Evan Urquhart

I don't agree 100% but it does seem like a pretty small corner of the issue and maybe not worth disputing too strongly. It also sounds like you think passing is pretty important, maybe more important than genitals, which makes my standard thought experiment less relevant.

Unless your danglies are on display and being waved around it's nobody's business what you've got down there. Be unobtrusive. Being intrusive is the problem.

The counter would be that prejudiced people tend to treat 'going about our lives" as if its some big angry political statement all the time. But, to me it sounds like your error is more about thinking rare things are common than thinking non-scary things are scary.

I'm not the one in error and I'm not under any moral obligation to give up my personal boundaries to accommodate men's feelings. Ever. Please get that idea out of your head right now. Women are not obliged to pander to men as a condition of entry to "not a bigot" status.

You've lost me.

You're lost where, exactly? This is the same argument I had with the chap whose thread I linked earlier. "Accept any man who claims trans identity, whatever the risk to yourself if you do, and shut up about boundaries." No. And I'm not a bad person for saying no.

That's where I got lost- I don't recall saying anything like that? I asked- or meant to ask- how acceptance leads to rape, and whether you'd agree that rape, harassment, assault, etc are crimes regardless of the sex (or gender) of the rapist.

Ah, sorry. Right, acceptance led to the Karen White and Illinous rape cases. In both instances the women who complained were called transphobic for complaining. Why did it happen? Because they were both accepted without exception as women rather than the rapist men they are.