Autogynephilia: The Elephant in the Transgender Bathroom

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

What "law" do you think was "just implemented"?

Out of curiosity ... what are you referring to?

NY Times-Obama to issue decree squashing transgender ‘bathroom law’.

The Obama administration will issue a sweeping decree Friday telling every US public school district to allow transgender students to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity. The letter, signed by officials from the Education and Justice departments, does not have the force of law but contains an implicit threat that schools that do not abide by the Obama administration’s interpretation of 'the law' could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid.

It's not a law. It's also because this is how the courts are ruling. The title 9 cases are ruling in favor of trans students. This is now a legal precedence and it's honestly a waste of time to keep bothering federal courts over this.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

We are making progress!!! LOL

Why will there be MORE MEN in women's bathrooms?

Why will there be MORE OPPORTUNITY for pedophiles and rapists?

Think it through ... I know this idea has upset you (as it was meant to) and I don't blame you for being upset.

We are talking about the same people going into the same bathrooms they always have. No one is going to stand at the door and decide if someone is male looking or female looking not check out their genitalia ...

Think about it ... does a sexual predator want to make themselves PUBLIC? MEMORABLE?

No, they don't.

Your attempts at upsetting me have failed. I am not upset in the least. Actually, I am about to have a belly laugh at your ignorance. History has proven that MORE men in a war...(most of the time) wins the battle. They say that America has the most gun violence than most countries simply because we are more violent prone, and watch too many Western's. The reality is because we have MORE PEOPLE, therefore more will have guns, hence there will be MORE gun violence. The MORE money you make, the MORE money you will make in the future (if it's handled wisely)...this is why they say "the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer".

The reality is....MORE = MORE. More men int he women's bathroom, will equate MORE violence, than the one example of the one girl that you provided to me back there in a previous post. Maybe 'Cute Kayla' can read this post too, so she will know what statistics really do.

a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Think about it ... does a sexual predator want to make themselves PUBLIC? MEMORABLE?

BTW, not every woman's restroom is lit up like a Christmas tree, and in a Mall.

originally posted by: redhorse

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: introvert

Perhaps you meant to reply to the other member. That quote is not from me.

You're the one who claimed to have access to a literature that nobody else can have access to.

COMMENTARY
Veale’s (2014) Critique of Blanchard’s Typology Was Invalid

Evidence Against a Typology: A Taxometric Analysis of the Sexuality of Male-to-Female Transsexuals (
This was the quoted article)

What is More Bizarre: The Transsexual or Transsexual Politics?: Men Trapped In Men's Bodies: Narratives of Autogynephilic Transsexualism. By Anne A. Lawrence, New York Springer, 2013.

A case study that represents the cultural narrative (to be fair) Gender Dysphoria: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back

And many, many more.

I know that many of you are invested in the idea that transgender automatically means completely harmless and benign, but the overall picture is more complicated. Having said that, I do believe that the overwhelming majority of transgender individuals pose no threat to others, and are (mostly) harmless to themselves. But to say that there are no negative aspects and that autogynephilia is just an off-hand fetish that doesn't have anything to do with transgenderism, or simply... not real, is disingenuous. This is discussed a great deal, and while his conclusions are certainly critiqued, Blanchard is not just dismissed as a crack pot within the psychological community. Sorry to burst your respective bubbles.

literally nobody thinks transgenders are harmless or saintly.

The objection is over the hysteria around bathrooms.

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Think about it ... does a sexual predator want to make themselves PUBLIC? MEMORABLE?

BTW, not every woman's restroom is lit up like a Christmas tree, and in a Mall.

Interesting observations about bathrooms.

Care to remark on why a true sexual predator would call attention to himself or make himself memorable in any way?

Thanks.

My guess is, that will all of your legalese there, and your expert opinion to the court, that you didn't know that all states have their own independent laws as well as Federal laws. If there were no bathroom laws anywhere, I don't believe they could get away with this "ordinance". It's CNN man....what else do you want from me? LOL

Alabama city: Use bathrooms matching biological sex or face 6 months in jail.

"Ordinance: Public restrooms "are places of increased vulnerability" and present risk of molestation".

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

We are making progress!!! LOL

Why will there be MORE MEN in women's bathrooms?

Why will there be MORE OPPORTUNITY for pedophiles and rapists?

Think it through ... I know this idea has upset you (as it was meant to) and I don't blame you for being upset.

We are talking about the same people going into the same bathrooms they always have. No one is going to stand at the door and decide if someone is male looking or female looking not check out their genitalia ...

Think about it ... does a sexual predator want to make themselves PUBLIC? MEMORABLE?

No, they don't.

Your attempts at upsetting me have failed. I am not upset in the least. Actually, I am about to have a belly laugh at your ignorance. History has proven that MORE men in a war...(most of the time) wins the battle. They say that America has the most gun violence than most countries simply because we are more violent prone, and watch too many Western's. The reality is because we have MORE PEOPLE, therefore more will have guns, hence there will be MORE gun violence. The MORE money you make, the MORE money you will make in the future (if it's handled wisely)...this is why they say "the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer".

The reality is....MORE = MORE. More men int he women's bathroom, will equate MORE violence, than the one example of the one girl that you provided to me back there in a previous post. Maybe 'Cute Kayla' can read this post too, so she will know what statistics really do.

Oh, so this is about you now?

News to me.

Men in war, guns in a battle, mo' money ... sounds like the typical action movie ... /shrug

Why will there be more men in the ladies room? You still haven't touched on that.

And you've ignored other reasonable questions, and called me a liar to my face.

If anyone should up upset it's me. But of course, I understand that this is the internet and you're really not much more than words on a screen to me.

SO ... pony up pardner, holster yer side arm and explain WHY you think that keeping the State out of people's pants is going to put more Men in the Ladies Room?

Are you a Man that has been stiffling your desire to go in there?

What''s the real deal here?

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Gryphon66

Do you think they are afraid of this?

Who can say?

(Actually, that is kinda creepy, and reminds me of a story on Reddit (LOL) /nosleep)

I think that as a general statement, right wingers are more interested in what goes on with other folks in the bathroom?

That's the only thing I can see. It's not about safety. /shrug

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician
My guess is, that will all of your legalese there, and your expert opinion to the court, that you didn't know that all states have their own independent laws as well as Federal laws. If there were no bathroom laws anywhere, I don't believe they could get away with this "ordinance". It's CNN man....what else do you want from me? LOL

Alabama city: Use bathrooms matching biological sex or face 6 months in jail.

"Ordinance: Public restrooms "are places of increased vulnerability" and present risk of molestation".

Federal law trumps state law and should in civil rights cases. I would be willing to make a bet with you this law is struck down by a federal court before the new year. If you know the process you know its true. Not only that all these states will be loosing federal funding over this.

Ironically other than NC all the states making bathroom laws are in poor States with bad education. NC being a mediocre educational state.

a reply to: Gryphon66

That's the only thing I can see. It's not about safety.

BINGO!

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Think about it ... does a sexual predator want to make themselves PUBLIC? MEMORABLE?

BTW, not every woman's restroom is lit up like a Christmas tree, and in a Mall.

Interesting observations about bathrooms.

Care to remark on why a true sexual predator would call attention to himself or make himself memorable in any way?

Thanks.

That's my point. Any idiot would know not to do anything in a woman's restroom in a well lit, public place....but public, doesn't always mean that the restrooms are always in a well protected place. They will exploit those restrooms that are not so noticeable, but because they will now be able to walk in comfortably. In a restroom that is not so "public", they can walk in as normal, without having to scope to see if they're being watched etc. and have the woman subdued before anyone can even hear anything. That's the danger. No one is defending Pedophile's here, or how they act, and I know no more than you do about them.

* Nice allusion to the possible reference, of my being a pedo though. Way to intellectually hold a conversation, by trying to discredit someone by alluding to lies. Who else does this?...Oh yeah the media and the government...when they are losing an argument.

Remember saying this?

Are you a Man that has been stiffling your desire to go in there? What''s the real deal here?

So yeah jerk. It is all about me.

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician

Your attempts at upsetting me have failed. I am not upset in the least. .

I'm not trying to upset you. I'm trying to get you to think rationally.

The right-wing media you listen to and parrot these talking points from is what has upset you and what was intended to do so.

I, on the other, hand, I'm trying to set you free from these baseless fears.

a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Why will they be able to walk in normally?

That's what you won't answer.

I didn't call you or imply that you are a pedo. You need to back waaay off of that.

You keep talking about sexual predators what they would do why they would do what they do.

If I thought you were a pedophile or a child molester I assure you, I wouldn't waste time on you.

EDIT: Do you really take yourself that seriously? Are you this given to overreaction?

If this conversation is upsetting you that much, perhaps we should end it?

a reply to: Gryphon66

You're the one who brought me, into the conversation, by inferring that I had intimate knowledge of bathrooms, more than you or anyone else, because I mentioned the danger of how Pedophile's may possibly exploit this new "policy" (is that better?).

The post was not about me, but clearly YOU....made that statement about me.

Remember this statement?

It was only 2 posts back. Have you forgotten THAT quickly...or are you trying to play the "smoke and mirrors" game with me? I see right through it.

Interesting observations about bathrooms.

a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

So, no statistics to prove your assertion that these non-discrimination laws will lead to more sexual offenses/assaults in women's public restrooms?

Didn't think so.

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician
a reply to: Gryphon66

You're the one who brought me, into the conversation, by inferring that I had intimate knowledge of bathrooms, more than you or anyone else, because I mentioned the danger of how Pedophile's may possibly exploit this new "policy" (is that better?).

The post was not about me, but clearly YOU....made that statement about me.

Remember this statement?

It was only 2 posts back. Have you forgotten THAT quickly...or are you trying to play the "smoke and mirrors" game with me? I see right through it.

Interesting observations about bathrooms.

So, wait ... you *didn't* make observations about bathrooms?

My bad. Consider the conversation over.

a reply to: kaylaluv

They said "one is too many".

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Think about it ... does a sexual predator want to make themselves PUBLIC? MEMORABLE?

BTW, not every woman's restroom is lit up like a Christmas tree, and in a Mall.

Interesting observations about bathrooms.

Care to remark on why a true sexual predator would call attention to himself or make himself memorable in any way?

Thanks.

That's my point. Any idiot would know not to do anything in a woman's restroom in a well lit, public place....but public, doesn't always mean that the restrooms are always in a well protected place. They will exploit those restrooms that are not so noticeable, but because they will now be able to walk in comfortably. In a restroom that is not so "public", they can walk in as normal, without having to scope to see if they're being watched etc. and have the woman subdued before anyone can even hear anything. That's the danger. No one is defending Pedophile's here, or how they act, and I know no more than you do about them.

* Nice allusion to the possible reference, of my being a pedo though. Way to intellectually hold a conversation, by trying to discredit someone by alluding to lies. Who else does this?...Oh yeah the media and the government...when they are losing an argument.

Your not winning an argument. Don't be so vain.

You have pretty much lost seeing as these bathroom 'laws" have existed already for a decade in many many cases. Without the hysterical examples.

What is different about this than if I wrote a piece saying pastors and child care workers have a high risk of being pedaphiles. Therefor we should stop Sunday school to protect children from predators that actually have statistical information regarding high levels of incidents?

There is no difference. I wouldn't suggest that some marginal statistics numbers should void people of their personal liberty which is the right to practice any faith.

I know that not all clergy are pedaphiles therefor no need to make hysterical laws, call special sessions and waste money on the issue.

Just watch your soroundings, take self defense, and pay attention.

Same as it ever was.

Stop playing the victim. The victim are the trans kids and adults being beaten by bigots. This conversation is about protecting those people.

I have to say at the very least at least the OP makes a concesion about unisex bathrooms. At least admitting there is an issue.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

So, no statistics to prove your assertion that these non-discrimination laws will lead to more sexual offenses/assaults in women's public restrooms?

Didn't think so.

No one can answer that because there's no answer that is not based on fear and nonsense.

But I digress ..