Corollary to Transgender Issues: strategies to stop the violence

[icehorse]

That's still false and as we have told you that ends up making victims out of cis women who some truly nasty people decide doesn't look feminine enough.

I don't give a hoot what "you've told me". I do NOT play intersectionality games. I will however listen to logic.

So, I understand that some cis-women don't look very feminine. That's a problem to be solved. But it could be solved by making more single use rest rooms. Which, again, avoids making the current situation worse for the vast majority of women.

 

[Quintessence]

Great, now women who don't look woman enough are a "problem" to be solved. For $#@%'s sake. It's bad enough to go on about this non-existent "issue" of bathroom violence.

Just stop.

 

[fantome profane]

So, I understand that some cis-women don't look very feminine. That's a problem to be solved.

What???

How is that a problem? And how do you propose to solve it?

Maybe just leave people alone.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't give a hoot what "you've told me". I do NOT play intersectionality games. I will however listen to logic.

So, I understand that some cis-women don't look very feminine. That's a problem to be solved. But it could be solved by making more single use rest rooms. Which, again, avoids making the current situation worse for the vast majority of women.

What worse situation? Several countries and places have unisex restrooms and it's not a problem.
And you are not listening to logic. Not at all. This is not an intersectionality game, it's real life for many cis women who have to deal with and suffer the consequences from people who share in your "concerns."

 

[Soandso]

You're still not getting my point. Let me try again. The issue is making it NORMAL for people who look like men - and mostly that means non-trans men! - to go into women's safe spaces. Sadly, men assault women a lot. This just makes it easier for MEN to do so.

I still don't get your point... No one is advocating for this to be normal. If they were, then maybe I might see your point, but it feels like you are worried about a super rare occurrence. If we had numbers to look at, then we could actually have something tangible to talk about

Maybe you could describe more clearly the ties between this

And this

Because what the issue IS at hand is trans people using the bathroom of the gender they associate with. As far as I'm aware, they aren't any more prone to bad behavior than anyone else. Instead of punishing all trans people and forcing the lady above into mens restrooms or forcing her into mens prisons if she breaks the law... Ehhh. That seems more dangerous to me than the prospect that she's gonna assault someone in a bathroom. Sure, we could have a trans person who doesn't pass well in the women's restrooms, but why should we assume worse of her than the lady above? Because the one above looks more feminine? I don't get it

 

[Twilight Hue]

So is policing the issue here?

It's keeping things truthful and not forcing people to accept or comply with something that is not entirely true.

Forcing identification of someone as a male or female vs it's natural definition and sports inequalities being prime examples.

 

[crossfire]

It's keeping things truthful and not forcing people to accept or comply with something that is not entirely true.

Forcing identification of someone as a male or female vs it's natural definition and sports inequalities being prime examples.

I have faith that the sports world will employ their sportsmanship and eventually figure it all out in a sportsmanlike manner.

When you mention natural definition, are you referring to strictly biological definition, or are you including societal gender norms in it as well?

In your previous post, you mentioned making concessions instead of forcing.

Stop forcing issues on people and look for concessions.

What sort of concessions? Is calling someone by their preferred pronoun a concession?

 

[Orbit]

You're still not getting my point. Let me try again. The issue is making it NORMAL for people who look like men - and mostly that means non-trans men! - to go into women's safe spaces. Sadly, men assault women a lot. This just makes it easier for MEN to do so.

This is off topic for this thread, which is about how to reduce violence against transgender people. Spew your misguided views on your own anti-trans threads,

 

[icehorse]

This is off topic for this thread, which is about how to reduce violence against transgender people. Spew your misguided views on your own anti-trans threads,

Sorry, pro-women is not the same as anti-trans, despite what the TAs have led you to believe.

There is a third path: find ways to protect trans people that do not degrade the safety and privacy of all women.

 

[icehorse]

I still don't get your point... No one is advocating for this to be normal. If they were, then maybe I might see your point, but it feels like you are worried about a super rare occurrence. If we had numbers to look at, then we could actually have something tangible to talk about

I think this is a useful way to look at this topic!

First: There aren't that many trans people, they are a small percentage of the population.

Second: There are a small number of men who have taken advantage of these situations. Male prisoners have declared themselves trans-women, been moved to women's prisons, and assaulted female prisoners. The same has happened in women's shelters. And in women's locker rooms. Lesbian-only gatherings have been disrupted by trans women. Lesbians who do not want to date trans women get "canceled".

Yes, I agree that the number of occurrences has - so far - been small. But so what??? Allowing trans women into women's only spaces negatively impacts ALL women. So how do we do the math? From a utilitarian perspective, it would seem that we should not adversely impact hundreds of millions of women - even a little bit - to accommodate a tiny number of trans women.

If you do some internet searches you'll find that trans people DO get attacked. It's a real problem and I haven't seen anyone on this board deny it. I'm not denying it. But you'll also find women who are adversely affected by allowing men (and trans women), into women's only spaces.

Here's just one article:

What About Transgender Women in Women's Shelters?

Ask yourself this: why did we create women's safe spaces in the first place?

 

[Viker]

I think this is a useful way to look at this topic!

First: There aren't that many trans people, they are a small percentage of the population.

Second: There are a small number of men who have taken advantage of these situations. Male prisoners have declared themselves trans-women, been moved to women's prisons, and assaulted female prisoners. The same has happened in women's shelters. And in women's locker rooms. Lesbian-only gatherings have been disrupted by trans women. Lesbians who do not want to date trans women get "canceled".

Yes, I agree that the number of occurrences has - so far - been small. But so what??? Allowing trans women into women's only spaces negatively impacts ALL women. So how do we do the math? From a utilitarian perspective, it would seem that we should not adversely impact hundreds of millions of women - even a little bit - to accommodate a tiny number of trans women.

If you do some internet searches you'll find that trans people DO get attacked. It's a real problem and I haven't seen anyone on this board deny it. I'm not denying it. But you'll also find women who are adversely affected by allowing men (and trans women), into women's only spaces.

Here's just one article:

What About Transgender Women in Women's Shelters?

Ask yourself this: why did we create women's safe spaces in the first place?

And still, when I express concern about being forced to use a men's restroom and not feeling safe, it means absolutely nothing to many people.

Single use/gender neutral restrooms are probably the best, maybe the only viable, option.

There are LGBTQ homeless shelters. But mostly only in larger cities like mine.

 

[Soandso]

Second: There are a small number of men who have taken advantage of these situations. Male prisoners have declared themselves trans-women, been moved to women's prisons, and assaulted female prisoners.

Two questions. Was sexual assault prevalent before they got there? It seems to me that if rape is a normality in prison, THAT is the issue here

Second question: how many times has this happened?

The same has happened in women's shelters. And in women's locker rooms.

Evidence, please

Lesbian-only gatherings have been disrupted by trans women.

Can trans women not be attracted to women? If they are, that makes them lesbians

Lesbians who do not want to date trans women get "canceled".

No one is forcing anyone to date trans people... comon

Yes, I agree that the number of occurrences has - so far - been small. But so what???

So what? So then we don't take huge action that negatively impacts people's lives based on slippery slope fallacies

Allowing trans women into women's only spaces negatively impacts ALL women.

No it doesnt

So how do we do the math? From a utilitarian perspective, it would seem that we should not adversely impact hundreds of millions of women - even a little bit - to accommodate a tiny number of trans women.

With that logic, we should eliminate any minority group because it inconveniences the majority group. The strong do what they like and the weak suffer what they must, right?

If you do some internet searches you'll find that trans people DO get attacked. It's a real problem and I haven't seen anyone on this board deny it. I'm not denying it. But you'll also find women who are adversely affected by allowing men (and trans women), into women's only spaces.

Just like white people who were adversely affected by being subjected to having to see black people kissing in public, which is why it used to be illegal

 

[icehorse]

Can trans women not be attracted to women? If they are, that makes them lesbians

No, because trans women are NOT women. So think about what you're saying here: If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a man with a penis, who happens to be wearing a dress, can be a lesbian????

 

[icehorse]

No it doesnt

Go find a bunch of women in the real world and ask them how they would feel if men with penises were naked in their locker rooms and watching them disrobe. I have asked, and overwhelming the women I've talked to would feel unsafe and feel like their privacy has been invaded.

With that logic, we should eliminate any minority group because it inconveniences the majority group. The strong do what they like and the weak suffer what they must, right?

Have you actually read what I've been posting? I have - over and over and over again - proposed that we find solutions that protect trans people AND do not negatively impact all women. This is not the either / or you're making it out to be.

No one is forcing anyone to date trans people... comon

Spend a little time with your search engine, sigh.

Just like white people who were adversely affected by being subjected to having to see black people kissing in public, which is why it used to be illegal

This is a very weak apples and oranges comparison.

 

[Soandso]

No, because trans women are NOT women. So think about what you're saying here: If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a man with a penis, who happens to be wearing a dress, can be a lesbian????

So I'm noticing something you do, here. I write a big long thing addressing every single point you bring up in hopes of discussion. You, on the other hand, latch onto one thing and take it down left field

I have an answer for you, but why would I want to continue this conversation with you when you keep doing this? You would just ignore what I say and latch onto something else and go on a sideways tangent with that as well

No thanks

Edit: ah nevermind, I see that you made a second post. One moment while I read it

 

[Orbit]

Sorry, pro-women is not the same as anti-trans, despite what the TAs have led you to believe.

There is a third path: find ways to protect trans people that do not degrade the safety and privacy of all women.

That still doesn't make your post on-topic. You are derailing the thread to discuss your own anti-trans concerns.

 

[Soandso]

Alrighty then, Ill address your points even though I notice you ignored half of mine, but ok

No, because trans women are NOT women. So think about what you're saying here: If I understand you correctly, you're saying that a man with a penis, who happens to be wearing a dress, can be a lesbian????

Yikes

No. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that a trans woman can be attracted to women, just like a biological woman can be attracted to women. Do you view trans women as men with penises who happen to be wearing dresses? I don't think that's how you view trans people, so why would you think that's how I view trans people?

Go find a bunch of women in the real world and ask them how they would feel if men with penises were naked in their locker rooms and watching them disrobe. I have asked, and overwhelming the women I've talked to would feel unsafe and feel like their privacy has been invaded.

Maybe you do view trans women as men with penises... Big yikes

Have you actually read what I've been posting? I have - over and over and over again - proposed that we find solutions that protect trans people AND do not negatively impact all women. This is not the either / or you're making it out to be.

In the real world we have gendered facilities and changing that is very expensive. People are resistant to change, especially when it impacts their wallets

Don't get me wrong - of love private restrooms where I don't have to interact with anyone, but even if that happened we still have prisons, private schools, and other gendered facilities. Are we going to have trans women's and trans mens shelters in small cities too where you'd have like 2 or 3 people using them? I'm not a fan of segregation to begin with, but on such a small scale? It's not very practical

Spend a little time with your search engine, sigh.

You might need to spend a little less with yours. The internet is full of misinformation

This is a very weak apples and oranges comparison.

Ok

 

[VoidCat]

Let me know when I can safely use the bathroom and be my nonbinary self...based on some the replies here I might as well stop existing. Even tho in my eyes being trans is a spiritual gift and deeply connected to my spirituality.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I have faith that the sports world will employ their sportsmanship and eventually figure it all out in a sportsmanlike manner.

When you mention natural definition, are you referring to strictly biological definition, or are you including societal gender norms in it as well?

In your previous post, you mentioned making concessions instead of forcing.

What sort of concessions? Is calling someone by their preferred pronoun a concession?

I'm talking about direct honesty and keeping it on the level.

If one is Trans, then identify as trans and stop maintaining there is absolutely no difference between a natural born female and one who went from male to female and vice versa, both in legal and personal venues, and stop the attempts to force others to accept what isn't entirely true.

There's nothing wrong or shameful with adding Trans male or Trans female as a prefix or suffix. It's just an expansion of gender and sex as things changes and advances in society.

Sports the same way, stop pretending there are no differences.

The concession is simply adding another category as it pertains to sex and gender issues and accommodate those changes in a proper and honest way.

 

[icehorse]

That still doesn't make your post on-topic. You are derailing the thread to discuss your own anti-trans concerns.

I disagree, I think my posts are speaking to the OP. Any solution that negatively impacts all women will not end well for trans people.