New anti-trans legislation in North Carolina

[SlowFJH]

Of course it's been driven by the religious right wing. But it does aim to achieve what many posters here appear to advocate - namely that biological males can only use men's toilets and changing rooms etc. Biological females must only use women's toilets and changing rooms. Will it gain wider support?

Did you have a good sleep slow? Hopefully, you feel refreshed enough to answer all the questions that you avoided earlier.

This gem from PosieReturningParker 25.3.16 19:35

"I saw a boy in Tesco tonight, his dad looked like Les Dawson in a dress, with shockingly shit make up. Poor kid"

I think this perfectly sums up what I mean about being on the wrong side of history.

Some questions for you Posie

1. How do you know for sure it wasn't his mum (a biological female) who just might not meet your standards?

2. Are you happy for strangers to be judging your appearance in Tesco?

3. What qualifies you to judge whether someone else's make up is "shockingly shit"?

4. Would you like to post a picture of yourself so that we can all be educated as to what "non-shit" make-up looks like?

5. If your comments were directed towards any other minority group - based solely on the fact that you disapproved of the parent's appearance (e.g. a black, Jewish, Muslim, disabled, Sikh, ginger-haired, Romanian person etc).. how would you sound?

6. If this person wasn't breaking any laws and there was no harm being done to the child, what the fuck has their appearance got to do with you?

But I am grateful to you for revealing the true nature of the anti-trans hatred.

How about you answer some of our questions, slow, before we think about indulging any more of yours?

tsk. Bloody male entitlement!

Sluglettuce

"A trans woman who doesn't pass looks nothing like a biological female of anyone's standards."

Who sets these "standards"? Who sets themselves up to judge them?

Still with the questions, slow?

Slow You don't deserve having any of your questions answered as you deliberately avoid answering any put to you.

You are becoming tedious.

"How do you think we should protect women from voyeuristic men?"

By using the law.

Sexual Offences Act 2003

What? The same law would apply and offenders should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Your comments reveal your real motives. You want to inflate fears that trans people want to use the loo for predominantly nefarious purposes (rather than simply using it to you know go to the toilet, wash their hands or try to get their make up looking as perfect as PosieReturningParker).

Ok, slow I know you're being given a hard time here, but bear with me as I'm open to looking at things in a different way.

At the moment, in the UK, it is legal to challenge a male-looking person entering or within a changing/toilet facility dedicated to use by females. This provides me, and other women with safety and security by increasing the risk of challenge to male looking people who may choose to target female dedicated spaces to commit crime, and in turn, those spaces are not seen as 'soft targets' by predators.

If the law changes to allow anyone, irrespective of their appearance or biological sex, to use female dedicated spaces then the risk to those people of being caught will be a lot less. That in turn will increase the likelihood of those spaces being targeted in that way - so increasing the risk to both women and trans-women.

I do not understand why trans-women do not want to minimise the risk to themselves. By insisting on access to places currently set aside for exclusive use by biological women, the risk those spaces pose to transwonen increases. There is a far safer alternative that is being rejected, which brings into question the motivation for the desire for change.

"I do not understand why trans-women do not want to minimise the risk to themselves."

Because to the autogynephiles who are pushing for this, there is no risk. They don't transition, they don't have hormones, they're as big and strong and violent as the men who will come into women's loos and perv and threaten us.

They're not interested in transsexuals who will be at risk.

PrettyBright

This thread was prompted by the bill passed in North Carolina - which I (and coincidentally also all of the Democrats in the NC state legislature) view to be retrograde as it removes hard won anti-discrimination protection.

People should be protected from sexual predators. But this particular law is a verY bad one.

The Sexual Offences legislation in the UK is being updated much more often than before to keep up with technology.

This is a separate issue however to how we treat trans people in general.

Thank you for that explanation, slow.
Are you going to answer my question?

I don't see a question mark. Please repost

I had a mammogram recently.

The notice in the cubicle said "you mammogram will be carried out by a female member of staff."

And it occurred to me that if transactivists get their way, that won't be the case in future.

Women will have to go through the embarrassment of having their breasts manoevred on the machine by men who identify as women but have done nothing to actually be like women except possibly have put on a dress. They'll still have their penises, beards, deep voices, male bodies, etc. For some women, this will be extremely traumatising and may trigger a week or so of distress. For others, it will be too traumatising to go through with, so they won't have the mammogram, meaning if breast cancer is there, it won't be detected, so by the time of their next mammogram, it will have spread further making it harder to cure.

But hey, what's a woman's life worth when a man's feelz have to be validated, eh?

AskBasil
That's quite a leap.

1. How many trans woman do you think there are in the NHS?
2. Of these, how many are in a position to perform an intimate examination on a woman.
3. Of those, how many do you think would lack the ethics and morals to disregard the express wishes of a female patient?

1. and 2) one is enough to distress someone.
2. With respect, the sort of transactivists who are pushing for this, have made it very clear that they've got exactly the sort of ethics and morals to disregard the express wishes of women. Read up on the Cotton Ceiling.

And now will you answer Slug's question please?

I don't buy the "wrong side of history" line at all. Many MN threads show that with more information and thought, people who previously accepted the gender-identity-is-everything angle become more aware of the problems it presents. I think that as this all goes more mainstream, and these problems start to have IRL consequences - as they will, sadly for both women and trans people - the general public's awareness will increase in exactly the same way. The vast majority of people either are, or are closely related to, women. Facts will out. No matter how much some internet TAs might wish biology was irrelevant, it isn't and never will be.

Slow, let me say this slowly.

It's not (necessarily - given MTF do commit crime at the same rate as men) the trans people we're saying will necessarily be voyeristic etc.

It's the other men, that there is no no way to challenge that are the problem.

These other men, are a danger both to women and transwomen, and yet, by campaigning to be given the right to use women's toilets purely on self-identification, trans womens are enabling these predatory men completely free access to womens' toilets and removing any right we have to challenge them until they have committed a crime.

^1) How many trans woman do you think there are in the NHS?
2) Of these, how many are in a position to perform an intimate examination on a woman.
3) Of those, how many do you think would lack the ethics and morals to disregard the express wishes of a female patient?^

Slow, how many would it take for you to consider it an issue, rather than silly women making a fuss over nothing/horrifying bigots making up lies to promote fear?

Right now, I can ask for a female member of staff, and get one.

If self-identification goes through, I can ask for a female member of staff and get a bloke.

Why are my feelings, as the person that's going to be vulnerable - allowing someone to prod, poke, and squeeze my intimate parts - less important than someone else's?