The Batlord

And my point is that regardless, "protecting women" is either a post-hoc rationalization or a feint to cover for more insidious pseudo-moralizing. If there's an actual problem then it can be dealt with as an actual problem rather than concern trolling about imaginary boogeymen.

__________________

SGR

Corn flakes were invented in Victorian England?

jwb

I don't think it's as important as you do what the original rationale was. What's more important to me is the pragmatic purpose it currently serves. I'm sure there are all sorts of things we still use that were created based on outdated thinking but we still use them if they work.

So the more interesting question is what are you saying, that there's better ways to organize it and address those problems than sexual segregation? I can't really tell where you stand.

I think like I said they only protect women so it won't affect me if they integrate any of this ****, but I can see why they might want to keep it separate.

But it depends on which issue we mean. I think the bathroom thing could fairly easily be integrated if we had a less prudish society but again, I also think it would be primarily women who have a problem with it.

As far as prisons go, men's prison is so much more of a violent place than women's prison. It feels like throwing lions and gazelles into the same prison.

As for sports, I really could care less. Do steroids. Take hormones. Get CTE. Anything to win!

djchameleon

not true

This is a similar tactic of like Fox News where they want to scare their audience and shock them with outrage. I agree with you that it TG doesn't need to be included but of course they want to rile up a certain audience.

I was in agreement until you mentioned hockey. Hockey is kind of exciting for all the rough checking that goes on but yeah other net sports are pretty boring/lame.

that's disingenuous and giving that writer more credit than it's worth.

You are right to be concerned about that because that was their intention.

__________________

Fame, fortune, power, titties. People say these are the most crucial things in life, but you can have a pocket full o' gold and it doesn't mean sh*t if you don't have someone to share that gold with. Seems simple. Yet it's an important lesson to learn. Even lone wolves run in packs sometimes.

jwb

Patrice used to call hockey "snow soccer"

The Batlord

Again, you're assuming there's an issue in need of dealing with. Going on hormones has a massive effect on just about every part of a trans person, from their mental to their emotional to their physical state. The conservative narrative takes for granted that men and women are completely unchangeable and that therefore a trans woman is just a standard dude in drag, which is absolutely not the case.

__________________

jwb

So you're saying you agree with the segregation but not by sex but by gender identity instead? Or would you completely integrate any of these institutions?

Synthgirl

Yup. Even when I was living and presenting as male, I was never what anyone would call masculine. Trans healthcare and being able to exist as my real identity has completely removed everything about me that conservatives would consider to be masculine traits.* Obviously not every trans woman is me, but in my experience most of us want nothing to do with manhood.

*

The Batlord

I support the current societal arc of our gender segregation no longer being based on biological sex, but whatever comes beyond that I'm not currently super concerned with cause as a society we're barely at accepting trans people at all. But I am totally down with further gender abolition in whatever form that might take.

__________________

jwb

You have a very vague way of speaking.

To be clear the answer to my initial question was yes? You still think segregation is warranted but based on gender identity instead of sex? Or is the segregation itself just unnecessary?