Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicky.
I don't understand this comparison at all to be honest. There is a lot of evidence of men being more violent (and especially more sexually violent) than women. Is there evidence that gay men (or gay women) are more violent than straight ones? I don't really see the need with mixing up sexuality and 'gender'. It actually quite annoys me when talking about this stuff and people are like 'oh but you would change next to a lesbian, whats the difference?!'
|
Maybe I didn't explain it well but I wasn't trying to mix up gender and sexuality. I'll try again lol. First of all yes when it comes to sexual violence the vast majority of abusers are men, straight/bi/gay doesn't make a difference as far as I'm aware. My point was that the argument itself of women being in danger if men are present in an area such as public toilets, suggests that it is sexuality, or sexual attraction, that is the point of focus there. So my comparison was to say that if the problem is men being in an area where they may be sexually attracted to somebody, and the likelihood of them being an abuser is great because they are male, would also be applicable to gay men in a mens public toilet, and the danger they would present to other men. Not that gay men ar emore likely to abuse than straight men or anything along those lines. My actual distinction is that sexuality
doesn't make a difference and that I don't believe sexual attraction whichever way it is directed causes women or anyone else to be in danger in an area such as a public toilet that happens to be inhabited by someone who may be sexually attracted to them. And I'm basing this on there currently being many gender neutral spaces where risk of abuse isn't heightened, and also by the fact that many men use public toilets and aren't considered to be at risk from male abusers who may be sexually attracted to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicky.
However, now that you have said about not agreeing with sex segregation to start with, I now completely understand how you do not see an issue with this. And also understand how you think that taking away womens rights (to areas segregated by sex) is not problematic.
So this will go round and round in circles as I do see need for sex segregation (maybe not in loos, provided the cubicles are full floor to ceiling and such) in certain areas of life  Maybe due to having different life experiences tbh. |
I'm not saying that though Vicky, again maybe I didn't explain myself well but I'm saying that sex segration is necessary in some areas and not in others and you've said a similar thing yourself with regards to toilets. One of the distinctions for me is danger, I mentioned prisons and violent criminals. Another is sports, where I'd consider it to be common sense that where you have a sport that is meant to test biological strength for example, that men and women have biological differences so segregation on biological sex makes sense to me. But areas where it comes down to a feeling of discomfort rather than actual danger I don't see as being necessary because that's to do with social norms and those can change. It's not an all or nothing thing for me and I'd like to think that although I have different life experiences I'm still able to acknowledge if a situation presents a danger to women. I may not know the feelings associated with those situations but I'm talking about real threat of danger rather than feelings. If you believe sex segregation should be based on feelings and social norms though then I completely understand that, I'm just coming from a different perspective and I don't believe that what I'm saying infringes on womens rights in general as I'm taking into account womens safety in all of this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicky.
As a side note, do you know you are actually a 'terf' for identifying a need for sex segregation in sports?  |
Yes I suppose I am
Good thing I'm not on twitter. But like I said I don't think throwing terms like terf around to shut people down is helpful anyway and I'm not trying to agree with all aspects of what the general transactivist line of thinking is, my own personal views just tend to be the same as a lot of theirs, but yes not all my views are, I'm trying to look at all sides of it and form my own views and as much as you and I still disagree on most of it you've been a massive help on that and I have changed some of my views based on things I've read during these discussions. For example I was firmly against Germaine Greer when the controversy surrounding her comments came out and I considered her transphobic but now I have a much better understanding of where she was coming from (even if I do still disagree with her) and I feel I have a better understanding of how feminists feel on these issues even if my views don't line up with a lot of theirs, I wouldn't like to be called anti-feminist as a result of that or anti-womens rights, or a terf for not agreeing completely with the other side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicky.
And may I suggest
Maybe it wouldn't. Can you see how it could be problematic for a woman only event to have men there? Especially, for example a lesbian event. Where the women there are already hassled by many men on a regular basis simply for refusing to worship the almighty penis?
|
It depends on the event I suppose but generally I can't see why a transgender woman being at a womans event (lesbian or otherwise) would be a problem. The suggestion in the article was that the event would be to do with dating and whilst I'm firmly against the idea that a lesbian should have to be attracted to a transgender woman with a penis (I've seen your posts regarding that and I agree with all of what you're saying), I don't see the harm in allowing a transgender woman to attend an event such as that. There may be lesbians there who wouldn't mind dating a transgender woman with a penis, there's all sorts of people out there. You get gay men who only date trans women, I've got a straight female friend who's husband underwent sex reasignment surgery, so there's all sorts of different people out there and I'm not talking about anyone being forced to be attracted to someone, or harassed to worship their penises, but allowing someone who may not fit the 'usual' to be included in an event such as that and not being disallowed because there are other people who harass and bully and abuse. Edit to add: if there is a transgender woman who is also a lesbian and wants to meet a woman, should they not be allowed to look for that? As long as they aren't harassing or bullying anyone at the event.