It’s really quite simple: define what you want to be true as your identity, and then castigate anyone who doesn’t agree with you as an oppressor.
That’s kinda the definition of an oppressor in this case, now innit? Particularly when those other people want to restrict your rights, as is also true in this case.
They can, but then supporting segregation makes it even harder for them to argue they’re not just bigots.
The only reason why gender segregated bathrooms happened was that both sides were okay with them, so I’m not worried about them actually getting separate bathrooms. Not when trans people have been using bathrooms that match their gender for decades now, without any additional risk.
If there’s little chance of it actually happening, then the only thing it does is make it easier to argue against these clowns.
I’m pretty sure that @The_Other_Waldo_Pepper wasn’t actually suggesting separate-but-equal bathrooms for trans people, but presenting it as a reductio ad absurdem.
My interpretation was that he was worried transphobes might suggest it, but that he himself was not one of them. Hence how I replied, saying it only harms them to suggest that.
At least Aspidistra replies to what people say, rather than just saying random BS.
You know that gender is part of identity, as you have identified as male. So fuck off with this nonsense.
I was commenting on the fundamental point of this whole debate: who gets to decide what social norms are. The- well, arrogance- of the more militant supporters of gender identity irks at times. So this being the Pit I took the occasion to say “you be damned”.
I agree about absurdity.
I have been in many queues where women have been actively encouraged (including by myself) to use the stalls in the men’s toilet due the queue for the ladies. I generally use the urinal, where - if I gave a shit about such things - some guy/lady might see my penis, something I struggle to care about.
The women used the stalls, which lock. No one had concerns about the sudden organic group decision that the gents was suddenly unisex. If there were trans people involved I would not have cared one whit.
If I am pissing next to a gay guy, and he has a glance at my nethers, I mean, who cares? Some guy looked at my cock. Maybe he’ll feel good about it, and more power to him if it makes him happy. Maybe a trans-woman saw it! Again, why would I care?
It is such a weird thing to care about.
We do. Society. And we are damned tired of assholes running roughshod over our minority and at-risk populations.
Hey, everyone! Back off on the whole “defending your rights” thing! A mediocre straight guy is bothered by it!
I usually see restrooms marked Family, probably for someone with young children. I think anyone can use them. If I thought no man, whether born that way or not, would bother me, I would share my restroom with males.
In other words, you ignored the actual conversation going on in this thread to substitute your own stupidity. Stupidity I was able to debunk in a single line. Gender has always been a part of identity, and was not made into such by trans people.
And if you’re tired of hearing from people who are anti-bigotry, how much more tired do you think we are? If you’d just stop coming up with whatever excuse to continue to be bigoted, we wouldn’t have to keep doing this.
I’m late, but I have spotted some. Is there a prize?
Well, yeah - I assumed this was like a “Where’s Waldo” type of thing. Except sometimes with Waldo you can’t spot him right away, this is too easy.
Personally, while it’ll likely take years or decades, I think we’d be fine with putting proper doors on the stalls and just having everybody use the same ones.
– back just before 2020 fully became 2020, I was in a restaurant which had two single-occupancy restrooms. Each of them had a sign on the door saying “We Don’t Care.”
Whether a man, woman, or other would bother me doesn’t seem to me to have much to do with whether we’re in a restroom at the time. I’ve been bothered, among other places, out on the public street. I’ve never been bothered in a restroom; and I have been in public multi-stall restrooms with men in them, whether men were cleaning the women’s john, or whether the restrooms were being used by a mixed-gender group of people who didn’t give a damn, or whether it was pressure of urgency (line’s too long/toilets are broken down, knock knock we’re coming in to your side, in either direction.)
I don’t see why restrooms should be seen as particularly risky. Nobody seems to be suggesting single-gender elevators, or enclosed stairwells, or anything else of the sort. – well, I’m kinda wrong. Some people do suggest that late-night streets and/or bars, etc., should effectively be single gender; they want all the women to stay away from them, at least unless escorted by a Protective Male™. Come to think of it, maybe these people should be arguing harder than anyone else for multiple-gender restrooms, so that women could bring their Protective Male™ in with them?
Sorry, I didn’t get enough sleep last night.
The tactic is more fundamental than that. The ultimate goal is control of what is acceptable to think by the deliberate deconstruction of language using social pressure and ultimately state violence as enforcers. Think about the linguistic contortions becoming more and more necessary to even discuss an issue.
There are parallels with the so-called racism label. Don’t want to discuss the merits of a topic? Label the advocate of the opposing side a racist and win the debate.
Well, that’s the thing, “Where’s Waldo” books weren’t just about finding Waldo, and just like those books, there’s more than just hate to point out.
Don’t want to deal with the fact that something might be racist? Simply accuse the other side of using the label of racism in bad faith and win the debate.
Please, tell us the words you want to use to discuss this issue but can’t?
If @octopus calls me a poopyhead I’m fully prepared to deconstruct language and use social pressure to silence him. If that doesn’t work, I may also employ surprise and ruthless efficiency, since clearly he’s not expecting that approach.
I’m just terribly amused by the side the octopus has chosen to champion here.
I mean, basically it boils down to ‘All men are rapists, no one with a penis can be trusted by women.’ It’s straight-up Andrea Dworkinesque misandry.
Who’da guessed that the octopus was a man hating radical feminist?
And if someone wants to actually* argue the subject I’m all eyes.
*We can start with ‘Where do people like Buck Angel get to pee when they’re not at home?’