Can Self-Identification Be Incorrect?

[shagster01]

No one sees anyone else's genitals in a public bathroom to care what's actually between their legs. It's all about the idea of gender separation, not actual gender separation.

You have clearly not been to the stadium with feeding trough style urinals or parks where the stalls have dividers, but not doors, or swimming pools where the stalls are right by the showers and changing areas.

 

[PureX]

You have clearly not been to the stadium with feeding trough style urinals or parks where the stalls have dividers, but not doors, or swimming pools where the stalls are right by the showers and changing areas.

Those are an 'old world' exception. And anyway, the issue here is not bathroom design. It's about the concept of gender and it's relationship to genital structure.

Obviously, the best modern bathroom design would be individual rooms with a commode and a sink; the number of these to be determined by expected use.

 

[shagster01]

Those are an 'old world' exception. And anyway, the issue here is not bathroom design. It's about the concept of gender and it's relationship to genital structure.

The problem is that bathrooms have always been divided by sex, and now people are trying to make it about gender.

 

[shagster01]

Let me ask you this PureX...

If a human has a penis, what sex are they?

 

[PureX]

The problem is that bathrooms have always been divided by sex, and now people are trying to make it about gender.

No, they were never really divided by sex. We just thought they were because we all assumed that everyone using the woman's restroom had a vagina and everyone using the men's bathroom had a penis. In fact, we had no idea what was between anyone else's legs. And we still don't.

Actual biological sex was never an issue, and there is no reason for it to be, now. Except that now we are aware that some people who look like women are not, and some people who look like men are not, and we don't like the idea of that. We want those "impostors" ostracized. We want them banned from our bathrooms. Even though in most instances we would never know they were there in the first place.

 

[shagster01]

Except that now we are aware that some people who look like women are not,

If they "are not" women then they should not go into the room labeled "women"

and some people who look like men are not,

If they "are not" men then they should not go into the room labeled "men"


Thanks for at least admitting they are not what they say they are.

 

[PureX]

If they "are not" women then they should not go into the room labeled "women"

If they "are not" men then they should not go into the room labeled "men"

Thus sayeth the Lord Shagster!

Thanks for at least admitting they are not what they say they are.

I didn't say that. All I said was that they did not have the genitals that everyone else thought they had between their legs. Which is why no one cared about it, until now. Now it's become apparent because of the internet and the idiocy of TV news that there is a difference between sex and gender, and we can't be sure what genitals people have from the way they look. And even though no one can tell the difference, they don't like knowing such a differences exists, and as usual, are afraid of these differences, and want to lash out at them, and punish them, and make them go away.

 

[shagster01]

Thus sayeth the Lord Shagster!

As opposed to Lord PureX saying who I must let in to the bathroom that I own.

 

[PureX]

As opposed to Lord PureX saying who I must let in to the bathroom that I own.

It doesn't matter who "owns" the public restroom, it's still a public decision who uses it, not the "owner's".

I'm not declaring who gets to use which public restrooms. I'm simply pointing out that there is no way to enforce a law based on people's genitalia because no one knows what's under anyone else's clothes. And the only reason politicians propose these laws is because they want to pander to people's fear and bigotry, which is exactly why these laws don't hold up in the courts.

 

[kmoney]

If bathrooms were only about relieving oneself, biologically, there would be no reason to separate the sexes in the first place. A toilet works just as well for anyone, regardless of their sex.

It's sexual identity that determines the separation, not biology. Women want to be treated differently from men, and men want to be treated differently from women. This is not a biological desire. It's a desire based on self-identification. On how we think of ourselves, and on how we want others to think of us.

:up: I agree and was about to say something similar. Biologically and practically there is no reason to separate bathrooms at all. Men can use urinals but that by itself doesn't necessitate separation. We separate them based on the desire for privacy and security because of how each gender functions in society. Whether or not there needs to be two categories (sex vs gender identity) is a different question I think, but there is at least a logic to it because bathrooms aren't separated based on biology alone.

Most transgender people are not detectable in public, or in a public bathroom. The few who might be are so small in number as to be insignificant. And no one knows what their sex is, anyway. So they could just be a very masculine looking woman or a very feminine looking man. And frankly, who really cares but a bigot, anyway?

This whole debate is once again about bigotry, and people wanting the right to discriminate and punish anyone they don't approve of. It has nothing at all to do with who is actually using which public restroom.

This all started because a law was made to allow people to use the facilities that corresponded with their identity. If no one knows anyway and no one cares then what problem were they attempting to solve?

 

[shagster01]

:up: I agree and was about to say something similar. Biologically and practically there is no reason to separate bathrooms at all. Men can use urinals but that by itself doesn't necessitate separation. We separate them based on the desire for privacy and security because of how each gender functions in society. Whether or not there needs to be two categories (sex vs gender identity) is a different question I think, but there is at least a logic to it because bathrooms aren't separated based on biology alone.


This all started because a law was made to allow people to use the facilities that corresponded with their identity. If no one knows anyway and no one cares then what problem were they attempting to solve?

If it doesn't matter what bathrooms people use, why are Trannies making such a fuss about what bathroom they use?

If it doesn't matter to you then stay out of the argument.

 

[shagster01]

It doesn't matter who "owns" the public restroom, it's still a public decision who uses it, not the "owner's".

By "public" you mean Obama?

 

[kmoney]

If it doesn't matter what bathrooms people use, why are Trannies making such a fuss about what bathroom they use?

I was saying biology by itself isn't why it matters.

 

[glassjester]

Or is the state going to dictate who we are, now, too?

Not the state, but certainly objective reality should have a say in the matter.


Is it possible for someone to self-misidentify? Could someone identify himself incorrectly? Or is that completely impossible?

 

[PureX]

This all started because a law was made to allow people to use the facilities that corresponded with their identity. If no one knows anyway and no one cares then what problem were they attempting to solve?

The problem is that "transgenders" exist. this is the rub. People are now discovering that they actually exist … and are out in pubic! And they don't like it, because these people are different. They are "queer". And some people really don't like anything that's different, or "queer". They fear it, and they loathe it. And they want it to go away.

So they want these people banished from the public eye, and from public consciousness.

And then some pandering politician realized this, and realized he could make some political hay pandering to it. And "wallah!"; the phony news media has another "issue" to peddle, for profit.

Has anyone here ever, in their whole life, actually seen someone of the opposite sex enter and use the restroom they were using? Ever? Odds are that not one person here has ever seen this happen. And very likely we never will. That's how insignificant this issue really is. … Except to pandering politicians and phony news outlets, of course.

 

[PureX]

Is it possible for someone to self-misidentify? Could someone identify himself incorrectly? Or is that completely impossible?

It depends on the circumstance. Why do you keep trying to insist that one rule must apply to all circumstances?

Human beings are both biological, and psychological. And these don't exist independent of the other. So what we think we are matters just as much as what we are, physically.

I don't need a penis to fix a car or build a house or do any of a million other things in life. Such that within all these circumstances, my biological sex is irrelevant. Just as it is irrelevant to my ability to use a toilet in a public restroom.

So why do you keep trying to insist that it is of the utmost relevance?

 

[glassjester]

It depends on the circumstance. Why do you keep trying to insist that one rule must apply to all circumstances?

Human beings are both biological, and psychological. And these don't exist independent of the other. So what we think we are matters just as much as what we are, physically.

I don't need a penis to fix a car or build a house or do any of a million other things in life. Such that within all these circumstances, my biological sex is irrelevant. Just as it is irrelevant to my ability to use a toilet in a public restroom.

So why do you keep trying to insist that it is?

Please show me where I insisted this.

I'm just asking if it's possible for someone to incorrectly self-identify.

 

[PureX]

Please show me where I insisted this.

I'm just asking if it's possible for someone to incorrectly self-identify.

Sorry, I got two different conversations mixed up. My apologies.

Yes, of course we can wrongly self-identify. And we do so all the time to greater and lesser degrees. But this is part and parcel of being human: of being both biological and psychological beings. And we would be dishonest and irrational to presume that biology should trump psychology (or vice versa depending on the circumstance).

 

[glassjester]

Sorry, I got two different conversations mixed up. My apologies.

Yes, of course we can wrongly self-identify. And we do so all the time to greater and lesser degrees. But this is part and parcel of being human: of being both biological and psychological beings. And we would be dishonest and irrational to presume that biology should trump psychology, or vice versa (depending on circumstance).

So when physical evidence contradicts someone's beliefs, which data should the rest of society act in accordance with? The physical fact, or the incorrect belief?

Or does the answer change, depending on the subject of the belief?

 

[shagster01]

The problem is that "transgenders" exist. this is the rub. People are now discovering that they actually exist … and are out in pubic! And they don't like it, because these people are different. They are "queer". And some people really don't like anything that's different, or "queer". They fear it, and they loathe it. And they want it to go away.

So they want these people banished from the public eye, and from public consciousness.

And then some pandering politician realized this, and realized he could make some political hay pandering to it. And "wallah!"; the phony news media has another "issue" to peddle, for profit.

Has anyone here ever, in their whole life, actually seen someone of the opposite sex enter and use the restroom they were using? Ever? Odds are that not one person here has ever seen this happen. And very likely we never will. That's how insignificant this issue really is. … Except to pandering politicians and phony news outlets, of course.

Transgender people do not exist. When a man likes girl things and girl lifestyles he is a feminine man, not a woman.

I'm ok with feminine men. I'm ok with men dressing in clothing that is traditionally for women.

I'm not ok pretending that liking or relating with those things actually makes you a woman.

I like, write, and perform "black" music. I identify with that culture. I even hang out with many black friends. My identity is tied to the music I make with black musicians as well. It doesn't make me black though. It makes me a white guy that likes and does traditionally black stuff. I'm not going to join the NAACP because I do black stuff.