Biden changes Trump law for transgender toilets & sport - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15157944
skinster wrote:Weird for someone as idealistic as you to say this, but agreed.

And you said 1 example would be enough. It doesn't seem like enough since you continue to be dismissive of transwomen raping women and children.

Yes, men do the raping. Thanks for catching on. This should lead you to understanding why lots of women are opposed to opening their spaces up to biological men (even if they call themselves women).

You're yet to provide anything besides your opinion that you think gender studies are a science, something you're yet to prove in any way. My guess is you're too embarrassed to show anything to support this opinion, which is understandable.

Where does biology state transwomen and and men are different, biologically?


I am not really sure what argument you think I am making.
#15157994
I find the issue of rape to be only slightly related to the issue of trans people using bathrooms.

Because if you do look at these subjects together as one issue, you end up doing morally unacceptable math.

I will explain:

There are basically two positions:

1. people should be allowed to use the bathroom they identify with, or
2. people should only be allowed to use the bathroom they are born into.

Now, if we argue for 1, we are theoretically increasing the risk of rape for women in these bathrooms. And we could easily end up with a non-zero number of rapes because of this.

If we argue for 2, we are theoretically increasing the risk of rape for trans women in these bathrooms. And we could easily end up with a non-zero number of rapes because of this.

So we end up arguing for the one we think causes less rapes? That seems like morally unacceptable math. We should instead argue for zero rapes. That seems like the only morally acceptable math.

And we need to do this regardless of where people go to urinate.
#15157995
Pants-of-dog wrote:I find the issue of rape to be only slightly related to the issue of trans people using bathrooms.

There are basically two positions:

1. people should be allowed to use the bathroom they identify with, or
2. people should only be allowed to use the bathroom they are born into.


Fair enough but those trans-identifying rapists in the links I share also exist, despite you pretending they don't.

And we need to do this regardless of where people go to urinate.


If only I could just dismiss this whole issue so it was about where people pee/piss/urinate/rape/etc. Weird that the main pushback against the gender-critical feminists comes from men. How fucking weird is that PoD? :lol:
#15158071
I'm asking why you're ignoring female fears of trans-identified men raping women and children in female spaces, or at best referring to them as "isolated" and shooing them away. I wish you had the same fight in you for women and children's rights that you do for men, but I'm just reminded that patriarchy is a hell of a drug and "leftist men" are often stuck in it.
#15158074
skinster wrote:I'm asking why you're ignoring female fears of trans-identified men raping women and children in female spaces, or at best referring to them as "isolated" and shooing them away. I wish you had the same fight in you for women and children's rights that you do for men, but I'm just reminded that patriarchy is a hell of a drug and "leftist men" are often stuck in it.


Okay.

I think that you are right.

We should not ignore these rapes. No sexual assault should be ignored.

Did these sexual assaults occur in bathrooms from strangers? While the lurking stranger is a problem in many sexual assault cases, most times it is someone known to the target. If that is the case, then this executive order is irrelevant, and instead we need to discuss how to prevent that sort of rape.
#15158075
Pants-of-dog wrote:We should not ignore these rapes. No sexual assault should be ignored.


Did these sexual assaults occur in bathrooms from strangers? While the lurking stranger is a problem in many sexual assault cases, most times it is someone known to the target. If that is the case, then this executive order is irrelevant, and instead we need to discuss how to prevent that sort of rape.


I've shared a bunch of articles that you could go ahead and read if it doesn't fuck with your cognitive dissonance too much, I don't know why you insist on playing dumb here.

A way to prevent that sort of rape is by keeping people with dicks out of female spaces. Maybe only allowing transwomen that have their dicks removed in those spaces could be a way of meeting in the middle.
#15158076
skinster wrote:I've shared a bunch of articles that you could go ahead and read if it doesn't fuck with your cognitive dissonance too much, I don't know why you insist on playing dumb here.


Sorry, I thought you had read them.

A way to prevent that sort of rape is by keeping people with dicks out of female spaces. Maybe only allowing transwomen that have their dicks removed in those spaces could be a way of meeting in the middle.


Again, if these assaults did not occur in female only spaces, then this policy you advocate would have no effect.
#15158079
Here is some info on the threat in prisons.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Sorry, I thought you had read them.


Yes, the first one included sexual assault of female prisoners in a female prison, as well as rape elsewhere.

Again, if these assaults did not occur in female only spaces, then this policy you advocate would have no effect.


Another article I shared had someone taking pics of children over the toilet in female toilets in Asda.

But keep on ignoring them and defending your own. :D
#15158081
skinster wrote:Here is some info on the threat in prisons.

Yes, the first one included sexual assault of female prisoners in a female prison, as well as rape elsewhere.


To get the irrelevant out of the way: Biden and Trump’s executive orders would have no impact in this.

Back to the important topic:

Yes, sexual assault in prisons is a problem. This is one of the reasons I tend to agree with prison abolitionists. It seems like all we do is move the problem into jails where it actually increases because the guards do not care, or are doing it themselves.

And now this rapist is serving the rest of her sentence in a male prison. It is likely that she has been raped if she is in the general population. One, she is a woman. Two, she is a rapist. While some would see justice in that, I am more of the opinion that zero is the only morally acceptable number.

Another article I shared had someone taking pics of children over the toilet in female toilets in Asda.

But keep on ignoring them and defending your own. :D


I will look that up next. Thank you.
#15158086
Pants-of-dog wrote:To get the irrelevant out of the way: Biden and Trump’s executive orders would have no impact in this.


That's not irrelevant because some states are working on housing transwomen in female prisons.

And now this rapist is serving the rest of her sentence in a male prison. It is likely that she has been raped if she is in the general population. One, she is a woman. Two, she is a rapist.


She is not a woman. Women don't have dicks.


Over here in the U.K. there was some sanity in parliament yesterday, against the erasure of women.
Last edited by skinster on 23 Feb 2021 16:44, edited 2 times in total.
#15158087
skinster wrote:That's not irrelevant because some states are working on housing transwomen in female prisons.


I think they would have anyway, is what I am saying.

She is not a woman. Women don't have dicks.


That is not the important thing, in my view. The important thing is to stop sexual assault.
#15158089
Pants-of-dog wrote:That is not the important thing, in my view.


Well it is for women, but you've made clear you don't care about what we think.

The important thing is to stop sexual assault.


It's also important to listen to women who fear sharing their spaces or opening up their sports to people with dicks and who are stronger, who also happen to sexually assault women about every minute of every day across the world and that explains the female fears of opening up spaces. But got it, women's legitimate grievances don't matter here. Only transwomen's feelings matter.
#15158092
skinster wrote:Well it is for women, but you've made clear you don't care about what we think.


Sorry.

I thought we were in agreement that rape is the important issue and the executive orders were not.

Are you saying that the executive orders are the important issue?

It's also important to listen to women who fear sharing their spaces or opening up their sports to people with dicks and who are stronger, who also happen to sexually assault women about every minute of every day across the world and that explains the female fears of opening up spaces. But got it, women's legitimate grievances don't matter here. Only transwomen's feelings matter.


Sorry, but you seem to be saying that rape does not matter, and that I should listen to women because rape does matter. I am probably confused about something,

Yes, I should listen to women. Rape does matter.
#15158096
It's very clear I'm talking about female spaces and their invasion by the only group you care about, I don't know why you keep playing dumb and ignoring female opposition to this invasion when above you pretend to care about listening to women (while ignoring them over and over and over again so the conversation results in the current shitshow it is :D ).
#15158100
I think the issue of whether or not (or how) women share their spaces with trans women is a discussion best had within the community of people oppressed by patriarchy.

As a cist het man, I doubt I have the experience to give an intelligent opinion.

So, instead I will take your advice and listen to women (trans or cis) instead of telling them what I think they should do.
#15158102
Pants-of-dog wrote:I think the issue of whether or not (or how) women share their spaces with trans women is a discussion best had within the community of people oppressed by patriarchy.


So everyone can discuss it? Cool. I thought that's what I was doing but you kept running around or ignoring/dismissing what's being discussed; the main issue is of the invasion of female spaces and erasure of women in language (see the above clip or the other debate over here in the U.K. about not naming sex in the Census).

Women were generally fine with trans ideology until it started to fuck with them. When it demanded we recognise 'transwomen are women' and got called names if we disagreed on the biological front. When it started suing beauticians and gynecologists for refusing to work on male genitalia. When it attacked and defunded women-only rape shelters. When it imposed itself into our spaces and sports despite clear objections. With the erasure of women in language and via various bills being debated in the U.K. currently. Changing statistics by self-ID that's resulted in an 84% increase of "female" pedos in the last 4 years. I won't bother going into the countless women who have lost jobs or who self-censor for not conforming to this ideology.

You need to stop pretending this isn't an attack on women's rights. There is something deeply misogynistic about aspects of this ideology and frankly it's not a huge surprise that men are either ignorant of it or willfully ignorant about it. I won't get into the homophobia within it that's lately been resulting in LGB groups taking the T out of their orgs but can do if interested.

So, instead I will take your advice and listen to women (trans or cis) instead of telling them what I think they should do.


But you've already been telling me it's basically ok for female spaces to be invaded just because someone labels themselves trans. That's your position. Simultaneously you ignore women's objections to this. Why?
#15158103
skinster wrote:So everyone can discuss it? Cool. I thought that's what I was doing but you kept running around or ignoring/dismissing what's being discussed; the main issue is of the invasion of female spaces and erasure of women in language (see the above clip or the other debate over here in the U.K. about not naming sex in the Census).

Women were generally fine with trans ideology until it started to fuck with them. When it demanded we recognise 'transwomen are women' and got called names if we disagreed on the biological front. When it started suing beauticians and gynecologists for refusing to work on male genitalia. When it attacked and defunded women-only rape shelters. When it imposed itself into our spaces and sports despite clear objections. With the erasure of women in language and via various bills being debated in the U.K. currently. Changing statistics by self-ID that's resulted in an 84% increase of "female" pedos in the last 4 years. I won't bother going into the countless women who have lost jobs or who self-censor for not conforming to this ideology.

You need to stop pretending this isn't an attack on women's rights. There is something deeply misogynistic about aspects of this ideology and frankly it's not a huge surprise that men are either ignorant of it or willfully ignorant about it. I won't get into the homophobia within it that's lately been resulting in LGB groups taking the T out of their orgs but can do if interested.


At the same time, trans people on the other side of this debate can rightfully accuse me of transphobia if I unilaterally support trans exclusionary feminists.

And no matter who I support, I would rightfully be accused of using my privilege to butt into a conversation that should also be only for (cis and trans) women. He debate itself seems like a women’s only space. The debate about spaces is not one I think I should participate in.

If you want to discuss sexual assault, then I am willing to discuss that again. That is definitely within my mandate.

But you've already been telling me it's basically ok for female spaces to be invaded just because someone labels themselves trans. That's your position. Simultaneously you ignore women's objections to this. Why?


If you wish to believe I claimed that, feel free. I am not interested in clarifying strawmen.
#15158105
A different view.

Gender dysphoria is a serious condition. The suicide rate among people so afflicted is very high. All individuals wishing to change gender identity should be REQUIRED to be seen and evaluated by a psychiatrist trained in handling GID. This should happen before they are allowed to do such things as changing their driving licenses, obtaining new identity documents and, yes, using their new restroom choices.

This should happen for a variety of reasons but most among them to protect the person from harm.

The idea that all that is required for a man to use the ladies room is a wig and lipstick is just wrong.

I am not moved by isolated incidents of assault. Rape is a crime of violence and not sexuality. That said.

I fear we have begun to trivialize sex differences. Traditional gender roles serve a very important purpose. I am disturbed by some so-called feminists who believe that the search for equality compels women to be more like men. Parish the thought. In this, as in so many forms of discrimination, we confuse being equal with being the same.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

Yes, Haiti probably is better at accepting statel[…]

@Verv , @Potemkin , and my good friend @Polit[…]

Atheism is Evil

Then what do yuo even mean by rationality? Are[…]

Self clarification

Been thinking a little bit about what irks me abou[…]