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.

 HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

You should get an inkling that something is up just from how much attention gets paid to trans women vs trans men. Why would a man want to be a woman? It doesn't make sense. Our society glorifies the masculine over the feminine - it "makes sense" for a woman to want to be like a man, even if we regard it as somewhat pitiable at the same time. When a man wants to "be like" a woman it makes a lie of the whole system.

Interesting that I was typing that I would object to that very thing of a female with male gender identity using the facilities with me as you posted this.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:

 HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

You should get an inkling that something is up just from how much attention gets paid to trans women vs trans men. Why would a man want to be a woman? It doesn't make sense. Our society glorifies the masculine over the feminine - it "makes sense" for a woman to want to be like a man, even if we regard it as somewhat pitiable at the same time. When a man wants to "be like" a woman it makes a lie of the whole system.

Interesting that I was typing that I would object to that very thing of a female with male gender identity using the facilities with me as you posted this.

Yes, our school allowed girls trying to be guys to wear pants, but still had to use girls restrooms and changing rooms. It worked both ways.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
And if girls, as in this case, have a problem, what then? Kind of shoots down your theory about the being about men and their silly ways.

Sorry, I'm trying to process what you're meaning here. It seems like you have the impression that misogyny is something inflicted on women by men. Generally speaking, misogynistic ideas exist in and are transmitted by our culture, which more or less exists in all of us, men and women.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
Women are objecting as they do when men who identify as men try to enter their restrooms and showers. For them your identity isn't as important as your bits and if you want to invade what is supposed to be a semi-private secure place for them when they don't want it, you are the problem.

I don't actually see anything wrong with a guy using the next stall over from me. They are stalls.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
I don't want a woman that identifies as a man using the same restrooms and showers as I do at the same time as I use them. And it isn't because I'm afraid I'll be attracted to her/him or she/he to me. For me, in my head, my gender and the girl by sex boy by gender don't have the same gender because for me it is a combination of sex and gender. So why does her/his head cannon (to borrow some nerd/gaming lingo) have more validity than mine. Why am I forced to accept an invasion of my privacy especially if there is an alternative available where no one's privacy is invaded?

Well, these are shared facilities. They are broken down on pretty arbitrary lines. Here we have decided that men will use this room and women will use this one. We could break them down in any number of ways. At present, we have chosen to break them down in this way. As trans men are men and trans women are women, they use the men's and women's rooms respectively. It is pretty straightforwards.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
Saying that because you aren't a prototypical boy or girl is not saying you are therefore a thing. People have all sorts of different ways of identifying themselves that don't fit neatly into one of two categories. So focus on expanding ideas to there being other options instead of pigeonholing people into categories that don't make a lot of sense like this person with a penis is actually a girl, end of discussion. At minimum you have sex and identity which may or may not match. In other cases you have indeterminate sex and identity and have characteristics of biological males and females and identify as both as well. That don't fit neatly into a box, but such a person is still a human being worthy of dignity and respect. Plenty of people will be fine with honesty and openness about it. Its when people start saying you must accept my version of reality as your version of reality and say I'm a girl and treat me as one in every situation even if there are some where that doesn't work for you, that widespread resentment, non-acceptance or whatever will manifest.

I'm glad you're open to treating all people with dignity and respect. Unfortunately, when you say "you are not a girl, you are really a boy and will be treated like a boy" you are not treating the person with respect and you are reinforcing a wider culture that treats trans people as jokes, freaks, others. They are not any of these things. They are just men and women who want to be able to go about living their lives, just like you and me. There does not have to be a big deal made about it.

If it's not a big deal they can use the bathroom others ask them to. It's not a big deal after all. And again why is their mental perception more valid than someone else's? Or put differently, if others have to accept reality as it is in their heads, why shouldn't they have to accept reality as it is in other's heads.

Regarding the misogyny...
So women are mistreating someone they perceive to be a man and it is because society taught them not to value themselves as women or something. And those or women just don't see how they are really just hating their own sex or gender or whatever.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
If it's not a big deal they can use the bathroom others ask them to. It's not a big deal after all. And again why is their mental perception more valid than someone else's? Or put differently, if others have to accept reality as it is in their heads, why shouldn't they have to accept reality as it is in other's heads.

Well, for example, I agree you are a man because you say you are a man. My agreement is not based on your genitalia, but on what you say you are. I apply this same standard to other people, including trans people. It's not about what you think "versus" what I think. What I think doesn't come into play, because I am not you. What I think matters for my gender, not yours.

I said them using the correct bathroom for their gender is not a big deal. It would be a bigger deal the other way around, because then you would have actual men who are attracted to women in the women's bathroom, for instance.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
Regarding the misogyny...
So women are mistreating someone they perceive to be a man and it is because society taught them not to value themselves as women or something. And those or women just don't see how they are really just hating their own sex or gender or whatever.

If you're interested, check out the book I linked in my earlier post (Whipping Girl by Julia Serano). It's pretty good and goes into it in some detail. It's a reasonably complex topic.

 TheMeanDM wrote:
I am of the"separate but equal" camp opinion in this matter.

It protects all parties.

The TG student avoids opportunities for additional harassment, for example. Do you recall what it was like as a teen boy in the locker rooms....towel snapping...for example...lol.

It also protects other students from being forced to observe genitalia that they do not want to see.

MY GOD, it is a penis. It just is used for making babies and going to the bathroom. Nothing else. It doesnt shoot poison, it doesnt insult you and it isnt a hidden weapon.
It is literally a body-part that is no different from your nose, your finger, you bicep or anything else.
It is a penis, we all have one here and we know how unharmful it is.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 TheMeanDM wrote:
I am of the"separate but equal" camp opinion in this matter.

It protects all parties.

The TG student avoids opportunities for additional harassment, for example. Do you recall what it was like as a teen boy in the locker rooms....towel snapping...for example...lol.

It also protects other students from being forced to observe genitalia that they do not want to see.

MY GOD, it is a penis. It just is used for making babies and going to the bathroom. Nothing else. It doesnt shoot poison, it doesnt insult you and it isnt a hidden weapon.
It is literally a body-part that is no different from your nose, your finger, you bicep or anything else.
It is a penis, we all have one here and we know how unharmful it is.

I don't know what you're talking about, mine can cut diamond and has a high voltage warning

Just throwing this out but would it make sense to ban kids from making these kind of life changing decisions until they are old enough to appreciate them? I mean, in the US your not allowed to join the military until you are a certain age so you can make a responsible decision, you aren't allowed to go to a bar and order a drink until your 21. So why are you allowed to say "im a Girl" or "Im a boy" when you are 10 or even younger?

I understand that this would cause other problems but realistically I don't think a person is capable of making such a life changing decision until they are at least almost completely done developing their brains say 18 or 20. (Age 25 is when the brain is fully matured according to research)

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Just throwing this out but would it make sense to ban kids from making these kind of life changing decisions until they are old enough to appreciate them? I mean, in the US your not allowed to join the military until you are a certain age so you can make a responsible decision, you aren't allowed to go to a bar and order a drink until your 21. So why are you allowed to say "im a Girl" or "Im a boy" when you are 10 or even younger?

Research frankly. Many many people that young feel that way

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:

Don't you think that these girls have a right to 'bodily privacy'?

That's an interesting question, given that we are presumably discussing group facilities. Should all students be granted access to individual facilities?

I was thinking the same myself.

Public swimming pools in the UK generally have individual cubicles for changing, though the male and female areas are segregated.

Of course teenagers are a lot more worried about their bodies and sexuality than mature adults.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Just throwing this out but would it make sense to ban kids from making these kind of life changing decisions until they are old enough to appreciate them? I mean, in the US your not allowed to join the military until you are a certain age so you can make a responsible decision, you aren't allowed to go to a bar and order a drink until your 21. So why are you allowed to say "im a Girl" or "Im a boy" when you are 10 or even younger?

I understand that this would cause other problems but realistically I don't think a person is capable of making such a life changing decision until they are at least almost completely done developing their brains say 18 or 20. (Age 25 is when the brain is fully matured according to research)

I am of the same mind. Like we as a society freely admit that children's brains are too full of stupid to make certain decisions. It's why we have a driving age, a smoking age, a drinking age, an age of majority, all of that. On average, we have come up with the idea that a person under that age simply cannot make a rational decision and so we make a decision for them.

However, if someone decides they are actually a girl at age 13 we are supposed to respect that and shut up? If someone wants to be emancipated before they are 18 to gain the power to take personal responsibility and sign legal binding contracts we make them go to court to prove it, right?

If someone goes to an actual doctor and is diagnosed as having some sort of chromosomal screw up, sure I'd be willing to play ball; but we should not be letting people under 18 self diagnose themselves for things of such magnitude. Let alone a 13 year old. When I was 13 I would probably have self identified as an autobot.

 Grey Templar wrote:


Its not a girl with a penis. Its a boy who is claiming he is a girl.

This person may be genuinely confused and think he is a member of the opposite sex, but that doesn't change the fact that he is still a boy. I can self identify as a watermelon, but that doesn't make me a watermelon. The only way to be completely unbiased is to separate everyone by what is actually between your legs. Whats that? You say you are uncomfortable changing in the guys locker room? Well too bad, 90% of the other boys are uncomfortable with it too. I'd rather you just be uncomfortable than deal with the problem of opening up the girl's locker room to any boy who wants to claim he's actually a girl, giving him free reign to get some panty shots, or vice verse.

What.

Do you have anything at all indicating that someone would actually pretend to be a transperson just to go peeping, or is it like lightning destroying your aircraft? (That is, something that pretty much doesn't happen).

Looks like an appeal to emotion.

This issue isn't black and white at all. On one hand, if the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights has the capacity to make and enforce the law that people can use the facilities that meet their (perceived) gender, then frankly the parents/students haven't got a leg to stand on.

On the other hand, these sorts of issues always tend to ignore how everyone else feels. What if the trans-woman is a 6 foot 3 and built like a brick gak house. How's the 5 foot nothing waif of a cheerleader going to feel about having this apparent girl getting changed next to her? How is her father going to feel?

It's not cut and dry and there is no easy answer.

Maybe Spock has the answer though: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of he few, or the one.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:


Its not a girl with a penis. Its a boy who is claiming he is a girl.

This person may be genuinely confused and think he is a member of the opposite sex, but that doesn't change the fact that he is still a boy. I can self identify as a watermelon, but that doesn't make me a watermelon. The only way to be completely unbiased is to separate everyone by what is actually between your legs. Whats that? You say you are uncomfortable changing in the guys locker room? Well too bad, 90% of the other boys are uncomfortable with it too. I'd rather you just be uncomfortable than deal with the problem of opening up the girl's locker room to any boy who wants to claim he's actually a girl, giving him free reign to get some panty shots, or vice verse.

What.

Do you have anything at all indicating that someone would actually pretend to be a transperson just to go peeping, or is it like lightning destroying your aircraft? (That is, something that pretty much doesn't happen).

Looks like an appeal to emotion.

Do you remember being 13? I can accept almost any adult who self-identifies as something other than what they appear to be, but I have a slightly harder job believing children, especially if they self identify and there is no psychological assessment (i.e. checking that the facts line up).

In fact, I'm just going to quote Bromsy, because he's already made the same point.

We as a society freely admit that children's brains are too full of stupid to make certain decisions. It's why we have a driving age, a smoking age, a drinking age, an age of majority, all of that. On average, we have come up with the idea that a person under that age simply cannot make a rational decision and so we make a decision for them.

That's not to say that I agree with Grey Templar, merely that I disagree that taking the word of a child at face value is something we should automatically do.

 Ashiraya wrote:

Spoiler:

 Swastakowey wrote:
I do disagree it has anything to do with a hatred of women. I find it hard to believe anyone who is a man can hate a women.

Spoilered because this is slightly OT. Sorry guys, but I simply must adress this.

Just out of curiousity, Swastakowey, are you sure no men hate women? Is this love and respect? If all men in your country were subjected to this treatment, do you think it would be justified to call it misandry?

You point to how women are treated over there but how many men got butchered by that group? Hint, more than women, I have seen endless videos of Taliban and similar groups killing men in all manner of ways and they specifically went on massacres of civilians (when they don't mention women and children in these massacres it means men are the victims). That is not women hatred but another kind of hatred based on more than just gender (since they do not only target women,, surely the hatred is based on something else yes?). So no I would not call it misandry.

Is male only conscription misandry? No, its just sensible if you want your country to survive a conflict. You can point to examples where a gender has issues but this does not equal a hatred of women or men. In fact, from their perspective they could very well be trying to do whats best (in their view) for people. I find it hard to believe anyone can hate a women.

Look at the synonyms for hate:

loathe, detest, dislike greatly, abhor, abominate, despise, execrate, feel aversion towards, feel revulsion towards, feel hostile towards, be repelled by, be revolted by, regard with disgust, not be able to bear/stand, be unable to stomach, find intolerable, shudder at, recoil from, shrink from

I doubt any man or woman could ever feel this way towards the opposite sex. Maybe against a specific person or group, but a whole gender? Well they would likely die a virgin because how can you sleep with something you feel "revulsion" to? It goes against the nature of a species that breeds.


Just some of the few sick things the Taliban has done to people:

The “castration” of the former Afghan president, Najibullah in 1996. The Taliban “dragged his body behind a jeep for several rounds of the palace and then shot him dead”. The 1998 massacre of 600 Uzbeks in the province of Faryab. “Western aid workers… said civilians were dragged from their homes, lined up and shot.” Other reports include accounts from refugees and human rights groups of the beating of infants, killing of children and hanging of bodies from lampposts. 8,000 people died by the following: hundreds of people were packed into containers where they suffocated when the doors were locked in the searing midday heat. Men, women and children were shot in their homes and on the street, and hospital patients were murdered in their beds.Mazar-e-Sharif was overrun by the Taliban, who have imposed the world's most extreme interpretation of Islam, barring women from education, banning television and forcing men to wear beards. The Taliban fighters swept through the city, firing heavy machineguns mounted on pickup trucks. One man described how the streets were covered with bodies and blood. The Taliban, he said, forbade anyone to bury the corpses for six days.On the second day, according to numerous witnesses, the Taliban began a house-to-house search for Hazara men. Hazaras, descended from Mongols, are easy to recognise by their distinctive Asiatic features compared with the ethnic Pashtuns who make up the ranks of the Taliban. They share their Shia faith with Iran, while the Taliban are Sunni Muslims.A witness whose testimony is described as "extremely reliable" by aid officials said most of the victims had been shot in the head, the chest and the testicles. Others had been slaughtered in what he called "the halal way" - by having their throats slit. Men not murdered on the spot were "stuffed into containers after being badly beaten", said another witness. He saw the doors opened on a container after all the men inside had died from suffocation.

There is more, but that does not sound like a group that "hates women", sounds like a group that hates many people regardless of gender.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
Unfortunately certain members of the victim class don't see it that way.

Yes, the "white Christians" can be a tricky bunch, demanding special treatment and respect while not in any way realising they are not returning the favour.

What do white Christians have to do with girls not wanting to be exposed to penises while they are in various states of undress themselves? And you are giving lectures on straw men and appeals to emotion?

So hundreds must be violated in their most private and vulnerable moments to make one a bit happier.

Strawman and appeal to emotion.

Where is the straw man? People are advancing the argument that biological males should be allowed in locations where they and biological females are likely to be in various stages of undress, and that those who don't want to be in that situation are bigots who need to grow up. Changing and answering the call of nature are among our most private moments. People do feel vulnerable in those moments. The number of people who would feel violated by having someone with a penis around at those times easily exceeds hundreds, and is much larger than the number of people who have gender identity issues. That I've highlighted the ultimate effect of the argument in concise terms is not the creation of a straw man.

The entire premise of the side that you support in based on speak to emotion not logic, so please spare me the appeal to emotion handwringing. It is suggested that the boy (that's what cold logical biological reality says he is) who is the starting point for this discussion wishes to ignore reality (that he is a boy) and expects everyone to do the same treating him as a girl when he is in fact a boy. Why should we do this? Because he will feel better if we do. Why should we care how he feels? Because caring about people's emotions is the right thing to do. Ok, if that's the case then how about caring about the emotions of people who don't want to be exposed to a penis? You can't have it both ways.

Reasonable compromise in the form of providing an additional neutral environment available to all is unacceptable, and to propose the same is to expose one's self as a monster.

It remains to be seen that the proposed compromise was reasonable. Certainly there are many issues with providing a segregated changing and toileting area for people that some people don't feel belong in with other groups. There are many potential solutions and compromises possible in these types of situations; some better than others. Suggesting one does not make you a monster (appeal to emotion); stacking the suggestion and argument to unduely harm one or more of the involved parties makes you a monster, as does utterly refusing to inform yourself of the situation.

Is anyone here suggesting trying to harm Lila or other similar persons? Yet when people say let's protect the girls that don't want to be around a penis, words like "bigot", "ignorant", "segregationist", or your pejorative use of "white Christian" start getting tossed around liberally. Curiously you, an apparent champion of logic, aren't bothered by, and are even willing to dabble in the use of these logically fallacious ploys.

All must conform in thought, word and deed. Those who do not should be second class citizens at best.

So sayeth the LORD!

Oh, wait...

(Strawman, hyperbole and appeal to emotion).

Not really. Here in this thread those who say let the biological females keep privacy from biological males have been called bigots, segregationists (an emotional appeal using a loaded word you haven't bothered to correct) . I see posts that fail to accept views that vaginas shouldn't have to be in the same room as penises when clothes are going to be removed as reasonable or acceptable. You dismiss them as uniformed. It has been said here that if a biological female doesn't want to use the facility with a biological male, the female shouldn't get to use it at all. Sounds like second class citizen status to me. The take away is the idea of "accept whatever we tell you to and no we won't accept anything else". In other words conform in word, thought and deed or we will label you or do other bad stuff like not let you pee.

Wow... This thread is growing so quickly! I can't read it all.

In any case, to me the solution seems simple. Just say that the changing rooms are divided by biological sex, not by gender. Problem solved and no need for "gender-neutral" nonsense which imo solves nothing (what the hell is 'gender-neutral' supposed to be anyway?)


Also, how come this transgender thing seems to be such an issue in the US but not in the Netherlands or most other European countries?

You can fix being ignorant about a subject. But when people just keep on repeating the same thing over and over again after you try to explain how something actually works it usually means that it is time to abandon the thread and let the echo chamber continue.

IMO, transes are third sex. Otherwise, they can cut off penis and somehow make another hole and problem solved, If they refuse, they are still male.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Wow... This thread is growing so quickly! I can't read it all.

In any case, to me the solution seems simple. Just say that the changing rooms are divided by biological sex, not by gender. Problem solved and no need for "gender-neutral" nonsense which imo solves nothing (what the hell is 'gender-neutral' supposed to be anyway?)


Also, how come this transgender thing seems to be such an issue in the US but not in the Netherlands or most other European countries?

Its because we evolving into a higher form of life. To the Stars!

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Wow... This thread is growing so quickly! I can't read it all.

Topics like this tend to grow very quickly around the time most of the American users are online. I don't know why, it's just something I've noticed.

In any case, to me the solution seems simple. Just say that the changing rooms are divided by biological sex, not by gender.

Then you end up with some people who look like boys/girls but wearing girl/boy clothes getting changed around a bunch of boys/girls. Bullying ensues, as well as psychological problems in most cases. Toilets are a different issue, as they should all have enclosed stalls.

Problem solved and no need for "gender-neutral" nonsense which imo solves nothing (what the hell is 'gender-neutral' supposed to be anyway?)

Starship Troopers shower scene. No, just kidding (don't google that at school). Gender-neutral in the context of locker/changing rooms generally means that instead of dividing two open rooms by gender, having one larger room with enclosed individual changing facilities, which is increasingly common in modern swimming pools. It basically gets rid of the young teenager anxiety problems of changing in front of other people, and apart from the space required, is a better solution.

Also, how come this transgender thing seems to be such an issue in the US but not in the Netherlands or most other European countries?

Not a clue. Probably because in Europe, we don't tend to have such a stark bipartisan divide along political lines. Kind of like how most of Europe doesn't care too much about abortion, in America, it's something that the two political extremes can fight over.

Not a clue. Probably because in Europe, we don't tend to have such a stark bipartisan divide along political lines. Kind of like how most of Europe doesn't care too much about abortion, in America, it's something that the two political extremes can fight over.

Be happy. if we're not fighting each other, we tend to try to take bits of the rest of the world. Onward...to Belgium!

 d-usa wrote:
You can fix being ignorant about a subject. But when people just keep on repeating the same thing over and over again after you try to explain how something actually works it usually means that it is time to abandon the thread and let the echo chamber continue.

I can understand something and still not be comfortable with it. As a parent, I can understand and empathize with what the child is going through and still not want her penis near my daughter in a school district encouraged capacity. I'm not woefully ignorant enough to assume that this person is just a pervert wanting to be near girls but that doesn't preclude the fact that she possesses a sexual organ that I only want my daughter exposed to after we have discussed the issue completely as a family, when we're ready, not when someone else thinks we should do it.

Again, I have the legal right to opt my child out of sex-ed classes but apparently have no legal rights when it comes to penises in the girls' bathroom and locker room at school; there's a dissonance there.

So, where do you draw the line? Is there a line between individual liberty and the collective rights of families to decide if and when their children learn about opposite sex genitalia? What about the religious rights of those who practice Judaism, Hinduism, Islam and conservative Christianity and how these religions teach gender differences?

This is not a giant community, there is one school per grade span and the HS only has 60 teachers and their freshman class looks to be about 60 students. If 150 girls walked out, that's a non-inconsequential percentage of the female student body.

I feel for the Principal of the school and district administration because there are no good options here.

Again I reiterate, we have rules in place to stop "Children" from making certain decisions and from doing certain things until they reach a certain age. Why is it that we allow minors to decide which gender they are?

I am all for equal rights and opportunity, but why can't these individuals just wait until they are 18 to make that decision? If at 18 you still feel you are a girl trapped in a boys body or vice versa, then by all means feel free to go to your local government office, county clerk or whatever, and have a doctors note with you as well, and then have them give you a photo ID legally making you a woman or a man. I am also strongly against ANYONE male or female, identifying as the opposite sex without first having gone to a Psychiatrist/psychologist to get proof that this is in fact the case. This isn't because I think everyone is faking it, but more to stop those handful of perverts who exist in our world from taking advantage of a loop hole so they can better get their "Fix". Because realistically I can definitely see some of these jerks taking advantage of equal rights transgender rules to go peak in on the opposite sex in public bathrooms/gyms/changing areas.

And on a related note, if the idea of making someone wait until 18 to "identify" is to long, keep in mind I am not saying they have to stop personally identifying as the opposite sex, And if Bullying is a concern because of gender Identity, I would simply tell them to report bullies and crack down on schools that refuse to address bullying because that is a far bigger concern to me then gender identity.

Because fething up a person for 18 years simply because other people don't know or believe that it is not just a case of simply choosing gender like its the flavor of the month is stupid.

There are many valid discussions about how to help transgender kids and normal kids integrate together and how we deal with that as a society, and that's fine. But forcing a guy to be a girl or a girl to be a guy for 18 years because you don't believe it is a thing is not a solution, it is damaging.

So, you'd have all children be considered genderless (though not sexless, of course) until they can decide at 18?

Sounds very difficult to make it work in practice.

 d-usa wrote:
Because fething up a person for 18 years simply because other people don't know or believe that it is not just a case of simply choosing gender like its the flavor of the month is stupid.

There are many valid discussions about how to help transgender kids and normal kids integrate together and how we deal with that as a society, and that's fine. But forcing a guy to be a girl or a girl to be a guy for 18 years because you don't believe it is a thing is not a solution, it is damaging.

I just specifically said they can self identify all they want, I don't feel children are mature enough to make that kind of decision yet. Researchers have said that the Human brain doesn't fully develop until around 25, we haven't even finished developing yet and people are talking about making that kind of a decision.

How can you tell me it is ok for a 8-12 year old to self identify as a female regardless of the fact that they were Born a boy, but it is not ok for them to do other tasks such as drinking/smoking/voting/military service/driving a car? We have age restrictions on everything, 99% of the time for safety or because we as a society have rules we adhere to, but these kids are ok to make decisions which could literally kill them later on (Transgender have the HIGHEST attempted suicide rate of any gender identity "41%")

 Ghazkuul wrote:
(Transgender have the HIGHEST attempted suicide rate of any gender identity "41%")

Well yes, I can imagine that being a girl but wrongly getting a boy's body and being called a boy constantly by others, even if you try to look as stereotypically girly as you can, is rather depressing in the long run. Not to mention gak like people pointing fingers at you and saying you just want to go in the other locker room to watch boobies, or women telling you that you are trying to 'infiltrate' them, or being made into a porn fetish online...

Thank feth I have never been forced to suffer all those things, but I have talked with enough people who have to know that it is horrific. I can imagine that the above person being told that they can't decide their gender until X years ahead and for now you will have to live with the gender we want to refer to you as/no gender at all is not going to make things better.

A young girl telling her parents that she is not a girl, but a boy, is not as dreadful as it sounds. If a few years pass and, after so much thinking and experience, she decides she was mistaken, she can always just go back.

Now, an age limit on hormone therapy, surgery etc. I fully support, because that is way harder to reverse.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
(Transgender have the HIGHEST attempted suicide rate of any gender identity "41%")

Well yes, I can imagine that being a girl but wrongly getting a boy's body and being called a boy constantly by others, even if you try to look as stereotypically girly as you can, is rather depressing in the long run. Not to mention gak like people pointing fingers at you and saying you just want to go in the other locker room to watch boobies, or women telling you that you are trying to 'infiltrate' them, or being made into a porn fetish online...

Thank feth I have never been forced to suffer all those things, but I have talked with enough people who have to know that it is dreadful. I can imagine that the above person being told that they can't decide their gender until X years ahead and for now you will have to live with the gender we want to refer to you as/no gender at all is not going to make things better.

A young girl telling her parents that she is not a girl, but a boy, is not as dreadful as it sounds. If a few years pass and, after so much thinking and experience, she decides she was mistaken, she can always just go back.

Now, an age limit on hormone therapy, surgery etc. I fully support, because that is way harder to reverse.

That is what I was saying Ash, however, I also support either a gender neutral bathroom/locker room for transgender people or make them go to the locker rooms/bathrooms that their gender says they should be in. Like I said this isn't because THEY are perverts but that some might use this to take advantage of the system as we all know they would.

I support a gender neutral locker room/etc. because it helps reduce conflict and awkwardness (believe me, many transpeople feel awkward with either locker room, albeit for different reasons).

I doubt people 'taking advantage of the system' is really going to be a thing beyond one of those once-every-three-years scandals we see plastered all over the headlines.