1170
Wisconsin judge sides with 11-year-old trans girl over her right to use school toilets
(www.thepinknews.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
1170 points (94.8% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2725 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Of course my point is about having separate spaces that are exclusive to the two sexes. Males commit the overwhelmingly large percentage of sex crimes. Giving males free access to women’s safe spaces is not going to end well.
You're making the unnecessary leap of toilets>sex. And then further to sex>sex crimes. This is why I mentioned portapotties. These are gender neutral public toilets found all over the nation. Are portapotties offensive? Sexual dens?
Toilets and bathrooms are perfectly functional as gender neutral spaces. The insistence that a transperson using the bathroom that aligns with their gender is somehow an invitation for sex crime just doesn't have much basis.
Portapotties are single person. You’re not walking around in a portapotty with other people. There’s no possibility of someone peeping under/over the stall wall in a portapotty.
Most public toilets are not gender neutral, they’re male and female.
Again - it’s not that the trans person will assault someone, it’s the fact that it eliminates it as a “safe space” where women can go knowing there won’t be men in there. If you let trans women in you’re letting biological men in, meaning any man can now use that space simply by saying they identify as a woman.
Ah, got it. You don't seem to be parsing between sex and gender here, which is probably why this is going to be a troublesome topic every time it comes up.
I mean you extrapolate from "biological men" into "any man" way too casually to have a serious opinion on this topic.
I mean, jist wait to you hear about this thing called homosexuality. No bathroom will be safe anywhere from anyone if people know about that!
Public toilets are sex based, not gender. They are male and female. They have existed since long before gender "wasn't a binary".
A biological female that identifies as a man can't use the urinals, can they? No, because they don't have a penis. Toilets have always been made to accommodate the different sexes, not genders.
It is the presence or lack of a urinal that makes a bathroom a safe space or not? Regardless of that tangent, toilets are not sex specific. (And before indoor plumbing becoming commonplace, outhouses and pit privies weren't exactly sex based either.)
But at least you've honed in and have gotten down to it: you find toilets to be inherently sexual. I find that to be pretty weird. While I won't kink shame you, I don't think it's a good foundation for how handle human waste in public.
(Stalls cam be made more private way more easily than public bathrooms be policed for genitalia conformance.)
You're just being disingenuous now. You know that was not said in relation to anything being a "safe space". You know it was said to show that toilets are sex based and not gender based, because gender apparently now has nothing whatsoever to do with your genitals.
"If I ignore your very real and very good point, I can disagree" lol. Male toilets have always had toilets designed for biological male bodies, ie a "penis owner". That proves that they aren't "gender based", otherwise why would only 1 of the 2 of them have a urinal?
I see there is no limit to your disingenuity. You're the one arguing to try and let biological males go to the toilet with biological girls.
You're forgetting the trough system in stadiums on top of ignoring the recurring point I've been making: bathrooms aren't inherently sexual. The injection of sexual acts and sexual crimes by accepting the jdea of trans people using the appropriate bathroom is the original disingenuous stance, so I'm sorry if you're taken aback. I don't meant to upset you if my fatigue at the "trans equals and enables peeping pervs" perspective. And come on now: A transwoman in a women's bathroom isn't using a urinal. A transman in a man's bathroom is also not using a urinal. There shouldn't be a problem there, but somehow having to know the genitalia of people shitting is less weird than letting
I mean this is the first you've mentioned stadiums, so there's that. I've never heard of urinals being in a female bathroom at a stadium. What stadium has troughs in the female bathrooms?
No one is saying they are. Apparently this is really difficult for you. The overwhelmingly large percentage of sexual crimes are committed by men (like 99%) and opportunity is one of the biggest factors in it. By allowing men to just openly use womens "safe spaces" you're inviting opportunity for more sexual assaults to take place. This isn't rocket science.
If a pervert male wants to take photos of little girls on the toilet, do you agree that allowing him access to the female toilets presents him with more opportunity to do it? If not, explain your reasoning, because I can already say it doesn't make sense.
We're also not just talking about bathrooms. Changing rooms, sexual assault centres, gyms, doctors, etc - the same applies, and once you start making legislation that takes away womens protections to sex based safe spaces in one area, you take them away for all.
You're starting at the pervert male and are working backwards, which is kind of the problem here.
That pervert male is already just as capable and already doing the things you're fantasizing about, which has nothing to do with trans people using their correspondingly accurate bathroom. It's really the bathroom of least resistance they're seeking, and somehow sex crimes are being displaced onto them.
The hypothetical sexual pervert is not a credible argument here.
No, they’re not. Pervert men aren’t going in to women’s prisons and impregnating women. Pervert men aren’t going to rape crisis centres and assaulting women.
With allowing anyone into these spaces, you’re now giving them access and the ability to do that.
The bathroom of least resistance is and always will be the bathroom of their sex.
Urgh, the notion that allowing trans people into the bathroom means sex crime is the original disingenuous point. That's kind of what I was trying to show you. Besides, a transwoman in a woman's bathroom isn't using a urinal. A transman in a man's bathroom isn't using a urinal. There shouldn't be a problem with that, and yet there are people just need to know the genitalia of everyone in the stalls. Like genitals need to policed instead of just abiding by a general social rule of public spaces regardless of sex and gender: don't be sexual in public spaces. Indecency and shit are still very real things that don't change with trans people existing and taking dumps, believe it or not. Now I don't mean to upset you, so I am sorry if you are taken so aback at my fatigue of the "trans = perverts" perspective.
No one is saying trans people = perverts. Well I’m sure some are saying that, but I’m not.
What I’m saying is that by allowing anyone to enter female-only spaces you remove the safeguards that make them safe spaces sin the first place.
Are the trans people there to assault women? No. Does it open the door to perverts that do want to assault women to just openly use female-only spaces? Yes. That’s the issue.
It only opens the door for perverts if you are, in fact, saying trans people = perverts.
After all you're saying allowing a trans person to use their aligning bathroom is the same as allowing anyone to enter female-only spaces.
(So you kinda are saying that. It does appear you might be one of those some.)
Sigh. Read my last comment again and try again.
Even if there wasn’t a single pervert who is trans, allowing anyone to enter female safe spaces allows non trans perverts unrestricted access to these places.
Do you understand? To allow trans people in to the opposite sex safe spaces means allowing everyone to enter them.
It really doesn't. It only feels that way if you are incapable of differentiating between a sexual pervert and a trans person.
Society can accommodate gender neutral bathrooms (meaning you don't have this social construct of genital specific genital policed bathroom spaces) alongside gendered bathrooms where people presenting as either gender can go to the bathroom. Where there is no neutral option, the closer aligning gender specific bathroom is better than the genital specific bathroom.
Or you can have it your way with bathrooms where people's genital have to be declared, revealed, matched, or somehow verified to use them. That is the only way to achieve genital specific safe spaces that you're craving. Otherwise our society can go about accepting that people presenting as a gender to use their preferred bathroom regardless of their genital status.
So how do you want verify if someone is trans or not when they're using the bathroom? Keep in mind you've already demonstrated that you're incapable of differentiating between a sexual pervert and a trans person.
The sky is the limit here:
How do you want our society to verify genitalia before providing public bathroom access?
So you can look at a person and tell if they are a sexual pervert? Holy cow, so the fbi know about your amazing talent? That’s a game changer.
What you can pick is a biological male. Every time, without fail. No one needs to look at genitals.
You keep purposely disingenuously saying rubbish like “you’re saying all trans people are perverts”. What I’m saying is that you can’t tell who is a pervert, but you know that if they’re a biological male who is a pervert that you just gave them free and unrestricted access to girls bathrooms by sallowing trans identified people into female space because there’s no way to verify “gender identity” so anyone can simply say they are a girl if they want to access female only spaces.
This isn’t hard to understand, and your attempts to twist it only highlight how weak your argument is.
Sex separated spaces exist for a reason. They existed long before the current “gender identity” thing began.
The entire person is the biological male part lol. It's not just genitalia.
No, that literally has nothing to do with it. The issue with trans people using bathrooms is that they're wanting to use bathrooms that were specifically made for them not to use. They're not "gender identity" based bathrooms, they're sex based since they have been around long before "gender identity" was a thing.
I haven't once said that, so you really need to stop telling lies and being disingenuous. You keep lying and saying that I'm saying trans = pervert when I have said no such thing.
I'm not linking them to trans people at all. What I am doing is pointing out that the consequences of allowing biological males that identify as female into female only spaces is that any male can then use those female only spaces, making them no longer female only spaces.
You've done nothing but tell lies and make up imaginary quotes so you can dance around the fact that you have no actual rebuttal.
Sigh, you are saying those things. Repeatedly. Instead of acknowledging that I am pointing out that you are, in fact, making these claims, you saying I am being disingenuous and a liar. It's a classic defense, for sure, to project as such.
Gender neutrality and the removal of gender and sex from bathrooms is not an inherent risk to anyone and does not subject them to aexual perverts. My evidence are things like the existence of gender neutral bathrooms not being sexual menaces upon people in public. This means that a step towards neutralizing either the gender, genital/sexing of bathrooms does not have an inherent co sequence of allowing perverts more access to bathrooms. It's a false equivalence and an unreal consequence.
In fact, it's closer to say the sexualized spaces of genital specific bathrooms is what actually puts those spaces at risk of perverts. Since you're missing the point, the circular nature of this self fulfilling prophecy is what I was referencing previously.
You can scream and sling insults about what you thing I have been doing engaging you here. That's what makes this a special place.
Show me where. Quote them.
100% false. It makes female safe spaces no longer that since males can simply come and go as they please. Female safe spaces exist for a reason.
Who is saying bathrooms are sexualized? Only you. Very odd. Something being sex based doesn't "sexualize" it.
Just more disingenuous arguments and lies from you.
Me: 1+1=2
You: No, 1+1=3. You're saying that 1+1=7 which is wrong.
Me: No, I'm saying 1+1=2. Where did you get 7 from?
You: You keep saying 1+1=7.
"Oh but you see, I have made you the soyjack, and have portrayed myself as the chad."
It's okay if you're mad. I'm not disappointed.
FWIW I have explained what I mean in every post and I have asked questions in every post you've completely ignored or haven't answered in the slightest. There clearly is nothing more of value that you can express.
Your homework, if you choose to accept it, is to read up the thread and live with the questions only rhetorical for you to marinade upon.
So no, you can't show me where and you can't quote them hahaha
It is hard quoting things that don't exist.
"hahaha"
It's all there for people to read. Just doing my part in helping you get the ol noggin cranking on why you hold those opinions.
So anyway, right: the numbers: 1+3 = 4 2+2 = 4
(You got this!)
Still waiting on those quotes mate. How many more posts can you go without being able to provide any?
Fucking A man, my replies are directly quoting your above posts. I don't know why you can't figure out how to scroll up.
Your replies with zero quotes have the quotes?