The costs of trans visibility

The UK will now outlaw gender-neutral toilets in all new or renovated non-residential buildings, the only exceptions being lockable single-occupant rooms with their own washbasins where this is compelled or allowed by space considerations.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/gover...

Back in the 80s when central governments didn't try to take over the finest details of everyone's lives the bathrooms in my dorm were gender-neutral.

Florence hospital stopped giving puberty blockers to minors after government inspection found tavistock-like procedures (easygoing prescriptions without psychiatric pre-assessment and the like).

The gvmnt is working to fully ban such prescriptions nationally.

To be clear they were very rare occurrences to begin with in Italy, still a nice development

Source in italian (leftwing, pro-trans source decrying the event as negative)

https://www.fanpage.it/politica/il-gover...

Hilariously the first comment on this is implying that there is no elevated violence against trans people

Why do you guys keep linking opinion pieces from 10 years ago as relevant to modern discussion?

You do realize your link is utterly and completely useless for anything, right?

I'm glad I missed the 100+ post long dance back and forth about how trans people deserve to be murdered for not disclosing their trans status.

The two sides in this thread are so desperate to refuse to agree on anything that the anti trans crowd was actually going to bat for murder

Can't make it up!

Yall can dislike me, you can dislike uke, you can think bryce is crazy, its whatever. But yall use that as a vehicle to unleash your most disturbing thoughts against trans people. That is pathetic.

And yet, almost all of your post is made up.

Brother, there are no less than 3 people that lent credibility to the discussion that trans people face blame for getting murdered for not disclosing their trans status. The entire premise is based on Rick just making some **** up, which he has been incredibly prone to do in this thread.

It incredibly hard not to insult you right now. You often pop in with sarcastic comments from the peanut gallery and don't add much other than the implication that you don't think much of these trans peoples. You are an affluent, pushing 60, white guy who likely has had an incredibly easy life. I don't hold your opinion in high regard outside of finance and even then, at this point I think I have better more relevant strategies.

you left out the rape part

Rick was the only one using that as any kind of argument, and he didn't in any way say that people should be blamed for getting murdered. You're completely twisting things, or maybe more likely, only paying attention to what uke said when he was completely twisting things.

the west is slowly but surely moving toward sanity by basically making many of the claims of the most active trans activists in this thread, crimes or illegal.

Fewer children are being mutilated and sterilized.

Fewer women are being forced to compete in sports with men who think they are women, to be in prison with men who think they are women, to be in rape shelters with men who think they are women.

trend is good, cordies of the western world notwithstanding.

From what I hear that'd be Evergreen or Oberlin. I think they're both much more liberal (or whatever term) than any of the large schools. I went to UC Berkeley. I have a daughter at a UC in the dorms and I think the bathrooms are co-ed (but surely like the dorms I had there are individual stalls for toilets and showers. Iirc, we had urinals in ours too because I think the dorms used to be single-sex per floor and iirc dudes generally didn't use them if the were women around.

neither school, it's not on any lists or ranks but it is in the very top if not the most - i visited friends who went to infamously liberal schools like reed and hampshire and they were nothing like what we had

people crocheting in a circle while passing a bowl around and listening to bela fleck or string cheese incident was probably the most common activity

don't think i once heard anything remotely resembling a conservative opinion the entire time i was there

I didn't factor that in date of publication. I picked it because it surveyed multiple opinions of faulty at an Ivy League school, which i feel lends credibly. As opposed to cherry picking a random blog or click bait article, which might say anything.

Are you saying these positions have been abandoned in recent years? Now, similar people would say trans people are obligated to be honest and forthright about their status?

Of course, the unnamed "most liberal school in America" gives you some type of antidotal experience that we should trust gives you greater insight on the issue, right?

i enjoyed reading it es2, i found it interesting and objective

It seems to me that at the base of our disagreement is that you don't think people can truly be transgender. You don't say "transgender women," you say "men who think they are women." If we don't accept that people can be trans, then nearly all of these issues are clear no's (I'm not saying they're clear yes's on the other side, but at least there's reason for debate).

You seem tense. Would you like to talk about it?

They could very well be truly transgender but that doesn't mean they get to compete with women in sports or go to women's prisons, even if their feeling get hurt due to this. As you said there's reason for debate and these are very pertinent reasons.

? I think being trans means being convinced you are of the opposite sex, semantically, consistently in time with no wavering.

I do accept people exist like that.

I don't say transgender women because I refuse radical leftist warping of words, you can't be a woman semantically without XY chromosomes , and the left doesn't decide semantics.

I think what you think you are should never have any meaning for others, others should never be forced to act differently depending on what you think you are.

We divide women from men in various cases because of average group characteristics being different enough among the 2 sexes, with women being weaker and needing protection from men in various cases, and being a sex or the other isn't a choice very simply.

I think this covers some of it.

One view is that some people have GD and that, up to a point, it is kind to go along with their preferences. Essentially as you would a convert to Islam who changes his name, diet, etc. These are like Protestants and wine. I.e. we all know it's actually wine, but we treat it as blood.

The Catholics in this analogy say a change has actually occurred. Trans women ARE women. Though the differences are right there in front of our face, easily observable, just as the wine shows every sign of being wine. It doesn't matter.

As 57 points out, there is also queer theory/gender theory etc. This is the view that gender norms are arbitrary and oppressive and must be destroyed for political purposes.

This is especially seductive to people like college kids and profs in the first world. The broader political narrative is that by being very "privileged"-as indeed they are--they are inherently bad. For example, their opinions should cary little to no weight.

By declaring themselves trans, non binary, etc. They become the good guys. Their opinions are automatically valuable. Rather than owing a debt to the oppressed, society owes them a debt. Rather than being at risk of saying the wrong thing, they can be the offended party, etc. This is attractive to people with particular mental health issues too.

Plus, even if you don’t go to the extremes of the politcal ideologies, it's obviously true that gender norms are somewhat capricious and a frequent source of stress. So people have often challenged them in the past.

Many movements, especially for young people, have been partly about challenging these norms. Maybe the prom king/queen aren't the platonic form to which we all must aspire. That must be a big part of the appeal here. I remember a HS teacher saying that since trans became popular, goths have vanished at his his school.

If you don’t have GD and are just superficially "non binary" during youth, it's a lot like being a goth, hippy, punk, etc. You don't have to adhere to mainstream standards of what is cool and create your own standards that allow you to feel cool within your cohort.

If you take out the crazy stuff, like the few dozen men who want to beat up on women in sports, and the targeting of minors for drugs and surgery, it wouldn't really be any big deal.

Part of the problem could be that. If we did that, the people on campuses in rich countries couldn't play at being oppressed, so they must demand crazy stuff to drive conflict.

It is a big deal in prison and it is even a bigger deal when you start counting men who think they are women as women for "gender income gap" purposes, or "pink quotas" under the law.

For ex in Italy we have a legal mandate of 40% women as board members for listed companies (yes really).

Women pay less car insurance in many countries.

There are "women entrepreneurship" fiscal advantages in many EU countries.

You cannot let being a woman be a subjective call under the law if you want to ever be allowed to legally discriminate in favor of women in ANY capacity.

It is not a small deal

You clearly don't want any of those discriminations forced by government to be allowed. So you are given a choice, use subjective definitions of sex and gender as arguments against something you are against in principle or go against your principles because it's more important to either signal your anti-trans religious fundamentalist extremism or the fascist need to punish people you consider deviant.

How about just arguing the government should treat people equally? That'd be the libertarian thing to do.

Board members quotas should obviously be unconstitutional.

But insurance companies should be allowed to discriminate on biological sex (and any other characteristic).

And unequal people should be treated unequally.

It wouldn't be equality to treat a 11y old as a 38y old legally right? Well it's not equality to dismiss having a penis or not when you are forced to sleep in the same small room for years with someone.

I not sure what your opposition to having women-only prison is and why you think that would be unequal treatment: each individual would have the same treatment, same sex prison for everyone.

I didn't say anything about what I opposed or not. Why in the world would you say this: "I not sure what your opposition to having women-only prison is "?

If you can't discuss things honestly, what's the point?