Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

How would you actually implement bathrooms separated by sex?

129 replies

blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 21:39

I'm actually curious about this. I'm defining sex as the most common combinations of chromosomes and gonads.

How would you enforce that only people with a particular combination uses a particular bathroom? In the case of intersex people, or transgender people who pass well?

OP posts:
thebewilderness · 08/05/2018 23:32

By definition, you will only notice as trans trans women who don't pass. You can't really say whether a person who passes as a woman is trans or not, at least not by external visual cues alone

This reminds me of the posts on tumblr of photoshopped transgender identified males that dares all to dispute their ability to pass, and then you see the before photoshop pic and, come on d00d.

I understand the need to feel that one is maintaining when on drugs, and passing when in a woman costume. Truth is that everyone knows and they don't say anything either because they don't care enough about you to tell you the truth or they are afraid you will assault them.

BrynsPicasso · 08/05/2018 23:17

MAAAAAATE

Do you think your hyperbole is making you sound intelligent?

Because it really really isn't.

Rufustheyawningreindeer · 08/05/2018 23:16

Ive no clue whats going on so im just gonna sit here and watch for a bit

black

It might be easier to to say what dreadfully 'transphobic' post you would like someone to type...then we can type it and knock off for the night

FissionChips · 08/05/2018 23:13

If I say "tall women", and then want to refer to those "women" who aren't tall, would "non-tall women" not be acceptable?

That be some crazy thinking, people end up being described as non-Chinesebraziliansouthafricanenglishlatvianpolish etc

You be funny Grin

FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 23:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 23:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 23:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 23:03

Sorry, I think the issue is partly with me not getting the reply to system. The acceptance of "prescribe" was the widely accepted one.

OP posts:
BarrackerBarmer · 08/05/2018 23:02

Every transwoman who uses facilities designated for females is pushing past women's boundaries and ignoring their consent. Women may or may not be aware of this at the time. Most are aware, some will not care, and some will care very much and will be impacted badly.

It is a violation.

'Yes, but some are getting away with it so all should be able to' is not a valid position to take.

'Oh but she didn't realise so it's OK' isn't an acceptable defence - it doesn't work to allow rape of a woman whilst unconscious, or theft from people with dementia, or abuse of those who lack capacity.

Unethical acts remain unethical whether they are immediately detected or not. And prioritising personal validation over the consent of women to their own bodily privacy from you, a member of the opposite sex, is unethical and wrong.

I consent to undressing in a changing room with other females, and to cervical smear tests performed by a female, and to security pat downs performed by females.
I refuse my consent to any of those situations with males.

If a male person attempts to breach my consent in those situations it is inexcusable.

Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 23:02

No, it isn't. If you assert a proposition (no trans woman passes), you are going to be asked for a proof of it. If you cannot provide such proof, then saying "we cannot currently tell whether no trans woman passes" is a fact.

OP posts:
FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 23:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 23:01

If I say "tall women", and then want to refer to those "women" who aren't tall, would "non-tall women" not be acceptable?

OP posts:
Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 22:59

That was a widely used acceptance of that term. I will try to make my language more informal though.

OP posts:
FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 22:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 22:57

Sorry, I'm not transgender. If I use an adjective (transgender) on a noun (women), I need a way to referring to instances of that now to whom that adjective doesn't apply

OP posts:
FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 22:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 22:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LaSqrrl · 08/05/2018 22:52

who pass as non-transgender women

We actually call them women. Bad luck blackandredarrow, you just outed yourself. So the answer to your REAL question is, no, you won't pass.

nauticant · 08/05/2018 22:50

One thing that's noticeable is that there's been a shift from ploppers shouting "transphobe" to posters who appear to have received the crappest Jesuitical training one can imagine.

Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 22:50

I am going to bed now. Thanks for all the answers

OP posts:
Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 22:50

Then why the joke about "prescribe"?

OP posts:
Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 22:49

You say no transgender woman passes. That demans proof. I say, until I see that proof, there is no way of knowing

OP posts:
Original poster
blackandredarrow · 08/05/2018 22:47

Intersex people where only part of my question. What about transgender people?

OP posts:
FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 22:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FrancisCrawford · 08/05/2018 22:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.