I wonder are there more de-transitioners than there are gender-dismorphic suicide victims?
@molgrips suicide rates of 'gender-dysmorphic' individuals are in line with similar age group referrals to CAMHS. Both these groups have the same range of underlying psychological/psychiatric problems ASD, body dysmorphia, drug dependency.... the gender component clouds the issue, it is not the source problem.
There is very little data on outcomes of drug and surgical treatment. The clinical studies I have read do not show any benefit (some argue they show worse than 'do nothing').
I think it is GIDS that has data that if a 'do minimum' approach is taken, well above 80% reconcile their 'inner selves' with their sexed bodies. Many are gender non-conforming lesbians. Early access to neutral support is needed.
This paper has a reasonable summary. These are caring concerned clinicians, not 'phobes.
> deleted - posted in wrong thread <
TBH it ties in with the idea that we should be genderblind
Did you read the 'black lives matter' (I think) thread a little while ago? What came out of that is that there is a evolution of understanding:
1) I'm racist, brown people are different and funny.
2) I'm not racist but I still think brown people are different and funny.
3) I'm woke, I'm colourblind, we're all the same really.
4) I realise and acknowledge that people of colour face daily challenges that barely even register with me as existing and now I totally see colour.
Broadly the same argument, n'est-ce pas? Most people don't get past 3), it took me a long time.
your bio sex is an immutable characteristic. It is physical and defined by your DNA.
Now we're getting somewhere. It is, sort of, it's the SRY gene and a couple of others I can't remember and would have to google, plus a bunch of cells which hopefully determine which lumpy bits you get. Which is all well and good unless those genes stop working or hormones contradict them or your primordial whatever cells don't form correctly so a surgeon guesses(*) or a shitload of other factors.
Many of these are very rare outliers of course, but an outlier of "one" proves unequivocally that it's not black and white.
Complicated questions have complicated answers, who'd have thought it.
(* and they almost always guess 'boy' for some reason.)
--
Kiera Bell said that she wasn’t given the opportunity to explore that concept, she just went along with the clinicians affirming that transition was the right thing to do. They all assumed she was sure.
Not familiar with that specific case so I cannot comment, but my own anecdotal experience with a friend is diametrically opposite. She needed surgery 'downstairs' for complicated reasons that aren't relevant to this discussion and it took months of pleading with the surgeon to get him to agree to it. The operation would render her infertile. She didn't want children, she'd never wanted children, her partner absolutely didn't want children and she was heading towards an age where childbirth would possibly present a health risk and in all honesty she was probably infertile anyway because of other issues. His objection for months was "well you might change your mind."
I'd guess that individual experiences vary between individuals?
A doctor refusing a request because the patient (for want of a better word) 'might regret it' is a very difficult situation. Some would view the doctor's attitude as paternalistic and intrusive; but for others it might be really important to have some brakes or outside views applied to their own mind. And how does a doctor tell the difference? Extremely difficult.
Did you read the ‘black lives matter’ (I think) thread a little while ago?
Rememver we had the 1,2,3 evolution discussion a few pahes back.
We agreed on a sligtly diff conclusion.
I don't agree with 4.
I don’t agree with 4.
could you expand?
@nickc to answer your question.
Cougar posited on this post back on page 8 that after stage 3 (4 above but 3 below) there is another stage where you do not see colour, but only after you have solved all of the problems referred to in stage 3.
Cougar wrote: It absolutely should be. Unfortunately it’s not how it’s panned out thus far. Maybe the progression should be a combination of yours and mine:
1) I don’t like brown people,
2) I don’t see colour,
3) I absolutely see colour and recognise the problems they face,
4) We’ve sorted this now and colour no longer matters.Ditto non-binary etc which was the point in the first place. I long for the day when someone is gender-fluid or gay or trans or vegan or Buddhist or Muslim or atheist or a goth or has green hair and the rest of the world goes, “meh.”
There are numerous problems with stage 3 in bold:
I think that his stages thing is misconceived but the point about stage 3 in bold is that it leads to abuse, belittling and maybe worse like job loss or public "shaming" of people that Cougar thinks are on stage 1 or 2.
Its easy to jump in now and say but yes the trans/gay/brown/differentother people get abuse all time.
The answer is undoubtedly but does passing that abuse around (or even back at the abusers) make things better?
I argue not, hence asking Cougar about his approach earlier, as some of his posts are a bit too enthusiastically like John Cleese centurion in Life of Brian.
If you ask the average trump voter or Johnson-O-Phile about trans or black people they will say that they have made victims of themselves and all lives matter and you can't turn a man into a woman etc.
These people are ignorant, where ignorant means unaware of the facts, oppression, pain, suffering, morals, science current philosophy etc.
How can we challenge this ignorance?
For me the answer is not with job loss, shaming, belittling, etc etc. It is by leading them gently into the light.
Any other approach is likely to lead to entrenched resistance (its happening on this thread every time someone hands out a headmaster like barb, or worse, and the other side just entrench) .
2) as alluded to above, 2 wrongs don't make a right and for many people cougars stage 3 in bold above leads to positive discrimination. Now I used to be a massive advocate of this, but it evidentially does not work. The anti BLM and anti trans movement is growing. And I think the main reason is because of stage 3 - considering colour and all the problems.
Some of us prefer to be the change we want to see, and positive discrimination is intellectually dishonest as it perpetuates discrimination. It may have been a good idea, but that time has passed.
3) there is a form of white knighting in this, many feminists do not want men to make things easier for them because they are girls - its the same concept - women have been badly treated so we must recognise their sex and treat them with more care than we would a bloke. Its a form of patriarchal patronisation. Personally I open doors for everyone (its a metaphor) and try to treat everyone with kindness.
Its the same with trans people, I don't think anyone wants to support gaslighting people into thinking that a male sex can be changed to a female sex and all their lived experience and underlying physical differences can be magicked away. I also do not think that trans people want to see other people oppressed on their behalf.
I confess to falling for this myself in that I don't really defend men, I don't think we need it..
4) Its too easy to say to someone like me whose beliefs are a not conformist with current ideology (I will set out my beliefs again, I have made them clear in the threads, but see below in quotes) that we are stuck at stage 2 when they are probably on stage 4, they are too similar so its a bit of trick, as way of trying to belittle our arguments when yours has run out.
5) I would argue that most/many of us here are on stage 4, or are a few conversations away from it (with some obvious stage 1'ers, but I don't want to fall into the trap of stages as I think its more scattered).
Some ideas about gender and sex.
a) People should be free of discrimination regardless of what they wear (we shouldn't care about appropriate dress, this is a form of oppression) , who they have sex with (consenting adults of course), how they behave in public (without encroaching on others rights and freedoms of course) etc etc. This is what non binary gender is about. we shouldn't really think gender is a thing and it is time we ignored it. I do.
b) you cannot change someones biological sex, regardless of their chromosomes, the number of sexes thing is a red herring, because you cannot safely change any of them. However their biological sex should not need to have any influence on their dress, sexual behaviour, societal role etc etc.
c)There is massive concern that the female sex is being oppressed/erased due to huge confusion over gender and sex, and where male sexed people especially are encroaching into female sexed spaces that ought should be protected.
d) There is even more concern that the health systems set up to support gender dysphoric people are flawed, hurried and badly thought out. The research is new, but in the name of affirmation we may have committed some horrendous crimes against people.
I really do apologise if I have hurt anyones feelings. That is not my intention.
Thanks, I'll take some time to read and take all that in.
Note I think Cougars intentions are pure, even he does get a bit too much of a kick out pointing out peoples ignorance..
This is an interesting distillation of most of the arguments.
https://www.patreon.com/posts/cis-free-speech-19166406
Huh. I didn't realise I'd posted that 1-4 thing twice. It was rolling around in my head, was all.
Note I think Cougars intentions are pure, even he does get a bit too much of a kick out pointing out peoples ignorance..
I don't think it's [fair|accurate] to say I get a 'kick' out of it.
I enjoy debate on a forum, it's what forums are for. I hope to both learn things and for others to do likewise. Though I do concede that I perhaps need to better recognise when it's all gone a bit 'big hitter' and step down.
This is an interesting distillation of most of the arguments.
If that's a distillation I'd hate to see the long form. Have you read it all?
yeah, sorry it is long.
It’s also very nasty. I’m out of this thread now.
This is an interesting distillation of most of the arguments.
^^^
Which says that notions around non-binary are being pushed for profit. On a site that invites financial donations, ironically enough.
.
I enjoy debate on a forum, it’s what forums are for. I
I think they are to slag off the state of people's fill in the blank in bike pictures.
On a semi serious note, what you see as debate is, er, debatable. See also conflating two completely separate things into one and using it as stick to beat someone with. I don't disagree at all with what you say about debate, I just don't think you realise that sometimes when you think you are debating, you may not come off that way to others. Debating, lecturing and hectoring are all points on a continuum, as it were.
Absolute proof is also not necessarily'scientific'. Even the meaning of words cannot be proved, but can be accepted.
If you genuinely want a debate, dismissing someone's opinion is not a great place to start.
I'm not trying to start an argument or derail this thread but it seemed an oddly appropriate place to put it.
See also conflating two completely separate things into one and using it as stick to beat someone with.
I thought I tried very hard to challenge that. Did I fail?
I just don’t think you realise that sometimes when you think you are debating, you may not come off that way to others.
Eh. Thank you. You're likely right, it's a blind spot. The Aspie in me always leaps in going "I can win this!" rather than the rational part deploying the empathy that I feel fit to lecture others on.
How do I improve this? I mean no harm. I think perhaps I see forums as a succession of debating teams, maybe I should just learn to shut up.
I’m not trying to start an argument or derail this thread but it seemed an oddly appropriate place to put it.
No no, I thank you for your constructive feedback. It's given me pause for thought.
Maybe this is a discussion for another thread.
How do I improve this? I mean no harm. I think perhaps I see forums as a succession of debating teams, maybe I should just learn to shut up.
Just dont be condescending when you think someone is wrong, even if they are Hitler in your eyes.
(That sounds horrifically condescending but I am not sure how else to say it).
Though I do concede that I perhaps need to better recognise when it’s all gone a bit ‘big hitter’ and step down
I don't think thats an issue, you have a right to express your opinions.
I agree it is a debating club too, we just need to agree on the rules..
To be honest, the suggestion that iirc, someone's opinion is what leads to people being beaten up or similar. That's a big stretch, and not to my mind true. The people doing doing the beating have made a choice, independent of whether someone holds an opinion which may be offensive. You could introduce the Trump gambit, which I'll concede is powerful but I would aldo say its unfair to lay the blame for another person's actions on someone for their opinion. Let's face it, most of the people on here don't have that kind of influence.
How you improve is a personal thing. If you think the point of the debate is to win, then essentially you have to agree on the ground rules, accepted 'facts' etc. Otherwise it just turns into yes it is, no it isn't. If that's your thing then crack on. I would suggest that's not a debate. See also monty python "I'm here for an argument".
The best advice I ever got about debating was not how to win one, but how to engage in one. Essentially you have to invite your opposer to counter. So your opinion is wrong, here is why doesn't do that. I hear your argument and counter with this/point out this fallacy etc etc. Which invites them to counter. It's a bit like dominos vs chess.
The best advice I ever got about debating was not how to win one, but how to engage in one. Essentially you have to invite your opposer to counter. So your opinion is wrong, here is why doesn’t do that. I hear your argument and counter with this/point out this fallacy etc etc. Which invites them to counter. It’s a bit like dominos vs chess.
Yeah that seems right, for me its not about winning, I am interested in advancing my knowledge. Ideally that gets honed every time someone presents me with better evidence. Doesn't always work though..
For me the answer is not with job loss, shaming, belittling, etc etc. It is by leading them gently into the light. Any other approach is likely to lead to entrenched resistance
While I agree with the sentiment, as far as I can see, many folk who're ignorant do not, under any circumstances at all, want to be led into the "light" of understanding. It is becoming an accepted (on both sides of the fence) truth that certainly the US was conceived as a white supremacist state (in so far as the history of power is largely held by white people for the benefit of white people and the exclusion of black people). There are many on the far-right who are more than prepared to kick off the 2nd US Civil War in order to keep it that way. They don't think they're wrong or ignorant, they think that people like you are dangerously deluded and are a race traitor. One only has to spend a few hours on message boards or listen to podcasts like The Daily Showa, or the Right Stuff to hear the day to day reality of what "entrenched resistance" already sounds like. So in so far as Cougar's statement is concerned, I'm with him there.
There is massive concern that the female sex is being oppressed/erased due to huge confusion over gender and sex
While I largely subscribe to your subset of gender and sex arguments (I think they're reasonable and well thought through) (A) have no issue with (B) I'm not sure I agree with the statement regarding sex but I agree with the outcome, so the argument is probably moot (C) I disagree that there should a massive concern about women's rights being trampled. I think this is a red-herring. because the two are separate issues (women's rights and trans-rights). Bathrooms and sport (for example) are mendaciously used by both sides as casus belli in a war of words. (D) I understand this position, I do think there needs to be more research, it is perhaps however a truth that should no longer be brushed under the carpet; that nearly every advancement of medical science leaves a trail of victims in it's wake. As horrific as that sounds (It is) It's also pretty accurate.
At least I've got an excuse next time I get old fashioned looks coming out of the women's loo.
it is perhaps however a truth that should no longer be brushed under the carpet; that nearly every advancement of medical science leaves a trail of victims in it’s wake. As horrific as that sounds (It is) It’s also pretty accurate.
Ethical advancement of medical science is built upon incremental development of knowledge. Trials are proposed, peer reviewed and established. Patients recruited informed of risks and outcomes. Data is collected, analysed and informs any next steps.
There is undoubtedly unethical 'experimentation' however, my opinion is that this is rare (I don't have data to back it up...).
Unfortunately, management of some adolescents with gender-related problems seems to fall into the latter category.
P.S. Regarding point C) doesn't the 'Transwomen are women' solgan immediately highlight a conflict? I think toilets and sports are highlighted as people can relate to them. Especially the wider unengaged public. I first became aware of this through cycling. An area of concern is the potential for malicious (non trans) males to exploit any transgender-related 'accommodations'.
many folk who’re ignorant do not, under any circumstances at all, want to be led into the “light” of understanding. It is becoming an accepted (on both sides of the fence) truth that certainly the US was conceived as a white supremacist state (in so far as the history of power is largely held by white people for the benefit of white people and the exclusion of black people). There are many on the far-right who are more than prepared to kick off the 2nd US Civil War in order to keep it that way. They don’t think they’re wrong or ignorant, they think that people like you are dangerously deluded and are a race traitor. One only has to spend a few hours on message boards or listen to podcasts like The Daily Showa, or the Right Stuff to hear the day to day reality of what “entrenched resistance” already sounds like. So in so far as Cougar’s statement is concerned, I’m with him there.
Yes I am 100% aware of this sentiment, and that they do not want to be led into the light. Will shouting at them about it work then? I don't think so. So far it has lead to the opposite. I think the left has gone too far (critical race theory etc) and has driven the situation you describe, we need to back off and change their minds in a smarter way. My position is that the approach of the last ten years has led to trump and brexit, precisely the opposite of what the intentions were.
Shouting and berating people simply does not work as a tool for changing their minds. It just doesn't. There are two questions here:
1) Do we need to work to educate and inform people?
2) Can we do this by aggression, ridicule and anger?
For me, the answer to 1 is yes, and 2 is definitely no.
100% agree.
.
Ethical advancement of medical science is built upon incremental development of knowledge. Trials are proposed, peer reviewed and established. Patients recruited informed of risks and outcomes. Data is collected, analysed and informs any next steps.
Yeah, I think I have that text book as well. In the mean time, here's a huge bunch of money and some doctors, and drug companies with slippery ethics, and poor regulation. In the meantime 70 years ago appendicitis may have killed you, pregnancy and childbirth 100 years ago was a killer for 50% of women. We've made huge progress in both these areas, but the trail of destruction to get here. is terrible to behold.
An area of concern is the potential for malicious (non trans) males to exploit any transgender-related ‘accommodations’.
I think it's a red herring because I don't think that sorts of men who're interested in invading women's spaces need the "excuse" of gender accommodation in order to do so. They'll just use anything they can find, be that Pool Attendant or "bloke in a dress". That (mostly) innocent transitioning people get blamed for it, is just (mostly) convenient scapegoating. That people are sexually assaulted by other people is already a thing that needs tackling, I don't think the needs of vulnerable people should be obscured by that.
Will shouting at them about it work then? I don’t think so
There has never been a point in my lifetime when women's rights and black civil rights in their modern forms weren't protested in the full glare of publicity. For the folk who're determined to look away, I think their time has run out. You're either in agreement with these causes or you are not. I think there may have been a point at which people could be lead gently, I think that time has passed.
we need to back off and change their minds in a smarter way.
I think this is the bit I disagree with, Equal rights should be a given In 2021. There's been enough explanation. people either get that or they don't want to.
That people are sexually assaulted by other people is already a thing that needs tackling, I don’t think the needs of vulnerable people should be obscured by that.
I get this but remember that one persons rights to not trump another's.
Women need protection also, and given the concept that you cannot change sex only gender, to me bathrooms and sports are sex based, not gender based. So there should not be an issue with access to womens space. It's sex based.
The fact that 99% of trans people are innocent does not mean that we should make laws to allow the nefarious through the net. Its a fact that male sexed trans persons commit sexual crime at the same rate as male sex. IE 10 times higher than females. So 98% of men are innocent, should we let them use the womens loos too?
I am happy with public and private funds being spent on a third way, I'd use it, I have been physically assaulted in the mens loos more than once.
You’re either in agreement with these causes or you are not. I think there may have been a point at which people could be lead gently, I think that time has passed.
Ok I understand why you are saying this but I would be interested to know how are you going to solve this issue if not gently? Can you talk us through your considered path to a solution?
BTW I am not talking about protest, I am talking about a philosophical approach to changing peoples minds.
I think this is the bit I disagree with, Equal rights should be a given In 2021. There’s been enough explanation. people either get that or they don’t want to.
They should be yes, now you are arguing for my point 4, and not Cougars point 3 below, people see that as unequal rights in favour of one minority group or another. That's why they are pushing so hard against it.
1) I don’t like brown people,
2) I don’t see colour,
3) I absolutely see colour and recognise the problems they face,
4) We’ve sorted this now and colour no longer matters.
In the US and UK there are loads of very poor white people, many more than poor black people, they see the protection of minorities as ignoring them. That's why they vote trump and tory. The right are using our own policies against us. And in truth the told us they would when it was proposed, because it is intellectually dishonest. You either discriminate or not, you can't pick a colour, its just a mirror image of their racism/trasnism.
The fact that 99% of trans people are innocent does not mean that we should make laws to allow the nefarious through the net
But those laws exist already (to prevent people sexually assaulting other people) there doesn't need to be a special clause for transitioning men particularly. The solution to this problem is the proper prosecution of existing laws, not the further sidelining of minorities with further (probably pointless) legislation.
Can you talk us through your considered path to a solution?
Haha, do I have a pithy one-liner to solve racism. No, I don't sorry. I don't think the solutions thus far have been up to much either.
Poverty and race/ethnicity
Poverty rates by gender and work status for Americans aged 65 and over
The US Census declared that in 2014 14.8% of the general population lived in poverty:[84]
10.1% of all white non-Hispanic persons
12.0% of all Asian persons
23.6% of all Hispanic persons (of any race)
26.2% of all African American persons
28.3% of Native Americans / Alaska NativesAs of 2010 about half of those living in poverty are non-Hispanic white (19.6 million).[84] Non-Hispanic white children comprised 57% of all poor rural children.[85]
Poeple don't understand stats, but when they and all their neighbours are dirt poor but the bleeding heart libtards spend $ on schemes for black and LGBTQ+ people they ask , umm what about us?
We need to be smart about how we approach these problems.
@nickc Compressing many years of bad news does highlight a trail of destruction however, myself, colleagues, wife and her colleagues did follow that textbook. That does not make the news.
Totally agree about the influence of money 🙁
Ben Goldacre is a good read on the failings of Pharma.
not the further sidelining of minorities with further (probably pointless) legislation.
I want to say backatcha here, I mean when people read about Karen White and Marie Dean, they think the GRA is pointless legislation. (I don't btw, but I think it needs revising)
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/11/karen-white-how-manipulative-and-controlling-offender-attacked-again-transgender-prison
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/01/marie-dean-story-shows-there-s-no-simple-answer-how-we-treat-transgender
At the same time trans persons need protecting from Men. although the stats for male on male assault are just as bad in prison as these on trans persons.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52748117
I am calling for a third space.
The solution to this problem is the proper prosecution of existing laws, not the further sidelining of minorities with further (probably pointless) legislation.
I fundamentally disagree, women need to be protected from the male sex, its a long proven point.
Aspects of the GRA undermine that protection too easily.
the problem with the GRA (or more likely its interpretation) is the conflation with gender and sex.
I am calling for a third space.
Cool, I will make a prediction that it will do nothing to reduce crime, Police and the criminal justice system is currently hugely underfunded, you'd do better to protest that than the creation of more laws.
I will make a prediction that it will do nothing to reduce crime
I make a prediction that it won't happen so don't worry too much.
Thanks for the feedback.
Women need protection also, and given the concept that you cannot change sex only gender, to me bathrooms and sports are sex based, not gender based. So there should not be an issue with access to womens space. It’s sex based.
The fact that 99% of trans people are innocent does not mean that we should make laws to allow the nefarious through the net. Its a fact that male sexed trans persons commit sexual crime at the same rate as male sex. IE 10 times higher than females. So 98% of men are innocent, should we let them use the womens loos too?
I totally understand that point of view, I really do. However if I'm in full girl mode - dress, heels, long hair, make up and I'm in a busy pub I can guarantee that if I go to the gents toilet I will be either verbally or physically assaulted. I've been jeered at, had my skirt pulled up, groped, punched and on one memorable occasion dragged into a cubical with a lovely gentleman who was very friendly until I knee'd him in the groin. If I went into the ladies, I got make up tips...
This is a few years ago though, I don't go to the toilet if I go out now, I just don't drink anything.
So yeah, ladies toilets should be safe spaces from predatory men, that's a given. So where do trans women, or non binary men presenting as women go to the toilet? Because men's toilets are most definitely NOT safe spaces for us.
I can guarantee that if I go to the gents toilet I will be either verbally or physically assaulted.
I am sorry about this and I don't think you should have to go to the mens either. I advocate for third or unisex space.
I fundamentally disagree, white women need to be protected from the black male sex, its a long proven point.
Sorry, I just wanted to check if you were consciously phrasing your arguments in the exact same way as segregationists in the US or if it was purely accidental?
I am sorry about this and I don’t think you should have to go to the mens either. I advocate for third or unisex space.
But you also said you don't think your third space idea is going to happen so what takes priority for you, the actual danger to transgender people (google Chrissy Lee Polis for an example of weak cisgender women against a transgender woman in the bathroom) or the imagined danger to cisgender women?
And before you say, 'But what about...', when I say imagined danger, I'm not referring to people who have multiple violent sexual convictions against women now identifying as women. I think we can all agree that is a special case and not really relevant to normal people who just need to pee.
However, let's say your third bathroom idea becomes a reality. I have a question. Will intersex people be forced to use it as well or do they fall into a different category to transgender people?
the suggestion that iirc, someone’s opinion is what leads to people being beaten up or similar. That’s a big stretch, and not to my mind true.
No. But it's an enabler. It normalises bigotry. Which does lead to people being beaten up or worse for the crime of looking a bit different.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sophie_Lancaster
Yes I am 100% aware of this sentiment, and that they do not want to be led into the light. Will shouting at them about it work then? I don’t think so.
Sure. But what will? Molgrips mentioned working "to educate and inform people" but that didn't have a great record of success back in 2016 now, did it.
Somewhat depressingly, I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that our last, best hope for peace is to wait for our current crop of bigoted nuggets to die off and leave evolution of progressiveness to our kids. It's a bit like "the Internet," to the Baby Boomers it's all new and scary and probably should be banned, to the Gen Z's it's always been there and just the way it is.
Its a fact that male sexed trans persons commit sexual crime at the same rate as male sex.
No it isn't.
people see that as unequal rights in favour of one minority group or another. That’s why they are pushing so hard against it.
The fundamental component that you're continually missing is that sometimes we need unequal rights. Being "equal" does not necessarily equate to being fair, some people need more support than others. You have two pound coins in your pocket and are with a homeless person and Jacob Rees Mogg, do you equally give them one each or do you fairly give both to the homeless woman?
We shouldn't be striving for equality, we should be striving for equity. Because otherwise your well-intended, noble aims are in fact just putting a poorly understood and chronically persecuted minority back in their box rather than allowing them a voice. Or, radical idea I know, listening to it.
Sorry, I just wanted to check if you were consciously phrasing your arguments in the exact same way as segregationists in the US or if it was purely accidental?
You had to add two words to change the meaning of my quote, is that proving a point or just deliberate misconstruction?
However, let’s say your third bathroom idea becomes a reality. I have a question. Will intersex people be forced to use it as well or do they fall into a different category to transgender people?
I don't really know the answer but I don't see why women should have to lose their rights.
I challenge you to explain to me why gender conforming men should not be allowed to use womens bathrooms. What good reason is there to segregate men from women?
I advocate for third or unisex space.
You can create as many spaces as you want, just because you've created a third (or fourth*) space it doesn't follow that it will be automatically free from crime. How are you going to prevent people from entering these places and assaulting other people?
*violence in accessible toilets is a pretty big problem also.
