GC: What are "sex-based" rights?

submitted by GenderbenderShe/her/hers from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

There really is no need for sexed spaces once you remove the patriarchy. There is no basis for them. Male and female bodies being different does not translate into needing separate spaces for them.

Huh? I don't get this at all. Can you explain further please? Thanks.

Also, I wasn't aware that the patriarchy had been slated for removal. Even if it does get removed one day, it's not gonna happen in my lifetime. The policies I advocate are for the real world in the here and now, not for some imaginary utopia that might happen far off in the future or the realm of fiction or science fiction.

BTW, in more than 50 years of being a feminist and many convos about what a world without male supremacy would be like, I have never heard anyone say there'd be "no need for sexed spaces" and "no basis" for them anymore.

So in the post-patriarchy utopia as you envision it, there'd be no spaces for lesbians or gay guys that exclude members of the opposite sex? Ever? Events like Michfest not allowed, and no more men getting together only with other men for hookups in bath houses and weekend orgies in places like Fire Island Pines? Really? I can see how this wouldn't go down well with a lot of people.

There really is no need for sexed spaces once you remove the patriarchy. There is no basis for them. Male and female bodies being different does not translate into needing separate spaces for them.

So a world without patriarchy would mean "no basis" for separate male and female sports? "No need? and "no basis" for corresponding sex separate locker rooms, training facilities, showers, saunas, therapeutic baths, either?

Sorry, a world in which there's only mixed-sex sports and therefore all the athletics opportunities, awards and glory go to males sounds exactly like patriarchy to me. No more sports for girls and women sounds eerily like the situation with school sports was in the US when I was growing up prior to US Title IX, in fact. Been there, done that and worked hard to change it. So to quote Sara Robles, "no thank you."

Also, no need or basis anymore for single-sex support groups for males with testicular and prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, hemophilia and male-pattern baldness - or for females dealing with menstruation, pregnancy issues, endometriosis, PCOS, childbirth injuries and trauma, breast and gynecological cancers, fibroids, menopause, pelvic organ prolapse, aging-related UTIs, incontinence and vaginal atrophy?

No separate accommodations for the two sexes in jails and prisons, hospital wards/rooms, LTCFs, dorm rooms, school and scouting trips?

In the post-patriarchy utopia you imagine, women who go to, say, a community swim pool with their teen or adult sons and male in-laws will have to share the same change rooms and showers with them? Will getting rid of patriarchy mean the vast majority of boys and men won't be heterosexual any more, and/or they won't have eyes and dicks? And that within families and households, there will be no need or basis anymore for the kinds of sex separation that customarily is put in place as children grow up and relationships change? Such as girls no longer being seen naked by their dads or brothers once they hit puberty? And pubertal boys being given bodily privacy by their mothers - and vice versa - too?

In the scenario about pumping breastmilk at work that I asked GenderBender about but she never addressed, no women in a post-patriarchal world would want, need or be permitted to pump breastmilk at work (or anywhere else) in a place where their male colleagues can't walk in and watch? Humans will have no need or desire for personal boundaries or privacy from any other members of the other sex ever?

Middle- and high-schoolers on overnight trips with school or scouts will all share sleeping arrangements, and all the tween or teen pregnancies that will inevitably result will be no big deal coz "no patriarchy" anymore? WTF? That sounds nuts.

[–]adungitit 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The policies I advocate are for the real world in the here and now

Just because you advocate a policy for a current issue does not excuse a complete lack of thought into any of its future implications and reasons for existence.

I have never heard anyone say there'd be "no need for sexed spaces" and "no basis" for them anymore.

lol what an argument. I've never heard of tau neutrinos either, but that doesn't make them stop existing.

So in the post-patriarchy utopia as you envision it, there'd be no spaces for lesbians or gay guys that exclude members of the opposite sex?

People have the right to form spaces on the basis of certain shared interests and identities. That is entirely different from legal protections for said spaces because they are necessary to lead a normal life, as is the case with women.

So a world without patriarchy would mean "no basis" for separate male and female sports?

Obviously sports require a sex-based division, as do medical issues. These divisions are based in physical differences in male and female bodies requiring different expertise and different evaluation standards. This is different from spaces that serve to protect women from the social problem of patriarchal violence and harassment. Women are still targeted specifically for their sex, but the reason why they need protection is entirely external.

No separate accommodations for the two sexes in jails and prisons, hospital wards/rooms, LTCFs, dorm rooms, school and scouting trips?

If we were ever to reach a world where men did not pose a threat to women in these environments, yes.

In the post-patriarchy utopia you imagine, women who go to, say, a community swim pool with their teen or adult sons and male in-laws will have to share the same change rooms and showers with them?

If they would get naked with their male parents, why would they not with their female parents?

Will getting rid of patriarchy mean the vast majority of boys and men won't be heterosexual any more, and/or they won't have eyes and dicks?

It's unlikely that most men would be heterosexual if we got rid of the patriarchy. Most "heterosexual" men really just have a fetish for femininity and misogyny. Moreover, you can be heterosexual and not act like a creep, just as homosexual people manage to do.

And that within families and households, there will be no need or basis anymore for the kinds of sex separation that customarily is put in place as children grow up and relationships change?

How exactly do you think gay people are able to function? Is there sexual tension between every non-straight family member?

Such as girls no longer being seen naked by their dads or brothers once they hit puberty? And pubertal boys being given bodily privacy by their mothers - and vice versa - too?

If the same things were to be normal with their same-sex family members, then yes.