Posted March 29, 2016
Bad Hair Day
Find me in STEAM OT
Registered: Dec 2012
From Other
Krypsyn
The Anti-Hippie
Registered: Oct 2008
From United States
Toast_burner
Burner of Toast
Registered: Feb 2010
From United Kingdom
Posted March 29, 2016
Disclaimer:
For the purposes of this discussion, I will leave politics and religion out of this post.
-------------------
There are good reasons for this new North Carolina law that have nothing to do with politics or religion/morality. The argument (leaving the "conservative morality vs liberal social justice" argument out of it) is fundamentally between peoples' right to be safe in the appropriate bathroom versus people who prefer to identify as a different gender choosing their bathrooms.
One massive argument in this debate that will never go away: There are plenty of people (mostly women) who are concerned that men will falsely pose as "transgender" as an excuse to enter womens' bathrooms and creep.
Now consider the principle of the rights of the majority versus the rights of the minority. If people who identify as transgender are allowed to pick any bathroom, then the rights of women (50% of the population) to appropriate privacy in the bathroom are being thrown under the bus to serve the transgender lobby. Transgenders are only a thin sliver of the population, probably somewhere between .001% and .01%. Are you seriously going to advocate endangering half of the population just so that .001% to .01% can feel more comfortable?
Allowing people to arbitrarily choose a bathroom makes it difficult to own a business. Suppose you're a business owner or manager in a "transgender-friendly" state like California, New York, or Massachusetts. One day, a panicked woman comes to the counter to complain about a man in the womens' bathroom being a creep. As the manager/owner/boss, it's your job to investigate the complaint. You confront the creep, and he claims to be a transgender (and it's a psychological condition so you have no way of actually verifying it short of an fMRI scan). You are now left with an unpalatable and unwinnable choice: You could boot the creep out of the womens' bathroom or out of your shop and risk getting sued for "discrimination", or you could let the creep stay while the negative reviews against your business pile up.
As the old saying goes: "Never wish for anything, you just might get it."
The governor and legislature in North Carolina are just doing their job - keeping their constituents safe. It isn't about discrimination, it's a matter of public safety (or at least potential public safety) for half of the population.
-------------------------
States also have the right to be different. One of the original founding principles in the U.S. was that any matter that isn't best served with federal regulations should be delegated to the states. This gives the people a choice (to vote with their feet). Instead of bashing down the law that North Carolina voted for through their elected governor and representatives, the transgenders (and the big businesses aligned with the transgender lobby) should just move to a state that favors them. Meanwhile, religious small business owners tired of being oppressed for their religious convictions could move to North Carolina. Let the conservatives move to conservative states and let the liberals move to liberal states. That way, everyone's happy and enjoying their rights in states aligned with their mindset.
-------------------------
FYI: it appears that the governor of Georgia caved in to big business interests and the transgender lobby, vetoing a similar bill in his state. Time for women concerned about their safety to move from Georgia to North Carolina.
If someone is being a creep then they can be thrown out regardless of their gender, so what point are you trying to make? Or would you be perfectly ok with a gay man filming you piss as long as he's in the correct bathroom? And if the person isn't actually being a creep but is simply just trans, then you tell the women who complained to shut up and go away, if she confronts the trans person then you throw her out for harassing customers/staff. Simple.
Your arguments are so pathetically weak I'm almost certain there's a different reason you support this bill.
227
New User
Registered: May 2011
From United States
Posted March 29, 2016
high rated
This forum has devolved into arguments about bathrooms so many times that I think I'm starting to become racist against bathrooms.
Krypsyn
The Anti-Hippie
Registered: Oct 2008
From United States
dtgreene
vaccines work she/her
Registered: Jan 2010
From United States
Posted March 29, 2016
low rated
For the purposes of this discussion, I will leave politics and religion out of this post.
-------------------
[...]
One massive argument in this debate that will never go away: There are plenty of people (mostly women) who are concerned that men will falsely pose as "transgender" as an excuse to enter womens' bathrooms and creep.
Now consider the principle of the rights of the majority versus the rights of the minority. If people who identify as transgender are allowed to pick any bathroom, then the rights of women (50% of the population) to appropriate privacy in the bathroom are being thrown under the bus to serve the transgender lobby. Transgenders are only a thin sliver of the population, probably somewhere between .001% and .01%. Are you seriously going to advocate endangering half of the population just so that .001% to .01% can feel more comfortable?
Hence, there is no "majority rights" versus "minority rights" issue here. Since allowing trans women in the women's bathroom doesn't put half the population in danger, there is no reason not to allow them there, especially since they would be out of place in the men's room, and likely harassed or assaulted there. (Also, I believe your estimate of how common trans women are is rather low; see
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/TSprevalence.html
.)
Also, your argument fails to address one other issue I mentioned earlier: The law (and similar bills under consideration) *require* trans men to use the women's room. I think that cis women would be far more uncomfortable with a trans man in the women's room than with a trans woman. (See one of my earlier posts for some pictures of such a man.)
Finally, I believe you failed to leave politics out of your post.
Martek
New User
Registered: Sep 2008
From United States
Posted March 29, 2016
As far as bathroom use goes..
Many places already have "family" bathrooms, where any "gender" or "identity" can already go - including a "mix" of the preceding. One "typical" use of such a facility is for family members to jointly change diapers on a baby.
So to say that transgenders don't already have more than one choice is disingenuous by those pushing an agenda.
Tying which bathroom one can use to some system is the apparent issue.
Some feel that tying to "physical" (aka "cis") gender is appropriate. Others feel typing to "emotional/mental/mind" is appropriate.
Being in favor of the "cis" system DOES NOT make one bigoted, misogynist, racist or ANY of the other negative terms those with agendas to forward like to use to make accusations.
One can be perfectly fine with "cis" "trans" and/or "whatever" AND STILL prefer the bathroom system be tied to "cis" gender.
I haven't yet heard a cogent argument WHY a "trans" should be allowed to use a different restroom that they would be allowed to use if they went into their "cis"-designated one. Why should their "discomfort" outweigh the discomfort of those that prefer a "cis"-separation? NO COGENT ARGUMENT.
I've known and get along with and am fine with all sorts of people, for my whole life, including "cis" (way before they were called that) and "trans", etc. I favor the "cis" system. It's simple and more straightforward. If someone chooses to FALSELY call me some kind of bigot because of that - well, "mean words" don't phase me (I won't need emergency counseling from within a "safe space"). If you have a penis - use this restroom; if a vagina - use that one. Don't bother me with "edge" cases - because there will ALWAYS be edge cases no matter how you approach it.
Some system has to be in place. NO COGENT REASON why it should be based on "trans" and not "cis". Both systems will make "someone" offended/uncomfortable (because, let's face it - getting OFFENDED is the raison d'êtr for far too many these days). No good reason to choose against the time-honored "cis" way and PLENTY of reasons NOT to choose the "newfangled" way (such as the obvious - perverts will "fake" things to go where they should not - but also less obvious things, including philosophical things, like - how often can one "change" their preferred "identity" and then go use THAT bathroom? Once a lifetime? Once a week? Multiple times per hour? HOW OFTEN?) - NONE of which have to do with bigotry, etc.
It's fine that folks disagree with that - but this YOU MUST BE BLAH BLAH (intolerant, bigoted, racist, misogynist, exclusive, discriminatory - fill in the blank with your favorite false bash) for thinking that is just soo much BS. It doesn't mean ANY of that - it just means preference for one system over another.
There's ALREADY "gender-neutral" bathrooms all over the place ("family" restrooms) that both/either "cis" or "trans" folk can use if the "designated" one is not preferred - let's stop pretending that's not the case.
Many places already have "family" bathrooms, where any "gender" or "identity" can already go - including a "mix" of the preceding. One "typical" use of such a facility is for family members to jointly change diapers on a baby.
So to say that transgenders don't already have more than one choice is disingenuous by those pushing an agenda.
Tying which bathroom one can use to some system is the apparent issue.
Some feel that tying to "physical" (aka "cis") gender is appropriate. Others feel typing to "emotional/mental/mind" is appropriate.
Being in favor of the "cis" system DOES NOT make one bigoted, misogynist, racist or ANY of the other negative terms those with agendas to forward like to use to make accusations.
One can be perfectly fine with "cis" "trans" and/or "whatever" AND STILL prefer the bathroom system be tied to "cis" gender.
I haven't yet heard a cogent argument WHY a "trans" should be allowed to use a different restroom that they would be allowed to use if they went into their "cis"-designated one. Why should their "discomfort" outweigh the discomfort of those that prefer a "cis"-separation? NO COGENT ARGUMENT.
I've known and get along with and am fine with all sorts of people, for my whole life, including "cis" (way before they were called that) and "trans", etc. I favor the "cis" system. It's simple and more straightforward. If someone chooses to FALSELY call me some kind of bigot because of that - well, "mean words" don't phase me (I won't need emergency counseling from within a "safe space"). If you have a penis - use this restroom; if a vagina - use that one. Don't bother me with "edge" cases - because there will ALWAYS be edge cases no matter how you approach it.
Some system has to be in place. NO COGENT REASON why it should be based on "trans" and not "cis". Both systems will make "someone" offended/uncomfortable (because, let's face it - getting OFFENDED is the raison d'êtr for far too many these days). No good reason to choose against the time-honored "cis" way and PLENTY of reasons NOT to choose the "newfangled" way (such as the obvious - perverts will "fake" things to go where they should not - but also less obvious things, including philosophical things, like - how often can one "change" their preferred "identity" and then go use THAT bathroom? Once a lifetime? Once a week? Multiple times per hour? HOW OFTEN?) - NONE of which have to do with bigotry, etc.
It's fine that folks disagree with that - but this YOU MUST BE BLAH BLAH (intolerant, bigoted, racist, misogynist, exclusive, discriminatory - fill in the blank with your favorite false bash) for thinking that is just soo much BS. It doesn't mean ANY of that - it just means preference for one system over another.
There's ALREADY "gender-neutral" bathrooms all over the place ("family" restrooms) that both/either "cis" or "trans" folk can use if the "designated" one is not preferred - let's stop pretending that's not the case.
Toast_burner
Burner of Toast
Registered: Feb 2010
From United Kingdom
Posted March 29, 2016
Many places already have "family" bathrooms, where any "gender" or "identity" can already go - including a "mix" of the preceding. One "typical" use of such a facility is for family members to jointly change diapers on a baby.
So to say that transgenders don't already have more than one choice is disingenuous by those pushing an agenda.
Tying which bathroom one can use to some system is the apparent issue.
Some feel that tying to "physical" (aka "cis") gender is appropriate. Others feel typing to "emotional/mental/mind" is appropriate.
Being in favor of the "cis" system DOES NOT make one bigoted, misogynist, racist or ANY of the other negative terms those with agendas to forward like to use to make accusations.
One can be perfectly fine with "cis" "trans" and/or "whatever" AND STILL prefer the bathroom system be tied to "cis" gender.
I haven't yet heard a cogent argument WHY a "trans" should be allowed to use a different restroom that they would be allowed to use if they went into their "cis"-designated one. Why should their "discomfort" outweigh the discomfort of those that prefer a "cis"-separation? NO COGENT ARGUMENT.
I've known and get along with and am fine with all sorts of people, for my whole life, including "cis" (way before they were called that) and "trans", etc. I favor the "cis" system. It's simple and more straightforward. If someone chooses to FALSELY call me some kind of bigot because of that - well, "mean words" don't phase me (I won't need emergency counseling from within a "safe space"). If you have a penis - use this restroom; if a vagina - use that one. Don't bother me with "edge" cases - because there will ALWAYS be edge cases no matter how you approach it.
Some system has to be in place. NO COGENT REASON why it should be based on "trans" and not "cis". Both systems will make "someone" offended/uncomfortable (because, let's face it - getting OFFENDED is the raison d'êtr for far too many these days). No good reason to choose against the time-honored "cis" way and PLENTY of reasons NOT to choose the "newfangled" way (such as the obvious - perverts will "fake" things to go where they should not - but also less obvious things, including philosophical things, like - how often can one "change" their preferred "identity" and then go use THAT bathroom? Once a lifetime? Once a week? Multiple times per hour? HOW OFTEN?) - NONE of which have to do with bigotry, etc.
It's fine that folks disagree with that - but this YOU MUST BE BLAH BLAH (intolerant, bigoted, racist, misogynist, exclusive, discriminatory - fill in the blank with your favorite false bash) for thinking that is just soo much BS. It doesn't mean ANY of that - it just means preference for one system over another.
There's ALREADY "gender-neutral" bathrooms all over the place ("family" restrooms) that both/either "cis" or "trans" folk can use if the "designated" one is not preferred - let's stop pretending that's not the case.
Your entire argument is based on that some morons don't want to use the same bathroom as a trans person, but you provide no reason why anyone should care abut what they think.
Post edited March 29, 2016 by Toast_burner
Martek
New User
Registered: Sep 2008
From United States
Posted March 29, 2016
Many places already have "family" bathrooms, where any "gender" or "identity" can already go - including a "mix" of the preceding. One "typical" use of such a facility is for family members to jointly change diapers on a baby.
So to say that transgenders don't already have more than one choice is disingenuous by those pushing an agenda.
Tying which bathroom one can use to some system is the apparent issue.
Some feel that tying to "physical" (aka "cis") gender is appropriate. Others feel typing to "emotional/mental/mind" is appropriate.
Being in favor of the "cis" system DOES NOT make one bigoted, misogynist, racist or ANY of the other negative terms those with agendas to forward like to use to make accusations.
One can be perfectly fine with "cis" "trans" and/or "whatever" AND STILL prefer the bathroom system be tied to "cis" gender.
I haven't yet heard a cogent argument WHY a "trans" should be allowed to use a different restroom that they would be allowed to use if they went into their "cis"-designated one. Why should their "discomfort" outweigh the discomfort of those that prefer a "cis"-separation? NO COGENT ARGUMENT.
I've known and get along with and am fine with all sorts of people, for my whole life, including "cis" (way before they were called that) and "trans", etc. I favor the "cis" system. It's simple and more straightforward. If someone chooses to FALSELY call me some kind of bigot because of that - well, "mean words" don't phase me (I won't need emergency counseling from within a "safe space"). If you have a penis - use this restroom; if a vagina - use that one. Don't bother me with "edge" cases - because there will ALWAYS be edge cases no matter how you approach it.
Some system has to be in place. NO COGENT REASON why it should be based on "trans" and not "cis". Both systems will make "someone" offended/uncomfortable (because, let's face it - getting OFFENDED is the raison d'êtr for far too many these days). No good reason to choose against the time-honored "cis" way and PLENTY of reasons NOT to choose the "newfangled" way (such as the obvious - perverts will "fake" things to go where they should not - but also less obvious things, including philosophical things, like - how often can one "change" their preferred "identity" and then go use THAT bathroom? Once a lifetime? Once a week? Multiple times per hour? HOW OFTEN?) - NONE of which have to do with bigotry, etc.
It's fine that folks disagree with that - but this YOU MUST BE BLAH BLAH (intolerant, bigoted, racist, misogynist, exclusive, discriminatory - fill in the blank with your favorite false bash) for thinking that is just soo much BS. It doesn't mean ANY of that - it just means preference for one system over another.
There's ALREADY "gender-neutral" bathrooms all over the place ("family" restrooms) that both/either "cis" or "trans" folk can use if the "designated" one is not preferred - let's stop pretending that's not the case.
Your entire argument is based on that some morons don't want to use the same bathroom as a trans person, but you provide no reason why anyone should care abut what they think.
Toast_burner
Burner of Toast
Registered: Feb 2010
From United Kingdom
Posted March 29, 2016
Your entire argument is based on that some morons don't want to use the same bathroom as a trans person, but you provide no reason why anyone should care abut what they think.
Martek
New User
Registered: Sep 2008
From United States
Posted March 29, 2016
You race bait me - and expect me to indulge your race baiting?
I invited you to "fill in the blank with your favorite false bash", and apparently you have so chosen.
Here, I'll indulge you - I'll start a list of known race baiters:
KNOWN RACE BAITERS:
-----------------------------------
#1: Toast_burner
There you go - I've indulged you. Race baiter.
Emob78
jack and coke plz
Registered: Dec 2012
From United States
Posted March 29, 2016
So... will the Rosa Parks of this movement need to be a really fat tranny taking a dump in a women's bathroom? I'd almost enjoy watching that just for the shits and giggles. Fuck it. You've all opened Pandora's box. As we say down south, 'no use closing the doors after the horses have left the barn.'
Where's Divine when you need him?... her? whatever. The fat dude that John Waters liked to put a dress on and eat dog crap. Trannies eating dog crap. Now that's goddamn sophisticated art! We can wheel his fat ass into Time Square and spin around his rotting corpse on a rotating toilet bowl. The toilet will be pre-packed with shit to enhance the 'spectacle' of the moment. Cameras will flash, the shit will fly... and there's your new Rosa Parks, motherfuckers. Dead tranny spinning around on a toilet bowl, spewing shit in all directions.
Anyone got a political slogan for this?
I got one. 'DEEP DOWN WE'RE ALL BROWN.'
L to the O to the L
Where's Divine when you need him?... her? whatever. The fat dude that John Waters liked to put a dress on and eat dog crap. Trannies eating dog crap. Now that's goddamn sophisticated art! We can wheel his fat ass into Time Square and spin around his rotting corpse on a rotating toilet bowl. The toilet will be pre-packed with shit to enhance the 'spectacle' of the moment. Cameras will flash, the shit will fly... and there's your new Rosa Parks, motherfuckers. Dead tranny spinning around on a toilet bowl, spewing shit in all directions.
Anyone got a political slogan for this?
I got one. 'DEEP DOWN WE'RE ALL BROWN.'
L to the O to the L
Martek
New User
Registered: Sep 2008
From United States
Posted March 29, 2016
As an aside, wasn't another of Divine's, uh, predilections, was to lick things in peoples homes (aka trailers) with her tongue? (Well, I guess adding "tongue" is redundant - what else would she lick with?) Haven't seen that movie in a long time - but that comes to mind on her mention..
Toast_burner
Burner of Toast
Registered: Feb 2010
From United Kingdom
Posted March 29, 2016
You race bait me - and expect me to indulge your race baiting?
I invited you to "fill in the blank with your favorite false bash", and apparently you have so chosen.
Here, I'll indulge you - I'll start a list of known race baiters:
KNOWN RACE BAITERS:
-----------------------------------
#1: Toast_burner
There you go - I've indulged you. Race baiter.
Ever heard the phrase "we remember history so we don't repeat it"? That's why it's important to remember stuff like racial segregation, so we don't do similar stuff (such as passing the law this thread is about).
Emob78
jack and coke plz
Registered: Dec 2012
From United States
Posted March 29, 2016
And don't give me this 'we're normally not freaks' shit.
WE'RE ALL FREAKS IN THE FREAK KINGDOM.