Also in both our lifetimes, we saw the first black president, legalized gay marriage and pretty massive improvements of standards of living for billions worldwide. — Jeremy Murray

I agree with a lot of what you said before this, but I wanted to expand on this. Obama's victory was so traumatizing to a large segment of white society that they had to "other" him with outlandish conspiracy theories that many still believe to this day (birtherism). It got so ridiculous that Obama tried to quell the controversy by producing his own birth certificate. I believe that a lot of whites saw the election of Obama as irrefutable proof that their time as king of the mountain was coming to an end and they went into denial mode. They did it again in 2020 when they couldn't believe their great white hope could lose to Joe Biden, so the election was obviously rigged. I know Trump has some crossover appeal from black and hispanic men, so this isn't true of all his voters, but I'm mainly talking about the evangelical whites who literally see him as heaven sent.

Talking to him over the years has me up on the basics, I guess, and it seems easy to suggest there are some problems related to woke policy in the state? Has that penetrated the schools? — Jeremy Murray

Yes. We have to monitor who we suspend very carefully or we would get investigated by the justice department (not a danger with Trump in office) and/or lose funding from California.

What scares me about the teaching ranks is that we are way more privileged than our students, and I question our own class/education privilege in expecting, say, a low literacy group of teens to be able to master 'new' pronouns without having even mastered the old ones? — Jeremy Murray

Most of my kids post-Covid are two grade levels behind in reading. Mastering pronouns is indeed quite a challenge for them.

Premising masculinity itself as inherently toxic is nuts to me, as an educator of freakin' children, and yes, it is fair to suggest that this IS how masculinity is presented in some classrooms. I don't mean to suggest that this worst-case scenario is therefore a default assumption you can make about discussing masculinity critically. — Jeremy Murray

School is hard for my 3rd grade boys. I carve out a lot of breaks throughout the day because they have trouble sitting still. My female principal banned football because the boys were playing "too rough". That really bugged me.

I am tolerant of anyone who keeps their delusions to themselves - whether it be believing in a God or believing your a woman in a man's body - and not expect others to change in ways to affirm their delusion. — Harry Hindu

If a biological male wants you to use "she" and "her" do you refuse?

I'm more worried about the much larger portion that preys one women. — Harry Hindu

No link between trans-inclusive policies and bathroom safety, study finds

Transgender people over four times more likely than cisgender people to be victims of violent crime

Prohibiting transgender people from accessing bathrooms puts them at added risk of harassment

“Current policy debates about transgender people’s access to restrooms are based on a narrative, asserted without evidence, that safety and privacy in women’s spaces are at risk,” said lead author Jody Herman, Senior Scholar of Public Policy at the Williams Institute. “However, research shows that transgender people are the ones who face harm from others in these spaces, including being denied access, verbal harassment, and physical assault. Moreover, they are at greater risk of harm when laws require them to use restrooms according to their assigned sex at birth.”

If you're concerned about people's safety, just let trans men use men's bathrooms and trans women use women's bathrooms.

I don't see how your response follows from my proposed solution. Are you saying everyone on an airplane is being used as bait for a terrorist hijacking? This is what you are saying, not me. If you want to insist on affirming delusions so men can get close to women in their safe-spaces, that is your position, not mine. I don't carry guns onto airplanes and have no intent on hijacking one, yet I am still subject to a search before boarding an airplane. — Harry Hindu

The end result being we just do what China has already been doing and we already partially accept which is mass public as well as internet surveillance/supervision.

We stop homegrown terrorists AND MAKE SURE THEY DO NOT ARISE TO BEGIN WITH. You are tackling the first part and adding nothing new to it as its been so focused on for my entire life time legally, morally, as well as politically. The latter is preventative and doesn't really get much publicity. By your responses you are seemingly unable to actually deal with the second part of this problem. Ergo, the former WILL CONTINUE UNTIL YOU SOLVE THE LATTER!

In a society where it is against the law for people to walk around naked, we have adopted rules for the purpose of finding mates in a society where our bodies are covered. Trans people are uprooting these agreed upon rules for how females and males present themselves in society for the purpose of distinguishing between men and women so that heterosexuals and homosexuals (which are sexual orientations, not gender orientations) can find proper mates. Is a homosexual man still a homosexual if they are attracted to female dressed as a man? Is it right for a trans person to fool a homosexual into having intimate relations with them? — Harry Hindu

Is it right for women to be sexually assaulted in mixed sex work places because it does happen (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7092813/) even if you regard it as percentage wise insignificant. Are you we supposed to now separate out work places by policy or LAW by sex?

We separate out jails by racial segregation as well to mitigate against harm potentially which may arise by gang affiliation which is usually correlated with a particular racial class. Should we also extend this segregation in LAW or public policy to mitigate against the prevalence of conflict among mixed racial communities?

__________________________________________________________________________________

The only reason @Harry Hindu that you would separate any number of social/biological/cultural classes is if you thought the dangers posed by having them mixed together outweighed any societal equity. HOWEVER, once that segregation is in place YOU HAVE TO SOLVE THE REASON IT AROSE. Not be a child and wipe your hands of it.

We stop homegrown terrorists and PREVENT THEM FROM ARISING by societal/cultural preventative strategies.

We jail rapists and PREVENT THEM FROM ARISING by societal/cultural preventative strategies.

We jail those who commit drug offences and PREVENT THEM FROM ARISING by societal/cultural preventative strategies.

@Harry Hindu we split them up and now you are going to propose a solution to the rape issue as that is the only reason why we split them up to begin with unless you have another legitimate reason.

@Harry Hindu This is our fault and it seems to be our moral duty on a daily level both personally as well as in terms of activism to restrain/rear your brothers because they seem to have gone for too long ripping up the local neighborhood. Trying to stick their dick where there isn't any consent. Time to man up and deal with the problem head on.

Or is there only one kind of response you can give and then you scuttle away.

The point is that in continuing to make the "bathroom" argument you are merely trying to address a symptom of the problem, not the cause - which is affirming someone's delusions for political capital. — Harry Hindu

The pot calling the kettle black here. . . you want to separate them out for safety reasons yet not actually give a solution to why there was a need for said separation to begin with.

At least we both agree with the feminists then about the danger that men pose.

The right to pee without any biological males around? — frank

It's really more of not wanting to take off your pants with any males around as that would include cases in the locker room as well.

Right. As far as I can tell it's not a matter of rights. It's just up to the community's sentiments.

If you're concerned about people's safety, just let trans men use men's bathrooms and trans women use women's bathrooms. — Michael

That's not the issue here. The issue is men that are not trans entering women's bathrooms and locker rooms. The ultimate issue is assuming that extraordinary claims with no evidence are true.

Again, if gender is merely a feeling, then that is all you need to be one gender or the other. The need to use one bathroom or the other would be irrelevant if all that is required is one's feelings to affirm one's gender.

We don't need a scanner to check for inter-sex people entering one bathroom or the other, so the discussion regarding that is irrelevant. Inter-sex people are already using the bathroom they want and their case is so rare that it is a non-issue. The issue is that predator men will use transgenderism as an excuse to enter women's safe spaces.

It would seem to me that the ones that are using people with a mental disorders for political gain are the true haters here. And it is these people that are actually putting everyone in danger, including trans-people, by affirming their delusions, instead of helping them get the proper care they need. This would be like prescribing diet pills to an anorexic instead of providing the proper psychological care they need. The left is not about helping people. They are about using people as a political club against their political opponents.

If a biological male wants you to use "she" and "her" do you refuse? — RogueAI

If I want you to refer to me as, "My Master" because I identify as a Dark Sith Lord, would you refuse?

If not, then it is incumbent upon you to explain the discrepancy. Why do you believe a man can be a woman more than a man can be a Sith Lord? Why do you believe a man can be a woman more than the claim that the Christian-right's God exists?

There is no logical inconsistency in the semantics, if sex is defined as biological and gender is defined as what is presented and (presumably) felt. My sense is that this won't catch on, because many are like you: unwilling to accept the semantics. As I indicated initially, that's the most trivial aspect of the TG issue. — Relativist

There is logical inconsistency in both the semantics AND the acceptance of extraordinary claims with no evidence.

Gender as "what is presented and felt" are biological. Feelings are biological, or more specific - neurological. I'm not sure what "presented" means other than using sexist tropes to "present" oneself as either a male or female.

If gender and sex are separate, then why is changing one's biology an affirmation of one's gender? If presenting and feeling are what define one's gender, then why the need to change the biology and control other's speech? Why the need to enter female spaces - which are divided by sex, not by gender?

The ultimate issue here though is that you and the others here have ASSUMED the claims of people that claim to be a woman when they are a man are true. Not only that, but you are being inconsistent in your acceptance of one claim over another when they both have the same amount of evidence - none. This is no different than how Christians accept the existence of one God over others, when there is the same amount of evidence for the existence of all gods - none.

You don't want to admit this because doing so will undermine everything that has been said in defense of transgenderism here.

The pot calling the kettle black here. . . you want to separate them out for safety reasons yet not actually give a solution to why there was a need for said separation to begin with. — substantivalism

We're talking about feelings here. Does a woman's need to feel safe override a man's feeling to be a woman? Who's feelings get affirmed at the expense of the others?

Right. As far as I can tell it's not a matter of rights. It's just up to the community's sentiments. — frank

Do we have a right to feel safe? Does our need to feel safe override other people's rights to do other things?

If I want you to refer to me as, "My Master" because I identify as a Dark Sith Lord, would you refuse? — Harry Hindu

My Master? Yes, I would refuse. Dark Sith Lord? And I knew you had a severe mental compulsion to be called that or it causes you distress? Sure, why not? But you didn't answer my question about pronouns. Do you refuse to call a man her or she?

Right. As far as I can tell it's not a matter of rights. It's just up to the community's sentiments.
— frank
Do we have a right to feel safe? Does our need to feel safe override other people's rights to do other things? — Harry Hindu

Are you saying that women have a right to use the bathroom without biological men in the room?

There is logical inconsistency in both the semantics AND the acceptance of extraordinary claims with no evidence. — Harry Hindu

You're wrong. Consistency is present if a word corresponds to a concept. It's an entirely different matter as to whether or not you (and others) are willing to accept the linguistic shift. But languages evolve all the time.

If gender and sex are separate, then why is changing one's biology an affirmation of one's gender? — Harry Hindu

Physical alteration of one's body is presentation. Is biology being changed? Amputation of a leg isn't a change of biology, nor is cosmetic surgery.

why the need to change the biology and control other's speech?

“The one constant of a vibrant living language is change,” explains Gregory Barlow, President of Merriam-Webster. “We continuously encounter new ways of describing the world around us, and the dictionary is a record of those changes.” (source)

In the present case, it's a matter of having a word to denote a particular concept. If you read the word, it's to your benefit to understand what the word means- there's no control involved. If you get triggered when you see others using the term, that's your problem. If you feel to need to correct others when they use the term in the way you oppose then you are as guilty of trying to control others as anyone.

Why the need to enter female spaces - which are divided by sex, not by gender?

Those are the serious issues! The semantics is trivia. I sense that you lump it all together in your mind.

Not in sport and not in society when it comes to social norms around women’s right to certain exclusive places.
What about social, emotional and mental sex are different? I just see these as outmoded sexist tropes. Men tend toward traditional masculine pursuits but those that don’t are still men. Women who tend toward masculine pursuits are still women. There still needs to be a distinction for sport and changing/toilet/shelters. For fairness, for safety and for dignity. I don’t see this as controversial

I don't disagree in strength and speed sports. Billiards, darts and poker, not so much. As to exclusive places, if someone has had surgery, IMO they're entitled.

We're talking about feelings here. Does a woman's need to feel safe override a man's feeling to be a woman? Who's feelings get affirmed at the expense of the others? — Harry Hindu

The discussion turned in the direction of bathrooms which according to the conservative manifest image either implies that we are giving up children/women to molesters and rapists. . . or at least increasing the risk of such occurrences.

Regardless of the feelings you point out or whether we do or don't enforce laws on the matter are irrelevant to solving the rape/molester epidemic if not addressing this, period. . . end of story. That involves going beyond retro-active approaches to pro-active ones including extensive attention paid to mental health, education on said topic matters to underage individuals, and care taken to social rearing of the next/future generations.

What did you say about metal detectors and safety concerns as regards terrorists on planes? Isn't there another aspect of that you were forgetting. . . having to do with the concept of deradicalization.

I don't disagree in strength and speed sports. Billiards, darts and poker, not so much. As to exclusive places, if someone has had surgery, IMO they're entitled. — LuckyR

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.
Imho, exclusive places are for females. We can agree to disagree but it’s for women to decide in the end.

:roll: of course I can agree with all that (just read my recent posts in other political discussions), but that will take generations to accomplish. A more immediate solution to the trans problem is to start addressing it as what it is - a delusional disorder.

In the present case, it's a matter of having a word to denote a particular concept. If you read the word, it's to your benefit to understand what the word means- there's no control involved. If you get triggered when you see others using the term, that's your problem. If you feel to need to correct others when they use the term in the way you oppose then you are as guilty of trying to control others as anyone. — Relativist

This is so laughable that you cannot see the contradiction in what you just said here.

What you just said can be applied to yourself and the trans-community. So when trans people hear the word "gender" being used a as a synonym for "sex", or pronouns being used to refer to sex, and are triggered, then that is their problem, right? This is just more of the left's "rules for thee, but not for me" (the right is hypocritical in this regard too, so it's more of an extremist tactic to control others to reinforce their delusions).

symptoms of delusional disorder may include:
Feelings of being exploited.
Preoccupation with the loyalty or trustworthiness of friends.
A tendency to read threatening meanings into benign remarks or events.
Persistently holding grudges.
A readiness to respond and react to perceived slights. — Cleveland Clinic

Physical alteration of one's body is presentation. Is biology being changed? Amputation of a leg isn't a change of biology, nor is cosmetic surgery. — Relativist

That is changing one's physiology which is part of one's biology.

The point is that why change your body if gender is a feeling and/or a social construction? If gender is feeling then changing your gender would be changing how you feel. If it were a social construction then changing gender would require changing society, not an individual's body parts.

Not to mention, that they never achieve creating real sex organs so the only thing they could be presenting is a fake version of a man or woman. When the the doctor creates hole between a man's legs as a "vagina" a medical grade dilator has to be used to keep the wound from closing. The body knows what it is, despite what the mind might think.

You're wrong. Consistency is present if a word corresponds to a concept. It's an entirely different matter as to whether or not you (and others) are willing to accept the linguistic shift. But languages evolve all the time. — Relativist

The problem is that this linguistic shift is based on a misunderstanding of other terms as well as contradictory with the rest of what we know. This is typical of religious claims. They end up contradicting other claims they have made, as well as being logically inconsistent in accepting some claims over others when they all have no evidence to support any of them.

Are you saying that women have a right to use the bathroom without biological men in the room? — frank

I'm saying that everyone, including women, has the right to feel safe.

My Master? Yes, I would refuse. Dark Sith Lord? And I knew you had a severe mental compulsion to be called that or it causes you distress? Sure, why not? But you didn't answer my question about pronouns. Do you refuse to call a man her or she? — RogueAI

You didn't answer the most important question on why you would believe a man can be a woman more than a man can be a Sith Lord, or believe in the existence of the Christian god.

As for pronouns - they refer to one's sex, so I will use them to refer to one's sex regardless of what one wishes.

Have you ever called someone a name that they did not identify with - idiot, moron, ass, bigot, racist, sexist, stupid, etc.?

I'm saying that everyone, including women, has the right to feel safe. — Harry Hindu

If I don't feel safe peeing with a dwarf in the room, is the state supposed to do something about that?

If I don't feel safe peeing with a dwarf in the room, is the state supposed to do something about that? — frank

That depends on whether your fear is realistic or not (delusional).

That depends on whether your fear is realistic or not (delusional). — Harry Hindu

Is the state supposed to sort out the nature of my fear, and then rule on the dwarf issue?

What are the statistics on dwarf on normal-statured people assaults vs men on women assaults?

What are the statistics on dwarf on normal-statured people assaults vs men on women assaults? — Harry Hindu

There are probably more men assaulting women. What are the statistics on men assaulting women in bathrooms?

There are probably more men assaulting women. What are the statistics on men assaulting women in bathrooms? — frank

I'm not sure as men have mostly been kept out of women's bathrooms so it would logically follow that most assaults on women occurred outside of the bathroom. By allowing men into women's safe spaces, the assaults in bathrooms undoubtedly will go up.

But none of this actually addresses the actual issue in that some in this thread are advocating that men should be able to enter a woman's bathroom or locker room based on the fallacious and incoherent idea that men can be women. Can men be women and vice versa?

By allowing men into women's safe spaces, the assaults in bathrooms will go up undoubtedly. — Harry Hindu

Prove it.

Irrelevant. What needs to be proven here is if a man can be a woman.

Irrelevant. What needs to be proven here is if a man can be a woman. — Harry Hindu

So you're abandoning your whole "everybody has a right to be safe" thing? You're leaving me to pee in front of dwarves even though I don't feel safe?

So you're abandoning your whole "everybody has a right to be safe" thing? You're leaving me to pee in front of dwarves even though I don't feel safe? — frank

Propagating a delusion as if it were real, creating mass delusion, is what makes everyone less safe.

If a man cannot be a woman then why have a debate about bathrooms? Should we abandon arguments that are red herrings?

It's not a matter of rights. If the public owns the toilet. Access to it is up to the public.

It's not a matter of rights. If the public owns the toilet. Access to it is up to the public. — frank

It's not even that because the trans-movement claims that one is a woman simply by claiming it. A man is no longer a man once they enter a woman's bathroom, so the discussion about men entering women's bathroom is irrelevant and we should instead focus on the trans claim that someone is a woman or man by simply claiming it, or by wearing a dress or entering a women's bathroom.

Yes. I disagree that a man can transition to being a woman. A man can transition to being a trans woman. I don't really understand why anyone would deny that, but I'm open to hearing the answer (though I might still disagree even after understanding it).

I think it's very clear that transitioning is psychologically precarious for some people. Apparently not for others. All any of us can do is look past the face, the race, the sex, the religion, the what have you, to the living breathing being who animates the form. I sort of feel sorry for people who can't do that.

A man can transition to being a trans woman. — frank

What does that even mean? What is a trans-woman and how does it differ from a man or woman? Man and woman are biological entities so to be a trans-woman appears to mean that you are intersex but have more female parts than male parts.