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?

You're a peach, OP.

You can't even apologise properly. What a surprise.

Slow just likes rehersing anything that he perceives as anti feminist. If you look at his other threads he believes in ladybrain and thinks all womens networks are a waste of employers time if I recall correctly.
I think if we were arguing for this legislation he'd be arguing against.
He just likes proving his manly ability to tell us we are wrong.

If men are attacking gender non-confirming people in men's toikets then those men need to be dealt with and men's loos etc need to be made safer. I fail to see how male-on-male violence is women's problem.

BombadierFritz no-one wants transmen to be forced anywhere (except mad religious loons).

Feminists are not more outraged by the idea of transmen being forced to share space with violent men, than the idea of women being forced to share space with violent men.

Feminists advocate for the safety of women, transwomen and transmen..

Transactivists aren't interested in women's safety. Only that of transpeople.

Oh and feminists advocate for male violence being acknowledged, addressed and solved.

Transactivists otoh, accept it as part and part of masculinity and want to be safe from it, though they're not above threatening women with it when we don't comply with their worldview.

AskBasil sorry i meant slow now appears to want to send transmen into this dangerous environment and save transwomen from it.
I disagree with one of your points though. I see the vast vast majority of transactivists as being interested only in transwomens safety. (What with them being men and therefore important)

CoteDAzur
"How about one? Can you guarantee there won't even be one?

No.

I'm not sure there is any aspect of life that has a 100% guarantee.

Actually i clarify my post. I meant 'as they are male and therefore important'. They are of course transwomen. I believe though that transactivists, perhaps subconsiously, view them as male and therefore accord them male privilege. The female, woman or transman perspective is sidelined

SuburbanRhonda
Yes if. Alex has not been on here.

I would (and will) apologise directly to Alex if I find out Alex actually felt offended. We don't know for sure if Alex prefers she or he. Your mock offence on Alex's behalf is a total sham and you know it.

The technique you are using is EXACTLY the same as the tricks used by the extreme right wing who try to convince us that people saying Merry Christmas is offensive to non-Christians. I have never met a single Muslim who would be "offended" at someone saying Merry Christmas. It is a lie trumped up to engender fear, mistrust, hatred and bigotry.

Alex has chosen to have a beard rather than being clean shaven. I am sure I am not the first or the last person to have said he rather than she. If it's an honest mistake I am sure Alex will be a lot more forgiving than the average MNer.

I think this is an exaggerated fear.

Do you accept that there are men who prey on women and transwomen for sexual gratification?

Do you accept that those predators will seek the lowest risk opportunities to do so?

Have you read any criminal psychology research into how criminals select the locations they commit crime and target their victims?
Do you know how Crime Prevention Professionals apply the findings of that research to reduce the incidence of crime?

What you think and what objective research shows seem to be in conflict.

(Google Scholar is your friend in this instance).

The fact that you would rather trust what you think rather than what is evidenced says a lot about the risks you are prepared to expose women and trans-women to in order to appease your own conscience.

Someone posted a link to a webpage listing transwomen and predatory men posing as transwomen who have been convicted for rapes and serious sexual assaults on women & young children in women's public bathrooms in the US on another MN trans thread. If any of the regular posters on here can remember which one & repost for the OPs benefit, that would be great as OPs armchair research skills seem limited by his imagination!

Bombardier
"The trans man perspective is sidelined

I think you'll find that Trans men are leading the protest against the North Carolina bill. They (like James Parker Sheffield who kicked off the online ridicule of McCrory's bill) just want to be able to use the men's room rather than potentially put their own safety at risk by being forced to use the women's room.

Actually, I found it: autogynephiliatruth.wordpress.com/2015/11/04/the-threat-to-women-and-girls-presented-by-transgender-bathroom-bills/

I don't say I agree with the sentiments expressed by the blog author, but it addresses the OP's shrill insistence that it'll never happen: autogynephiliatruth.wordpress.com/2015/11/04/the-threat-to-women-and-girls-presented-by-transgender-bathroom-bills/

Care to comment slow?

There is no logic to the argument you make about safety in toilets. Thats what i mean slow. Transwomen are not safe in male toilets you say? So how are transmen safe in there? Why are transwomen not safe in there but transmen are?

Your mock offence on Alex's behalf is a total sham and you know it.

I'm not offended - mock or otherwise- because it wasn't said to me.

But as you may know (not presuming anything, unlike you), and as has been pointed out by pp on this thread, misgendering is considered one of the worst ways to misrepresent trans people. So your "maybe she'd be fine with it, maybe she wouldn't" line is, let's be charitable, disingenuous.

And still no comment about the trans midwife I posted about that was apparently so crucial to the discussion several pages ago?

Or equally i suppose, why are transwome safe in female toilets but transmen are put in danger in them?

Anyhow, either way, luckily it is illegal to attack people for no reason in the uk (and possibly also north carolina) so they, like everyone else, can rely on legal recourse should they be attacked, which, according to you, should be enough to keep them happy

I would (and will) apologise directly to Alex if I find out Alex actually felt offended. We don't know for sure if Alex prefers she or he. Your mock offence on Alex's behalf is a total sham and you know it.

In writing that you show you don't know much about trans women in general or Alex Drummond in particular if you think a trans woman would prefer to be referred to as "he" "him" etc.

The use of the individual's preferred pronoun or the neutral "they" is basic etiquette. Alex Drummond is quite well known and is always in any interview I've read with her referred to as "she". It is as rude to refer to her as "he" as it would be to refer to me as "he.

I've never heard of any trans women who preferred being called "he". Your statement about that is patent nonsense.

There is reams of information on the Internet about misgendering-you might want to read it.

Why on earth would a transitioned person prefer the gender pronoun of the gender they had transitioned from?

Alex has chosen to have a beard rather than being clean shaven. I am sure I am not the first or the last person to have said he rather than she. If it's an honest mistake I am sure Alex will be a lot more forgiving than the average MNer

Just read your whole post. You are missing the point spectacularly. Alex Drummond identifies as a transitioned woman. Even if you had not heard of her that is the information you were provided with on this thread. There was no reason for you to make a mistake and refer to her as "him".

I suspect Alex does get people in real life who don't know her calling her "he" - but you were told on this thread what her status was.

Lass
Alex's picture was posted here (without his knowledge or permission) in an overt transphobic and hateful way (claiming that woman would be forced to have intimate gynaecological examinations by someone like Alex. This is just fear mongering and it is blatantly obvious.

Thankfully the younger generation see right through it. The attitudes on display here will soon sound as anachronistic and rare as the older patients refusing treatment from a non-white HCP.

When future readers read these pages it will be more from a "What was all the fear and fuss about?" and less "Oh my God! This was the start of thousands of cases of predatory men getting into women's toilets and women being forced to have gynaecological examinations from people with beards and penises in a dresss"

That does not explain or justify why you decided to refer to a trans woman as "he".

Alex's picture was posted here (without his knowledge or permission)

Why are you persisting in misgendering Alex? Or are you making assumptions about her in the same way as you've made assumptions about pretty much everyone on this thread?

Lass
You're right. My calling Alex "he" is unforgivable.

It was a mistake. I meant she.

You missed out the word "repeatedly", OP.