transgender student OKed for locker room access

Post Reply New Topic

This isn't even close to the same thing and you know it, or at least you should.

Again, under this argument we may as well not have any separation at all and everyone use the same room no matter the sex/gender because to do so would be discrimination against someone.



I'm not sure what you're saying here exactly, but if I'm reading it correctly. If you are uncomfortable sharing a locker room with people of your own sex and gender, that's your problem and no one else's. No one is forcing their sex or gender upon you under this situation that I can see.

I personally would be uncomfortable with this. I don't think transgender women qualify as women. All it takes now for someone to qualify as a woman is to announce that they feel like they are a woman.

How would someone born biologically male know what it feels like to be a woman? He could assume that he knows how it feels to be a woman, based upon observations, but could not actually know that what he is feeling is the same feeling a woman has. He could decide that he identifies as female, and then decide to become a she, instead of a he, and dress in a way that she feels is appropriate to a female gender, behave in a way that she believes is in accordance with a female gender, but that will still not make her a woman.

A person can not simply decide they feel they are a different race either and just become a different race. It didn't work for Rachel Dolezal. How exactly does someone of a certain race just decide that they feel they are another race and live that way? If they are not biologically of that race, how do they know that they really feel the way someone of another race feels? They don't. They can only make assumptions.

A biological male will have male dna throughout the body. The bone structure, brain structure, muscles, everything, is different in a biological male from a biological female. There are no female reproductive organs. There is no chance of pregnancy, or a menstrual cycle. A biological male has superior strength. A biological male who has gone through puberty as a male has experienced life as a male and cannot possibly understand what it is really like to be a woman.

There is some evidence that some people who identify as transgender may not have brains that are as masculinized or feminized as they should be for the biological sex. There is also some evidence that some of those who identify as transgender have mental disorders, such as body dysmorphic disorder, or are simply homosexual but are uncomfortable with their bodies.

I really don't care what gender anyone identifies with. But I do care when someone who is not a woman, or a man, wants to claim that they are just because they feel that they know what it's like. I do not want biological men, especially pre-op, in my bathrooms or locker rooms. They often still look like men in dresses.

How am I supposed to know if someone who appears to be male, but dresses as a female, is actually transgender? There are gay male crossdressers that use the women's facilities out of convenience. There are straight male crossdressers as well. So does that mean that straight men that choose to dress as women can get away with using the women's restrooms? It does not make me feel safe at all.

Create unisex restrooms and locker rooms and then those who are transgender or those who simply don't care can use them and there will be no problems.

This may not be a popular opinion but it's the only one that makes any logical sense to me.

Makes perfect sense to me.

My local Target store has three restrooms on their top floor.....

One for males, one for females, and one with the male AND female symbols on the door.

Problem solved, or problem avoided.

This is actually a big thing we discuss in the trans community - what does it mean to be a certain gender? Can you define for me what makes you 'feel' a woman? For me, being non-binary means to have a certain disconnect from binary genders, seeing binary categories and being able to say "that is not where I fit in", but to be honest there isn't really anything I can put my finger on that makes me specifically genderless, it's just the lack of connect to any other gender. How does it work for? Is it shared experiences, having that "connection" with your gender, having a uterus? Would you still be a woman without a uterus? I see a lot of cis people saying "trans people cant know what it's like to be x gender" but don't back it up with their own experiences of what gender means to them and why trans people can't experience it. What makes you a woman? What makes you not a man, or not genderless, or not a third gender or not several genders at once? What makes you 100%, hands-down, ultimately certain that you are a woman? And why can trans people not experience that?

And trans-ethnicity is a whole different kettle of fish and is vastly different - most people who claim to be transethnic do so based on wanting to be a stereotype or be involved in the cultural aspects of that particular race rather than "My skin should be darker". Us trans people, we look at our bodies, and what comes though our heads is "This is not my body." We go through puberty see breasts growing and voice dropping and there's an undercurrent at the back of our minds saying this is wrong this is wrong this is so very wrong. There's an itch under our skins where we know what we have isn't right and maybe if we peeled back our skin we'd find the right parts. It's hearing the wrong pronouns and feeling disconnected from it, feeling pain from someone calling you by your birthname because it's like someone's been stirring s**t behind your back and you're the last one to find out. It's feeling a connection to a gender, feeling some sense of kin with people of another gender to the one you are born with. We don't "decide" to become another gender, we [i]are[i] another gender, and we just came out of our mum's vaginas the wrong way round.

And in regards to knowing whether someone is transgender or just a straight man - you don't. Just like I can't be sure if the next person who walks in the room will be blatently transphobic, like how I don't know if the next person to cross the street with be the one to kill me, because statistically speaking those are all very likely for an openly trans person like me. I have no idea. You have no idea. No-one has any ideas. We can't ban people based on the fact they "might" be a threat - but if a straight man uses the guise of a trans woman to be creepy in a locker room, you still have the right to speak to security or people at the front desk, you have the right to be safe. But you don't have the right to use a minor discomfort on something that could possibly happen to ban other women from using the correct changing rooms, especially when said discomfort can be mitigated by using a stall.

And I am all for unisex changing rooms. Please give me unisex changing rooms, that would solve p much half my problems.

It's biology. I was born female. My brain is female. I was raised female. I am 100 percent female. I know what it's like to have a female body, not just female sex organs. I know about how it feels to be able to get pregnant, or raped, or have a menstrual cycle. I know how it feels to be physically weaker and smaller. Women and men have extremely different physiology and yes it most definitely affects the brain and personality. Ask a neuroscientist (and not one that is biased in either way).

Biological sex affects the entire body, including how medications are metabolized. It's not just made up.

Just because you feel disconnected from your biological sex does not mean you actually know what it is to experience being the opposite sex. Your discomfort, your feeling of things being wrong, still do not mean that you actually have any way of knowing what it's like. You have no way of knowing, it's impossible.

It may make you feel better to call yourself whatever you feel that you are, but it doesn't make it true. There is a huge difference between a biological woman and transgender woman, especially in terms of life experience.

I think if a person feels comfortable living as the opposite gender, no gender, or another race, that is their choice. But that doesn't mean that they are the same as someone biologically that way, or born that way, and I feel it's really insulting and arrogant for them to assume they know what it's like just because they think they do.

As far as safety for trans people, versus safety for women, logically, it's more important for women to be safe. There are far, far, far, more biological women out there than trans women. What you are saying is that it's more important for the needs of the few trans people out there to be met, rather than the needs of the vast majority of women. That makes no sense. A study estimates that about 0.5 percent of adults 18-64 are transgender. About 50 percent of most populations are biological women. So all these women should just accept feeling unsafe to satisfy a very small population? Mr. Spock would not agree with this.

And unlike transwomen, I had no choice to be what I am. I can't become a man and suddenly be safe. I can't grow taller or be strong like a man. You may feel you had no psychological choice, but I literally had no choice period. If I were to become a transgender man I would get no benefit whatsoever from it. I'm tiny, even for a woman. I would be less safe. At least a trans woman could choose to stay a man and benefit from it.

I personally know of several local bathrooms where women were raped. If we feel we aren't allowed (or shouldn't) question a masculine looking person entering the bathroom, we'll be more likely to overlook dangerous situations in order to be tolerant.

This doesn't mean I dislike transgender people. Or that I don't want them to be safe. They should be safe. But so should I. People are jerks and homophobic, transphobic, what have you. I agree with this.

Unisex bathrooms. Everywhere. Should be mandatory (except in really small places, mom and pop stores, etc). Unisex changing rooms wherever possible. And the bathrooms should be in the open (not isolated down a hallway) in case something does happen.

Not every woman is smaller nor weaker than men. Does that mean they are not women? Female children do not have periods, are they not women? Trans people have a higher rate of sexual assault, does that mean they're all women since they're able to be raped? I agree, transwomen have different experiences to ciswomen, but that doesn't make them any less a woman. They are women with different experiences, just like cis women. There has to be something more than "I experienced A and have B chromosomes, therefore I am C gender".

I don't claim biology is fake, I'm saying that there are far more biological complexities involved in gender than just simply XX and XY chromosomes. I think someone spoke about earlier about some biological markers in the brain for gender which can be mixed up, I myself have talked about intersex people and how certain sex charactaristics in one sex can occur in another (gynaecomastia in men, indistinguishable genetalia, excessive hair growth in women etc). When I talk about disconnect and pain associated with my body, I am also talking about my hormonal chemistry and insides as well as out. The thought of keeping my vagina and uterus and having so much estrogen and wider hips makes me feel like I'm being inhabited by something out of Alien. When I say my body isn't mine, I mean all of it. Given the neurodiversity we see in autism and ADD and other syndromes, is it such a far leap to imagine it possible for there to be gender neurodiversity in the brain not associated with physical body?

(I also googled neurodivergeance between the sexes and hoo boy, there is one bitter fight over that. We could spend our whole lives fighting that monster. Long story short, no-one can decide whether the structural design of sexed brains has any effect on gender presentation and gender identity.)

You say you don't have a choice to be who you are. Neither did we. Just like I didn't choose to be autistic, I didn't choose to be transgender. And there isn't much of a choice to be made when the two options are live as the person I am or live in living hell as a fasimile of a woman, in a body that isn't mine to inhabit. We are not safe as our birth genders. We cannot "pretend" to be our birthgenders, in the same way that we on this forum cannot pretend to be neurotypical - it's either we are in danger from you as cis people, or we are at risk from ourselves. And even then, I know from experience that the people around you will always know when you are different from them.

Yes, we are a relatively small community. But does that mean we should not be afforded safety and peace because someone feels uncomfortable? Since being autistic is a minority, should we sacrifice our comfort and safety because some allistic folk are uncomfortable with us having accomodations to help us live? 70% of trans people have been harrassed/attacked/denied entry to the bathroom corresponding to their gender (http://www.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2013/06/25/transgender-people-are-harassed-and-assaulted-in-public-bathrooms-survey-says). Not only that, but "there has never been a verifiable reported instance of a trans person harassing a cisgender person, nor have there been any confirmed reports of male predators 'pretending' to be transgender to gain access to women's spaces and commit crimes against them." (http://mic.com/articles/114066/statistics-show-exactly-how-many-times-trans-people-have-attacked-you-in-bathrooms#.97925EYkh) No attack on a woman in a public bathroom has involved someone pretending to be trans.

You are not the ones at risk here.

(As a fun aside, I for all intents and purposes look male. I am pre-operative, but have facial hair, my voice is deep, I have a realistic penile prosthesis. Some days I am indistinguishable from a cisgendered man. As I was born female, can you truly say you'd be comfortable with me sharing your changing space?)

The problem with your opinion is not that it's unpopular, it's that it's not supported by any medical/scientific evidence. This is what makes it discriminatory--you don't understand transgenderism, but you feel comfortable guessing what it's like for them and what rights they should have based on what you incorrectly guess about their experience without informing yourself. I think this is where most discrimination comes from--I don't think the majority of it is based in malice or pure hatred, I think it is usually based in fundamental misunderstanding of the group being discriminated against, combined with an unwillingness to be informed about the group. If you don't know anyone who is transgender, you've never looked at the research, and you are not a doctor, how can you possibly think you understand what it means to be transgender or what it entails?

Science is infallible?

The problem with experts is they get tunnel vision. They focus so much a tiny area of human knowledge they lose sight of the big picture.

Being an expert does not preclude stupidity.

Nope, science is obviously not infallible and our base of knowledge is constantly being updated, corrected, and improved as we conduct research and learn. This is the purpose of the scientific method, to make improvement of our base of knowledge possible. I am just wondering if anyone arguing against the legitimacy of transgenderism has any actual evidence that the preponderance of scientific evidence to support transgenderism and the many experts that believe that it's a real phenomenon are incorrect? If they don't, just saying "science isn't infallible" in the face of all the evidence for the existence of transgenderism as a real phenomenon is not really a legitimate argument.

You are making assumptions about what you believe I know, and the research I've done.

One can find research to support nearly any theory they wish to believe in.

Like those who have found research that evolution isn't possible. Tons of religious extremists quote scientists that have done "research" that proves creationism is the only answer and evolution is impossible.

There is research out there that people use to prove the existence of an afterlife. Yet an opposite group of people has research that proves an afterlife is impossible. So who is correct?

Or what about the Afrocentrists that have research saying that every great civilization was black and that white people are albinos? And the white supremacists that say that white peoole invented everything and are ultimately superior?

If your researchers are biased, and using bad science, interpreting data incorrectly, not using correct scientific practices, then it's useless. The only useful research is sound scientific research interpreted in an unbiased way.

So I am not going to go and read research only by people who have an axe to grind. I read good research. I don't just read the parts that support what I want to believe.

There are plenty of things that I would really like to be true. I could go and find biased research to support these desires. And then I could go around believing what makes me happy to believe, armed with a bunch of flawed research that I can shove in the faces of anyone that disagrees. But I can't lie to myself like that.

And you, being transgender, are telling me I can't possibly know what it's like. That is funny, considering that I was saying the same thing, but it's not okay when I say it.

Don't tell me a transgender woman really knows what it's like to be a woman, when you insist a biological woman couldn't possibly understand what it is to be transgender. You can't have it both ways.

Totally illogical argument. Very disappointing.

Speaking of baseless assumptions: I am not transgender. Also, you mix up my arguments here with the arguments of other commenters. None of you people who are so convinced transgenderism isn't a thing are arguing in good faith, and it's disappointing as hell. I guess I fell for the stereotype that people on the spectrum are more logical by nature, which is my own bias. I am out of this conversation.

ETA: You still have provided no evidence that any of the research discussed in this thread was done improperly. You can't even be arsed to try to argue that the samples are too small, or the results haven't been repeated in other studies, or called into question the professional credibility of the researchers involved or the publications that published the research. All you can say is "science can be biased"--yet you offer no evidence whatsoever than any of the scientific studies discussed in this thread show any bias at all because you won't even look at the sources. You are not arguing with intellectual honesty, and I refuse to participate further in this sham of a debate where one side clearly and openly states they are not even willing to look at the evidence offered by the other side. That is some bogus BS.

First, any one such attribute you mention can be missing, or even multiple ones can be missing and someone can still be assigned female at birth, be raised as such, identify as such and no one would claim it is invalid. This severely weakens the argument - how many attributes does one have to have if there is no clear set of necessary ones?

Second, you are apparently unaware how humans develop as sex dimorphic organisms. Many trans people have other attributes that developed "opposite" expectations based on birth assignment. Most famous is the skeletal system (ie 2:4 digit ratio), but far more interesting are things like endocrine receptors throughout the body. The latter would indeed be very important in "feeling" like a man or woman.



That's based on...your single, rather narrow experience. Only. As such, it really only applies to that one instance. A child who is 3 and insists they are a boy, is raised as such and is always treated as such will know only that experience, regardless of how their birth certificate was marked and regardless of whether that document matched their identity. You might have more empathy if you had lived through the experience of nobody respecting your innate identity.



That is an *exceedingly* cultural perspective. As such, it's invalid in other cultures or subcultures. Not everyone lives in your little world. Question: if a girl declares she is a girl at 3 (the age children typically identify themselves as such is 3-5yo), is raised as such, grows up and gets married, etc., the *only* difference she would necessarily have if she is trans is a few years of medical intervention in her teen years. But a number of women have medical conditions that most others do not, right?



Oh, please do define woman or man "biologically" with no exceptions. Do you not find it equally insulting and arrogant for other people to tell trans people what they are, without having a clue as to the medical and biological aspects of it?



You are claiming that both trans and non trans woman can't be safe at the same time. That would seem to imply trans women as somehow being the cause of danger to non trans women. How, exactly, does that work please? Also, do you really see nothing wrong or immoral with saying, "they are different and only a few, therefore they can be sacrificed"?




40% suicide rate without treatment vs 2% (same as anyone else) with treatment and acceptance. That looks quite a bit like "no choice". But if you mean their bodies, again you are showing your ignorance (perhaps willful ignorance) about sex dimorphism in humans. In other words, you are claiming out of thin air that there is no biological underpinnings when 20 years of good solid science prove you wrong. It would help if you could accept the findings that there is no pure biological binary, as that is much of the the foundation of many of your arguments.



If you force trans people to use the bathrooms for the sex they were assigned at birth, you'll see plenty of bearded, muscular trans men in the woman's room. It would be sooo much easier for a rapist to then walk in at lunch, do bad things and simply walk out. No need for makeup, heels or wig, he can just wear his work clothes or suit!



While that sounds conciliatory, it's not. Everything else you've said shows you do not like trans people and do not wish for them to be safe - stances inconsistent with your final, reasonable-sounding claim about wanting them to be safe.

As things stand, trans people are getting harrassed and physically harmed when they use the wrong bathroom. Going back 30+ years at *least*, there has never been a report of a trans person harming a non trans person in the bathroom, nor someone "pretending" to be trans and doing the same.

While insisting that I don't have any empathy for trans people, you don't seem to have any empathy or real understanding of what it's like for cisgender people.

I am aware of all of what you present as evidence, that you insist that I don't know.

I'm also aware of trans people that disagree with the viewpoint that they are the same as cisgendered people of the gender they identify with. They are, of course, harassed and labeled as self-hating because their viewpoint doesn't agree with the extremist views of many transgender activists. I guess they don't know what they are talking about either, right? Even though they are transgender, they don't agree with the popular opinion, so of course they are wrong.

You are making a lot of erroneous assumptions about what you think I know, about what you think I am saying, and about what research I have done.

Once again, you also can't insist that I can't know what it's like to be transgender, and that my experiences as a cisgender female are irrelevant, while asserting that a trans woman knows exactly what it's like to be biologically born woman, somehow magically just "knows" that their experiences are the same, without actually being one.

How do you know that I don't know what it's like? Because I'm not transgender? That is correct, I don't. And neither does a transgender woman know what it's like to be a cisgender female, so stop claiming that you know what it's like to be something you are not.

By the way, there is also a high suicide rate for transgender people after sex reassignment surgery.Study

And no, I don't think the needs of the few transgender people out there are more important than the needs of all the cisgender women. But the trans activists out there are basically saying, "Here we are, agree with us. If you don't agree with us, you are a bigot. Our needs are the most important, and we don't care whether or not accommodating our demands hurts you. We don't even think they will hurt you, and all of your concerns are complete crap." So they obviously think that their concerns mean more than the concerns of the vast majority.

I just have to add this:

Why do people always assume that because a person doesn't agree with them, it means they hate the particular group that that person belongs to?

I do not hate transgender people. I do not hate black people or people of any race or ethnicity, I don't hate religious people even though I'm agnostic, I don't hate disabled people, I don't hate little people, I don't hate homosexual or bisexual people, I don't hate liberals, conservatives, communists, people with ASD, NTs, etc.

But I believe I have the right to disagree with anybody from any of these groups without being accused of hating them, just because I have a different opinion. Disagreement does not equal hatred or even bigotry.

Being accused of hating some group of people just because I have a different opinion is unfair. And it honestly really upsets me.

FYI, that's known as "The Swedish Study" and it's been thoroughly debunked as a talking point. If you were to actually read it (which anti trans people never seem to do), you find that in the conclusion the authors made it clear that a) they were talking only about Sweden, and b) the direct reason for the higher rate is because of an almost total lack of follow up care in their health system for post surgical trans people.

The rest of your post appears to be saying, "because I said so", a lot. If you don't actually have any rational arguments to make, I'm going to check out of the thread for a while, this is going nowhere.

Fine with me, I'm not the one with the axe to grind. You completely bypass any arguments I make that actually require nothing but logical thought. Simple logic.

And then mention studies and evidence that apparently "everyone" agrees with but list none of it. Then make hostile accusations because someone doesn't agree with you and your interpretation of evidence. Also, only evidence you deem worthy (evidence that supports your views) is allowed to be entered into the discussion.

So apparently "everyone" knows that what you say is true, the evidence is irrefutable, only trans people have the "magical" ability to know what it feels like to be cisgender, but cisgender people don't get to have this magical ability in regards to trans people.

If only everyone would agree with you and believe your self-proclaimed expertise on the subject, without argument, or disagreement, then everything would be fine. Questioning your superior abilities and knowledge is only asking for punishment, and then rage and hostility will commence.

Having a different opinion is clearly not within the rights of non trans people. And making up our own minds is just arrogant!

That's what I'm hearing. And that's the opposite of science. It's fanaticism.