View Single Post
Old 05-10-2019, 01:06 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,587
Originally Posted by clairobscur View Post
Nobody is arguing here that trans people don't exist. People are arguing that being trans doesn't necessarily allow you to be considered a woman in all circumstances.
I don't care what people are "considered" -- I care how people are treated. You haven't offered any good reason why trans people should be treated poorly, as you appear to be advocating should be allowed.

As far as I'm concerned, the problem would be nicely solved by making all locker rooms and such unisex and saying to whoever is unhappy about it to go pound sand. But society at large, including both conservatives and progressives, agrees that women have a right to and even a need for unisex locker rooms. Hence the need to decide who is a woman and who isn't.
I don't care about what strangers are thinking, I care about what they're doing. I also don't care if locker rooms are unisex. I think trans people should be allowed to use locker rooms and bathrooms. You appear to be advocating that they shouldn't. If you're advocating that trans people should use the wrong locker rooms, why? Who does that help? There are anti-trans bigots that use both locker rooms. Why does one group of anti-trans bigots get their preference, but not the other one? Why are trans people the ones who should be forced by law to feel distress?

And this statement equally applies to transwomen. Feeling distressed because you're refused access to women locker rooms is also part of life. Plenty of people are unhappy because they can't, for any number of reasons, do something they would really want to do, like participating in a sporting event. Cis women unhappy about or feeling threatened by sharing locker rooms with preop transwomen can perfectly change at home. Transwomen unhappy about or feeling threatened by not being allowed into women locker rooms can also change at home. You have decided that the concerns of transwomen absolutely trump the generally accepted concerns of cis women, but you stating so doesn't make it objectively true. Especially since, once again, it amounts to state that the subjective distress/fear/whatever of the few trumps the equally subjective distress/fear/whatever of the many.
I've decided that trans people should be allowed to use locker rooms and bathrooms. That's pretty much all I've decided. You appear to disagree.

If you accept that the concern of women wrt men entering locker rooms is legitimate, how can you decide for them what exactly they perceive as a problem and who exactly they perceive as a man? If I enter a women locker room and begin to undress, how is this woman supposed to determine whether or not I actually feel I'm a woman? Why wouldn't this be a valid concern? I in fact suspect that you would even reject the idea that she has any right to question my presence there, like saying "what the fuck are you doing here?" and expect an answer. At which point any man can indeed enter the women locker room and check up the undressed underage girl, as the author of the article fears.
Anyone can ask any questions they like, even with vulgarity. Using vulgarity isn't against the law.

And men can already enter women's locker rooms, physically speaking. The only thing that stops this is societal disapproval and sanction. Nothing would change if trans people are allowed (as they mostly are) to use locker rooms. Liars and perverts will be liars and perverts, as they always have. There's no new risk by allowing trans people to use locker rooms. Pervs can and do still sneak into locker rooms, plant cameras, and other illegal pervy bullshit.

This supposed fear of pervy men is entirely fictional -- pervy men have always existed, and always will. Allowing trans people to use bathrooms and locker rooms doesn't change this at all.

But even if we assume so, how would you even define who can be legitimately be considered a trans person? Why would you assume that anybody self-identifying as a woman would do so, not only sincerely, but for clear, real, serious, lasting reasons? Why would a somewhat genderfluid person, for instance, who feels rather womanish today be prevented from using the women locker room? What about a transvestite who wants to feel more like a woman today? What about a man who wants to have a "woman experience"? On what basis could the line be drawn? And how anybody could determine that a specific person claim falls on this side of the line or on the other?
All of this is already possible, and there aren't terrible things happening. I could put on a dress and shave and walk into a woman's bathroom or locker room, and in all likelihood nothing would happen. I don't do this because I have no desire to, but if I did, it wouldn't matter if trans people are or are not allowed to use locker rooms and bathrooms.

Seriously. If there was going to be some plague of pervy men pretending to be women, it would have already happened. This has always been possible. It's always been societal sanction/taboo/custom that has kept people going into the "right" bathrooms and locker rooms. Nothing would change by allowing trans people to also use locker rooms and bathrooms.

Once again, if you want women only locker rooms, you need a definition, and I don't see how where you personally, or that transwoman in particular, want to draw the line is anymore valid than any other. I dont see why "I don't want anyone with a dick" is anymore or any less valid than "I don't want anyone who feels he's a man", especially since while the first can be determined by an observer, the second can't.
No, we don't need such a definition, because society pretty much sorts this sort of thing out as it always has. There's no crisis here. People tend to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity, and only very rarely do perverts act pervy. And when they do, it's because they're criminal perverts, not because of some rule or lack thereof about trans people.