awards, job positions, etc are different situations that might require different solutions. My guess is that the best solutions would create both satisfaction and disappointment for both sides.
-
-
Replying to @MEVring @life_minutiae and
Safe spaces for women exist to protect the safety, privacy, and opportunities for women. Adding safe spaces for transwomen for these same reasons would make sense. Sacrificing the safety of women for the validation of transwomen does not.
2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @NathanielHart72 @life_minutiae and
I agree. But when does a safe space for women become unsafe with transwomen in them? (I'm just pondering with you if you'd let me.) In contact sports, it seems obvious. But are there ways to make public toilets more inclusive? Like more private spaces? Are there situations >>
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MEVring @NathanielHart72 and
where one can make evaluations on a case-to-case basis? Like, say prisons? Because some transwomen are obviously not a threat to women, while others are. Seems to me that transwomen differ greatly from one another.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MEVring @life_minutiae and
I'd say that since the reasons for sex separation differs per facility, so should the contemplations with regards to the circumstances under which transwomen could be exempt from that sex separation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NathanielHart72 @MEVring and
In sports for instance, there are no known methods for erasing male advantage, though puberty blockers + HRT (if such a thing could be verified to begin with) might come close. Placing such a restriction on participation however would violate international human rights laws.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NathanielHart72 @MEVring and
For other circumstance, SRS might be an acceptable criterion. Certain women's spaces are separated more on the basis of privacy and modesty than on the basis of safety. For those spaces it could be argued that the Staniland question is valid: should penises be allowed there?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NathanielHart72 @MEVring and
For toilets, the criteria in practice is going to come down heavily towards appearance if it’s not self ID, and frequently results in the harassment of cis women with more butch presentation - meanwhile I was using the correct restrooms for seven years before SRS without notice
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @life_minutiae @MEVring and
As long as you can pass and don't wave your penis around like some transwomen have, you can indeed do so for quite some time without being noticed. This is a tad harder to do in a communal locker room or shower area. Where should one draw the line though, according to you?
5 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NathanielHart72 @life_minutiae and
I like how all the TERFs in this thread just quietly accept the buck-fucking-wild accusation that 1) It's somehow common for trans women to "wave their dick around" in communal spaces 2) The law as currently written protects their right to do so
2 replies 2 retweets 42 likes
"Waving your dick around" is ALREADY ILLEGAL It's already something cis men are not allowed to do to other cis men in male locker rooms, it's sexual harassment
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @NathanielHart72 and
Good Lord, the world you people live in and the shit you just accept as a starting point in your discourse, when you think you're being all reasonable
1 reply 3 retweets 35 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NathanielHart72 and
I can't actually believe what i just read - don't they realise they aren't arguing to *keep* us out of this or that space, they're arguing to *evict* us from our current spaces that we've been safely using for decades! Has no-one told them we've been self-id'ing all along either?
0 replies 0 retweets 8 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.