PS- From your link:
How’s that word salad supposed to ‘clarify’ anything? Sorry, but I insist, I am as tolerant of LGBT as anyone I know, but on this particular branch (?) I think it’s confusing as hell. And I highly doubt that coming up with more and more terms/categories is helping anyone on the inside or the outside.
I just wish someone would give it to me straight. 
Paradoxically, the expansion of human tolerance has led to an increase in people departing from the norm in an increasing number of ways, meaning that one’s descriptor grows longer and longer to define all the things that one is or is not, even if they were previously the default.
I tell you, you learn some weird shit hanging out in the dark parts of the Internet.
So you want me – and tons of people like me – to walk around with our 'net devices at the ready in case some says “hi, I am a straight cisgender”? And that helps anything, how?
Bullshit.
So for the crowd that thinks that people should use the facilities of their gender, and that the assault risk is an important argument–what about transmen?
Take a transman that’s either early in the process or for whom the therapy isn’t working very well–he looks like a woman. If anything is an invitation to get assaulted by the more troglodytic members of society, that’s one. I’d think that many transmales would prefer to use the female facilities in any situation where they felt at risk. I’d suppose that a transman could pass as a woman even fairly along in the process; highly reduced breasts, light body hair, and a generically male style of dress aren’t going to be impediments.
I’m personally ok with transmen having the choice of facilities, depending on their comfort level, but then it seems inconsistent to deny others the same choice.
… You didn’t know a word, so you think people who do should stop using it?
It’s your hill.
You know that you talk about “transgenders” in the same dismissive way that some people talk about you, right?
To be fair, it’s one of those Tumblr-borne cutesy neologisms (coined in reference to ancient Latin geography and current chemistry jargon, where “cis” is the opposite of “trans”) and one can be irritated by its use or by the assumption that everyone ought to know it, just like one can be irritated by similar terms like “shaming” and “mansplaining,” without necessarily disagreeing with anything that the person using the word actually advocates. I’d suggest not pre-emptively irritating people you’re trying to persuade by introducing a lot of inside jokes and flippant humorous slang terms for no good reason.
I don’t assume everyone knows any word I use. I assume they can look it up, or ask if it’s an actual real-life conversation. I also assume they won’t be angered by my use of it. It’s not an inside joke or a “flippant humourous slang term”, it is actually the word that means “not transsexual”. Google it, I didn’t invent it.
Yeah, right. That’s exactly what I am saying. I don’t speak Cantonese either, so I think it ought to be banned from use. :rolleyes:
Just in case anyone in this thread is still operating under the misconception that you have any clue what you’re talking about, the first recorded usage of “cisgender” dates to 1994. Tumblr was launched in 2007.
You said
“So should we as a society cater to peoples’ irrational emotional response to such harmless things as being around someone with different genitalia nude?”
Presumably, the reason transpeople do not want to use the locker room, spa etc used by those with the same genitalia because the transpeople have an emotional response to being around someone with the same genitalia nude. Why is one emotional response rational and something we should cater to while the other is not?
IMO, if someone wants to place limitations on another persons actions or movement, they need to provide an argument for the restriction that’s significantly stronger than the other person’s reasons for wanting to do the restricted thing. If both reasons are equally valid, the person who wants to restrict someone else’s actions loses.
Here, I’mma be the ultimate SDMB douchebag and lead by socratic example. Watch this:
Identify yourself.
Actually, I’ll save you the trouble. By identifying yourself, assuming you’ve done it, you’ve left out dozens or hundreds of factoids or figures about yourself - factoids that you assign no moral or personal significance whatsoever - based sheerly on relevence. You already have piles of these; it doesn’t hurt to add one more.
It is neither just nor meaningful to judge a person by their shoe size, but if we’re discussing shoe stores in Xintiandi, it might be relevant. Since we’re discussing issues of sexuality, I figured it wouldn’t hurt to add mine to the mix, and everybody’s something.
I think it is too.
I honestly don’t know a lot of American women who are comfortable being naked around anyone - a number of them that includes their husbands. We are a puritan society.
The community center I go to has a mens locker room, a womens locker room, and a family locker room with stalls for you to get dressed in - a lot of women use the family locker room even if they don’t have kids - so they don’t need to take a shower in front of other women or get dressed in front of other women. I know women who don’t shower at the gym - or do so in a swimsuit, grab the corner locker, change using the “expose no skin you don’t see on the treadmill” method.
Now, presumably, if you go to an Asian bathhouse, you aren’t quite so prudish - you are comfortable enough to be naked around what you think of as other women. But not necessarily around what you think of as men. Regardless of how that individual perceives themselves. (Or vice versa).
I’d also imagine that an Asian bathhouse is pretty likely to be patronized by Asians - who don’t necessarily have a forward thinking culture on gender identity.
However, if transpersons aren’t likely to go into a situation where they’d be “made” its pretty unlikely that this particular transperson was actually kicked out for being trans - 'cause who would notice, I’m not checking other women for their implant scars for a breast enhancement, and I’ve never seen anyone look that close in any locker room I’ve been in - its likely that they were kicked out for some other sort of inappropriate behavior. And, when you are a person who is often discriminated against, its easy to see any negative action as discrimination.
(And please forgive any poor word choices, my intent here is good, but I find the language on this topic to be confusing and don’t speak it often).
HOOOLEEEEE SHIIIIIIT
Well, here’s what we all get for speculatin’. I found a news report about it.
Transman, not woman.
Offered private shower.
Refused.
Filing suit.
Playing the racial segregation equivalency card.
No, I don’t know him. Yes, it appears drama llama was the correct answer. I don’t have a problem going back there.
Thanks, all. It’s been real.
FWIW I think “cis*” is awkward to say IRL, and seems somewhat new-agey and contrived (despite it being around for a couple of decades or so) but it can make online discussions easier (less typing).
Then you aren’t looking very hard. Again, not every instance of bigotry or discrimination is just like what happened to Black people. Just as every genocide is not a Holocaust, and every dictator is not Hitler. Comparing any and everything to those things just indicates you are a lazy thinker or a dishonest debater.
That stat is clearly false. I don’t even know why you would try to pass that off as even remotely plausible. There are about 900k trans people in the US. Let’s assume half are women. In 2011, there were 9 trans people murdered in the US. In 2012 (up until November), there were 13. There is absolutely no way you stat is even remotely accurate. Or to quote this site:
In short, the stat seems to have been made up. If you have a source, please cite it. Otherwise, please stop saying such a ridiculous claim.
The catering part is because you are asking others to be okay with allowing individuals to use their own internal logic rather than societal norms to determine who is in the “right” place.
What the hell are you talking about? Why don’t you try quoting what you responding to.
Are you under the misimpression that every transexual will have the proper identification at all times?
It does not change your point that much, but there are about 3:1 to 4:1 transwomen to transmen. Just FYI.
Yeah, when I saw that 1 in 12 number I almost choked; holy shit. I was going to post some citations as to the real figures, but I was sans laptop.
Murder used to be a more significant cause of death for transwomen (but never within an order of magnitude of 1 in 12), due largely to a disproportionate number of transwomen being forced into sex work due to being fired or unable to be hired. The real tragedy of transwomen is suicide, with 19-33% attempting suicide at some point in their lives, and conservatively estimating, a “successful” suicide rate nearly 70 times that of the general population. Vis, about 800 in 100,000 on a lifetime basis (compared to 11.5 in 100,000) Haas, Ann P. et al. “Suicide and Suicide Risk in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Populations: Review and Recommendations” Journal of Homosexuality 58 (2011): 10–51.
Sadly, many do not.
Nonetheless, it’s the recent rise in insular, largely Internet-based communities where people can quickly spiral into their own little worlds of private languages and more that has made the term one that is popular with people who are likely to use it.
That’s all great, but it wasn’t what I asked to have explained. What I want to have explained is why you think we should have divided locker rooms at all.