Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
The basic argument is for dignity, privacy and safety. It ought to be a given in society that women ought to be able to use the toilet or get changed for work without men in close proximity. Whether or not the man in question is actually likely to assault them is a distant secondary consideration and in fact is a regular strawman put up by trans activists. Why should they have men listening to them, or looking at them? Why should women who have suffered sexual assault in the past have to suffer being told, while at a rape crisis centre, that it is their responsibility to ‘re frame their trauma’ when they learn that the person in charge of the centre is a man larping as a woman (this actually happened in Edinburgh)?
|
I know you're not aiming that at anyone in particular, which ought to go without saying.
Given my long conversations with Dan over the past 2 decades, I'd stake my reputation that she'd never think that way or commit such crimes.
But as we all know, one person is one too many. It does happen.
I remain conflicted on this. I'm glad people like her still have protection in Law for their trans status. One of the only viable way forward to suit as many people as possible would be more gender-neutral toilets etc which of course will trigger many bigotted-types until it's been pointed out to them that disabled toilets have been that way for decades.
My employer has a LGBTQ+ forum group which is open to all, and we meet up each month. I joined so I could learn how to be a better Straight Ally, however, this does not mean I agree with all views put forward. This will no doubt be the main topic of discussion at the next meeting, and I'm eager to hear all opinions on the day.