*** OFFICIAL BREXIT SUNLIT UPLANDS and #MEGA THREAD ***

[OngBonga]

If seeing someone just being in a place causes you to be offended - not them behaving in any way that is threatening or malicious - and you're only explanation for why you're offended is irrational fear on your part, then that's bigotry.

Again, apply this logic to regular men in the women's room and tell me you still stand by this.

Especially when your assumption is that trans = threat to health and/or safety.

Especially when your assumption is that men = threat to health and/or safety.

I'm not trying to belittle you by replying like this. I'm trying to make the point that we already separate people based on these fears you consider to be bigotry. Women don't want men in their toilets. As a society, we understand that and it's not a problem. If a man in a dress makes them feel the same degree of discomfort or even fear, why is this now bigotry when it wasn't before he put the dress on?

Insisting that a person is not some gender because they weren't always that gender is malicious.

Ok it's easy to get lost in gender vs sex in this debate. I'm not insisting anyone is any gender. I don't want a society that insists anyone is any gender. But woman is not a gender. It is a sex. And so when I talk about "gender segregation", that's me using the wrong word. I'm promoting same-sex facilities for women. That, as best I understand it, is what women want.

I agree with your points about gender. It is not binary. If I give the impression I think otherwise, I'm using the wrong word. I'll try not to do that.

It's called a society, ong.

And people are not honest in society.

Your entire argument is predicated on guessing someone's gender by looking at them.

It's not. My entire argument is muddle by me using the word gender when I mean sex.

Do you want people to show a gender ID card in order to use a restroom?

No. I want trans facilities.

I'm not sure you understand the word private. A private club can exclude blacks. The KKK is a private club.

Right, but in the UK these "clubs" are illegal, banned, if you're a member of a banned group you're in a world of shit.

Racism is quite literally illegal in the UK. And it's enforced, if it can be proven.

FWIW, I talked to my gal about this conversation and she doesn't even think it's women who have the most butthurt voices in the conversation. She thinks is a lot of men getting all white-knighty about a non-issue that women don't care about.

There might be an element of truth to this. Certainly this is largely my motivation. Being a white knight isn't really an insult, at least not for me. It's a respect for women's rights.

I know women who feel very differently about it, and they are not people I would describe as bigots. Far from it. Perhaps I'm influenced by these friends. Their concerns tend to be less about genuine trans people who have either transitioned or are in the process of doing so, and more about men who have no intention of transitioning... part time trans people, cross dressers if you like. And it's less about toilets and more about public showers, support groups and sports. Are these concerns legitimate? I certainly sympathise with such concerns. They are motivated by a perceived threat to their safety, or in the case of sports, fairness.

Toilets are an issue because, along with sports, they represent the first real battleground between trans activists and feminists.

She doesn't think it's about women feeling upset or bothered by people who see themselves as women doing woman things.

I would certainly agree here. It's about the threat posed by dishonest people. If it was purely about feminine people doing feminine things then I would agree that is motivated by bigotry.

If we lived in an honest society this really wouldn't be a problem. We don't. Women have fears. Maybe not all women, and maybe these fears are unjustified, but having fears is not bigotry. Not when you live in a society where such fears might have some basis, even if social media might have blown those fears out of proportion.

Bigotry for me is a conscious effort to discriminate, it's motivated by a hatred of a group. I don't think that is a large amount of people. I think most people who want same-sex spaces for women are motivated by fear, not hate. And so the conversation is about if these fears are justified or not.

I wish I could say they weren't justified, but I just don't believe it.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Again, apply this logic to regular men in the women's room and tell me you still stand by this.

If you identify as male and there's a men's room that is available, then you should use the room that is designated for people who consider themselves male. If it's not available, then politely use whatever you can so you don't piss yourself in public.

Especially when your assumption is that men = threat to health and/or safety.

My point is that any such assumption is clearly unfair and bigoted.


Why are you trying to argue that ugly women with hairlip shouldn't be allowed into the women's room?
Obv. you're not, but this is a perfectly foreseeable conclusion to your argument that other people judging your appearance gets to mandate if and which restroom you can use.

If a man in a dress makes them feel the same degree of discomfort or even fear, why is this now bigotry when it wasn't before he put the dress on?

A "he" in a dress is not a "she." A trans woman is a "she."
It's not up to me. It's up to them.
It's about identity and what someone feels is their Truth.

If they're a man in a dress sometimes and a trans woman in a dress other times and they go back and forth at their heart's content, that's fine. They are what they are when they feel what they feel. Unless your base assumption is that anyone who feels this way is a charlatan trying to crime on women, which I don't think it is, then none of this matters.

If any person is a "she," then she should use the women's room or a unisex room.
If any person is a "he," then he should use the men's room or a unisex room.
What matters is how they see themselves, not how anyone else sees them.

But woman is not a gender. It is a sex.

I agree with your points about gender. It is not binary. If I give the impression I think otherwise, I'm using the wrong word. I'll try not to do that.

Neither is binary. Neither is any of our business unless that person chooses to make it so.

Asking someone to *prove* either to use a toilet is nonsense.

And people are not honest in society.

And it's not a problem until/unless it is.
What you're talking about being worried about is already criminal.
Nothing's stopping any man from going into a ladies room and doing crimes aside from the fact that nearly no men are interested in doing crimes on women in a ladies room.
It's a non-issue.

Not that the sex or gender of the criminal matters in any part of law I've heard of.

It's not. My entire argument is muddle by me using the word gender when I mean sex.

It doesn't change anything about my position, whichever issue you've been discussing.

No. I want trans facilities.

Obv. we both want that. In the light of the fact that is not the current reality, we discuss.

Moving on.

Right, but in the UK these "clubs" are illegal, banned, if you're a member of a banned group you're in a world of shit.

Racism is quite literally illegal in the UK. And it's enforced, if it can be proven.

Well, we believe in freedom of speech over here, and that includes the freedom to be an offensive twat, provided there is no clear and present danger to the health and safety of others.

more about men who have no intention of transitioning... part time trans people, cross dressers if you like. And it's less about toilets and more about public showers, support groups and sports. Are these concerns legitimate?

Of course they're not legitimate.

I mean... unless there's a serial criminal in the area, whom there is a legitimate reason to be afraid of.

Being afraid of the boogeyman under your bed is fine and all. Until you start insisting someone else doesn't have the same rights as you do because you've made them your boogeyman.

I would certainly agree here. It's about the threat posed by dishonest people. If it was purely about feminine people doing feminine things then I would agree that is motivated by bigotry.

Then you just happen to bring up this issue in relation to trans rights, why?
Trans people are dishonest?
It is OK for your first impression of hearing that someone is trans that they are dishonest?

'Cause that's not OK with me.
We're all dishonest about certain things, especially with strangers.
Especially when we are something that strangers sometimes are assholes about.
(As if I'm remotely honest about my depression when I'm out in public.)
Calling out dishonesty on its own as some kind of mark of badness is unfair by any measure.

What's the assumption? That since you looked at them and assumed one gender, then later found out your assumption was wrong that is somehow them playing a trick on you? They've deceived you? What utter bullshit, if that's the claim.

If we lived in an honest society this really wouldn't be a problem. We don't. Women have fears. Maybe not all women, and maybe these fears are unjustified, but having fears is not bigotry. Not when you live in a society where such fears might have some basis, even if social media might have blown those fears out of proportion.

Dude. Being afraid of an innocent person who is clearly by their actions and nature of no threat to you, and defending said fear when the utter truth of the situation is known... that's bigotry.

Being uninformed and assuming what best protects you from the unknown is great.
Continuing to insist that a person is a threat to you when they're obviously not is bigotry.

Bigotry for me is a conscious effort to discriminate, it's motivated by a hatred of a group. I don't think that is a large amount of people. I think most people who want same-sex spaces for women are motivated by fear, not hate. And so the conversation is about if these fears are justified or not.

See above. Knowledge matters. Insisting innocent people are threatening based solely on who they are as a person is bigotry.

I wish I could say they weren't justified, but I just don't believe it.

They're not.
They're choosing to see people as dangerous to themselves when they have been exposed to more than ample evidence to the contrary.