And after days of debating, you still don' t get that even if there were no attacks from men in those shelters, those men should still not be there.

I absoloutly understand that you want to deny even the most harmless transgender women in need of a women's shelter the help she needs out of pure bigotry. I just don't agree with your bigotry.

Four differences here: a.) that badge is how the subway operator makes sure you paid your fare, which adresses a vital need for them, meanwhile, your "requiere an electronic ID-Badge to use the restroom"-idea is aderessing nothing but your irrational fear of the person in the next cubicle having different gonads than you

It makes a point of having distinct categories based on realities and gives people the option of choosing.

what "option of choosing" does it give anyone to force people into the bathroom of their birth sex?

I have no clue what this sentence mean.

That your insane bathroom-policing-plan does not, at all, give anyone any "option of choosing", it takes options away.

I don' t see the problem with that. Plus, I am not really sure how it works in other countries, but in mine we have sanitary electronic badges so they could be easily modified to be read by a reader outside of those places or do it with ID documents in general as long as they are electronic. You don' t need a different badge, you can use the ones you already have.

I have never heard of any such thing. What would even be the reasoning behind some electronic badge just to use the restroom? Sounds utterly absurd.

It sounds absurd to you because breaking that rule is beneficial to you.

I have never used a gender-seperated space opposite to my birth sex, never tried to do so and have no intention of ever doing so. Demanding an electronic badge kust to use the restroom is still absurd, and your ad hominem is deeply misplaced here.

I AM NOT TELLING THEM TO USE THEIR BIRTH SEX' S FACILITY, I AM TELLING THEM TO FIGHT FOR THIRD SPACES AND USE THEM, which you keep claiming they do, and yet you keep whining about letting all of you inside your preferred ones. If they are not willing to do it, I don' t care where they go as long as it' s not women' s bathrooms.

In other words, you just don't want to share a bathroom with the "icky" trans people.

with the difference that accomondations for people with disabilities allows people who would otherwise not be able to participate in society to do so, while your over-the-top transphobic plan instead keeps people from particiüpating in society for no other reason than your bigotry.

Nobody is keeping them from participating in society, they just have to follow the same rules everyone else has to follow. If that' s too much for them, it' s their problem, not mine.

Keeping transgender people from being able to live their lives as the gender they identify as is keeping them from fully participating in society.

It costs roughly 1000 $ to sequence a human genome 1 and demanding a blood test for me to use the restroom shure as hell is intrusive.

That stuff is usually done at birth. You keep pretending that this is something that would have to be done every time you use a public space, I already explained how it should be done.

Except it has to be done every time someone, for whatever reason, doesn't have that badge but has to use a gender-seperated space.

Personally, I think that sanitary badges should carry those informations regardless of this stupid debate anyway, so you are barking at the wrong tree.

Again, I have no idea what the heck you are talking about with these "sanitary badges". I have never heard of such a thing, and the concept by itself (needing some form of identification to use the restroom) sounds utterly absurd to me.

reread what I wrote again. I talked about non-transgender womenh (aka how you define "women") getting kicked out of the women's restroom due to being mistaken for transgender. I have actually seen calculations, that, even if one were to be able to tell with 99% accuracy which one is trans and which is not, it would (due to transgender people being such a small minority) STILL result in more women being falsly thrown out than transgender women being kept out. So the over-agressive bathroom-policing of the kind you are advocating for harms more non-transgender women than transgender women.

GNC women are being thrown out because they are mistaken for men, and the only reason why there is a surge in that attitude is because men are allowed to be in women' s spaces. WOmen don' t want men there, so they are hyper focused on finding people who might look like that' s not their place. This is entirely on the trans movement. As I said already said, if there were a way to make it fixed who can and who cannot use those spaces, by listing your biological sex, things would settle down again and this wouldn' t happen, or if it happened, those women would be able to show that they have the right to be there. As it is now, everyone can get in, and no surprise there, GNC women are getting the flacks without doing anything wrong, while men who should get flack have all benefits from it.

This form of over-agressive bathroom policing that harms everyone always experiences a severe upswing whenever transgender exclusion is pushed for.

trans women are women.

Nope.

yes they are.

The analogy clearly went over your head.

Nope.

It clearly did.

women are more likely to be described as "uterus havers", "birthing body", "menstruator" and similar shit than men are likely to be called "ejaculators", "prostate havers" and "penis person"

this is constrained to medical settings, where clarifying anatomical terms are usefull. And, as I clearly expressed in my very first comment on this post, this should absoloutly applied equally for both areas.

women' s spaces are more likely to be disrupted and defunded

no, it's just that men don't complain about trans men in their spaces as much.

lesbians are more likely to be called out on their "transphobic" genital preferences...

the type of transgender person who calls "genital preferences" transphobic exists on both sides, and it's wrong both ways.

Still doesn' t change the fact that those terms are intersex terms that nobody except them should use. I definitely won' t, not only because I am not intersex, but also because I already have a perfect word that describes my biology: woman.

Except, as I have already explained several times, "men" and "women" are terms for social categories (which you are absoloutly free to use to refer to yourself), not biological ones. Therefore, trans men are men (despite having a female birth sex) and trans women are women (despite having a male birth sex). Calling trans men women or calling trans women men is deeply offensive. Therefore the transgender community adapted the terms used by the intersex community in order to express birth sex where this information is needed.

Not really. Gender dysphoria causes the relationship of transgender people towards their body and the development of said body to be very much different from a cisgender of the same birth sexe's experience with their body and their bodies development.

I was talking about the women, not the men who call themselves women. Women are more likely to have similar experiences to me in regards of their bodies. Trans people can have different experiences compared to the ones of members of their sex, but their experiences are still more likely to be similar to that than the ones of people of the other sex.

Transgender men also have very different experiences regarding their bodies than cisgender women. Because they experience it as someone with a male gender identity, meaning that sexed development that would be felt as "correct" for someone with a female gender identity would feel utterly and deeply wrong to them.