View Single Post
  #104  
Old 05-10-2019, 10:15 PM
clairobscur is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 17,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Feel free to advocate for this. But, in general, people seem to prefer segregated-gender bathrooms and locker rooms. Yet, somehow, we haven't had a plague of pervs, despite how incredibly easy it is to be deceitful (and always has been), mostly because virtually no one is interested in going in the "wrong" bathroom. This is a solution in search of a problem. Treating trans people with decency doesn't change this at all.
If you assert that there's no compelling interest in having segregated locker rooms besides a vague preference, since they don't offer any more safety for instance, obviously having transwomen in them isn't an issue, but then again neither is having anybody else there, including an openly cis and straight male. Which obviously nullifies the "but what if the transwoman is actually a cisman" concern.

But many people argue that there's such a compelling interest. If a woman was telling you that she should be spared the presence of men in locker rooms because she fears for her safety (even if she recognizes that the risk of being assaulted is objectively extremely low), or because it makes her very uncomfortable to have men possibly checking her up when she undresses, or because she shouldn't have to see some stranger's dick, would you tell her that in fact she shouldn't have such an expectation, and that none of the reasons she advances are legitimate?

Because in this case, her interest in preventing access to the locker room can be valued at 0, which seems to be your argument, and the desire of a transwoman to go into this locker room will necessarily be more important than hers, even if it's only valued at 0.001 for feeling good. But if you agree that she has *some* interest at least in limiting this access, say valued at 1, then you have to show that the interest of the transwomen in entering the locker room can be given some higher value because then there are competing interests, and you have to choose whose interest is more important.

So do you recognize or do you deny that women have any legitimate interest in limiting access to locker rooms on the basis of gender besides a meaningless personal preference?
__________________
S'en vai la memoria, e tornara pu.

Last edited by clairobscur; 05-10-2019 at 10:15 PM.