# Disputation and The Straight Dope Message Board **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [November 25, 2019, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977 "2019-11-25T18:20:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/461 "2019-12-05T16:03:00Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Are we at the point at which those whose minds are open enough to learn have been reached by now and further discussions are unlikely to cause much more ignorance reduction and instead the offense of even a contained to a single thread discussion actually _debating_ transgender rights is too offensive, too costly, too … rude? I’m thinking _probably_ so, but I am not sure. I think, definitely not. I personally learned about the terms “trans man” and “trans woman” within the past couple months, from my participation here in ATMB. From your own cite, some 70%+ of Republicans believe gender is binary, even as over half of them would be somewhat comfortable having a friend come out as transgender. In my personal experience, people here are hardly aware enough of transgender issues to stop using slurs. At work we have thousands of patients. Exactly one patient, in twenty years of practice, is identified as transgender. We have an active lesbian community nearby. Ten years ago that community did not exist. Even today they do not stray from their enclosed neighborhood, although I think they have some sort of lesbian bowling club (in their neighborhood bowling alley). I doubt homosexual men feel welcome here. There are people of color, too. They do not live in the largest community, they live either in the suburbs or the hood. The public schools which I attended were F- and D- rated, with a diverse student body. The charter school in the nearby community was A- rated and stereotypically white. Kids were putting “no colored people allowed” on water faucets in my schools and leaving tied nooses hanging over the school guardrails. I graduated in 2014. All is not well in America. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/462 "2019-12-05T16:15:31Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > … At work we have thousands of patients. Exactly one patient, in twenty years of practice, is identified as transgender. … Of course part of that reason is that many of the transgender patients feel it is unsafe to be so identified. They are there. It is really an observation that somewhat supports the other argument. The need to create spaces that are not perceived as hurtful. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/463 "2019-12-05T17:26:38Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > At any point, feel free to post or PM me that you agree to disagree and our discussion will end right there. I don’t need nor want you to agree with me. I want the people with actual power here to. > [@Max\_S](#): > > I don’t see why advocating for something that increases the risk of harm is the same as advocating for harm. Sorry, I believe there was a part there that I took as read, but apparently not - “it” there was the specific case I mentioned, not whatever general case you could squeeze out of an analogy. > [@](#): > > Although being told you can’t achieve your dream increases the risk of suicide, Does it? Cite. > [@](#): > > Although being told that your race is inferior increases the risk of suicide, and suicide is a harm, debating whether genetics factor into the observed racial disparity in IQ (is inferior) is not the same as advocating harm. Yes, it is, when you do it in a forum where PoC (especially vulnerable PoC youth) can read your words. Same with being told you shouldn’t, or don’t exist for LGBQT youth. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/464 "2019-12-05T17:27:46Z")
> [@nelliebly](#): > > Since Mr. Dibble already pointed out that modifying what another poster said is forbidden (no matter what your supposed reason), I will just say “Thanks, Mr. Dibble!” and not repeat what he said. Kindly do not modify what I’ve said. I’m not so sure that it’s forbidden, but I will do my best not to modify your quotes in the future. > [@nelliebly](#): > > Clearly, though, you still don’t get it. > > The point is that telling people to avoid inflammatory words or actions is wrong and has perpetuated injustices. Whether the wrongness is words or actions, the effects are the same. I don’t understand what you mean here. I was saying, if you are stressed out by reading threads on subjects you find objectionable, don’t read those threads. I don’t know what injustices are perpetuated by you staying away, unless you mean that the bigot goes unchallenged and therefore continues being bigoted. But if that’s what you mean, why would closing the thread stop the bigot from being bigoted? > [@nelliebly](#): > > Frankly, you’re starting to seem less and less like someone who goes to extreme lengths to rationalize bigotry and more and more like someone who adopts a purist stance in order to allow the expressions of bigotry to continue. I’m not trying to be either. I am trying to rationalize _your_ opinion, and the opinions of other people in this thread. The people who say things like, ‘we shouldn’t allow bigoted discussions to take place here at all’. > [@nelliebly](#): > > You are, in fact, incorrect. I was pointing out how allowing bigotry, whether it’s expressed via speech/writing or action, to continue without limits has been a means of allowing such bigotry to continue. If you mean leaving a bigoted thread unchallenged results in allowing the people in that thread to remain bigoted, I agree. In my opinion, that’s how it’s supposed to be. If someone has an opinion that you disagree with and you simply ignore them, that opinion isn’t going to change or disappear. Maybe you can stop noticing it but it still exists. If you are concerned that bigotry itself makes you unsafe, because it exists in general, then shutting down discussions is not going to make you feel any safer except in some superficial “out of sight, out of mind”. Such a policy will only make this forum yet another safe space, but it doesn’t address the root problem. Learning and teaching is stressful, especially when dealing with sensitive subjects. I come here to learn, and if I’m lucky, to teach. I don’t come here to relieve stress (maybe in the Cafe/Thread Games forums). Again, maybe you see these message boards as having a different purpose. That might explain the apparent lack of daylight between us. > [@nelliebly](#): > > And you are wrong in assuming that those of us who recognize and acknowledge the damage, not only to individuals but to debate, that such expressions of bigotry inevitably entail, do not want to visit such threads, though I admit, it’s cleverly disingenuous to claim so. What we want is for such threads to be recognized as the cover for bigotry that they are and on that basis to be closed. I think you and I went through this before. You were saying, and appear to still say, that bigotry is bad faith so we shouldn’t even entertain bigoted threads and posters. My response to this was and still is to address the bad faith instead of the bigotry, because I reject the premise that all bigotry is bad faith. This recent back and forth between us came out of a discussion between **thorny locust** and I. In that discussion I was trying to understand why she believes allowing discussion of bigotry is harmful. I apologize if I misrepresent you or anyone else’s argument, please correct me [DEL]if[/DEL] when I do so. > [@nelliebly](#): > > You seem to have extreme difficulty grasping these arguments. Perhaps if you were to question the assumptions you make about those of us objecting–assumptions you doggedly stick to regardless of how well or how often we point out their erroneous nature-- you’d understand better. Or perhaps you don’t care to understand. I’m beginning to suspect that’s the case. I try to notice and question my own assumptions. As I am sure you know, it is a never ending struggle. The reason I press the “why is this harm” is to avoid making assumptions, because the ones I can think of only seem to reinforce my existing opinion. Most recently I did so in [POST=22009535]post #419[/POST]. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/465 "2019-12-05T17:37:50Z")
Altering another posters text in quote boxes - other than to snip our irrelevant parts or to place emphasis on the part to which you are replying is absolutely forbidden. There are few more straightforward paths to trouble for a poster. Avoid doing so ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/466 "2019-12-05T17:44:21Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Yes, I know. I could wish for a unicorn. > > However, I _can’t_ wish for a unicorn that is _also_ a hornless horse. That is literally impossible to wish for. I can verbalize it as a wish, but it’s a noncognitive statement, devoid of any meaning. It is “Colourless green ideas sleep furiously” encoded as a wish. Same for wishing for something but not wishing for the necessities it entails. Wishing for one _is_ wishing for the other. I don’t think bigotry without harm is noncognitive like a hornless unicorn. I cannot imagine a hornless unicorn, because a unicorn must have a horn by definition. I can imagine a country without black people, because a country does not need black people to be a country. By ignoring any realistic process of getting from reality to the ideal, a white nationalist (which I am not) can wish for blacks to go away without wishing or wanting any harm to come upon them. This isn’t some unrealistic hypothetical bigot either. I remember talking with people who held those beliefs: wish black people would go away, but against harming them or forced removals. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/467 "2019-12-05T17:46:00Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Altering another posters text in quote boxes - other than to snip our irrelevant parts or to place emphasis on the part to which you are replying is absolutely forbidden. There are few more straightforward paths to trouble for a poster. Avoid doing so Alright, will do. Apologies to **nelliaby**. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/468 "2019-12-05T18:13:16Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I don’t think bigotry without harm is noncognitive like a hornless unicorn. I cannot imagine a hornless unicorn, because a unicorn must have a horn by definition. I can imagine a country without black people, because a country does not need black people to be a country. By ignoring any realistic process of getting from reality to the ideal, a white nationalist (which I am not) can wish for blacks to go away without wishing or wanting any harm to come upon them. > > This isn’t some unrealistic hypothetical bigot either. I remember talking with people who held those beliefs: wish black people would go away, but against harming them or forced removals. > > ~Max Having to live in a society in which people want you gone is harmful. No overt acts of harm needed. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/469 "2019-12-05T18:17:57Z")
duplicate ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/470 "2019-12-05T18:24:00Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > Could you clarify how or why the timing seems strange to you? Losing a mod, in part due to obvious modding inconsistencies and disregard of precedent, combined with such public soul searching hints at deeper schisms internally in how a board should be run. I think the feedback seeking at this point isn’t going to be productive as it is sort of backwards. I’m of the opinion that you set the tone and rules of the board and have the population it attracts be the population of the board. Trying to please a very obstinate and different set of people with strong ideological differences is an exercise in futility. This is a thread on disputes which primarily would be a focus for boards such as elections, GD, perhaps the Pit. I think the status quo enforced with an even hand and according to precedent is as good as we can get. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/471 "2019-12-05T18:28:10Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I don’t think bigotry without harm is noncognitive like a hornless unicorn. The only bigotry without harm is completely unexpressed bigotry. But we’re talking about expressed bigotry here, so that hypothetical inner private bigotry is irrelevant. > [@](#): > > By ignoring any realistic process of getting from reality to the ideal Like I said, it’s an utterance a human can make, but its inherent self-contradictory nature makes it meaningless. We don’t need to consider wishing for magic beans as meaningful. > [@](#): > > This isn’t some unrealistic hypothetical bigot either. I remember talking with people who held those beliefs: wish black people would go away, but against harming them or forced removals. They lied to you. Of this I am 100% certain. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/472 "2019-12-05T18:58:37Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > This isn’t a preference. This isn’t a disagreement. We are talking about bigotry. Bigotry is a moral wrong. Ignoring a moral wrong by not participating is not how you deal with it. I agree with you, but my advice of ignoring bigotry threads was not intended to deal with them at all. I am saying, if bigoted threads disturb you, stress you out, cause you harm, make you want to leave the board, then maybe just ignore them. Don’t deal with them, let them be. Yes, that means they might go unchallenged if everybody does so. Part of fighting bigotry is that it’s stressful. There’s no way around that. It cannot be an easy task. And then of course, what you think is or is not moral is your opinion. Nobody has to agree with you about that, and I think it’s a bad idea to justify some sort of accusation of bad faith with your personal moral beliefs. To those with different morals, such an accusation would be baseless and therefore any censorship based on that accusation would appear unfair. Talk about burning bridges. > [@BigT](#): > > It’s also 2019. No one would be bringing up such blatant issues because they legitimately didn’t know they are bigoted. In my experience, you are just plain wrong. I’ve been in cities where people are very much aware of bigotry. I can understand why you might think everybody has heard about transgender issues or supports gender equality or homosexual relations. I feel like we aren’t going to agree about this, if you aren’t taking my word for it already. > [@BigT](#): > > If we ignore it, then the bigotry remains unchallenged, and that’s even worse. So we wind up having to fight it. I’m trying to understand you, too. My initial assumption (apparently wrong, I can’t say I’m surprised) was that being exposed to bigotry caused harm, too. What you’ve written indicates to me that my assumption was wrong, or at least does not accurately describe you. I have already laid out four different assumptions (reproduced below) I could make about why you might think ignoring bigotry is “worse” than trying to address it. Alternatively, you can tell me what you think. > [@Max\_S](#): > > [ul][li]You feel compelled to correct bigots and therefore cannot stay away from obviously bigoted threads, even if they cause great distress to you[/li][li]You take some sort of pleasure in reading bigoted arguments, even if they cause great distress to you[/li][li]You aren’t offended about yourself being exposed to bigoted arguments, you are offended because other people are offended[/li][li]You aren’t offended about yourself being exposed to bigoted arguments, you are offended that bigots still exist[/ul][/li]I doubt that I’ll bend for #1 or #2. #3 is only delegating whatever reasoning I might understand to another person. #4 seems most likely to me. But if you are offended by the persistance of bigots in general, I still don’t think that’s any basis for banning bigoted debates. Removing them from this place does not change the world for the better, it denies them a platform yes, but no minds are going to change as a result. Less communication between bigots and non-bigots is worse for everybody, and this is my opinion, isolation breeds ignorance breeds fear breeds hate. For the rest of your post, which I think is the substantive part, I am reading that you are afraid that without more moderation you think the bigots will crush any hope of fighting ignorance with their bad faith tactics. That they will stay just on this side of the rules, and all of the good posters will fall to temptation and get banned. In other words, you are saying that bad-faith bigotry is _so dangerous_, and _so successful_ that it will succeed against any good-faith arguments; not only that, but if there is such a thing as good-faith bigotry, it is indistinguishable from bad faith. You didn’t say that exactly but I can’t seem to make sense of your argument any other way. Please correct me if I’m wrong. I confronted a similar argument in the concurrent misogyny thread. I think what you are presenting is a form of defeatism that leads to the absurd conclusion that it is impossible to fight ignorance that manifests itself in the form of bigotry. As such, I must reject the premises: first, it _is_ possible to distinguish between good-faith and bad-faith bigotry, at least enough of the time so as to preserve these forums; second, bigoted opinions can and should be addressed with reason. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/473 "2019-12-05T19:36:04Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > [T]he examples you gave show you mean arguments where one side puts forth blatant, unquestionably bigoted statements. […] > > There are actually aspects of these topics where discussion can be had. But stuff like whether or not making black people sit in the back of the bus is acceptable not one of them. You might as well be asking whether or not it’s okay to keep black slaves. > > There are people who are racist, misogynistic, or transphobic without any intended malice. But those who argue things like this are not among them. It took me a while to think of such discussions that I might give the benefit of the doubt to, and approach with an open mind. Let’s say you have a bus line. Of all the neighborhoods it services, only one has a significant black population and that neighborhood is at the end of the line. The opposite end of the line is like, downtown or wherever everyone wants to get off. A thread asking if it is racist for the bus driver to ask blacks to sit at the back does not automatically earn the mark of bad faith, in my opinion. I think it is racist because the driver is assuming the black person is staying until the end of the line, solely based on their skin color. It may also be practical but that doesn’t make it any less racist. People might like to mingle on the bus line (ha!) and such a rule prevents that; also normally you give the front seats to people who have trouble walking. But I would not put this hypothetical thread beyond the pale of civil debate. Or let’s say there’s a thread where somebody says, slavery isn’t necessarily evil. The person lays out a utilitarian argument and claims that overall, slavery could result in less suffering, especially in a post-scarcity economy. He cites that StarTrek episode where Rome meets the modern day, and says the slaves could have unions and guaranteed healthcare and social benefits. No mention of race based slavery. I would surely disagree, but I think it is possible to have a civil debate on that topic. > [@BigT](#): > > I’ve already discusses at length in multiple threads what they may instead be doing. I simply invite you to watch the video series “[The Alt-Right Playbook.](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY7v0VkYRbANnTnzkA_HMFtQ)” I can’t watch videos right now but I will check it out later tonight. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/474 "2019-12-05T19:41:57Z")
> [@str8cashhomie](#): > > So lets say you’re an immigrant, in a political thread you read “immigrants breed like rabbits”, and this apparently is allowed because it isn’t an explicit call for violence against immigrants. I don’t think that’s even an implicit call for violence, and to be honest I don’t think it’s offensive. To “breed like rabbits” is an idiom meaning to have lots of children. I have used this phrase in colloquial speech when describing my own family and the families of my friends. I have also heard it used to describe the Catholics as a religious denomination, Orthodox Jews, and adherents of Islam. I have heard immigrants themselves use the phrase, as well as WASPs. If it is offensive to you, that only shows how different the culture that surrounds me is from the culture that surrounds you. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/475 "2019-12-05T19:55:40Z")
You’re a creative apologist, l’ll give you that. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/476 "2019-12-05T19:58:32Z")
Comparing immigrants/religious denominations to animals is not offensive? That benefit of the doubt you talk about, **Max**? You’ve pretty much lost any I would have given you. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/477 "2019-12-05T20:11:25Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > And I’d like to press this point. Do you think we’ll ever again get decent female or person of colour moderators if they are expected to simply scroll by racism and misogyny? Doubling back to this. First we have to accept that a post being racist or misogynistic is not usually a matter of objective fact but of perception. It is like Yanni vs Laurel. Some things that you see or hear someone else honestly sees or hears as something else even though you cannot imagine how. With that as a basis my sense is that many posters of traditionally disempowered groups recognize that being at the table, or part of the loop, does not mean that their perception will always carry the day, but it does mean that others hear that Yanni is also heard. Being part of a diverse group in the loop is a clear good for all. Even if your view is not always the consensus you have a better chance to have a more informed consensus. Some hopefully are interested in that. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/478 "2019-12-05T20:27:06Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Far too often on this board and in the wider real world, a dishonest tactic used to silence or ‘deplatform’ others is to use aggressive language directed at the person instead of language that disproves an idea. Labeling someone a racist, Nazi, or whatever merely for political reasons is far too prevalent and I can’t believe folks want to be able to do so here. I don’t think dishonesty motivates anybody in this thread. People have made it clear that they think bigoted ideas are harmful and/or bad-faith. I may not be able to comprehend why they are harmful (yet), and I may disagree that bigotry implies bad-faith, but I do not think the participants of this thread want to “silence” people “for political reasons”. > [@octopus](#): > > Ultimately, it looks like the majority want an ideological safe space and want the rules to reflect that. Sounds boring. There’s nothing wrong with wanting a safe space to talk with friends. I don’t think it fits the brand, but maybe it’s time for rebranding. But if this is the goal, I wish proponents would be a little more upfront about it. I get the impression (especially from **DSeid** ) that a safe space is not the goal, just some standard of decency that is more stringent than what we have now. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/479 "2019-12-05T20:51:24Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Of course part of that reason is that many of the transgender patients feel it is unsafe to be so identified. They are there. It is really an observation that somewhat supports the other argument. The need to create spaces that are not perceived as hurtful. Sex is the sort of thing you can’t easily hide during a physical. Either they are coming in as their birth-assigned gender, or they choose to hide SRS from the record _and_ otherwise deceive us. But one out of multiple thousands isn’t unrealistic, especially if the few others around here drive to the nearest metropolis for their non-emergent healthcare needs. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/480 "2019-12-05T21:03:14Z")
Transgenderhood isn’t always going to be obvious on physical examination and afaik, the vast majority haven’t undergone SRS. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977.md?page=25)