PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: nddons on May 11, 2016, 03:36:46 PM
-
Interesting analysis of how the DOJ's use of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to allow transgenders to select bathrooms based on how they feel will now destroy the results of Title IX.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/5648/obama-doj-cracks-down-womens-bathrooms-they-just-ben-shapiro?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=051016-news-title&utm_campaign=dwbrand
-
It is a Democrat War on Women!
-
It will be fun watching someone actually attempt this in court.
-
Where's the popcorn emoji? This is going to be fun to watch.
-
I've got it on good authority that the authors analysis is deeply flawed.
-
I've got it on good authority that the authors analysis is deeply flawed.
Would that authority be a woman? A Feminist?
-
I've got it on good authority that the authors analysis is deeply flawed.
So your good authority knows that when transsexualism gets defined as a sex in one part of the CRA then it doesn't apply to the other parts of the CRA? How does that work?
-
So your good authority knows that when transsexualism gets defined as a sex in one part of the CRA then it doesn't apply to the other parts of the CRA? How does that work?
Through the magic of hypocritical progressive bullshit.
-
I've got it on good authority that the authors analysis is deeply flawed.
Really. Why don't you tell us what "good authorities" have to say.
-
Really. Why don't you tell us what "good authorities" have to say.
Because then people would point out the flaws. An appeal to authority is a logical fallacy for a reason.
-
Would that authority be a woman? A Feminist?
Yep. And a law professor to boot.
-
Interesting analysis of how the DOJ's use of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to allow transgenders to select bathrooms based on how they feel will now destroy the results of Title IX.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/5648/obama-doj-cracks-down-womens-bathrooms-they-just-ben-shapiro?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=051016-news-title&utm_campaign=dwbrand
Are there any women worried about this or is it only the guys? This whole debate is divorced from reality. But then it is an election year and it is a great way to whip up the GOP base -- the dying remnants of the Confederacy.
I rather seem to recall one Renee Richards who as a transsexual entered women's professional tennis back in the 70's and was going to destroy women's tennis. Guess what, nothing happened. Apparently, transsexual women do not retain their male strength, assuming that had it to begin with, after they go through whatever.
Of course, if the birth certificate is dispositive, the female to male transsexuals will get male strength and get to play on the women's team. Is that what you are hoping for?
-
Of course, if the birth certificate is dispositive...
"if"? Of course it is (or at least should be to anyone with the IQ above that of a soap dish) (actually, it's the genetics, not the birth certificate... in order to handle the cases where there is a typo on the birth certificate)
... the female to male transsexuals will get male strength and get to play on the women's team. Is that what you are hoping for?
PEDs are allowed?
-
"if"? Of course it is (or at least should be to anyone with the IQ above that of a soap dish) (actually, it's the genetics, not the birth certificate... in order to handle the cases where there is a typo on the birth certificate)
Really! We have a lot of sub-soap dish IQ's in this discussion as most everything said parrots the argument that dicks shouldn't be in the women's restroom/locker room. Putting aside the number of times someone may have made a clerical or medical error on a birth certificate, not everyone with XY chromosomes has a dick and not everyone with XX chromosomes doesn't have one. So which is the important one: chromosomes or genitalia? Which should we use to determine who uses which bathrooms.
PEDs are allowed?
I read that transsexual women take female hormones. I assumed that transsexual men took male hormones. Now that you mention it, Chaz Bono is looking quite a bit more masculine than little Chastity did, so I am thinking hormones were involved, but I could be wrong. Not sure where the hair came from without it though. So perhaps if a man's testosterone is at a normal level, whether said testosterone came from a bottle or the gonads, it isn't considered a PED. That would make sense as I assume that all male athletes have testosterone and are not considered to have taken PED's unless the levels are abnormally high.
-
Really! We have a lot of sub-soap dish IQ's in this discussion as most everything said parrots the argument that dicks shouldn't be in the women's restroom/locker room. Putting aside the number of times someone may have made a clerical or medical error on a birth certificate, not everyone with XY chromosomes has a dick and not everyone with XX chromosomes doesn't have one. So which is the important one: chromosomes or genitalia? Which should we use to determine who uses which bathrooms.
I would like to see the percentage of people with XY chromosomes that do not have male genitals and the same for those that have XX chromosomes that do.
-
So which is the important one: chromosomes or genitalia? Which should we use to determine who uses which bathrooms.
why is this even a question?
The answer is genetics determines sex.
The science is sooooo inconvenient.
-
I would like to see the percentage of people with XY chromosomes that do not have male genitals and the same for those that have XX chromosomes that do.
It would be interesting, but I don't think anyone knows for sure. But there are some as anyone who reads the news knows.
Personally, if you look like a guy and act like a guy, I just as soon you used the men's room. I don't really care what is between the legs or what the chromosomes are. Ditto on the sports thing. But hey, that is just me.
-
why is this even a question?
The answer is genetics determines sex.
The science is sooooo inconvenient.
It would inconvenient if you knew anything about the science of this issue or bothered to look up a bit of it, as I have. But in 15m I discovered that there are all sorts of conditions that can give use XY chromosomes without having male genitalia. So it gets back to my point, which is to be the determining factor as to who uses which restroom.
If you think this is cut and dried, you need to do some more reading.
-
It would inconvenient if you knew anything about the science of this issue or bothered to look up a bit of it, as I have. But in 15m I discovered that there are all sorts of conditions that can give use XY chromosomes without having male genitalia. So it gets back to my point, which is to be the determining factor as to who uses which restroom.
If you think this is cut and dried, you need to do some more reading.
Wow! you've spent 15 minutes reading about it.
It must be wonderful to be so full .... of yourself.
-
Personally, I wouldn't mind if a woman comes in the men's room.
And my wife could handle herself if a man came in the women's room, as long as he didn't assault her.
And I don't have any daughters, so I don't really have a dog in that fight. But having never hung out in a woman's rest room, I don't know for sure, but I have a feeling most women don't openly expose themselves in there. Perhaps locker rooms are different, so I think rest rooms and locker rooms should be handled differently.
My proposal is use which ever restroom you are most comfortable, but if you annoy any of my women folk, that is a risk you take.
As for women's locker rooms, "no dicks allowed". Otherwise, you just know that somewhere, sometime, some over eager heterosexual stud or unfulfilled pervert is going to go straight to the girl's showers with a big smile on their face.
-
If a woman loses her uterus because of cancer, is she no longer a woman?
If a man loses his penis and testes due to cancer, is he no longer a man?
-
This is all another Obama ploy to divide the country. It is no accident that he chooses these things.
-
why is this even a question?
The answer is genetics determines sex.
The science is sooooo inconvenient.
Inconvenient (http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943) for you, yes.
-
the GOP base -- the dying remnants of the Confederacy.
For the record - I didn't read anything afterwards. Whatever brilliance you might have ever said has been completely nullified by this bullshit.
I'm neither a Republican nor a supporter of the Confederacy. You just invoked an extension of Godwin's law as the basis of making your argument, you lose.
-
It would be interesting, but I don't think anyone knows for sure. But there are some as anyone who reads the news knows.
Personally, if you look like a guy and act like a guy, I just as soon you used the men's room. I don't really care what is between the legs or what the chromosomes are. Ditto on the sports thing. But hey, that is just me.
My point was that it's likely such a small number that it makes that kind of argument irrelevant. There are medical anomalies that happen (in general) and I would guess the numbers bear this out.
-
Wow! you've spent 15 minutes reading about it.
It must be wonderful to be so full .... of yourself.
I didn't consider 15 minutes much of an accomplishment, more like a prerequisite. But then, knowing what one is talking about on this subject seems to be exceedingly rare.
-
Personally, I wouldn't mind if a woman comes in the men's room.
And my wife could handle herself if a man came in the women's room, as long as he didn't assault her.
And I don't have any daughters, so I don't really have a dog in that fight. But having never hung out in a woman's rest room, I don't know for sure, but I have a feeling most women don't openly expose themselves in there. Perhaps locker rooms are different, so I think rest rooms and locker rooms should be handled differently.
My proposal is use which ever restroom you are most comfortable, but if you annoy any of my women folk, that is a risk you take.
As for women's locker rooms, "no dicks allowed". Otherwise, you just know that somewhere, sometime, some over eager heterosexual stud or unfulfilled pervert is going to go straight to the girl's showers with a big smile on their face.
That is a reasoned compromise with which I agree.
-
For the record - I didn't read anything afterwards. Whatever brilliance you might have ever said has been completely nullified by this bullshit.
I'm neither a Republican nor a supporter of the Confederacy. You just invoked an extension of Godwin's law as the basis of making your argument, you lose.
Do I get credit for inventing the corollary? 8) Regardless of who can claim or disclaim this or that label, the point is that this is an issue largely involving the southern conservative wing of the GOP.
-
My point was that it's likely such a small number that it makes that kind of argument irrelevant. There are medical anomalies that happen (in general) and I would guess the numbers bear this out.
Yes, but once you start enshrining into law definitions and rights based on gender, genitalia, chromosomes, etc, the exceptions matter.
-
Yes, but once you start enshrining into law definitions and rights based on gender, genitalia, chromosomes, etc, the exceptions matter.
You can thank the progressive left for that. This was never an issue until a minority group started crying and then the progressives decided it was something that should be an issue. I have no doubt that there are transgenders that have been using the opposite restroom for years and never made it a big deal. A male is a male and a female is a female and biology and genetics agree with me. Use the restroom of your gender and this won't be a big deal.
-
This is all another Obama ploy to divide the country. It is no accident that he chooses these things.
It is no accident that progressives bring this nonsense up during election years. Just like the idiotic free birth control four years ago, this is just another progressive ploy to move the ball at a time when at least some politicians are too frightened to act like adults.
-
It is no accident that progressives bring this nonsense up during election years. Just like the idiotic free birth control four years ago, this is just another progressive ploy to move the ball at a time when at least some politicians are too frightened to act like adults.
small suggested change: "when at least some politicians are too frightened to act like responsible adults.
-
You can thank the progressive left for that. This was never an issue until a minority group started crying and then the progressives decided it was something that should be an issue. I have no doubt that there are transgenders that have been using the opposite restroom for years and never made it a big deal. A male is a male and a female is a female and biology and genetics agree with me. Use the restroom of your gender and this won't be a big deal.
Over reaction on all sides I would say. There seems to be some issue with dealing with kids under treatment for gender issues and how that plays out in the schools. I don't know enough about how this should be handled and apparently neither does anyone else in this discussion, though I seem to be the only one admitting that. I agree that Obama has over-reached as has North Carolina. I don't know what the right answer is, but it seems to be that it should be sorted out on the local level.
In your mind, is gender and genetic male (XY) and genetic female (XX) the same thing? I am trying to figure out what you mean by "use the restroom of your gender".
-
I am trying to figure out what you mean by "use the restroom of your gender".
I don't understand why this is so confusing.
-
Over reaction on all sides I would say. There seems to be some issue with dealing with kids under treatment for gender issues and how that plays out in the schools. I don't know enough about how this should be handled and apparently neither does anyone else in this discussion, though I seem to be the only one admitting that. I agree that Obama has over-reached as has North Carolina. I don't know what the right answer is, but it seems to be that it should be sorted out on the local level.
In your mind, is gender and genetic male (XY) and genetic female (XX) the same thing? I am trying to figure out what you mean by "use the restroom of your gender".
Please tell me you understand why North Carolina passed the law otherwise more than 15 minutes of study is required.
For the record, I travel to Asia and it is common for women to be cleaning the men's room while being used by men. It's just a fact of life there that you may accidentally get hit in the junk with a mop stick while standing at the urinal. Different cultures different attitudes towards using the restroom. Traditional Japanese toilets are co-ed and if you want to discuss exposure of genitalia, that's the place to look (so to speak).
-
In your mind, is gender and genetic male (XY) and genetic female (XX) the same thing? I am trying to figure out what you mean by "use the restroom of your gender".
It's not that complicated. If you have XY chromosomes you are a male, use the men's restroom. If you have XX chromosomes, you are a female, use the women's restroom. Why do you want to over complicate this? There is no "self identification". You either are, or are not, a particular gender. Having surgery doesn't change that, either.
I saw this video last night and it made my head hurt. Someone actually thinks there may not be a difference between males and females.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4S0gHlKiho
-
It's not that complicated. If you have XY chromosomes you are a male, use the men's restroom. If you have XX chromosomes, you are a female, use the women's restroom. Why do you want to over complicate this? There is no "self identification". You either are, or are not, a particular gender. Having surgery doesn't change that, either.
I saw this video last night and it made my head hurt. Someone actually thinks there may not be a difference between males and females.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4S0gHlKiho
Reality is SO HARD for progressives, because it means that some things are absolute.
You either have an innie, or an outie. It is that simple, except to whining, entitlement, progressives.
-
http://conservativepost.com/texas-transgender-caught-taking-pictures-of-13-yr-old-girls-at-target-lgbts-leader-she-was-born/
"A transgender ‘woman’’, James Goebel, was caught taking photos of teens girls using the restroom at a Dallas area Target store. One of the victims, a 13 year old girl, said she could hear someone’s iphone camera snapping and was curious, so she looked under the stall only to see the camera phone in her face. She ran out and told her father, who held the door shut until police arrived."
-
http://conservativepost.com/texas-transgender-caught-taking-pictures-of-13-yr-old-girls-at-target-lgbts-leader-she-was-born/
"A transgender ‘woman’’, James Goebel, was caught taking photos of teens girls using the restroom at a Dallas area Target store. One of the victims, a 13 year old girl, said she could hear someone’s iphone camera snapping and was curious, so she looked under the stall only to see the camera phone in her face. She ran out and told her father, who held the door shut until police arrived."
Texas seems like a terrible place to try this. Of course, this is also from the article:
Dallas’s local LGBT community has come together to stand in defence with Goebel, claiming she should not be persecuted because she was “born a pedophile and therefore can not change her sexual orientation”. This comment comes from the leader of Dallas’s LGBT Aqua Squad, Dorothy Wright.
This is disgusting. It's not an orientation, it's a way for people to get away with hurting children.
Then there's this, from a very liberal state: A Connecticut woman, who sports a pixie haircut, says she was harassed in a Walmart restroom by a woman who apparently mistook her as transgender.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/woman-mistaken-transgender-harassed-walmart-bathroom-article-1.2638748
So in Texas the LGBT community is defending this guy while in Connecticut a lady took offense to a female whom she thought was a male, using the women's restroom.
-
http://conservativepost.com/texas-transgender-caught-taking-pictures-of-13-yr-old-girls-at-target-lgbts-leader-she-was-born/
"A transgender ‘woman’’, James Goebel, was caught taking photos of teens girls using the restroom at a Dallas area Target store. One of the victims, a 13 year old girl, said she could hear someone’s iphone camera snapping and was curious, so she looked under the stall only to see the camera phone in her face. She ran out and told her father, who held the door shut until police arrived."
And this is where the LGB community has made a fatal mistake by linking itself with transgender freaks. It soils whatever credibility it seeks.
"Dallas’s local LGBT community has come together to stand in defence with Goebel, claiming she should not be persecuted because she was “born a pedophile and therefore can not change her sexual orientation”. This comment comes from the leader of Dallas’s LGBT Aqua Squad, Dorothy Wright."
-
I found the story on FB. One of my FB friends shared it and I decided to also share it. After I shared it on of my FB friends commented on it. I clicked on the notification to see what they said and got the FB broken page thing.
The only explanation I have is that FB censored it and pulled it down. I have no other way to explain it.
-
Please tell me you understand why North Carolina passed the law otherwise more than 15 minutes of study is required.
It was a reaction to a very poorly worded Charlotte town ordinance which permitted anyone to legally use any bathroom they wanted based on which gender they choose to claim. I can't find the ordinance exact wording right now, but it essentially said that your gender was based on your self identification. A police officer responding to a complaint about a man in the women's restroom or locker room would be powerless to order him to leave. That was true even if the man was dressed as a man but said he "felt" like a woman that day.
I think the NC Legislature overreacted to the ordinance. They needed something but they probably went too far. I don't think it is difficult to see why they wound up where they did and I hear more than a little support from around the state.
-
And this is where the LGB community has made a fatal mistake by linking itself with transgender freaks. It soils whatever credibility it seeks.
"Dallas’s local LGBT community has come together to stand in defence with Goebel, claiming she should not be persecuted because she was “born a pedophile and therefore can not change her sexual orientation”. This comment comes from the leader of Dallas’s LGBT Aqua Squad, Dorothy Wright."
This news story was fraudulent, no?
-
This news story was fraudulent, no?
As it turns out the story came originally from a site that specializes in making shit up. Shot isn't bad enough these days that we need sites making up crap news.
My apologies for posting it. :-[
-
Pretty sad that it was so believable that nobody knew for a long time...
-
I don't understand why this is so confusing.
You didn't answer the question: In your mind, is gender and genetic male (XY) and genetic female (XX) the same thing?
I am just wondering if you think we all need to have our chromosomes checked to make sure we are using the correct restrooms?
-
Please tell me you understand why North Carolina passed the law otherwise more than 15 minutes of study is required.
For the record, I travel to Asia and it is common for women to be cleaning the men's room while being used by men. It's just a fact of life there that you may accidentally get hit in the junk with a mop stick while standing at the urinal. Different cultures different attitudes towards using the restroom. Traditional Japanese toilets are co-ed and if you want to discuss exposure of genitalia, that's the place to look (so to speak).
So what you are really saying is that this distinction between male and female restrooms is merely cultural and you are not willing to change that to accommodate transgender people.
-
It's not that complicated. If you have XY chromosomes you are a male, use the men's restroom. If you have XX chromosomes, you are a female, use the women's restroom. Why do you want to over complicate this? There is no "self identification". You either are, or are not, a particular gender. Having surgery doesn't change that, either.
So you are advocating restrooms for male (XY), female (XX), and "other" for (XXY, XO, XXXY, androgen insensitivity syndrome, etc)?
Fair enough! The only problem I see is having to get everyone tested so that they know which restroom to use.
-
And this is where the LGB community has made a fatal mistake by linking itself with transgender freaks. It soils whatever credibility it seeks.
Well, the made up story did accomplish one thing. It got you to remove any doubt about your bigotry in the matter.
-
So you are advocating restrooms for male (XY), female (XX), and "other" for (XXY, XO, XXXY, androgen insensitivity syndrome, etc)?
Fair enough! The only problem I see is having to get everyone tested so that they know which restroom to use.
No. Why do you continue to make this more complicated than it needs to be? I've agreed there are medical anomalies but those are a very small percentage. I've also said that I have no doubt that transgendered people have likely been using whatever restroom they want for years and it's never been an issue because they didn't make it one. The progressives and media need something else to make an issue out of, especially in an election year.
Where do we draw the line? If anybody can "self identify" as anything they want, we'll spend years and countless sums of money accommodating each individual so they can feel special. How about you just use the restroom of your actual gender and we call it good?
-
It was a reaction to a very poorly worded Charlotte town ordinance which permitted anyone to legally use any bathroom they wanted based on which gender they choose to claim. I can't find the ordinance exact wording right now, but it essentially said that your gender was based on your self identification. A police officer responding to a complaint about a man in the women's restroom or locker room would be powerless to order him to leave. That was true even if the man was dressed as a man but said he "felt" like a woman that day.
I think the NC Legislature overreacted to the ordinance. They needed something but they probably went too far. I don't think it is difficult to see why they wound up where they did and I hear more than a little support from around the state.
You are correct. I wonder if Kristin was also so knowledgeable about the history.
-
So what you are really saying is that this distinction between male and female restrooms is merely cultural and you are not willing to change that to accommodate transgender people.
Transgender is a choice made by the mentally challenged (retarded). So no, I'm not in favor of accommodation unless it's within the confines of a mental institution.
-
You are correct. I wonder if Kristin was also so knowledgeable about the history.
Me too. I was saving the trouble of having to go out and dig out the history of why HB2 is actually better than what it was fixing.
-
This entire charade is nothing but a made up outrage, carefully timed to occur during an election year, so lazy, self-obsessed lesbians and homosexual males can 'feel' important and special. using the election year timing many folks, like Kristen, will automatically jump on the bandwagon because that's what progressives do.
It's really quite simple.
Progressives NEED attention. They need it now. And they need it all the time.
Their motivation is selfish and destructive, but the need for attention is so pervasive that they willingly embrace destructive things as long as it means they get attention for being special, and sensitive, which makes them feel superior and oh so much better than ordinary people.
That's why no progressives gave transgender bathroom access a second thought until it became a new way to garner attention to themselves. Progressives couldn't care less about transgender bathroom access. They care about faux outrage and attention getting protests, that always lead to attacks against everyone else, because as soon as a progressive jumps on a bandwagon, they pretend that makes them more sensitive, more evolved, and more special than normal folks, and that's the real agenda.
-
PEDs are allowed?
Personal Electronic Devices??? ;D
I would like to see the percentage of people with XY chromosomes that do not have male genitals and the same for those that have XX chromosomes that do.
Admit it, you just want to see the genetalia :o
This is all another Obama ploy to divide the country. It is no accident that he chooses these things.
Yes, because dammit to hell if people should have an opinion about something controversial...
http://conservativepost.com/texas-transgender-caught-taking-pictures-of-13-yr-old-girls-at-target-lgbts-leader-she-was-born/
"A transgender ‘woman’’, James Goebel, was caught taking photos of teens girls using the restroom at a Dallas area Target store. One of the victims, a 13 year old girl, said she could hear someone’s iphone camera snapping and was curious, so she looked under the stall only to see the camera phone in her face. She ran out and told her father, who held the door shut until police arrived."
It would be sad if the rest of the story included the father being arrested for unlawful detainment.
-
Well, the made up story did accomplish one thing. It got you to remove any doubt about your bigotry in the matter.
There is nothing bigoted about not accepting swinging dicks in women's bathrooms and, worse, locker rooms and showers. If a woman wants to come in to a men's bathroom or locker room, I couldn't care less. The risk of men in women's facilities is much greater, given the rape and sexual assault statistics, and the number of registered sex offenders living in virtually every community in this country.
I could not care less about the "feelings" of some dude who thinks he's a woman, when it conflicts with the expectations of privacy and safety of women and girls.
You keep raising statistically insignificant medical abnormalities as the reasons for these laws. Yet that is never cited as the rationale for these laws, nor should it be.
The rationale is for accommodation of the "feelings" of someone who thinks they are the other gender, but are not. That is not something worthy of making wholesale accommodations. Yet the GLB lobby has made the "T" minority their cause celeb.
-
This entire charade is nothing but a made up outrage, carefully timed to occur during an election year, so lazy, self-obsessed lesbians and homosexual males can 'feel' important and special. using the election year timing many folks, like Kristen, will automatically jump on the bandwagon because that's what progressives do.
It's really quite simple.
Progressives NEED attention. They need it now. And they need it all the time.
Their motivation is selfish and destructive, but the need for attention is so pervasive that they willingly embrace destructive things as long as it means they get attention for being special, and sensitive, which makes them feel superior and oh so much better than ordinary people.
That's why no progressives gave transgender bathroom access a second thought until it became a new way to garner attention to themselves. Progressives couldn't care less about transgender bathroom access. They care about faux outrage and attention getting protests, that always lead to attacks against everyone else, because as soon as a progressive jumps on a bandwagon, they pretend that makes them more sensitive, more evolved, and more special than normal folks, and that's the real agenda.
Exactly.
-
Where the fuck are we as a country that the President feels it his responsibility to set bathroom rules.
-
You didn't answer the question: In your mind, is gender and genetic male (XY) and genetic female (XX) the same thing?
I am just wondering if you think we all need to have our chromosomes checked to make sure we are using the correct restrooms?
No, I think that original plumbing is enough to determine gender.
-
The rationale is for accommodation of the "feelings" of someone who thinks they are the other gender, but are not. That is not something worthy of making wholesale accommodations. Yet the GLB lobby has made the "T" minority their cause celeb.
[/quote
This is not about LGBT feelings. It is yet another way for the Dems and the media to further divide, and distract us from the real, crisis issues going on right now.
-
No, I think that original plumbing is enough to determine gender.
Would you really want a guy that had a sex change operation using the men's room?
-
At lunch today, I was served by a small, androgynous Asian person. I didn't know what to think.
Speaking of which, anyone see this movie? I got about 3/4 through it years ago when my wife and I were dating; we put it on indefinite pause.
-
To understand that this is a political agenda playing out, and not in any way about transgender issues look at it this way.
A few weeks ago nobody on the far left could have cared less about forcing people to accept child molesters and sexual predators into public and school bathrooms and showers with young girls.
Now these same hypocrites are all about screaming and whining about anyone that dares apply common sense to the question.
Where were these faux sensitive people before it was the new make believe rage?
Nowhere to be found until progressives could use it to further divide and gather attention to their pathetic existences.
-
Where were these faux sensitive people before it was the new make believe rage?
Nowhere to be found until progressives could use it to further divide and gather attention to their pathetic existences.
All these issues have been made up by the Dems, especially the Obama Admin, and the DOJ. Fake outrage, fake issues, all promoted by the complicit media. All done to further divide and conquer, and it is working.
-
No. Why do you continue to make this more complicated than it needs to be? I've agreed there are medical anomalies but those are a very small percentage. I've also said that I have no doubt that transgendered people have likely been using whatever restroom they want for years and it's never been an issue because they didn't make it one. The progressives and media need something else to make an issue out of, especially in an election year.
Gee, it looks to me like the conservatives are the ones using this to whip up the base in an election year. Maybe both are doing it.
Where do we draw the line? If anybody can "self identify" as anything they want, we'll spend years and countless sums of money accommodating each individual so they can feel special. How about you just use the restroom of your actual gender and we call it good?
So that small minority just doesn't get any restroom too use.
-
Transgender is a choice made by the mentally challenged (retarded). So no, I'm not in favor of accommodation unless it's within the confines of a mental institution.
And I bet you are surprised when you are accused of bigotry.
-
Gee, it looks to me like the conservatives are the ones using this to whip up the base in an election year. Maybe both are doing it.
I don't understand where you are getting that from.
So that small minority just doesn't get any restroom too use.
Or this. I've already stated which restroom they should use.
-
This entire charade is nothing but a made up outrage, carefully timed to occur during an election year, so lazy, self-obsessed lesbians and homosexual males can 'feel' important and special. using the election year timing many folks, like Kristen, will automatically jump on the bandwagon because that's what progressives do.
It's really quite simple.
Progressives NEED attention. They need it now. And they need it all the time.
Their motivation is selfish and destructive, but the need for attention is so pervasive that they willingly embrace destructive things as long as it means they get attention for being special, and sensitive, which makes them feel superior and oh so much better than ordinary people.
That's why no progressives gave transgender bathroom access a second thought until it became a new way to garner attention to themselves. Progressives couldn't care less about transgender bathroom access. They care about faux outrage and attention getting protests, that always lead to attacks against everyone else, because as soon as a progressive jumps on a bandwagon, they pretend that makes them more sensitive, more evolved, and more special than normal folks, and that's the real agenda.
This entire charade is nothing but a made up outrage, carefully timed to occur during an election year, so that the homophobic, the bigoted, the insecure, and the angry will forget that the politicians are picking their pocket and line up to support the GOP by making them feel righteous and superior.
-
There is nothing bigoted about not accepting swinging dicks in women's bathrooms and, worse, locker rooms and showers. If a woman wants to come in to a men's bathroom or locker room, I couldn't care less. The risk of men in women's facilities is much greater, given the rape and sexual assault statistics, and the number of registered sex offenders living in virtually every community in this country.
I thought it was all about chromosomes. Now it is switching to genitalia. You need to make up your mind here. So you don't have a problem with post-operative transsexuals using the restroom concomitant with their new gender?
I could not care less about the "feelings" of some dude who thinks he's a woman, when it conflicts with the expectations of privacy and safety of women and girls.
Spare us the Sir Lancelot act. If men were really all that concerned about women they would do something about the omnipresent sexual abuse from the very large number of men who feel their wives are fair game for physical or sexual violence. The transgendered are the least of our concerns.
-
And I bet you are surprised when you are accused of bigotry.
It's never happened in all my 49 years. Are you going to be the first? I'd be honored if you were. :o
Just because the DSM is changed due to politically correct pressure doesn't make it correct.
-
Spare us the Sir Lancelot act. If men were really all that concerned about women they would do something about the omnipresent sexual abuse from the very large number of men who feel their wives are fair game for physical or sexual violence. The transgendered are the least of our concerns.
Liberals voted him in as POTUS, twice. The person you're thinking about is William Jefferson Clinton.
-
The transgendered are the least of our concerns.
Transgenders are not our concern. People like this are.
(Man in dressing room) http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2016/05/17/shopper-upset-man-allowed-to-use-womens-dressing-room-in-ross/
(Man in pool locker room) http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wa-man-women-bathroom-test-transgender-ruling-article-1.2535150
(Man in homeless shelter showers) http://www.torontosun.com/2014/02/26/predator-who-claimed-to-be-transgender-declared-dangerous-offender
(Man filming women in bathroom) http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Man-Dressed-as-Woman-Arrested-for-Spying-Into-Mall-Bathroom-Stall-Police-Say-351232041.html
(And again) http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Secret-Recording-Store-Mall-Antelope-Valley-Palmdale-Restroom-207541101.html
(and again) http://www.dailywire.com/news/330/university-toronto-dumps-transgender-bathrooms-pardes-seleh
These are all recent and all directly related to official announcements of allowing transgenders to use their choice of bathroom.
Before these announcements, nobody believed these things were OK. Then they were told they were and suddenly the perverts are coming out of the wood work and showing up all over the place. I think right now they're in a "testing" phase, trying out what they can get away with.
Laws like NC-HB2 have become a necessity because liberals didn't listen. They pushed without understanding the consequences and CREATED a dangerous situation that now must be fixed with overly restrictive laws.
-
Just who wrote and published the decree? Seems to me Obama has brought this to the fore. Is he a Republican now?
-
Just who wrote and published the decree? Seems to me Obama has brought this to the fore. Is he a Republican now?
Lots of local organizations and governments.
In NC, this was kicked off by a Charlotte city ordinance. In Washington, it was a State law that they're now trying to walk back. Toronto, it was a university policy.
It doesn't matter what the source was, telling people that they can choose which bathroom to use has negative consequences because you're giving them permission to be there.
-
I thought it was all about chromosomes. Now it is switching to genitalia. You need to make up your mind here. So you don't have a problem with post-operative transsexuals using the restroom concomitant with their new gender?
Spare us the Sir Lancelot act. If men were really all that concerned about women they would do something about the omnipresent sexual abuse from the very large number of men who feel their wives are fair game for physical or sexual violence. The transgendered are the least of our concerns.
Ah, another of the truly militant, angry feminist I see. My sister is one as well. I presume you yell "I can do it MYSELF!" when someone holds the door open for you, right?
As to your first paragraph, to whom are you addressing when you say "you"? I've always said where you go depends on your hardware. So no, if someone had an addadicktome surgery, then the men's room would be appropriate. If someone tucks his dick and puts on a dress, the women's room is NOT appropriate. Leave it to you to complicate it.
As to your second, you may enjoy ordering the men in your life to sit down to pee and otherwise diminish their manhood, but fortunately what you say is inconsequential. If protecting people from harm is a Sir Lancelot act, then I'm sorry if that goes against your feminist playbook. Get over it.
-
Liberals voted him in as POTUS, twice. The person you're thinking about is William Jefferson Clinton.
Good example of a predator. He is not, however, a transvestite, transsexual, trans-whatever.
-
Transgenders are not our concern. People like this are.
(Man in dressing room) http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2016/05/17/shopper-upset-man-allowed-to-use-womens-dressing-room-in-ross/
(Man in pool locker room) http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wa-man-women-bathroom-test-transgender-ruling-article-1.2535150
(Man in homeless shelter showers) http://www.torontosun.com/2014/02/26/predator-who-claimed-to-be-transgender-declared-dangerous-offender
(Man filming women in bathroom) http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Man-Dressed-as-Woman-Arrested-for-Spying-Into-Mall-Bathroom-Stall-Police-Say-351232041.html
(And again) http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Secret-Recording-Store-Mall-Antelope-Valley-Palmdale-Restroom-207541101.html
(and again) http://www.dailywire.com/news/330/university-toronto-dumps-transgender-bathrooms-pardes-seleh
These are all recent and all directly related to official announcements of allowing transgenders to use their choice of bathroom.
Before these announcements, nobody believed these things were OK. Then they were told they were and suddenly the perverts are coming out of the wood work and showing up all over the place. I think right now they're in a "testing" phase, trying out what they can get away with.
Laws like NC-HB2 have become a necessity because liberals didn't listen. They pushed without understanding the consequences and CREATED a dangerous situation that now must be fixed with overly restrictive laws.
I don't believe that in most jurisdictions there were laws about who used which restroom. Indecent exposure and lewd and lascivious conduct was, and still is, illegal. I would not be surprised if most of these recent ones which were not obviously perverts, were probably conservatives making a political statement. This too will pass.
-
Ah, another of the truly militant, angry feminist I see. My sister is one as well. I presume you yell "I can do it MYSELF!" when someone holds the door open for you, right?
Only occasionally, like when some dick brain tells me that women are mentally and biologically capable of competently flying an aircraft. Fortunately, the ones I have run across that have been willing to say that to a woman's face have likely all shuffled off this mortal coil
As to your first paragraph, to whom are you addressing when you say "you"? I've always said where you go depends on your hardware. So no, if someone had an addadicktome surgery, then the men's room would be appropriate. If someone tucks his dick and puts on a dress, the women's room is NOT appropriate. Leave it to you to complicate it.
Well, some of you are argument for chromosomes and birth gender, as NC legislated, and others have taken the somewhat more sensible approach as you have here.
If protecting people from harm is a Sir Lancelot act, then I'm sorry if that goes against your feminist playbook. Get over it.
Protective concern for a nonexistent danger while ignoring more real dangers is not genuine concern. It is an act to cover whatever revulsion or disgust you feel towards the unfortunate.
-
Well, some of you are argument for chromosomes and birth gender, as NC legislated, and others have taken the somewhat more sensible approach as you have here.
Care to show us the language of the HB 2 that says birth gender?
-
Well, some of you are argument for chromosomes and birth gender, as NC legislated, and others have taken the somewhat more sensible approach as you have here.
I also said that it's likely that transgenders have been using whatever restroom they wanted for a while and it wasn't a huge deal because they didn't make it one. This is only a big deal now because the progressives want to make it one by saying that your gender doesn't matter, only what you feel like you are. This is already leading to other, much bigger issues.
-
Good example of a predator. He is not, however, a transvestite, transsexual, trans-whatever.
Hot damn, something we agree upon ;D Except of course we don't know his attire when he and the Hildabeast are bumping uglies.
-
This entire charade is nothing but a made up outrage, carefully timed to occur during an election year, so that the homophobic, the bigoted, the insecure, and the angry will forget that the politicians are picking their pocket and line up to support the GOP by making them feel righteous and superior.
You are full of shit. You're hatred of conservatives is the driving force behind your posts and your devotion to the progressive mantra overrides anything you bring to this topic.
If the same jerk exposes himself to young girls one foot from the restroom he goes to jail as a flasher. Somehow you blind, pathetic, progressives think if the jerk exposes himself on the inside of the girls room door anyone telling him to leave and cover up should go to jail.
You people are insane.
Liberalism has become a mental disorder.
-
Interesting article from the Daily Signal:
One fact will remain, no matter how deep in the tank Obama goes for the gender nonconformists, genetics and God’s design of male and female, no matter how repugnant that is to some, cannot be changed. Biological gender remains fixed no matter how many cross-gender hormones are taken or cosmetic surgeries are performed. No law can change the genetic and biblical truth of God’s design. Using financial blackmail to achieve the elimination of gender will become Obama’s ugly legacy.
http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/16/a-former-transgender-persons-take-on-obamas-bathroom-directive/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Top5&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWTJabFlqSTNNalF3TXpFNCIsInQiOiI5eDhkR0NcL01cL2QxV2hFK01LZnZ1QmFFRFwvWm5jWFVna0tPakIwQklrUjd6bTNGWjBPdTNrdUdmNnU0SjVlSDlSSHRjcVVyaTRMU0VCWm9kbVJTNGZCazdwKyt6RzhKUHo4TzZDMTFoRndsYz0ifQ%3D%3D
-
I don't believe that in most jurisdictions there were laws about who used which restroom. Indecent exposure and lewd and lascivious conduct was, and still is, illegal.
Yes, it is. So why do men suddenly think they can enter the ladies restrooms and locker rooms? Because they have been been told that they legally can do it. It's removed a barrier and created direct access to a boundary condition. Disturbed men are acting on it.
Question - if a transgender man is using a women's locker room and exposes his penis to a young girl, he's committed a pretty serious sex offense hasn't he? Basically he is no different than the flasher in a trenchcoat.
I would not be surprised if most of these recent ones which were not obviously perverts, were probably conservatives making a political statement. This too will pass.
You think someone deliberately took actions to get themselves registered as a sex offender for the purpose of pointing out that it was possible? Do you realize how laughable that sounds? Go back and re-read it with a neutral mind and try to fight off your embarrassment at what you wrote.
No, it isn't going to pass, it is going to get worse. Here's another one that I missed, it just showed up in the "past 24 hours" search. Man filming a 10 year old girl. http://fox43.com/2016/04/21/alleged-ladies-restroom-peeper-arrested-on-child-pornography-charge/
I keep getting them mixed up, there are too many to keep straight. I believe I also missed one about a man assaulting a 8 year old girl in a Chicago ladies bathroom in a Jason's Deli. Again, the barriers to him being in the bathroom were broken down and that put him and his victim alone in the bathroom.
Do you know where I haven't seen one of these stories? In North Carolina.
-
Good example of a predator. He is not, however, a transvestite, transsexual, trans-whatever.
Jessica Hambrook is a straight transvestite man. And a predator.
-
Care to show us the language of the HB 2 that says birth gender?
Google it yourself. The specific language is gender on the birth certificate, but don't take my word for it.
-
I also said that it's likely that transgenders have been using whatever restroom they wanted for a while and it wasn't a huge deal because they didn't make it one. This is only a big deal now because the progressives want to make it one by saying that your gender doesn't matter, only what you feel like you are. This is already leading to other, much bigger issues.
I have said consistently that I thought the local government went too far and that the legislature went too far in response. And then Obama screwed everything up by getting in the middle. There is certainly a problem for schools that have transgender kids, but It seems like it should be worked out on the local level.
-
Hot damn, something we agree upon ;D Except of course we don't know his attire when he and the Hildabeast are bumping uglies.
Bad visual there. Wish I hadn't read that before dinner. :o
-
You are full of shit. You're hatred of conservatives is the driving force behind your posts and your devotion to the progressive mantra overrides anything you bring to this topic.
Oh no dear! It is just you.
If the same jerk exposes himself to young girls one foot from the restroom he goes to jail as a flasher. Somehow you blind, pathetic, progressives think if the jerk exposes himself on the inside of the girls room door anyone telling him to leave and cover up should go to jail.
If the same jerk exposes himself inside the restroom he still goes to jail. Let me clue you on a little something that might have escaped your notice during one of your mindless rants; the women's restrooms have stalls. There are no urinals. They don't work well for women. We use a basic flush type toilet in a little stall, in which it is very difficult to have more than one person in there. For that reason, we we don't see each other's genitalia. Maybe guys are waving their weinies around, but women are much more refined. So if anyone is in the women's room flashing genitals, then it is pretty clearly indecent exposure.
Liberalism has become a mental disorder.
No more than angry, narrow-minded bigots like you.
-
Google it yourself. The specific language is gender on the birth certificate, but don't take my word for it.
See what you did there? You previously said birth gender. The two are not the same.
-
Yes, it is. So why do men suddenly think they can enter the ladies restrooms and locker rooms? Because they have been been told that they legally can do it. It's removed a barrier and created direct access to a boundary condition. Disturbed men are acting on it.
What jurisdiction was it illegal for men to be in the women's room? Fortunately, we don't make laws based on what the deranged me do. If we did, all gun ownership would be illegal.
Question - if a transgender man is using a women's locker room and exposes his penis to a young girl, he's committed a pretty serious sex offense hasn't he? Basically he is no different than the flasher in a trenchcoat.
No, I don't think it is quite the same thing. There is the issue of intent. I am sure that most transgendered women have no desire for anyone to see their penis. If they were that proud of it, I doubt that they would be transgender. While this may shock you, women can handle the sight of a penis. The uncomfortable part comes when we don't know what is coming next. So if some man is waving a penis at us, the fear comes in from what he is going to do next, not the sight of the penis per se.
You think someone deliberately took actions to get themselves registered as a sex offender for the purpose of pointing out that it was possible? Do you realize how laughable that sounds? Go back and re-read it with a neutral mind and try to fight off your embarrassment at what you wrote.
The ones that are just in the women's room with their clothes are are not likely to be convicted of a sex crime. If they are laying about with their dick hanging out, then they are of the "obvious pervert" exception I made. No embarrassment here as I understood what I wrote when I wrote it.
No, it isn't going to pass, it is going to get worse. Here's another one that I missed, it just showed up in the "past 24 hours" search. Man filming a 10 year old girl. http://fox43.com/2016/04/21/alleged-ladies-restroom-peeper-arrested-on-child-pornography-charge/
Obvious pervert. It will not be hard to get a conviction there.
I keep getting them mixed up, there are too many to keep straight. I believe I also missed one about a man assaulting a 8 year old girl in a Chicago ladies bathroom in a Jason's Deli. Again, the barriers to him being in the bathroom were broken down and that put him and his victim alone in the bathroom.
That story did not identify whether there was separate restrooms for men or women or whether there was just one, in which case the bathroom laws have no bearing.
-
See what you did there? You previously said birth gender. The two are not the same.
Birth gender and gender on the birth certificate do seem functionally equivalent.
Unless I'm missing something.
Under what circumstance would they not be the same?
-
There is the issue of intent. I am sure that most transgendered women have no desire for anyone to see their penis. If they were that proud of it, I doubt that they would be transgender. While this may shock you, women can handle the sight of a penis. The uncomfortable part comes when we don't know what is coming next. So if some man is waving a penis at us, the fear comes in from what he is going to do next, not the sight of the penis per se.
Then why do we have laws prohibiting adults from exposing themselves even accidentally to a minor? As soon as you put a child in the picture, intent pretty much goes out the window.
Since the term "transgender" covers such a broad area, you really have no idea what a transgender man wants and doesn't want when it comes to their penis. To claim otherwise is just not credible.
Transgender: denoting or relating to a person whose self-identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender.
A straight transvestite is transgender. So is a gay crossdresser, but I suspect neither has any desire to rid themselves of their penis or to refrain from exposing it to the appropriate people and perhaps to inappropriate people.
You cannot narrow intent to just the ones that wrap up the issues conveniently for you because each individual has unique intent. Nor is it necessarily possible to determine intent afterwards. The best you can do is take a best guess, which is assured to be wrong sooner or later.
-
Birth gender and gender on the birth certificate do seem functionally equivalent.
Unless I'm missing something.
Under what circumstance would they not be the same?
Apparently there are jurisdictions that allow someone to change the sex on their birth certificate if they've had a sex change operation. It's rediculously stupid, but there it is...
-
Birth gender and gender on the birth certificate do seem functionally equivalent.
Unless I'm missing something.
Under what circumstance would they not be the same?
Your birth gender would be what was on your birth certificate the day you arrived. Now let's say at age 32 you decided to change sex through medical means. At the point in time all that takes place, the gender on your birth certificate will be changed to match your new gender. Seem like they are functionally quite different to me.
BTW, that is part of what makes all the hullabaloo over HB2 bullshit. Even tranny's can have their birth certificate changed.
-
Birth gender and gender on the birth certificate do seem functionally equivalent.
Unless I'm missing something.
Under what circumstance would they not be the same?
See my answer to Kristen and I see others have chimed in already too. Most of think that what it says when you came out of the womb is it, period.
The answer though is why the liberals seem crazy to be so spun up over HB2 since someone who had a sex change would be using the restroom of their new sex and that would also be the sex on their birth certificate. Tranny's can also have their birth certificate changed.
I suppose we can argue all day on dumb all that seems, but as far as HB2 goes it would only really be a problem for a trangender that has not decided to have their birth certificate altered.
-
OK.
My assumption was that when referring to one's "birth certificate", one was referring to a singular document issued at the time of one's birth. It was hard for me to imagine under what circumstances that would not coincide with the sex of the newborn.
If a "birth certificate" is seen as a "living document", changeable over time, then I'll concede the difference. I just never imagined it used in such a way.
-
OK.
My assumption was that when referring to one's "birth certificate", one was referring to a singular document issued at the time of one's birth. It was hard for me to imagine under what circumstances that would not coincide with the sex of the newborn.
If a "birth certificate" is seen as a "living document", changeable over time, then I'll concede the difference. I just never imagined it used in such a way.
Welcome to liberal land, where down is up, north is south, and humans are amphibians capable of changing their genders.
Who knew that "Lola" by the Kinks was prescient.
-
Then why do we have laws prohibiting adults from exposing themselves even accidentally to a minor? As soon as you put a child in the picture, intent pretty much goes out the window.
I am not up on sex crimes. Not my area of the law. I know we have such for statutory rape, but I have never heard that there was absolute criminal liability for exposure. I hope that there is an exception for family or my mother is a serial sex criminal, given the number of times I saw here in the all together.
Since the term "transgender" covers such a broad area, you really have no idea what a transgender man wants and doesn't want when it comes to their penis. To claim otherwise is just not credible.
A straight transvestite is transgender. So is a gay crossdresser, but I suspect neither has any desire to rid themselves of their penis or to refrain from exposing it to the appropriate people and perhaps to inappropriate people.
You must know more transvestites and gay drag queens than I do. I always that they were doing it for kicks and not because they thought they were actually female. I will bow to your superior experience on that.
You cannot narrow intent to just the ones that wrap up the issues conveniently for you because each individual has unique intent. Nor is it necessarily possible to determine intent afterwards. The best you can do is take a best guess, which is assured to be wrong sooner or later.
Most of criminal law involves intent on some level or another, but it an element of the crime or relevant in sentencing. Criminal law has encompassed the concept of "intent" for centuries and juries seem to be able to figure it out.
-
Apparently there are jurisdictions that allow someone to change the sex on their birth certificate if they've had a sex change operation. It's rediculously stupid, but there it is...
Well, about 15 years ago I needed a passport and sent for a copy of my birth certificate. What I got back was a computer generated certificate with the state seal that attested to my name, parents, and gender. However, since it was computer generated, I assume that any element of it could be changed. I am guessing that they quit storing all those old paper files and have just entered all the info into the computers.
-
Apparently there are jurisdictions that allow someone to change the sex on their birth certificate if they've had a sex change operation. It's ridiculously stupid, but there it is...
Here in Georgia if you have a sex change operation the state will send your employer a very detailed letter of the things you must do. A couple of them are that you must seal the employees records, since they will not exist anymore in the eyes if the state and you must not refer to them by their old name.
-
Here in Georgia if you have a sex change operation the state will send your employer a very detailed letter of the things you must do. A couple of them are that you must seal the employees records, since they will not exist anymore in the eyes if the state and you must not refer to them by their old name.
Not doubting, but I'd love to see that actual document linked.
-
... and you must not refer to them by their old name.
Do this apply to everyone with a name change or only the idiots that mutilate their bodies to pretend to be a different gender?
-
Not doubting, but I'd love to see that actual document linked.
http://www.lambdalegal.org/know-your-rights/transgender/changing-birth-certificate-sex-designations
-
http://www.lambdalegal.org/know-your-rights/transgender/changing-birth-certificate-sex-designations
Thanks - I'll check that out.
I just did. All it says is: "Statute: Ga. Code Ann. § 31-10-23(e) (2005).
Text: (e) Upon receipt of a certified copy of a court order indicating the sex of an individual born in this state has been changed by surgical procedure and that such individual's name has been changed, the certificate of birth of such individual shall be amended as prescribed by regulation."
Where does "A couple of them are that you must seal the employees records, since they will not exist anymore in the eyes if the state and you must not refer to them by their old name." appear? Or did you mean terms like that may appear in some states other than GA? I did not read your post that way.
-
Thanks - I'll check that out.
I just did. All it says is: "Statute: Ga. Code Ann. § 31-10-23(e) (2005).
Text: (e) Upon receipt of a certified copy of a court order indicating the sex of an individual born in this state has been changed by surgical procedure and that such individual's name has been changed, the certificate of birth of such individual shall be amended as prescribed by regulation."
Where does "A couple of them are that you must seal the employees records, since they will not exist anymore in the eyes if the state and you must not refer to them by their old name." appear? Or did you mean terms like that may appear in some states other than GA? I did not read your post that way.
I lived through this when an employee I had went from he to she. We received a letter from the state giving us precise instructions as to what was required of us. Once they go under the knife he ceases to exist and she is what is left.
-
I lived through this when an employee I had went from he to she. We received a letter from the state giving us precise instructions as to what was required of us. Once they go under the knife he ceases to exist and she is what is left.
Not according to biology but that doesn't matter anymore. Feelings override science.
-
Not according to biology but that doesn't matter anymore. Feelings override science.
For the life of me I can't understand the make believe outrage of progressives over people's actual plumbing.
It is clearly more of that transformation they are so intent upon that will finish off America once and for all.
Not a single person is ever harmed by being required to use the restroom that corresponds to their PLUMBING, not their feelings, fake feelings, or make believe feelings.
-
You must know more transvestites and gay drag queens than I do. I always that they were doing it for kicks and not because they thought they were actually female. I will bow to your superior experience on that.
Yes, I do actually know a few, 3 actually, which I am astounded at. But I also live in NC and HB2 is a direct law for me. Therefore I have sought more education. The reasons people dress as the opposite sex runs the gamut - because they're legitimately convinced or have convinced themselves that they are supposed to be the opposite sex, it's fun, it's a challenge, it's work, it's kinky, it's taboo or it's a way to gain access to places they're not supposed to be so they can get a sexual thrill. I've probably missed quite a bit. These people can be gay, straight, bi or claim some orientation that you and I don't comprehend. Some are really good and some are not.
Do you often form opinions on things that you're not fully educated about?
HB2 posits that there are more perverts who would have taken advantage of the Charlotte city ordinance than transgender people that it would have helped. Based on my research, I have to agree. More people will be victimized by legitimizing bathroom choice than by than will be helped by it.
-
Yes, I do actually know a few, 3 actually, which I am astounded at. But I also live in NC and HB2 is a direct law for me. Therefore I have sought more education. The reasons people dress as the opposite sex runs the gamut - because they're legitimately convinced or have convinced themselves that they are supposed to be the opposite sex, it's fun, it's a challenge, it's work, it's kinky, it's taboo or it's a way to gain access to places they're not supposed to be so they can get a sexual thrill. I've probably missed quite a bit. These people can be gay, straight, bi or claim some orientation that you and I don't comprehend. Some are really good and some are not.
Do you often form opinions on things that you're not fully educated about?
HB2 posits that there are more perverts who would have taken advantage of the Charlotte city ordinance than transgender people that it would have helped. Based on my research, I have to agree. More people will be victimized by legitimizing bathroom choice than by than will be helped by it.
I have an acquaintance who is a Mecklenburg county cop who is engaged to a lefty, so his response is coming from the left as well. He has said that there never was a law prohibiting men from using women's bathrooms, so he was critical of HB2.
In other words, just because there was no previous law, the Charlotte ordinance was moot, and the NC law was an overreaction.
I didn't engage him on this, but if I did, I would ask "is that your defense?" IMO, the Charlotte law "normalized" perverse use of different gender's use of bathrooms and locker rooms, and any normal-thinking person could see that there will be dangerous consequences from it.
-
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160525/04c5fd85acd64b61cb1a1582eedd62df.jpg)
-
Mmmmmmm...
...banana!
-
I lived through this when an employee I had went from he to she. We received a letter from the state giving us precise instructions as to what was required of us. Once they go under the knife he ceases to exist and she is what is left.
Damn! And all this time, I'd been making the argument that a man is more than his Pockets and his Penis.
-
Damn! And all this time, I'd been making the argument that a man is more than his Pockets and his Penis.
You'll have to add vagina to the list ;)
-
I lived through this when an employee I had went from he to she. We received a letter from the state giving us precise instructions as to what was required of us. Once they go under the knife he ceases to exist and she is what is left.
I'm curious: Did "she" have to interview for the job since "he" resigned from the position? What if you'd made a decision not to hire - for whatever reason you felt that someone else would be better suited to the position? Oh, man talk about being forced into a corner.
-
I'm curious: Did "she" have to interview for the job since "he" resigned from the position? What if you'd made a decision not to hire - for whatever reason you felt that someone else would be better suited to the position? Oh, man talk about being forced into a corner.
He had not been with us long enough to qualify for medical leave and us holding his position. He was told that after his surgery and recovery she could always apply for any opening we might have.
-
Yes, I do actually know a few, 3 actually, which I am astounded at. But I also live in NC and HB2 is a direct law for me. Therefore I have sought more education. The reasons people dress as the opposite sex runs the gamut - because they're legitimately convinced or have convinced themselves that they are supposed to be the opposite sex, it's fun, it's a challenge, it's work, it's kinky, it's taboo or it's a way to gain access to places they're not supposed to be so they can get a sexual thrill. I've probably missed quite a bit. These people can be gay, straight, bi or claim some orientation that you and I don't comprehend. Some are really good and some are not.
Do you often form opinions on things that you're not fully educated about?
HB2 posits that there are more perverts who would have taken advantage of the Charlotte city ordinance than transgender people that it would have helped. Based on my research, I have to agree. More people will be victimized by legitimizing bathroom choice than by than will be helped by it.
Who knew North Carolina was so racy. Maybe I am not "fully" educated about all the different motivations of transvestites, but we seem to have more of a definitional issue than one of information. As I understand it, if one believes themselves to be of the opposite gender, then they are transsexual and not a transvestite. You seem to be lumping them all together.
Perhaps you ought to define the terms before you accuse someone of being ignorant.
-
Who knew North Carolina was so racy. Maybe I am not "fully" educated about all the different motivations of transvestites, but we seem to have more of a definitional issue than one of information. As I understand it, if one believes themselves to be of the opposite gender, then they are transsexual and not a transvestite. You seem to be lumping them all together.
Perhaps you ought to define the terms before you accuse someone of being ignorant.
You're not even partially educated and it's not a definitional thing. But you're learning so this is positive. The most commonly accepted definitions can be retrieved via Google and I'm sure you've done that.
The only thing I lumped together was "the group of people who wear clothing of the opposite sex" because that is the group relevant to HB2 and where the source of the problem comes from. You cannot identify someone's motivation by looking at them. Bathroom access laws open the door to predators with a very low barrier to entry. That has been proven and places are walking back their access laws for reasons of safety.
And FWIW, I travel for work frequently and try to get out and experience nightlife where I am. The three individuals I mentioned are from Toronto, LA and San Francisco. Two were met through friends and one hit on me in the hotel bar. Perhaps the third one is a stretch to call a friend since we talked at the bar and then he went away and I've never seen him since.
-
You're not even partially educated and it's not a definitional thing. But you're learning so this is positive. The most commonly accepted definitions can be retrieved via Google and I'm sure you've done that.
That may be true, but want is your basis of knowledge? Are you in the Transbiz somehow? Shrink? T-person yourself?
The only thing I lumped together was "the group of people who wear clothing of the opposite sex" because that is the group relevant to HB2 and where the source of the problem comes from. You cannot identify someone's motivation by looking at them. Bathroom access laws open the door to predators with a very low barrier to entry. That has been proven and places are walking back their access laws for reasons of safety.
You lumped that group together and called them Transvestites which does not seem to be how the dictionary defines it nor the DSM. You should let us know when you are going to make up new definitions. It will save time.
What problem are you speaking about. As I understand it, and no one has proven me wrong yet, most jurisdictions never had laws about which gender/sex/genitalia/chromosomes/etc, could use which restrooms. This whole predator thing being something new based on Charlotte's misguided actions is bunk.
And FWIW, I travel for work frequently and try to get out and experience nightlife where I am. The three individuals I mentioned are from Toronto, LA and San Francisco. Two were met through friends and one hit on me in the hotel bar. Perhaps the third one is a stretch to call a friend since we talked at the bar and then he went away and I've never seen him since.
Why do I keep hearing the chorus to Lola in my head.
-
I would define myself as a knowledgable person. I educated myself both because of meeting good people and later because Charlotte pushed an agenda to which the NC legislature reacted.
Not aware that I'm "making up definitions", although there are so many that I will agree it's possible I may have used an incorrect word in the past. Are you arguing semantics of something that you yourself didn't know about when this thread started?
As I understand it, and no one has proven me wrong yet, most jurisdictions never had laws about which gender/sex/genitalia/chromosomes/etc, could use which restrooms. This whole predator thing being something new based on Charlotte's misguided actions is bunk.
You are incorrect, this did not start with Charlotte. It started in other places, such as Toronto and Washington state, both of which have or are trying to walk back their laws because of problems what resulted from them. Did you even bother to look or did you just decide for yourself that there's no problem?
This is a rare case where we don't have to guess. Several states have already tried this out and we (at least I) know what happens. Perverted men use the law to gain access to women's bathrooms. There are more than 25 reported police cases of it and who knows how many unreported. Breaking down the bathroom barrier puts the predator in a situation where they are one on one with their victims and we are down to some remaining traces of a moral constraint to protect women.
In North Carolina, if a man enters a women's bathroom, then he is in the wrong. No question, it's a black and white thing. I'm comfortable with that. If someone is in NC and is not comfortable, I-85, I-77 and I-95 run north and south and I-40 runs west. Pick one.
-
I would define myself as a knowledgable person. I educated myself both because of meeting good people and later because Charlotte pushed an agenda to which the NC legislature reacted.
OK! You have read some articles about this issue since the NC legislature waded it and you have been to bars. Thus you are knowledgeable. I have only read articles. I am not knowledgeable, according to you. I guess you got one hell of an education on those bars. I will bow to your superior, er, experience on at least the nitty gritty.
Not aware that I'm "making up definitions", although there are so many that I will agree it's possible I may have used an incorrect word in the past. Are you arguing semantics of something that you yourself didn't know about when this thread started?
You define "transvestism" as anyone who wears the clothes of the opposite gender. The dictionary and the DSM don't define it that way. I was going on what I read, but maybe that was something else I missed out in the bars of SF.
You are incorrect, this did not start with Charlotte. It started in other places, such as Toronto and Washington state, both of which have or are trying to walk back their laws because of problems what resulted from them. Did you even bother to look or did you just decide for yourself that there's no problem?
You misunderstand my point completely. Prior to this latest wave of attempting to define what is male and female and which restrooms each should use, putatively to protect us poor little helpless females, there were few, if any laws that attempted to define who should use which restrooms. Granted there was overwhelming custom in the matter, but as far as I can tell, and no one has yet corrected me, most jurisdictions historically did not have laws about who could use which restrooms.
This point is relevant to the claim that the good burghers of NC, et al, needed to make this law to prevent hoards of perverts from descending on the women's rooms of America and raping every female in sight. Since it was never illegal for a male to be in the women's restroom in the first place, and the faux parade of horribles had yet to materialize, this justification is pure BS.
Now admittedly, it was the lefties that opened up pandora's box with their misguided attempt to legislate the issue in the first place which would have been better left to the schools to try and sort out themselves. However, as Mom always said, you can't remove BS with more BS.
-
OK! You have read some articles about this issue since the NC legislature waded it and you have been to bars. Thus you are knowledgeable. I have only read articles. I am not knowledgeable, according to you. I guess you got one hell of an education on those bars. I will bow to your superior, er, experience on at least the nitty gritty.
You define "transvestism" as anyone who wears the clothes of the opposite gender. The dictionary and the DSM don't define it that way. I was going on what I read, but maybe that was something else I missed out in the bars of SF.
You misunderstand my point completely. Prior to this latest wave of attempting to define what is male and female and which restrooms each should use, putatively to protect us poor little helpless females, there were few, if any laws that attempted to define who should use which restrooms. Granted there was overwhelming custom in the matter, but as far as I can tell, and no one has yet corrected me, most jurisdictions historically did not have laws about who could use which restrooms.
This point is relevant to the claim that the good burghers of NC, et al, needed to make this law to prevent hoards of perverts from descending on the women's rooms of America and raping every female in sight. Since it was never illegal for a male to be in the women's restroom in the first place, and the faux parade of horribles had yet to materialize, this justification is pure BS.
Now admittedly, it was the lefties that opened up pandora's box with their misguided attempt to legislate the issue in the first place which would have been better left to the schools to try and sort out themselves. However, as Mom always said, you can't remove BS with more BS.
Yes, there were few laws that tried to tell people they couldn't be in certain bathrooms and it was not a problem. It did not become a problem until someone decided to make it an issue and push for laws that explicitly allowed it. Two of those places were Washington and Toronto. They created permission to do away with the traditional custom and to permit men to use the women's bathroom if the men felt like they belonged there.
You're agreeing with me. I agreed with you, I just explained the next step. Now that the taboo has been broken, men are victimizing women in restrooms, locker rooms and other places.
I don't understand why you claim "the faux parade of horribles had yet to materialize" when it is neither false nor hypothetical. It is bad enough that Toronto has reversed it's rules and Washington is trying to. It is bad enough that there are concrete and identifiable events occurring all over the country.
I have posted the examples and they continue to happen. What are you missing? Do you think the events are fake? Do you think there aren't enough of them to justify protecting women? Do you think it's just tough luck, women should suck it up when they get attacked? Do you think it won't happen to you so who cares?
I'm not following you.
-
Yes, there were few laws that tried to tell people they couldn't be in certain bathrooms and it was not a problem. It did not become a problem until someone decided to make it an issue and push for laws that explicitly allowed it. Two of those places were Washington and Toronto. They created permission to do away with the traditional custom and to permit men to use the women's bathroom if the men felt like they belonged there.
You're agreeing with me. I agreed with you, I just explained the next step. Now that the taboo has been broken, men are victimizing women in restrooms, locker rooms and other places.
I don't understand why you claim "the faux parade of horribles had yet to materialize" when it is neither false nor hypothetical. It is bad enough that Toronto has reversed it's rules and Washington is trying to. It is bad enough that there are concrete and identifiable events occurring all over the country.
I have posted the examples and they continue to happen. What are you missing? Do you think the events are fake? Do you think there aren't enough of them to justify protecting women? Do you think it's just tough luck, women should suck it up when they get attacked? Do you think it won't happen to you so who cares?
I'm not following you.
I think some of it is manufactured and I think we have too small a sample size. I think that this is an election year and I think that a little manufactured hysteria is good for whipping up the base. Keep in mind, that predators in the women's room is not a new phenomenon. That has been going on for as long as there have been women's rooms. The question is has the liberal laws made it worse? We have no evidence that it is worse than it was before the liberal laws, anecdotal evidence notwithstanding.
While we agree that it was better before either the left or the right started to legislate in this area, I don't seen anyone taking a rational approach to this sort of legislation. It will inevitably end in defining who is male and who is female. If you have done as much study as you claim, you will understand how problematic that is. Better to limit ourselves to either legislating not at all, or limit ourselves to specifying under what circumstances might a transgendered person be allowed to use the restroom of the opposite-of-birth gender.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/02/state-aclu-director-resigns-after-daughters-frightened-by-men-in-womens-restroom/
The American Civil Liberties Union’s state director in Georgia has resigned after her young daughters were “visibly frightened” and concerned for their safety when three men dressed in drag entered the women’s restroom with them.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/02/state-aclu-director-resigns-after-daughters-frightened-by-men-in-womens-restroom/
Nothing to see here. Move along.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/02/state-aclu-director-resigns-after-daughters-frightened-by-men-in-womens-restroom/
I'm curious; How does one tell the difference between "transgender" and "pervert" in this case?
“I have shared my personal experience of having taken my elementary school age daughters into a women’s restroom when shortly after three transgender young adults, over six feet [tall] with deep voices, entered.
-
I'm curious; How does one tell the difference between "transgender" and "pervert" in this case?
This is a trick question, right?
-
I think some of it is manufactured and I think we have too small a sample size.
Which of the examples is manufactured?
Are you saying that just a few abuses is OK? As long as it doesn't impact too many victims then it's acceptable?
-
Which of the examples is manufactured?
Are you saying that just a few abuses is OK? As long as it doesn't impact too many victims then it's acceptable?
I think the argument Kristin is forwarding is similar to the current crop of celebrity and politician progressive assholes who demand that gun ownership be banned, while speaking surrounded by armed guards. The fact that these cases cropped up to malign her progressive mantra of gender confusion and our obligation to assume everyone is good and kind, is clearly - in her mind - proof of a vast right wing conspiracy, or of no value what-so-ever.
Progressives are all over the make believe crisis of perverts and penis confusion and no amount of facts, reason, or logic is permitted to be discussed.