Can we talk about the equality act?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

I am also not concerned in the least bit about being going to a public restroom and being attacked by a trans woman. I also am not concerned about my daughters going to a public restroom and being attacked by a transwoman.

OP here. Let clarify, I’m not insinuating that a trans woman will attack domeonebin the bathroom. I’m asking does the bill allow any man( who is not trans, not dressed as a man in any way) say I will use the women’s bathroom because I identify as such? I am not a lawyer and I interpreted it to mean this way, but I’m hoping that someone can clarify if that’s not the case. Here’s the bill:https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

This is the line which seems to make it a catch all:

“Specifically, the bill defines and includes sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation.“

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand your concern about bathrooms. There is nothing now to stop men from dressing as women to enter a women's restroom if they really want to, and yet this doesn't seem to be a problem in practice. As a cis-gendered woman, I have zero concerns about trans women using the restroom alongside me.

I don’t have an issue with Trans using women’s bathroom either. I’m not a lawyer but I think someone pretending to be a woman in a bathroom could be jailed if they are found doing something malicious. Not a lot of pervs do this right now because the law is not on their side. This new bill however makes it easier for pervs to do this kind of act. The issue is not trans using women’s bathroom, it’s the other people doing malicious things using this bill because it’s written too broadly, If I’m wrong with this please enlighten me, I really do hope I’m misunderstanding the text. As to sports, why can’t we just have LGBT sports?

At this moment, anyone who commits a criminal act in a women's restroom is subject to criminal penalties for that act. It doesn't matter if it is a man, a trans woman, or a cisgender woman. If it's a crime, it's a crime. This bill would not somehow take away the criminal penalties associated with committing a crime in a women's restroom.

At this moment, and for many, many years before now, transgender women have used women's restrooms without incident. People just didn't realize it was happening because they passed for cisgender women and no one thought about it. During that time, men have also had the opportunity to pose as women to enter women's restrooms if that's how they way to try to commit crimes against women, and yet that simply is not a thing that happens with any kind of regularity to warrant allowing legal discrimination against trans women. Moreover, to the extent the current state of the law does discourage men from trying to pose as women to enter women's restrooms for criminal purposes, those men most likely are just finding different ways to commit those crimes, not becoming law-abiding citizens, so the Equality Act is not likely to result in any increase in crime, except perhaps by anti-trans men who want to make a statement about this act.

Follow up question on this. So in the previous example, we used men who are disguised as wonen in women’s bathroom. Let’s remove the trans women in the discussion, they are not an issue as far as I’m concered. With the new bill, can a man( not in disguise, and not LGBTQ), say he wants to use the bathroom because he identifies as a woman?

All the Equality Act would mean is that transgender women cannot be forced to use men's restrooms on the grounds that they were born with penises. This bill would not prevent a man from pretending to be a woman in order to use the women's restroom in an otherwise appropriate manner. If that man were to do anything inappropriate while in the bathroom, they would be subject to the same criminal penalties they are now.

But again, there is nothing in practice now to prevent men from pretending to be women to use a women's restroom in an appropriate manner, unless you're advocating for guards at every restroom door who can subject people to a strip search before allowing them access.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

I am also not concerned in the least bit about being going to a public restroom and being attacked by a trans woman. I also am not concerned about my daughters going to a public restroom and being attacked by a transwoman.

OP here. Let clarify, I’m not insinuating that a trans woman will attack domeonebin the bathroom. I’m asking does the bill allow any man( who is not trans, not dressed as a man in any way) say I will use the women’s bathroom because I identify as such? I am not a lawyer and I interpreted it to mean this way, but I’m hoping that someone can clarify if that’s not the case. Here’s the bill:https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

This is the line which seems to make it a catch all:

“Specifically, the bill defines and includes sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation.“

OP, can you tell us the specific scenario you're concerned about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand your concern about bathrooms. There is nothing now to stop men from dressing as women to enter a women's restroom if they really want to, and yet this doesn't seem to be a problem in practice. As a cis-gendered woman, I have zero concerns about trans women using the restroom alongside me.

I don’t have an issue with Trans using women’s bathroom either. I’m not a lawyer but I think someone pretending to be a woman in a bathroom could be jailed if they are found doing something malicious. Not a lot of pervs do this right now because the law is not on their side. This new bill however makes it easier for pervs to do this kind of act. The issue is not trans using women’s bathroom, it’s the other people doing malicious things using this bill because it’s written too broadly, If I’m wrong with this please enlighten me, I really do hope I’m misunderstanding the text. As to sports, why can’t we just have LGBT sports?

At this moment, anyone who commits a criminal act in a women's restroom is subject to criminal penalties for that act. It doesn't matter if it is a man, a trans woman, or a cisgender woman. If it's a crime, it's a crime. This bill would not somehow take away the criminal penalties associated with committing a crime in a women's restroom.

At this moment, and for many, many years before now, transgender women have used women's restrooms without incident. People just didn't realize it was happening because they passed for cisgender women and no one thought about it. During that time, men have also had the opportunity to pose as women to enter women's restrooms if that's how they way to try to commit crimes against women, and yet that simply is not a thing that happens with any kind of regularity to warrant allowing legal discrimination against trans women. Moreover, to the extent the current state of the law does discourage men from trying to pose as women to enter women's restrooms for criminal purposes, those men most likely are just finding different ways to commit those crimes, not becoming law-abiding citizens, so the Equality Act is not likely to result in any increase in crime, except perhaps by anti-trans men who want to make a statement about this act.

Follow up question on this. So in the previous example, we used men who are disguised as wonen in women’s bathroom. Let’s remove the trans women in the discussion, they are not an issue as far as I’m concered. With the new bill, can a man( not in disguise, and not LGBTQ), say he wants to use the bathroom because he identifies as a woman?

All the Equality Act would mean is that transgender women cannot be forced to use men's restrooms on the grounds that they were born with penises. This bill would not prevent a man from pretending to be a woman in order to use the women's restroom in an otherwise appropriate manner. If that man were to do anything inappropriate while in the bathroom, they would be subject to the same criminal penalties they are now.

But again, there is nothing in practice now to prevent men from pretending to be women to use a women's restroom in an appropriate manner, unless you're advocating for guards at every restroom door who can subject people to a strip search before allowing them access.

OP here. Thank you. You make a good point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

I am also not concerned in the least bit about being going to a public restroom and being attacked by a trans woman. I also am not concerned about my daughters going to a public restroom and being attacked by a transwoman.

OP here. Let clarify, I’m not insinuating that a trans woman will attack domeonebin the bathroom. I’m asking does the bill allow any man( who is not trans, not dressed as a man in any way) say I will use the women’s bathroom because I identify as such? I am not a lawyer and I interpreted it to mean this way, but I’m hoping that someone can clarify if that’s not the case. Here’s the bill:https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

This is the line which seems to make it a catch all:

“Specifically, the bill defines and includes sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation.“

OP, can you tell us the specific scenario you're concerned about?

OP here. The most common scenario being thrown out there is that any man will now be able to say, I identify as a woman (with this bill), and use the women’s bathroom. My issue is that this seem to make it easier for pedos/pervs(NOT TRANS) to abuse the bill.

The other is the issue where trans competes in Women’s sports competition, there are reports /studies that trans women may have the edge compared to biological women due to testosterone( see nbc link on the previous post), if this is the case, then it seems it might sideline biological women. I think further studies are being done about this and that it is recommended that the testosterone level be measured before being allowed in.

These are the top 2 that I can think of, I’m not sure about other issues but these 2 seem to stand out to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

I am also not concerned in the least bit about being going to a public restroom and being attacked by a trans woman. I also am not concerned about my daughters going to a public restroom and being attacked by a transwoman.

OP here. Let clarify, I’m not insinuating that a trans woman will attack domeonebin the bathroom. I’m asking does the bill allow any man( who is not trans, not dressed as a man in any way) say I will use the women’s bathroom because I identify as such? I am not a lawyer and I interpreted it to mean this way, but I’m hoping that someone can clarify if that’s not the case. Here’s the bill:https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

This is the line which seems to make it a catch all:

“Specifically, the bill defines and includes sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation.“

OP, can you tell us the specific scenario you're concerned about?

OP here. The most common scenario being thrown out there is that any man will now be able to say, I identify as a woman (with this bill), and use the women’s bathroom. My issue is that this seem to make it easier for pedos/pervs(NOT TRANS) to abuse the bill.

The other is the issue where trans competes in Women’s sports competition, there are reports /studies that trans women may have the edge compared to biological women due to testosterone( see nbc link on the previous post), if this is the case, then it seems it might sideline biological women. I think further studies are being done about this and that it is recommended that the testosterone level be measured before being allowed in.

These are the top 2 that I can think of, I’m not sure about other issues but these 2 seem to stand out to me.

Hint: there are already transpeople playing in high level sports. You just don't know about it because they don't flaunt it and want to keep their privacy. I suspect it will remain the same even after this law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

I am also not concerned in the least bit about being going to a public restroom and being attacked by a trans woman. I also am not concerned about my daughters going to a public restroom and being attacked by a transwoman.

OP here. Let clarify, I’m not insinuating that a trans woman will attack domeonebin the bathroom. I’m asking does the bill allow any man( who is not trans, not dressed as a man in any way) say I will use the women’s bathroom because I identify as such? I am not a lawyer and I interpreted it to mean this way, but I’m hoping that someone can clarify if that’s not the case. Here’s the bill:https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

This is the line which seems to make it a catch all:

“Specifically, the bill defines and includes sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation.“

OP, can you tell us the specific scenario you're concerned about?

OP here. The most common scenario being thrown out there is that any man will now be able to say, I identify as a woman (with this bill), and use the women’s bathroom. My issue is that this seem to make it easier for pedos/pervs(NOT TRANS) to abuse the bill.

The other is the issue where trans competes in Women’s sports competition, there are reports /studies that trans women may have the edge compared to biological women due to testosterone( see nbc link on the previous post), if this is the case, then it seems it might sideline biological women. I think further studies are being done about this and that it is recommended that the testosterone level be measured before being allowed in.

These are the top 2 that I can think of, I’m not sure about other issues but these 2 seem to stand out to me.

The advantages men have over women in sports are not just related to testosterone. It's also the way their frame is different, for example - hips parallel for efficient running vs wider for child birth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

Really, she plays in a singles tennis against boy players in her official High School competition? Can you give more details?

This is a fibber!!!!

Nope, not a fibber. I never said it was official high school competition just that she was in high school. It's for her JTT team. She is on a 18 u advanced team and does play against high school boys. She's been playing against boys regularly through JTT. Not concerned about her losing out on scholarships just because she plays against boys. Not concerned about her playing trans girls in official high school because she already is playing against boys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

I am also not concerned in the least bit about being going to a public restroom and being attacked by a trans woman. I also am not concerned about my daughters going to a public restroom and being attacked by a transwoman.

OP here. Let clarify, I’m not insinuating that a trans woman will attack domeonebin the bathroom. I’m asking does the bill allow any man( who is not trans, not dressed as a man in any way) say I will use the women’s bathroom because I identify as such? I am not a lawyer and I interpreted it to mean this way, but I’m hoping that someone can clarify if that’s not the case. Here’s the bill:https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

This is the line which seems to make it a catch all:

“Specifically, the bill defines and includes sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation.“

OP, can you tell us the specific scenario you're concerned about?

OP here. The most common scenario being thrown out there is that any man will now be able to say, I identify as a woman (with this bill), and use the women’s bathroom. My issue is that this seem to make it easier for pedos/pervs(NOT TRANS) to abuse the bill.

The other is the issue where trans competes in Women’s sports competition, there are reports /studies that trans women may have the edge compared to biological women due to testosterone( see nbc link on the previous post), if this is the case, then it seems it might sideline biological women. I think further studies are being done about this and that it is recommended that the testosterone level be measured before being allowed in.

These are the top 2 that I can think of, I’m not sure about other issues but these 2 seem to stand out to me.

Based on your post above it sounds like you're now okay with the bathroom issue.

On the sports issue, people will have differing views on that, and I'm going to argue with you that it's totally black and white. From my perspective, transgender women make up a remarkably small number of female athletes in this country. While there are a handful of examples people can point to of transgender women winning at the highest level in women's sports, they are more the exception than the rule. The vast majority of women's athletic championships are won by cisgender women. The vast majority of college athletic scholarships will continue to go to cisgender women. Yes, certain transgender women may have certain physiological advantages over certain cisgender women in certain sports, but that is not the rule across the board. If you're going to start drawing lines based on hormone levels for what makes someone a woman for athletic purposes, any line you draw likely will allow some transgender women to participate anyway and will exclude some cisgender women who are at the far end of the range. Is it fair to those cisgender women to be excluded just so you can exclude transgender women too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

I am also not concerned in the least bit about being going to a public restroom and being attacked by a trans woman. I also am not concerned about my daughters going to a public restroom and being attacked by a transwoman.

OP here. Let clarify, I’m not insinuating that a trans woman will attack domeonebin the bathroom. I’m asking does the bill allow any man( who is not trans, not dressed as a man in any way) say I will use the women’s bathroom because I identify as such? I am not a lawyer and I interpreted it to mean this way, but I’m hoping that someone can clarify if that’s not the case. Here’s the bill:https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

This is the line which seems to make it a catch all:

“Specifically, the bill defines and includes sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation.“

OP, can you tell us the specific scenario you're concerned about?

OP here. The most common scenario being thrown out there is that any man will now be able to say, I identify as a woman (with this bill), and use the women’s bathroom. My issue is that this seem to make it easier for pedos/pervs(NOT TRANS) to abuse the bill.

The other is the issue where trans competes in Women’s sports competition, there are reports /studies that trans women may have the edge compared to biological women due to testosterone( see nbc link on the previous post), if this is the case, then it seems it might sideline biological women. I think further studies are being done about this and that it is recommended that the testosterone level be measured before being allowed in.

These are the top 2 that I can think of, I’m not sure about other issues but these 2 seem to stand out to me.

Hint: there are already transpeople playing in high level sports. You just don't know about it because they don't flaunt it and want to keep their privacy. I suspect it will remain the same even after this law.

There are also athletes already plaing in high level sports who are taking performance enhancing drugs. That doesn't mean that it is a good thing or that we shouldn't try to stop it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

I am also not concerned in the least bit about being going to a public restroom and being attacked by a trans woman. I also am not concerned about my daughters going to a public restroom and being attacked by a transwoman.

OP here. Let clarify, I’m not insinuating that a trans woman will attack domeonebin the bathroom. I’m asking does the bill allow any man( who is not trans, not dressed as a man in any way) say I will use the women’s bathroom because I identify as such? I am not a lawyer and I interpreted it to mean this way, but I’m hoping that someone can clarify if that’s not the case. Here’s the bill:https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

This is the line which seems to make it a catch all:

“Specifically, the bill defines and includes sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation.“

OP, can you tell us the specific scenario you're concerned about?

OP here. The most common scenario being thrown out there is that any man will now be able to say, I identify as a woman (with this bill), and use the women’s bathroom. My issue is that this seem to make it easier for pedos/pervs(NOT TRANS) to abuse the bill.

The other is the issue where trans competes in Women’s sports competition, there are reports /studies that trans women may have the edge compared to biological women due to testosterone( see nbc link on the previous post), if this is the case, then it seems it might sideline biological women. I think further studies are being done about this and that it is recommended that the testosterone level be measured before being allowed in.

These are the top 2 that I can think of, I’m not sure about other issues but these 2 seem to stand out to me.

The advantages men have over women in sports are not just related to testosterone. It's also the way their frame is different, for example - hips parallel for efficient running vs wider for child birth.

In the data study of people in the military cited above, trans men and cis men showed no difference in running ability after one year on testosterone, suggesting that hormones is the biggest difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have two daughters who play sports. One (my high schooler) even plays on a tennis team and regularly plays against boy players. I am not concerned one iota about her losing out on a scholarship to a boy.

Really, she plays in a singles tennis against boy players in her official High School competition? Can you give more details?

This is a fibber!!!!

Nope, not a fibber. I never said it was official high school competition just that she was in high school. It's for her JTT team. She is on a 18 u advanced team and does play against high school boys. She's been playing against boys regularly through JTT. Not concerned about her losing out on scholarships just because she plays against boys. Not concerned about her playing trans girls in official high school because she already is playing against boys.

Would you be in favor just having open competitions (no gender discrimination) so that boys and girls compete against each other?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we please go back to the topic? The lack of response makes me think a lot of people don’t have enough understanding about this.

Because trans women are women, they should play women’s sports. Basic human rights here. Not much to debate. Sorry not sorry.

Biologically they are men and as such have a definite advantage over women in most sports.
So we should let these people with an advantage because of their biological sex compete at the expense of women?
What good is Title IX then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we please go back to the topic? The lack of response makes me think a lot of people don’t have enough understanding about this.

Because trans women are women, they should play women’s sports. Basic human rights here. Not much to debate. Sorry not sorry.

Biologically they are men and as such have a definite advantage over women in most sports.
So we should let these people with an advantage because of their biological sex compete at the expense of women?
What good is Title IX then?

DP. Far more women get to participate in sports due to Title IX than just the very small number who happen to be transgender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we please go back to the topic? The lack of response makes me think a lot of people don’t have enough understanding about this.

Because trans women are women, they should play women’s sports. Basic human rights here. Not much to debate. Sorry not sorry.

Biologically they are men and as such have a definite advantage over women in most sports.
So we should let these people with an advantage because of their biological sex compete at the expense of women?
What good is Title IX then?

DP. Far more women get to participate in sports due to Title IX than just the very small number who happen to be transgender.

And as more and more transgender women compete, fewer biological women will.
This is the unintended consequence of this type of bill.