Well, isn't this a slippery slope? Are we going to prohibit dads from taking their little girls into the bathroom because they might see men at the urinal?
Or how about women with younger male children. Wouldn't they be similarly "scarred" by accompanying their moms into the locker room?
Do we now say women can't breastfeed outside of bathroom stalls lest a child inadvertently see their breasts? Are we going to prohibit public family bathrooms because then a child then might be seeing his or her opposite gender parent's genitalia?
This is a locker room. It's an appropriate place for changing clothes. If someone is behaving lewdly or exhibiting inappropriate behavior, that's a different story. But if someone who identifies as a female is changing her clothes, there should be no more offense taken than for any other person who identifies as a female changing her clothes.
Those are excellent answers. I suppose the slippery slope argument could go either way, though: why have gender-specific changing rooms at all, then?
People are so weird about nudity, esp non- sexual nudity. Who cares if someone catches a glimpse? If you or your kid have questions after seeing a transgendered person in a locker room, there are readily-available answers.
Well, and presumably some people who are transgendered have gone through transition and you wouldn't even know. And I'm going to wager that someone who hasn't is well aware of the bias that exists against them and is going to be careful about where they are changing anyway (although it's within their right to change where everyone else does.)
Kids are curious. But you're just as likely to have to discuss saggy boobs and wrinkly skin and hairy labias as you are anything else. This woman's response is not about protecting anyone. It's pure bigotry.
Post by Ohhmm(bligo) on Mar 25, 2015 5:58:57 GMT -5
I want to know how she knew this. If any women in my locker room are packing a penis, I have no idea. I don't look at their crotch. And I'm willing to bet that a transgendered person isn't exactly bold about the fact that they're actually the opposite sex.
Also, she apparently doesn't mind humiliation and ruining her reputation, as she continues to make an ass of herself, so that's rich.
Last Edit: Mar 25, 2015 6:00:31 GMT -5 by Ohhmm(bligo)
"You. You and your crazy life. You and your geographic anomaly. You and your drunken lesbianic ways and terrible navigational skills." - ProfArt and her holy baby
So, I'm trying to play devil's advocate and think of what she really thinks the harm will be. I suppose her strongest argument is that a little girl could see a stranger's penis and that's inappropriate.
I guess I don't see why that's any different from seeing female genitalia, but on the other hand, we do have segregated dressing rooms.
Is that her strongest argument? How would you answer it?
Well, isn't this a slippery slope? Are we going to prohibit dads from taking their little girls into the bathroom because they might see men at the urinal?
Or how about women with younger male children. Wouldn't they be similarly "scarred" by accompanying their moms into the locker room?
Do we now say women can't breastfeed outside of bathroom stalls lest a child inadvertently see their breasts? Are we going to prohibit public family bathrooms because then a child then might be seeing his or her opposite gender parent's genitalia?
This is a locker room. It's an appropriate place for changing clothes. If someone is behaving lewdly or exhibiting inappropriate behavior, that's a different story. But if someone who identifies as a female is changing her clothes, there should be no more offense taken than for any other person who identifies as a female changing her clothes.
Things get sticky for me when we start being asked as a society to ignore biological realities. A person can dress as whatever gender they want, get whatever surgeries they want. It's their body. I don't care.
However, when I'm being asked to accommodate their desires in such a personal way as allowing a man in a women's changing area or be called a bigot, I get a little frustrated.
Every cell in his body tells me he's a man. He doesn't have to act like one, and I don't know where the line is in accommodating him, but I don't appreciate being considered hateful for accepting the reality that he is a man.
Am I a bigot for thinking that a white student who self identifies as black shouldn't be allowed access to scholarships for black students?
Am I a bigot for thinking a currently 40 year old man who self identifies as 5 years old shouldn't be allowed to stay in kindergarten until his natural death?
I think opening this door of perception vs. Physical reality enforced inclusiveness is going to be impossible to actually accommodate as a society.
Obviously, private business are at liberty to have whatever policies they so choose. I think this lawsuit is idiotic.
So, I'm trying to play devil's advocate and think of what she really thinks the harm will be. I suppose her strongest argument is that a little girl could see a stranger's penis and that's inappropriate.
I guess I don't see why that's any different from seeing female genitalia, but on the other hand, we do have segregated dressing rooms.
Is that her strongest argument? How would you answer it?
But why are small children in the locker room? Is it like the Y with family activities, community pool?
i'm assuming its like the PF in our town and doesnt even have child care much less children's programing.
Post by underwaterrhymes on Mar 25, 2015 7:45:21 GMT -5
First of all, annica, I googled her name and I see nothing about what you reference. This person identifies as female. Furthermore, "He in a wig" is incredibly offensive. She went to this PF exactly twice as she was a guest and not a member.
stellas, The comparisons you make are examples of what bigots use to justify their discomfort with people who are transgendered. Feeling trapped in the wrong body is legitimate. She may have been born biologically male, but she is a female and she has every right to access services and facilities other women do.
A family member is a manager at a store that has had issues with the victim. As mentioned, I don't believe her creepiness is relevant to the merits of the case but I do believe it's distracting to some who aren't only focusing on equality.Â
First of all, annica, I googled her name and I see nothing about what you reference. This person identifies as female. Furthermore, "He in a wig" is incredibly offensive. She went to this PF exactly twice as she was a guest and not a member.
stellas, The comparisons you make are examples of what bigots use to justify their discomfort with people who are transgendered. Feeling trapped in the wrong body is legitimate. She may have been born biologically male, but she is a female and she has every right to access services and facilities other women do.
I absolutely believe that feeling trapped in one's own wrong body is legitimate. I also believe that gender is absolutely not the only way that feeling manifests itself. It may be the most common way, but we are very obviously not living in a world where percentage of the population affected illegitimizes accommodation.
So....how are these other people trapped in the wrong bodies in other ways to be accommodated?
Stellas, your examples are ridiculous and offensive. It is simply not true that every cell tells you a person is a man. Is her brain not a cell in her body? Hormones? Breasts?
Intersexed people exist, too. Do you get to tell them that you get to decide where they can and can't go by taking a glimpse at their genitals?
First of all, annica, I googled her name and I see nothing about what you reference. This person identifies as female. Furthermore, "He in a wig" is incredibly offensive. She went to this PF exactly twice as she was a guest and not a member.
stellas, The comparisons you make are examples of what bigots use to justify their discomfort with people who are transgendered. Feeling trapped in the wrong body is legitimate. She may have been born biologically male, but she is a female and she has every right to access services and facilities other women do.
I absolutely believe that feeling trapped in one's own wrong body is legitimate. I also believe that gender is absolutely not the only way that feeling manifests itself. It may be the most common way, but we are very obviously not living in a world where percentage of the population affected illegitimizes accommodation.
So....how are these other people trapped in the wrong bodies in other ways to be accommodated?
So, I'm trying to play devil's advocate and think of what she really thinks the harm will be. I suppose her strongest argument is that a little girl could see a stranger's penis and that's inappropriate.
I guess I don't see why that's any different from seeing female genitalia, but on the other hand, we do have segregated dressing rooms.
Is that her strongest argument? How would you answer it?
Our Y has a women's locker room (no one under 18 allowed), a men's (same restriction), a boys, a girls AND a family locker room. Do they really allow kids at PF?
People used to react that way when people brought up gay rights. 50 years ago even you would have thought gay marriage was outlandish.
I'm demonstrating the sliding scale of acceptance here. The only way to truly resolve the issue is to work in absolutes.
I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, but more asking to stop throwing around the term bigot in order to scare people into shutting up. We all discriminate on some level.
Post by underwaterrhymes on Mar 25, 2015 9:06:29 GMT -5
Okay, stellas. Here is why your examples aren't valid.
First:
A white person who identifies as a black person is not being denied equal rights. There are scholarships for minorities because they experience widespread racism, discrimination, have fewer opportunities, and often are first generation college students. Additionally, there are a wide range of other scholarships available for white students. A white person who identifies as a black person can also do a lot of things to feel a part of the culture. It's not illegal for them to attend a predominantly black church or to hang out with mostly black friends or to marry a black person. But they should not have access to scholarships set aside for minorities because they are not experiencing the widespread racism and discrimination a black person experiences.
An elderly man who identifies as a child had exactly the same rights a child has when he was a child. He was not denied the right to attend school. Additionally, there are services available for adults who have the mental capacity of children. They are not being denied any rights.
But someone who is transgendered is absolutely routinely denied rights. (As are people who are gay, obviously, but since transgendered and gay are two totally different things, we're going to leave it out of this particular discussion.) People who are transgendered experience hatred and bigotry. To deny them the right to use the bathroom or the locker room of the gender to which they have been assigned is discrimination. (Keep in mind sex and gender are different. They may have been born with the sexual characteristics of a male, but psychologically their gender is female.) And the psychology is what matters here because that's where the discrimination happens. People are beaten or killed because they are transgendered. People are denied jobs or services because they are transgendered. People are isolated and ostracized and are made to feel unloved because they are transgendered. I know I don't have to tell you that the suicide rates for transgendered people are astronomical.
UWR, I adore you and you are bang on, but you're also talking to someone who thinks the only way to resolve this is to 'deal in the absolutes'. This likely precludes her from reading your words with any mindfulness. I feel dirty for engaging.
So if trans people are forced to use facilities according to biological sex, that would force biological women who identify (and appear) as male to use the ladies room. And biological men who identify (and appear) as female will be in the men's room. And in the example stellas used, even post-op trans people would have to use the restroom according to biology (so clearly it's not about seeing a penis in the ladies room).
Are we supposed to create bathroom czars to check everyone's chromosomes? (and what about XXY or XYY people?)
Here's the point: trans people have to pee, and they shouldn't be afraid every time they have to choose which restroom or locker room to use.
Ombligo questioned whether there was more to this - because it should seemingly be black/white. It's my belief that the victim in this case is as great a champion for this cause as freelee the banana girl is for healthy living. I'm all for equal rights, but in a society that does not embrace transgendered folks, I think it's unfortunate that the victim in this case has created negativity within her community thru actions that are not reflective of the trans community. These negative impressions have influenced opinions on the matter and it's become difficult for some to differentiate between the behavior of one individual and the community she is representing.
That's the problem with expecting any one person to stand in for their entire community, and dismissing civil rights issues because the "champion" isn't pure enough. You're blaming the victim for not being some saint, instead of focusing on the actual issue.
Ombligo questioned whether there was more to this - because it should seemingly be black/white. It's my belief that the victim in this case is as great a champion for this cause as freelee the banana girl is for healthy living. I'm all for equal rights, but in a society that does not embrace transgendered folks, I think it's unfortunate that the victim in this case has created negativity within her community thru actions that are not reflective of the trans community. These negative impressions have influenced opinions on the matter and it's become difficult for some to differentiate between the behavior of one individual and the community she is representing.
There are people who are transgendered who are also jerks? You don't say!
I still don't really get your point (besides the fact that you keep calling her a "victim" - how is she the victim, in any sense? There is no victim, as far as I can tell), are you suggesting she was being deliberately provocative in this case?
If that's true, then that is a different kettle of fish. But I don't see any evidence of that. Do you have any?
Ombligo questioned whether there was more to this - because it should seemingly be black/white. It's my belief that the victim in this case is as great a champion for this cause as freelee the banana girl is for healthy living. I'm all for equal rights, but in a society that does not embrace transgendered folks, I think it's unfortunate that the victim in this case has created negativity within her community thru actions that are not reflective of the trans community. These negative impressions have influenced opinions on the matter and it's become difficult for some to differentiate between the behavior of one individual and the community she is representing.
Yes, I'm sure bigoted people within the community are going to be honest about their interactions with someone who is transgendered.
what does deal with the absolutes even meeeeeeean?
It means that people with extreme viewpoints should be coddled and catered to, because progress is scary.
There is nothing about being transgendered that remotely resembles a person thinking that they are not a human/are 40 years younger/belong to a different race. To draw an equivalency is debasing to transgendered people in such a patently offensive way it can be motivated by nothing other than A) bigotry; or B) crass carelessness in pursuit of argumentative "victory."
Okay, stellas. Here is why your examples aren't valid.
First:
A white person who identifies as a black person is not being denied equal rights. There are scholarships for minorities because they experience widespread racism, discrimination, have fewer opportunities, and often are first generation college students. Additionally, there are a wide range of other scholarships available for white students. A white person who identifies as a black person can also do a lot of things to feel a part of the culture. It's not illegal for them to attend a predominantly black church or to hang out with mostly black friends or to marry a black person. But they should not have access to scholarships set aside for minorities because they are not experiencing the widespread racism and discrimination a black person experiences.
An elderly man who identifies as a child had exactly the same rights a child has when he was a child. He was not denied the right to attend school. Additionally, there are services available for adults who have the mental capacity of children. They are not being denied any rights.
But someone who is transgendered is absolutely routinely denied rights. (As are people who are gay, obviously, but since transgendered and gay are two totally different things, we're going to leave it out of this particular discussion.) People who are transgendered experience hatred and bigotry. To deny them the right to use the bathroom or the locker room of the gender to which they have been assigned is discrimination. (Keep in mind sex and gender are different. They may have been born with the sexual characteristics of a male, but psychologically their gender is female.) And the psychology is what matters here because that's where the discrimination happens. People are beaten or killed because they are transgendered. People are denied jobs or services because they are transgendered. People are isolated and ostracized and are made to feel unloved because they are transgendered. I know I don't have to tell you that the suicide rates for transgendered people are astronomical.
THAT is why your examples don't work.
I know and believe in what you are saying about the transgendered being ostracized and hated by many, but that does not mean that being denied access to things based on a dissonance between self identified race or age is any different. Being prohibited from access to things that are associated with your self identity is discrimination anywhere at any time. It does not matter what you have access to given your biological traits. Separate but equal doesn't cut it.
what does deal with the absolutes even meeeeeeean?
It means that people with extreme viewpoints should be coddled and catered to, because progress is scary.
There is nothing about being transgendered that remotely resembles a person thinking that they are not a human/are 40 years younger/belong to a different race. To draw an equivalency is debasing to transgendered people in such a patently offensive way it can be motivated by nothing other than A) bigotry; or B) crass carelessness in pursuit of argumentative "victory."
No. It means we either accept a certain level of discrimination in society (where that falls depends on the individual obviously, but do not kid yourself that you do not discriminate) or we don't. If even one individual is marginalized by a people, there is discrimination.
To call transgendered identity "self-identified gender," as you are by using your purported "self-identified race or age" examples is a fundamental misunderstanding of what transgendered identity is. I am not transgendered. But I know it's more than looking in the mirror and thinking "you know, today I think I'd like to be a man." It's not "self-identified." It is the person's SELF.