"But I think the solution you are championing is the least pragmatic of all. It purports to want to get all trans women - even the passing ones who ‘have shown commitment’ and admittedly cause no trouble- out of ‘women’s spaces’, but allows CIS men INTO those spaces, either as security guards hunting down ‘masculine loking persons’ "
"But I think the solution you are championing is the least pragmatic of all. It purports to want to get all trans women - even the passing ones who ‘have shown commitment’ and admittedly cause no trouble- out of ‘women’s spaces’, but allows CIS men INTO those spaces, either as security guards hunting down ‘masculine loking persons’ "
Haha, no, this obviously isn't what I'm suggesting. I think very few people, other than the absolutely most extreme weirdos, want anything like this.
I 'm suggesting an honest recognition that a trans woman is, in fact a man. Because from there, we can have an honest conversation about under which circumstances, if any, a man should be allowed into a woman's space.
You, at least, are honest enough to admit that what you're advocating for is unisex spaces, aka, the abolition of sex segregation. I think this is a terrible idea, but at least it allows us to talk about why we have sex segregation and all the situations in which sex matters more than this meaningless concept of gender.
There are lots of times when I'd rather not use men's spaces. Men's toilets are often super gross, some men are really weird in men's changing rooms, if, heaven forbid, I were ever sent to prison, I'd be terrified to be held in the men's wing and would much rather be in the women's. Male violence is a scary thing. And I say that as a larger and stronger than average man.
But while the problem of male violence absolutely needs to be solved, I don't understand why you think it's women's responsibility to put themselves in greater danger to solve it. You talk about "sacrificing minorities" for the comfort of one specific group, but women are also a marginalised group, and you're talking about sacrificing that very significant group for the comfort of a minority group that you can't even define in a coherent way!
Again, once we can distinguish trans women unambiguously from men, I think we could have this conversation much more easily. But until then, trans women aren't even a minority! Because you're advocating for all men to be treated in exactly the same way.
The percentage of men who would rather not go to a men's prison, say, is roughly 100%. So in your view, why shouldn't they also be able to claim refuge in women's prisons? What's the difference? Seriously, this whole conversation is a waste of time until you address this question: what is the difference between a man and a trans woman? How can we ever tell the difference?
As for Ilona, you say she's clearly a woman (although you also say that she "clearly [doesn't] fit either [male or female] box neatly"), but WHY is she clearly a woman? If, as you claim, male and female are two ends of a spectrum, why do you cite her as an example of someone who is further from the female end of the spectrum than Kim kardashian, say? If someone like Dylan Mulvaney is also a woman, WHAT DOES THE WORD "WOMAN" MEAN???!!!
I'm sure Ilona walks into women's restrooms all the time. She looks like a woman. A big woman, yes, but a woman. Masculine looking women Do, and always have faced more scrutiny in women's spaces. I've heard several stories about that, and usually they're resolved the moment she opens her mouth or the other person gets a clear look at them. Despite the common attempts to obfuscate this fact, human beings are very, very well adapted to distinguish between men and women.
But this is still largely beside the point. Some men are small and slight enough to be able to put on a dress and walk into a woman's bathroom. If they grew out their hair and had a shave, maybe they wouldn't even attract much attention. BUT I STILL DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD DO THIS. Because they're men.
Yes, men can walk into women's bathrooms. I could easily have pushed past that woman and had a pee in one of the stalls if I'd really wanted to. But doing so would have a deliberate violation of women's boundaries. This is not a benign or innocent act. You seem to be totally overlooking this fact. Again, the reason there are all these people asking how to find the "courage" to use women's spaces is because they know they're not supposed to be using them.
I'm happy to admit that genuine trans women (I'll use transsexual for clarity) complicate this dynamic. If someone with diagnosed gender dysphoria, who has undergone treatment and transition, uses the women's bathroom, I struggle to see an issue with that. I know many women in the comments here would disagree, but as we've agreed, chances are they've already shared a bathroom with someone like this.
The issue is this new and insane idea that any man, simply by saying he identifies as a woman, should be treated in the same way. The only way to accommodate this particular brand of insanity is, as you say, to do away with sex segregation altogether. And this would trample over the wishes and boundaries of well over 50% of the population (lots of men would object too) to satisfy the desires of a few people who are confused about the distinction between sex and gendered stereotypes.
Lastly, on male gynaecologists, yes, male gynaecologists exist, but they're largely a hangover from the days when women simply couldn't be doctors. Now that's changed, the majority are women, and I'm pretty sure the trend will grow.
Also, it's fairly routine for women to ask to be seen by a female gynaecologist. And the bigger issue here is that they get to choose. Women in your sex desegregated future, wouldn't get to choose who shared their spaces. Even now, lesbian bars and apps are being shut down if they even attempt to be woman only. Women are being slandered as bigots and having their gym/spa memberships revoked if they object to unambiguous men using their spaces. Men who could easily use the male spaces without any issue.
I always get the impression when I talk to your side of this debate that you're only ever thinking of some dainty, 5'5" twink who would never hurt a fly. And sure, these people absolutely exist. But can you also recognise that the majority of males are not like this. And that there are several counter examples that need more serious consideration than, "just let them do what they want and we'll take action once they rape someone!"?
"But I think the solution you are championing is the least pragmatic of all. It purports to want to get all trans women - even the passing ones who ‘have shown commitment’ and admittedly cause no trouble- out of ‘women’s spaces’, but allows CIS men INTO those spaces, either as security guards hunting down ‘masculine loking persons’ "
Haha, no, this obviously isn't what I'm suggesting. I think very few people, other than the absolutely most extreme weirdos, want anything like this.
I 'm suggesting an honest recognition that a trans woman is, in fact a man. Because from there, we can have an honest conversation about under which circumstances, if any, a man should be allowed into a woman's space.
You, at least, are honest enough to admit that what you're advocating for is unisex spaces, aka, the abolition of sex segregation. I think this is a terrible idea, but at least it allows us to talk about why we have sex segregation and all the situations in which sex matters more than this meaningless concept of gender.
There are lots of times when I'd rather not use men's spaces. Men's toilets are often super gross, some men are really weird in men's changing rooms, if, heaven forbid, I were ever sent to prison, I'd be terrified to be held in the men's wing and would much rather be in the women's. Male violence is a scary thing. And I say that as a larger and stronger than average man.
But while the problem of male violence absolutely needs to be solved, I don't understand why you think it's women's responsibility to put themselves in greater danger to solve it. You talk about "sacrificing minorities" for the comfort of one specific group, but women are also a marginalised group, and you're talking about sacrificing that very significant group for the comfort of a minority group that you can't even define in a coherent way!
Again, once we can distinguish trans women unambiguously from men, I think we could have this conversation much more easily. But until then, trans women aren't even a minority! Because you're advocating for all men to be treated in exactly the same way.
The percentage of men who would rather not go to a men's prison, say, is roughly 100%. So in your view, why shouldn't they also be able to claim refuge in women's prisons? What's the difference? Seriously, this whole conversation is a waste of time until you address this question: what is the difference between a man and a trans woman? How can we ever tell the difference?
As for Ilona, you say she's clearly a woman (although you also say that she "clearly [doesn't] fit either [male or female] box neatly"), but WHY is she clearly a woman? If, as you claim, male and female are two ends of a spectrum, why do you cite her as an example of someone who is further from the female end of the spectrum than Kim kardashian, say? If someone like Dylan Mulvaney is also a woman, WHAT DOES THE WORD "WOMAN" MEAN???!!!
I'm sure Ilona walks into women's restrooms all the time. She looks like a woman. A big woman, yes, but a woman. Masculine looking women Do, and always have faced more scrutiny in women's spaces. I've heard several stories about that, and usually they're resolved the moment she opens her mouth or the other person gets a clear look at them. Despite the common attempts to obfuscate this fact, human beings are very, very well adapted to distinguish between men and women.
But this is still largely beside the point. Some men are small and slight enough to be able to put on a dress and walk into a woman's bathroom. If they grew out their hair and had a shave, maybe they wouldn't even attract much attention. BUT I STILL DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD DO THIS. Because they're men.
Yes, men can walk into women's bathrooms. I could easily have pushed past that woman and had a pee in one of the stalls if I'd really wanted to. But doing so would have a deliberate violation of women's boundaries. This is not a benign or innocent act. You seem to be totally overlooking this fact. Again, the reason there are all these people asking how to find the "courage" to use women's spaces is because they know they're not supposed to be using them.
I'm happy to admit that genuine trans women (I'll use transsexual for clarity) complicate this dynamic. If someone with diagnosed gender dysphoria, who has undergone treatment and transition, uses the women's bathroom, I struggle to see an issue with that. I know many women in the comments here would disagree, but as we've agreed, chances are they've already shared a bathroom with someone like this.
The issue is this new and insane idea that any man, simply by saying he identifies as a woman, should be treated in the same way. The only way to accommodate this particular brand of insanity is, as you say, to do away with sex segregation altogether. And this would trample over the wishes and boundaries of well over 50% of the population (lots of men would object too) to satisfy the desires of a few people who are confused about the distinction between sex and gendered stereotypes.
Lastly, on male gynaecologists, yes, male gynaecologists exist, but they're largely a hangover from the days when women simply couldn't be doctors. Now that's changed, the majority are women, and I'm pretty sure the trend will grow.
Also, it's fairly routine for women to ask to be seen by a female gynaecologist. And the bigger issue here is that they get to choose. Women in your sex desegregated future, wouldn't get to choose who shared their spaces. Even now, lesbian bars and apps are being shut down if they even attempt to be woman only. Women are being slandered as bigots and having their gym/spa memberships revoked if they object to unambiguous men using their spaces. Men who could easily use the male spaces without any issue.
I always get the impression when I talk to your side of this debate that you're only ever thinking of some dainty, 5'5" twink who would never hurt a fly. And sure, these people absolutely exist. But can you also recognise that the majority of males are not like this. And that there are several counter examples that need more serious consideration than, "just let them do what they want and we'll take action once they rape someone!"?
This is the most civil and reasoned discussion I’ve seen on the topic. Thanks both.