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

[Dmmetler]

My kid attends a women's college that admits transwomen, as well as males into a very limited handful of graduate programs, and has some male faculty and employees. But they also do limit dormitories to natal females, and have designated women's restrooms and changing facilities and designated "all gender" restrooms, and a designated Men's restroom in public buildings. Basically, it's the island of the Amazons, it is set up for women and is focused on women's issues, and if you are male in any way, shape or form, you are the one who has to adapt, not the other way around. 

 

 

 

 

[ktgrok]

5 hours ago, Janeway said:

He/she has a penis. He/she does not belong in the female space. IF this person were really trans, I do not think he/she would be comfortable showing his/her penis in public. It should not be allowed. After he/she fully transitions, sure. But not while he/she carries a penis.

Curious...where does the person who has had top surgery, and has breasts, but not bottom surgery, so has a penis, go?

I can't imagine the men's area would be safe for someone with large female breasts. I understand why the women's area is not welcoming of someone with a penis. 

So?

[LMD]

4 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Curious...where does the person who has had top surgery, and has breasts, but not bottom surgery, so has a penis, go?

I can't imagine the men's area would be safe for someone with large female breasts. I understand why the women's area is not welcoming of someone with a penis. 

So?

So, a male person is uncomfortable in the male section. Why should the solution be to make a large percentage of the females in the female section feel uncomfortable or unsafe?

Why is males problems with other males a problem for females to solve.

[Melissa Louise]

15 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Curious...where does the person who has had top surgery, and has breasts, but not bottom surgery, so has a penis, go?

I can't imagine the men's area would be safe for someone with large female breasts. I understand why the women's area is not welcoming of someone with a penis. 

So?

Having breasts is not a reason for a male to use female only space. In the case of the spa, there was a mixed sex area appropriate for this hypothetical person. 

[KSera]

1 minute ago, LMD said:

So, a male person is uncomfortable in the male section. Why should the solution be to make a large percentage of the females in the female section feel uncomfortable or unsafe?

Why is males problems with other males a problem for females to solve.

I took it to mean that Katie was acknowledging that neither place was a good solution. Perhaps I read it differently. I don’t think there’s a good answer for that scenario. That’s where I come back to needing a mixed sex area. In the long run, there are deeper things that would help a lot, but I don’t see them happening right now. 

[ktgrok]

2 minutes ago, KSera said:

I took it to mean that Katie was acknowledging that neither place was a good solution. Perhaps I read it differently. I don’t think there’s a good answer for that scenario. That’s where I come back to needing a mixed sex area. In the long run, there are deeper things that would help a lot, but I don’t see them happening right now. 

Right, I didn't mean that person does belong in the women's area, I said I understood why that would not be a welcoming area for them. And as for the mens area, it might not only be unwelcoming, but actually unsafe. 

Which leaves me wondering where? this spa did have a mixed area, but I meant more in general. 

A similar issue comes up with say, restrooms. If we say you have to use the one that matches your birth certificate, or even genitalia, that leaves ftm trans people using the women's room...and most of the people creating these rules don't want a person who for all intents and purposes looks male using the women's room.

I really have no dog in this fight, as I could care less personally if I see a penis in a women's area, but I find the logistics confusing. 

[LMD]

The good solution is either 

a) males should accept other non-conforming males.

b) those males who feel unsafe should find and fight for their own separate provision, just like women had to.

Or perhaps in the case of optional luxuries like visiting this specific spa.

c) miss out. We can't all, always, have everything we want.

 

Either way, the 'solution' isn't to make male feelings the responsibility of women, to give up their rights, comfort, safety or dignity to soothe. There cannot be a reasonable compromise while women's feelings are ignored.

[Melissa Louise]

Bathrooms - single sex female/mixed sex/single sex male.

OR

Individual, self enclosed lockable toilets with a wash basin inside, proper doors. 

 

 

[ktgrok]

5 minutes ago, LMD said:

The good solution is either 

a) males should accept other non-conforming males.

b) those males who feel unsafe should find and fight for their own separate provision, just like women had to.

Or perhaps in the case of optional luxuries like visiting this specific spa.

c) miss out. We can't all, always, have everything we want.

 

Either way, the 'solution' isn't to make male feelings the responsibility of women, to give up their rights, comfort, safety or dignity to soothe. There cannot be a reasonable compromise while women's feelings are ignored.

At no point have I said their feelings should be ignored. That's not at all what I'm saying, or asking. I have now said in both my posts that I understand why using the women's area is not a viable option. So why are you continuing to respond as if that is what I'm saying?

3 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Bathrooms - single sex female/mixed sex/single sex male.

OR

Individual, self enclosed lockable toilets with a wash basin inside, proper doors. 

 

 

Thank you for answering. 

[LMD]

You said you understand why that would "not be a welcoming area for them" ie, the male persons feelings centred. 

Sorry, I know I'm being blunt. That's not meant to be an attack, I'm just trying to say plainly what women are being required to do.

These hypotheticals have been asked and answered many times before. Third spaces would be a good solution for many reasons, including non-trans reasons (like parents with opposite sex youngsters).

This case wasn't a grey area case, this male person wasn't perfectly passing, nice or vulnerable. This male person claiming a trans identity is a repeat sex offender.

If you want to solve another hypothetical, what about the women currently locked in prison cells with intact male rapists who claim a trans identity? Because the prison system solution is to hand out the morning after pill...

[Condessa]

9 hours ago, Tanaqui said:

So... it wasn't a hoax, but also nobody was trans and as a result at least two people WERE hurt (stabbed) in anti-trans violence connected to this video.

Did you read the whole article?  The person was trans, according to both the legal definition in the state it occurred and the generally proposed standard by trans activists.  Having abused the rights accorded based on that status does not change whether the standard was met.

[KSera]

32 minutes ago, LMD said:

If you want to solve another hypothetical, what about the women currently locked in prison cells with intact male rapists who claim a trans identity?

I think prisons are actually an easier one to solve than most any other scenario, because they know the biological sex and anatomy of the people they are dealing with. I think having three different areas of a prison would make most sense and not be nearly as difficult to implement as it would for public changing areas and restrooms. Melissa’s suggestions for public facilities are the same two I would come up with, but enforcement is just about impossible for the second option, IMO. And the first is impractical in some scenarios where they just wouldn’t have space to provide enough individual facilities. I guess a combo of those two solutions might be the best we could do for now. Who would pay for every place to put in new restrooms, though? I guess it could be thought of similar to the ADA, just a requirement for keeping things fair and accessible to everyone 🤷‍♀️. This does make everything more complicated for those who have been trans for decades.

[LMD]

Sure, I agree with you. The prison and government officials don't agree with us though.

We can't solve for every hypothetical scenario, but every scenario can come to a compromise if all parties are respected.

At the moment that is not happening, women being locked in with rapists is the end of that line of thinking, and we are already there.

The first female public toilets were burned to the ground. Women have fought hard for those provisions, in many places they still are. I'm not saying it is an easy fix. What I am saying is that claiming women's labour is not an acceptable or respectful solution. Having boundaries is not hate.

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, LMD said:

Sure, I agree with you. The prison and government officials don't agree with us though.

We can't solve for every hypothetical scenario, but every scenario can come to a compromise if all parties are respected.

At the moment that is not happening, women being locked in with rapists is the end of that line of thinking, and we are already there.

The first female public toilets were burned to the ground. Women have fought hard for those provisions, in many places they still are. I'm not saying it is an easy fix. What I am saying is that claiming women's labour is not an acceptable or respectful solution. Having boundaries is not hate.

I might be misinterpreting tone, but I sense you are arguing with me, yet I've been agreeing with you throughout, so I'm confused.

[Melissa Louise]

4 hours ago, KSera said:

I think prisons are actually an easier one to solve than most any other scenario, because they know the biological sex and anatomy of the people they are dealing with. I think having three different areas of a prison would make most sense and not be nearly as difficult to implement as it would for public changing areas and restrooms. Melissa’s suggestions for public facilities are the same two I would come up with, but enforcement is just about impossible for the second option, IMO. And the first is impractical in some scenarios where they just wouldn’t have space to provide enough individual facilities. I guess a combo of those two solutions might be the best we could do for now. Who would pay for every place to put in new restrooms, though? I guess it could be thought of similar to the ADA, just a requirement for keeping things fair and accessible to everyone 🤷‍♀️. This does make everything more complicated for those who have been trans for decades.

The other way to deal with facilities like change rooms is open + female only. Works for sport too. 

[ktgrok]

8 hours ago, LMD said:

You said you understand why that would "not be a welcoming area for them" ie, the male persons feelings centred. 

 

It just flowed with the sentence. I could have ended the sentence and started a new one, centered on the women. 

The men's area isn't safe for them. And for the safety of women, the women's area is not a good option either. 

The point was, often I hear they are men, so need to use the mens area, but that's not really a viable option. And was asking about other viable options. 

6 hours ago, KSera said:

I might be misinterpreting tone, but I sense you are arguing with me, yet I've been agreeing with you throughout, so I'm confused.

Same. 

[Janeway]

11 hours ago, ktgrok said:

Curious...where does the person who has had top surgery, and has breasts, but not bottom surgery, so has a penis, go?

I can't imagine the men's area would be safe for someone with large female breasts. I understand why the women's area is not welcoming of someone with a penis. 

So?

I did not even know anyone did that! 

But I guess...I do not go to places where I show my naked body around and be okay with it just because everyone is of the same gender. I don't even see why anyone wants to. But, on that note, it would seem to me that if someone is trans and wants to put out the appearance of being a specific gender, that person would not want to go in to a place, naked, and show off the mixed gender parts.

[KSera]

4 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

The other way to deal with facilities like change rooms is open + female only. Works for sport too. 

I would want a solution that was fair for both male and female, and I don’t think this way would be as far as facilities go.  I think that could be a smart way to go to solve the sports problem though. That seems actually doable, also. 

[SKL]

3 hours ago, ktgrok said:

The point was, often I hear they are men, so need to use the mens area, but that's not really a viable option. And was asking about other viable options.

I don't understand why people keep saying this, when there was a third option at that spa for either/both sexes.  Why wasn't that enough?

I mean there aren't that many situations where everyone in the room knows what genitals you have down there.  This individual seems to have deliberately chosen this situation to make a statement or maybe to perv around.  Whichever it is, as others have said, it demands that females give up their boundaries.

Our prez has vowed to push our high schools to allow trans people in girls' sports.  Once again it's on girls to suck it up and be taken over by males.

As a 50+ woman with a good memory, it's sad to see these steps backward after so much work was done to get where we are.

[KSera]

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

I mean there aren't that many situations where everyone in the room knows what genitals you have down there.  This individual seems to have deliberately chosen this situation to make a statement or maybe to perv around.  Whichever it is, as others have said, it demands that females give up their boundaries.

This does seem one of the situations where the rules could be clearly stated to avoid this (unless someone flagrantly violates them). With three areas available, there doesn’t seem to be a reason for this to happen. This is a pretty specific scenario, though. 

[Melissa Louise]

5 hours ago, KSera said:

I would want a solution that was fair for both male and female, and I don’t think this way would be as far as facilities go.  I think that could be a smart way to go to solve the sports problem though. That seems actually doable, also. 

Then males and male identifying people are going to have to come up with a solution, and stop lobbing the problem over the net to females. 

Honestly, I get where LMD is coming from with the sheer frustration  (generally, not at you) that females are expected to be everyone's mums and look after everyone else. 

 

[Melissa Louise]

8 hours ago, ktgrok said:

It just flowed with the sentence. I could have ended the sentence and started a new one, centered on the women. 

The men's area isn't safe for them. And for the safety of women, the women's area is not a good option either. 

The point was, often I hear they are men, so need to use the mens area, but that's not really a viable option. And was asking about other viable options. 

Same. 

Why isn't it viable?

Gay men, effeminate men, disabled men, young men - all males who are sometimes not safe in male provision - should they also be in female spaces? 

This is an inter-male problem. Male homophobia, male transphobia, male violence. Towards other males.

They really need to sort it out between themselves and stop expecting females to be cleaner-uppers and chief validators. 

 

[Melissa Louise]

4 hours ago, KSera said:

This does seem one of the situations where the rules could be clearly stated to avoid this (unless someone flagrantly violates them). With three areas available, there doesn’t seem to be a reason for this to happen. This is a pretty specific scenario, though. 

The spa would be breaking the law, as I understand it, if they 'made the rules clear'. 

[KSera]

1 minute ago, Melissa Louise said:

The spa would be breaking the law, as I understand it, if they 'made the rules clear'. 

If that’s the case, that’s where some of this has to start, but I feel like we’re a long way away from being able to put some of the genie back in the bottle on this issue. I think the fact that trans issues have had so much loud opposition by the same groups that are anti-gay has made the situation much worse, because people generally on the side of equal rights for all people have lumped this issue into the same bucket as gay rights issues, and there’s a whole lot more nuance here that needs to be considered, and  the affirm immediately no matter what approach is causing real harm to many young people. I know that’s completely unintentional for most people doing the affirming but it’s happening nonetheless, and until it’s spoken about more openly and frankly, it’s going to take longer before anything can be done to shift the current course. 

[Melissa Louise]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

If that’s the case, that’s where some of this has to start, but I feel like we’re a long way away from being able to put some of the genie back in the bottle on this issue. I think the fact that trans issues have had so much loud opposition by the same groups that are anti-gay has made the situation much worse, because people generally on the side of equal rights for all people have lumped this issue into the same bucket as gay rights issues, and there’s a whole lot more nuance here that needs to be considered, and  the affirm immediately no matter what approach is causing real harm to many young people. I know that’s completely unintentional for most people doing the affirming but it’s happening nonetheless, and until it’s spoken about more openly and frankly, it’s going to take longer before anything can be done to shift the current course. 

Oh, I think it's all a done deal at this point. It's really hard, if not impossible, to wind back self ID in law. 

I agree nothing much will shift the current course. All progressive media ran with the 'don't believe the (Black) woman because she's got the wrong politics/hoax' line and very few have walked it back.

Not a hoax. 

Not a surprise. 

Also not a surprise, the general lack of mea culpas.

I'm hoping the next generation will remember the principle of balancing competing rights. But ya know, not holding my breath. The new misogyny seems to be entirely too comfy. 

 

 

[BusyMom5]

I think we need to stop and ask ourselves what discrimination is, and if this fits the definition.  Often in these types of discussions,  people bring up pronouns, passing, etc.  I think we first need to stop acting like surgery or drugs changes a persons sex.  It doesn't.   It changes how they look (present,  pass), but nothing can ever truly change your sex, its coded into your DNA.  Transwomen are not biological women and they never will be, no matter when they start drugs, what surgeries they have, or what they look like.  They are not trapped in the wrong body, they are unhappy with the body that their genes are coded for- but it is the correct body!  The genes didn't mess up!   We should not be able to just go change that on a birth certificate or driver's license- it HAS a meaning.  I do think you should be able to remove the designation to X if you do not want to be referred to as your given sex, but the entire world cannot just forget that it exists.  You don't get to appropriate another's term- female- just because you want to.  That is exactly what this is.  Appropriation.   Call yourself a transwomen- that's what your definition is.  And recognize that by choosing that, there are some safe spaces you cannot go.  You are not a biological female.  The whole "treatment " and the words used need to change.  I cannot believe that it's mentally healthy to believe you can change yourself through drugs and surgery, and I think its malpractice to do those things, particularly on young people with mental health issues.  

I do not wish harm towards transpeople, I don't think they should be denied housing or not be able to buy clothes in certain stores, etc.  I do think in prisons and college dorms- there should be a separate floor for trans-identifying people.  They should not get to mix in with female inmates. In segregated bathing/swimming areas, even changing rooms and restrooms- that they should choose what would make biological women feel safer.  Its unfair to appropriate our term, then invade our spaces,  while claiming how feminine you are!  Thats misogyny 😉

 

[KSera]

9 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

All progressive media ran with the 'don't believe the (Black) woman because she's got the wrong politics/hoax' line and very few have walked it back.

I just looked again, and I see Pink News is the only non conservative outlet I see having published on this update, and they definitely didn't walk it back. To me their story still reads as this having been an incident of harassment of a trans woman, who, incidentally (at least they did include it at the end), has a long history of indecent exposure offenses, going back almost two decades.

[ktgrok]

36 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Then males and male identifying people are going to have to come up with a solution, and stop lobbing the problem over the net to females. 

Honestly, I get where LMD is coming from with the sheer frustration  (generally, not at you) that females are expected to be everyone's mums and look after everyone else. 

 

 

29 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

 

They really need to sort it out between themselves and stop expecting females to be cleaner-uppers and chief validators. 

 

So, I, as a woman, and the people on this board, as women, should not care about potential solutions that work for everyone, or at least are safe for everyone, and we should just say, "too bad, so sad, we don't care about your problems because you have a penis"? 

There is no reason that only men should care, or want to discuss the potential issues and solutions. 

[Melissa Louise]

2 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

 

So, I, as a woman, and the people on this board, as women, should not care about potential solutions that work for everyone, or at least are safe for everyone, and we should just say, "too bad, so sad, we don't care about your problems because you have a penis"? 

There is no reason that only men should care, or want to discuss the potential issues and solutions. 

I'm yet to see the solutions that acknowledge women are more than a safe space for GNC men. 

 

[Melissa Louise]

4 minutes ago, KSera said:

I just looked again, and I see Pink News is the only non conservative outlet I see having published on this update, and they definitely didn't walk it back. To me their story still reads as this having been an incident of harassment of a trans woman, who, incidentally (at least they did include it at the end), has a long history of indecent exposure offenses, going back almost two decades.

Right. 

The Guardian largely did the same. 

Slate added an update to their hoax story. 

 

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

The Guardian largely did the same. 

Slate added an update to their hoax story. 

Interesting those ones didn't come up in my search, yet lots of out there conspiracy theory and right wing sites I've never visited do. I use DuckDuckGo so my results don't depend on what sites I usually visit, so I guess that's probably why.

[LMD]

To Kt and Ksera, 

I'm not trying to be argumentative but yes, I am so frustrated and I'm not tiptoeing around with kind language.

I'm frustrated that these women were victimised by a male sex offender, too many of us have been there.

I'm frustrated that the law forced the spa to allow that male sex offender into the section where women are naked.

I'm frustrated that the mansplainer tried to gaslight her about her very recent experience of being sexually harassed by a male sex offender. 

I'm so frustrated that she was painted as a liar, inciting hate etc. She didn't make this a trans issue, she said 'a man' - the law, the spa, the mansplainer & the media made this a trans issue and vilified her. She wasn't the right kind of victim so eff her right? What happened to believe women? 

 

And now, NOW, she's been completely proved right. It was a repeat sex offender, a male who identifies as trans. This is exactly what they campaigned for.  The government was warned about consequences like this, but those (largely) women were written off as bigots.

No retractions though, no apologies. One of the first posts here yesterday STILL painted her as being responsible for male violence. A female victim of a male sex offender is at fault when other males fight each other?!

This spa was legally required to be inclusive to a male sex offender, and allowed women to be victimised and excluded.

So, yes, I'm frustrated that the discussion is still the same hand wringing 'it's so difficult and complicated' - it's really only complicated if you don't think males should hear the word no. In these specific, sex segregated, women only spaces where women are unclothed or very vulnerable, females feelings come first - anything less and you exclude some women, then males have all the spaces and some women have none. I really don't think that's too much to ask.

I am angry, I'm furious that we're here, I'm incandescent about the prison situation, and I'm frankly baffled that other women aren't. 

[WildflowerMom]

1 hour ago, LMD said:

To Kt and Ksera, 

I'm not trying to be argumentative but yes, I am so frustrated and I'm not tiptoeing around with kind language.

I'm frustrated that these women were victimised by a male sex offender, too many of us have been there.

I'm frustrated that the law forced the spa to allow that male sex offender into the section where women are naked.

I'm frustrated that the mansplainer tried to gaslight her about her very recent experience of being sexually harassed by a male sex offender. 

I'm so frustrated that she was painted as a liar, inciting hate etc. She didn't make this a trans issue, she said 'a man' - the law, the spa, the mansplainer & the media made this a trans issue and vilified her. She wasn't the right kind of victim so eff her right? What happened to believe women? 

 

And now, NOW, she's been completely proved right. It was a repeat sex offender, a male who identifies as trans. This is exactly what they campaigned for.  The government was warned about consequences like this, but those (largely) women were written off as bigots.

No retractions though, no apologies. One of the first posts here yesterday STILL painted her as being responsible for male violence. A female victim of a male sex offender is at fault when other males fight each other?!

This spa was legally required to be inclusive to a male sex offender, and allowed women to be victimised and excluded.

So, yes, I'm frustrated that the discussion is still the same hand wringing 'it's so difficult and complicated' - it's really only complicated if you don't think males should hear the word no. In these specific, sex segregated, women only spaces where women are unclothed or very vulnerable, females feelings come first - anything less and you exclude some women, then males have all the spaces and some women have none. I really don't think that's too much to ask.

I am angry, I'm furious that we're here, I'm incandescent about the prison situation, and I'm frankly baffled that other women aren't. 

Thanks for this.  I wrote something earlier and deleted it before I posted.   I’m sick and tired of catering to men, all men.  

[KSera]

I’d like to give an eloquent answer, but really I’m just feeling worn out on the topic and like it’s futile to hope to fix it even though I think the current state of things is messed up. Maybe later I will have the energy to elaborate, but reading this Guardian article about the spa incident was so depressing I’m out of ability to talk about it right now. As long as this this the way these discussions are divided up, and the way the media reports on them, it seems hopeless: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/28/anti-trans-video-los-angeles-protest-wi-spa

Now that this issue has gotten so wrapped up with right wing, conspiracy theory, anti gay, Q Anon, etc kind of crap, it feels like any hope for reasonable discussion and nuance is long gone and now we’re stuck with what we have. I’m angry about that and wish the hate mongers had stayed away so there would have been some hope of a better outcome than where we have landed. At this point, it seems to me that the most likely changes will come way down the road, via people who are young now, but who have been and/or will be hurt by the current ideology and who will eventually lobby for change. That’s a long way off though and comes at the expense of a lot of pain and loss for a lot of those people first. 

[Melissa Louise]

Wow. 

Well at least you're honest. 

This isn't high school. You don't 'pick a side' because you like some people better than other. 

What's disrespectful is thinking that your personal feelings about others somehow have any bearing on the truth of matters. 

The people you don't like here have done a hell of a lot more research than you, and at this point, are more aligned with growing medical consensus than the people you like. 

Shame on you for stirring up trouble and misinformation to 'own' others. You have a lot of learning to do on this issue. 

[Idalou]

18 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Wow. 

Well at least you're honest. 

This isn't high school. You don't 'pick a side' because you like some people better than other. 

What's disrespectful is thinking that your personal feelings about others somehow have any bearing on the truth of matters. 

The people you don't like here have done a hell of a lot more research than you, and at this point, are more aligned with growing medical consensus than the people you like. 

Shame on you for stirring up trouble and misinformation to 'own' others. You have a lot of learning to do on this issue. 

She was being honest, and you chose to be very ungracious and condescending. This board is very perplexing.

[Melissa Louise]

25 minutes ago, Idalou said:

She was being honest, and you chose to be very ungracious and condescending. This board is very perplexing.

She admitted to trolling. Damn right I'm not feeling gracious. 

Edited September 5, 2021 by Melissa Louise

[LMD]

See, I'm also so very frustrated that left wing feminists have been trying to have this conversation for, oh, 30 years. And have definitely tried hard for the last 10 years to raise the alarm re current issues.

Can you guess what happened to them?

It's only now that the big scary right have taken notice that suddenly people are seeing the nuance and wanting a conversation. Convenient. Even on this board the conversation was very difficult even 5 years ago. Blaming right wing hate mongers is a cop out, the right wing is reactionary because the left let it get out of hand and tried extraordinarily hard to shut down any discussion. No one is covered in glory here (except the Cassandras who tried to warn us), and still, as always, women pay the price.

 

Signed, not American, not right wing, not interested in the partisan blame game.

Edited September 5, 2021 by LMD

[Melissa Louise]

7 minutes ago, LMD said:

 

 

Signed, not American, not right wing, not interested in the partisan blame game.

Thank you. 

This is a developed nation issue, not an American issue.

Mapping parochial politics onto it is ignorant. Countries like Finland (not widely known as a bastion of American Republicanism) are at the forefront of pulling back from the medical and social malpractice that has been taking place. 

Nobody's 'side' is ever infallible. 

[KSera]

14 minutes ago, LMD said:

It's only now that the big scary right have taken notice that suddenly people are seeing the nuance and wanting a conversation. Convenient. Even on this board the conversation was very difficult even 5 years ago. Blaming right wing hate mongers is a cop out, the right wing is reactionary because the left let it get out of hand and tried extraordinarily hard to shut down any discussion. No one is covered in glory here (except the Cassandras who tried to warn us), and still, as always, women pay the price.

I don't think it's the case that people are seeing nuance and wanting a conversation only now that the right is involved (haven't they been involved for a long time?) I recall this conversation being very difficult years ago. I've been glad to see more ability to have it this time. My point in mentioning hate mongers is that their entry into the discussion has indeed made it more difficult (surely you're not suggesting hate mongering is a good thing, right? I would think we both agree that's not helpful). This matters to me because this issue is not just theoretical to me; I know many young people personally affected by it, so I have no interest in which "side" it is that sorts this out, I just want progress to be made to improve where we have ended up. And like it or not, the loud entry into the conversation by angry far right wingers for whom this is just one more thing like anti gay marriage or anti vax stuff or whatever else is the issue du jour damages it immensely. That's what was so depressing about the Guardian article I shared. It was obvious they see this issue as a right vs left thing, and that is being played right into by the nature of the protests. And as long as that's the case, we're not going to make progress. And I'm interested in progress on this and not the continued propping up of scientifically unfounded ideology on one side and moral outrage-based opposition on the other. I'm against both of those things. I care about the actual people involved, and there seems to be very little of that right now, on either side.

[LMD]

I think portraying 'the right' as hate mongers and by implication 'the left' as kind, reasonable, respectful, open to discussion on this topic is very biased and ignorant of what's been happening to left wing feminists - especially lesbians - for the past decade. The right has actually been very late to the party, they (shamefully imo) ignored the issue as another 'left eating itself' joke that only affected useless women anyway 🙄

 

Eta - I don't know if you US citizens have any idea how insanely partisan you come across on everything. The whole world is not mapped perfectly onto US D vs R...

Edited September 5, 2021 by LMD

[Melissa Louise]

11 minutes ago, KSera said:

I don't think it's the case that people are seeing nuance and wanting a conversation only now that the right is involved (haven't they been involved for a long time?) I recall this conversation being very difficult years ago. I've been glad to see more ability to have it this time. My point in mentioning hate mongers is that their entry into the discussion has indeed made it more difficult (surely you're not suggesting hate mongering is a good thing, right? I would think we both agree that's not helpful). This matters to me because this issue is not just theoretical to me; I know many young people personally affected by it, so I have no interest in which "side" it is that sorts this out, I just want progress to be made to improve where we have ended up. And like it or not, the loud entry into the conversation by angry far right wingers for whom this is just one more thing like anti gay marriage or anti vax stuff or whatever else is the issue du jour damages it immensely. That's what was so depressing about the Guardian article I shared. It was obvious they see this issue as a right vs left thing, and that is being played right into by the nature of the protests. And as long as that's the case, we're not going to make progress. And I'm interested in progress on this and not the continued propping up of scientifically unfounded ideology on one side and moral outrage-based opposition on the other. I'm against both of those things. I care about the actual people involved, and there seems to be very little of that right now, on either side.

Yeah, the left haven't been very kind to those of us worried about women, and about our own kids. 

I have zero to do with the American right or the AU right, and wouldn't run to then for help on women's issues or evidence based medicine, but I sure as hell wouldn't be running to the left either. 

It's not my fault the left decided to leave a wide open goal for the right. The left should have had some flipping principles in the first place. 

The ONLY people I trust are the UK socialist feminists because they are the only group who appear to be a.in contact with material reality and b. prepared to discuss how to negotiate a clash of rights in good will while c. actually giving a toss about children and parents caught up in this. 

 

[KSera]

3 minutes ago, LMD said:

I think portraying 'the right' as hate mongers and by implication 'the left' as kind, reasonable, respectful, open to discussion on this topic is very biased and ignorant of what's been happening to left wing feminists - especially lesbians - for the past decade. The right has actually been very late to the party, they (shamefully imo) ignored the issue as another 'left eating itself' joke that only affected useless women anyway 🙄

I'm well aware of the history of the discussion. I've been listening in for a long time (and was listening as one leaning right when I first started listening in). I don't mean the right in general are hate mongers, I mean the particular groups participating in protests and involving themselves in this. It's coming from the same place that anti-gay stuff comes from. That is not helpful. The left has been terrible on this issue as well. People have taken strong positions without really understanding the issues as well, and thinking that they are being helpful and supporting people by taking that position. I hold medical and mental health professionals highly responsible for all of this as well.

[KSera]

1 minute ago, Melissa Louise said:

It's not my fault the left decided to leave a wide open goal for the right.

I feel like my point about this part of it isn't coming across clearly. That may be true that the left has done that, but with my interest being material in figuring out how can progress in a better direction actually be made, it means that in the US, the nature of the discourse on this coming from the right is anti-trans in a way that makes it extremely hard for anything to improve. It might be that the left "deserves" it, but I don't really care in this case who deserves what. I want to see some changes, and I fear that become less and less likely the more these protests are clearly religiously and politically motivated.

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, KSera said:

I feel like my point about this part of it isn't coming across clearly. That may be true that the left has done that, but with my interest being material in figuring out how can progress in a better direction actually be made, it means that in the US, the nature of the discourse on this coming from the right is anti-trans in a way that makes it extremely hard for anything to improve. It might be that the left "deserves" it, but I don't really care in this case who deserves what. I want to see some changes, and I fear that become less and less likely the more these protests are clearly religiously and politically motivated.

If you think progress on this issue is going to come from the Dems, I think you'll be disappointed. The only progress is coming through women self-funding legal actions. 

Just yesterday a Black social worker in charge of child safeguarding at the Tavistock (gender clinic) was awarded damages. She was a whistle blower about children being endangered by the clinic, and the courts found she should be awarded damages because of the detriment to her career she faced as a result. 

Those brave women (incidentally, in the UK, all WOC) are the only people moving things forward in anything like a positive direction, and they are reviled by Dems. 

[KSera]

15 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Those brave women (incidentally, in the UK, all WOC) are the only people moving things forward in anything like a positive direction, and they are reviled by Dems. 

This is true. I've been clear I think the left is totally screwed up on this, and they treat women trying to speak up about it horribly. This may be another case where the particular political climate in the US is relevant to what I'm trying to say. In this country, that's not likely to happen that way. And if it did happen from the right wing groups instigating it, we're in trouble, because they're the same people who also want to take rights away from gay people. So, if one happens, the other is likely to follow, if it comes only from the right. The left needs to change on this in order for it to get better.

Eta: I think it might be relevant for me to make clear that I’m not a Republican or a Democrat. I think people might be making assumptions that are coloring their impressions.

Edited September 6, 2021 by KSera

[Melissa Louise]

2 minutes ago, KSera said:

This is true. I've been clear I think the left is totally screwed up on this, and they treat women trying to speak up about it horribly. This may be another case where the particular political climate in the US is relevant to what I'm trying to say. In this country, that's not likely to happen that way. And if it did happen from the right wing groups instigating it, we're in trouble, because they're the same people who also want to take rights away from gay people. So, if one happens, the other is likely to follow, if it comes only from the right. The left needs to change on this in order for it to get better.

This whole thing is OF the non-materialist left. From France to the US and then, because the US is culturally dominant, to other Western nations. 

It's their baby, and to try to tackle it from the left results in (literal) expulsion. 

I can't even find words to describe the feelings of utter betrayal. 

[KSera]

I realize this might seem unrealistically optimistic of me, but as strong and unmoving as the current view is on the left, I still feel like they are teachable. I feel like the wish is actually to do the right thing, but they got the wrong idea of what the right thing is. It’s true that this is so ingrained that it’s hard to see how people let go of their current thinking on it.

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, KSera said:

I realize this might seem unrealistically optimistic of me, but as strong and unmoving as the current view is on the left, I still feel like they are teachable. I feel like the wish is actually to do the right thing, but they got the wrong idea of what the right thing is. It’s true that this is so ingrained that it’s hard to see how people let go of their current thinking on it.

As long as people want to 'own' the people they don't like, and won't stop to consider 'impure' facts,  nothing will change. 

 

[KSera]

11 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

As long as people want to 'own' the people they don't like, and won't stop to consider 'impure' facts,  nothing will change. 

 

True. This is the case on both “sides”. I don’t see this as a political issue at all myself, though. I think it’s more appropriately approached as a medical (and mental health) issue, though things like bathrooms and all that are social issues, which tends to bring people’s politics into it. As far as @Ordinary Shoesposts, while I disagreed with her take throughout, she sounds open to learning now, and I’m more interested in helping her do that than on coming down on her for being wrong. Because again, I’m more interested in change than in one “side” or the other, and I think small conversations like these, on a wide scale, are how inroads might finally be made.  It’s kind of like when an anti vaxer decides to get the Covid vaccine—I’m not going to then berate them for how stupid they were not to have gotten it to that point. 

Edited September 6, 2021 by KSera
Grammar