Backwards ideas

[Sketcher]

So you claim that it is what is between a person's legs that makes them a man or a woman?

I claim that what they are or aren't born with does.

Are you aware of any cases where a man has pretended to be a woman so he can get into the women's toilets to attack a woman?

I mean, such a law won't stop it from happening. Even now, they don't bother pretending to be a woman. Look at this guy: https://thewest.com.au/news/perth/m...-into-claremont-public-toilets-ng-b881185865z

And this guy. Manhunt after 10-year-old girl sexually assaulted in public toilets

Simply put, any man who is intent on going into a woman's bathroom to assault someone isn't going to be put off by a law that says trans women have to use the mens room.

Oh, I'm not saying that they will be more respectful of women to not harm them, bathroom or no. But this essentially hands them an excuse to make when they are caught going into the bathroom. If an authority believes it, or is constrained by policy to humor it, this enables them further.

 

[Moral Orel]

Light Intermission: I used to think I was a male trapped in a female body. Then my mother gave birth and the feeling went away.

Not that this has anything to do with the thread, but your joke reminded me of a Stephen Wright bit.

"I still remember when I was a fetus I used to sneak out of my mother's womb at night and run around town. I remember thinking, this is the perfect time to commit some crimes... while I don't have fingerprints."​

 

[Kylie]

I claim that what they are or aren't born with does.

And what if they are born with nothing? It does happen you know.

Here's a man who was born without a penis. HuffPost is now part of Oath

And there's also this. Ambiguous genitalia - Symptoms and causes

Guess it sucks to like that, they don't know what they are!

Oh wait, they do, because gender identity isn't determined by what a person is born with.

Oh, I'm not saying that they will be more respectful of women to not harm them, bathroom or no. But this essentially hands them an excuse to make when they are caught going into the bathroom. If an authority believes it, or is constrained by policy to humor it, this enables them further.

Well, how about we use a law that says: "Do not sexually assault people" instead? And if someone sexually assaults another person, regardless of what gender the attacker or victim is, regardless of what genitals they have, regardless of where it happens, we prosecute them? How does that sound?

 

[Moral Orel]

Oh, I'm not saying that they will be more respectful of women to not harm them, bathroom or no. But this essentially hands them an excuse to make when they are caught going into the bathroom. If an authority believes it, or is constrained by policy to humor it, this enables them further.

Are the unisex bathrooms we've had in America already for years before the trans debate any more dangerous than the segregated bathrooms? If yes, let's see some data.

 

[Strathos]

What's wrong with it - so long as it's consensual and the people are of age?

Genetic conditions and deformities.

 

[Desk trauma]

Genetic conditions and deformities.

If that’s the standard a lot of people with genetic disorders likely to be passed on would be relegated to mandatory celibacy or sterilization.

 

[timothyu]

I would say unless one was trans then they have no business assuming anything.

 

[variant]

If that’s the standard a lot of people with genetic disorders likely to be passed on would be relegated to mandatory celibacy or sterilization.

We call that eugenics. Tends to have a lot of "baggage".

 

[Desk trauma]

We call that eugenics. Tends to have a lot of "baggage".

Just call it freedom something and the baggage gets jettisoned instantly.

 

[Sketcher]

Are the unisex bathrooms we've had in America already for years before the trans debate any more dangerous than the segregated bathrooms? If yes, let's see some data.

I don't know of any unisex bathrooms that had more than a 1-person occupancy, so I don't see how that would be a good counterpoint.

 

[variant]

I don't know of any unisex bathrooms that had more than a 1-person occupancy, so I don't see how that would be a good counterpoint.

It's quite possible to just install stalls.

 

[Sketcher]

And what if they are born with nothing? It does happen you know.

Here's a man who was born without a penis. HuffPost is now part of Oath

And there's also this. Ambiguous genitalia - Symptoms and causes

Guess it sucks to like that, they don't know what they are!

These are rare, anomalous cases where there's room for looking deeper for factors that could be tiebreakers either way. But as to Joe, the example you gave: I think the damage he suffered is instructive. There used to be a bias in doctors, in the case of intersex babies, to cut off the male genitals and just raise the babies as girls, and that wasn't good. Likewise, in the cases of children where they clearly have one set of genitals and not the other, I believe it is harmful to claim they are transitioning to another gender. Messing with their hormones at critical growing stages that much, combined with their developing minds where they are unsure of so much is just dangerous. I don't see why it should be condemned in Joe's case and praised in the case of other children.

Well, how about we use a law that says: "Do not sexually assault people" instead? And if someone sexually assaults another person, regardless of what gender the attacker or victim is, regardless of what genitals they have, regardless of where it happens, we prosecute them? How does that sound?

That's already on the books, and I am in favor of that like most civilized people. I believe my stance on bathrooms makes it easier to prevent the crime and enforce the law than yours does.

 

[Sketcher]

It's quite possible to just install stalls.

So they wouldn't be handicap-friendly anymore?

 

[variant]

So they wouldn't be handicap-friendly anymore?

You've never seen a handicapped friendly stall before?

 

[Sketcher]

You've never seen a handicapped friendly stall before?

Yeah, I've seen them. They're the size they are in order to accommodate the wheelchair. So are the biggest unisex bathrooms I have seen in public places - one occupant only, just big enough to accommodate a person, a wheelchair, a toilet, a sink, and maybe a baby changing station. Cut that in half to put another toilet in, and you don't have room for the wheelchair anymore. Increasing the overall size of the bathroom to accommodate both is an expensive construction project, and removing the handicap capacity may be a violation of federal or state law.

 

[Moral Orel]

I don't know of any unisex bathrooms that had more than a 1-person occupancy, so I don't see how that would be a good counterpoint.

You haven't personally seen one, okay. Have you done any research to find out if they exist and if they're dangerous, or is your argument based solely on what you've imagined to be a problem?

 

[Kylie]

Genetic conditions and deformities.

My understanding is that it doesn't cause too many problems if they aren't brother/sister and there's no history of inbreeding. https://io9.gizmodo.com/why-inbreeding-really-isnt-as-bad-as-you-think-it-is-5863666?IR=T

In any case, contraception is cheap and readily available.

 

[Kylie]

These are rare, anomalous cases where there's room for looking deeper for factors that could be tiebreakers either way. But as to Joe, the example you gave: I think the damage he suffered is instructive. There used to be a bias in doctors, in the case of intersex babies, to cut off the male genitals and just raise the babies as girls, and that wasn't good. Likewise, in the cases of children where they clearly have one set of genitals and not the other, I believe it is harmful to claim they are transitioning to another gender. Messing with their hormones at critical growing stages that much, combined with their developing minds where they are unsure of so much is just dangerous. I don't see why it should be condemned in Joe's case and praised in the case of other children.

But do you agree that the shape of a person's genitals is not an indication of whether they think of themselves as man, woman, or something else?

That's already on the books, and I am in favor of that like most civilized people. I believe my stance on bathrooms makes it easier to prevent the crime and enforce the law than yours does.

You haven't even shown that it's a problem.

 

[Sketcher]

You haven't personally seen one, okay. Have you done any research to find out if they exist and if they're dangerous, or is your argument based solely on what you've imagined to be a problem?

Have you? Or are you imagining that they exist for the sake of a counterpoint?

But do you agree that the shape of a person's genitals is not an indication of whether they think of themselves as man, woman, or something else?

I figure for most of us, it's a pretty good clue.

You haven't even shown that it's a problem.

Sociopaths using rules, laws, and conventions as weapons against their prey and to protect themselves is a problem. What we've been discussing is one specific vector of that problem.

 

[Kylie]

I figure for most of us, it's a pretty good clue.

Yes, for most of us it is.

MOST.

It doesn't work for everyone, and so, if someone comes up to you and says that they are one of the people for whom it doesn't work, the normal decent thing to do is to accept them at their word, isn't it?

Sociopaths using rules, laws, and conventions as weapons against their prey and to protect themselves is a problem. What we've been discussing is one specific vector of that problem.

Again, you haven't been able to show that men disguising themselves as women in order to sneak into public women's toilets to assault women is even a problem.