http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/04/14/why_the_transgender_bathroom_wars_matter__130282.html

From Real Clear Politics...

Dan, you're heading down a rabbit hole with all this stuff and you don't seem to realise it. Quite apart from the fact that this is one study, and as such hardly constitutes a significant body of scientific work, two points immediately stand out that you're ignoring.

1) The fact that an MRI scan might show up different brain activity among Transsexual men makes them different for sure, but it doesn't make them female. Ifd the findings of this study can be taken as established fact (which they can't of course, but let's run with it), then all we've learned is that their brains are wired differently to most people who share the same biological gender. That's not exactly an insignificant point of course, it strengthens the case for tolerance and should engender a degree of sympathy, but it doesn't really change anything fundamental.

2) So what ? What we're talking about here is a political/social issue, not a medical one. How does this information feed into our political choices ? It's not immediately obvious that it makes any difference whatsoever to the public toilet debate. Now as I've already said, I don't give a damn about the toilet debate as such, but since that's what we seem to be obsessing over, how would you apply the knowledge about brain wiring towards a policy that addresses this great issue of our times ? Perhaps we could require all men who wish to use the ladies to first have a mandatory MRI scan and carry a little card to prove that their brains are wired differently ? Does that sound as ludicrous to you as it does to me ? If we're not going to do that (and of course we aren't and shouldn't) then we're still going to be left with a situation where any man who declares himself to be a woman is free to use the women's toilet facilities. It's not something that I'm going to lose any sleep over, but the point is that this scientific study you're so keen on doesn't actually help us resolve any of the political issues concerning transsexuals in society.

Eventually, the application of the law does mean that people learn tolerance and acceptance.

Erm, I cannot agree with you there, Ricky. I see what you're saying, but you're at least 75% wrong.

When defending individual rights, and fighting discrimination becomes perceived as synonymous with "screwing with Republicans", Republicans have a problem.

Won't argue there. (Duh).

an, you're heading down a rabbit hole with all this stuff and you don't seem to realise it.

Speaking of the rabbit hole, some of this thread has been right out of the March Hare! Sass has a point there!

I am guessing the author who disparages transgender use of their choice of restroom as making "gender as no more than what you feel or believe it to be" does not know of the study indicating their brains are different. I'm sure conservatives think that transgendered are just screwed up people coddled by a liberal society. But the reality is we used to have a society that tried to fit everyone-even if they were square--into round holes. And now people in a freer society are just being who they are, even if makes the rest of us uncomfortable. But we'll deal get over it. And conservative Christians can live the way they want to live, as well. That is what freedom is, isn't it? To me where it crosses that line is if there is insistence that women must accept transgendered men in their restroom. That is impinging on the rights of another. But recognizing transgendered as having a right to dignified use of a public restroom does not signal the end of our civilization. It just means having compassion for people who were dealt a real tough hand in life through no fault of their own.

I am pretty sure Sass that transgendered think the bathroom and locker room issue is a big deal even though you don't. I guess you are arguing that you don't care what bathroom they use, and therefore everyone else should not care, but the fact that states are passing laws that don't allow them to use the bathroom they want should indicate that a lot of people do care. Hence, this makes it a political issue which means contrasting views must be adjudicated. Other issues like jails and high-level athletics only affect a fraction of people and therefore might be interesting from a policy standpoint but do not have as big of an impact.

Sassenach wrote:Dan, you're heading down a rabbit hole with all this stuff and you don't seem to realise it. Quite apart from the fact that this is one study, and as such hardly constitutes a significant body of scientific work, two points immediately stand out that you're ignoring.

1) The fact that an MRI scan might show up different brain activity among Transsexual men makes them different for sure, but it doesn't make them female. Ifd the findings of this study can be taken as established fact (which they can't of course, but let's run with it), then all we've learned is that their brains are wired differently to most people who share the same biological gender. That's not exactly an insignificant point of course, it strengthens the case for tolerance and should engender a degree of sympathy, but it doesn't really change anything fundamental.

That was not the only study on that article.

2) So what ? What we're talking about here is a political/social issue, not a medical one. How does this information feed into our political choices ? It's not immediately obvious that it makes any difference whatsoever to the public toilet debate. Now as I've already said, I don't give a damn about the toilet debate as such, but since that's what we seem to be obsessing over, how would you apply the knowledge about brain wiring towards a policy that addresses this great issue of our times ? Perhaps we could require all men who wish to use the ladies to first have a mandatory MRI scan and carry a little card to prove that their brains are wired differently ? Does that sound as ludicrous to you as it does to me ? If we're not going to do that (and of course we aren't and shouldn't) then we're still going to be left with a situation where any man who declares himself to be a woman is free to use the women's toilet facilities. It's not something that I'm going to lose any sleep over, but the point is that this scientific study you're so keen on doesn't actually help us resolve any of the political issues concerning transsexuals in society.

Because for a start, it questions the theory that transgender is about "choice" if it is biological.

It does not "resolve" political issues, but it does help inform the Social debate. There is a difference between discrimination based on someone's choices or actions, and based on what they are. The latter is less fair, and usually less acceptable.

JimHackerMP wrote:

an, you're heading down a rabbit hole with all this stuff and you don't seem to realise it.

Speaking of the rabbit hole, some of this thread has been right out of the March Hare! Sass has a point there!

When people make assertions of fact, such as that there is no science behind transgenderism, or that the Y chromosome is determinative of gender, we can either ignore it and maybe run off with incorrect assumptions, or question them.

Turns out that there are variations between genetic and physical sex. Turns out there are studies that indicate biological, and even genetic, correlation to transgender identity.

But yes, the original situation - lawmakers declaring who can't use a toilet based on arbitrary absolutes (eg birth certificate sex) - is taking a leap down that hole already.

Sexual crimes are already illegal and already we try to detect and punish them. Criminalising or marginalising the innocent may well be a greater harm than what is prevented. Eg: trans male-to-female who looks very feminine being subject to physical attack by trans/homophobic when using the men's room.

And that should be a social and political consideration before legislating.

But that still doesn't get us any closer to an answer. Should transgender men be allowed to use female toilets ? For me I don't really see why not, but I'm not a woman so my opinion is irrelevant.

Good point! What are the political and social arguments behind this one?

Sassenach wrote:But that still doesn't get us any closer to an answer. Should transgender men be allowed to use female toilets ? For me I don't really see why not, but I'm not a woman so my opinion is irrelevant.

I have the same opinion as you, essentially, but I don't think your opinion is irrelevant.

Why do we need a law? And is it "women" calling for the law, or another lobby?

Oh - and when did we suddenly get easy answers?

Oh, I realise that there aren't any easy answers. All I was really saying is that speculative science isn't really going to get us any nearer to resolving what in this case are very much political questions. While I don't see it as an especially big deal myself, it could be that plenty of women are bothered by having what are essentially men using their toilet facilities. Even if this is only a small minority of women, it's likely to be a much larger number of people than the tiny number of transgender people who are also affected. As such there's a balance to be struck between the rights of two groups. That's a political question.

Sass

Should transgender men be allowed to use female toilets ?

A transgendered man who looks like Laverne Cox.... would have a very hard time entering a men's public washroom. And wouldn't be noticed by women ... (Except that she usually looks fabulous.)

A transgendered woman who looks like Chaz Bono would have a very hard time entering a woman's public bathroom.
But wouldn't be noticed by other men.

I imagine that transgender who have successfully transitioned and are passing as their chosen sex are probably using their chosen public washroom without incident or comment all over the US.
Its the one's who aren't very successfully appearing as their chosen sex who might be in peril.

I really don't think a law is required... If somewhere somehow a transgender person starts revealing themselves in a public washroom, the laws already cover that crime. Its another incidence of creating a law that is virtually impossible to enforce, and whose intent is to prevent crimes that apparently have never happened.
But the symbolism is important. And that's what the fight is really all about.

rickyp

Eventually, the application of the law does mean that people learn tolerance and acceptanc

e.

hacker

Erm, I cannot agree with you there, Ricky. I see what you're saying, but you're at least 75% wrong

.
Once something or some people become familiar, they are accepted.Its human nature.
In support I'll point to public opinion in the US for inter racial marriage. Before the law only 4% of Americans approved. Now its 87%

http://www.gallup.com/poll/163697/appro ... hites.aspx

The same thing is happening with Gay marriage...
And has largely happened with the acceptance of Gays and Lesbians in society. Its not to the point where there is no discrimination. And the recent religious tolerance laws are a blow against universal acceptance....so its important that religion not be a legal out for bigots or once again gays will need to keep themselves hidden to keep their jobs.

rickyp wrote:I imagine that transgender who have successfully transitioned and are passing as their chosen sex are probably using their chosen public washroom without incident or comment all over the US.
Its the one's who aren't very successfully appearing as their chosen sex who might be in peril.

I am fine with them using after surgery for gender reassignment.

Do the rights of others have any bearing on this discussion?

The same thing is happening with Gay marriage...

Ricky, have you been hiding under a rock? How many states just passed their so called religious protection laws? If that's what you call catching on then you're a lot more patient than I am.