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??

You are SO naive.

SO ignorant of how many women feel in a space with only a partition that doesn’t reach the floor or ceiling between them and a man when they have their pants round their ankles.

SO ignorant of men who like to hear women pee. (You can Google this fetish if you like, loads of perverts out there discussing it).

SO ignorant of cameras under and over partitions.

SO ignorant of women needing to clean up after menstrual flooding, perimenopausal problems, breast milk leakage in PRIVATE away from male people in the sink area.

Are you young? It’s the only charitable explanation I can think of for your total naivety, ignorance and lack of any deeper thinking. Or you are not female.

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

Uhm, what? Judging that that children aren't able to drive, vote and....that last creepy thing you said, is very different from collectively judging gay, or trans, or disabled, or black people etc from being predators? That's a hell of a pedantic reach you pulled 🙄

I stand by my obvious statement. People who haven't done anything wrong, shouldn't be punished for/accused of things they haven't done, purely based on their skin colour, sexuality, disability, being trans etc.

So you would be OK with him using the girls toilet?

Again, you are wrong. Some female people need those spaces to feel safe and to suit their needs for dignity and privacy to use them. This makes them ‘safe spaces’ for that purpose.

Male on male rape is talked about by the media and is taken much more seriously than the rape of women or girls.
Women cant rape anyone so there's no women on women rape to report and the vanishingly rare cases of women sexually assaulting women are reported its just so rare that you probably missed it
People who choose to use nudist beaches are irrelevant in a discussion about people who choose to use single sex facilities, the fact that you are falling back on the niche subject of nudists to try and shoehorn men into womens single sex spaces shows how little you have to defend your position.
Any man however he identifies who enters a female single sex facilitie is a predator who is intentionally braking the law and social convention that is a fact whether you like it or not.

I, and many people disagree that it's important for toilets to be 'sexed' in the first place.

Standard adult toilets? Yes.

You and your mum and your mates on reddit?

Logic isn't really your strong suit, is it?

"Restroom" klaxon

Age is a characteristic, just as much as sex or sexuality. And children are being penalised based on that characteristic, so your assertion that "No one should be penalized based on a characteristic" is shown to be nonsensical.

Thus yes, it's perfectly possible to penalise people based on a characteristic. That's why both men and women are penalised, by being forbidden to join the single-sex spaces of the other sex.

Note that trans people are not being penalised for being trans. There's no right non-trans people have that trans people don't have. Trans people have at least as many rights as non-trans people, and the same obligations too - including that of not entering the single-sex spaces of the opposite sex.

Freeman-on-the-loo got very dull after the first few hours.

Honestly, it writes itself 😀

I'm enjoying this so much - I know there's an argument for not engaging with someone who just keeps insisting everybody else is wrong, but it helps keep the mind sharp does it not? Like Judy Grahn's Ella, in a square apron, along Highway 80 -
....
She keeps her mind the way men
keep a knife—keen to strip the game
down to her size.

But it's dark, and it's tea-time, and I'm bowing out for now.
I wonder will Sky still be on repeat when I come back?

I also wonder if Sky is in the same time zone -
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.
'restroom', 'already', 'offense' - if not on the other side of the Atlantic, Sky has clearly imported large chunks of American English, and perhaps that's where the opinions come from too.

That said, his ultimate arbiter was his 'mum' not his 'mom'..

Why adult toilets? Are you saying that little girls might be at risk if adult men use their toilets?

And where does one find a standard adult toilet. Most toilets in the UK are for all ages

Law doesn't decide right or wrong?

Whut?

"Male on male rape is talked about by the media and is taken much more seriously than the rape of women or girls."
😄Based on absolutely nothing whatsoever. Odd then that most domestic abuse and rape subjects are mostly dedicated to women. But you seem to think that something being more common makes less common things unimportant. "Women get raped more!"

"Women cant rape anyone so there's no women on women rape to report and the vanishingly rare cases of women sexually assaulting women are reported its just so rare that you probably missed it"

I think it's fine to call women rapists. I'm aware of the stupid definition change, but it's wrong. Most people in general aren't rapists, but you don't have to be so dismissive about it just because you're biased against female predators getting attention.

"Any man however he identifies who enters a female single sex facilitie is a predator who is intentionally braking the law and social convention that is a fact whether you like it or not."

Explain to me how a man is a predator if he walks into the toilet, uses the toilet, washes his hands and leaves. None of that is predatory. You can disapprove of him being there as much as you want, and it could be as illegal as you want, but factually speaking, it doesn't make him a predator, it means he's broken the law, quite a difference. He would have to assault someone, or at the very least spy on or harass someone in order to be considered a predator. How is a gay man a predator against women, if he has no interest in them and says/does nothing to them. You're not a serious person.

Do you view women and doctors as killers of unborn babies if it happens in a country where it's unlawful/illegal? Do you judge them just as harshly purely based on the legal status? Or do you make an exception because it's something you might be biased about? Just wondering how much you actually believe what you're saying.

It was once lawful to own slaves. I guess it was fine.

Then who does? The Trans Theocracy?

😴Didn't read most of that. Snark away.

You and others are also insisting that people (and myself) are wrong. So what.

Oh right, I see. This is the level of argument is it?

Well thankfully the law disagrees with you.
A man entering a female single sex space has made an active choice to break the law and then followed through with that choice as such his intent to break the law is manifest. The moment he enters hes committed the crime of trespass, and potentially harassment, if he looks at a women or girls in their thats potentially voyeurism especially if she's in a state of undress, if he starts undressing in anyway thats indecent exposure.
If a man and a women are in the same room that is a women's single sex facilitie he is a criminal and a predator.
Wake up and smell the coffee its 2026 and women are taking our stuff back

I will repeat the question. Why do you think we have single sex toilet facilities in the first instance?

Ate you seriously equating women saying no to men to slavery??

Tell me you're not