Not a thing. You're talking about rape in prison, for some reason. I'm talking about the word transgender being deliberately - and incorrectly - juxtaposed beside the word rapist. If you're agreeing with me that that is wrong, then you have a funny way of showing it.

Now stay with me. The thing the article is pearl clutching about is the possibility of this trans woman raping other women in prison. If pressed the writer would presumably claim she was not bigoted towards trans people and only concerned with public safety. Therefore for them to not just be a bigot they should also be concerned with rape in prison in general.

I agree, as I said. I'm just saying that the title, the headline, misrepresents the actual crime. I don't have an opinion on whether trans people who commit crimes should be incarcerated in men's or women's prisons - I really don't know, and I agree with you that it could be problematical either way. All I'm concerned with though is that the headline is clickbait and will attract the far right crowd and the hatemongers and they'll all point the finger.

yeah, my money's on the writer doesn't give a **** about dudes raping other dudes in prison.

isn't the entire reason they segregate the prisons into different sexes based on the presumption that the men pose a threat to the women?

I feel like the prison thing is somewhat reasonable especially since you are dealing with criminals. They shouldn't go to men's prison either though. We need to build a new trans only super-prison with separate wingsv for all 72+ genders and send all of the nation's trans convicts to that one facility. It's the only reasonable solution.

I do think with the bathroom thing though l feel like people are full of **** when they pretend it's about safety since if it was we would have young boys use the women's room since it's obviously safer. Instead we send them into the piss soaked lion's den that is the public men's room.

I remember my little cousin’s were timed when they went to the bathroom at McDonalds or something. My aunt was like “if they’re not back in five minutes I’m going in.” Even then I remember thinking about all that could happen in five minutes in a men’s room.

I'd be willing to put $5 down on it being a Victorian era prude thing about fraternization.

Big spender over here.

I mean come on they invented Corn Flakes to stop mental patients from masturbating cause that was apparently the most pressing concern. Do you really think the people who created the modern prison system were more concerned with safety than regulating the morality of the underclasses?

Maybe not but i just think all those forms of sexual segregation are in place to protect women, not men. Maybe the original rationale was different but if we were to debate getting rid of those forms of segregation today the arguments in favor of not doing so would all center around either protecting women from men physically or giving them their own sports leagues so they can compete, etc.

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.

Corn flakes were invented in Victorian England?

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!

not true :bonkhead:

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. :nono:

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

Patrice used to call hockey "snow soccer"

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.

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?

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.

*

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.

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?

Well the things you believe can be described by a monkey whereas I am a leftist talking to a monkey and have to worry about wild conspiratorial interpretations of ideas which are often abstract and/or non-traditional. Have a banana and stfu.

Now, to answer your question, I don't particularly value sex segregation in general but I also am not crusading against it, so McDonald's bathrooms are not really a concern for me aside from opposing anti-trans legislation about bathrooms, but if one day our culture changes to the point that people start asking if gender segregated bathrooms are necessary then I'm cool with that conversation so long as it's not a fascist dog whistle conversation.

Micheal Knowles this idiot. :bonkhead:



They are so fixated on making transgenders out to be like they are predators preying on children which is weird and speaks more about them. They are probably chasers in secret.

source: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/cpac-...b0c78bb7430b1c

At least his friends probably call him a Mexican behind his back.

:laughing:

1) one monkey stocks the bananas and another monkey eats them. Don't ever get the false impression that you can pose as an intellectual to me like I'm buying that **** for a second. You're just another **** slinger.

2) you picked the easiest example though. Plenty of countries have unisex bathrooms and I already said I agree that's not a crazy idea. I tried googling and I don't see any information on countries that have unisex prisons. Any comment on that topic?

You say you're theoretically ok with the discussion of its not couched in dog whistles but I haven't been dog whistling at all. I have been much more clear than you have. And it's not because you are being too nuanced it's because you're hiding behind vague answers for something you probably haven't even fleshed out your views on.

The opposite of a monkey isn't an intellectual and you keep proving my point that I can't say anything vaguely non-traditional (I.e. trans prisoners shouldn't be discriminated against via biological sex) without you leaping to conspiracies that I'm hellbent on abolishing anything based on gender cause you're too much of a monkey to contemplate any discussion about gender.

I mean the only way you can have any kind of nuanced position on this is for it not to affect you personally and therefore you don't care rather than having an actual nuanced thought cause you're a stupid monkey whose thoughts don't progress farther than your dip**** father.

Wtf

This is like watching toddlers have the “my mommy” fight.

“My mommy.”

“No MY mommy!”

Because they’re too stupid to realize they both have mommies

I'm not going to explain how I came upon an article on The American Conservative titled "If Lenin Had Been Trans" but it introduced to my lexicon the term "triple-Hitler move" and I am going to start using it extensively.

https://www.theamericanconservative....ad-been-trans/

I want to know what a triple-Hitler move is but I don't want to read the article. Please explain

A thing Hitler would do. Googling leads only to this article so I guess the writer is some sort of genius.

Maybe it’s when you lose two world wars and an Olympics.

:laughing:

Or when your art is so bad that the only way you can get it displayed is to invade the rest of Europe and force them to show it!

If I ever get rich I'm absolutely buying Hitler paintings to dodge taxes.

Edit: Wtf the highest a Hitler painting has ever sold for is 12k. That's mind boggling.

Bind moggling.

So are you wokesters happy about Perversion month coming up?

Dear mods,

Is this Norg?

Thank you, ***got

Kinky is using a feather during sex.

Perverted is using the entire bird.