Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 63

Thread: Transsexual Toilet Trouble

  1. #1
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    No longer in Albion
    Posts
    15,748
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Transsexual Toilet Trouble

    His Brexit view wasn't much, but his views on transsexuals pretty much amounted to "I don't want male perverts near my daughter in the bathroom". Clearly hasn't heard of this meme campaign, might change his view on how dumb he sounded.
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" - Daryl Davis
    "What makes something right or wrong?" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." # | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs." RG

  2. #2
    Clan Clan InsaneApache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Grand Duchy of Yorkshire
    Posts
    8,581

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Don't tell me you've fallen for clownworld.

    honk honk
    There are times I wish they’d just ban everything- baccy and beer, burgers and bangers, and all the rest- once and for all. Instead, they creep forward one apparently tiny step at a time. It’s like being executed with a bacon slicer.

    “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.”

    To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise.

    "The purpose of a university education for Left / Liberals is to attain all the politically correct attitudes towards minorties, and the financial means to live as far away from them as possible."

  3. #3
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,005

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    His Brexit view wasn't much, but his views on transsexuals pretty much amounted to "I don't want male perverts near my daughter in the bathroom". Clearly hasn't heard of this meme campaign, might change his view on how dumb he sounded.
    Is that not a valid concern?
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  4. #4
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,288

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by InsaneApache View Post
    Don't tell me you've fallen for clownworld.

    honk honk
    If you try to mock something hard enough, you'll eventually turn into a clown yourself.
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

  5. #5
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    No longer in Albion
    Posts
    15,748
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    Is that not a valid concern?
    Why would it be a valid one?

    The idea that allowing people who essentially are male and female to use the bathroom legitimately, see pictures:


    - essentially opens the 'floodgates' that makes you want (after all, you are male) want to don a dress then try to peep on women peeing is absolutely absurd. They don't even need dresses if they want to do that, or even they might try to pose as a women even without allowing transgender people anyway. Anyone trying to 'perv' would be appropriately face the consequences. It is pure Daily Mail-esque Boogeyman trash with no basis in reality.

    If we are worried about 'exposure' to the daughter. Which would be the weirdest one? I would argue it is the top picture of the FTM guy (and where the majority of people) wouldn't be able to tell and say "There is a man in the female toilets!".
    Last edited by Beskar; 07-07-2019 at 09:37.
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" - Daryl Davis
    "What makes something right or wrong?" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." # | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs." RG

  6. #6
    Hǫrđar Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hordaland, Norway
    Posts
    6,327

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    people who essentially are male and female
    That, they are not. If anything, they are artificially intersex.
    Runes for good luck:

    [1 - exp(i*2π)]^-1

  7. #7
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,005

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    Why would it be a valid one?

    The idea that allowing people who essentially are male and female to use the bathroom legitimately, see pictures:


    - essentially opens the 'floodgates' that makes you want (after all, you are male) want to don a dress then try to peep on women peeing is absolutely absurd. They don't even need dresses if they want to do that, or even they might try to pose as a women even without allowing transgender people anyway. Anyone trying to 'perv' would be appropriately face the consequences. It is pure Daily Mail-esque Boogeyman trash with no basis in reality.

    If we are worried about 'exposure' to the daughter. Which would be the weirdest one? I would argue it is the top picture of the FTM guy (and where the majority of people) wouldn't be able to tell and say "There is a man in the female toilets!".
    Argument ad absurdum is a fallacy and I know how you like to point out others' fallacies.

    You haven't explained why removing the legal prohibition from someone society identifies as a man entering the women's facilities shouldn't be a concern.

    The reason it is a concern is because it removes the prima facie case for arresting perverts BEFORE they do anything. I recall the pre-op trans-woman who persuaded the government to place her in a woman's prison and then assaulted several female inmates.

    Even if society decides that changing the law is something that should be done that does not make the concerns foolish or illiterate or prejudiced. I saw Long Walk to Freedom with Idris Elba today - part of the plot relates to white fears of reprisal once blacks can control of the government. At no point does Mandela say these fears are not legitimate, he says, in fact, that he wants revenge - but he continues to insist on majority rule (and he says he wants peace more than revenge anyway).
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  8. #8

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    *sigh* Pre-crime again? First, "concerns" without reasonable basis such as these must be prejudicial inasmuch as they are not merely delusional or otherwise arbitrary without reference to justification. Second, the bare possibility that someone somewhere may have concerns that are not "foolish or illiterate or prejudiced" gives no indication as to whether yours fall afoul.

    One example of a possible non-prejudicial concern might appear as motivation to give every person a single-occupancy bathroom because of a generic fear that having any multiple persons in a bathroom creates an unacceptable risk of shenanigans. But whether or not unfounded, such a non-prejudicial concern could not arise suddenly with respect to transgender issues; it would have to be longstanding.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  9. #9
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    No longer in Albion
    Posts
    15,748
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    You haven't explained why removing the legal prohibition from someone society identifies as a man entering the women's facilities shouldn't be a concern.
    I like to use flair to makes points and I am lazy into going into details, but let's do a summary.

    The burden of proof is on those expressing the concern, not me, but let's make it easy and just unpack what you are stating. You are arguing the following:
    - Perverts are Males
    - Perverts prey on women in bathrooms.
    - Banning everyone born as a male from entering the bathroom would ban the perverts.
    - By banning men, you prevent perverts from being perverts. (Pre-Crime)
    - Perverts will exploit LGBT rights to be perverts.

    Given the expressed concern did not state FTM going into the male bathrooms as a concern and you avoided my points about this. I assume it based solely on some distrust of males in particular.

    If we bring some facts to your points:
    - Perverts are unisex. Instead of an obscure unknown eference, I will just throw Myra Hindley into this one. Everyone knows her.
    - Perverts generally speaking do all sorts and can do it legally with money or even free. It is also hard term to actually define, but I think we agree it is significantly far greater than simply males peeping on females peeing without their conaent. Let's change the term being used to 'unsoliciated acts for sexual gratification in bathrooms'. A fair alternative?
    - As you bring up logical fallacies, all men does not equal all perverts as stated before. The acts can continue without males even being present. Also those who do that are likely to be in the statistically minority. What is a fair number, 1 on 100,000 ? Compared with the effect this ban has on individuals such as the female above who can be distressed or extremely uncomfortable given their presentation.
    - Pre Crime arguments. Let's ban you from driving your car so you don't run someone over. There is a significantly higher chance of you running someone over (assuming you are a competent driver) than the incidences of 'perversion' being alluded too by trans people. Now you can rightly argue we recognise this risk as a society and don't ban people from driving for the greater good.
    - Now, this is assuming the argument followed the example of someone who is not trans simply putting on a dress and walking into the ladies. Going to be honest, given the level of discrimination in a thread as well mannered as this one would make someone uncomfortable. Nevermind those individuals risk being abused and assaulted for simply wearing a dress. Again, it completely overlooks the real life examples which people posted who are genuinely just wanting to pee without sticking out like a sore thumb.

    Personally I don't see any valid arguments for the claimed concern. As I said, it is trumped up hogwash by people who want to descriminate against trans individuals by a very flawed argument they are 'perverts in disguise'.

    So let's turn this back to yourself. I have posted pictures of two individuals who shared their experience publicly for awareness. Do you genuinely think they should be forced into those bathrooms when they are so clearly out of place in them?
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" - Daryl Davis
    "What makes something right or wrong?" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." # | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs." RG

  10. #10
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,987

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    Argument ad absurdum is a fallacy and I know how you like to point out others' fallacies.

    You haven't explained why removing the legal prohibition from someone society identifies as a man entering the women's facilities shouldn't be a concern.

    The reason it is a concern is because it removes the prima facie case for arresting perverts BEFORE they do anything. I recall the pre-op trans-woman who persuaded the government to place her in a woman's prison and then assaulted several female inmates.

    Even if society decides that changing the law is something that should be done that does not make the concerns foolish or illiterate or prejudiced. I saw Long Walk to Freedom with Idris Elba today - part of the plot relates to white fears of reprisal once blacks can control of the government. At no point does Mandela say these fears are not legitimate, he says, in fact, that he wants revenge - but he continues to insist on majority rule (and he says he wants peace more than revenge anyway).
    Bwahahaha. In the Brexit thread, a Brexiteer argues that just because people vote for something to be made law, does not mean the idea is not foolish. I agree with on re: this bare argument, but shouldn't this argument be applied to something rather more wide-ranging than who can go into a specific toilet?

  11. #11
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,458

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    I like to use flair to makes points and I am lazy into going into details, but let's do a summary.

    The burden of proof is on those expressing the concern, not me, but let's make it easy and just unpack what you are stating. You are arguing the following:
    - Perverts are Males
    - Perverts prey on women in bathrooms.
    - Banning everyone born as a male from entering the bathroom would ban the perverts.
    - By banning men, you prevent perverts from being perverts. (Pre-Crime)
    - Perverts will exploit LGBT rights to be perverts.

    Given the expressed concern did not state FTM going into the male bathrooms as a concern and you avoided my points about this. I assume it based solely on some distrust of males in particular.

    If we bring some facts to your points:
    - Perverts are unisex. Instead of an obscure unknown eference, I will just throw Myra Hindley into this one. Everyone knows her.
    - Perverts generally speaking do all sorts and can do it legally with money or even free. It is also hard term to actually define, but I think we agree it is significantly far greater than simply males peeping on females peeing without their conaent. Let's change the term being used to 'unsoliciated acts for sexual gratification in bathrooms'. A fair alternative?
    - As you bring up logical fallacies, all men does not equal all perverts as stated before. The acts can continue without males even being present. Also those who do that are likely to be in the statistically minority. What is a fair number, 1 on 100,000 ? Compared with the effect this ban has on individuals such as the female above who can be distressed or extremely uncomfortable given their presentation.
    - Pre Crime arguments. Let's ban you from driving your car so you don't run someone over. There is a significantly higher chance of you running someone over (assuming you are a competent driver) than the incidences of 'perversion' being alluded too by trans people. Now you can rightly argue we recognise this risk as a society and don't ban people from driving for the greater good.
    - Now, this is assuming the argument followed the example of someone who is not trans simply putting on a dress and walking into the ladies. Going to be honest, given the level of discrimination in a thread as well mannered as this one would make someone uncomfortable. Nevermind those individuals risk being abused and assaulted for simply wearing a dress. Again, it completely overlooks the real life examples which people posted who are genuinely just wanting to pee without sticking out like a sore thumb.

    Personally I don't see any valid arguments for the claimed concern. As I said, it is trumped up hogwash by people who want to descriminate against trans individuals by a very flawed argument they are 'perverts in disguise'.

    So let's turn this back to yourself. I have posted pictures of two individuals who shared their experience publicly for awareness. Do you genuinely think they should be forced into those bathrooms when they are so clearly out of place in them?
    i think you have just demolished the very concept of bathrooms separated by sex [or] gender.

    if these things are all imagined problems, then why have two sets of bathrooms at all?
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

    Member thankful for this post:



  12. #12
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    No longer in Albion
    Posts
    15,748
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    i think you have just demolished the very concept of bathrooms separated by sex [or] gender.

    if these things are all imagined problems, then why have two sets of bathrooms at all?
    Here is an article on that particular topic applied to the United States.


    TL;DR Answer was to discriminate against women, such as in many cultures women were forced into separate rooms and not allowed to mingle with the males. With some Victorian values of modesty thrown in there. In short, until the end of the 19th Century, all public restrooms were unisex.

    To quote near the end of the article applied to this argument:
    Opponents of transgender rights have employed the slogan “No Men in Women’s Bathrooms,” which evokes visions of weak women being subject to attack by men if transgender women are allowed to “invade” the public bathroom.

    In fact, the only solid evidence of any such attacks in public restrooms are those directed at transgendered individuals, a significant percentage of whom report verbal and physical assault in such spaces.
    Last edited by Beskar; 07-08-2019 at 09:13.
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" - Daryl Davis
    "What makes something right or wrong?" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." # | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs." RG

  13. #13
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    No longer in Albion
    Posts
    15,748
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Viking View Post
    That, they are not. If anything, they are artificially intersex.
    They are for all intents and purposes that gender.

    You are also an artificially constructed consciousness manifested from a gurgling meat-suit made of billion of cells using an artificial box constructed out of inorganic materials transmitting photons to interact with other gurgling meat-suits.
    Last edited by Beskar; 07-08-2019 at 09:37.
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" - Daryl Davis
    "What makes something right or wrong?" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." # | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs." RG

    Member thankful for this post:



  14. #14
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,005

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Bwahahaha. In the Brexit thread, a Brexiteer argues that just because people vote for something to be made law, does not mean the idea is not foolish. I agree with on re: this bare argument, but shouldn't this argument be applied to something rather more wide-ranging than who can go into a specific toilet?
    So, what you got from my post was that majority-rule in South Africa was foolish?

    Go read my post again, I said that just because someone does NOT vote for something that the majority believe is right does not mean that person is foolish. In the context of Brexit that means that I do not think Remain voters are foolish for being worried about Brexit.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  15. #15
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,005

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    They are for all intents and purposes that gender.

    You are also an artificially constructed consciousness manifested from a gurgling meat-suit made of billion of cells using an artificial box constructed out of inorganic materials transmitting photons to interact with other gurgling meat-suits.
    You believe in Intelligent Design now? Or Aliens?

    Disregarding the rest of your colourful description wherewith is the human consciousness "artificial"?

    If you respond "gender is artificially constructed" I'll simply respond "no it isn't" because you have no evidence for that claim - in fact your entire argument here rest on gender being spontaneously generated.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  16. #16
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,458

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    [URL="http://theconversation.com/how-did-public-bathrooms-get-to-be-separated-by-sex-in-the-first-place-59575"]HWith some Victorian values of modesty thrown in there. In short, until the end of the 19th Century, all public restrooms were unisex.
    i have no real objection if that is the outcome.

    but as long as there is an argument to justify the separation then i suppose i have more sympathy drawing the line at sex rather than gender.

    if someone has legally transitioned then fair enough, but if someone has simply decided to 'identify' as a chick then I can't say that I care if their choice is given no weight when it come to enforcing the separation that is the status quo.
    Last edited by Furunculus; 07-08-2019 at 11:00.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  17. #17
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    No longer in Albion
    Posts
    15,748
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    Disregarding the rest of your colourful description wherewith is the human consciousness "artificial"?
    It is interesting out of all that, the thing you highlight is me making a silly reference to the theories of.consciousness and it's arguments. You sure like to avoid being challenged Phillip.

    Aside from the obvious strawman fallacy as bait... (side-note: it was HoreTore who liked to pull out logical fallacies in their Latin glory, not myself. He was also big on rationalwiki)... It is a topic that is vast, it's arguments are.many,.and to have no desire to get into them.

    Though best to ignore the artificial part as a word, as can become too confusing with the concept of 'artifical intelligence' opposed to the nature of consciousness itself. Try the TED talk on conscious reality being a shared hallunication as a starting point.
    Last edited by Beskar; 07-08-2019 at 11:40.
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" - Daryl Davis
    "What makes something right or wrong?" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." # | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs." RG

  18. #18
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    No longer in Albion
    Posts
    15,748
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    if someone has legally transitioned then fair enough, but if someone has simply decided to 'identify' as a chick then I can't say that I care if their choice is given no weight when it come to enforcing the separation that is the status quo.
    Given the argument is about those who have legally transitioned or sufficiently through the process being banned because people who even here have argued against it, making it about birth sex, due to banning the mythical 'man in a dress being a pervert'.

    Since you agree it is okay, we are not opposing. As I am sure you are happy with those two individuals I posted for example using the respective toilets.
    Last edited by Beskar; 07-08-2019 at 11:41.
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" - Daryl Davis
    "What makes something right or wrong?" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." # | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs." RG

  19. #19
    Hǫrđar Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hordaland, Norway
    Posts
    6,327

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    They are for all intents and purposes that gender.
    The terms male and female often refer specifically to sex; they are the terms used in biology.

    Separately, unless you can somehow define the genders in a manner that is completely independent of sex (good luck), that such individuals should be of the claimed gender for all intents and purposes does not seem reasonable.
    Runes for good luck:

    [1 - exp(i*2π)]^-1

  20. #20
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,458

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    Given the argument is about those who have legally transitioned or sufficiently through the process being banned because people who even here have argued against it, making it about birth sex, due to banning the mythical 'man in a dress being a pervert'.

    Since you agree it is okay, we are not opposing. As I am sure you are happy with those two individuals I posted for example using the respective toilets.
    sure, but in a similar vein to my caution over gay marriage; i would suggest that recent attempts to make gender reassignment a beurocratic triviality preclude me from agreeing with you so readily.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  21. #21

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    sure, but in a similar vein to my caution over gay marriage; i would suggest that recent attempts to make gender reassignment a beurocratic triviality preclude me from agreeing with you so readily.
    ?

    Removing legal sanction is fundamental to the whole premise of queer activism. Your caution is not respectable. There is no available law or rule against the abusive "man in a dress" of legend that in its implementation does not overwhelmingly impinge on "real" transgenders, in the way that a law against 'being bad' would undermine the whole population subject to capricious enforcement (here just the absolute whole population of subjects). And it's important for everyone to keep in mind that the metaphysics of gender and the application of law and politics are distinct subjects so long as one does not seek the coercive enforcement of a concrete preferred social order. As a classical liberal you probably already uphold the pieties of individual liberty over the Great Chain, right?
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  22. #22
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,288

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Viking View Post
    The terms male and female often refer specifically to sex; they are the terms used in biology.
    I was going ask you about your thoughts about social interactions with regards to gender. Instead, I am going to ask you why your argument for supposedly allowing intersex people go about life as they please does not apply to people suffering from dysphoria?
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

  23. #23
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,005

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    It is interesting out of all that, the thing you highlight is me making a silly reference to the theories of.consciousness and it's arguments. You sure like to avoid being challenged Phillip.

    Aside from the obvious strawman fallacy as bait... (side-note: it was HoreTore who liked to pull out logical fallacies in their Latin glory, not myself. He was also big on rationalwiki)... It is a topic that is vast, it's arguments are.many,.and to have no desire to get into them.

    Though best to ignore the artificial part as a word, as can become too confusing with the concept of 'artifical intelligence' opposed to the nature of consciousness itself. Try the TED talk on conscious reality being a shared hallunication as a starting point.
    That's not a strawman, that's me chiding you for saying something I consider foolish and logically inconsistent. Specifically, your post implied that the human consciousness is artificially, wilfully constructed. If this was the case then the human conception of gender would also be artificially constructed, and if that were the case there would be no legitimate transgender people - because people would be able to willingly choose there gender.

    The entire basis of transgender identity is that gender is not a choice.

    Viking said that transexuals were artificially a certain gender you said they were "to all intents and purposes" that gender - then you said Viking was an artificially constructed consciousness.

    Something which is "artificial" is man-made, constructed through "artifice", whereas the human consciousness (assuming it is not divinely inspired) is generally held to be a naturally emergent phenomenon, not something that humans deliberately bring into being.

    Further, before you run any further in the wrong direction - I did NOT say it was wrong to allow transgender people into a certain bathroom or toilet - I said it was wrong to assume people had no reasonable objections to that.

    In response to your previous post, which I did not have to time address this morning.

    1. Our society practices a lot of what you call "pre crime", we have banned guns and the carrying of almost all knives in public, including basic pen knives and swiss army knives.

    2. You're quite right to pick me up on the word "pervert", let's replace that with "sexual predator".

    3. You've reduced this to a niche issue of "men watching women peeing" but that misses the point entirely. This is not about some specific, bizarre, fetish it's about exposing women at their most vulnerable to predator men - especially young women. Consider a simple example - woman goes into toilet to adjust her bra - man walks in. Consider another, woman washing her hands - man slaps her arse whilst she's bent over the sink.

    Given that we can probably rely on public conveniences remaining CCTV-free exactly because that's an undue invasion of privacy that makes public conveniences a convenient CCTV black spot for sexual predators.

    4. It's certainly true that not all men are sexual predators... wait is it? Anyway, it is true that not all sexual predators are men, but straight women get enough unwanted attention from lesbians already - I hardly think that is an argument to expose them to male predation as well.

    At the end of the day the average man is bigger, stronger, taller and heavier than the average woman - he's more able to enforce his physical will on a woman within the same part of the height/weight curve that vice versa. I'm not quite 5'9, but if I were a woman I would be around 5'4 (just under average height in both cases). It's the basics of physical mechanics that tends to make men the majority of sexual predators - they just tend to be bigger in most instances.

    It's also all well and good for you or I to argue this but at least one of us is a relatively civilised person - there is a vast population of uncivilised men out there - as evidenced by the use to which smartphone cameras are put in schools and universities. How do you suppose those Law Students from my university here in Exeter would have felt about the prospect of mixed bathrooms? The ones at Warwick? The 500,000 who downloaded the "Depp Nudes" App before it was withdrawn (look it up).

    There are some nasty men out there who would casually grope your teenage daughter for a cheap thrill and think nothing of it 2 minutes later. It's perfectly reasonable as a father to worry about her not even being able to escape them in a gendered public toilet - if you can't see that you're just too evolved.

    None of what I have just written in any way denies the possibilities of young men being predated upon by women but realistically they're also probably more at risk from other men.

    Here's a source on this: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-a8519086.html

    Just under 90 per cent of complaints regarding changing room sexual assaults, voyeurism and harassment are about incidents in unisex facilities.
    The concern is not about some transgender guy who likes to wear muscle shirts and live in the gym being in the Gents', or about some waifish transgender woman in the Ladies' - it's about the move to unisex facilities and the implication of that.

    This is your argument ad absurdem - you are taking the fringe case that people like to talk about and ignoring the wider long-term policy implications, and smearing anyone who does worry about that as ignorant and transphobic.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  24. #24

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    1. Our society practices a lot of what you call "pre crime", we have banned guns and the carrying of almost all knives in public, including basic pen knives and swiss army knives.
    Pre-crime is not the principle behind what you listed, which was a restriction on property or commerce rather than people. A better comparison would be to demographic profiling. There is reasonable profiling, such as passing over infants for murder suspects, and unreasonable profiling, such as banning those who regularly consume alcohol from driving vehicles. From the viewpoint of state action, pre-crime is pre-punishment, so demographic profiling can immediately become group discrimination or collective punishment. This unsurprisingly inflicts real-life costs on the targeted demographics.

    Further, before you run any further in the wrong direction - I did NOT say it was wrong to allow transgender people into a certain bathroom or toilet - I said it was wrong to assume people had no reasonable objections to that.
    [...]
    This is your argument ad absurdem - you are taking the fringe case that people like to talk about and ignoring the wider long-term policy implications, and smearing anyone who does worry about that as ignorant and transphobic.
    The mere possibility that some objection somewhere is reasonable does not entail anything about a specific objection.

    Spend less energy protesting virtue and more examining your premises to see if they fall afoul of your ostensible commitments.

    2. You're quite right to pick me up on the word "pervert", let's replace that with "sexual predator".

    3. You've reduced this to a niche issue of "men watching women peeing" but that misses the point entirely. This is not about some specific, bizarre, fetish it's about exposing women at their most vulnerable to predator men - especially young women. Consider a simple example - woman goes into toilet to adjust her bra - man walks in. Consider another, woman washing her hands - man slaps her arse whilst she's bent over the sink.

    Given that we can probably rely on public conveniences remaining CCTV-free exactly because that's an undue invasion of privacy that makes public conveniences a convenient CCTV black spot for sexual predators.
    Such men already exist and are already subject to legal sanction on the basis of demonstrable transgressions.

    It's also all well and good for you or I to argue this but at least one of us is a relatively civilised person - there is a vast population of uncivilised men out there - as evidenced by the use to which smartphone cameras are put in schools and universities. How do you suppose those Law Students from my university here in Exeter would have felt about the prospect of mixed bathrooms? The ones at Warwick? The 500,000 who downloaded the "Depp Nudes" App before it was withdrawn (look it up).
    Men routinely set up hidden cameras in women's bathrooms at this very moment, because they have the motivation and opportunity.

    There are some nasty men out there who would casually grope your teenage daughter for a cheap thrill and think nothing of it 2 minutes later. It's perfectly reasonable as a father to worry about her not even being able to escape them in a gendered public toilet - if you can't see that you're just too evolved.
    So what does this have to do with restrictions on transgender people?

    None of what I have just written in any way denies the possibilities of young men being predated upon by women but realistically they're also probably more at risk from other men.

    Here's a source on this: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-a8519086.html

    The concern is not about some transgender guy who likes to wear muscle shirts and live in the gym being in the Gents', or about some waifish transgender woman in the Ladies' - it's about the move to unisex facilities and the implication of that.
    I was going to contest your impression of the safety of unisex spaces or the right of 'concerned fathers' to demand a restriction of others for the sake of their comfort, but I realized there's an immediate logical inconsistency embedded: what does any of that have to do with transgender people? It should be immediately apparent that maintaining segregated spaces is compatible with deference to transgendered individual preferences.

    If your reasonable and non-prejudicial anxiety is over unisex spaces, why are you talking about transgender people?
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Member thankful for this post:

    Beskar 


  25. #25
    Mr Self Important Senior Member Beskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    No longer in Albion
    Posts
    15,748
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    If this was the case then the human conception of gender would also be artificially constructed, and if that were the case there would be no legitimate transgender people - because people would be able to willingly choose there gender.
    If we are going to go into this, let's go. Gender is an artificial construction. It is based on social and cultural norms opposed to biological sex. Women are not born with dresses and men into black-tie dress. I will lazily just point to this topic on Wikipedia for you to read as it contents all the information there.

    In fact, gender has never always been a simple binary into masculine and feminine either. This is a product of Western culture and you can easily see differences by looking into other cultures.

    In India, there were the Hijra.
    In Native American society, known as the umbrella term of Two-Spirit.
    We also have the Māhū in Hawaiian and Tahitian cultures.
    We also have the Takatāpui as an umbrella term describing differences of understanding within Maori culture.
    There are the Kathoey in Thailand.
    There are the Fa’afafine in Somoa.
    The Skoptsy which are a Christian Sect in Russia.
    The Femminiello in Neopolitan society.
    The Mino in Benin, known as the Dahomey Amazons.
    There is also Iran's take on transsexuality. I remember watching a documentary about it where the Imam describes it akin to baking bread. Cannot remember the source though.


    There is are many more examples I can list. I think I will stop here because I think I have made my point.

    The world is an amazing diverse place. You can learn a great deal if you put your head outside its comfort zone.
    Last edited by Beskar; 07-09-2019 at 01:32.
    "We are living in space-age times but there's too many of us thinking with stone-age minds" - Daryl Davis
    "What makes something right or wrong?" | How to spot a Humanist
    "Men of Quality do not fear Equality." # | "Belief doesn't change facts. Facts, if you are reasonable, should change your beliefs." RG

  26. #26
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,005

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Beskar View Post
    If we are going to go into this, let's go. Gender is an artificial construction. It is based on social and cultural norms opposed to biological sex. Women are not born with dresses and men into black-tie dress. I will lazily just point to this topic on Wikipedia for you to read as it contents all the information there.

    In fact, gender has never always been a simple binary into masculine and feminine either. This is a product of Western culture and you can easily see differences by looking into other cultures.

    In India, there were the Hijra.
    In Native American society, known as the umbrella term of Two-Spirit.
    We also have the Māhū in Hawaiian and Tahitian cultures.
    We also have the Takatāpui as an umbrella term describing differences of understanding within Maori culture.
    There are the Kathoey in Thailand.
    There are the Fa’afafine in Somoa.
    The Skoptsy which are a Christian Sect in Russia.
    The Femminiello in Neopolitan society.
    The Mino in Benin, known as the Dahomey Amazons.
    There is also Iran's take on transsexuality. I remember watching a documentary about it where the Imam describes it akin to baking bread. Cannot remember the source though.


    There is are many more examples I can list. I think I will stop here because I think I have made my point.

    The world is an amazing diverse place. You can learn a great deal if you put your head outside its comfort zone.
    I contest your premise - the fact that some express a non-binary gender does not make gender an artificial construction, the fact that not everyone fits a binary gender does not mean that those who conceive of their gender in binary terms do so primarily because they are conditioned to do so. Some humans have twelve fingers and twelve toes and yet the accepted scientific number is ten of each - variance does not obliterate "normal".

    AGAIN - your argument undercuts the transgender people you are purporting to defend. If gender is a purely artificial construct then transgenderism is a purely artificial construct, it's not a real thing.

    I think your mistake is that you are confusing gender and gender roles - so a soldier who is female must be partly masculine, and Russian heretics who mutilate their bodies as a commitment to chastity must be intersex.

    Monasticism is both asexual and robustly masculine and that is in no way a contradictory statement. Not for the first time I note that you try to pigeonhole me into some sort of cookie-cutter right-wing intellectual box, which is ironic given the current thrust of your argument.

    The fact your argument has a thrust doesn't make it any more masculine, in case you were wondering.

    You've actually pivoted from supporting transgender rights to talking about gender-non conformity when the transgender examples you pictured ARE gender conformant, in fact most trans-gender people you will see tend to either be highly conformant or they look like they are in drag. I've encountered both and the latter are, frankly, quite bizarre in their bearing - the trans-women who fall into that category are really a terrible parody of womanhood.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	15-nicole-maines.w1200.h630.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	264.2 KB 
ID:	22741

    But please, tell this young lady her gender-identity is an artificial construct.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  27. #27
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,005

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    [QUOTE=Montmorency;2053795388]Pre-crime is not the principle behind what you listed, which was a restriction on property or commerce rather than people. A better comparison would be to demographic profiling. There is reasonable profiling, such as passing over infants for murder suspects, and unreasonable profiling, such as banning those who regularly consume alcohol from driving vehicles. From the viewpoint of state action, pre-crime is pre-punishment, so demographic profiling can immediately become group discrimination or collective punishment. This unsurprisingly inflicts real-life costs on the targeted demographics.[quote]

    In the UK we infringe upon the "Right to Bear Arms" enumerated in our Bill of Rights because a few people have used arms for terrible purposes.

    Therefore, it is assumed that anyone who wishes to practice with arms will do the same and so almost all arms are restricted. This is the same as saying any man who enters a woman's bathroom is a sexual predator and therefore all men shall be banned from women's bathrooms. The relatively small risk that this will happen has led to the complete ban on handguns and the banning of all non-bolt-action centrefire rifles.

    The mere possibility that some objection somewhere is reasonable does not entail anything about a specific objection.

    Spend less energy protesting virtue and more examining your premises to see if they fall afoul of your ostensible commitments.
    This argument started because Beskar implied that anyone with anxiety over the safety of his teenage daughter in allowing men into female bathrooms to accommodate transgender rights was morally bankrupt.

    I merely argued that this was not necessarily the case and now apparently I hate transgender people - I don't feel like I'm the one making the logical leap here.

    Such men already exist and are already subject to legal sanction on the basis of demonstrable transgressions.
    We used to have men who owned guns and knives too - now we arrest them all and send them to prison before they even think of hurting anyone. We do this because we are not a liberal society- which is fine - but its inconsistent to be liberal in some areas and not others.

    Men routinely set up hidden cameras in women's bathrooms at this very moment, because they have the motivation and opportunity.
    Be a spate of that in Costa Coffee shops here - guess what. Those toilets are unisex.

    So what does this have to do with restrictions on transgender people?
    Not wanting transgender people to be in the bathroom of the sex they were not assigned at birth is not about "restricting transgender people" it's about our society being over-liberal and creating opportunities for abuse that do not currently exist.

    I'd quite like to own a semi-automatic rifle in 7.62mm, preferably an SLR, because I enjoy shooting - I'm good at it - and if you're going to have a boom stick you might as well have something with some KICK. 5.56mm doesn't have kick, rifles like the SA80 are very easy to shoot and not very satisfying. I'm not talking about my arse here, I'm speaking from personal experience and I miss shooting. However, I accept it's illegal in the UK for reasons of collective safety.

    I was going to contest your impression of the safety of unisex spaces or the right of 'concerned fathers' to demand a restriction of others for the sake of their comfort, but I realized there's an immediate logical inconsistency embedded: what does any of that have to do with transgender people? It should be immediately apparent that maintaining segregated spaces is compatible with deference to transgendered individual preferences.

    If your reasonable and non-prejudicial anxiety is over unisex spaces, why are you talking about transgender people?
    AM I talking about transgender people? See, I though I was criticising Beskar for suggesting that anyone who DARED question the current transgender orthodoxy was morally bankrupt. Remember, this started because Beskar intimated that the reason a union activist lost his job was not because of Brexit but because of his view on transgender use of bathrooms and Beskar's tone indicates his disdain for those views.

    Essentially, this man is being pilloried for being unsophisticated, and this is supposedly enough to lose him his role in organising his union despite his obvious unionist credentials - and shortly after he went on Youtube to make the "Left Wing case for Brexit" too. Frankly, given Beskar's own lack of sophistication I find this deeply ironic.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  28. #28
    Hǫrđar Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hordaland, Norway
    Posts
    6,327

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by CrossLOPER View Post
    Instead, I am going to ask you why your argument for supposedly allowing intersex people go about life as they please does not apply to people suffering from dysphoria?
    I haven't argued for or against any particular policy in this thread. I think the only solution that will make everyone reasonably happy is to include one or more unisex toilets in addition to the usual gender-segregated ones, but that will often take more space and cost more money, and not make the enterprises happy.
    Runes for good luck:

    [1 - exp(i*2π)]^-1

  29. #29
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,239

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Viking View Post
    I haven't argued for or against any particular policy in this thread. I think the only solution that will make everyone reasonably happy is to include one or more unisex toilets in addition to the usual gender-segregated ones, but that will often take more space and cost more money, and not make the enterprises happy.
    Have one thing with unisex cubicles and another with unisex urinals.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  30. #30
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,005

    Default Re: EXIT NEGOTIATIONS

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    ?

    Removing legal sanction is fundamental to the whole premise of queer activism. Your caution is not respectable. There is no available law or rule against the abusive "man in a dress" of legend that in its implementation does not overwhelmingly impinge on "real" transgenders, in the way that a law against 'being bad' would undermine the whole population subject to capricious enforcement (here just the absolute whole population of subjects). And it's important for everyone to keep in mind that the metaphysics of gender and the application of law and politics are distinct subjects so long as one does not seek the coercive enforcement of a concrete preferred social order. As a classical liberal you probably already uphold the pieties of individual liberty over the Great Chain, right?
    I can't parse "Your caution is not respectable" as a statement. Generally speaking, caution and deliberation in decision making are respectable virtues, the only time this is not the case is when they are used to hide some sort of moral fault - such as prejudice or cowardice.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO