Transsexual Toilet Trouble

[Furunculus]

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.

[Montmorency]

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?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

?

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.