Just in case you’re not aware of this, the disagreement in this thread is whether it’s “practical benefit vs practical benefit” or “rights vs practical benefit”.
Be that as it may, my position in this thread has been that it’s about “practical benefit vs practical benefit”. When I respond to YogSothoth (or anyone) my posts reflect my position. Would be pointless and confusing it they didn’t …
I go to a fair number of conferences & colliquiums to which a higher-than-mainstream percentage of gender-variant people go. The default “bathroom” behavior has shifted towards “generic bathrooms for everyone”. There are usually a handful of single-stall toilets hither and yon and their location is publicized for the benefit of people who really can’t handle being in the toilets with folks of some gender or sex. Everyone else just shrugs and quits making a big deal of it.
I think you’re dodging the question.
I want you to come out and say that if someone - your wife or daughter or mom, perhaps - said they were very uncomfortable with having a man (a male) in the lady’s room with them, you would tell them to just deal with it because, hey, those are just feelings. That’s the real world.
If they weren’t certain if it was a trans person or not, then I would say something like that – “that might be a transwoman, and if so, they have as much reason to be in that bathroom as you do”. If they were certain it was not a trans person (because we knew them already, or something), then, depending on the circumstances, I might inform the authorities, or wait to confront the man after he left the bathroom, or something else.
Considering that in almost zero cases could we be certain whether someone is a trans person or not, what part of my reaction is a dodge? That’s what I’d do.
And why should I be particularly concerned with this possibility, which seems only slightly more likely to occur than my female relative complaining that someone shat in the sink, unless you can provide some reason why I should consider it likely?
Same thing I was trying to figure out. It seems like out of all the combinations of gender, sex, and orientation, the only combination that it is NOT bigoted to feel uncomfortable around is a gender-typical, straight male. If you feel uncomfortable around any other combination being in the same bathroom with you, then you are a bigot. But if you feel uncomfortable around a straight, gender-typical male, then that is just a normal way of feeling.
And I say this as someone who couldn’t care less WHO was in the bathroom with me.
Why?
Are you saying going using the opposite sex restroom might be illegal? I thought you said it wasn’t.
Why confront the man? What did he do wrong? I thought you said it wasn’t wrong to do that.
What HARM was done to your daughter or wife or mom? It’s just their feelings, right?
Why do you make a distinction between a transgender male and a gender-typical male on what actions you would take?
Right, but it might be against the rules of whatever establishment we’re in. If I had any suspicion that he might intend harm, I might inform the establishment authorities.
When did I say it wasn’t wrong? I’d confront the man if I had any suspicion he might mean to do harm.
I wouldn’t be addressing it because of feelings, but because of the possibility of harm. If I was absolutely certain that the man definitely meant no harm to anyone, then I would probably do nothing. But I’m not sure how I could ever know for certain that the man didn’t plan to do any harm.
But this is an absurd scenario. For one, how would I ever know that it wasn’t a transgender person? And for another, even if I knew for certain that it wasn’t a transgender person, how could I know that he didn’t intend to do harm of some sort?
Such scenarios seem so ridiculous and unlikely to me that I barely will consider them more than I’d consider the possibility of which bathrooms some triple-gender aliens ought to use.
Those weren’t the possibilities, that I understood them – I thought the possibilities were between a transgender woman and a cisgender man.
The fact that you think it matters is what I find telling. The scenario involved a man, could be gender-typical, could be transgendered.
It involved someone that my daughter/wife/mom thought was a man, but that doesn’t mean it’s a man, whether cis or trans. Someone can look like the traditional appearance of a man and be a woman, and vice versa.
So yes, there were more possibilities – it could have been a cis man, a cis woman, a trans man, or a trans woman, or another possibility for those who use other descriptors, no matter their appearance.
Stop.
I didn’t say anything about suspicion to intend harm.
He’s not being suspicious or threatening. He’s just in the lady’s room. Perhaps you know him and know he’s not a threat and not transgender. The women are upset by it. What do you tell them? Do their feelings matter, or not?
Again, no suspicion, just him being there and the women not liking it. Is that wrong, or not?
And what would you tell your daughter, wife, etc? To just get over it and stop being silly?
If a man decides he’s going to no longer respect the social norm of gendered restrooms, but your wife, etc. wants to preserve that norm, where do you stand and why?
It may or may not be absurd, but the point is rhetorical, as you know.
BOOM!
That’s what I was saying a long time ago.
If someone can look like a man and have male genitals but be a woman, there’s no point in gendered restrooms - or gender at all, for that matter. Why pretend otherwise?
Yes, there were many possibilities, and you focused on the one that contained a gender-typical man, and actually had “call the authorities” as one of your options, even though the man was doing nothing threatening in the scenario. No where in your list of actions that you might do was “Tell my wife/daughter to get over it”
I don’t understand how I could possibly know this. You’re getting into some sci-fi realm of mind-reading.
My family’s feelings always matter to me. I would try to make them feel better if they felt bad.
I’d want to know and understand the man’s reasoning behind his actions. I don’t see how I could possibly know this without psychic abilities.
At some point the absurdity drowns out any possibility of rhetorical benefit. This one is as absurd as ostrich bathrooms, or imaginary friend bathrooms.
If you can give me a scenario that doesn’t require supernatural powers, I’d be happy to try again.
But there is a point to them – most people prefer them and will continue to use them. If we’re “pretending otherwise” about the need for gendered bathrooms, it’s a shared fiction – and shared fictions continue as long as most people believe in them and practice them.
If everyone (or almost everyone) accepts that some men (trans or cis) might look like the traditional appearance of a women, and vice versa, so what? Yes, it’s possible that gendered bathroom usage could break down, but this was always possible. I’m not going to worry about this possibility (for one thing, because I don’t care if gendered bathrooms cease) until I see any evidence that it might occur. I think, at least in the short and medium term, the most likely event is that the vast majority of men (trans or cis) would use the men’s room, and the vast majority of women (trans or cis) would use the ladies room, whatever their appearance, and non-traditional appearing folks might get raised eyebrows sometimes, but most people will maintain a relatively traditional appearance, so these raised eyebrows will be pretty rare, and almost no one will much care even when they do occur.
ASSUME you know. For argument’s sake. Stop dodging!
Would you tell them it’s okay to not want a man in the restroom with them? Yes or no? If they said it’s not about whether they are transgender or a threat and to stop dodging the question, would you give a straight answer to them at least?
So in that case, it seems that’s your answer to your wife, daughter etc. – since they can’t possibly know that he’s not a transgender person (even though, as you like to say, that’s pretty unlikely), then you have to tolerate any and all men in the lady’s room.
At least just say it.
Now you’re just bullshit dodging. I thought you were better than this.
Nope, I’m really done now. If you can’t discuss in good faith and can’t be honest, forget it.
I’m doing my best. If you can’t have disagreements without accusing people of being dishonest and arguing in bad faith, then that’s a shame.
More circular argument dodging.