5 minutes ago, KSera said:

 I think it’s understandable that a large number of people would have interpreted this to mean that the no clothing allowed places were separated by sex. I know it says gender, but it’s still a pretty recent change that sex and gender didn’t meant the same thing in this context, and I would expect a lot of people who aren’t up on these things would have had a reasonable expectation they were sharing the space with people with the same general body configuration as themself. Now it’s clear that’s not how they meant it, but I do think it’s understandable up until the point of this episode that women would have expected not to see male genitals in that area. Now they know (and it will mean a lot of women no longer feel comfortable there—society will have to decide how much that matters and what to do about it). 

Society has already decided. It doesn't matter, therefore there is nothing to do about it. 

 

[Melissa Louise]

17 minutes ago, Plum said:

keyword: gender segregated

We want your money but we won't do anything if someone with a penis enters the women's floor and most of the women complain. 

Then why even have the gender segregated floors? Why have any rules? 

You don't have to be an immodest transphobe to be upset at seeing male genitalia within the gender segregated floor. They can put it on their website and in their membership agreements, but it's a whole other thing to be confronted with it. 

Women, the majority of biological females, are losing rights all over the place. Women are sexually harassed everywhere we go. And now we even have to put up with it in places where we thought we could just relax and hang out with our girls. We might as well stay home and knit. Why enter sports? Why enter a beauty pageant? Why join a spa with gender segregation? Is there no place for biological women anymore? We should accept that 1 trans has more power than all of us. 

The progress everyone is hoping for will only end up with segregation by identity. 

To be fair, I don't care about beauty pageants.  🙂 Males want to play these utterly unserious games? Have at it. 

But yes, self ID will drive a % of women out of both public and private spheres. And they're the lucky ones - with a place to retreat. Even though we know that for many Women, the retreat is itself unsafe. 

Women in sport can only retreat (or be pushed ) into non-competition. Women who need female provision of care, rape crisis services, DV refuges - nothing.  Women in prisons ? Just get handed condoms. If they're 'lucky'. 

Boggles the mind that it's all considered progressive. 

And yes, it's bizarre to get rid of the limited forms of sex-segregation we have but turn them into same-gender segregation. Why on earth would there be any material need to segregate by gender?

 

 

 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Melissa Louise

[Frances]

26 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Society has already decided. It doesn't matter, therefore there is nothing to do about it. 

 

At least in the US, I don’t think that is true. Different states have different laws, and various businesses have different policies. It’s still legal in places in the US to discriminate based on sexual orientation, so it’s definitely legal in some states to have policies that exclude transgendered people.

[Melissa Louise]

3 minutes ago, Frances said:

At least in the US, I don’t think that is true. Different states have different laws, and various businesses have different policies. It’s still legal in places in the US to discriminate based on sexual orientation, so it’s definitely legal in some states to have policies that exclude transgendered people.

I don't like the rhetorical trick of comparing self ID laws to discrimination against homosexual people. 

Are you saying you think the rights of vulnerable women matter? Or do they only matter so long as they don't get in the way of male rights to self ID?

Edited July 4, 2021 by Melissa Louise

[Frances]

4 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I don't like the rhetorical trick of comparing self ID laws to discrimination against homosexual people. 

 

I wasn’t trying to trick anyone. I was just making the point that discrimination based on sexual orientation is allowed in many states in the US. Therefore, I don’t think we are going to see universal laws in the US not allowing transgendered people to be excluded anytime soon. There is more consensus on the sexual orientation issue, but discrimination is still allowed in many places. And just to be clear, I’m not equating the two.

Edited July 4, 2021 by Frances

[Melissa Louise]

10 minutes ago, Frances said:

I wasn’t trying to trick anyone. I was just making the point that discrimination based on sexual orientation is allowed in many states in the US. Therefore, I don’t think we are going to see universal laws in the US not allowing transgendered people to be excluded anytime soon. There is more consensus on the sexual orientation issue, but discrimination is still allowed in many places.

Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is wrong. 

In the same way, transsexual people ( not self ID) should be protected against discrimination in terms of housing, health care, employment. 

Where the rights of two groups collide, women should not automatically be assumed to give way to trans needs,  especially when self ID is the law of the land.

If a need for single sex services is proportionate ( and where safety and/or dignity is involved, same-sex provision IS proportionate) it should be available to women. 

You may be unaware that the US is quite backward on gay and trans discrimination. In places like AU and the UK, trans people are already protected from discrimination under law. And yet, still the push for self ID, still the push to remove the rights of women to limited same sex provision...why?

 

 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Melissa Louise

[Frances]

3 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is wrong. 

In the same way, transsexual people ( not self ID) should be protected against discrimination in terms of housing, health care, employment. 

Where the rights of two groups collide, women should not automatically be assumed to give way to trans needs,  especially when self ID is the law of the land.

If a need for single sex services is proportionate ( and where safety and/or dignity is involved, same-sex provision IS proportionate) it should be available to women. 

You may be unaware that the US is quite backward on gay and trans discrimination. In places like AU and the UK, trans people are already protected from discrimination under law. And yet, still the push for self ID, still the push to remove the rights of women to limited same sex provision. 

 

I don’t disagree with any of this. I just don’t agree with your take on the current situation in the US. The US is a very diverse country and state laws and culture vary widely.

And having a gay son, I’m very aware of where various parts of the US are when it comes to gay rights.

Edited July 4, 2021 by Frances

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, Frances said:

I don’t disagree with any of this. I just don’t agree with your take on the current situation in the US. The US is a very diverse country and state laws and culture vary widely.

Sure.

And in states where self ID is law, where gender over-rides sex in legislation, the issue has been decided, and not in favour of females. 

Are you suggesting that women who want same sex provision should move state? 

 

 

[Frances]

1 minute ago, Melissa Louise said:

Sure.

And in states where self ID is law, where gender over-rides sex in legislation, the issue has been decided, and not in favour of females. 

Are you suggesting that women who want same sex provision should move state? 

 

 

No, of course not. I just don’t agree with your statement that society has decided, at least in the US. In some states, yes. In many states, no.

Edited July 4, 2021 by Frances

[Melissa Louise]

12 minutes ago, Frances said:

No, of course not. I just don’t agree with your statement that society has decided, at least in the US. In some states, yes. In many states, no.

I'm sure you can see the direction of social movement and the law, across the Western world. 

In any case,  limited same sex provision, and safeguards on self ID, shouldn't have to come at the cost of gay rights, or reproductive rights. 

Rock and a hard place for women who aren't from the Right, but who DO think there are times when gender does not over-ride sex. It should not be considered hateful and transphobic to want to balance LGB and women's rights, with the rights of transsexual people. 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Melissa Louise

[Frances]

2 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

 

In any case,  limited same sex provision, and safeguards on self ID, shouldn't have to come at the cost of gay rights, or reproductive rights. 

Rock and a hard place for women who aren't from the Right, but who DO think there are times when gender does not over-ride sex. It should not be considered hateful and transphobic to want to balance LGB and women's rights, with the rights of transsexual people. 

I don’t disagree with any of this. I just don’t think the types of laws that have passed in some states are going to become the law of the land in the US anytime soon.

[Melissa Louise]

3 minutes ago, Frances said:

I don’t disagree with any of this. I just don’t think the types of laws that have passed in some states are going to become the law of the land in the US anytime soon.

Ok. Fair enough. 

What do you think can be done for women in states where these laws have been passed? 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Melissa Louise

[Frances]

13 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Ok. Fair enough. 

What do you think can be done for women in states where these laws have been passed? 

It’s not really something I’ve given much thought to. I’m still learning about the issues which is why I like these threads.

[Melissa Louise]

6 minutes ago, Frances said:

It’s not really something I’ve given much thought to. I’m still learning about the issues which is why I like these threads.

One thing I do is donate money as I can to services which have their funding withdrawn because they are female only. Rape crisis services, mostly. 

[Frances]

1 minute ago, Plum said:

CA banned state-funded travel to FL and 4 other states (17 total now) because of laws those states passed that CA deems discriminatory. This decision comes down in the midst of the FL condo collapse. 

"Make no mistake: We're in the midst of an unprecedented wave of bigotry and discrimination in this country — and the State of California is not going to support it," AG Bonta said.

Unfortunately every time a state decides for themselves how they want to handle this issue they are called backwards, hateful and transphobic. We are not allowed to have conversations like this. We are not allowed to have any opinion outside of what the mob rules. 

What would help is to see more trans people speaking out against this sort of behavior. I have a hard time believing all trans think this sort of thing is good for their cause. I wonder if they are afraid to speak out for fear that the mob turns on them. 

There are many states which I don’t think will follow CA’s lead. I personally haven’t experienced what you say about mob rule and not being allowed to have conversations like this, but I trust you that it is happening where you live.

[Melissa Louise]

2 minutes ago, Plum said:

CA banned state-funded travel to FL and 4 other states (17 total now) because of laws those states passed that CA deems discriminatory. This decision comes down in the midst of the FL condo collapse. 

"Make no mistake: We're in the midst of an unprecedented wave of bigotry and discrimination in this country — and the State of California is not going to support it," AG Bonta said.

Unfortunately every time a state decides for themselves how they want to handle this issue they are called backwards, hateful and transphobic. We are not allowed to have conversations like this. We are not allowed to have any opinion outside of what the mob rules. 

What would help is to see more trans people speaking out against this sort of behavior. I have a hard time believing all trans think this sort of thing is good for their cause. I wonder if they are afraid to speak out for fear that the mob turns on them. 

Plenty of trans people speaking up against self ID, identifying with women, not just AS women...they get called truscum. 

[Melissa Louise]

2 minutes ago, Plum said:

One woman holding up a sign about locker rooms. It was ripped from her hands before I could read it. 
 

 

This is why I spend so much time talking to my kids about how to behave at protests, including trans rights protests. 

It may feel good to kettle the 'enemy', especially if you dehumanize her as a white TERF, but all you demonstrate here in this way is political immaturity.

You demonstrate that your ideas aren't strong enough to stand without harassment and intimidation. Fair minded observers will conclude you are nothing but shallow agitators. 

 

[Melissa Louise]

6 minutes ago, Plum said:

Good to hear there are those that speak out. I’m not up on all the lingo or follow all of this all that closely. I’m guessing truscum is a negative? I haven’t seen any trans speak out anywhere I can see them. 

Yep, a negative. 

Kristina Harrison is the first transwoman I came across who supports women. She's from a left wing, union background. 

Most dissent comes from UK- based transsexual people. Fionne Orlander and Debbie Heyton are two other outspoken supporters of women. Miranda Yardley too. MY and DH have written on the topic for major UK papers. 

There is some self-interest involved. Before self ID was introduced (it's not, actually, the law in the UK, but Stonewall has pushed institutions well ahead of the law) this cohort were relatively well accepted, especially by women. They've seen attitudes harden and alliances crumble with the advent of self ID. 

There's no-one who speaks up in AU.

I'm only aware of relatively anonymous trans supporters of women in the US. Buck Angel (transman, former porn star, dies not deny his sex, is against self ID and pediatric transition) is probably the most vocal. 

 

 

[Melissa Louise]

@Plum

Here's a recent article from Debbie Heyton. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.spectator.co.uk/article/biden-s-trans-rights-agenda-is-bad-news-for-women/amp

I actually dislike the way some people will only consider articles on women's rights if it comes from a trans voice, so tens not to share DH or others - women's arguments are enough - but yes, definitely there are trans people who do not like where things are heading for women and girls. 

[Melissa Louise]

*tend

[KSera]

17 minutes ago, Plum said:

Even my outspoken Dh has warned me to be careful about what I post in public forum when it comes to these divisive topics. Doxxing and harassment are weapons for those who decide their actions are justified. I would like to think that no one is afraid of little old me, but I can’t be sure. It’s not just us reading this forum. 😳😬

Yep. I have almost come back and deleted all my posts in this and the related topic for this reason. I tend to stay away from reading general discusisions on this topic online, but came across a discussion somewhere and it reminded me how totally ugly and scary it can get and I almost deleted everything--and that's with me having pretty middle of the road, protective of trans people opinions, but the fact I also have concerns makes me a target. (And we have had an unusual pattern of brand new posters who don't seem to be here for anything to do with homeschooling on this forum the last couple months, which makes me even more concerned that TWTM is coming up in more people's search results.)

 

 

[Danae]

1 hour ago, Plum said:

We are not allowed to have conversations like this. We are not allowed to have any opinion outside of what the mob rules. 

 

We’re not?  And yet we appear to be having it. 

[Melissa Louise]

15 minutes ago, Danae said:

We’re not?  And yet we appear to be having it. 

There are five places on the internet 'we' can have this public discussion without being shut down/kicked out/doxxed/modded out of the discussion/harassed.

Lipstick Alley, Mumsnet, Ovarit, Spinster and now WTM. That's it. 

 

[Melissa Louise]

32 minutes ago, KSera said:

Yep. I have almost come back and deleted all my posts in this and the related topic for this reason. I tend to stay away from reading general discusisions on this topic online, but came across a discussion somewhere and it reminded me how totally ugly and scary it can get and I almost deleted everything--and that's with me having pretty middle of the road, protective of trans people opinions, but the fact I also have concerns makes me a target. (And we have had an unusual pattern of brand new posters who don't seem to be here for anything to do with homeschooling on this forum the last couple months, which makes me even more concerned that TWTM is coming up in more people's search results.)

 

 

I don't think WTM is being infiltrated. I recognize most of the names, and some I don't post mostly on the other boards. 

I've only been threatened with doxxing once here, and that poster no longer posts. 

I do anticipate the conversation being shut down here soon, however. And who could blame SWB? 

Edited July 4, 2021 by Melissa Louise