Transman wins lawsuit agains school board (Virginia) [Title edited by MNHQ at poster's request]

So, ditch gender, but keep the female-specific provisions we currently have until society had evolved to the point we don't need them any more.

And how this would work in practice is to make single sex provision something you can opt out of but not opt into.

So a female person could opt out (on a case by case basis) of the female-only spaces and protections she has a right to use, but she can’t opt into male ones. Vice versa for males.

Clearly that means third spaces for the use of those who opt out, so parallel multi sex provisions become the norm.

Then over time, as we see single sex provisions becoming unused for a particular situation because although both sexes participate everyone is using the third space, it’s a good social signal that that specific need for single sex provisions has gone.

And so, we hopefully evolve to the point very few single sex provisions are needed, not by throwing them out wholesale because an ideology says we shouldn’t need them, but by ensuring the need has gone before we lose the space.

The beauty of the opt-out not in model is

Firstly the whole issue of trans ideology forcing the label cis and an associated gender definition onto everyone else in order to justify their claim to the opposite sex’s provisions goes away, because you can only opt out of your own sex provisions not into some one else’s.

Secondly, we (society) don’t need to work out in advance what needs to stay single sex and what doesn’t. We just make sure the mixed-sex option always exists, keep challenging sexism, sexist structures and stereotypes wherever we find them, and see what evolves.

oops Artiechokeleaves*

Have just come to the thread and was about to quote Artichokeleaves' post like StellaAndCrow. This is one of the clearest explanations of the conflicts involved. Thanks Artichoke I intend to steal this explanation to use in other spaces, hope you don't mind.

Right I understand what catherine is saying and im not disagreeing as such

But surely condoms are a sex thing not a gender thing…what am I missing

Yep. And female people have needs that are nothing to do with gender that are not shared by males, that arise from both the abilities and limitations of our bodies, and the impact of having those bodies in a systemically sexist society.

So, ditch gender, but keep the female-specific provisions we currently have until society had evolved to the point we don't need them any more.

I'm good with that.

Of course toilets are gendered spaces. For example, changing tables are often just found in women's toilets, condom machines in men's, I have seen hair straighteners and machines dispensing hair brushes in the women's... these unequal arrangements are based on gender assumptions/expectations.

Very much so. So the obvious solution is to have stuff that's not body-related in both spaces. Because by definition, if it's gender thing that can be found in both sexes, it's not a sex thing.

What the solution is not, is to ignore the very real needs of female-bodied people dealing with the physical and social impact of having our bodies in a sexist society, and do away with all sex segregation just so a male with a woman gender identity has access to a hairbrush dispenser!

give people care based on their specific needs rather than lumping folks together into a specific body associated with a specific gender, throw the whole idea that men or women act or think a specific way away, etcetera.

Yet when GC folks fight for this they are told it's bigoted.

How would you suggest transition would happen for trans people who, for whatever reason, choose not to undergo medical/ surgical intervention, in this hypothetical world?

The obvious solution is to stop associating people with genders, then.

Sounds like a plan to be honest.

Just get rid of the terms man and woman, give people care based on their specific needs rather than lumping folks together into a specific body associated with a specific gender, throw the whole idea that men or women act or think a specific way away, etcetera.

Saves you a lot of bullshit if you don't have to wade through the sexism of having people insist you're a frail weak innocent easily fooled girl tricked into starting testosterone to avoid sexual harassment on your way to getting HRT because you want a deep voice and a hairy ass.

These groups make a load of money don’t they?

So why the fuck didn't Gavin get the money

The fine was to cover legal fees not as compensation.

And the fine was levied against the state schools dept I assume? They paid the $1m plus.

Fucking fucking awful.

They didn't give like even a % of it to Gavin?

That's really really bad. IMO.

This sort of thing is seen a fair bit in USA and coming here. Finding someone who is a good sympathetic candidate for X and use them to push an agenda.

Really unethical behaviour.

Come on ACLU where is your support for Gavin now?

Well why the fuck didn't Gavin get anything???

Gavin is the one who felt discriminated against, has been the one whose face is in any reporting. Has according to article mh and other issues. And is very very young.

So why the fuck didn't Gavin get the money.

(Rhetorical question. Shameless fucking bastards.)

Also important to notice that the other children lost.

You are kidding! I can imagine a double look maybe - but for the love of god, screaming at you. I hope you pointed out the error on her thinking...

I saw one video of a US school or mall or something where a butch looking girl was asked to leave but there were police involved and as usual no mention of the backstory prior to where the footage starts.
I've never been thrown out of a toilet but I have been challenged. So I do believe it happens but I don't think incidences have increased because of gender critical ideology.
There would need to be a baseline figure of incidents and a marked increase, with everyday homophobia discounted.
It's not nice being treated badly for being butch, but this is an attempt to turn those kinds of incidents into some kind of argument that men should be allowed in women's toilets.

Also, the transman referred to in the OP has definitely been used. Bit like the Guardian writer who wanted a motherless child. Useful prop for men who want things changed to suit themselves.

The title of this thread is wrong. The trans man didn’t win anything.

It was the ACLU who got the money. Gavin got nothing.

I don’t see what reason this case was brought and what good it did to the one person who the case was about.

The $1.3 million was for lawyers fees and expenses.

Gavin will realise eventually that for all the stress there was no win. No payment to make up for the years of having a life put on hold

I get what you're saying, KittenKong and maybe it doesn't make much sense to use the word as an indication of gender non-conformity. It comes from the old butch/femme lesbian dynamic although most lesbians don't identify as either. A bit like how some gay men are "bears". It's just useful in-group language.

And there are people who declare (on social media) that non feminine women have been mistaken for men and asked to leave ladies loos. I’m sure it’s a crock though.