Cool when brand new accounts join the forums to defend TERFS with all the nuance of a chatGPT bot copy pasting every so-smart argument from Ben Shapiros twitter feed.

I see we've made our way back to the inevitable "trans women are going to commit sex crimes in bathrooms" part of this eternal molehill of an issue based solely around bigotry.

I suppose a situation would be more complex if I had to consider all of the imaginary arguments one could have.

Fortunately… I don’t. I can treat one side tilting at windmills with all of the respect it deserves.

To soften the blow on this, the same spaces argument can come from another perspective. The transperson in question doesn't have to be a predator. That's a shit assumption to make. They just have to be an unintended trigger. Their very presence could be that trigger. It is a much easier thing to keep those spaces single sex for the wellbeing of those that use them.

Accepting a transperson into a prison or same-sex space has no elegant solution. So you pick the one that pisses off the least amount of people.

@shindig: A trigger how? Does a trans person who has had surgery count as being able to use the bathroom of the gender they ascribe to? Is the trigger seeing a person you view as a man? If so, does that mean trans individuals that you deem as passing wouldn't be a trigger and should therefore be able to use the restroom of the gender they identify as? What about someone who was born a woman but has transitioned and now "passes" as a man? Would that not be triggering, and if it is, does that mean that they should use the men's restroom?

The argument that it is triggering and that we should therefore only use the spaces of our identity ascribed at birth is also a shit argument.

@shindig: That’s not softening the blow. That’s actively ignoring the fact that this is a safety issue for an oppressed minority to appease the “comfort” of others. Trans women are in danger when put into male spaces, included documented assaults, rapes, and murders for being forced to go into men’s prisons. Accepting the solution that “pisses off the least amount of people” is making the decision to let people be tortured and killed so normies don’t have to think about gender assumptions. It’s simply a monstrous position to hold.

@shindig: I mean... there are people who say that phone signals cause them headaches. Yes, their lives are made worse by the existence of telephone poles, but should we change our politics due to that?

Because that's kind of what you're suggesting. In both cases their irrational fears have real consequences.

@shindig said:

There are documented cases of cis women being harassed for using women's bathrooms, because they dress a certain way or have short hair. Bigots have shown time and time again that they are incapable of looking at someone and instantly knowing what a person's sex or gender identity is.

Being triggered by the genitalia that you think someone has is frankly bizarre. It happens, to be sure. But the burden of dealing with that trigger is not on the person who unknowingly causes it. If someone looks at you and is uncomfortable, that isn't your fault, and you shouldn't have to deal with it.

@jacksmedulla said:

For some abused women, a man in their safe space could absolutely trigger past trauma. I've seen that happen first hand. It's not a hypothetical thing.

@shindig: You didn't answer my questions. Would a Trans man count as triggering, and would they therefore need to use the men's restroom? If so, then your policy requiring people to use the spaces matching their gender at birth due to the possibility of triggering someone already falls apart.

@shindig: I love how you think you’re making a more humane argument but instead just digging the transphobe hole further. First, to you a trans woman is a man, which gives up the game quickly. Then you conveniently ignore any other axis of abuse that a cis woman might experience. Assaulted by a black woman? Might as well keep them out of the bathroom. Assaulted by a gay woman? Guess they have to use another bathroom then. What about the trauma of cis straight, white women on other cis straight white women? Looks like no one’s allowed to use the bathroom.

Happy International Women’s Day, btw.

So, what, anyone that is remotely masculine looking has to show everyone else in the women's room what is between their legs? Or apologize for looking butch? Or should everyone have to answer when they had their last period and show some sort of proof to those using the bathroom at that time?

Again, this has always been a non issue. You think you're being fair and kind, which is so much worse. You're inventing a problem to account for your own bigotry. Period.

Both sidesing is a hell of a drug.

I was talking more about women's refuges, to be honest. Bathrooms are strictly utilitarian to me so it doesn't bother me who goes where.

Maybe women treat bathrooms differently but I, like many people discussing this topic, have likely never been in one.

You have never been in a bathroom?

You know what I meant.

Guys, its true that some predators use the Trans angle to prey on women, there have been news stories about this from time to time. But I don't agree that this means Trans people are bad. First of all, their not really Trans, they're just pretending to be in order to commit of horrible crime. Second, even if you do have a criminal who happens to be Trans, it doesn't mean all Trans people are bad. Criminals come in all races, genders, and yes sexual orientations, but it doesn't mean the whole group is bad. But, bigots will use those cherrypicked stories to try and disregard an entire group. This is the main thing JKR is doing, even today. People of color have been dealing with this for generations.

@shindig: Do I? you really have not said much of anything.

@shindig: Love how you skip past my initial response about prisons and just move on to bathrooms, but ok. What "refuges" are you talking about exactly? Because you're being awfully evasive here.

https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/homelessness/womens_refuges

I would've thought that was obvious.

@shindig: Weird how folks in the VAW space have already accounted for this, and are working towards inclusive services that include trans women, who experience intimate partner violence at greater rates than cis women. I’m sure you already read resources like the following before making your “strong” arguments here:

https://www.vawlearningnetwork.ca/our-work/reports/report_2017_3.html

Once again, your inane and bigoted argument only considers cis-straight, and presumably white presenting women. Surely lesbian women of intimate partner abuse must endure the sight of women at VAW facilities, but the precious cis-straight women who are offended at trans women (or just women with masculine features) are the ones that must be protected. Great argument, chief.

@shindig: Okay, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are just ill-informed, but let's go through why this is a problematic stance. First off, it's just straight a feminism appropriating radical transphobe talking point, that is not really a real problem. It's based on hearsay and only exists in theory, as there have been basically been no documented cases of any of this happening and in the cases that they have been documented, they have quickly turned out to be hoaxes purposefully spread to instill fear. In addition, there are much more effective ways of dealing with these situations other than just taking away human rights from people.

Now, the reason I don't use the term TERF and instead call them FARTs is that this itself is a very conservative view of women as victims and not independent actors, but more importantly, it is taken straight out of the fascist playbook. And I literally mean playbook, as it's been written down by fascist ideologues as a way to get people to support fascism: First, you start with demagoguery and fearmongering towards a group of people. Then, when you have people riled up and irrationally scared, you use that as a reason to deny human rights to that group of people in legislation. It's the same strategy, just exchange the group of people: Immigrants, African-Americans, transpeople, "intelligentsia" or people with eyeglasses, or the extreme example of jews. We then end up in a situation where human rights are not universal and you can easily erode democracy by making your oppositions into pariahs.

So, as I said in the start, I'm not calling you a transphobe or a fascist, but you are repeating their message. Which begs the question, if you had to choose which groups of people deserve human rights and which don't, who would they be?

The game is decent but a bit boilerplate

At the end of the day, it's another open world RPG with coloured loot and ubisoft level of collectibles.

Combat's decent though

@retris: Everyone deserves the same rights. That's my answer.

@shindig: So like, unisex spaces?

Sure, if that can work.

@shindig: But your original claim is that it can't work?

Have we ever really tried?

I've been in unisex bathrooms. They're nice because there are nothing but stalls, people tend to flush, and there are way fewer slurs carved into the walls.

Fair enough.

The wild thing about the bathroom bullshit (that I can't believe we are talking about AGAIN, it's like the 21st century version of Satanic panic) is that the majority of assaults of this nature happen in public spaces like parks and parking garages, not highly trafficked public restrooms. If your goal is truly segregation, at least start where the problems actually exist.

@sethmode: It's because none of this is in good faith. These chuds don't care about women's safety, or the safety of anyone by themselves. They just find trans people icky and try to dress it up in intellectual armor.

I love how this "debate" started around 2016 by right-wing fringe types, and 7 years later these same ridiculous claims are being parroted by ignorant concern trolls as the "mild" take because all the other panic around trans people has gotten so extreme. Really, really exposing just how little some people think of us, and making me recontextualize some earlier posts in this thread.

The same garbage gender essentialization can be dressed up in progressive language too. For example, I went to a (to its detriment) incredibly progressive liberal arts college, and some nonbinary acquaintances would consistently treat my dude friends like trash and when called out on it, they'd say, "well, I was abused by a cis man, so, you know."

The pain and trauma of abuse is valid. Using that pain to justify being a shitty person isn't, especially to the degree JKR and GC types have taken it. "I was abused by a man, so 1% of women shouldn't be allowed to exist in public," isn't an argument.