Legitimate question, according to you, this person should be going into the woman's room: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_Angel#/media/File:Buck_An...
How do you feel about that?
How do you feel about that?
A biological female entering men's spaces and activities is far, far less problematic. I for one would have no problem with that person entering a men's restroom or locker room. But I think it's not unreasonable for others to object.
I think the pertinent question is, should a person who made the affirmative choice to transition their body via surgery, hormones, etc. have their preferences supersede those of others who were not involved in that choice? This question is a corollary of a deeper question, which is: should a person who insists that material, shared reality is incorrect have the right to force others to participate in their delusion? Should a schizophrenic experiencing visual hallucinations have the right to reorder society in order to accommodate their delusion? The answer is obviously "no". So why then do trans-people have the special right, in the minds of some, to reorder our language, customs, and culture to accommodate their delusions?
So, returning to your question, my answer would be, either Buck Angel should use a unisex restroom, or, if none is available, go elsewhere to find one.
Here is a sample of what I think are better questions to ask:
Should this person be imprisoned alongside biological women? [1]
Should these biological males be allowed to compete in women's cycling? [2]
Should this man have been imprisoned with women? [3]
Should this biological male have been given use of the girls' restroom at his high school? [4]
Should this biological male have been given use of womens' restroom? [5]
Should this person be imprisoned alongside biological women? [6]
Should this biological male have been given access to the girls locker room at his high school? [7]
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-67613441
[2] https://www.nationalreview.com/news/male-cyclists-take-gold-...
[3] https://www.nbcnewyork.com/investigations/man-posing-as-tran...
[4] https://apnews.com/article/loudoun-virginia-lawsuit-transgen...
[5] https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/transgender-woman-convicte...
[6] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-45825838
[7] https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/after-trans-woman-exposed...
So you are trading one form of dehumanization for another. I think if you want to implement this policy you need to mandate unisex restrooms. Otherwise you are excluding trans people from public life... but that's the point isn't it?
> Should a schizophrenic experiencing visual hallucinations have the right to reorder society in order to accommodate their delusion? The answer is obviously "no". So why then do trans-people have the special right, in the minds of some, to reorder our language, customs, and culture to accommodate their delusions?
We routinely set policy based on voices our representatives hear in their heads they believe to be the voice of God. George Bush is quoted saying God told him to invade Iraq. For thousands of years human history and law has been guided based on a bunch of people claiming an invisible sky wizard told them how to order society. Why do the voices in their head rank higher than a trans person's?
> So you are trading one form of dehumanization for another
It's not even close to dehumanizing. Concentration camps are dehumanizing. War is dehumanizing. Genocide is dehumanizing. Requiring Angel to use an appropriate restroom is at most an inconvenience (for Angel).
Angel wasn't born this way. Angel's decision, motivated by desire and/or delusion, to undergo surgical and chemical alterations was made deliberately and affirmatively. And thus Angel should bear the consequences of those decisions. Angel doesn't have the right to reorder society's customs, culture, and rules as a result of those decisions. (And I would argue these kind of anatomical disfigurement is far more "dehumanizing" than being asked to use a unisex bathroom.)
I'll also note that it is telling that you've chosen as the trans exemplar in this discussion a pornographer and fetishist whose behaviors and values are wildly out of line with the mainstream of society.
> We routinely set policy based on voices our representatives hear in their heads they believe to be the voice of God
Straw man, and also, false. [1] It is obvious that no delusional person has the right to reorder society's customs, culture, and laws. Or are you arguing that we must take all delusional people seriously in order to placate trans-people?
-------------
[1] Bush had to follow the rules by going to Congress to make his case for war. The basis of the case presented to Congress was not "the voice of god".
Participation in public life is a key aspect of human society. Going to the bathroom is also a key part of being a human biological being. In recognition of this, the government mandates appropriate bathroom facilities in public places like stores, restaurants, government buildings, etc.
What you're proposing essentially is that a certain class of people should not have access to the bathrooms, and therefore should be excluded from society. Explain how that is not dehumanizing. Do you know how many people kill themselves each year because of policy you are proposing? What if it was your kid?
You're denying them an aspect of society that I am 100% sure you would cry about were similar discrimination applied to you. That you don't feel it to be dehumanizing simply tells me you have not been the target of the kind of discrimination you advocate against others.
And the fact that you don't propose solutions like the government should mandate unisex bathrooms so everyone can go tells me you don't actually want these people in public life, you'd prefer if they all just stayed home. You can't even state that you don't want that.
> I'll also note that it is telling
And what exactly does that tell you? I chose that person from Google image search because he looks like the kind of person conservatives would freak out about for being in the women's restroom. His background is immaterial, no one would know anything about him if they saw him in the woman's room.
> Straw man, and also, false. [1] It is obvious that no delusional person has the right to reorder society's customs, culture, and laws. Or are you arguing that we must take all delusional people seriously in order to placate trans-people?
No, I'm pointing out our society is already run by disordered individuals. You're acting like trans people are so uniquely crazy they don't deserve to be taken seriously. But people who believe in an invisible sky wizard who speaks to them in their dreams and who grants their wishes are running the government and setting national policy based on a book of fiction they think is real. Talk about delusion, but you're fine with that, yeah?
George Bush absolutely talked about God all the time and how God influenced his decisions. The fact that in his argument for war he lied about the motivation when the whole time he was hearing voices in his head that implored him to go to war is a problem. But conservatives are fine listening to voices in their heads and setting policy over it.
I'll leave with this final point: every time a conservative says to a person "You're not man enough" or "man up", they are admitting that gender is a spectrum and implicitly linked with societal gender roles. If gender is binary then one is either man, or a woman. There's no way to become "more" of a man if gender is binary. Unless of course gender is a spectrum and a construct of society, and not biologically immutable. So is it really a delusion if even conservatives implicitly believe it?
Who's saying this? No-one in this thread.
Point is that male people shouldn't be going into female bathrooms and female people shouldn't be going into male bathrooms.
> What you're proposing essentially is that a certain class of people should not have access to the bathrooms, and therefore should be excluded from society.
No-one is proposing this.
>>Buck Angel should use a unisex restroom, or, if none is available, go elsewhere to find one.