Isn’t AGP also what every woman experiences when they get dressed up & feel good about themselves?

[Theboredpanda]

I have no agenda here. I’ve always just been interested in exploring other perspectives of debates…although I’m sure this particular thought will get flamed on here and end up very one-sided indeed 🤣
I don’t believe every trans woman has AGP, but I believe a significant proportion do. And I’ve always considered that proportion to be creepy, I feel anger at the fact these men get to walk around, at least in some circles, socially accepted as women, just so they can satisfy a sexual fetish. However, I was thinking about how I feel as a woman who’s comfortable and happy about being a woman when I get dressed up in my favourite sexy outfit and put on some makeup. It makes me feel sexy. Not sexually aroused but I do feel sexy. Is that vastly different to what a trans woman feels like when they get dressed up and look (at least in their eyes) like a woman? Could it be that it’s either not AGP and we all feel sexy when we know we look good as the gender we are or want to be…or everyone’s a bit AGP when they think they look sexy because they therefore feel sexy? Or is this a totally unoriginal thought that’s already been troped out by TRAs and actually there is a huge difference??

That's not actually true if you look at the law. And my point was that laws are often wrong and don't dictate right from wrong anyway. You're appealing to authority, which is a logical fallacy.

Why, with this ChatshitGPT you are spoiling us.

Men who have no intention of harming women, are going to harm women.

Citing evidence is not an 'appeal to authority', toots. I think you should google that fallacy, too.

When men enter a provision designated a female single sex, they are indeed harming the female people that need that space to remain female single sex.

Yes! You are close to getting it. Women who want privacy from men are harmed by the presence of men in a women only space.

Most women don't seem to care, many have no issue with sharing restrooms, nude spaces etc. I asked my mum if she was against the idea of trans women using the same toilets and she said she didn't care. You don't speak for half the human population. You have your feelings, they have theirs. What's not okay is telling people they are predators for not agreeing with your view.

All you had to do was see it from women's point of view. Well done. Took a while but you got there. 😊

Toilets aren't safe spaces. Many women say different from you.

Look, love, your mum is not entitled to give consent on behalf of other women.

You need to stay out of women's spaces.

You don't represent people based on sex. race, religion etc. You don't speak for women. Many disagree with you.

Indeed. It's not illegal for a man to enter a women's space; it's only illegal for the space provider to let him do it. Same result.

And yes, laws are often wrong. Doesn't mean they are always wrong.

You seem very young, so I will be kind: listen to women when they say no.

Oh for the Love of God, of course it doesn't matter. What possible interest is it of any woman, what the man's intentions are?

My father-in-law is delightful, he doesn't intend any harm, I certainly don't want to share facilities with him, or my son's friends, who are perfectly lovely.

Being Communist isn't an ideology either, but Communism is (albeit with many flavours). So being trans is not an ideology, but the concept of trans and the outworking of that concept is an ideology (albeit with some different understandings and expressions).

I agree with you that women can dress inappropriately for some circumstances too. I have been taught by a woman whose clothing choices were inappropriate for a school, but would not have raised an eyebrow in '70s culture in other contexts. Men wearing "dresses" is acceptable in some contexts and not in others; some African and middle-eastern cultures include clothing that is essentially "dresses" for men, but designed for male bodies and not sexually revealing.

I do have an issue with men trying to fit their bodies to women's clothes via hormone use and surgery, though it only becomes a major issue for me when the clothing is clearly sexualised and intended to be titillating. I had a similar issue with my teacher (in a boys' school) wearing very short skirts which were a considerable distraction to the adolescent boys in the class. What her motivation was, I don't know, but she was being at best unprofessional.

Societal boundaries usually exist for reasons. It is not always unreasonable to push at boundaries, so men wearing dresses is not in itself, in all circumstances, unreasonable. But transgressing boundaries to the extent of ignoring the reasons for them may be poor behaviour without any law having been broken. My teacher did not, as far as I know, break any law, but she was not behaving in the best interests of the testosterone fuelled pupils who were being distracted from their studies.

Consent isn't required to be in the same room. You're argument boils down to authoritarian technicalities "WeLl, It sAyS WoMAn oN tHe DoOR". With no mind as to whether or not it's actually wrong. Laws do not factually dictate right or wrong. Appeals to the law don't give you credit.

If even ONE woman cares, then that's enough. And between the traumatised ones, the religious ones, and the ones who don't want men in their spaces just because, that's a whole lot more than just one.

Women are promised women only spaces, and they have a right to expect just that.

And yes, a man who deliberately breaks the social promise of a woman-only space being woman-only, is at least antisocial and transgressive, by definition.

We're going to need a bigger bingo card!

Who do you claim to speak for, Skywinn?
I know many people disagree with me. You do realise many and not just on this thread - disagree with you too.

Says the person who doesn't understand laws.

And many agree with her.

What now?

Anyone keeping a tally on how many times the word authoritarian has been used?

My kingdom for a thesaurus!

'some go in with their young daughters,' They shouldn't be taking their daughters into the female single sex toilet. They should be either taking them into a cubicle in the male toilet or they should find an alternative. Many of us on this board are parents and had to address this or the opposite issue. The male person entering into a female single sex provision in this instance is indeed transgressing female people's boundaries.

'some do it to skip a queue' This is no excuse. The male person entering into a female single sex provision in this instance is indeed transgressing female people's boundaries. If this as happened because there is an issue with the male single sex toilet, then there should be someone who is alerting female people to those male people's presence.

'some are cleaners' Male cleaners and any other male person who is present on a profession basis should have a sign out. They should also leave the toilet if a female person requests that they leave while that female person is using that provision.

'some are trans who want to use the women's room.' The male person entering into a female single sex provision in this instance is indeed transgressing female people's boundaries.

'None of those things are 'transgressive''. On the contrary. Except for the cleaner, none of those reasons are acceptable for a male person to enter the female single sex toilet.

Wow, so many more thousands of words devoted to justifying men accessing women’s single sex spaces! And so consistent in their condescending faux-logic. It’s almost admirable.

Yes, but the idea that it's important that men and women not be allowed in the same rest room isn't backed up with anything other than blind insistence and authoritarianism.