|
|
Post by gw on Nov 28, 2020 7:28:33 GMT
That's an interesting point that women who might not feel safe might have the last word. But what if the transgender person is used to going into their preferred restroom, having done so for years and feels uncomfortable going into the other one? While there is the fear of a person with male genitalia interacting with a woman against their will, the truth is that a cisgender man can attack a man in a men's restroom or a cisgender woman attack a woman in a women's restroom, or a particularly strong transman could assault a cisgender man in a men's restroom. You get the picture. In spite of all that, nobody objects that a particularly strong person uses the restroom at the same time as somebody physically weaker, you see what I mean? I am talking about men who can now pretend just to use the women's shower and bathroom. That can't be done with the normal way things are. Do I think this is likely? Not very, but it is cause for some concern imo. I am not talking about attacks, I am talking about creepsters who just want to watch women undress and naked and if they can just say they are trans then it would be very easy. So basically I think the rule should be that only someone with full surgery should be able to take a shower with women. As a man I don't care who uses the men's bathroom. You make a good case for disallowing people with male genitalia from using the women's restroom to prevent oglers but what if a strong woman goes into the men's restroom, especially one with urinals? You may be underestimating what a strong woman could do to a man. If you're going to use the *not likely but just in case* argument shouldn't you consider that possibility as well?
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 7:29:18 GMT
At this point we might as well just make every shower, sport and bathroom all inclusive. I would have no problem with that, but I have a feeling that most people would. Any other way doesn't add up to me. In university where I completed my masters in midlands UK, almost all washroom/toilet in the newly built building was unisex. After a time people get totally used to it. I think it may feel odd initially to some, but after a time people will get used to such things. I felt very shy about getting my haircut from a female hair-cutter but once I did, it never felt any awkward. Although because the haircut was not so good I never used her service again. Yes, it will take time and trans people need to also understand why this is a cause of massive confusion for binary people. It goes both ways. It sounds like a mental disorder to me, but apparently it isn't. I just don't understand how it isn't even after reading about it. It even seems split between professionals on whether it is a mental disorder or not. The difference regarding homosexuality once upon a time is that they don't require things that will possibly change who they are with surgery and then feel suicidal down the line when they realize it was something else. My main issue with the subject has to do with children under the age of 16. I think this all needs to be handled with extreme caution. Trans people must understand why this is very hard for most binary people to accept. It goes against everything most people understand in many cases.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 7:31:24 GMT
I am talking about men who can now pretend just to use the women's shower and bathroom. That can't be done with the normal way things are. Do I think this is likely? Not very, but it is cause for some concern imo. I am not talking about attacks, I am talking about creepsters who just want to watch women undress and naked and if they can just say they are trans then it would be very easy. So basically I think the rule should be that only someone with full surgery should be able to take a shower with women. As a man I don't care who uses the men's bathroom. You make a good case for disallowing people with male genitalia from using the women's restroom to prevent oglers but what if a strong woman goes into the men's restroom, especially one with urinals? You may be underestimating what a strong woman could do to a man. If you're going to use the *not likely but just in case* argument shouldn't you consider that possibility as well? I said, I am not talking about attacks. But fair enough. This is an issue that they can deal with.
|
|
|
|
Post by gw on Nov 28, 2020 7:38:34 GMT
You make a good case for disallowing people with male genitalia from using the women's restroom to prevent oglers but what if a strong woman goes into the men's restroom, especially one with urinals? You may be underestimating what a strong woman could do to a man. If you're going to use the *not likely but just in case* argument shouldn't you consider that possibility as well? I said, I am not talking about attacks. But fair enough. This is an issue that they can deal with. My bad. It's late at night here. Women can ogle a man and if they're strong then they can get away with it, especially if it's just one or two men. That's what I should have said. Women's restrooms have the privacy of stalls, though it's a different story if there's showers. I think that there's a better case for using regular restrooms than showers for that reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 7:51:10 GMT
I said, I am not talking about attacks. But fair enough. This is an issue that they can deal with. My bad. It's late at night here. Women can ogle a man and if they're strong then they can get away with it, especially if it's just one or two men. That's what I should have said. Women's restrooms have the privacy of stalls, though it's a different story if there's showers. I think that there's a better case for using regular restrooms than showers for that reason. Me personally, anyone can use the bathroom I'm in if they want. I hope all of this works out in a way that will be satisfactory for the majority and in a way where everyone will feels safe and un-threatened. I don't see that happening anytime soon though. I am basically just an observer, but I sympathize with both sides on certain issues. I don't sympathize with anyone who wants to remove the basic rights of transgender adults though.
|
|
|
|
Post by gw on Nov 28, 2020 7:57:55 GMT
My bad. It's late at night here. Women can ogle a man and if they're strong then they can get away with it, especially if it's just one or two men. That's what I should have said. Women's restrooms have the privacy of stalls, though it's a different story if there's showers. I think that there's a better case for using regular restrooms than showers for that reason. Me personally, anyone can use the bathroom I'm in if they want. I hope all of this works out in a way that will be satisfactory for the majority and in a way where everyone will feels safe and un-threatened. I don't see that happening anytime soon though. I am basically just an observer, but I sympathize with both sides on certain issues. I don't sympathize with anyone who wants to remove the basic rights of transgender adults though. Alright. Fair enough. I don't have all the answers either, obviously. I suppose that if reality always worked out perfectly then there would wouldn't be very many possible worlds to live in.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 8:01:34 GMT
Me personally, anyone can use the bathroom I'm in if they want. I hope all of this works out in a way that will be satisfactory for the majority and in a way where everyone will feels safe and un-threatened. I don't see that happening anytime soon though. I am basically just an observer, but I sympathize with both sides on certain issues. I don't sympathize with anyone who wants to remove the basic rights of transgender adults though. Alright. Fair enough. I don't have all the answers either, obviously. I suppose that if reality always worked out perfectly then there would wouldn't be very many possible worlds to live in. I assume you mean social worlds and not literal worlds. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Nov 28, 2020 8:04:25 GMT
The issue itself should not cause any great alarm as far as active military personnel because it's not like there will be thousands pouring in. As far as the "movement," this is the 21st century and since there are means now to accommodate an adult who wants a sex change, or whatever its called now, they should be able to get one. It's not a matter of me trusting them because I know lots of folks who have all their junk in place and are still rotten, devious assholes who I don't trust either. That isn't what I am talking about. Any adult person can do whatever they want to their body. Are you on the Asperger's scale?
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 8:10:02 GMT
That isn't what I am talking about. Any adult person can do whatever they want to their body. Are you on the Asperger's scale? I am.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 8:27:58 GMT
That isn't what I am talking about. Any adult person can do whatever they want to their body. Are you on the Asperger's scale? What gave me away? Assuming you haven't seen me blatantly pointing it out and explaining Asperger's in great detail in other threads.
|
|
|
|
Post by gw on Nov 28, 2020 8:32:27 GMT
Alright. Fair enough. I don't have all the answers either, obviously. I suppose that if reality always worked out perfectly then there would wouldn't be very many possible worlds to live in. I assume you mean social worlds and not literal worlds. I meant 'worlds as in worlds as they exist and as they develop over time' like real universes, the place of beings within them and how most worlds wouldn't exist if perfection were the goal. What I should have said was this: If the world were in perfect harmony then there would be no point in living in it because imperfection provides meaning to choice and if there were a perfect way to live then we wouldn't have that choice as things would have to work in an ideal way and thus rob us of all the possibilities that only living the imperfect majority of lives would entail. The only reason we need exist is that so we can decide between multiple imperfect situations to paint an unideal picture in order to provide one of many situations that must exist simply to add one more less than ideal addition to the total spectrum of possibilities. If everything worked out perfectly, then the majority of worlds would not exist. If there were a convenient solution to most of our problems then there would be no need for our reality to play them out and give the paths we take in this universe direction. I don't know if I stated that as well as I could have, and the idea is harder to explain than I realized but to bottom line it: Most possible universes are bad to varying degrees and our choice between imperfect situations gives our lives a sort of purpose that a perfect universe with choices that worked well for everybody wouldn't have.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 8:35:11 GMT
I assume you mean social worlds and not literal worlds. I meant 'worlds as in worlds as they exist and as they develop over time' like real universes, the place of beings within them and how most worlds wouldn't exist if perfection were the goal. What I should have said was this: If the world were in perfect harmony then there would be no point in living in it because imperfection provides meaning to choice and if there were a perfect way to live then we wouldn't have that choice as things would have to work in an ideal way and thus rob us of all the possibilities that only living the imperfect majority of lives would entail. The only reason we need exist is that so we can decide between multiple imperfect situations to paint an unideal picture in order to provide one of many situations that must exist simply to add one more less than ideal addition to the total spectrum of possibilities. If everything worked out perfectly, then the majority of worlds would not exist. If there were a convenient solution to most of our problems then there would be no need for our reality to play them out and give the paths we take in this universe direction. I don't know if I stated that as well as I could have, and the idea is harder to explain than I realized but to bottom line it: Most possible universes are bad to varying degrees and our choice between imperfect situations gives our lives a sort of purpose that a perfect universe with choices that worked well for everybody wouldn't have. I don't know what to make of any of that. Reads like a lot of word salad to me. I am only aware of one world.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 8:39:04 GMT
I assume you mean social worlds and not literal worlds. I meant 'worlds as in worlds as they exist and as they develop over time' like real universes, the place of beings within them and how most worlds wouldn't exist if perfection were the goal. What I should have said was this: If the world were in perfect harmony then there would be no point in living in it because imperfection provides meaning to choice and if there were a perfect way to live then we wouldn't have that choice as things would have to work in an ideal way and thus rob us of all the possibilities that only living the imperfect majority of lives would entail. The only reason we need exist is that so we can decide between multiple imperfect situations to paint an unideal picture in order to provide one of many situations that must exist simply to add one more less than ideal addition to the total spectrum of possibilities. If everything worked out perfectly, then the majority of worlds would not exist. If there were a convenient solution to most of our problems then there would be no need for our reality to play them out and give the paths we take in this universe direction. I don't know if I stated that as well as I could have, and the idea is harder to explain than I realized but to bottom line it: Most possible universes are bad to varying degrees and our choice between imperfect situations gives our lives a sort of purpose that a perfect universe with choices that worked well for everybody wouldn't have. Pick one section and then I can address one thing at a time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Nov 28, 2020 8:50:02 GMT
Are you on the Asperger's scale? What gave me away? Assuming you haven't seen me blatantly pointing it out and explaining Asperger's in great detail in other threads. The way you phrase your answers.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 28, 2020 8:51:15 GMT
What gave me away? Assuming you haven't seen me blatantly pointing it out and explaining Asperger's in great detail in other threads. The way you phrase your answers. Interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Nov 28, 2020 9:44:40 GMT
This is how delusional wing-nut preacher, evangelical activist, and former Colorado state legislator Gordon Klingenschmitt described some big changes coming to the military under the incoming presidency of Joe Biden. According to Klingenschmitt, female solders and students will be “forced to share common showers and rooms with cross-dressing men or boys with male anatomy, within hours of Biden’s inauguration.” Within hours, mind. He goes on, “Christian troops who object to sharing co-ed showers and bunks with opposite gender anatomy will be vilified as ‘discriminators’ and punished, demoted, discharged or court-martialed. Mark my words. The devil wants an atheist army for the Antichrist, soon.”Where do we sign up? I remember those co-ed showers in "Starship Troopers." Looked good to me. What exactly are you intending to do in the shower? If you have a penis, why can't you take a shower in the stall for people with penises? If you don't why can't you take a shower in the stall for people who don't? It seems to me you need to realize that taking a shower involves no sexual activity. The Biden victory by no means indicates that "transgender" is a meaningful term. The proper term is "delusional." In the shower it really doesn't matter what your delusions are, providing do not stand too close. The Democratic Party has a long history of helping the different and underprivileged and perhaps even transgressors avoid mistreatment. It is a tragic mistake for them to believe that means the rest of the world is going to have to play along with the sexual delusions of others. Your ignorance of all science including psychology is going to be reviewed, that's all. Some of your findings will have to be overturned.
|
|
|
|
Post by gw on Nov 29, 2020 0:11:05 GMT
I meant 'worlds as in worlds as they exist and as they develop over time' like real universes, the place of beings within them and how most worlds wouldn't exist if perfection were the goal. What I should have said was this: If the world were in perfect harmony then there would be no point in living in it because imperfection provides meaning to choice and if there were a perfect way to live then we wouldn't have that choice as things would have to work in an ideal way and thus rob us of all the possibilities that only living the imperfect majority of lives would entail. The only reason we need exist is that so we can decide between multiple imperfect situations to paint an unideal picture in order to provide one of many situations that must exist simply to add one more less than ideal addition to the total spectrum of possibilities. If everything worked out perfectly, then the majority of worlds would not exist. If there were a convenient solution to most of our problems then there would be no need for our reality to play them out and give the paths we take in this universe direction. I don't know if I stated that as well as I could have, and the idea is harder to explain than I realized but to bottom line it: Most possible universes are bad to varying degrees and our choice between imperfect situations gives our lives a sort of purpose that a perfect universe with choices that worked well for everybody wouldn't have. Pick one section and then I can address one thing at a time. Our choices are made purposeful through the imperfections of our reality where many decisions have consequences where each choice is less than ideal. If our choices had no imperfect consequences then why make them at all? You could just decide everything through the flip of a coin and there would be no need to weigh pros and cons in a decision making process. Start there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 29, 2020 4:38:43 GMT
Well that I agree with, but this whole transgender thing makes me uncomfortable. There is a lot of confusion even between psychologists when it comes to this issue. I have a distrust of the movement and perhaps irrationally so. I am trying hard, but this might be my brain's limit. I am in 100% in support of transgender people. I want their recognition and hope people see them as any other person in society. But their biggest challenge comes from a section of LGBT people themselves. I have seen some getting too much hate. Incidentally, my favourite person on this site is a transgender. A few I have known have all been nice and good to me. The irrational fear of some is sad. People don't fear them Aj, they just don't want to be told that they have to accept them as being a real and genuine biological gender as to what their birth physiology dictates. If they were, they wouldn't be known as "transgender" and there is no way out of this. They are a change within themselves and just have to accept themselves that they are not the "real" gender they choose to identify as. People can respect their decision to the pronoun of choice, but that is where it ends.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Lost One on Nov 29, 2020 19:16:15 GMT
It's not a scientific idea as much as an existential one. One can make a scientific argument for it but it really depends how you define gender in the first place which is obviously beyond the purview of science. Is gender just a matter of chromosomes? Well then you can't change gender. But if you define gender more broadly to include appearance, genitalia, clothing, behaviours etc then all these things can indeed be changed and there are strong reasons for preferring that definition of gender (we can't tell someone's chromosomes by looking at them). There's also scientific analysis to suggest transgender people exhibit brain patterns more typical of the gender they claim to be. |
|
|
|
Post by HeCantStandStill on Nov 29, 2020 19:39:18 GMT
That's an interesting point that women who might not feel safe might have the last word. But what if the transgender person is used to going into their preferred restroom, having done so for years and feels uncomfortable going into the other one? While there is the fear of a person with male genitalia interacting with a woman against their will, the truth is that a cisgender man can attack a man in a men's restroom or a cisgender woman attack a woman in a women's restroom, or a particularly strong transman could assault a cisgender man in a men's restroom. You get the picture. In spite of all that, nobody objects that a particularly strong person uses the restroom at the same time as somebody physically weaker, you see what I mean? I am talking about men who can now pretend just to use the women's shower and bathroom. That can't be done with the normal way things are. Do I think this is likely? Not very, but it is cause for some concern imo. I am not talking about attacks, I am talking about creepsters who just want to watch women undress and naked and if they can just say they are trans then it would be very easy. So basically I think the rule should be that only someone with full surgery should be able to take a shower with women. As a man I don't care who uses the men's bathroom. I don't see an issue with gays or trans in any military. Gays have been in the military in different countries for centuries. Alexander the Great was gay.
|
|
