banneret

 

That article is a mess as written, I'm loathe to engage with it at all, since it primarily cites previous articles from the same site and is a collection of five incidents that it presents as "'transgender' men" abusing restroom occupants, where only one of the five involves an offender identifying as trans in their incident. The first case is man, who makes no effort to identify as a woman, attempting to excuse his entry by suggesting it is enabled by the law, which it is not. The third and fourth cases are men using drag to gain access, which has been happening for decades. The fifth is men taking photographs of women in a neutral bathroom, which is not substantively different from them doing it in a women's bathroom, or taking photos of men in a men's bathroom, both of which have been happening for decades.
The second case, it doesn't seem - having followed the article trail through several different deeply partisan sites - like the offender genuinely identifies as trans, nor that he made any effort to present as a woman. It isn't the same sort of opportunism as the first case, because some authority did give him access when he made a claim. There isn't a lot of information out there, beyond the fact that he is mentally ill and was already a convicted sex offender.
So, there is that one, I shouldn't have been absolutist. Beyond that, the fact that this article can be presented as five cases of "'transgender' men" abusing restroom occupants, and read as "at least three, arguably four" is very telling. Every single one of these incidents was perpetrated by straight, cis men against women, and that is the only common element. One offender claimed identity to gain access, one offender attempted to invoke the law as a defense, and the remainder did things they could - and probably would - have done regardless of the law. When all is said and done, which of these cases could have been avoided by removing restroom protections for transfolk? Not one.
While the article is not persuasive, I do understand what you are getting at, Don Edwards, and I do not think you are transphobic. I apologize if I inadvertently gave you that impression, I am merely frustrated with the red herring, and in fact I was responding to Scotty. Personally, I would prefer neutral, single and double (for diaper stations) occupant restrooms with actual doors and locks. Moving over to that standard could actually have an impact on restroom comfort and safety.

As it does not solve anything, it is, by definition, not a solution.
Can I just say something? The whole "dangerous pervert" angle is a red herring, and we have to dispense with it. Even the hypothetical you've presented - "could there be... probably" - is ridiculous. Not one person is going to attempt to pass themselves off as trans to gain access to other people in a restroom. It requires a lot of effort to present, and presentation will make you visible or notable, either because you do not pass, or because you perform femininity/masculinity to a prototypical level to pass. There are probably hundreds of ways to sneak a peek, and not one of them is going to be more difficult, nor expose the hypothetical pervert to greater risk of discovery and/or violence.
The whole legal push against transfolk is not about public safety. It won't improve the safety of any restroom occupant. It does not address the incidents that do occur in restrooms. All it seeks to do, and all it does in real terms, is make a subset of the population more vulnerable.

It would not, certainly not automatically. And I have in fact seen both good games and good webcomics in which sexual crimes and offenders played a part. What is important is how the subject matter is treated. If it is treated with respect for the victims and with a careful examination of possible causes and consequences, it can actually be a good thing. Mind you, it should probably feature an advance notice and taken in manageable doses.
The problem arises when a serious and potentially life-destroying topic is treated with unironic levity and disdain for the victims, as a mere source of entertainment or worse yet as something good to be emulated. And yes, you could certainly call out games that feature mounting hills of corpses for falling into that category. It does depend on how it is treated, mind. I will agree that most MMOs and the like I have seen have a somewhat disturbing tendency to feature the killing of enemies as at most an occasion for a climbing kill counter.

No disagreement here, Scotty. I was dancing around the gatekeeping role of medical professionals. They have a lot of latitude in how they approach treatment, and many do demand a period of living as the target gender prior to surgical and, in some cases, hormonal intervention. This was more common in the past, as the DSM-V and the most recent revision of the WPATH Standards of Care no longer treat gender dysphoria as pathological, but these demands do persist in some practices. Where you are and what insurance you are on can lead to a completely different experience with the establishment from another person. Sometimes, there are a lot of hoops.

No disagreement here, Scotty. I was dancing around the gatekeeping role of medical professionals. They have a lot of latitude in how they approach treatment, and many do demand a period of living as the target gender prior to surgical and, in some cases, hormonal intervention. This was more common in the past, as the DSM-V and the most recent revision of the WPATH Standards of Care no longer treat gender dysphoria as pathological, but these demands do persist in some practices. Where you are and what insurance you are on can lead to a completely different experience with the establishment from another person. Sometimes, there are a lot of hoops.

El Goonish Shive is the only comic I was reading fifteen, or even ten, years ago which I am still reading today. As I grew old and tired, other media failed to grow with me, but El Goonish Shive has. That is all I can say, for the moment.

Ahem. One man's junk is another man's treasure, and I'm always up to abscond with a fortune.

I'll see myself out of this thread.

My sister is doing well, she's a lot happier than she was when she was in denial about her actual gender and trying to live as something she's not.
And I really wish more people had accepting parents.

El Goonish Shive is the only comic I was reading fifteen, or even ten, years ago which I am still reading today. As I grew old and tired, other media failed to grow with me, but El Goonish Shive has. That is all I can say, for the moment.

El Goonish Shive is the only comic I was reading fifteen, or even ten, years ago which I am still reading today. As I grew old and tired, other media failed to grow with me, but El Goonish Shive has. That is all I can say, for the moment.

El Goonish Shive is the only comic I was reading fifteen, or even ten, years ago which I am still reading today. As I grew old and tired, other media failed to grow with me, but El Goonish Shive has. That is all I can say, for the moment.

El Goonish Shive is the only comic I was reading fifteen, or even ten, years ago which I am still reading today. As I grew old and tired, other media failed to grow with me, but El Goonish Shive has. That is all I can say, for the moment.

Ed Verres has plenty of faults, but he's the parent that stayed with his child.  He doesn't seem the warmest man in the universe, but he does come across as no-nonsense and down to earth.  I can't see him calling a marriage off because the first child was magically impaired or because his wife didn't want more, and I cannot see him kicking Noriko out unless she already wanted to go.  It's not in his character. 
Noriko doesn't have a "character" yet.  We don't know much about her except for a few hurtful things she has done.  It was Norko who kept scanning Tedd for signs of magic ability not Ed Verres, and then she's the one who left.  Certainly Mrs. Kitsune harbors a huge grudge against her sister for how she acted towards Tedd.  Those are the dots we have to connect and they point right at Noriko as the problem, not Ed Verres.

At this point, even if they're not related, it isn't just about birth. The sister you make along the way matters as well, just ask Elliot.

All archetypal models are necessarily reductive, so the intent is to capture the broad strokes. If we were building decks around the eight, most of them would have three if not four colours, but distilling down their primary one or two aspects for a single card is a more interesting challenge.
I think the cast in general is lacking in Black - the only two living human characters I can think of who have any Black are Diane (with Blue) and Ellen (with Red) - the former because of her longstanding focus upon her own self interest, and the latter due to her individualistic hedonism. Neither would be wholly Black, of course. Green is also uncommon, as it entails a philosophical acquiescence to natural law and is thus less agentive than the other colours; you can make a case for Grace (with White), Justin (with Blue) or perhaps Catalina (with Red). The other three colours are both easier to apply to the individual as defined and more common in the cast, with Red and Blue the most common.
Justin is where our categorizations diverge the most. I feel he is best described as Green and Blue. In terms of Green, Justin accepts people and circumstances as they are, and is always looking to their further development; recall Nanase's sexuality, his experience at the game store, his own contemplation of zen philosophies, and even his whole friendship with Susan. On the other side, his self-expression is always muted, tempered by consideration and moderate introversion, which echoes how Susan approaches her own life. Like Susan, our Blue paragon, Justin keeps his mind in the forefront and is always analyzing, often helpful as a result.

At this point, even if they're not related, it isn't just about birth. The sister you make along the way matters as well, just ask Elliot.

While I agree in principle, in practice, telling Susan does nothing to improve Diane's chances of survival, it isn't really a choice between the two. Susan may be more effective than Tedd or Sarah in a fight, but she goes to a different school, and all the members of the circle from Diane's school are considerably more powerful with much more access. For that matter, Rhoda might be a potent protector in time. I think Susan should know, but this isn't really about Diane's safety.

I agree, hence "talents" rather than "skills". I was referring to her placement with her partner, rather than being in the Bureau to begin with, sorry about the ambiguity.

I am in agreement with you, Hack, this is one of the most painful pages of the comic to date. The conversation is necessarily insensitive, due to the topic, but Nanase and Ellen did not approach it very well. This exchange is made worse by the absence of an intermediary, because - of all the friends in their circle - they've spent the least time developing their relationships with Susan. Discussing the topic with Tedd's father was quite invasive, and seeking the truth is not a sufficient justification for either invading her privacy or putting this on her in the moment. They haven't thought this mystery through, it is not as simple as unmasking a man. Telling her creates distress but it doesn't benefit her or Diane in the near term.

I am in agreement with you, Hack, this is one of the most painful pages of the comic to date. The conversation is necessarily insensitive, due to the topic, but Nanase and Ellen did not approach it very well. This exchange is made worse by the absence of an intermediary, because - of all the friends in their circle - they've spent the least time developing their relationships with Susan. Discussing the topic with Tedd's father was quite invasive, and seeking the truth is not a sufficient justification for either invading her privacy or putting this on her in the moment. They haven't thought this mystery through, it is not as simple as unmasking a man. Telling her creates distress but it doesn't benefit her or Diane in the near term.

I am in agreement with you, Hack, this is one of the most painful pages of the comic to date. The conversation is necessarily insensitive, due to the topic, but Nanase and Ellen did not approach it very well. This exchange is made worse by the absence of an intermediary, because - of all the friends in their circle - they've spent the least time developing their relationships with Susan. Discussing the topic with Tedd's father was quite invasive, and seeking the truth is not a sufficient justification for either invading her privacy or putting this on her in the moment. They haven't thought this mystery through, it is not as simple as unmasking a man. Telling her creates distress but it doesn't benefit her or Diane in the near term.

This may be the most painful page of EGS that I have read in quite a while. I don't think I have seen anything even near it since the time Tedd acknowledged Mr. Verres' transphobia.
It is clear that Susan has held a mental image of her father close in which she tried to preserve at least some sort of person worthy of love. It would be easier to think of him as someone who started with good intentions but stumbled into a bad mistake. Being brought face to face with the possibility that not even this much was true... yes, anger and denial are two of the first steps. Having it all intermixed with her immensely traumatic experience with the vampire back in France would not make it any better, to put it mildly.
I am torn. Nanase unquestionably meant well. But I am starting to think that she would have done better to think this more carefully through. Even so, I am doing this from hindsight so I am not precisely in a position to criticise her. Her intentions are obviously good and based on the fact that not only is Diane in danger, she also deserves to know of her half-sister's existence... and that Susan deserves to know the truth as well.
The problem with that is that while truth indeed has the power to set you free, it can also open old wounds and do grave harm. It is for that very reason that Ellen rejected the notion of telling Tedd what they had learned about his mother. This situation is of similar complexity and may well reopen old wounds for Susan... and possibly even make them worse.

As my grandmother once told me, if you're not willing to listen to what you have to say, then why should anyone else give a curse?

As my grandmother once told me, if you're not willing to listen to what you have to say, then why should anyone else give a curse?