No, it isn't, just like words like "straight", "able-bodied", "white", etc. aren't offensive.

I do wonder why people who never needed the label "straight", all of a sudden need to accept it just because someone came up with it.

My little bro's mentally disabled clasmate talks about killing one of his teachers. Should society encourage him to be what he wants to be?

It's offensive if I feel it's offensive. It's my privilige.

Because laws of this kind are all about trans people. The entire reason that NC passed one of these bathroom bills was to counter a local ordinance that explicitly allowed trans people to use a loo that corresponded with their gender identity, not some overnight wave of sexual assault in public bathrooms. Hell, the whole 'think of the children' thing was the rhetoric used by the politicians here to try and conflate trans people with pedophiles in order to have support for the law. Trying to talk about the situation without expecting the conversation to address trans people is a bit like trying to talk about vagrancy laws without some mention of homeless people coming up; it's not going to happen.

Flashing people is very much illegal, last I checked. There is no real danger of accidental exposure of the junk, either; if someone is using the urinal, there tend to be stalls at waist height; even when there aren't, you would have to work to get even the slightest glimpse of their equipment. If someone is using a stall, then the possibility of someone exposing themselves to others while in the can drops to zero; you'd have to be looking over the stall to see genitalia, and at that point the person peeping would be far more likely to be running afoul of the law.

Simply put, bathroom bills make no sense from an anti-perv stance. They don't make intentional flashing any more illegal than it already is, and whatever you might see of someone's junk would be what is seen in standard use of the bathroom; in other words, you see nothing unless you go out of your way in increasingly strenuous ways to peep.

Depends on what you mean by 'fully'. If you mean they have been on hormone therapy, then it's entirely possible; however, bills like the one that got passed in NC don't make that distinction, and they require that surgery be done (more on that later).

If you mean to refer to people who have undergone surgery, then here's some fun trivia: a lot of people don't undergo surgery. There are a whole hell of a lot of reasons for that. First off, it's incredibly expensive and may not be covered under your insurance. Secondly, even if cost isn't an issue, sex reassignment surgery is the kind of procedure that can go horribly wrong in many ways.


Also, even if someone does decide to go through surgery in order to change their birth certificate (which states like NC do require for that sort of thing), there are no real guidelines about what kind of surgery is sufficient; the doctor may hold that enough has been done even if the surgery was for clearing one's sinus passages, meaning that someone may be in compliance with the law but still has unchanged genitalia.
No, because fondling of that nature is still very much a crime; laws allowing trans people into bathrooms doesn't grant everyone the bathroom version of Diplomatic Immunity for any sex crimes committed in the john.

Michael Hughes says what?
We did have some of those at the city/county level in NC; HB2 overrode those with a requirement that you go to the loo based on on your birth certificate.

Unfortunately, your notion of "scientific fact" is inaccurate and out-of-date. Studies have actually shown that the brains of transgender people physically resemble those of the gender they identify as more than the one corresponding to their genital configuration at birth.

Actually, you are neglecting to mention the fact that there are states that will refuse to change birth certificates even after surgery: according to a map on Wikipedia, ID, KS, OH, and TN. If you are transgender and have the misfortune to have been born in one of those states, even genital surgery is not enough to get your birth certificate changed.

What you mean to say is there was one study which measured over 140 areas of the brain of 18 trans men and 18 trans women and compared them to 24 men and 19 women. They found just 3 areas of the brain of trans women which they described as "halfway" between men and women by diameter. For trans men, they couldn't find the same, but declared that there were regions shaped differently.

First, the small sample size. Second, the cherry-picking of 3 areas out of over 140. And why is the criteria changing? Can't find what you are looking for, look for anything? How many oddities did they consider? Is this a prime example of looking for anything to prove your theory? That is not how science is supposed to work...

And the big third, you characterize these studies as proof that the brains resembled the other gender, they don't except the abnormalities mentioned in a handful of areas.

How about you get your facts straight! I'm getting a bit sick of you spreading the same misinformation in every thread you can find....

And this study is 5 years old. Where is the follow-up with a bigger sample size focusing on the same areas and abnormalities? Or have people tried to repeat it and found nothing and choose not to publish it? I'm not a fan of "advocacy" science...

You back?Your as bad as the other spitters...
Waaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh,Im done with this place and *here we are again*.

Well, perhaps you should show them how it's properly done by setting an example and doing it the right way yourself!

I recon when Sachy comes back you will spit the dummy and split,but like the rest you will grovel your way back.

If only game related discussions could also be this lively :\

They can. Remember when Hatred came out. :P