He's just being Uke. He just dishonestly sent you searching for a definition in his post history that doesn't exist. He knows he looks ridiculous but I'm sure in his mind it's justified

Look, gender ideology is the root of all these controversies. Men in womens sports, transitioning kids, the pronoun police including the canadian human rights code, drag queen story hour, men in women's shelters, men in women's prison, etc. At the root of gender ideology is obviously some basic concepts. What is a woman? What is a man? That's 99% of the population across cultures throughout human history. Everyone understood these things. They can't even define what man or woman is now. Ok so there's also other genders. I asked to list and describe 2 additional genders and give a definition. That didn't happen either. I asked a handful of other pro trans agenda crowd and they had nothing either. This is at total, complete, and utter clown show

Now his tactic is to deflect. But Matt Walsh already asked this question. This would be irrelevant to me asking uke except it makes him look even worse. He's seen Walsh aske the question and instead of pumping the brakes and re-evaluating his own position or coming up with an actual answer, he just marches forward like a hypnotized cult member. The fact matt walsh asked the question doesn't change the fact that he or his comrades can't make any sense of the gender ideology they subscribe to. It's a feeble and transparent attempt to deflect. The next move is to keep uking people in the thread while pretending we all can't see the giant shoes and big red nose. It's just an amazing schtick

Bro. What is a woman? You stumped? OK that's embarrassing. How about demonstrating you have a shred of humility and tone down the uke o mania

Because society has rules, and decision have consequences. Whenever society makes rules that lead to less rapes and murders, that's a good thing.

If society decides that it's okay to obtain sex by deception, then that's going to lead to more rapes and more murders. That's a bad thing.

Ya bud, that's great. Nobody is proposing some imaginary pro-rape rules. I get that the bad bad trans person trope gets everyone all caught up and the idea of evil trans people going around raping people is just fodder for this, but can you maybe tone the thought experiments down a tad?

Well, you missed the key point which is that the (simple to state) concept of sexual dimorphism has led to the (complicated to state) concept of gender which is the part that trans people are identifying with.

Your objections don't really make sense. Whether some people are or are not ok with trans people doesn't make it any more or less valid of a concept. All sorts of jurisdictions have policies and laws either restricting or enabling trans people - that there may be no independent way to conclusively "objectively determine" whether someone is trans may occasionally make some legal sticking points, but this isn't some inherent flaw with the concept of trans people, it's just a reality of a messy world where all sorts of legal sticking points occur.

let's go defend rape for a few dozen posts in a row

Yet people argue people should not have to disclose their biological sex when engaging in sexual activity, which under UK law is rape.

And this is not some abstract thought experiment - people do lie about their sex in order to rape people, and get sent to prison for it.

I didn't say anything about objectively determining who is trans, but about who is a woman. Maybe a minor difference, but it seems important to me, because women are the ones special privileges and spaces are given to, not trans people. I think if special spaces were given to trans people, that would cause fewer objections.

However, except in extremely rare circumstances, I don't think there should be separate spaces for anyone. You seemed to at least agree with me somewhat in the support for unisex bathrooms. I don't think that expanding the number of people given special privileges helps progress towards the ideal of no special privileges for anyone.

Vintage uke

He might not be able to tell you what a woman is, but he can play this game all day

Congratulations

Some people in fact are, as previously mentioned. You should not imagine that these people are 'trans', because they generally aren't. They are using the 'trans' thing as a wedge.

Trans activists don't want that. They want to maintain existing segregation rules, but they want access to women's segregated spaces and sports.

Most of the rules proponents of trans rights suggest are just allowing trans people to do things any other woman is allowed to do. Like IF we have gendered bathrooms THEN trans people should be allowed to go in the bathroom they identify with. Like sure maybe I'm somewhat on board with the idea that we should move away from gendered bathrooms, and maybe we will, but as long as we do then trans people should be allowed in them.

This doesn't really pose any problem with the "definition" of women, basically everyone knows exactly what everyone else is talking about in these cases when we say something like a trans woman should be allowed in a woman's bathroom. Its no more legally murky than any other legal topic having to do with definitions and the like.

None of this actually responds to the definition I gave. It is just Matt Walsh style guffawing. Not that I care at all about "defining" what a woman is, but you seemed desperate for me to do so, so a little amusing that you didn't bother engaging with the provided definition one iota.

Ya buddy, I get that you like to make things up horrible things you think your opponents believe (take your "you support rape" and "sham marriage" nonsense), but I've(obviously) made zero posts "defending rape". I have pointed out certain people's obsession with the "bad trans person of the day" MO, and how "the bad trans rapist who gets murdered" fits that regular narrative. But that isn't within the same galaxy as defending rape. Obviously.

amazing how uke just crumbles into pieces once luciom stops posting news random pieces that always allow an easy escape to divert his collapsing argument onto a fresh topic

i never said any of this, really sad and pathetic you need to make stuff up like people are advocating killing trans

I've also pointed out to you multiple times that i was obviously joking when i said you support rape but you prefer to be a victim

you have since however continued to double and triple down that trans should have have carte blanche in the bedroom, have you learned nothing from metoo?

if i were to disguise myself as a woman, seduce lesbians, and hide the existence of my penis from them we made out, as I go down on them, and get them good and drunk and tell them it's a strap on and I'm shy due to this being so newly out of the closet so doggy style in the dark fully clothed in only way etc etc is that not rape?

Um I have lucium on ignore, so no whatever he posts has almost no effect on my posting.

Lol reading comprehension fail. I didn't say anything at all suggesting you were "advocating killing trans". The bit where you said I "support rape" though is a direct quote from you. A shameful fabrication, so perhaps you are overly eager to imagine I would also do shameful fabrications, but unlike you I always have receipts.

Sigh, rick's editing his own posts sometimes makes responses to the edited posts seem weird.

Lol, the "I was joking" routine. I actually don't think you have tried to laugh that off previously. But regardless, buddy, I don't think anyone took you seriously that you meant the stupid things you said. But you're still going to be called out for saying stupid things, joking or otherwise.

Do you mean "trans people"? But no, I've said literally not one word on this topic. Is this another one of your "jokes"? haha.

Lol I find that kinda weird actually, unisex toilets over my way don't have urinals, just cubicles.
Edit: Just seen your later post clarifying the issue.

Curious why you support unisex bathrooms. Is it just because you view it as equal?

The pro argument seems obvious but: in many cases we don't want to be blasting farts etc in front of other gender. Could be awkward to pee in front of them.

There's sex stuff. Women don't want to be leered at or spied on. Guys don't want to accidentally do something wrong. Like turn around from a urinal a little too soon and there's a 12 year old girl there. Or walk in on a woman in a stall.

In general, we both have an extra layer of social obligation and decorum around the opposite gender and it can be nice to take a break. Most want to just relax when doing something that is usually private.

you caught me uke, i actually reported you to the mounties last week, they should be pulling you over at some point next week on your commute

rob is deep into the local music scene of portland

i am big into that scene myself

grungy unisex bathrooms are very typical and most people are too inebriated and radically progressive to care much about it seeing a guy at a urinal while waiting for the 3 people doing blow to exit the stall

if you have a kink for seeing women drop their pants and sit on a sink to pee because they don't feel like waiting, start going to punk shows and drink plenty so you'll need to make frequent bathroom visits

Reminds me of going to clubs in Brazil nearly 20 years ago. They were far ahead of us on these things I guess.

Anyway, there were these massive clubs for gay, straight, trans. Just a big free for all. They also were less racially divided.

The bathrooms were originally designed as m/f but this was completely ignored. This added to the fun and the vibe as it was just a super free environment. Plus it's loud, everyone is wasted, etc. Plus, no children are around.

Of course, in other settings, they have regular BRs.

I support unisex everything. I think most of the awkwardness is cultural and would go away if people didn't grow up with the cultural hangups.

Although I actually think it would be better not to have urinals in public restrooms either. I use them because I don't want to wait extra time, but I don't particularly like urinating in public and seeing other guys do it myself.

Brazil managed race a lot better because there was a huge amount of miscegenation, so almost everyone would be black under the one drop rule, even if many people are white passing.

lately they went crazy because of wokism and grade skin colour (in tribunal if necessary) to do their version of AA unfortunately.

but among the people, racism isn't anything close to what it was in the USA because most people feel they are Mulatto one way or another.

which is the only possible pacifying endgame tbh