Autogynephilia: The Elephant in the Transgender Bathroom

originally posted by: Gryphon66
This thread is typical political propagandizing at it's very best ... bait for bigots and balm for their confirmation bias.

Looks like it's bait for any trans-supporter who can't acknowledge alternate opinions on the matter.

EDIT: With a heaping dose of ad hominem attack on the side!

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Gryphon66
This thread is typical political propagandizing at it's very best ... bait for bigots and balm for their confirmation bias.

Looks like it's bait for any trans-supporter who can't acknowledge alternate opinions on the matter.

EDIT: With a heaping dose of ad hominem attack on the side!

It's not a matter of "alternate opinions" ... it's a matter of what words mean, the basic logic of how one thing relates to another, etc.

And apparently, you really need to look up the meaning of "ad hominem."

This discussion, as noted, repeatedly, focuses ostensibly around the works of one person, who has stated very clearly that their original contention (from 1988 or so) was flawed and does not address "transsexuals."

If one's main source discredits what one is saying ... it's time to reconsider, whether one is discussing opinions, conjecture, or wild suppositions.

/shrug

a reply to: Teikiatsu

If that's the first time you've seen the point made, then you simply haven't been listening.

"Moving the goal posts"??? Incredible. This is not about the words you or I use to describe these matters. This is about what people live and experience every day as measured, understood, codified and verified by accepted medical science and legal precedent.

No, I'm not saying Trans* people are confused. If you can't accept my definition, then look up the accepted medical explanations. None of them claim merely that a Trans* person "thinks likes another gender."

What you presented was an explication of your own agenda based on flawed premises. Wingnut 099.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Gryphon66
*snip*you believe in your political ideology that says you should use the power of the State (as North Carolina and others have done) to invade the privacy of some Americans and attempt to render them as second-class citizens!

I know I wasn't going to respond, but wow....."invade the privacy"?? Really? You mean like the privacy of this girl? -

Ask this 13-Year-Old Girl if Transgender Bathrooms Pose a Threat

The lack of concern for her privacy, or that of any other girl, is appalling.

Ok.... one. the suspect was dressed a s a man and not in crossdress or drag right? So obviously just a perverted MALE and not a transgender.

Two. Until they catch this person we do not know what he is other than a arsehole.

Three. Your bias is showing as well as your knee jerk reactions. the author of that article Deliberatly misleads the reader with speculation and no facts beyond a man in the womens room. Way to take the bait.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Gryphon66
*snip*you believe in your political ideology that says you should use the power of the State (as North Carolina and others have done) to invade the privacy of some Americans and attempt to render them as second-class citizens!

I know I wasn't going to respond, but wow....."invade the privacy"?? Really? You mean like the privacy of this girl? -

Ask this 13-Year-Old Girl if Transgender Bathrooms Pose a Threat

The lack of concern for her privacy, or that of any other girl, is appalling.

OH, I've learned not to read your posts for reliability so no worries in responding.

So, aside from the spin that "Conservative Review" is desperately trying to put on the story, that "Transgenders say women don't face danger in public bathrooms" (which is of course a another stinking lie) ... this has nothing to do with Trans* rights, a Trans* person in the restroom, etc. but just another sad story of someone taking advantage of kids, and another example of conservatives taking advantage of that kind of tragedy in a ridiculous attempt to make it about Trans* folks.

So, just to recap, you posted a story about a probably straight man taking advantage of a little girl in a public restroom that has nothing to do with any Trans* access to the facilities ... brilliant.

Catch up. We've established that the real issue here is the safety and privacy of these public spaces.

That issue is the one that we all need to be looking at, so that everyone can be safer in these places.

The only ones "invading privacy here" are the rank authoritarians, like you and the State of North Carolina, who want the government to verify genitalia ... because you can't conceive of the idea that Trans* Americans have the SAME rights as everyone else.

Another great example of Conservative desperation and willingness to use sad stories of child abuse for political advantage.

#forshame

In other words, you refuse to address the issue of this girl's privacy. Shows the facts well.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Thank you for posting that link. I suppose we can be thankful the creeper just wanted to take pics... but as noted in the article, who knows where those pics will end up... it's a scary thought.

I was reading an article earlier about surveys of men, and the numbers of men who said they had drugged women's drinks was crazy, and something like 35% said they would rape a woman if they thought they could get away with it.

The Border Patrol union chief testified before congress about "supply and demand" and how criminal activity naturally and predictably increases when we make it easy to break the law. We're just eliminating the laws and increasing the "supply" for the creepers' "demands."

You are welcome! Quite recent case, and relevant, though some here would prefer to pretend otherwise. That's the sort of thing that has me with the kids in public restrooms. Some jerk trying that with one of my girls won't be walking out! Son, either, for that matter. I have to wonder, too, what sort of person defends policies that would encourage this sort of thing to happen?

That's bizarre! What sort of upbringing causes people to act in such a fashion? 35%??? Wow......

I don't even know what to say to that.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Thank you for posting that link. I suppose we can be thankful the creeper just wanted to take pics... but as noted in the article, who knows where those pics will end up... it's a scary thought.

I was reading an article earlier about surveys of men, and the numbers of men who said they had drugged women's drinks was crazy, and something like 35% said they would rape a woman if they thought they could get away with it.

The Border Patrol union chief testified before congress about "supply and demand" and how criminal activity naturally and predictably increases when we make it easy to break the law. We're just eliminating the laws and increasing the "supply" for the creepers' "demands."

You are welcome! Quite recent case, and relevant, though some here would prefer to pretend otherwise. That's the sort of thing that has me with the kids in public restrooms. Some jerk trying that with one of my girls won't be walking out! Son, either, for that matter. I have to wonder, too, what sort of person defends policies that would encourage this sort of thing to happen?

That's bizarre! What sort of upbringing causes people to act in such a fashion? 35%??? Wow......

I don't even know what to say to that.

How is it relevant? Is it a rate increase? Can you seriously never find an incident like this in the history of the US.

What's to say there is any correlation? Did the investigation determine this?

If I put up all the church Diddlers should my headline be look how dangerous religion is?
Some of you act as if your doing research but would be skewered in peer review.

I wonder what kind of person puts children in harm's way. I mean there are real statistics to transgender abuse. You are using the old Alex Jones method of reporting.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Gryphon66
*snip*you believe in your political ideology that says you should use the power of the State (as North Carolina and others have done) to invade the privacy of some Americans and attempt to render them as second-class citizens!

I know I wasn't going to respond, but wow....."invade the privacy"?? Really? You mean like the privacy of this girl? -

Ask this 13-Year-Old Girl if Transgender Bathrooms Pose a Threat

The lack of concern for her privacy, or that of any other girl, is appalling.

Ok.... one. the suspect was dressed a s a man and not in crossdress or drag right? So obviously just a perverted MALE and not a transgender.

Two. Until they catch this person we do not know what he is other than a arsehole.

Three. Your bias is showing as well as your knee jerk reactions. the author of that article Deliberatly misleads the reader with speculation and no facts beyond a man in the womens room. Way to take the bait.

The subject would be allowed, under the demanded standards, to enter, no matter how he was dressed at the time. That's the problem. These sorts of laws don't set requirements for those entering, and if they did, those demanding said laws would throw yet another fit, claiming that any standards were also "discriminating against" them. We all know this is true. That is why such facilities should be regulated according to anatomy. No exceptions. Under that standard, this sort of creep can be told not to be there. Under laws that allow him in, there is no defense. That's the point.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

You should prepare yourself for a loss here. Both Republican and Democratic presidential candidates are going to support transgender equality. One having run bussinesses where it's already been allowed for some time.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Gryphon66
*snip*you believe in your political ideology that says you should use the power of the State (as North Carolina and others have done) to invade the privacy of some Americans and attempt to render them as second-class citizens!

I know I wasn't going to respond, but wow....."invade the privacy"?? Really? You mean like the privacy of this girl? -

Ask this 13-Year-Old Girl if Transgender Bathrooms Pose a Threat

The lack of concern for her privacy, or that of any other girl, is appalling.

Ok.... one. the suspect was dressed a s a man and not in crossdress or drag right? So obviously just a perverted MALE and not a transgender.

Two. Until they catch this person we do not know what he is other than a arsehole.

Three. Your bias is showing as well as your knee jerk reactions. the author of that article Deliberatly misleads the reader with speculation and no facts beyond a man in the womens room. Way to take the bait.

The subject would be allowed, under the demanded standards, to enter, no matter how he was dressed at the time. That's the problem. These sorts of laws don't set requirements for those entering, and if they did, those demanding said laws would throw yet another fit, claiming that any standards were also "discriminating against" them. We all know this is true. That is why such facilities should be regulated according to anatomy. No exceptions. Under that standard, this sort of creep can be told not to be there. Under laws that allow him in, there is no defense. That's the point.

As a Gender dysphoric myself i can tell you I wont be going in the womens bathroom because i do not look like a female yet. Im willing to say Almost all others liek me feel th e same. Also legally if they specify you look male and or female it would not be seen as discrimination and it would be seen as a affirmation to most of us that were on the right track when we are passable.

Also How you gonna check their genitals without also violating their rights? the solutions not to do anything and let the issue fade away again.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

This is just so nonsensical. Predators who go into bathrooms don't want to be seen by witnesses, as they will be identified. Think about it. A guy walks into a women's room in plain sight of several people. If he then attacks a woman, the police will be asking witnesses what they saw. Don't you think the witnesses will tell the police about the guy that went in there? That guy is going to be suspect numero uno, and he knows it. Any predator knows they have the best chance of getting away with it if they aren't seen by anyone. This is how predators have dealt with bathrooms since way before any non-discrimination laws for transgender people were passed, and it's how they have and will continue to deal with it after the non-discrimination laws. No witnesses. These laws won't change that.

It is better by noble boldness to run the risk of being subject to half the evils we anticipate than to remain in cowardly listlessness for fear of what might happen.

Herodotus


Just saying. Most of the things we have anxieties about, never happen.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

In other words, you refuse to address the issue of this girl's privacy. Shows the facts well.

Yes, it does show the facts.

And the facts are that that you are wrong again.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

We've established that the real issue here is the safety and privacy of these public spaces.

That issue is the one that we all need to be looking at, so that everyone can be safer in these places.

No, really, can we go back to your ignoring my posts?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

This is just so nonsensical. Predators who go into bathrooms don't want to be seen by witnesses, as they will be identified. Think about it. A guy walks into a women's room in plain sight of several people. If he then attacks a woman, the police will be asking witnesses what they saw. Don't you think the witnesses will tell the police about the guy that went in there? That guy is going to be suspect numero uno, and he knows it. Any predator knows they have the best chance of getting away with it if they aren't seen by anyone. This is how predators have dealt with bathrooms since way before any non-discrimination laws for transgender people were passed, and it's how they have and will continue to deal with it after the non-discrimination laws. No witnesses. These laws won't change that.

Apparently, some folks have taken the propaganda bait from the rightstream media hook, line and sinker:

They think that there is "some law" being imposed "some where" that says that "any man" can go into any bathroom "any time" and not be questioned, observed, or asked to leave.

Do you know what "law" they think they're talking about? Does anyone else?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

This is just so nonsensical. Predators who go into bathrooms don't want to be seen by witnesses, as they will be identified. Think about it. A guy walks into a women's room in plain sight of several people. If he then attacks a woman, the police will be asking witnesses what they saw. Don't you think the witnesses will tell the police about the guy that went in there? That guy is going to be suspect numero uno, and he knows it. Any predator knows they have the best chance of getting away with it if they aren't seen by anyone. This is how predators have dealt with bathrooms since way before any non-discrimination laws for transgender people were passed, and it's how they have and will continue to deal with it after the non-discrimination laws. No witnesses. These laws won't change that.

Apparently, some folks have bought the propaganda line from the rightstream media hook, line and sinker:

They think that there is "some law" being imposed "some where" that says that "any man" can go into any bathroom "any time" and not be questioned, observed, or asked to leave.

Do you know what "law" they think they're talking about? Does anyone else?

Hey gryph here is a very dark list of the worst States for women to live in. These are rapes per capita. See if you see a pattern to which states and what those states moralities are.

I ll just start with the 30 worst places to be a woman.
where rape is most common
By John D. Sutter, CNN


20. Alabama - 26.9
21. Florida - 27.2
22. Rhode Island - 27.4
23. Mississippi - 27.5
24. Illinois - 27.7
25. Maine - 28
26. Iowa - 28.3
27. Kentucky - 29
28. Oregon - 29.2
29. Texas - 29.6
30. Idaho - 30
31. Minnesota - 30.5
32. Tennessee - 31.5
33. Ohio - 31.7
34. Washington - 31.8
35. Utah - 33
36. Nevada - 33.7
37. New Hampshire - 34
38. Arizona - 34.7
39. South Carolina - 35.5
40. Kansas - 36.5
41. District of Columbia - 37.3
42. Montana - 37.7
43. Nebraska - 38.3
44. North Dakota 38.9
45. Colorado - 40.7
46. Oklahoma - 41.6
47. Arkansas - 42.3
48. New Mexico - 45.9
49. Michigan - 46.4
50. South Dakota - 70.2
51. Alaska - 79.7

a reply to: luthier

*buzz in*

"What are mostly Red States in the USA??"

(Should we compare these numbers with Europe?)

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: luthier

*buzz in*

"What are mostly Red States in the USA??"

(Should we compare these numbers with Europe?)

We could except they actually have a much better reporting and classification system for rape. Sweden for instance is very strict and rape is almost always prosecuted.

en.m.wikipedia.org...
Whereas here in the USA we can just say well she was drunk so who knows what the real story is in most states. Particularly those red ones. A new study from USC just said 8 percent of woman have had there drinks spiked in college.

None of that in public restrooms.

a reply to: yuppa

As has been stated many times, if someone looks female, no one would pay attention, unless that person did something to call attention to themselves.

a reply to: kaylaluv

By your logic, no such predator would ever have been caught. Yet, they are caught. Plus, some enjoy the attention, and will take advantage of these laws regardless of who sees them. The peeper types won't care if they are seen looking,and under those laws, they'd be allowed to do do. Think about that, in a public changing room, where young girls are present.

Not something I would tolerate around my daughters, I can tell you that. Not something any decent parent wants for their children.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

In other words, you refuse to address the issue of this girl's privacy. Shows the facts well.

Yes, it does show the facts.

And the facts are that that you are wrong again.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

We've established that the real issue here is the safety and privacy of these public spaces.

That issue is the one that we all need to be looking at, so that everyone can be safer in these places.

No, really, can we go back to your ignoring my posts?

The facts are that this sort of law violates the privacy of women and girls everywhere, and all you and others on your side want to do is complain about the "rights" of people who can't figure out what sex they are.

To the thread as a whole - anyone here defending this nonsense that is a normal, straight person? I'm quite curious.