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?

JAPAB are you erasing people who identify as neither trans not cis? Your new words seem not to include those people.

Both men and women (whether cis or trans) have shifted away from the old bio-definitions, and have been doing so for years. Huh? If you mean that people are defining behaviours and dress (gender) less by assigning them to biology (sex) that would be lovely. But untrue as any trio to a toy shop will tell you.

But some people are saying that gender is 'real' and sex isn't. Therefore the terms we invented to describe real, biological, universal differences are being used now to describe ephemeral, transitory, cultural and geographical idiosyncrasies. That is ridiculous bullshit.

*trip to a toy shop.

The old bio-definitions

Jesus, you couldn't make this up.

Ah, where would the FWR boards be without JAPAB popping up on every thread to attempt to argue semantics.

FloraFox replace cis with non-trans if you wish. Whether you refer to people who identify as women and who biologically are women as cis or non-trans or just "women full stop", you will still need to develop some dismissal tactics for those of themm and transmen, who do not hold to the bio-definitions. Clearly imputing motives and thought processes of "male privilege" and so on won't work here.

FloraFox replace cis with non-trans if you wish.

How very gracious of you. I'll stick with "woman", thanks.

We have words for the gender feels; masculine and feminine. And a tonne of others; girly, blokely etc. Male/female and woman/man are biological definitions.

WindyMillersProbationOfficer actually my original point wasn't a semantic one. It is in fact other people who responded by arguing semantics.

slugseatlettuce yes I agree, just as the compound H2O exists independently of humans. Whether we use the word water to denote this or something else altogether or in addition to it, and what dismissal tactics we use against those who want to change (or keep it the same) is another matter.

eplace cis with non-trans if you wish. Whether you refer to people who identify as women and who biologically are women as cis or non-trans or just "women full stop", you will still need to develop some dismissal tactics for those of themm and transmen, who do not hold to the bio-definitions.

No I don't need to accept "non-trans* nor come up with dismissal tactics. Words can change meaning but words don't change into meaningless circular definitions. TAs can't come up with an effective new definition so there's nothing to be dismissed, no more than Humpty Dumpty's position on the meaning of words needs to be dismissed.

If anyone see's a male looking person in females toilet or a female looking person in a males toilet, you'll have no chance of knowing whether they have the 'right' to be there without having a Scooby in their pants! Which I presume isn't allowed??
Maybe everyone should just piss at home.

Does this mean that if a biological woman used the men's facilities (as some women do when there is a queue) they could be arrested and prosecuted?

(Using the word biological for clarity)

Everyone knows that trans women are male, and trans men are female. Deep down, even the most aggressive trans activists know this - and that's why they are so abusive to women who disagree with them. It's a collective delusion that no-one truly believes.

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

Poor kid.

It's interesting that you use the chemical formula of water in your comparison, JAPAB

You are right that we can call H2O whatever we like, water, cis water, trans water, unwater.

And yet, to be water, each molecule must be composed of two atoms of hydrogen, each covalently bonded to an atom of oxygen

It can't sometimes contain nitrogen, or carbon that feels as though it is hydrogen

If it did, it wouldn't be water, but something else

Perhaps you'd like to find a different analogy, I don't think this one is doing what you'd like it to do

Society's definition of male and female hasn't moved on. Use the term "cis" outside the social media bubble or ask someone "do you think trans women are exactly the same a biological women" and everyone will look at you like you're mad.

Everyone is fine with these terms and I for one am not ready to give up "woman" and "female" because that way lies massive confusion and unintended consequences.

Aren't there cubicles in women's toilets and can't urinals be put in cubicles? I don't see why we need segregated toilets at all!!
completely misses the point of the thread

*cubicles in women's AND mens' toilets

Many trans women don't want unisex toilets though.

They want to be allowed unimpeded access to women's toilets.

And great for you if you're happy to use unisex toilets, but not everyone is.

The progressive, liberal and tolerant thinking is all heading towards towards integration and away from segregation.

Segregation breeds fear and mistrust. Compare Brussels and Paris with London. If you buy into segregation of the sexes then what's stopping us ending up like the Islamic states.

I would much rather a world where people behaved appropriately, considerately, legally, with dignity and respect for each other - without having to be segregated.

I would much rather a world where people behaved appropriately, considerately, legally, with dignity and respect for each other

As would all civilised people. Unfortunately there are some who don't a follow these rules. Which is why it is perfectly logical for women to prefer men not to use women's toilets.

Segregation is a necessity to keep women safe. I am shocked you don't understand that given how many women are murdered raped and victimised all over the world by men. Integration is not inevitable, not if women have anything to do with it. Stop goading us.

Logical? I'm not sure. It sounds more like an irrational and inflated emotion (namely fear) about what might happen, or what crimes these people might commit.