Why would I care to?

Well if you want to let "genuine transwomen" into women's protected spaces, then I am sure you will wan to keep the fetishists out? No?

dude, christ, get a fucking life. or find another topic to be a bot about. fucking TEDIOUS.

DO you not care about safeguarding for women and girls from abusive men?

Regardless of fetishes, it is IMPOSSIBLE to keep women and children safe on this planet. Your pathetic attempt to target people is useless.

Some of us are interested in reducing the risks though. How about you? Do you want to reduce risks?

There's a reason I have access to a myriad of weapons at any given time. Something to consider.

How very American of you.

Honey, this thread isn't about domestic violence.

If keeping women and girls safe from abusive men was the actual topic here, yes. But it isn’t. It’s just you being dumb.

Donald Trump the rapist shouldn’t be allowed in women’s dressing rooms or teen beauty pageant dressing rooms.

Indeed. Like all men should not be in there. Especially ones with cross-dressing fetishes and paraphilias.

To which paraphilias are you referring?

Transvestic paraphilias. www.msdmanuals.com/home/mental-...

Oh, you're only talking about extreme forms of transvestism? I thought you were talking about all transvestism.

Well I would suggest all transvestites do it for sexual reasons. It is a fetish. I do not have data, bit come on - do you doubt this? Some transvestites are severely disordered and probably dangerous.

Should have used a different source then. Cross-dressing isn't always sexual and not all fetishes are paraphilias. Once again, I ask you to specify what fucking subset of people you're talking about.

Yes. If you believe that then I have a bridge to sell you.

And since the same source specifies that the disorder doesn't equate to a sense of belonging to the other sex, I also ask once again: why do you believe cross-dressers are entering changing rooms assigned to the opposite gender?

Those are orthogonal classifications.

What is the difference between the two objectively?

They are neither mutually exclusive nor are they mutually inclusive. The criteria for classification are different.

How do I tell the difference though. They both want to shower with the girls in the sports club. Do you let them both in?

Why do you imagine that somebody who gets sexual gratification from wearing women's clothing wants to shower with girls?

Also a good point.

A male says he is a "transwoman" and wants to use the same showers & changing rooms at the swimming club as my teenage daughter. How do I tell the difference between the genuine "transwoman" who only wants to shower with the girls for wholesome reasons and the abusive fetishist in women's clothes?

How do you tell the difference between a woman who wants to shower with your daughter and an abusive woman who wants to shower with your daughter?

You are avoiding the question. You do want to keep abusive cross-dressing and fetishistic men out I hope? How do you tell the difference between them and blameless "transwomen"?

Wait, now the cross-dressing isn't what's fetishistic? If so, what exactly is the fetish you're complaining about?

Paraphilias cluster. Someone who cross-dresses may also be a voyeur or exhibitionist. Or worse. And in all of this you show zero empathy for women and girl's dignity and privacy. That is very telling. You do not even acknowledge the problem.

So you can't even manage to tell me what fetish you're complaining about. Colour me shocked.

I exactly just did.

Do you believe society has an equal responsibility to serve trans people’s safety and dignity?

Indeed. But not at the expense of women and girls. Dismantling the protections for women is regressive and sexist. The trans movement needs to get a grip and change tack if they are not to be completely sidelined.

So you are interested in denying transgender people equal rights.

How would you protect trans people?

Anything that doesn't allow people to get off to them.

That tracks. I don't know if they've realized how funny this disingenuous little "you wouldn't let in abusers, now would you?" tack they're trying is.

I hope your own answer to that is not to send someone else’s trans daughter to go shower with the men instead.

Oh, I'm sure it is.

That's the level of debate your going to get if you insist on scare quotes and labeling things as fetishist.

You are flummoxed by this question aren't you? But this is not a hypothetical. Since you allow in some men (the transgender ones) how can you stop abusive men going in?

You can't. You can't keep the abusive women out either. You also can't keep the abusive men out of the men's locker room. Unless you want to figure out how to make pre-crime work.

Abusibve men are far more common than abusive women. Nearly all sex crime is perpetrated by males and their victims are most commonly by far females. How do you stop these fetishists out and let your saintly "transwomen" in?

Unlike you, I'm not about to throw all transgenders under a bus. Any more than I'd say cis het white men perform most mass shootings so stop selling them guns.

Of all the possible gifs, this felt the most appropriate.

Seriously tho, someone who cross-dresses as a fetish gets their sexual gratification from the cross-dressing. That's what a fetish is. They aren't using it to sneak into the opposite sexes locker room.

Do you object to a woman who wears men's clothing into a changing room?

Well abusive men represent a disproportionate threat. And you are trying to avoid answering. So how do you tell the difference?

I'd like evidence of the premise of the question before I answer. You also said earlier that virtually all trans women (excepting prisoners apparently?) are fetishists, so what even is this question?

Well I am sure you want to let the good ones in. And I am sure you want to keep the abusers out. How do you do it?

As @snrtmahtnt.bsky.social has asked, how are you distinguishing between women in changing rooms who are abusive and those who aren't?