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??

But does she get taken to drag shows

I already explained it to you. Most of the young trans people are gay/female/autistic, while most of the middle-aged trans people are male/straight/possibly AGP. There's no contradiction here.

So statistics don't matter, charts don't matter, polls don't matter, the law doesn't matter, what women want women doesn't matter, what was the other thing? Oh yeah, consent doesn't matter.

I wonder if Sky's mum ever, ever thinks that just occasionally, she really doesn't matter.

If you're argument is that it's okay to penalize people who haven't done anything wrong because of trends, then that's not a sensible argument. Being a pest, something that many non trans people are, has nothing to do with criminality either. I don't dictate where people go because I don't like their personality or behaviour, unless they actually commit a crime.

No. AGP is quite different from a woman putting on makeup and a nice outfit

Keeping men out of the ladies is not penalising them.

Ffs. Women's facilities aren't a gold star

It is penalising the ones who had a boner about it and are now sadface.

Penilessening, if you like.

I think you are again mixing up opinion and law.

If I decide to something that I know to be against the law in the country I'm in, I expect consequences. Whether or not I agree with the law, or with the consequences, I accept that the law will be enforced whether I think it is right or wrong.

My opinion=this should not be illegal.
The law=this is illegal.

Therein lies a whole range of vehement arguments and debates and demonstrations and lobbying and on-line discussions - but the law that is currently in force is the one you have to abide by, or accept the consequences.

Arguing that you think the law is wrong is a way to pass a Sunday afternoon, but it won't matter much if you are arrested for breaking it.

Well, since by "being a pest", I actually meant, "doing crimes such as voyeurism, exhibitionism, and sexual assault in female single-sex spaces", I do think I have a sensible argument.

Trans people are not being penalised because they've done nothing wrong. They are being penalised because a lot of them did a whole lot of things very wrong indeed. I wish they hadn't, because whether I want it or not, I'm also a part of that "community" - but they did, and now consequences must follow.

The claim is made about both male and female trans people most of the time, from what I've seen. Not just lesbians. If you want to generalize that most trans women are predators toward women, then that's overshadowing gay, feminine ones who are nothing like that.

A 50 year old man wants to join a ballet class for girls aged 5-8. This man is not known to have committed any crimes .

Do you let him join the class or do you dictate that he can't go to the class?

By definition, saying "most" directly implies "not all are like that".

Trans people who have not done anything wrong do not have to face any consequences. Consequences are for people who do something wrong in the first place. So what you're saying it nuts. No one should be penalized based on a characteristic. And being trans also doesn't make you part of a community, neither does being black, or gay or anything else.

"Well, since by "being a pest", I actually meant, "doing crimes such as voyeurism, exhibitionism, and sexual assault in female single-sex spaces", I do think I have a sensible argument." Most people don't do that? So save it for the people that actually do it.

No, I don;t think he should join.

Generalizing that "most" people are predators based on any characteristic is massively bigoted. And it will have a knock on effect to people.

I thought earlier people were saying this isn't about saying that most trans people are predators? Now you're coming right out and saying it.

No one should be penalized based on a characteristic.

So I suppose you're okay with 5-year-olds driving, voting, going to work, and having sex with adults?

Penalising people based on a characteristic is part of how the whole concept of safeguarding works. But then you don't seem to understand that concept at all.

Yay🎉something else we all agree on!
Now can we all go and have our tea?😄

I thought you didn't dictate where people could go unless they had committed a crime? Why don't you think he should join the class - he just wants to plie

There are no serious consequences for people using either restroom already. Fortunately most people aren't insane enough to think it should be in imprisoning offense.

Don't, just don't - we were within an inch of tea-time😁

If it's a child class, then I don't have a problem with neither women nor men not being allowed. That's an organised event. Not a public toilet.

No one has said that male people and female people cannot use mixed sex toilets.

They have stated clearly that if a single sex provision is labelled clearly as being for female people, using language that refers to female people, that no male person should be accessing that provision to use it. If a space is not designated as being female single sex, then it is open to all.

“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.”

This is not what has been argued.

Well, no, most trans people can't be predators. The young autistic ones aren't. The older non-AGP ones aren't. That's a whole lot already, duh.

I know. I'm starving. We have lentil soup as a starter, balderdash for mains, and definitely NOT Ferrero Rocher for afters.

And that is where you don’t understand consent.

Posters have tried to explain it to you on this thread already. The minimum standard for consent for a publicly accessible single sex provision is that if even one female person using that space doesn’t consent to a male person using it, that is all that is needed.

Consent is not transferable. And non-consent does indeed negate another person’s consent in this instance.