If you think that homeless shelters are businesses, I don't know what planet you're from.Though 'businesses know best, only their opinions matter' is a lazy take.
Tom
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
If you think that homeless shelters are businesses, I don't know what planet you're from.Though 'businesses know best, only their opinions matter' is a lazy take.
So you have no idea about the difference between biological sex and gender?If they have penises, they are male.
That's like saying "aside from the fact that this is a structure built of bricks with four walls, a floor and a ceiling, it isn't a building".Psychological issues aside, they are male.
Actually, there really isn't. This is literally the way bathrooms have always operated. They don't have "genital scanners" to check the genitals of everyone who comes in.If their presence in a woman's shelter is based solely upon what they SAY they are, that is a problem....a big one.
And why not? What studies or actual concrete evidence can you give of the harm caused by admitting pre-op trans people into shelters?And it's one I, were I running a woman's shelter, wouldn't deal with. A transgender (male to female) who can't produce medical proof that s/he is well along the process of a 'gender change,' isn't going to...and shouldn't be allowed access to...a woman's shelter. The same goes vice versa, of course.
Except that "guy" is actually a woman, and is also coming to seek shelter and protection from having been abused.IMO, of course. I believe that the women who are seeking shelter and protection from men who have abused them need the help more than the guy who just SAYS 'but I'm a woman!"
And you have yet to provide a single justification for this position.If he's not on hormones with a planned surgery schedule? Not a chance in hades.
And isn't that exactly what the bill proposed in the OP is intending to do?
I know, and in most cases there would not be a problem. But what is to be done with the rare case where women cannot take the presence of any genetic male? I think that in most cases it would be far better if women's shelters took in trans-females too. But at times a bit of flexibility might be desirable.Is it more of a problem, though, than transwomen who suffer staggeringly high ratios of violence, being turned away from aid either for their looks, or their papers? What if they're not comfortable being around men? Kind of a catch 22 imo.
Ah, I was misled by the thread title and poll question.Either you completely misunderstood it or I did it. Because what I understood is that shelters will be able to decide who is a woman and who is not. It has nothing to do with forbidding them from accepting transgender. If anything, it gives more power to shelter operators, not less.
You don't think "the guy who just SAYS 'but I'm a woman!'" sometimes end up seeking shelter and protection from men who have abused them? Is their need somehow less?If they have penises, they are male. Psychological issues aside, they are male. If their presence in a woman's shelter is based solely upon what they SAY they are, that is a problem....a big one.
And it's one I, were I running a woman's shelter, wouldn't deal with. A transgender (male to female) who can't produce medical proof that s/he is well along the process of a 'gender change,' isn't going to...and shouldn't be allowed access to...a woman's shelter. The same goes vice versa, of course.
IMO, of course. I believe that the women who are seeking shelter and protection from men who have abused them need the help more than the guy who just SAYS 'but I'm a woman!"
If he's not on hormones with a planned surgery schedule? Not a chance in hades.
How about we let the staff of the shelter decide who to let in and who to keep out?And I've officially changed my vote from not sure/undecided to trans women shouldn't be banned from womens shelters, because it's the right decision to make.
*eyeroll again* neverminding that privately owned homeless shelters and state subsidized landlords who operate homeless shelters for money are both things that exist Homeless shelters prove profitableIf you think that homeless shelters are businesses, I don't know what planet you're from.
Tom
I can well understand why you'd prefer to avoid the discussion.*eyeroll again* neverminding that privately owned homeless shelters and state subsidized landlords who operate homeless shelters for money are both things that exist Homeless shelters prove profitable
That you chose to focus on that instead of the actual point tells me that we're done here.
What does "take the presence of a genetic male" even mean? And why would this not the case for transwomen? Or a cis woman with another woman? It just seems like transwomen are being unfairly singled out.I know, and in most cases there would not be a problem. But what is to be done with the rare case where women cannot take the presence of any genetic male? I think that in most cases it would be far better if women's shelters took in trans-females too. But at times a bit of flexibility might be desirable.
Back at you, on both statements.I can well understand why you'd prefer to avoid the discussion.
Have a nice day.
Tom
How about we let the staff of the shelter decide who to let in and who to keep out?
This whole thing is about requiring staff of homeless shelters to do things they don't think is a good idea. Maybe they know more about the situation than you and your SJW buddies do?
So you have no idea about the difference between biological sex and gender?
That's like saying "aside from the fact that this is a structure built of bricks with four walls, a floor and a ceiling, it isn't a building".
Actually, there really isn't. This is literally the way bathrooms have always operated. They don't have "genital scanners" to check the genitals of everyone who comes in.
And why not? What studies or actual concrete evidence can you give of the harm caused by admitting pre-op trans people into shelters?
Except that "guy" is actually a woman, and is also coming to seek shelter and protection from having been abused.
And you have yet to provide a single justification for this position.
You don't think "the guy who just SAYS 'but I'm a woman!'" sometimes end up seeking shelter and protection from men who have abused them? Is their need somehow less?
The staff discernment should be the bottom line.For sure the staff discernment should always be in play.
Pretty straightforward. It obviously includes both cis males and trans females. And no, trans women are neither not being singled out. This is a problem that we do not have all of the answers to yet. A dogmatic approach from either extreme is not the answer.What does "take the presence of a genetic male" even mean? And why would this not the case for transwomen? Or a cis woman with another woman? It just seems like transwomen are being unfairly singled out.
... what does that have to do with people in legitimate need of shelter fleeing abuse?It's sad. However, it's not THAT hard to get properly diagnosed and get on the hormones.