Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Revisiting the issue of allowing biological males to use women's bathrooms, and the Loudoun County rape case (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ekbeats
- Start date
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Yeah, I know there are several posters that don't like each other around these parts (and I understand I am in this group for some and have several I don't like). But IMO step too far is when posters claim others dismiss sexual assault, are racist, hate America, or other b.s. like that. I am always surprised when those types of posts slide, but people get dinged and TO'd for other lesser posts.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Seems more and more is sliding by these days. But keeping myself out of most of it because you never know when things get strict again.
So the consensus is that I should get suspended for calling out a post where someone says that "some rapes are the price we should be willing to pay" for a progressive policy. In a thread about a 14 year old girl getting raped and sodomized. Great, got it. 
I like Ivan but he was way out of line with that statement. It was dumb and it most definitely was dismissive of one of the worst crimes imaginable. Yet only one poster has criticized him, while you and sho direct your outrage at me for calling it what it was. Stop tilting at windmills. You look foolish.
I like Ivan but he was way out of line with that statement. It was dumb and it most definitely was dismissive of one of the worst crimes imaginable. Yet only one poster has criticized him, while you and sho direct your outrage at me for calling it what it was. Stop tilting at windmills. You look foolish.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Maybe I just start with the belief that people don't believe those things around here- ie dismissing rape. Ik is free to clarify his statements of course. it would take me a lot to post that about another poster, as I think the vast majority are good, well intended people.
But take it for what it's worth, I haven't forgotten what you think of me.
But take it for what it's worth, I haven't forgotten what you think of me.
Once again I used the word dismissive, not supportive. I have no doubt he’s a good person.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
“We have to make trans people suffer so that it will be slightly more difficult for cis men to peep on women.”
squistion
Footballguy
If you had bothered to read the thread, you would see that I asked to make the thread title change and he complied shortly after that.
Last edited by a moderator:
Insein
Footballguy
"We have to make trans people slightly inconvenienced so that women can have an expectation of safety in a place where they are vulnerable."
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
This is basically everywhere.
Like people have pointed out, it's not like bathrooms are guarded heavily or anything. Unfortunately there is very little stopping somebody from doing a terrible act like this now or in the past, whether they dress up as a woman or not.
Insein
Footballguy
No. If a man is dressed as a woman, women would clearly call them out and say get out of the women's bathroom. Now they can't for fear of being labelled a bigot. And no women are not the same level of vulnerable walking down the street alert as they are sitting in a stall with their panties around their ankles.
To say "Well if women have to be exposed with no recourse to sexual predators dressing up as women, then that's a small price to pay for progress" is just asinine. That's not progress. That's regression as a society. We are catering to the criminals and making it easier for them to commit crimes.
Last edited by a moderator:
Suffer.
.They can still use a stall in the bathroom that has been assigned to those who have ####.
A slight inconvenience for super tiny minority instead of putting all normal women on bathroom peep notice.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
This slight inconvenience is often enough assault, sexual and otherwise for both trans men and trans women.Suffer.
They can still use a stall in the bathroom that has been assigned to those who have ####.
A slight inconvenience for super tiny minority instead of putting all normal women on bathroom peep notice.
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
Both scenarios can end in rape. A trans woman goes into a male bathroom and is assaulted. A cis man dresses as a woman in order to enter a female bathroom. The rate of sexual violence against trans people is very high, so one could argue this is the more likely negative outcome. In a 2015 study, 10% of transgender report being sexually assaulted in the past year. Seems pretty, pretty inconvenient to increase your odds over 10%, because 10% is pretty bad.Suffer.
They can still use a stall in the bathroom that has been assigned to those who have ####.
A slight inconvenience for super tiny minority instead of putting all normal women on bathroom peep notice.
https://vawnet.org/sc/serving-trans-and-non-binary-survivors-domestic-and-sexual-violence/violence-against-trans-and
bigbottom
Footballguy
Godsbrother
Footballguy
This is the other side of the argument and I hope some people here do not think it is less horrible of crime if it is perpetrated on a trans person.
IK wasn't implying this case wasn't horrible and didn't matter but that the number of cases that occur in this scenario is so small that there are probably more significant factors that we could focus on to reduce sexual assaults in general.
The same folks here making the argument that this one case of a sexual assault of a boy wearing a skirt using the ladies bathroom means the policy is a bad one don't have a problem ignoring the thousands of cases each year of shootings when arguing against gun control.
I certainly don't want to turn this into yet another debate on guns, I am just saying that this thread just seems to me as an over-the-top example of one side going to an extreme to paint the other as bad. And let me make this clear: people on the left do the same thing.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Great post, thanks. We see the 2nd bolded way too much around here, and this is a better way of putting what I was trying to get to as well.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Thanks. This is exactly right.
The US is a big country. If something might plausibly happen, there's a very good chance that it will actually happen a few times just thanks to having 300+ million people living here. If we allow men into spaces that have traditionally been reserved for women, is it plausible that that might result in additional sexual assaults? Sure. Men are more likely to sexually assault women than the other way around, and it stands to reason that putting men and women together in areas where people are often alone and/or kind of vulnerable might result in a bad encounter. I expect that to be very rare, but probably not totally nonexistent.
So is there a potential downside to allowing trans women (men) to use women's restrooms? I guess so.
Well, what are the upsides? BB has pointed out a bunch of times that a lot of trans people are able to pass pretty well for members of their preferred gender. That includes trans men, some of whom look pretty much exactly like guys. What happens if we force those folks to use the women's room? Well, first, a bunch of women are going to freak out when some bearded dude comes wandering into their restroom -- it would be less socially disruptive to allow those people to use the men's room instead, where nobody would give them a second look.
But also, this would end up enabling a different group of sexual predators. It's just as plausible that some perv might claim to be a trans man (woman) who has no choice but to use the women's room, just to gain entry to that space. I'm a guy, and I definitely look like a guy. In a "you must use the restroom that corresponds to your biological sex" world, I could just say that I'm trans and it's not like anybody's going to check. Obviously I would never actually do that, but it's plausible and the US is a big country, so . . .
Overall, I think the costs and benefits add up such that it makes the most sense to let trans people use the bathroom that corresponds to their preferred gender. My mind isn't going to be changed by one isolated example of a rape facilitated by that arrangement, because I already have that baked in on the "cost" side of the ledger.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Along those same lines, I would be totally fine with unisex restrooms for everybody. Similar downside, but the upside here is greater efficiency in space usage.
Also, I think the relative costs and benefits change if we're talking about locker rooms instead of bathrooms. If a woman is worried about a guy being in the next stall, I'm comfortable saying "Hey, look, he can't see you and you can't see him. Your privacy is being protected -- get over it." I think her privacy concerns are exponentially more relevant in a locker room setting, and I'd almost certainly change my vote if that's what we were talking about.
Also, I think the relative costs and benefits change if we're talking about locker rooms instead of bathrooms. If a woman is worried about a guy being in the next stall, I'm comfortable saying "Hey, look, he can't see you and you can't see him. Your privacy is being protected -- get over it." I think her privacy concerns are exponentially more relevant in a locker room setting, and I'd almost certainly change my vote if that's what we were talking about.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Great posts as usual, IK!
So would it be a fair analogy if in the George Floyd thread you stated “some black deaths are the price we should be willing to pay" for a lower crime rate?
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
You and I probably both feel the same way about "defund the police" -- it's a bad idea IMO. I take police brutality seriously. I support the widespread use of body cameras, I think police should be demilitarized, lots of petty crimes that create interactions with law enforcement should be taken off the books, we should greatly scale back qualified immunity, etc. But abolishing police is going too far, and I say that knowing perfectly well that if you have armed LEO walking around, a certain degree of police abuse is probably inevitable. I can live with that in exchange for the lower crime rates that come along with policing.
Broadly speaking, I think it would be good for people to acknowledge that nearly all policy debates involve tradeoffs, and there is almost certainly some kind of downside associated with whatever your preferred policy happens to be on any given issue. That's okay. It's better to argue that benefits > cost instead of pretending that cost = 0.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
If we are talking assault and not just a strict definition of sexual assault I'm sure you can figure out that women freaking out because of the "biological woman" that is indistinguishable in appearance from a man is in the woman's restroom can lead to the trans males being assaulted. And this happens often enough that some trans males have asserted that there is not a public restroom where they feel safe no matter which door they enter.
And I agree that changing policies isn't going to be an immediate fix to this as people will still be the people they already are.
Last edited by a moderator:
AAABatteries
Footballguy
I’ve heard from people that the women’s restrooms can be as bad or worse than men’s. No clue if that’s accurate, as thank god, I’ve never had to clean public restrooms.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
Ruffrodys05
IBL Representative
As a part-time or full time bartender the past 35 years who also had to clean at the end of the night I can attest to the fact that women's restrooms could most assuredly be 100% more disgusting than the men's. Depends on the establishment and the clientele.
(HULK)
(Smash)
So, it does look like the one dude did attempt to cover it up at that school board meeting. He lied.
I don't know if that rises to the level of what a 'cover up' is in my mind is though, as police reports were filed and such. That dude just lied, probably because it was convenient to him to do so. That guy should be fired for not being honest with his constituents.
I still think I'm pro unisex bathrooms though. I know I don't like the idea of 3 bathroom types, and the mens/ladies thing is just problematic. No matter how you do it, some group gets hosed over. From my minimal looking into it, unisex bathrooms are actually pretty safe too.
ETA: To me, a 'cover up' is about multiple people and organizations trying to hide something, not 1 or 2 people in the same organization not owning up to something.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Is that indicative of your news sources?
I think this is a better update on what is happening without the OMG style and "insults to sociopaths" nonsense.
Max Power
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
(HULK)
(Smash)
I didn't love your link either, but I saw the evidence and agree, that dude clearly lied in the school board meeting.
All the other stuff is noise. It's 2021 and my brain has developed an incredible filter for just editing out that noise.
It's no wonder the father got so upset. Look at the a-holes he had to deal with. From Day 1 they were more concerned about the father's "threatening language" than they were about an actual rape that occurred. And then they had the nerve to lie about it at the June 22nd BOE meeting - right to the father's face. Tell you what - if that was my daughter and they denied the incident to me in public forum while other parents were harassing me about it (because they rightfully thought I was making it up) I would've done more than just resist arrest. And imagine being the parent of the second child who got raped after these idiots put the rapist back in school? Just awful.
He identified as a girl and was wearing a dress when he raped the girl. The Superintendent lied, and then he lied again. How he still has a job tells you a lot about the state of public schools in this country.
(HULK)
(Smash)
He shouldn't.
Although, I don't know why any sane person would want to be on the school board in Louden. They're also having these CRT protests/craziness despite not actually teaching CRT in any of their schools/curriculum.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
I would guess since it is a 15 year old we will not really know anytime soon. But it seems pretty stupid to double down if the student was known or thought to be "gender fluid" as is claimed. I guess in the "what else would he say category" would be that because the school's investigation is required to be on hold until after the criminal investigation (also addressed in the link) that he could not have known at the time.
I'm not defending the guy by the way, just pointing out what he said and guessing at what he might say next if the 15 year old is one way or the other trans.
Interesting reaction to bombshell news - criticize the the news source and then provide two possible explanations for the Superintendent lying and covering it up.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
It is only a bombshell if you get your news from such sites that need to sensationalize everything. I prefer a little less emotion, especially outrage when consuming news. But to each their own.
And whether the superintendent lied or just keeps stumbling over the facts the harsh reality is that him being the face of this topic serves those with an opposing point of view then my own. The sooner he is gone the better - fair or not!
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
As far as I know, the father of the victim is the source that says the rapist was gender fluid and wearing a skirt. There is a lot we don't know about the alleged rapist and the circumstances of the alleged rape because both the rapist and victim are minors. The email from the Superintendent to the School Board calls the rapist "male", which depending on your perspective could mean that:
- The Superintendent and board thought the perpetrator was a cis male, and therefore there's no deliberate cover up of a trans bathroom rape; or
- Everybody knew the rapist was trans but the email just said "male" to assist in the alleged coverup and defense of trans bathroom access; or
- The kid is actually just a cis male and this whole thing is being exploited for political purposes.
I’ve read numerous reports that have said the kid was wearing a skirt when the rape happened. Can you provide one report that says he wasn’t wearing a skirt? If that fact were incorrect the school would certainly have clarified it, even if through leaks yo the media.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
GoBirds
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
In retrospect this shouldn't have qualified as a bombshell either, but I admit that some of the narrative collapsing does come out of left field to me, it is unexpected. Even if it should not have been surprising.
That is this was not a case of a guy exploiting a trans bathroom policy to hunt out a vulnerable victim (at least the first incident) but instead a person hooking up with his date in the restroom. She wasn't a vulnerable victim that happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but based on her testimony was date raped in the bathroom.
Now I'm not suggesting "date rape" was okay, but I think it also changes the narrative of allowing a predator back into the schools to hunt out the next restroom victim.
