Banning ‘Woke’ Words in State Documents, Arkansas Governor Signs Executive Order

[Revoltingest]

Well I'm pretty sure you'll disagree with this, but a trans woman is not a woman.

And that is where you want discrimination,
ie, treating cis women as women, but trans
women as men.
Our disagreement lies in whether this is ethical
discrimination or not. Some discrimination is
ethical, eg, lending based on risk, employment
based on education, housing based on good
landlord references.

 

[icehorse]

Where's your data that we've all been waiting for? Can you show us evidence of an increase in violence against women using public rest rooms in states that have anti-discrimination bathroom laws?

Again, I know we're going to disagree, but I believe you are the one making the extraordinary claim, so providing extraordinarily good evidence is on you, not me.

Same deal. I change in a change stall.

I think this is what we call a "luxury belief" Since you are fortunate enough to have stalls in your locker rooms, it must not be a problem for all those women who do not.

 

[icehorse]

And that is where you want discrimination,
ie, treating cis women as women, but trans
women as men.
Our disagreement lies in whether this is ethical
discrimination or not.

Well, I no we disagree, but I think that if you want trans women to be afforded all the rights of women, then you are discriminating against women.

From what I can gather, you think it's better to negatively impact women than trans women?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Again, I know we're going to disagree, but I believe you are the one making the extraordinary claim, so providing extraordinarily good evidence is on you, not me.

You don't have any. Just say that.

Just assertions and handwaving when data is presented to you.

I think this is what we call a "luxury belief" Since you are fortunate enough to have stalls in your locker rooms, it must not be a problem for all those women who do not.

LOL Then hold a towel around yourself like everyone else. Or have someone hold it for you. Or change in a toilet stall. Stalls are pretty standard, as far as women's washrooms and locker rooms go.

Nice try though.

 

[fantome profane]

From what I can gather, you think it's better to negatively impact women than trans women?

If cis women were negatively impacted we would have a serious ethical dilemma. But there is no evidence that this is the case.

 

[Revoltingest]

...if you want trans women to be afforded all the rights of women, then you are discriminating against women.

That's illogical.

From what I can gather, you think it's better to negatively impact women than trans women?

I favor positive impact on all women, be they cis or trans.

 

[icehorse]

Just assertions and handwaving when data is presented to you.

I've responded to the data provided. It is NOT extraordinarily good data. It's skimpy, so-so data.

LOL Then hold a towel around yourself like everyone else. Or have someone hold it for you. Or change in a toilet stall. Stalls are pretty standard, as far as women's washrooms and locker rooms go.

Sure who cares about women's rights to privacy - those spoiled women!

 

[SkepticThinker]

Well, I no we disagree, but I think that if you want trans women to be afforded all the rights of women, then you are discriminating against women.

From what I can gather, you think it's better to negatively impact women than trans women?

Nobody is discriminating against me in allowing other people to have rights.

 

[icehorse]

If cis women were negatively impacted we would have a serious ethical dilemma. But there is no evidence that this is the case.

If you think I'm wrong, you need to get out more. There are LOTS of women who agree with me. But again, your team is the one making the extraordinary claim, so the research is on you, not me.

 

[icehorse]

That's illogical.

sadly, the current "solution" is zero-sum.

I favor positive impact on all women, be they cis or trans.

Hey! We share this goal!

 

[fantome profane]

There are LOTS of women who agree with me.

I am sure there are. But that doesn't mean they are right. There are lots of cis women, and cis men, who hold bigoted opinions.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I've responded to the data provided. It is NOT extraordinarily good data. It's skimpy, so-so data.

That was my response to your response.

You've not provided any data backing up your claims.

Sure who cares about women's rights to privacy - those spoiled women!

I didn't say any such thing. Try addressing what I said instead please.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If you think I'm wrong, you need to get out more. There are LOTS of women who agree with me. But again, your team is the one making the extraordinary claim, so the research is on you, not me.

Nope. It's your claim, you back it up.

I get out a LOT.

 

[fantome profane]

I get out a LOT.

Really?

What's it like?

 

[icehorse]

Nope. It's your claim, you back it up.

I get out a LOT.

Well, we're at loggerheads.

I'll put this a different way, but I'm pretty sure you'll still disagree:

Your team is making the implicit claims that allowing people who look like men into women's safe spaces does not put women at increased risk, nor does it infringe on womens' privacy.

I think those are extraordinary claims. Claims that defy common sense, and defy the stories I've heard from real, live women. This is also something you can go research, which I also know you will not do.

 

[icehorse]

I didn't say any such thing. Try addressing what I said instead please.

Which was in response to my concerns about privacy for women.

I based my conclusion about your stance based on this:

Then hold a towel around yourself like everyone else.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Really?

What's it like?

So-so.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Well, we're at loggerheads.

We're at the point where you're asked to back up your claims and just refuse to do so. We've hit this point a couple of times now, in this thread.

I'll put this a different way, but I'm pretty sure you'll still disagree:

Your team is making the implicit claims that allowing people who look like men into women's safe spaces does not put women at increased risk, nor does it infringe on womens' privacy.

No. You are claiming that "allowing people who look like men into women's safe spaces puts women at increased risk."

To that I say, there isn't any good evidence demonstrating that has or will happen. Do you have any? And apparently that means we're at loggerheads, because you refuse to provide any data that does back up your claim. Though we do have some data that shows your claim to be erroneous. But you don't like that data and you're going to stick to your guns.

To that, I also say that transwomen don't look like men.

And to that, I ask, how is it you think my privacy, as a woman, is being infringed upon by (continuing to) allow people to use the rest room they feel most comfortable in? To me, it's the same thing we've all been doing since we were born.

And the point that keeps coming up (and ignored) over and over is, how are we going to make sure people are in their "proper" rest room that matches their biological sex? It seems to me, that would be infringing upon their right to privacy.

I think those are extraordinary claims. Claims that defy common sense, and defy the stories I've heard from real, live women. This is also something you can go research, which I also know you will not do.

You're making a case you can't back up. So you cry "common sense" as though that's an argument for anything.

How am I supposed to "go research" stories that you claim "real, live women" have told you??

 

[SkepticThinker]

Which was in response to my concerns about privacy for women.

I based my conclusion about your stance based on this:

That's what we commonly do in change rooms when we're in a hurry or there are no stalls available.

 

[icehorse]

To that I say, there isn't any good evidence demonstrating that has or will happen. Do you have any?

How much do you need?

Honestly, I have a lot of evidence, but I can predict how you'll respond. You'll whine about my sources being "transphobic" or some such. Your team has repeatedly demonstrated an inability to separate the message from the messenger