Jump to content

Menu

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


Recommended Posts

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. 

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

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

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. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@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. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Frances said:

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.

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. 😳😬

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

@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. 

I have to make dinner but I’ll keep the tab open to read later. Thanks again. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.)

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
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 by Melissa Louise
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Danae said:

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

I think it's great that we have been able to have it here. It's an important conversation. Besides doxxing and harassment, there are many online forums where any discussions like these have been shut down and the channels banned as hate speech. Detransitioners trying to talk about their experiences have had their spaces shut down. In many places, the range of what opinion is allowed in order to not be considered hate speech is extremely narrow. And it frustrates the heck out of me, because that's not not for the benefit of trans-identifying people (particularly young people) at all. To be all hoo-yah! about instant hormones and function-impairing surgeries for any young people that request it is not coming from a place of genuinely caring about those young people, it's all about appearances and thinking the "right" thing without any significant thought or research into what that actually is and what effect it is having.

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

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. 

Oh, I don't think we have been infiltrated on this thread or anything on this topic at this point. I just mean in general. There have been some weird patterns lately that indicate this forum must be coming up more often in people's search results when they search for random things. And there have been a number of new accounts that post in a random thread with a profile picture of a guy's headshot, and each is a different guy, but the kind of picture is so similar that it's weird to me. Maybe I'm the only one who's noticed that 🤷‍♀️. In any case, nothing to do with this topic, just saying I do feel like the chances of someone stumbling across it is higher now than it used to be.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KSera said:

Oh, I don't think we have been infiltrated on this thread or anything on this topic at this point. I just mean in general. There have been some weird patterns lately that indicate this forum must be coming up more often in people's search results when they search for random things. And there have been a number of new accounts that post in a random thread with a profile picture of a guy's headshot, and each is a different guy, but the kind of picture is so similar that it's weird to me. Maybe I'm the only one who's noticed that 🤷‍♀️. In any case, nothing to do with this topic, just saying I do feel like the chances of someone stumbling across it is higher now than it used to be.

I hope women do stumble across it. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Danae said:

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

This conversation has come a looooooong way here. 3 years ago it was shut down with slurs. I'm sure there's at least a few posters who still wish the conversation would go away, I don't exactly blame them, it's not comfortable. The conversation being mostly respectful and productive here is very delicate and rare.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 7/3/2021 at 8:59 PM, Melissa Louise said:

Ok. Fair enough. 

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

I think the thing that will make the most practical difference is that females will stop patronizing businesses that put trans males' wants above females' needs.  Wi Spa will look at its P&L and suddenly get creative about how to address females' concerns.

Females are the main purchasers in the US, not males.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

I think the thing that will make the most practical difference is that women will stop patronizing businesses that put trans men's wants above women's needs.  Wi Spa will look at its P&L and suddenly get creative about how to address females' concerns.

Women are the main purchasers in the US, not men.

That works for things like the spa, not so much for things like prisons. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

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?

 

 

 

What bothers me is that we seem to be seeing more gatekeeping that is keeping cis women out of specific spaces if they're not women enough. The fact that due to inclusion of trans women in Olympic level sport there is an accepted testosterone level that is set at a bar below which some cis women fall is not acceptable to me-particularly since it seems to mostly affect Black women.  So not only do women have to compete with trans athletes who got the benefit of going through puberty as a male before transitioning, but any natural advantages they may have been born with-and which have additional side effects, because while extra testosterone might be helpful as a teen/young adult athlete, it has a lot of disadvantages, too. (I have a friend who falls into that category, and even in high school, being really good in gym class and on the cross country team didn't make up for getting teased because of not being built "like a girl", or having to start waxing facial hair at age 12-and it definitely didn't make up for not being able to get pregnant without serious medical intervention)-are enough to exclude them.

 

I was also reading a college website (to see what the resolution had been for a dorm that literally blew up a week before L was supposed to move in three summers ago) and noticed that they now have gender inclusive dorms and floors within dorms. And basically, if you move into a gender inclusive dorm, you're saying you're OK and accepting with anyone who is placed with you (and that you're not requesting a specific roommate because you are in a sexual relationship with them). Uh, as a mom, that thought sends horror through my spine, because I have the kind of liberal kid who I could see ticking a gender inclusive box without even thinking about it-but I definitely would not be comfortable with my 16 yr old sharing a room and bathroom with an 18 yr old with a penis, especially since I see nothing on the forms that would keep a completely cis, straight male from doing so-and I'm not willing to trust the motives of teen boys! 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Dmmetler
  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, KSera said:

Oh, I don't think we have been infiltrated on this thread or anything on this topic at this point. I just mean in general. There have been some weird patterns lately that indicate this forum must be coming up more often in people's search results when they search for random things. And there have been a number of new accounts that post in a random thread with a profile picture of a guy's headshot, and each is a different guy, but the kind of picture is so similar that it's weird to me. Maybe I'm the only one who's noticed that 🤷‍♀️. In any case, nothing to do with this topic, just saying I do feel like the chances of someone stumbling across it is higher now than it used to be.

I've noticed a few new members whose only reason for being here seems to be so they can start controversial topics or post inflammatory statements on topics that had been fairly respectful. Some people call them out as previous members with new names but in most cases I'm not good at recognizing someone's posting style. Either way, whether they're new or old with new names, it seems to be a trend. Thankfully hasn't happened in this thread but it's definitely a weird new thing on WTM. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dmmetler said:

The fact that due to inclusion of trans women in Olympic level sport there is an accepted testosterone level that is set at a bar below which some cis women fall is not acceptable to me-

 

 

 

 

This was actually happening prior to inclusion of trans athletes.  Women with “too high” of testosterone were accused of being trans or not female enough and excluded on that basis.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dmmetler said:

And basically, if you move into a gender inclusive dorm, you're saying you're OK and accepting with anyone who is placed with you (and that you're not requesting a specific roommate because you are in a sexual relationship with them). Uh, as a mom, that thought sends horror through my spine, because I have the kind of liberal kid who I could see ticking a gender inclusive box without even thinking about it-but I definitely would not be comfortable with my 16 yr old sharing a room and bathroom with an 18 yr old with a penis, especially since I see nothing on the forms that would keep a completely cis, straight male from doing so-and I'm not willing to trust the motives of teen boys! 

I can totally see this as well. My dc is in gender inclusive housing next year and they were just telling me about someone who had a straight cis guy as a roommate last year in the gender inclusive housing, and everything was cool and no problem, but that they thought it was funny they requested gender inclusive and wondered why. I suggested like you say, that maybe they wanted to indicate they were an ally. It is true there’s nothing to stop someone with other motives, but unless they pick a certain roommate (who has to also pick them), they would have no idea who they would end up with. It would be equally likely they would be with a trans woman male-bodied roommate who likes guys. Which probably wouldn’t be their goal. I do have concerns about the boyfriend-girlfriend aspect causing awkwardness, as my dc is rooming with two trans students, male and female, and doesn’t know if they are romantically involved or just friends. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Dmmetler said:

What bothers me is that we seem to be seeing more gatekeeping that is keeping cis women out of specific spaces if they're not women enough. The fact that due to inclusion of trans women in Olympic level sport there is an accepted testosterone level that is set at a bar below which some cis women fall is not acceptable to me-particularly since it seems to mostly affect Black women.  So not only do women have to compete with trans athletes who got the benefit of going through puberty as a male before transitioning, but any natural advantages they may have been born with-and which have additional side effects, because while extra testosterone might be helpful as a teen/young adult athlete, it has a lot of disadvantages, too. (I have a friend who falls into that category, and even in high school, being really good in gym class and on the cross country team didn't make up for getting teased because of not being built "like a girl", or having to start waxing facial hair at age 12-and it definitely didn't make up for not being able to get pregnant without serious medical intervention)-are enough to exclude them.

 

I was also reading a college website (to see what the resolution had been for a dorm that literally blew up a week before L was supposed to move in three summers ago) and noticed that they now have gender inclusive dorms and floors within dorms. And basically, if you move into a gender inclusive dorm, you're saying you're OK and accepting with anyone who is placed with you (and that you're not requesting a specific roommate because you are in a sexual relationship with them). Uh, as a mom, that thought sends horror through my spine, because I have the kind of liberal kid who I could see ticking a gender inclusive box without even thinking about it-but I definitely would not be comfortable with my 16 yr old sharing a room and bathroom with an 18 yr old with a penis, especially since I see nothing on the forms that would keep a completely cis, straight male from doing so-and I'm not willing to trust the motives of teen boys! 

 

 

 

 

The sports issue is complex. 

In general, athletes required to lower testosterone have XY specific DSD's, and have undergone partial or full virilization at puberty.

Not all athletes with an XY DSD profile need to do so - CAIS women who are XY but don't go through a male puberty at all, compete according to the same rules as XX athletes. 

None of that has anything to do with transwomen in women's sport. A whole other issue,  well beyond testosterone levels. I can't personally see much progress in having Laurel Hubbard competing against females half his age  at the Olympics, but that's apparently a minority view. 

Re gender inclusive rooming...I guess consenting adults can do what they want but the framing is problematic, especially for minors. Nobody of college age wants to be 'gender exclusive' - there needs to be a way for female students, particularly, to express a need to room with other bio female students, without the 'oh no that's bigoted' penalty. Nothing to do with bigotry, everything to do with risk reduction. 

I continue to have no idea why we would, as a society, segregate by gender identity or presentation. Makes zero sense to me. The only point to limited sex segregation is risk reduction due to differences in population-level  offending profiles between the two sexes. 

Edited by Melissa Louise
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, KSera said:

Oh, I don't think we have been infiltrated on this thread or anything on this topic at this point. I just mean in general. There have been some weird patterns lately that indicate this forum must be coming up more often in people's search results when they search for random things. And there have been a number of new accounts that post in a random thread with a profile picture of a guy's headshot, and each is a different guy, but the kind of picture is so similar that it's weird to me. Maybe I'm the only one who's noticed that 🤷‍♀️. In any case, nothing to do with this topic, just saying I do feel like the chances of someone stumbling across it is higher now than it used to be.

There’s jobs on upwork and similar for users to create accounts and post a certain number of posts on forums or to post seeding posts on forums.  I think the goal is to create an online profile for someone who then takes it over for whatever purpose.  The similarity of the types of posts make me think this is what’s going on.  Fake profiles for spreading disinformation is a whole troubling thing.

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Color me (not) shocked. 

Apparently this was probably a hoax. 

Quote

There is increasing doubt among law enforcement and staff at the Wi Spa whether there was ever was a transgender person there to begin with. Anonymous sources within the LAPD tell the Blade they have been unable to find any corroborating evidence that there was a transgender person present on that day.

Similarly, a source at the Spa told the Blade there’s no record of any of its usual transgender clients on its appointments guest list on the day in question. Treatment at the Spa is by appointment only, and most of its transgender clients are well known to the staff.

Quote

The American right relies on manufactured rage to keep its base engaged. Whether it’s Dr. Seuss, Mr. Potato Head, Critical Race Theory, or women soccer players not knowing which way to face during the National Anthem it doesn’t matter if the instigating event is real, so long as it is plausible to the base and it makes them angry. In the case of the mysterious trans woman at the Wi Spa, it no longer matters if she existed at all. The far right got the attention they wanted, and even if it proved to be a hoax or a set-up, no one will remember that in the long run.

Yep. 

Alleged Trans incident at upscale LA spa may have been staged

Edited by Ordinary Shoes
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol

'A possibility' 'anonymous sources' 'well known TERF websites' 

Seems legit. 🤨

We all saw the video with our own eyes, that's pretty elaborate for a hoax.

And it still doesn't change the fact that female only safe spaces that include males will exclude some females.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I'll repeat my first post on this thread. People need to stop falling for viral videos. 

 

Agreeing people need to stop falling for viral videos (I still haven't seen this one, as I didn't see the relevance of viewing that particular video to engage in a discussion on the broader topic). The last couple links posted also bring to mind though the way the media has been so irresponsible with this issue and continues to be in so many ways, on both sides. A good time to post again a link shared earlier by someone else:

What the media gets wrong on gender reassignment

 

eta: I really, really recommend anyone truly interested in the issue read the *entire* article, even though it's long. It's a much more nuanced treatment of the issue than typically seen (and I expect some people who think they "like" it when they start reading it, will be less sure how to think as they get deeper into it, and vice versa for those who don't like the beginning, but start agreeing as it goes on). We dearly need this kind of nuance in this area though, and it's terribly lacking.

Edited by KSera
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LMD said:

Lol

'A possibility' 'anonymous sources' 'well known TERF websites' 

Seems legit. 🤨

We all saw the video with our own eyes, that's pretty elaborate for a hoax.

And it still doesn't change the fact that female only safe spaces that include males will exclude some females.

"remains a possibility the man in the spa wasn't even a transwoman" - bingo!

TFW even TRA's are starting to understand the problem of self ID...

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, LMD said:

Lol

'A possibility' 'anonymous sources' 'well known TERF websites' 

Seems legit. 🤨

We all saw the video with our own eyes, that's pretty elaborate for a hoax.

And it still doesn't change the fact that female only safe spaces that include males will exclude some females.

Why no corroborating evidence? Why haven't they identified this person? All of this comes from an anonymous Twitter account. 

I remember when I first heard the Jussie Smollet (sp?) story and knew that it didn't sound right. Many people said that this story seemed off to them. The same with all of those Project Veritas videos. 

People need to stop falling for viral videos posted by anonymous Twitter accounts. Who are these people? 

Pretty elaborate for a hoax? What about those Project Veritas videos? We know they are total crap but they're elaborate. No one sees any video with their own eyes. Remember those videos from early in the pandemic from hospitals that were supposed to prove that no one was in the hospital for COVID? They were crap but yet, you could "see with your own eyes" that the floor was empty. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. I'm not getting into a source v source pissing contest.

Females are a distinct group with their own sex specific experiences and needs which necessarily sometimes excludes males. I don't think that's a difficult or controversial statement.

But nice non answer.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Not sure how I feel about this yet. 

The tough thing is that rules and “right” ways of thinking about this are already being put in place, such that it’s already affecting people while those it doesn’t really affect have the luxury of not having an opinion yet (and I’m not blaming people for not knowing what they think yet—much better that than just going with whatever the predominant group think from ones own “side” is). But it’s tough, because somehow a small group has decided what the right answer is, and anyone with thoughtful questions or hesitations is painted with broad strokes as a hateful bigot by the media—and the whole dynamic is worsened by the fact that there is a large group of people who largely are in fact hateful bigots yelling the loudest, over the top of those with reasonable concerns who have no malice or moralizing involved. The whole issue is a mess right now. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, LMD said:

Thanks. I'm not getting into a source v source pissing contest.

Females are a distinct group with their own sex specific experiences and needs which necessarily sometimes excludes males. I don't think that's a difficult or controversial statement.

But nice non answer.

Saying that I'm not sure yet is not a "non-answer." You do understand that people sometimes need time to think about issues right? 

And I genuinely don't know yet. 

But I'm still beating my wife though. 

Which is hard because I don't have a wife. 

And the lack of any corroborating evidence is not a "source v source pissing contest." 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, KSera said:

The tough thing is that rules and “right” ways of thinking about this are already being put in place, such that it’s already affecting people while those it doesn’t really affect have the luxury of not having an opinion yet (and I’m not blaming people for not knowing what they think yet—much better that than just going with whatever the predominant group think from ones own “side” is). But it’s tough, because somehow a small group has decided what the right answer is, and anyone with thoughtful questions or hesitations is painted with broad strokes as a hateful bigot by the media—and the whole dynamic is worsened by the fact that there is a large group of people who largely are in fact hateful bigots yelling the loudest, over the top of those with reasonable concerns who have no malice or moralizing involved. The whole issue is a mess right now. 

Yes, these are complicated issues and viral videos like these don't help advance dialogue. 

This isn't the first time I've been jumped on here for doubting that a viral video told the whole story. 

My inclination is to agree with the idea that biological females deserve their own space. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a thread here now about how people fall for conspiracy theories. It's about Q. Q people believe they "see it with their own eyes" when they watch carefully cultivated videos that tell them what they already believe. 

The police say, "no, Comet Pizza does not even have a basement," and people shrug it off. 

Conspiracy theories thrive when the ideology is more important than anything else. 

The police have no corroborating evidence. No one has been able to identify any of these people. The spa itself says they had no trans clients that day. 

But it's a big plot. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

thrive when the ideology is more important than anything else. 

This is a big problem on many fronts right now, including with this issue. All kinds of issues arise when ideology is more important then facts or consequences. 
 

 

6 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

The spa itself says they had no trans clients that day. 

I have zero idea if it did or didn’t happen. But this particular reason doesn’t seem relevant to me in deciding that because I think most people would agree that if this happened, that was likely not a trans woman, because that’s not how most trans women would behave in a locker room.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KSera said:

This is a big problem on many fronts right now, including with this issue. All kinds of issues arise when ideology is more important then facts or consequences. 
 

 

I have zero idea if it did or didn’t happen. But this particular reason doesn’t seem relevant to me in deciding that because I think most people would agree that if this happened, that was likely not a trans woman, because that’s not how most trans women would behave in a locker room.

However, under Cali law ( self ID) there is no way to tell 'true' transexual from 'fake'. 

And there is no way for even women who believe TWAW to make sure the spa is woman-only under their own definitions. 

And the free market can't solve it, because it's illegal to discriminate between true and false. 

No female space. Not even any female + guaranteed TW space! I know the TWAW crowd don't give a shit about actual females, but surely they can at least see self ID is not great for real TW?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

The spa itself says they had no trans clients that day.

Just because there was no trans client DOES NOT mean there was no MAN in the women's area . The woman was not complaining about a trans person in the women's area, she was complaining about a man (which is what many of us thought in the first place) in the women's area. From what I can tell (I can't hear what the employee says) it was the man in the video (who didn't even see the person in question) who first mentioned that it could be a trans person. 

I can't really tell if the woman speaking was recording or if someone else was recording but it wasn't just the one woman who possibly posted the video. There was a small crowd of women there and the one woman trying to get her money back. Certainly if they could keep track of one trans client, they would have noticed a small crowd of women who were not members trying to stir up trouble.

In any case, there is no more proof of this article than there was of the original video. As a matter of fact, there seems to be less. And even if the video was a faked, self-ID  is still a legitimate concern for many women and we need to be able to discuss these concerns. 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, KidsHappen said:

Just because there was no trans client DOES NOT mean there was no MAN in the women's area . The woman was not complaining about a trans person in the women's area, she was complaining about a man (which is what many of us thought in the first place) in the women's area. From what I can tell (I can't hear what the employee says) it was the man in the video (who didn't even see the person in question) who first mentioned that it could be a trans person. 

I can't really tell if the woman speaking was recording or if someone else was recording but it wasn't just the one woman who possibly posted the video. There was a small crowd of women there and the one woman trying to get her money back. Certainly if they could keep track of one trans client, they would have noticed a small crowd of women who were not members trying to stir up trouble.

In any case, there is no more proof of this article than there was of the original video. As a matter of fact, there seems to be less. And even if the video was a faked, self-ID  is still a legitimate concern for many women and we need to be able to discuss these concerns. 

The important proof in the article is that the police believe there is no evidence of what was claimed to have happened. 

But we don't know the truth which is why <let's say it together!> don't fall for viral videos! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

The important proof in the article is that the police believe there is no evidence of what was claimed to have happened. 

But we don't know the truth which is why <let's say it together!> don't fall for viral videos! 

 

That's not my understanding of the article you posted. My understanding is that there was no trans person there but not necessarily that there was no man there. I don't see that they addressed this possibility at all which is the issue most women seem concerned with. 

So far every viral video I have seen has turned out to be legitimate. I am not saying that there have not been fake videos, just that I haven't seen any so in my experience they can be trusted until proved otherwise. Of course, YMMV.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, KidsHappen said:

That's not my understanding of the article you posted. My understanding is that there was no trans person there but not necessarily that there was no man there. I don't see that they addressed this possibility at all which is the issue most women seem concerned with. 

So far every viral video I have seen has turned out to be legitimate. I am not saying that there have not been fake videos, just that I haven't seen any so in my experience they can be trusted until proved otherwise. Of course, YMMV.

Did you see any of those videos from early in the pandemic where people infiltrated hospitals to try to prove that there was no pandemic? 

The Project Veritas videos are well known for being crap. 

I'm not talking about the viral videos of kittens or someone saving a dog or a kid. I mean the ones that go viral because they shore up some political point. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

The important proof in the article is that the police believe there is no evidence of what was claimed to have happened. 

Say the male split after realizing things were getting serious.  What evidence would you expect the police to find?  One assumes they don't have security cameras in the locker room or any other room where everyone is supposed to be naked.

If the various women in the room stated they saw a naked male's sex organ openly displayed in that room, none of their statements matter?  I mean, I could agree with you if it was one woman saying it happened and multiple other women, also present, saying it didn't.  Is that how it went down?

There's often no "evidence" other than a woman's statement when men commit offenses against women.  So is the standard of evidence now "we don't have proof other than a female's statement, so this didn't happen"?

Edited by SKL
  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, SKL said:

Say the male split after realizing things were getting serious.  What evidence would you expect the police to find?  One assumes they don't have security cameras in the locker room or any other room where everyone is supposed to be naked.

If the various women in the room stated they saw a naked male's sex organ openly displayed in that room, none of their statements matter?  I mean, I could agree with you if it was one woman saying it happened and multiple other women, also present, saying it didn't.  Is that how it went down?

There's often no "evidence" other than a woman's statement when men commit offenses against women.  So is the standard of evidence now "we don't have proof other than a female's statement, so this didn't happen"?

It was in a public place so the evidence would be other people who were there. 

And who is this woman? She has an anonymous Twitter account. 

Why are we talking about "standard of evidence" here? It's a viral video. None of us know what actually happened. 

Stopped getting played. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

It was in a public place so the evidence would be other people who were there. 

And who is this woman? She has an anonymous Twitter account. 

Why are we talking about "standard of evidence" here? It's a viral video. None of us know what actually happened. 

Stopped getting played. 

 

You brought up the evidence discussion by saying the police say they didn't find any.

I don't know if this happened or not, and neither do you.  But you've spent this entire thread, and others, shooting down other people's views / ideas without proposing any real support for your own, if you even have any.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

It was in a public place so the evidence would be other people who were there. 

And who is this woman? She has an anonymous Twitter account. 

Why are we talking about "standard of evidence" here? It's a viral video. None of us know what actually happened. 

Stopped getting played. 

 

Oh and I just read that ridiculous article you posted.  It is so extremely biased it isn't funny.  Also, ironically, the author of that article is anonymous.  LOL.  And you talk about others getting played.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'mon, an anonymous source says their neighbour's brother's FIL heard from a buddy who's a cop...there was NO MAN! 

Hilarious how some will place so much faith in the cops sometimes, even in a game of Whispers. 

Indecent exposure (even though an indicator of potentially escalated future offences) is rarely properly investigated and even more rarely prosecuted. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...