If trans-people's safety are threatened in bathrooms, then what makes you think a trans-man will be safe entering a men's bathroom? When you actually dig deep and think beyond the statistics you are providing, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, or is realistic. — Harry Hindu

What do you mean "think beyond the statistics"? You're suggesting we ignoring the facts? Because the facts are:

Among transgender men who used women’s restrooms (i.e., according to their sex assigned at birth), about 10% were denied access, and nearly 11% experienced verbal harassment in the past year, compared to those who used men’s restrooms (5% and 7%, respectively).

Among transgender women who used men’s restrooms (i.e., according to their sex assigned at birth), 7% were denied access, and nearly 9% experienced verbal harassment in the past year, compared to those who used women’s restrooms (5% and 7%, respectively).

Whether or not it "makes sense" to you is irrelevant. Your intuition – or whatever it is – is wrong.

Well yes and mostly no. True a minority of trans women have "bottom surgery", but of those who do, which was the subject matter being discussed, almost noone has their penis removed without the creation of a vagina. Which was the claim I was addressing.

Interesting. So noting you have little understanding of a surgical procedure is now an "insult". Okay, I guess I apologize for "insulting" you. While you're right that few trans folks get surgery, that doesn't address my opinion on the status of those who do.

my bad, someone claimed that? People are just chopping off their willies to look like Allen Rickman in Dogma?

nteresting. So noting you have little understanding of a surgical procedure is now an "insult". Okay, I guess I apologize for "insulting" you. While you're right that few trans folks get surgery, that doesn't address my opinion on the status of those who do. — LuckyR

I have a perfectly adequate understanding thanks very much. I think your opinion is feeble and based upon nothing. That cover it?

Well yes and mostly no. True a minority of trans women have "bottom surgery", but of those who do, which was the subject matter being discussed, almost noone has their penis removed without the creation of a vagina. Which was the claim I was addressing. — LuckyR

It isn’t a vagina.

.
the muscular tube leading from the external genitals to the cervix of the uterus in women and most female mammals.

I have a perfectly adequate understanding thanks very much. I think your opinion is feeble and based upon nothing. That cover it? — Malcolm Parry

No, you've given nothing just like @Harry Hindu and the person before that. The reality is that we are stuck with mixed sex spaces. . . that means we need to give a solution NOW to any issues or risks that poses. The most direct answer is in addressing what @Harry Hindu called something along the lines of 'long term and time consuming' a process to handle issues regarding the asymmetrical statistics on rape/molestation/etc via changes to social/legal/cultural policies. What those are. . . everyone here is rather silent? They'd rather ramble about what we've been talking about for over ten years now.

You and him are silent. Paying it lip service in philosophical side comments.

Are you going to remove all mixed sex spaces in all aspects of society? If you can't and you won't then the issue will persist so the problem remains to be solved.

Trans people are really women according to definition 56. . . there are still mixed sex spaces and rape epidemic rages on. They are not women according definition 12. . . there are still mixed sex spaces and the rape epidemic rages on.

As @Michael continues to show through his own links there is the still prevalent risk trans-people have as regards using the bathroom according to their sex. That is why we don't naively stop at legal dictate and then wipe our hands of the issue as this continues via the inherent cruelty of the general masses that we are all familiar with.

I guess rape and molestation is fine as long as its done to the smaller group? We can go out to eat now, right guys? Problem solved. . .

The reality is that we are stuck with mixed sex spaces. — substantivalism

I don’t have an issue with unisex spaces with individual cubicles.

Are you going to remove all mixed sex spaces in all aspects of society? I — substantivalism

What mixed sex spaces need removing?

Trans people are really women according to definition 56 — substantivalism

They aren’t according to United Kingdom law. How are they women? In your view? What makes a trans woman a woman?

As Michael continues to show through his own links there is the still prevalent risk trans-people have as regards using the bathroom according to their sex — substantivalism

Then it is up to the authorities to provide a space for these vulnerable men. Not foist them on women.

I don’t have an issue with unisex spaces with individual cubicles. — Malcolm Parry

Do you have a problem with mixed sex spaces?

Eventually those people walk out of their cubicles. . . and see each other. . . in the same space. . .

What mixed sex spaces need removing? — Malcolm Parry

So we are going to keep the spaces which we understand to exacerbate the problems we are talking about. . . then that makes addressing them more pressing as you aren't putting an iron wall between men and women across all aspects of society. Wherever they mix there will be friction.

They aren’t according to United Kingdom law. How are they women? In your view? What makes a trans woman a woman? — Malcolm Parry

Semantics which I've shown are irrelevant to the core issue.

Then it is up to the authorities to provide a space for these vulnerable men. Not foist them on women. — Malcolm Parry

So are you going to pay for a fourth bathroom to be setup across the entire U.S. rather than just layout a plan to address the prevalence of mental health issues that select men have?

Is the plan to keep backtracking because you fail to ever address the core issue?

What rape issue!? We just need to add a fifth bathroom and a 52nd safe space and then it will. . . go away all on its own.

I addressed the relevant issue. Trans people are at a greater risk when they use the bathroom according to their biological sex and cis women are not at a greater risk when trans women are allowed to use the women’s bathroom.

So if your concern is people’s safety then trans men ought use men’s bathrooms and trans women ought use women’s bathrooms. — Michael

Wrong. You are avoiding the relevant issue. You are also focused on symptoms and not the cause.

Asking which bathrooms trans-people used before this became an issue is an entirely relevant issue. You want to avoid answering it because you are intelligent enough to realize that you've caught yourself in a logical trap.

1. If trans-people had been using bathrooms that aligned with their sex before this became an issue, then why did this become an issue? Where are the actual statistics of trans-people being attacked because they used the wrong bathroom instead of being attacked for being trans?

2. If trans-people had been using bathrooms aligned with their gender then how can there be any evidence of trans-people being attacked because they were using the bathroom associated with their gender and not their sex?

3. How is letting trans-people use the bathroom that aligns with their gender going to make them safer when they can still be attacked in whichever bathroom they choose?

All the other questions I asked are relevant because they address how realistic your claims are. You just want to keep repeating the claim.

The most relevant issue that you are avoiding is how do we determine when someone is telling the truth when they say they are a man or a woman? What makes one a man or a woman? What makes sex so special that one can identify as the opposite sex but if one were to identify as a cat, Elvis Presley or a Dark Sith Lord, well that is just crazy? You are making extraordinary claims without supporting evidence that their claims are true.

You can't even make a sensible distinction between sex and gender.

Whether or not it "makes sense" to you is irrelevant. Your intuition – or whatever it is – is wrong. — Michael

You can make it make more sense by not trying to avoid the relevant questions that you should be asking yourself. But you won't because it's politics/religion to you.

The most relevant issue that you are avoiding is how do we determine when someone is telling the truth when they say they are a man or a woman? — Harry Hindu

You don't need to know. Just let people take a piss in peace. It's not hard. Why you are even thinking about other people's genitals or chromosomes or psychology when going to the toilet is beyond me. It's kinda creepy.

You obviously haven't read a word I wrote. I'm not focused on their genitals. I am focused on their psychology. You are the one focused on sex as you are making a special case for people that identify as the opposite sex as opposed to identifying as other types of entities -as if you have some kind of sexual fetish.

It is you that is focused on the bathroom issue when I have shown that is a symptom and not the cause. It is illogical to even discuss bathrooms when you haven't ironed out the psychological issue first.

It is you that is focused on the bathroom issue when I have shown that is a symptom and not the cause. It is illogical to even discuss bathrooms when you haven't ironed out the psychological issue first. — Harry Hindu

I’m focused on actual people trying to live their actual lives. Trans people aren’t just some philosophical hypothetical. They exist and they often need to use public bathrooms. The studies show that it is safer to let trans men use men’s bathrooms and trans women use women’s bathrooms, so any law that tries to prevent this ought not be passed.

If you don’t understand trans people then fine. You don’t need to. Them going to the toilet has nothing to do with you - or anyone else.

Do you have a problem with mixed sex spaces?

Eventually those people walk out of their cubicles. . . and see each other. . . in the same space. — substantivalism

Yes. I think women need certain exclusive places for certain activities.

As for the rest I doubt we will ever agree. I’m not even sure what you think needs to be done.

Yes. I think women need certain exclusive places for certain activities. — Malcolm Parry

. . . but do you have a problem with mixed sex spaces?

As for the rest I doubt we will ever agree. — Malcolm Parry

You literally don't want to actually discuss it. It's not a case of disagreement as it's the equivalent of saying, "We've given women their exclusive places! We are done."

Then walk away. You say nothing else and give snide comments about how you 'care' about solving it but say nothing. You give no further options.

Your almost as bad as @Harry Hindu who's brilliant strategy to solve the prevalence of rape and assault issues is to add a dick scanner in front of bathrooms and he doesn't even have a second. . . or third. . . or fourth thought about the mental health issue at hand here. Paraphrased he says, "It's real hard and long term. We'd need to do a lot of work." Yeah, sherlock. That is why it needs to be discussed.

Someone is getting raped and molested whether we:

1) Have mixed sex and unisex spaces together.
2) Add new spaces to accommodate further gender identities or groups.
3) Remove by legal dictate distinctions between such spaces making them all mixed sex.
4) Only retain unisex spaces across all aspects of society.

It's almost as if those serial rapists, trans-phobic individuals, violent anti-feminists, and opportunistic molesters don't just take a holiday because the laws been written up. They don't just pack up their mental baggage and think now is the time to get that treated or fixed before it becomes a problem because a new woman's space opened up. In fact, it's almost as if they just designate a new target. If not women then men in women's clothing it seems. That or they reduce their high order criminal offences to work place harassment which may even result in criminal offences if the condition motivating this behavior results in them mentally boiling over.

These people have been discussing this topic matter on this forum for at least as far along as this forum has probably existed. Is proposing proactive solutions to that issue in all its aspects too difficult a task but posting the same semantic debate and back an' forth that you participate in for that same allotted time is more important?

I’m not sure what you are going on about. What problem are you trying to solve?

I’m not sure what you are going on about. What problem are you trying to solve? — Malcolm Parry

The prevalence of molestation and violent inter-sex tendencies among the male population.

What I've been talking about for how many posts now. . .

As you said in a previous comment. . .

I agree with all of that and male violence should be addressed. — Malcolm Parry

Thanks for your agreement I'm sure those rape survivors appreciate your. . . desire to. . . eventually. . . maybe. . . possibly. . . address it.

Just not. . . now.

Well, what was said in reference to post surgical trans women, was: "A man with his penis removed does not have a vagina".

The prevalence of molestation and violent inter-sex tendencies among the male population. — substantivalism

What do you want society to do about it? If you have answers i’m in full support.

Thanks for your agreement I'm sure those rape survivors appreciate your. . . desire to. . . eventually. . . maybe. . . possibly. . . address it.

Just not. . . now. — substantivalism

I’m with you all the way. But until you’ve fixed the world maybe just allow women to go for a pee without men in the bathrooms. Seems fair

Well, what was said in reference to post surgical trans women was: "A man with his penis removed doesn't have a vagina". — LuckyR

Which is factually correct.

Swinging by because someone DMd me here and wow, this old thread of mine is still going... ain't got time to catch up on the 15 pages I've missed, but while I'm here I do want to share some updates to the ideas in the OP that I've made over the ensuing years.

The first update is that someone long ago pointed out that there can be orientations and bearings ("gender" in the psychological sense, as in the OP) regarding sex and gender (in the sociological sense) separately, so there's not just sex (biological), gender (sociological), orientation and bearing (both psychological), there's sex, sexual orientation, sexual bearing, gender, gender orientation, and gender bearing -- six different things that may correlate but can come apart from each other, for each of which you can have a position on a two-dimensional spectrum of masculinity X femininity.

But then I realized that I have been conflating the spectrum of masculinity X femininity with a different spectrum of degrees of attraction (to another or for oneself) to the binary corners of that spectrum. But agender is not neutrois, bigender is not (for lack of a better word, this specific sense of) genderqueer, asexual is not attraction to neutrois people, and bisexual is not (necessarily) attraction to (that sense of) genderqueer people. What we need is a field (a value at each point) over the masculine X feminine spectrum, for both gender and sex, and for both orientation and bearing for each.

So you’ve got

• sex (biological), and
• gender (sociological)

and for each of those you’ve got

• what you are (your sex or gender itself),
• what you want to be (your sex or gender bearing), and
• what you want in another (your sex or gender orientation),

and for each of those,

• you’ve got potential answers in a two dimensional spectrum of masculinity X femininity (one or the other, both or neither, and everywhere in between),
• for every point in which you can have anything from 0 to 1 as part of your answer.

Someone a while ago made a joke about me doing quantum mechanics of gender here, and I guess I’ve moved on to quantum field theory of gender now.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

This is a genuine question to try and understand why it is important for all the various labels for the various phenomena to be not based on sex?
I am interested in why in 2025 that anyone even had to label themselves. I’m a bloke because I am but I also read Jane Austen, I love cooking and I love some other stuff that be seen as traditionally female. I have no issue with how anyone dresses, who they have relationships with etc etc. However, in the society we are in today certain activities and certain spaces should exclude men. Imho. For participation in sport and for times when women have to go to bathroom or get undressed. Why is this so controversial and hateful to some people?
I do say that a trans woman is a man. I am happy to address them as the name they wish to be called but cannot and will not see them as women. Why is that wrong? If people think I am wrong , why?
I find the subject fascinating because I see it as simple but people make it complicated.

It doesn’t. The 2% figure includes people with syndromes that only males or females have. A tiny percentage of people are ambiguous but that is because of developmental issues. It is not a spectrum. Do you believe it is and if so why?

I’m focused on actual people trying to live their actual lives. Trans people aren’t just some philosophical hypothetical. They exist and they often need to use public bathrooms. The studies show that it is safer to let trans men use men’s bathrooms and trans women use women’s bathrooms, so any law that tries to prevent this ought not be passed.

If you don’t understand trans people then fine. You don’t need to. Them going to the toilet has nothing to do with you - or anyone else. — Michael

You are focused on affirming the delusions of delusional people. I never said trans-people don't exist. I said that their beliefs are delusions, just as anorexic people exist but they have a distorted view of their body. You are the one denying that delusional disorders and mass delusions exist

You don't understand trans-people either which is evident by your inability to define "gender" and "woman". If you can't define either term without contradicting yourself then you effectively don't understand them either.

Those studies do not show that it is safer to let trans people use which ever bathroom they choose. It simply shows that trans people are at risk regardless of which bathroom they choose because they can still be assaulted in any bathroom.

Sure, I have seen women go into the men's bathroom because the line to the women's bathroom was too long. I have seen a man enter the women's bathroom with his elderly mother to assist her. The difference is that they did not enter the bathroom on the premise that they are a man or woman and entering either bathroom doesn't make them, or affirm they are a man or woman. Sure, they can enter whichever bathroom they choose, but it won't be because they are an actual man or woman. The problem isn't which bathroom they use. The problem is using bathrooms as a way of affirming the delusions of a delusional person, which would be like prescribing diet pills to an anorexic person.

Is it ethical to play along with a person's delusions?

The first update is that someone long ago pointed out that there can be orientations and bearings ("gender" in the psychological sense, as in the OP) regarding sex and gender (in the sociological sense) separately, so there's not just sex (biological), gender (sociological), orientation and bearing (both psychological), there's sex, sexual orientation, sexual bearing, gender, gender orientation, and gender bearing -- six different things that may correlate but can come apart from each other, for each of which you can have a position on a two-dimensional spectrum of masculinity X femininity. — Pfhorrest

Masculinity and femininity are different across different cultures, so not necessarily based in the biology of the sexes. If gender is a social construct, then gender would be different in each culture. If a trans-person travel internationally, does their gender change?

A social construct is a concept, idea, or category that is created and maintained by a society or group through shared beliefs and practices, rather than being inherent or naturally occurring. A social construct as something created and maintained by society would be the antithesis of a personal feeling. To change gender, we would have to change society, not an individual's body parts or clothing.

The social construct was created as a means of distinguishing between the sexes in a society that covers their bodies with clothing. Clothing evolved as a way of flaunting one's sex and resources, the same way peacocks use their tails. So wearing a dress does not make one a woman. It is meant to display the fact that one is already a woman and the dress is means of representing that fact when the dress covers up the fact.

It's not clear to me what delusion you believe they have. We've already established that trans men don't believe that they were born with a penis or XY chromosomes, so it can't be that.

And neither the DSM nor the ICD classify gender dysphoria/incongruence as a type of psychosis, and unless you're a qualified psychiatrist you're in no position to question the professionals – or at the very least I have no good reason to believe you over them.

The social construct was created as a means of distinguishing between the sexes in a society that covers their bodies with clothing. — Harry Hindu

Never understood where the leap came for gender to describe societal differences between the sexes to people wanting society to validate their right to pick a gender. Very dismissive of women and their status in society. Women fought long and hard to get the rights and respect they now have.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.