The News Thread

[CiG]

@Einherjar86 should be condemning this as anti-science/science denial.

 

[Dak]

POST 20,0000 ERMAGERZZZZZ

 

[Einherjar86]

View attachment 8925

@Einherjar86 should be condemning this as anti-science/science denial.

Of course there's a difference! But explain to me how this difference impacts the use of bathrooms in enclosed stalls?

 

[CiG]

Of course there's a difference! But explain to me how this difference impacts the use of bathrooms in enclosed stalls?

I didn't say it did. I was merely ribbing you.

I've already stated my thoughts and position in my longer post, address that if you're interested.

 

[Carpe Mortem]

Who the fuck cares if it is selfish? What do they owe to a society that would rather erase their very existence than even so much as view them as human?

Why is it that the feelings of people who spend their entire lives having their existence validated through social and cultural norms/institutions are the ones we are worried about?

Why is it that a small group of people trump the needs of the majority? This kind of logic sets a dangerous precedent where everyone wants to be that special to get their own special benefits. It gets taken advantage of. Nobody wants to erase trans folk, and most don't have a problem with them. But this shit busting into mainstream culture so suddenly isn't the way to approach it. People are delicate. Its dumb, but that's the way it is. There needs to be slow integration of either a third or a unisex restroom, and any trans person who gives a shit about their cause would understand that.

A whiny snowflake with a dick wearing a dress demanding instant societal change, however, is a sick and selfish individual and shouldn't be seen as a spearhead of the movement.

 

[Einherjar86]

I didn't say it did. I was merely ribbing you.

Ribbed.

I've already stated my thoughts and position in my longer post, address that if you're interested.

I didn't see this. I don't think you mean any harm, but I just have some reservations about certain things:

I'm not demonising anybody. I'm saying if gendered toilets have no standards for who can use them, why even have them to begin with? If I as a grizzly bearded dude can use a women's toilet because passing is irrelevant, what the hell is the use of them to begin with?

That's a great point, and the root of my commentary is that gendered bathrooms are the result of socialized processes, hierarchies, taboos, etc.--not the necessary consequence of any biological difference between sexes. Because of this we actually can entertain the flexibility and accommodations of gender categories--it's not all or nothing. Biological sex is a roughly stable issue, unless we get into inevitable exceptions that need to be addressed; but social institutions such as public restrooms aren't actually derived from scientific knowledge of the sexes. They respond to the dynamics of social interaction, and that means gender, not sex.

The general demeanor of your comments was that a certain degree of passing should be necessary in order for transgender people to use a bathroom of their chosen gender, otherwise any schmuck could walk into a women's bathroom--in other words, imitate the sex of your chosen gender. Now, I want to try and explain the implicit danger of demonizing trans-people that I perceive in this sentiment:

I said, if you dismiss the concept of passing, you are inadvertently saying any man (ie cis men) can say they're women and use the toilet and who can deny them? You've stripped the issue of any standard and since we're talking about gendered toilets here, the standard should at least be considered.

I already listed, in an earlier post, the potential reasons for someone using a bathroom typically reserved for the opposite biological sex. If you recall, I said that either these people are legitimately transgender, no matter what they look like, or they're looking to cause harm (in which case the problem is criminality, not transgender), or they're looking to ruffle feathers. You say that when we dismiss passing, we open the door to the dismantling of any bathroom standard whatsoever. And you're absolutely right, standards are on the line here--except that we often still appeal to them, even those of us who critique them, and we rely on a certain degree of social agreement in order to do so.

My objection arises because, from what I can tell, your position is the one that poses the greatest threat to any standard of gendered bathroom use. You say that you're all for transgender bathroom rights, but your argument in favor of passing allows you to offer yourself (i.e. a non-transgender man) as the wild card under which the entire agreement crumbles: "If passing doesn't matter, then I can just walk into a women's bathroom!" The implication here being, of course, that you're not transgender--therefore, men who aren't transgender can simply choose to stroll into women's bathrooms for whatever purpose. Of course, I'm not saying you intend any harm, or that your argument was that men will go into women's bathrooms for nefarious purposes. I'm only saying, as simply as I can, that by presenting yourself as the wrench in the gears, you've implied the possibility that people might use opposite-gender restrooms for malicious reasons.

And that's where the implicit demonization comes in.

I realize that some of this probably seems like a stretch, but to me it's very obvious how the danger of demonization is close to the surface here.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

"their chosen gender" ...and right when i was starting to take your post seriously. Amazing.

 

[Einherjar86]

It's a choice to the degree that individuals decide to acknowledge the gender they identify with. The identification isn't a conscious choice, of course.

 

[CiG]

gendered bathrooms are the result of socialized processes, hierarchies, taboos, etc.--not the necessary consequence of any biological difference between sexes.

Fair point and we can agree here.

Acknowledging this, do you think it's reasonable to strip this away like a rug from under a picnic, or should we slowly pack away all the picnic items before we remove the rug? @Mort Divine and others like him say women should just deal with it because it's "transmisogynistic" (I would argue it's actually misandrist, as it deals more with women's feelings about men and their violent nature, after all people aren't opposed to it because these transwomen are feminine but rather because they perceive them as men) not to just immediately accept it.

Biological sex is a roughly stable issue, unless we get into inevitable exceptions that need to be addressed; but social institutions such as public restrooms aren't actually derived from scientific knowledge of the sexes. They respond to the dynamics of social interaction, and that means gender, not sex.

This isn't entirely true. Many women's toilets provide maxipads and tampons and many men's toilets provide condom machines so there is actually a very clear separation between men's and women's toilets, informed by biological differences. Though this can obviously be remedied by simply providing these items in all toilets.

The general demeanor of your comments was that a certain degree of passing should be necessary in order for transgender people to use a bathroom of their chosen gender, otherwise any schmuck could walk into a women's bathroom--in other words, imitate the sex of your chosen gender.

Initially I only said that the trans community should consider passability before they choose which toilet they use. It was a social suggestion, not so much a legal suggestion. After all, we all know trans people have been using their preferred toilets for decades and this inherently suggests that they've also been using the toilet they know their appearance matches the most, as a means to avoid drama.

Trans community has to at this point decide between progress via being reasonable or stifled progress via being unreasonable people. I think the former will go the furthest.

My objection arises because, from what I can tell, your position is the one that poses the greatest threat to any standard of gendered bathroom use. You say that you're all for transgender bathroom rights, but your argument in favor of passing allows you to offer yourself (i.e. a non-transgender man) as the wild card under which the entire agreement crumbles: "If passing doesn't matter, then I can just walk into a women's bathroom!" The implication here being, of course, that you're not transgender--therefore, men who aren't transgender can simply choose to stroll into women's bathrooms for whatever purpose. Of course, I'm not saying you intend any harm, or that your argument was that men will go into women's bathrooms for nefarious purposes. I'm only saying, as simply as I can, that by presenting yourself as the wrench in the gears, you've implied the possibility that people might use opposite-gender restrooms for malicious reasons.

The main purpose of me bringing up what I believe is a nonsensical position ("passing is irrelevant") is that we're either arguing that you should look more like a woman than a man when you use a women's toilet and vice versa or we should do away entirely with gendered toilets. That's the crux of it.

Edit: And yes that latter comment is an appeal to the comfortability of cis people and the general social contract we all engage in.

 

[Dak]

Gross oversimplification but the principle of the epistemological barriers to serious consideration of serious, more external matters in this the current year, for some, holds true.

 

[Einherjar86]

Acknowledging this, do you think it's reasonable to strip this away like a rug from under a picnic, or should we slowly pack away all the picnic items before we remove the rug? @Mort Divine and others like him say women should just deal with it because it's "transmisogynistic" (I would argue it's actually misandrist, as it deals more with women's feelings about men and their violent nature, after all people aren't opposed to it because these transwomen are feminine but rather because they perceive them as men) not to just immediately accept it.

No, I wouldn't advocate pulling the rug out, so to speak. I would advocate programs to educate people as to irrationality behind their discomfort.

This isn't entirely true. Many women's toilets provide maxipads and tampons and many men's toilets provide condom machines so there is actually a very clear separation between men's and women's toilets, informed by biological differences. Though this can obviously be remedied by simply providing these items in all toilets.

Right, this is more of a cosmetic difference. I'm talking about the design of bathrooms and toilets themselves, which don't conform to anatomical differences between the sexes or anything like that.

Initially I only said that the trans community should consider passability before they choose which toilet they use. It was a social suggestion, not so much a legal suggestion. After all, we all know trans people have been using their preferred toilets for decades and this inherently suggests that they've also been using the toilet they know their appearance matches the most, as a means to avoid drama.

Trans community has to at this point decide between progress via being reasonable or stifled progress via being unreasonable people. I think the former will go the furthest.

Honestly, I feel like most trans-people do consider passing, and that the reasons behind it are different than they were when blacks and gays had to pass. For transgender individuals, the passing becomes a means of gender identification. That said, I still don't see it as necessary; it's a performative element, like all gender.

 

[CiG]

Right, this is more of a cosmetic difference. I'm talking about the organization of bathrooms themselves, which don't conform to anatomical differences between the sexes or anything like that.

Women's toilets have wall urinals?

Honestly, I feel like most trans-people do consider passing, and that the reasons behind it are different than they were when blacks and gays had to pass. For transgender individuals, the passing becomes a means of gender identification. That said, I still don't see it as necessary; it's a performative element, like all gender.

Not sure how blacks or gays are relevant here. Pass as what? Are you suggesting blacks did whiteface in order to use segregated toilets?

But yes, I do think most trans people care about passing. In fact I think the trans community perpetuate gender roles/norms about as much as anybody else. Another reason I think @Mort Divine's position is delusional.

 

[Einherjar86]

Women's toilets have wall urinals?

I'm using "toilet" to refer to the floor toilet, not the general vicinity of the room. Floor toilets don't gender discriminate.

Not sure how blacks or gays are relevant here. Pass as what? Are you suggesting blacks did whiteface in order to use segregated toilets?

I'm suggesting that people of color also pass, but they did so in order to blend in rather than to identify as white (although inevitably many of them did end up identifying as white to some degree).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_(racial_identity)#Passing_for_white

Werner Sollors also published this landmark text that wrote in part about racial passing:

 

[EternalMetal]

Initially I only said that the trans community should consider passability before they choose which toilet they use. It was a social suggestion, not so much a legal suggestion. After all, we all know trans people have been using their preferred toilets for decades and this inherently suggests that they've also been using the toilet they know their appearance matches the most, as a means to avoid drama.

Trans community has to at this point decide between progress via being reasonable or stifled progress via being unreasonable people. I think the former will go the furthest.

This is really a bigger part of the problem than most realize. Trans people have been using whichever bathroom they see as most appropriate for years, and as far as I call tell it has not even been an issue worth talking about. The argument about passability is unfortunately important because doing so complies with social norms, and not doing so unnecessarily goes against the grain and creates controversy. Im not saying that social norms are inviolable, but on the same token I dont think anybody is going to wear a death metal t-shirt to a business deal. Not because they cant, but because our social norms dictate what is an acceptable appearance for such a situation and this is fully rooted into our culture. When someone who is clearly just a man with a dress walks into a woman's bathroom, even a young child is capable of recognizing the aberration.

To me, this issue is entirely a social one. Just like you cant force someone to respect you, you cannot force people in general to be ok with (I like the pulling the rug out analogy) turning our social norms upside down. The opposition to recent events is only to be expected until people can change their perspective and come up with reasonable compromises. Personally im all for not legislating this and allowing/forcing the trans community to go back to how they have been fitting in already without creating controversy.

Talking about social norms and regulations of trans people also brings up the discussion of their validation. Some people are fully in the camp that trans women are women (see Mort), some people are only superficially convinced (and know deep down that a trans woman is still a man), and even others who view transgenderism as a mental health condition. I feel like gender and bathrooms will only be able to be properly discussed on a large scale when the general public has more of an agreement on how they view the transgender community. Personally I lean towards the mental health side of the argument, and therefore would not like to see signs and bathroom designations that normalize gender transitioning. This is a fringe population of people we are talking about, and there is nothing glorious about having to suffer from this condition.

 

[Dak]

I think there's a space between calling it a mental "illness" and not "normalizing" it.

 

[Carpe Mortem]

I do disagree with it being a mental illness in every case.

But that being said, the one transperson I know well is a mess of a person. Even moreso since openly coming out and starting hrt. I think instability increases the likelihood of those feelings and ruins the movement unfortunately, since some people really are just fucked in the head.

 

[Dak]

Pretty funny story playing out in the news right now. Trump says Sweden has immigrant problems, Sweden denies it. Sweden has riots in an area with a large immigrant population right after, which they try to downplay as a common occurrence. sweatandredbuttonmeme.jpg

 

[rms]

the denial was because Trump said he saw it last night, mis speaking is his forte apparently

 

[Dak]

the denial was because Trump said he saw it last night, mis speaking is his forte apparently

Of course he does get briefings on stuff we probably don't hear about, and European governments have been trying to downplay immigrant related problems. He probably did misspeak, but again, that almost makes it better.

 

[rms]

come on dude