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.

Aydian Dowling, into the female showers you go!




You too, Shawn Stinson!



Get that vaginer in with the rest of the little ladies, Buck Angel!

If I was a woman, I don't think I would mind so much with them.

Apparently Texas is choosing to keep poor children from eating so they can discriminate against Trans people.

 skyth wrote:
Apparently Texas is choosing to keep poor children from eating so they can discriminate against Trans people.

They won't have the energy to rape each other, so it's win-win.

 d-usa wrote:

 skyth wrote:
Apparently Texas is choosing to keep poor children from eating so they can discriminate against Trans people.

They won't have the energy to rape each other, so it's win-win.

I read this in dewey's voice...

Anyway I would be more confused with a woman walking into a males locker room than a male having different genitals. Although I think the whole segregated locker room thing is kind of stupid, but that is besides the point.

 Ouze wrote:
Aydian Dowling, into the female showers you go!

Spoiler:

You too, Shawn Stinson!

Spoiler:

Get that vaginer in with the rest of the little ladies, Buck Angel!

Spoiler:

For every transsexual that looks even remotely that passible there are probably 100 male to female transsexuals that make this one look downright feminine.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Aydian Dowling, into the female showers you go!

Spoiler:

You too, Shawn Stinson!

Spoiler:

Get that vaginer in with the rest of the little ladies, Buck Angel!

Spoiler:

For every transsexual that looks even remotely that passible there are probably 100 male to female transsexuals that make this one look downright feminine.

That's a photoshop.

Come on man. Is this really the best you can do?

Hey when did curt schilling get a dakka account?

 feeder wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Aydian Dowling, into the female showers you go!

Spoiler:

You too, Shawn Stinson!

Spoiler:

Get that vaginer in with the rest of the little ladies, Buck Angel!

Spoiler:

For every transsexual that looks even remotely that passible there are probably 100 male to female transsexuals that make this one look downright feminine.

That's a photoshop.

Come on man. Is this really the best you can do?

So what if it was a photoshop? The point still stands that a VAST majority of transsexuals are NOT passable in any way. I could have done better, but looking for a bad Let's ensure we steer clear of offensive language, thanks pic that wasn't NSFW was kind of hard.

Also, why the photo removal Dakka???

 cuda1179 wrote:
So what if it was a photoshop? The point still stands that a VAST majority of transsexuals are NOT passable in any way. I could have done better, but looking for a bad tranny pic that wasn't NSFW was kind of hard.

You honestly don't see any problem with posting photoshopped pictures to support your idea of what transgendered people look like?

PS: "tranny" is incredibly offensive, on the level of various racist terms that will get you immediately banned for using them. But I suspect you know that and are doing it deliberately.

Also, why the photo removal Dakka???

Because one of this site's rules is that attachments and gallery pictures must be related to wargaming. Offensive stereotype pictures are not related to wargaming, so you'll have to find somewhere else to host them before a moderator removes them.

If your defense is 'I would have definitely used a real picture and not a photoshop, but finding one that fit my argument was too hard', maybe the argument doesn't really hold up all that well in the first place.

 Spinner wrote:
If your defense is 'I would have definitely used a real picture and not a photoshop, but finding one that fit my argument was too hard', maybe the argument doesn't really hold up all that well in the first place.

This is probably one of the most on-point rebuttals I've ever read on this forum.

 Ouze wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
If your defense is 'I would have definitely used a real picture and not a photoshop, but finding one that fit my argument was too hard', maybe the argument doesn't really hold up all that well in the first place.

This is probably one of the most on-point rebuttals I've ever read on this forum.

Unfortunately, it will most likely fall on deaf ears (or whatever the Internet equivalent of that idiom is).

I tend to default to letting women decide the outcome on this one. I'm decently confident in my ability to remain un-molested by any potential transman attacker, mythical or otherwise, so it ought to be up to the ladies.

Seaward wrote:
I tend to default to letting women decide the outcome on this one. I'm decently confident in my ability to remain un-molested by any potential transman attacker, mythical or otherwise, so it ought to be up to the ladies.

Which is a pretty irrelevant fact, since the myth of bathroom attacks is just that: a myth. If you're alone and isolated in a bathroom where someone attacking you isn't going to immediately get police attention it doesn't matter what sign is on the door or what bathroom policies are in effect.

 Peregrine wrote:

Seaward wrote:
I tend to default to letting women decide the outcome on this one. I'm decently confident in my ability to remain un-molested by any potential transman attacker, mythical or otherwise, so it ought to be up to the ladies.

Which is a pretty irrelevant fact, since the myth of bathroom attacks is just that: a myth. If you're alone and isolated in a bathroom where someone attacking you isn't going to immediately get police attention it doesn't matter what sign is on the door or what bathroom policies are in effect.

But the crime won't happen to begin with if you just put up a sign.

Why not put up a sign that says "don't molest anyone in the bathroom" instead?

I'm against these stupid bathroom laws, but I will concede that I would support a "Don't molest anyone in here" sign for the bathroom.


Still no prawns, though.

So, if it doesn't matter what is between your legs in the locker room or shower like some people here claim, then why not just have uni-sex showers at gyms. After all the ladies won't mind some swinging meat, right?

Why not just be completely naked in the rest of the gym as well, helicoptering on the treadmill? Just helicopter in, run a few laps, helicopter out?

 Ouze wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
If your defense is 'I would have definitely used a real picture and not a photoshop, but finding one that fit my argument was too hard', maybe the argument doesn't really hold up all that well in the first place.

This is probably one of the most on-point rebuttals I've ever read on this forum.

There are definitely pictures of non-convincing trans people. I just got tired of pouring through the mountain of XXX pictures that popped up with a google search. for every g-rate pic there were thousands of dirty ones. Believe it or not, looking at nude intersexed people and be quite nauseating for a good chunk of the population.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
Why not just be completely naked in the rest of the gym as well, helicoptering on the treadmill? Just helicopter in, run a few laps, helicopter out?

Yeah, that's kind of my point. People are claiming that having a pork-lance in the ladies room isn't a big deal, you shouldn't be looking anyway. If that were the case showers wouldn't be gender specific.

 cuda1179 wrote:
So, if it doesn't matter what is between your legs in the locker room or shower like some people here claim, then why not just have uni-sex showers at gyms. After all the ladies won't mind some swinging meat, right?

This is a valid point that has been raised. We probably should just have one shower/locker room for everyone, and get over our absurd cultural belief that non-sexual nudity is some kind of simultaneously horrifying and fascinating thing. It turns out that, once you get over that issue, having a bunch of mixed-gender people naked in a non-sexual context is pretty boring. All those other naked people just become part of the background and are about as stare-worthy as the naked people you're already around.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cuda1179 wrote:
There are definitely pictures of non-convincing trans people. I just got tired of pouring through the mountain of XXX pictures that popped up with a google search. for every g-rate pic there were thousands of dirty ones.

IOW, "trust me, the evidence is totally out there, even though I can't find it". If you can't find your evidence with a brief search then perhaps it isn't as common as you think?

Believe it or not, looking at nude intersexed people and be quite nauseating for a good chunk of the population.

Sounds like you just have some issues to work through. I personally find it about as interesting as watching paint dry.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Yeah, that's kind of my point. People are claiming that having a pork-lance in the ladies room isn't a big deal, you shouldn't be looking anyway. If that were the case showers wouldn't be gender specific.

I think your point is actually your terrible argument about bathrooms is losing, so you're trying to move the goalposts somewhere else. To go back on topic (sorry), I think it's atypical for me to see anyone else's bald-headed yogurt slinger on a typical visit to the bathroom. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a skin flute on a trip to the bathroom, ever.

While I agree that nudity shouldn't be an issue, I totally understand that it IS an issue for many people.

Ideally I think new gyms and school locker rooms should simply be designed to have many individual locking rooms. Everyone can get changed, or shower, in complete privacy. No segregation then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
Yeah, that's kind of my point. People are claiming that having a pork-lance in the ladies room isn't a big deal, you shouldn't be looking anyway. If that were the case showers wouldn't be gender specific.

I think your point is actually your terrible argument about bathrooms is losing, so you're trying to move the goalposts somewhere else. To go back on topic (sorry), I think it's atypical for me to see anyone else's bald-headed yogurt slinger on a typical visit to the bathroom. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a skin flute on a trip to the bathroom, ever.

whoops, when I said ladies room I meant ladies changing area. My bad on that one. If you look at my previous posts you'll see that I am more tolerant toward the trans community concerning bathrooms.

 cuda1179 wrote:

There are definitely pictures of non-convincing trans people. I just got tired of pouring through the mountain of XXX pictures that popped up with a google search. for every g-rate pic there were thousands of dirty ones.

Okay, cool.

But you didn't actually post any, is the thing.

I mean, I get that there's some 'non-convincing' trans people - I worked with one lady once who seemed to have a permanent five-o'clock shadow - although I have reservations about the assertions that there's hundreds for every one one that's 'convincing'. My real issue was the disingenuousness of putting up a photoshop with the implication that it was an actual picture, then falling back on saying that 'well, we all know there's plenty of people that look like that, I would have put up real pictures but the Internet is full of porn that I don't want to look at'.

I also get that the Internet is full of porn.

It's the sort of thing you'd see that one angrily political relative or family friend or old classmate post on Facebook, like that Danny DeVito picture that came up in the other thread. If there's pictures of non-convincing trans people and you want to use them to support an argument, post them. If you can't find them, don't try to use a fake one as an example. If all you saw was porn, then just say all you saw was porn or don't bring it up at all.

Why not just be completely naked in the rest of the gym as well, helicoptering on the treadmill? Just helicopter in, run a few laps, helicopter out?

Wait, you're not supposed to do that?

That actually explains a lot.

...I've got some apology cards to send, anyone have any recommendations?

 cuda1179 wrote:

So what if it was a photoshop? The point still stands that a VAST majority of transsexuals are NOT passable in any way. I could have done better, but looking for a bad Let's ensure we steer clear of offensive language, thanks pic that wasn't NSFW was kind of hard.

So your point is there is transwomen out there that are still fairly masculine? Is that it? I'm struggling to understand. You're only okay with transpersons if they are cute enough for you?

edit: derp fix

To be fair, if the United States would somehow manage to join the rest of the western world when it comes to attitude about nudity we wouldn't have any of these problems.

 Spinner wrote:
...I've got some apology cards to send, anyone have any recommendations?

A pop-up card would be the most appropriate thing.

 Ouze wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
...I've got some apology cards to send, anyone have any recommendations?

A pop-up card would be the most appropriate thing.

Perfect! Thanks, let's see if we can get that so-called 'lifetime ban' lifted!

 feeder wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

So what if it was a photoshop? The point still stands that a VAST majority of transsexuals are NOT passable in any way. I could have done better, but looking for a bad Let's ensure we steer clear of offensive language, thanks pic that wasn't NSFW was kind of hard.

So your point is there is transwomen out there that are still fairly masculine? Is that it? I'm struggling to understand. You're only okay with transpersons if they are cute enough for you?

edit: derp fix

The argument was made that women would be extremely uncomfortable with very manly looking (in other worded VERY passable) trans-men being forced into the ladies locker rooms. I'm just saying that the number of trans-people that look as convincing as those shown are fairly slim. The number of extremely passable trans-men is less than the number of non-passable trans women. If we are setting the standards of who-goes-where, then I say go with option that causes the least panic, even if it is imperfect.

 cuda1179 wrote:
If we are setting the standards of who-goes-where, then I say go with option that causes the least panic, even if it is imperfect.

And I'm guessing you aren't counting the panic of the transgendered people in question in this calculation.