Teen's Interaction With Transgender Woman in YMCA Locker Room Sparks Heated Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,297
57
Michigan
✟166,106.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Like it or not, at some point we are going to have to start setting some rules and boundaries, "including telling people what is absolutely right or else is wrong around these things", etc, because if we don't, all will descend into very great perversion and very great chaos if we don't, etc... Allow me to give you a few examples, and allow me to explain, etc... A little foretaste of things to come, etc...

Right now you're worried about guys and gals, and boys and girls (children) having to see each other naked, or having to be getting undressed in front of one another, long enough to have to say, change clothes or something like that, etc, but, what if a guy or gal, or a boy or a girl (children) wants to say, "play with themselves out in the open or openly in those rooms out in the open and openly for others to see with their own parts", etc? Can you tell them it is either, absolutely right, or else absolutely wrong, for them to either do, or not be doing so, etc? I mean, they are allowed to be naked there, and there are no rules, right? (Schools and/or your Wal-Mart restooms, or lockerooms or change/dressing rooms at your YMCA, or "whatever", etc) So what's stopping them then, etc? And I do mean "any of them" in "any of those places", etc? Whats stopping them, etc? Adults, children, adults with children, or in front of children, etc, what's there exactly to be stopping any of them, etc? I mean, if they are only playing with just there own parts, and are not touching anybody else's, etc, and thats only if you want to draw a line or at least make some rules there maybe anyway, etc? Anyway, what's there exactly to be stopping any of them, etc? I mean, they are all free to do whatever they want to in places that they are allowed to get or be naked with their own body parts, right? Who's anyone else to tell them about the right, or else wrong of it, etc? No one can ever do that to another person, right? Clearly violates their rights, right, etc?

And I could have said more, and scarred all of you even further than that, etc, but hopefully you see the slippery slope now, and why there must be some rules or boundaries made in these areas or all will descend into chaos, etc...

I regret that people are this stupid, and we must tell them to or by the point of threat what is either right, or else is absolutely wrong in these areas, but apparently, we must, and people are actually this stupid, "or else", etc...

I apologize I had to say what I had to say the way I did and make it so graphic, etc, I could have said even more, etc, but sometimes, that's the only thing that stupid people who can't see or predict the obvious, will ever truly understand, etc...

Legal rules and laws of absolute right and wrong are absolutely necessary, etc...

And I hope you can see that very, very clearly now, etc...

People will violate and cross all of them eventually just because they can if you don't ever make them, etc...

Hopefully I don't get into a lot of trouble for this post, but if the point is clearly made, and you maybe don't see me for a little bit, then I would consider it well worth it, etc...

If the point was clearly made or got across very well anyway, etc...

See ya'll later (maybe?) (Or maybe not maybe, etc?)

(Guess we'll have to see)...

God Bless!
I think a more likely scenario would be the formation of "volunteers" to police locker rooms and schools who would be charged to inspect every student to make sure they are using the right facilities. Just tell the kids that being striped by pawed by strangers is a small price to pay to keep them safe from perverts.
 
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,642
14,525
Here
✟1,196,039.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
the video is unavailable.

So you are judging her by appearance...and found her unappealing. Does that justify the girls lies? or the way the right is attacking her and disparaging her? Does it justify any number of perverts speculating about what underneath her clothes?

It's available, you just have to click the link and watch it on YouTube directly, ABC news doesn't allow their vid to be played in embedded format for some reason.

Yes, I'm judging by appearance, and no, it doesn't have anything to do with whether or not she's "appealing". The appealing part is irrelevant. The relevant part is whether or not she objectively looks and sounds like what people have associated with "woman" up until (in the grand scheme of history) 5 minutes ago.

As I've stated in my previous thread, the lies aren't justified.

However, I think some people who are uncomfortable with certain things (for reasons that are, if people were being honest, understandable --note: the operative word here is "understandable", not saying inherently right or wrong...I'm not saying a person who dislikes steak cooked rare is "right", quite the opposite...however, I can understand their aversion to it.

...and every time they express their discomfort, they're met with gaslighting, it's not surprising that a small subset of people will choose to "pad their argument" out of frustration.

It's not unlike Jussie Smolliet in a way...he was uncomfortable with the fact that racism wasn't properly being acknowledged and addressed, any understandable gripes he had were met with gaslighting from the right and "well here's this stat showing there's no real threat of systemic racism", and decided to concoct a story out of frustration to prove his point.

He was wrong for lowering the bar to dishonesty, but one can certainly understand the frustration that led to that sort of behavior.


Disingenuousness from Party A often draws out dishonesty from Party B.
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,297
57
Michigan
✟166,106.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
It seems the LGBTQQIP2SAA+ plan is to change the world by either eliminating gender or completely redefining it.
I thought they were going to do this by destroying the family.

Or was it corrupt the military?

Or was it trick people into choosing to be gay by appearing on television?
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,487.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
I think a more likely scenario would be the formation of "volunteers" to police locker rooms and schools who would be charged to inspect every student to make sure they are using the right facilities. Just tell the kids that being striped by pawed by strangers is a small price to pay to keep them safe from perverts.
Did you see "any" of my prior posts in this thread, etc???

No policing, no checking, no unnecessary asking or hounding, or that's called harassment, for which the person doing that can be charged for, or get into trouble legally for, etc...

People are going to have to learn to operate under an assumption, unless it is only very, very clearly, and very, very blatantly, etc, clearly shown to be otherwise, etc...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,297
57
Michigan
✟166,106.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
It's available, you just have to click the link and watch it on YouTube directly, ABC news doesn't allow their vid to be played in embedded format for some reason.

Yes, I'm judging by appearance, and no, it doesn't have anything to do with whether or not she's "appealing". The appealing part is irrelevant. The relevant part is whether or not she objectively looks and sounds like what people have associated with "woman" up until (in the grand scheme of history) 5 minutes ago.

You mean appealing.



As I've stated in my previous thread, the lies aren't justified.
yet here you are empathizing with those doing that and suggesting that its REALY the fault of the LGBT community with the implication that they deserve it.
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,297
57
Michigan
✟166,106.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Did you see "any" of my prior posts in this thread, etc???

No policing, no checking, no unnecessary asking or hounding, or that's called harassment, for which the person doing that can be charged for, or get into trouble legally for, etc...

People are going to have to learn to operate under an assumption, unless it is only very, very clearly, and very, very blatantly, etc, clearly shown to be otherwise, etc...

God Bless!
i strove to make a scenario as ridiculous as the one you came up with....but the more i think about it the more i can beleive this could happen
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Neogaia777
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,487.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Did you see "any" of my prior posts in this thread, etc???

No policing, no checking, no unnecessary asking or hounding, or that's called harassment, for which the person doing that can be charged for, or get into trouble legally for, etc...

People are going to have to learn to operate under an assumption, unless it is only very, very clearly, and very, very blatantly, etc, clearly shown to be otherwise, etc...

God Bless!
For example, in the case of a women's lockeroom, etc, the assumption has to be, that that person must have either had to have gender reassignment surgery, or that's just a really ugly woman, etc, unless it is very, very clearly, and very, very blatantly, clearly shown to be otherwise, etc...

And all of us everywhere are probably going to have to get used to some amount of strange, from time to time, etc...

But this might actually help all of us, with some of the acceptance process over time, etc...

God Bless!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

RocksInMyHead

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
May 12, 2011
6,812
7,419
PA
✟317,158.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
If someone's presence in the locker room makes you uncomfortable, change in a private area (stall, etc). If someone's actions make you uncomfortable, get yourself to safety as quickly as possible and report it to the proper authorities (gym staff, police). Seems pretty simple to me.
 
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,642
14,525
Here
✟1,196,039.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You mean appealing.
No, I mean what I said, which is that appealing is irrelevant, and I'm referring to what has traditionally been seen as objectively looking like we society has always viewed as a woman.

They're two totally different concepts.

John Stamos looks appealing, he doesn't look like a woman.
Snookie from the Jersey Shore looked like a woman, but I didn't see her as appealing.


yet here you are empathizing with those doing that and suggesting that its REALY the fault of the LGBT community with the implication that they deserve it.
I'm not empathizing with their lying, I'm empathizing with their reasons for feeling uncomfortable in the first place, and the frustration they might succumb to if expressing that always leads to getting gaslighted.


If people were trying to make someone eat something they didn't like the taste of, and every time they expressed that they didn't care for it, and the reasons why, everyone was disingenuous and lectured them with "well, it's actually really good for you, look at the data", or "this actually tastes like this other thing you like, so you're silly for not liking it" or "I could mix some of this in with other foods, and you'd never even know this ingredient was in there if we didn't tell you"

There's a good chance that eventually they may just lie and tell everyone "I'm allergic to that so don't put it in my food, the last time I had that I had a bad reaction"

I wouldn't say the lying is right, it's obviously not okay to be dishonest...however, I could empathize with the person's original circumstance and understand why they may have been pushed to that point.


Understanding the catalyst for a behavior isn't the same as condoning the behavior.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: rjs330
Upvote 0

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,625
6,387
✟293,730.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I bolded the part "equitable", because society having equity as one of the goals it what makes it tough to find a solution that makes everyone happy.

Obviously it's not equitable or "fair" that all the 5' 8" people who really love basketball can't make the team as frequently as all of the 6' 5" people who love basketball (due to biological differences that are out of their control). But good luck ever finding a solution that doesn't upset one side or the other.

We don't usually expect to be treated fairly when some sort of special talent is required.

The current issue is dealing with people having somewhere to change clothing and shower. We certainly can't accommodate everyone if some people are going to get hysterical over sharing space with a post op transgender woman and seeing a butt.

I've seen a few man butts in my time changing clothing, I think the girl will be OK and should quit it with the histrionics.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rjs330

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
May 22, 2015
22,257
5,975
64
✟333,152.00
Faith
Pentecostal
So, what about then, the scenario of a trans-woman (who may have not had any surgeries as of yet, but chooses to wear makeup and women's clothing), but doesn't have any "parts" associated with women yet. They still use the men's/boy's changing facility at that point?

Or would the people solidly on the "against" side still have an issue with that?

What I'm trying to find here, is the line of practical between the two extreme positions.

I certainly wouldn't take issue with that. I don't think most people would. If they were wearing makeup and a dress, so what? They would obviously be the odd man, but that's what they choose to be.

Being different is a thing. And we as humans have a tendency to not want to accept different. If you are in school a lot of bullying comes from the fact you are different. You might have red hair, be from a different town, have a big nose or walk with a limp. Bullying is out of the question. If a dude wears a dress into a male locker room and undresses and is a male, he shouldn't be bullied for that. Leave him alone. He's different, and he has a mental health issue. We should have compassion for those that have mental health issues.

But we also should not cater to those issues and allow them to go into girls spaces like that while still having boy parts.
 
Upvote 0

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,625
6,387
✟293,730.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
That's not a perfect comparison in that we haven't traditionally had separate facilities for "attractive" and "ugly"

But there are some comparisons that can be drawn.

The one I mentioned earlier... 5' 8" people are less likely to make the basketball team than a 6' 8" person. ..but that aside

True, passable isn't a perfect analogy to attractive but it's close enough to make the point. What we're talking about with transgender people is how well they fit into expectations for stereotypical gender cues. What we are talking about with attractiveness is how well people meet our ideal expectations for human beauty. It's very similar. So, having rules for how people "fit" a certain aesthetic standard rather than say being very bad at it and disgusting us is precisely what we are talking about I think.

Since what we are talking about is making rules, I think the problematic idea of trying to make legal, public accommodation rules or customs, to police gender segregated spaces based upon arbitrary aesthetic standards. I point to the idea that we don't make different rules for people who are ugly. One of the reasons for this is because it becomes a exercise in arbitrary aesthetic judgement, which I wouldn't trust whatever king Solomon you could find to judge properly.

As to your height analogy:

We generally don't have any legal distinctions for public accommodation between 5'8 and 6'8" people. If we do they are usually justified for "ride safety" (certain people literally don't fit certain places safely).

With regards to this topic, it's not so much about rules, as it is perceptions.

I don't think it instantly makes a person a "bad person" simply because they're very uncomfortable with something that they were raised to be uncomfortable with, and can't change that at the drop of a hat. And the "passable" aspect ties into that. Thus the reason that fewer people would be alarmed by seeing Janet Mock walk into a women's room than seeing the person in this story doing the same.

I don't think they are necessarily bad people either, I think they are acting poorly. It's understandable that people might react poorly to something they aren't used to.

Lying about the experience and trying to raise a local mob and make it into a national story are all bad actions and all quite a bit above and beyond what we might expect from someone put in such a situation though.

Which is why I said I hoped the girl would learn to do better.

Now, if someone is lying or exaggerating (like it sounds the girl in this story who complained was doing), that's not justified either.

But I wonder how much of the lying and exaggerating is motivated by the fact that no nuance is being allowed for people who are uncomfortable with it, and any measured and moderated critique they may have is always met with gaslighting and/or a lecture about how they're wrong for feeling the way they feel and how they need to "check their implicit bias"

We are in fact expecting people to "get over it" a bit, and it's fair that they are uncomfortable but you have to judge the actions of the parties involved.

1 is a transgender woman going about her day using the bathroom of their chosen gender identity.

1 is a person who decided that they didn't like that and made up a story to stoke fear and retribution locally and a national media that ran with it.

I can tell you where my sympathies lie. And yes, one of these people needed a lecture. Make it an understanding lecture though, you are right, she is young and outside her experience.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,487.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
I certainly wouldn't take issue with that. I don't think most people would. If they were wearing makeup and a dress, so what? They would obviously be the odd man, but that's what they choose to be.

Being different is a thing. And we as humans have a tendency to not want to accept different. If you are in school a lot of bullying comes from the fact you are different. You might have red hair, be from a different town, have a big nose or walk with a limp. Bullying is out of the question. If a dude wears a dress into a male locker room and undresses and is a male, he shouldn't be bullied for that. Leave him alone. He's different, and he has a mental health issue. We should have compassion for those that have mental health issues.

But we also should not cater to those issues and allow them to go into girls spaces like that while still having boy parts.
I agree with your post, if someone who is still anatomically male but is wearing women's clothes, make-up, etc, goes into a men's locker room or whatever, they should not get harassed or accosted or policed or whatever by the men in there, etc, and if they do, then those men should get in trouble for it, etc. Like I said, we are all probably going to have to get used to some sort of strange, or different, etc, but this is also why I strongly recommend a third room or option also, just in case that person themselves wants another option, or is not entirely comfortable with it, etc, not that they have to, or should have to, but they can if they want, etc...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,487.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
I agree with your post, if someone who is still anatomically male but is wearing women's clothes, make-up, etc, goes into a men's locker room or whatever, they should not get harassed or accosted or policed or whatever by the men in there, etc, and if they do, then those men should get in trouble for it, etc. Like I said, we are all probably going to have to get used to some sort of strange, or different, etc, but this is also why I strongly recommend a third room or option also, just in case that person themselves wants another option, or is not entirely comfortable with it, etc, not that they have to, or should have to, but they can if they want, etc...

God Bless!
And also like I said earlier also, if you have to explain some of this to your kids sometime(s), then tough, you have to explain some of this to your kids sometime. It's all part of the process of learning acceptance of those who are different, and that's just the way it is, etc, but at least hopefully they won't have to see the opposite kinds of parts to their own genders yet, etc, and you can at least save some of those kinds of discussions for another time, etc...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
12,271
7,626
51
✟312,535.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Way to miss the broader picture about where it is happening. How do you know she is lying. Were you there? She NEVER claimed to see a penis. She claimed to see a man. And she did not want the naked man seeing her naked. Do you believe that girls should be forced to allow boys to see them naked?
Rebecca Phillips initially claimed she saw Chrisynne Wood's exposed penis in the YMCA locker room.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
12,271
7,626
51
✟312,535.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Do you believe that girls should be forced to allow boys to see them naked?
Who exactly is doing this? It certainly didn't didn't happen here. Absent evidence how do I know you are not making this up?
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,297
57
Michigan
✟166,106.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Being different is a thing. And we as humans have a tendency to not want to accept different. If you are in school a lot of bullying comes from the fact you are different.

the most common reason a child is bullied is that they are LGBT or perceived to be LGBT. Bullying rates for LGBT youth are three to five times higher depending on the school and the local community.

You might have red hair, be from a different town, have a big nose or walk with a limp. Bullying is out of the question. If a dude wears a dress into a male locker room and undresses and is a male, he shouldn't be bullied for that. Leave him alone. He's different, and he has a mental health issue. We should have compassion for those that have mental health issues.
being LGBT isn't a mental health issue but you continuing to say so is bullying.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: john23237
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,642
14,525
Here
✟1,196,039.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I don't think they are necessarily bad people either, I think they are acting poorly. It's understandable that people might react poorly to something they aren't used to.

Lying about the experience and trying to raise a local mob and make it into a national story are all bad actions and all quite a bit above and beyond what we might expect from someone put in such a situation though.
For most people like that, their descent into irrational/unethical approaches (like making up a false story to attack someone else) isn't their first action. It's usually the type of thing someone resorts to after becoming disgruntled and disenfranchised when they feel they're not being heard or taken seriously, and the frustration has built.

Same would go with a lot of people who resort to more extreme things. I doubt a young man runs out and jumps on the "mens' rights" message boards after only 1 or 2 negative experiences.
 
Upvote 0

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,625
6,387
✟293,730.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
For most people like that, their descent into irrational/unethical approaches (like making up a false story to attack someone else) isn't their first action. It's usually the type of thing someone resorts to after becoming disgruntled and disenfranchised when they feel they're not being heard or taken seriously, and the frustration has built.
Being irrational/unethical because you are super irritated by how your worldview is treated by those it is meant to demean and look down upon doesn't really make it better.

People who routinely compound their negative experiences by making them much worse and retreating into hatred and unethical behavior ARE examples of what I would call "bad people".

And you can tell who the bad people are by how they act. To your point though, the "acting out" is usually well on the road, so it is a troubling sign when people do.
Same would go with a lot of people who resort to more extreme things. I doubt a young man runs out and jumps on the "mens' rights" message boards after only 1 or 2 negative experiences.
I have my doubts that the people going down these roads are virtuous people that are simply misunderstood, frustrated and "not taken seriously".

Hate is something you have to want. It is something that people invite into their hearts and embrace.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟163,501.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Or we could just have the two different restrooms and mind our own business?
Does it really make sense to separate restrooms based on just 2 different biologies, while ignoring other biological facts?

By your logic we should all share a bathroom regardless of biology and just mind our own business, but why don’t we do that? Hint: because it makes people uncomfortable.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.