Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Still doesn't mean the opposite doesn't happen.

Relapse wrote:

I don't know what it's like in your country, but here a man is far more likely to rape a woman than a woman is.

Men are also far more likely to rape men, should men stop going into locker rooms?

Relapse wrote:
That is the truth of it right there. Someone brought up earlier that they were scared a pre op that identified as the opposite gender would get beaten up if they were in a locker room related to what their pre op sex was. Has anyone here even considered the far more likely scenario of some boyfriend either alone or group of boyfriends going animal on a guy that is in the women's locker room with his/ their girlfriend(s) when he leaves the gym?

The difference is that if they go into they're in the locker room that matches their gender identity they can go into a private area to change their clothes, hold a towel in front of them while they're changing, etc, and keep anyone from ever realizing that they aren't just another person of that gender. If, on the other hand, they go into the other room then they just walked in wearing the "wrong" clothing, using the "wrong" name, etc, and broadcast a "I'M TRANSGENDERED" sign to anyone who might react badly to that fact.

A concern that was mentioned to me by both men and women I work with is that an individual who claims to "identify" as a woman, could be just some stalker or rapist scouting out a victim to attack somewhere else.

Why is this "scouting" more effective in a locker room where someone hanging out watching people instead of changing their clothes and leaving is going to be suspicious, and the people they're watching may or may not just go straight to their car without ever being an easy target? Why wouldn't this potential rapist watch for victims in a place where spending excessive time is normal, or wait in a parking lot or whatever where they plan to attack someone? And why would they be willing to draw attention to themselves by claiming a fake gender identity (they're certainly not going to be good at their act) instead of doing everything they can to stay anonymous?

Also, let's not forget that in most rape cases the victim already knew the attacker, so "scouting" for victims isn't usually going to involve anonymous locker room strangers.

Okay. So on the one hand, we have the rights of an already horribly marginalised group. On the other, we have a vague imagined threat that seems totally pointless. Everyone seems to agree a dude is not going to use the policy to attack someone, because the little woman picture on the door does not actually prevent dudes from just walking in if they want to. So now it's devolved into... they might use it to "monitor" someone they're stalking.

I mean, you realise how silly that is? They can just stand outside the door if they want to "monitor" someone. And really, you think some dude is going to pretend to be part of possibly the most misunderstood and maligned group in our society when they can just stand outside the door? And this is so likely it's worth stamping on people who are already stamped on constantly?

I mean, the threats being concocted are so unlikely that the only way I can imagine them amounting to something in the mental arithmetic is if the rights of trans people are given no consideration at all.

I can't stress enough that the rights of actual people should be given far more weight than imagined threats with no evidence behind them.

 HiveFleetPlastic wrote:


I can't stress enough that the rights of actual people should be given far more weight than imagined threats with no evidence behind them.

Except for the rights of the woman that reported a man in the woman's dressing room, right?

Not a man, but a women.

 cincydooley wrote:
Except for the rights of the woman that reported a man in the woman's dressing room, right?

What rights? The right to remain a member of a private club, despite ignoring their requests to stop behaving badly on their property?

Also, let's no pretend that it was just one report. She didn't say "I think there's a man in there" and drop the issue when they told her what was going on, she kept complaining and "warning" other customers.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Not a man, but a women.

If he had the stuff still hanging, he was a man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dogma wrote:

Relapse wrote:

I don't know what it's like in your country, but here a man is far more likely to rape a woman than a woman is.

Men are also far more likely to rape men, should men stop going into locker rooms?

CDC stats say women are raped far more often.

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf

1 in 5 women vs 1 in 71 men.

Relapse wrote:
If he had the stuff still hanging, he was a man.

That's a very narrow-minded opinion, to put it politely.

CDC stats say women are raped far more often.

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf

1 in 5 women vs 1 in 71 men.

I think you missed the point there. The actual point was that if a man is raped then the rapist is more likely to be another man than a woman. So, if you're sincerely concerned about preventing rape with statistics then you need to keep men out of locker rooms and other situations where other men could be available as victims.

 Peregrine wrote:

Relapse wrote:
If he had the stuff still hanging, he was a man.

That's a very narrow-minded opinion, to put it politely.

CDC stats say women are raped far more often.

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf

1 in 5 women vs 1 in 71 men.

I think you missed the point there. The actual point was that if a man is raped then the rapist is more likely to be another man than a woman. So, if you're sincerely concerned about preventing rape with statistics then you need to keep men out of locker rooms and other situations where other men could be available as victims.

Not much to talk about between the two sides at this point, really, since neither appears like they are going to convince the other.

If your "side" is that trans women are men until they've had genital surgery, you're quite simply wrong and missing the whole point of why people are trans. They are not trans because they thought it would be fun, or because they really like frilly dresses and want to be able to wear them, or because they prefer the activities typically associated with the other sex, or because they realised that women have it better in our modern society and they want to join the winning team. They are trans because the part of their brain that determines their gender says that they are the other sex. This does not really seem to be something that changes - it seems to be set at birth.

This is why people are trans - because their brain gender is not in alignment with the rest of their body. The only question is what they will choose to do about it.

On top of that, we know that denying people's gender expression is pretty terrible. Trans people as a group have close to a 50% suicide rate. They need all the support they can get, which includes being treated as the correct gender and not told to do ridiculous things that you would never ask a non-trans person to do, like use the other gender's changing room or bathroom.

Relapse wrote:

CDC stats say women are raped far more often.

Indeed they are, but that wasn't the point of my question.

 HiveFleetPlastic wrote:
If your "side" is that trans women are men until they've had genital surgery, you're quite simply wrong and missing the whole point of why people are trans.

That would depend on HOW one defines 'man' and 'woman'. Typically, in America, the terms are defined as fully mature males or females, and are determined by biological and physiological characteristics, specifically primary and secondary sexual characteristics, so he isn't technically wrong. Unfortunately, though, those definitions don't leave much wiggle room for transgender individuals.

That being said, the argument could be made that we (Americans) should look into attempting to change the way we view such thing and how we teach small children about sex (not the act), gender roles, and perhaps how we view 'man' and 'woman'.

Relapse wrote:
CDC stats say women are raped far more often.

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf

1 in 5 women vs 1 in 71 men.

1 in 5 hey? Ok...

Genuine interest, why would it specifically list it as rape when the study said it included things as unwanted kissing?

That seems bizarre as hell to me. To me, rape would be sexual assault, intercourse, with a form of penetration (I could be completely wrong here, quite happy to admit my knowledge in this area is lacking).

Actually looking into it that's a pretty piss poor idea of rape, considering it would exclude completely female on male (yay for wikipedia I guess).

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Not a man, but a women.

No, she said it was a man. Who determines when a person is a man or woman?
To me, this is determined by the body. But others may have different standards that I find hard to understand.

Relapse wrote:[ concern that was mentioned to me by both men and women I work with is that an individual who claims to "identify" as a woman, could be just some stalker or rapist scouting out a victim to attack somewhere else.

Oh, my friend. Let me point you back to further in the thread

H.B.M.C. wrote:Walking around constantly afraid of rape? Get counselling.

H.B.M.C. wrote:[You seem to be seeing rapists behind every corner. You've mentioned it in damn near every post you've made so far.

Sigvatr wrote:Yes. If you fear rapists around every corner, you're extremely paranoid and should immediately get professional help.

So, I think their concerns actually indicate a a problem with their worldview, at least according to this thread. You should refer them to counseling

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
But why? Why seperate from those who have balls from those who have ovaries. They are both Gonads.
I want to know, other then protecting them from harm because they hurt when hurt, why do genitals matter so much and who has which one?

Exactly why not just have one locker room for both sexes to use. But then again that's the point - we separate the locker rooms by sex so people feel comfortable.

Gender identity is defined by the reproductive organs you have (you could argue chromosomes but we now have the power to surgically change that). If you want to be a woman, have your manly parts removed and replaced with womanly parts. Until you have the surgery, your gender has not been reassigned.

It's time people just grew up and started behaving like adults. A gym locker rom is a place to gak, shower, and shave after a work out. Most of the gyms I've been to have shower stalls and bathroom stalls. Want to be private, go there. Want to change quickly, do it by your locker. Nobody is checking anyone out in the locker room whether they are gay or straight.

boyd wrote:
Exactly why not just have one locker room for both sexes to use.

I feel like just having cubbies or stalls might be the best way to address that, honestly. The truth is, I'd sort of prefer not to have anyone see me changing regardless of what is or is not dangling from their undercarriage unless they are Mrs. Ouze, and then as little as possible.

 Stonebeard wrote:
One, your kid shouldn't be more than a few feet from you at any given time, anyway, and two, in the case of young boys, they're already in a room filled with naked dudes. Lets face it, you should already be a DEFCON 2.

Going back to this for a moment, I found this to be one of the more amusing posts ITT. Well done.

The gym I go to has unisex changing rooms. It's glorious.

Anyway, I just skimmed this thread, so here's my thoughts. I am a man, I will go in the men's room. If you come in here and you have boobs, I will stare at them, and that's your problem. If you're either repulsed or attracted to my junk, that's also your problem.

I don't expect the reverse to be true in the other locker room, because women nowadays are being taught to fear all men. So I guess Trans of all types should just go in the men's room if they want to keep the peace.

 Ouze wrote:

boyd wrote:
Exactly why not just have one locker room for both sexes to use.

I feel like just having cubbies or stalls might be the best way to address that, honestly. The truth is, I'd sort of prefer not to have anyone see me changing regardless of what is or is not dangling from their undercarriage unless they are Mrs. Ouze, and then as little as possible.

I agree - locker rooms are only split that way because people feel more comfortable. I feel that teenagers should be split because of raging hormones but when you get older, it shouldn't be a big deal. Nobody goes into a locker room to hook up - it may be a huge porn fantasy but it's really a smelly place and if someone has athletes foot, you may catch it somewhere you don't want it.

I've been a member of 4 different gyms in the last 8 years and all of them have private showers. If you're afraid of people seeing your gribbly bits, then put your under garments on when you finish drying from your shower and come out.

 Stonebeard wrote:

 HiveFleetPlastic wrote:
If your "side" is that trans women are men until they've had genital surgery, you're quite simply wrong and missing the whole point of why people are trans.

That would depend on HOW one defines 'man' and 'woman'. Typically, in America, the terms are defined as fully mature males or females, and are determined by biological and physiological characteristics, specifically primary and secondary sexual characteristics, so he isn't technically wrong. Unfortunately, though, those definitions don't leave much wiggle room for transgender individuals.

That being said, the argument could be made that we (Americans) should look into attempting to change the way we view such thing and how we teach small children about sex (not the act), gender roles, and perhaps how we view 'man' and 'woman'.

I think this is a weird argument, because if you look at a person then your impression of their gender is not going to be based on their genital configuration. Much of your gender presentation is not made up of any physiological characteristic. This makes the discussion really strange, because if you ask people what defines a man or a woman then, yes, many will instantly say "their genitals", but that isn't actually how people identify gender.

But you're right that we should probably think about gender differently. Part of increasing acceptance for trans peeps is increasing awareness that people can be whatever gender without meeting arbitrary biological standards.

What I was trying to point out, though, is what actually makes you a man or a woman. A lot of people think it is the genitals, and it's not. The key to understanding trans people (and I apologise if you already know this, but numerous people in the thread do not and I think the world would be improved if they understood) is that what makes you a man or a woman is not your genitals, it's your brain. Somehow, your brain knows your gender. For most people, that does align with their genitals, so they can end up thinking the genitals are what make them a man or a woman, but it's not correct. Sometimes your actual gender is not the same as your body, but in our society we assign people genders at birth based on their bodies, and that's how we end up with trans people.

If you, person reading this, turned into the opposite sex tomorrow, you'd almost certainly end up in a great deal of distress, because your mind would know what you are, even though your body would be different. This is something that's happened to people before - the one from memory is a child who had an accident after they were born - IIRC, he was a boy, and something happened soon after birth that destroyed his penis and the parents decided to raise him as a girl. It did not work, causing him a lot of suffering, and when he was 16 or so he started living as a man.

This all gets confused a bit because we don't really have a concept for it in the language.

 Ouze wrote:
So, I think their concerns actually indicate a a problem with their worldview, at least according to this thread. You should refer them to counseling

Bingo... ?

While masculinity and femininity (gender) is based on the brain, male and female (sex) is based on genitals. While you can be whatever gender you want, you can't just say "I'm now female" if you have male genitalia (or "I'm now male" if you have female genitalia).

Most of them time I've been getting the impression that people have been talking about sex, not gender, but not making that entirely clear (though I could be wrong about that).

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The gym I go to has unisex changing rooms. It's glorious.

How does that work exactly?

Uni students go there to have sex? (Ba-dum-cha)
Don't worry, I'll escort myself out.

I've been a member of 4 different gyms in the last 8 years and all of them have private showers. If you're afraid of people seeing your gribbly bits, then put your under garments on when you finish drying from your shower and come out.

Pfft nuts to that. How can I go around telling golf stories in the gym to anyone, at inappropriately close distances? You're just taking the fun right out of it.

 Frazzled wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The gym I go to has unisex changing rooms. It's glorious.

How does that work exactly?

There are naked college-age boobies everywhere and you pretend not to see them while you change. It is somewhat of an ordeal.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The gym I go to has unisex changing rooms. It's glorious.

How does that work exactly?

There are naked college-age boobies everywhere and you pretend not to see them while you change. It is somewhat of an ordeal.

See thats not going to work. You want to see grandpa in the buff?

 Frazzled wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The gym I go to has unisex changing rooms. It's glorious.

How does that work exactly?

There are naked college-age boobies everywhere and you pretend not to see them while you change. It is somewhat of an ordeal.

See thats not going to work. You want to see grandpa in the buff?

Why not, it's the 90s?

*Aid whispers "Sir, it's 2015"*

Goddamit! Why wasn't I told!