I don't disagree. I guess I took your comment on: "There is the social aspect of competing in leagues with darts snooker etc. access to facilities etc that mean it makes sense to have female only pursuits. Darts is a very social and male dominated pursuit. If women want to pursue it then a women’s only league seems reasonable", as side stepping my addressing the physical unfairness of M2F transexuals competing as women.

So you agree there isn't much of a physical advantage in transwomen competing in darts?

If so then we're reverting to the "exclusive spaces" argument (which I've addressed, and you've not commented on in reply).

So you agree there isn't much of a physical advantage in transwomen competing in darts?

If so then we're reverting to the "exclusive spaces" argument (which I've addressed, and you've not commented on in reply). — LuckyR

I said the male advantage in those sports comes from the social aspects. If women want to fully participate it makes sense to have women only competition. I disagree that fully transitioned trans women should have access to these spaces. A clean definition line needs drawing imho. I think we are on the same page apart from how fully transitioned people are treated.

Men have been abusing women for so much of human history, I have no problem with women wanting safe spaces from men even when there's no obvious advantage between the sexes.

If I identified as the reincarnated spirit of Elvis Presley and petitioned government to force people to refer to me as, "The King", to upgrade bathrooms toilets to thrones for the King, or that children must pray to the spirit of the King in school, would I be keeping my delusion to myself? — Harry Hindu

You mean like out on a street corner?

We already have laws in the books for discrimination and treating people equally. — Harry Hindu

Those laws protect trans people from discrimination based on their trans status. It's illegal to refuse employment or housing to trans people. Does that cause your head to explode?

Well in my experience, outside of online pontificating, everyone I know uses external genital appearance as the final practical arbiter of an individual's gender, thus fully transitioned trans folks pass that test. Perhaps your experience is different. I'm not speaking of athletic competition, rather the "exclusive places" argument.

No, I haven't. Although, I have worked for myself for a significant portion of my life. Companies are abandoning DEI initiatives. To even implement them in the first place is implying that you weren't treating people fair and equal before your company implemented them. Again, they are assuming the premise that systemic racism exists. We already have laws in the books for discrimination and treating people equally. DEI was a push to give special treatment to certain groups. — Harry Hindu

You act as if we put a law in and then people start singing hippie chants while they dance around a fire.

If that were the case then we wouldn't have murder, rape incidents, molestation, or work place harassment in any form or percentage. Only once they don't exist in any percentage can you think the laws are enough but until that is done other proactive actions have to be taken.

Are you a child? Murder is illegal. . . there are still murders and for a variety of different reasons. Are you going to address those or sit on your a** while those statistics continue onward. . . chunks of the population suffering. . . while you sit in your arm chair doing nothing because the law will punish them AFTER they do it.

What about prevention? What about lowering those statistics and not taking them as some peculiar 'natural' state of our society?

So, it wouldn't matter whether they were implemented in some wider social/cultural changes or specifically in the form of DEI but you can't trust the population to play nice.

What I'm doing about it is exposing the hypocrisy and motivations of the extreme left for open minds to see. — Harry Hindu

I'm exposing the ineptitude of those who virtue signal for the other side. I expect substantial results from anyone including yourself that are proactive and actually intend to fix those social/cultural/legal divides.

It's like how when race statistics come up in discussions surrounding criminal offences. I expect to see more than some peculiar jab at a particular group or a declaration of how its natural, that its too 'hard' or 'long' term to fix it, and to also just express some nihilistic 'well, they are just a messed up community we can do nothing about.'

I think we have our wires crossed. There is no debate because men have significant physical advantages over women. — Malcolm Parry

Don't forget the genes! We love to see who has the best natural physique to sit high atop the rest of the population.

Why are people so keen to dismantle women’s exclusive places? Why do we need to re engineer bathrooms and changing rooms for a less safe inferior solution? There are social aspects of these places that aren’t factored in. I find the whole mindset dismissive of women. — Malcolm Parry

Why is it less safe?

Is it because there is a rape/molestation issue. . . having to do with one particular sex statistically speaking. . . should we then be talking about that because its the reason why its unsafe?

Should we be. . . proposing social/cultural solutions for this difficult mental health crisis that a mere legal band aid isn't going to fix?

Really weird we are just. . . avoiding that.

Well in my experience, outside of online pontificating, everyone I know uses external genital appearance as the final practical arbiter of an individual's gender, thus fully transitioned trans folks pass that test. Perhaps your experience is different. I'm not speaking of athletic competition, rather the "exclusive places" argument. — LuckyR

The “exclusive places” are for females. A man without a penis does not pass that test. Just because a man has no penis doesn’t mean he automatically looks like a woman. Do you think women should have places where men are excluded from?

Why is it less safe?

Is it because there is a rape/molestation issue. . . having to do with one particular sex statistically speaking. . . should we then be talking about that because its the reason why its unsafe?

Should we be. . . proposing social/cultural solutions for this difficult mental health crisis that a mere legal band aid isn't going to fix?

Really weird we are just. . . avoiding that. — substantivalism

I agree with all of that and male violence should be addressed. Until then maybe keep males out of places where women are vulnerable. Once tgat has been overcome then ask women if they feel socially comfortable in toilets and changing rooms with men even when there is no threat of violence. I would hazard a guess many would prefer to keep men out.

You mean like out on a street corner? — frank

:roll: Are Christians trying to bring God back into public schools from a street corner?

Both Christians and atheists are protected by the first amendment. People can be as deluded as they want to be. It's none of your business. — frank

I don't want it to be my business but they try to make my beliefs their business so that they can cancel or ban me if they do not align with their views. That is my point.

Those laws protect trans people from discrimination based on their trans status. It's illegal to refuse employment or housing to trans people. Does that cause your head to explode? — frank

Like I said, we already have laws that made discrimination illegal. The reason why we still have the laws is because people still discriminate. That is what the laws are for. We don't need more of the same laws. We need to enforce the ones we already have. If there is discrimination happening, then point it out specifically, so that we may fight it together. But using these vague, nebulous accusations of discrimination isn't helping anyone.

Are Christians trying to bring God back into public schools from a street corner? — Harry Hindu

They do proselytize and advertise the good word on corners from my campus.

I agree with all of that and male violence should be addressed. Until then maybe keep males out of places where women are vulnerable. Once tgat has been overcome then ask women if they feel socially comfortable in toilets and changing rooms with men even when there is no threat of violence. I would hazard a guess many would prefer to keep men out. — Malcolm Parry

No excuses and exceptions then. This goes public and private in a wide manner both legally as well as culturally.

Women don't feel safe not just in bathrooms but just as much in work places even their own cities out at night. This momentary utilitarian gambit to garner greater moral virtue by reducing overall harm CANNOT be so single minded or limited.

It's either sex segregation or not. We either allow them to mix while aware of the risks involved or we allow the government as well as social strong handed individuals to intervene and restrict this mixing.

In either scenario that 'addressing of male violence' continues but I leave it to the general public to decide how separate the sexes should be socially, culturally, or legally.

We need to enforce the ones we already have. — Harry Hindu

There is also an educational aspect and a social engineering one. Every generation has be expand beyond and past the faults of those who came before otherwise were just waiting for a new generation of dysfunctional individuals to take root.

I don't want it to be my business — Harry Hindu

Good. Ignore it then.

Your argument makes no sense. Who is likely to disrupt a women's exclusive place more, a person with breasts and a vagina who happens to be XY or a short person with a beard and a deep voice who happens to be XX?

It's either sex segregation or not. We either allow them to mix while aware of the risks involved or we allow the government as well as social strong handed individuals to intervene and restrict this mixing. — substantivalism

Do you wish to eradicate single sex spaces?

Your argument makes no sense. Who is likely to disrupt a women's exclusive place more, a person with breasts and a vagina who happens to be XY or a short person with a beard and a deep voice who happens to be XX? — LuckyR

A man with his penis removed does not have a vagina. A woman with a beard and a deep voice is still a woman.

There will be no gender inspection at the entrance to toilets etc so if a man passes for a woman because they have had extensive work then no one will be any the wiser. Most trans women look like men. If a trans man wishes to use the men’s facilities no man will object. If they wish to use the women’s facilities they have every right to do as they are a woman.

Good. Ignore it then. — frank

I can't when people like yourself do not ignore it and assume their claims are true and then start threads like this to have a debate about bathrooms when it isn't necessary if you would take your own advice and ignore them.

Sheesh. It's just full-circle hypocrisy with you, but else would one expect of one that sees the world through the prism of politics/religion.

Good. Ignore it then.
— frank
I can't — Harry Hindu

Might be worth taking a long walk and contemplating why.

That is not the solution. The solution is for you to start being more logically consistent, intellectually honest and take your own advice to ignore delusional claims.

The issue is men that are not trans entering women's bathrooms and locker rooms. — Harry Hindu

So trans women ought to suffer using men's bathrooms, risking being abused, because cis men might pretend to be trans women to use women's bathrooms? That seems unfair.

And perhaps read the first article I linked to:

There is no evidence that letting transgender people use public facilities that align with their gender identity increases safety risks, according to a new study from the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law. The study is the first of its kind to rigorously test the relationship between nondiscrimination laws in public accommodations and reports of crime in public restrooms and other gender-segregated facilities.

“Opponents of public accommodations laws that include gender identity protections often claim that the laws leave women and children vulnerable to attack in public restrooms,” said lead author Amira Hasenbush. “But this study provides evidence that these incidents are rare and unrelated to the laws.”

Most attacks on women happen where there are no witnesses. In public places there are CCTV cameras everywhere.

So trans women ought to suffer using men's bathrooms, risking being abused, because cis men might pretend to be trans women to use women's bathrooms? That seems unfair. — Michael

This is like saying that a delusional person ought not to suffer the knowledge that they are deluding themselves.

This is also saying that the same people that are arguing for people to use the bathroom corresponding to their sex would then assault people that are actually doing that.

Where are the statistics that show that trans-people are disproportionately assaulted in bathrooms as opposed to other places? Where did trans-people go the bathroom before we started having these types of discussions? We were not discussing who uses which bathroom 10-20 years ago, so where were trans-people going to the bathroom 10-20 years ago?

How about trans-men? Is it OK for trans-men to use the men's bathroom or must they use the women's bathroom?

A man with his penis removed does not have a vagina. A woman with a beard and a deep voice is still a woman.

There will be no gender inspection at the entrance to toilets etc so if a man passes for a woman because they have had extensive work then no one will be any the wiser. Most trans women look like men. If a trans man wishes to use the men’s facilities no man will object. If they wish to use the women’s facilities they have every right to do as they are a woman

We are in complete agreement on your bolded statement. In fact that's my point. Your declaration of what "most" trans women look like inspires no confidence considering creation of a neo vagina is standard transition surgery so you're clearly out of your depth.