That's just data on prisons. If you want examples from the general population you don't have to look far. Voyeurism is a thing, the prevalence is high, it's higher in males, and women are far more likely to be repulsed by it. "Subsequent research showed that 65% of men had engaged in peeping, which suggests that this behaviour is widely spread throughout the population." "Research shows that, like almost all paraphilias, voyeurism is more common in men than in women." "A 2021 study found that 36.4% of men and 63.8% of women were strongly repulsed by the idea of voyeurism." Example of a peeping tom using the excuse of being a transgender woman to video a woman in a change room at Target.

Women have a reason not to want men in their bathrooms and change rooms. This was all common knowledge when I was growing up. How do people not know this now?

It's very clear from your comments on this thread now that your support of having trans women in women's bathrooms and change rooms is simply to feed your weird fantasy or fetish. This is at the expense of regular old women. We see you and we see what you're doing.

I have to thank the comments section on this article for giving me an "a-ha" moment. I couldn't understand where all this sudden support of "trans women's rights" were coming from, particularly on a forum mostly populated by guys who are one step away from shooting up a high school. It turns out most of the guys here are closet misogynists who relish the idea of being able to walk around naked in women's dressing rooms. This is coming from a place of sick male fantasy, plain and simple. Yes, this comment will be down-modded, but that's because the moderators are pulled almost exclusively from the same pool of people. Best of all, they get to be misogynists and virtue-signal at the same time. It's win-win!

Except that since trans women have been starting to be admitted to women's prisons they've been tracking sexual assault data for all groups and trans women commit sexual assaults at a significantly higher rate than cis women. one source of many. also this. You can't just slap "-phobic" on the end of a word and argue it's automatically wrong. If a woman says she's at higher risk of being sexually assaulted by a trans woman than by a natal female, the data supports her.

My kids were that age about 10 to 15 years ago, and I had no problem bringing them to the men's room if my wife wasn't with us, and even then I would say more than half had baby changing stations. I do remember complaining about the ones without change stations, like... "what year are we living in?"

Well, three seconds of googling found this but I guess I can't expect someone on slashdot to be able to use the internet.

Well, someone drank the kool-aid. Your examples are nothing like the example I provided. Your illogical mind is showing... how can you support safe spaces on campus, or shout "believe all women," but deny that women feel uncomfortable pulling her skirt up with some creepy guy in the next stall?

I'm going to guess you're a man/male (as am I) and certainly I could care less who uses the same bathroom as me. On the other hand I've heard a lot of women online arguing that there need to be female-only spaces because they don't feel safe. I appreciate there are some trans women who really feel more comfortable in the women's room, and aren't a danger at all, but I've also come across some pretty creepy dudes who I wouldn't be surprised would get off on hanging out in women's rooms. Until you can tell the difference (hint: never) then this issue isn't going to be resolved to everyone's satisfaction, and you're literally saying the rights of trans women should override the rights of females. I could care less who wins that argument, but in the long term once everyone hears both arguments it's pretty clear that there are more female voters than trans women voters.

Agreed. This is a once-in-a-lifetime deal for the US. They get to write off old inventory. They get to see how one of their two primary adversaries fare against those weapon systems. They get to degrade the capabilities of said adversary by pointing out targets to Ukrainian forces. They get to observe the new drone warfare paradigm as it evolves. And all while never putting American troops in harm's way. It's a win-win for Ukraine, who gets to punch way above their weight.

On Twitter the stats are that 80% of the content is produced by 10% of the creators, so that doesn't make it much different than "main stream media." It's a small number of people who control the narrative. Back in the days of network (over the air) television, there were rules which said the stations had to give equal time to both sides of any story. So that meant no matter what station you watched, you were always exposed to varied viewpoints. That died with cable news, which argued they shouldn't be constrained by such rules because there were so many cable channels that it was impossible for one side to control all the stations. Which is true, I suppose, but it means everyone lives in a bubble now.

Correct, and shutting it down is a good start. Now do "X", Facebook, and every other social media platform (yes, including /.)

Surveys of adults are pretty clear... parents are less happy and are more stressed moment to moment, but report higher life satisfaction. So pick your poison. I have kids. Some days it's a struggle, but I'm glad I did. It's an amazing experience and I'm a better person because of it.

Exactly. The last generation fought for women to have a choice... women felt like the option of a career was denied to them. They now have that choice, but the reality of the fact that you have to choose family, career, or a lesser combination of both is causing some heads to explode. "You mean we can't have it all?" Well, no, men couldn't have it all either. Every single rom-com or drama movie growing up explained to me that as a man I would face a dilemma: have a super-successful career, or be a great Dad (with the latter always being portrayed as the "right" choice). You have to set priorities. There are trade-offs. For some reason our culture never explained that to young women.

Worker shortages are not bullshit; it's just basic demographics. Go look at a population pyramid sometime. Your generation didn't have nearly as many kids, and now we have a tiny generation entering the workforce just as the largest generation (the boomers) is in the midst of retiring. This isn't rocket science; it's arithmetic. And if you started and grew 4 "successful" companies and you still don't have a wife or a home, then I suspect everything you just posted here is the real bullshit.

Chemical fertilizers have nothing to do with that, eh?