|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
 Posted: Sun May 08, 2016 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aussiesuede wrote: | That ones easy - Their word. If someone declares they are transgendered, and walks into the restroom of their choosing? End of story.
If after walking into the restroom of their choosing they make use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? End of story.
If someone in the restroom is nude or otherwise disrobed whilst in the process of making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose and they are noticed by another person? Well this is an area where America needs to just grow the eff up and join the rest of the modern world. Seeing a nude body of either sex simply is not, nor should be, a life altering experience. It's stupid that so many Americans insist on acting like children when it comes to brief nudity. Seriously, they need to grow the eff up.
If someone engages in illegally perverted actions whilst loitering in the restroom and not making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? Prosecute them for their perverted actions just as is the case already. End of story. |
So then, how do you handle other gender designated facilities and associations? For instance... why can't someone who was born a man do the following:
- Enter a women's shelter
- Sign up for a women's only gyms like Curves
- Get the discount on ladies night
- Play in the WNBA, LPGA, etc?
Do you take them at their word for these too or is their word not good enough for you here? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Sun May 08, 2016 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | That ones easy - Their word. If someone declares they are transgendered, and walks into the restroom of their choosing? End of story.
If after walking into the restroom of their choosing they make use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? End of story.
If someone in the restroom is nude or otherwise disrobed whilst in the process of making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose and they are noticed by another person? Well this is an area where America needs to just grow the eff up and join the rest of the modern world. Seeing a nude body of either sex simply is not, nor should be, a life altering experience. It's stupid that so many Americans insist on acting like children when it comes to brief nudity. Seriously, they need to grow the eff up.
If someone engages in illegally perverted actions whilst loitering in the restroom and not making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? Prosecute them for their perverted actions just as is the case already. End of story. |
So then, how do you handle other gender designated facilities and associations? For instance... why can't someone who was born a man do the following:
- Enter a women's shelter
- Sign up for a women's only gyms like Curves
- Get the discount on ladies night
- Play in the WNBA, LPGA, etc?
Do you take them at their word for these too or is their word not good enough for you here? |
Yes
Yes
Yes
Once the sport sets competitive standards, yes.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Sun May 08, 2016 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Omar Little wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | That ones easy - Their word. If someone declares they are transgendered, and walks into the restroom of their choosing? End of story.
If after walking into the restroom of their choosing they make use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? End of story.
If someone in the restroom is nude or otherwise disrobed whilst in the process of making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose and they are noticed by another person? Well this is an area where America needs to just grow the eff up and join the rest of the modern world. Seeing a nude body of either sex simply is not, nor should be, a life altering experience. It's stupid that so many Americans insist on acting like children when it comes to brief nudity. Seriously, they need to grow the eff up.
If someone engages in illegally perverted actions whilst loitering in the restroom and not making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? Prosecute them for their perverted actions just as is the case already. End of story. |
So then, how do you handle other gender designated facilities and associations? For instance... why can't someone who was born a man do the following:
- Enter a women's shelter
- Sign up for a women's only gyms like Curves
- Get the discount on ladies night
- Play in the WNBA, LPGA, etc?
Do you take them at their word for these too or is their word not good enough for you here? |
Yes
Yes
Yes
Once the sport sets competitive standards, yes. |
Since I'm more mouthy, I'll take it a bit furthur:
1: Womens Shelter
| Quote: | | Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, or LGBT, people are not explicitly protected from discrimination under the federal Fair Housing Act. However, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, sought to remedy this through the Equal Access Rule, or EAR, which makes it illegal to discriminate against LGBT individuals and families in any housing that receives funding from HUD or is insured by the Federal Housing Administration, regardless of local laws. As currently written, EAR prohibits inquiries into an individual’s sexual orientation and gender identity |
Shelters not adhering the EAR, whether through ignorance or defiance, can be successfully sued and lose their HUD funding, effectively shuttering them. One would have to be a pretty callous individual to bring such a suit though since they'd effectively be putting a group of women out in the cold.
Transgendered in Shelters
2) Women Only Gym like Curves?
Curves is treated as a private social club that can pick and choose its membership. As long as there are reasonably accessible clubs where men can also participate in physical fitness activity in a way that doesn't bring common discomfort (such as the discomfort many fat women experience when in the company of men) then I would not find that an inequality exists in the marketplace. I'd venture to guess that the overwhelming majority of both men and women appreciate the fact that a fatty-centered female only club exists in the first place. I think it's a win-win for all concerned. If an entrepreneur wanted to open a fatty centered mens only club, I don't think most would argue with it. Nor would I think most would take issue with a co-ed fatty-centered club if some entrepreneur wanted to open one.
3) Ladies Night?
Private business's can host any legal promotion they desire. Most business's will do so based on what they think will earn them money. By offering a larger quantity of liquored up women, a bar owner posits that he can attract a larger crowd of men looking to get laid since their liquored up state enhances the chance that pairings will occur. It's a win-win for all concerned. The bar owner makes more money, the guys get laid more easily, and the less desirable women don't have to wait around all the way to bar closing to secure a desperate hookup. Men's night on the other hand would be a lose-lose situation as the bar owner wouldn't earn more money, the guys would not have enhanced hookup opportunities, and the less desirable woman would stand less of a chance of someone without standards taking them home due to the fact that all those dudes would be plum passed out from all the cheap liquor.
4) Womens Sports?
If a transgendered woman desires to play the sport and achieves a competitive enough status, then let her play. Their population is so statistically insignificant that the fact is it would have practically zero effect on a leagues overall competitiveness.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fan0Bynum17
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 15436
|
| Posted: Mon May 09, 2016 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| A lot of this topic reveals just how sexist against men (or even anyone with a penis) society still is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Mon May 09, 2016 4:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Slightly off topic but do women really want to use the same toilet in public restrooms where most guys won't even bother wiping even after spraying all over the bowl?
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon May 09, 2016 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Omar Little wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | That ones easy - Their word. If someone declares they are transgendered, and walks into the restroom of their choosing? End of story.
If after walking into the restroom of their choosing they make use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? End of story.
If someone in the restroom is nude or otherwise disrobed whilst in the process of making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose and they are noticed by another person? Well this is an area where America needs to just grow the eff up and join the rest of the modern world. Seeing a nude body of either sex simply is not, nor should be, a life altering experience. It's stupid that so many Americans insist on acting like children when it comes to brief nudity. Seriously, they need to grow the eff up.
If someone engages in illegally perverted actions whilst loitering in the restroom and not making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? Prosecute them for their perverted actions just as is the case already. End of story. |
So then, how do you handle other gender designated facilities and associations? For instance... why can't someone who was born a man do the following:
- Enter a women's shelter
- Sign up for a women's only gyms like Curves
- Get the discount on ladies night
- Play in the WNBA, LPGA, etc?
Do you take them at their word for these too or is their word not good enough for you here? |
Yes
Yes
Yes
Once the sport sets competitive standards, yes. |
I don't know. I think I'd rather put that responsibility on the shelter (or other association) to decide. And they should adequately train their staff to assess situations appropriately.
My concern is not a legitimately transgendered person. My concern is ... man shows up at a shelter. He may or may not be a resident's abusive husband. They say women only, he says, I identify as a woman.
Legally speaking now, the shelter must let the man in assuming they have sufficient room, etc. At minimum, they couldn't bar his entry for reasons of gender.
Or, if we're saying the shelter can stop anyone they want from entering their shelter, which I believe they can do now, then, we don't need to change anything. We don't need to take them at their word. The shelter can decide if they believe the person is a legitimate trans person. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon May 09, 2016 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aussiesuede wrote: | | Omar Little wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | That ones easy - Their word. If someone declares they are transgendered, and walks into the restroom of their choosing? End of story.
If after walking into the restroom of their choosing they make use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? End of story.
If someone in the restroom is nude or otherwise disrobed whilst in the process of making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose and they are noticed by another person? Well this is an area where America needs to just grow the eff up and join the rest of the modern world. Seeing a nude body of either sex simply is not, nor should be, a life altering experience. It's stupid that so many Americans insist on acting like children when it comes to brief nudity. Seriously, they need to grow the eff up.
If someone engages in illegally perverted actions whilst loitering in the restroom and not making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? Prosecute them for their perverted actions just as is the case already. End of story. |
So then, how do you handle other gender designated facilities and associations? For instance... why can't someone who was born a man do the following:
- Enter a women's shelter
- Sign up for a women's only gyms like Curves
- Get the discount on ladies night
- Play in the WNBA, LPGA, etc?
Do you take them at their word for these too or is their word not good enough for you here? |
Yes
Yes
Yes
Once the sport sets competitive standards, yes. |
Since I'm more mouthy, I'll take it a bit furthur:
1: Womens Shelter
| Quote: | | Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, or LGBT, people are not explicitly protected from discrimination under the federal Fair Housing Act. However, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, sought to remedy this through the Equal Access Rule, or EAR, which makes it illegal to discriminate against LGBT individuals and families in any housing that receives funding from HUD or is insured by the Federal Housing Administration, regardless of local laws. As currently written, EAR prohibits inquiries into an individual’s sexual orientation and gender identity |
Shelters not adhering the EAR, whether through ignorance or defiance, can be successfully sued and lose their HUD funding, effectively shuttering them. One would have to be a pretty callous individual to bring such a suit though since they'd effectively be putting a group of women out in the cold.
Transgendered in Shelters
2) Women Only Gym like Curves?
Curves is treated as a private social club that can pick and choose its membership. As long as there are reasonably accessible clubs where men can also participate in physical fitness activity in a way that doesn't bring common discomfort (such as the discomfort many fat women experience when in the company of men) then I would not find that an inequality exists in the marketplace. I'd venture to guess that the overwhelming majority of both men and women appreciate the fact that a fatty-centered female only club exists in the first place. I think it's a win-win for all concerned. If an entrepreneur wanted to open a fatty centered mens only club, I don't think most would argue with it. Nor would I think most would take issue with a co-ed fatty-centered club if some entrepreneur wanted to open one.
3) Ladies Night?
Private business's can host any legal promotion they desire. Most business's will do so based on what they think will earn them money. By offering a larger quantity of liquored up women, a bar owner posits that he can attract a larger crowd of men looking to get laid since their liquored up state enhances the chance that pairings will occur. It's a win-win for all concerned. The bar owner makes more money, the guys get laid more easily, and the less desirable women don't have to wait around all the way to bar closing to secure a desperate hookup. Men's night on the other hand would be a lose-lose situation as the bar owner wouldn't earn more money, the guys would not have enhanced hookup opportunities, and the less desirable woman would stand less of a chance of someone without standards taking them home due to the fact that all those dudes would be plum passed out from all the cheap liquor.
4) Womens Sports?
If a transgendered woman desires to play the sport and achieves a competitive enough status, then let her play. Their population is so statistically insignificant that the fact is it would have practically zero effect on a leagues overall competitiveness. |
I'm not talking about legitimate transgenders. I already agree with most of what you're saying. I'm talking about with whom the litmus test should reside.
I just don't think you can put that on the person attempting to gain access, I think you have to put it on the person granting it to decide.
I don't think a business or association should be legally required to "take them at their word". I think they should listen, but then ultimately be able to make the call. Of course, they cannot discriminate on basis of identified gender, so, if they do that, then, they shall be held accountable in a court of law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fan0Bynum17
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 15436
|
| Posted: Mon May 09, 2016 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why are you assuming their abusing partner would be the opposite gender? Perhaps it's a same-sex relationship, what's stopping them from currently accessing the shelter? This is not a problem that's uniquely created from having unisex shelters, or shelters that takes any claims of transgenderism at face value.
My opinion? Bathrooms and publicly funded shelters should be unisex, and if you have a problem with that, then tough, your uneasiness around the other gender doesn't justify discrimination. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Mon May 09, 2016 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | | Omar Little wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | That ones easy - Their word. If someone declares they are transgendered, and walks into the restroom of their choosing? End of story.
If after walking into the restroom of their choosing they make use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? End of story.
If someone in the restroom is nude or otherwise disrobed whilst in the process of making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose and they are noticed by another person? Well this is an area where America needs to just grow the eff up and join the rest of the modern world. Seeing a nude body of either sex simply is not, nor should be, a life altering experience. It's stupid that so many Americans insist on acting like children when it comes to brief nudity. Seriously, they need to grow the eff up.
If someone engages in illegally perverted actions whilst loitering in the restroom and not making use of the facilities for it's designed purpose? Prosecute them for their perverted actions just as is the case already. End of story. |
So then, how do you handle other gender designated facilities and associations? For instance... why can't someone who was born a man do the following:
- Enter a women's shelter
- Sign up for a women's only gyms like Curves
- Get the discount on ladies night
- Play in the WNBA, LPGA, etc?
Do you take them at their word for these too or is their word not good enough for you here? |
Yes
Yes
Yes
Once the sport sets competitive standards, yes. |
Since I'm more mouthy, I'll take it a bit furthur:
1: Womens Shelter
| Quote: | | Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, or LGBT, people are not explicitly protected from discrimination under the federal Fair Housing Act. However, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, sought to remedy this through the Equal Access Rule, or EAR, which makes it illegal to discriminate against LGBT individuals and families in any housing that receives funding from HUD or is insured by the Federal Housing Administration, regardless of local laws. As currently written, EAR prohibits inquiries into an individual’s sexual orientation and gender identity |
Shelters not adhering the EAR, whether through ignorance or defiance, can be successfully sued and lose their HUD funding, effectively shuttering them. One would have to be a pretty callous individual to bring such a suit though since they'd effectively be putting a group of women out in the cold.
Transgendered in Shelters
2) Women Only Gym like Curves?
Curves is treated as a private social club that can pick and choose its membership. As long as there are reasonably accessible clubs where men can also participate in physical fitness activity in a way that doesn't bring common discomfort (such as the discomfort many fat women experience when in the company of men) then I would not find that an inequality exists in the marketplace. I'd venture to guess that the overwhelming majority of both men and women appreciate the fact that a fatty-centered female only club exists in the first place. I think it's a win-win for all concerned. If an entrepreneur wanted to open a fatty centered mens only club, I don't think most would argue with it. Nor would I think most would take issue with a co-ed fatty-centered club if some entrepreneur wanted to open one.
3) Ladies Night?
Private business's can host any legal promotion they desire. Most business's will do so based on what they think will earn them money. By offering a larger quantity of liquored up women, a bar owner posits that he can attract a larger crowd of men looking to get laid since their liquored up state enhances the chance that pairings will occur. It's a win-win for all concerned. The bar owner makes more money, the guys get laid more easily, and the less desirable women don't have to wait around all the way to bar closing to secure a desperate hookup. Men's night on the other hand would be a lose-lose situation as the bar owner wouldn't earn more money, the guys would not have enhanced hookup opportunities, and the less desirable woman would stand less of a chance of someone without standards taking them home due to the fact that all those dudes would be plum passed out from all the cheap liquor.
4) Womens Sports?
If a transgendered woman desires to play the sport and achieves a competitive enough status, then let her play. Their population is so statistically insignificant that the fact is it would have practically zero effect on a leagues overall competitiveness. |
I'm not talking about legitimate transgenders. I already agree with most of what you're saying. I'm talking about with whom the litmus test should reside.
I just don't think you can put that on the person attempting to gain access, I think you have to put it on the person granting it to decide.
I don't think a business or association should be legally required to "take them at their word". I think they should listen, but then ultimately be able to make the call. Of course, they cannot discriminate on basis of identified gender, so, if they do that, then, they shall be held accountable in a court of law. |
A simple rule of thumb would be to take them at their word unless you had compelling evidence to the contrary that you would be willing to defend in court.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Mon May 09, 2016 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here is the type of incident everyone seems to be up in arms about. It seems that this guy went into the womens locker room for potentially political reasons (we don't know because he refused to respond).
| Quote: |
A young man undressed twice last week in front of young girls in the women’s locker room at Seattle’s Evan’s Pool facility and police were not called due to confusion over Washington State’s new Gender Identity regulations. The rules allow any male to enter women and girl’s locker rooms, showers, restrooms, saunas, etc. by invoking his belief in “Gender Identity”, a psychological form of reproductive sex unrelated to actual biological sex. Males who enter such facilities without proclaiming a personal belief in psychological sex are subject to arrest under sex crime statutes.
The man in question twice reportedly entered the female changing facility and observed the women and girls in various stages of undress, and removed his own clothes in front of them.
| Quote: | “Seattle Parks and Recreation has confirmed an adult male inappropriately used a female locker room at Evans Pool in Green Lake while a youth swim team used the facilities on Feb. 8
Was the individual a male inappropriately using the facilities or a transgender female well within her rights?
“This didn’t seem like a transgender issue to staff — someone who was ‘identifying’ as a woman,” Seattle Parks and Recreation Communications Manager David Takami told me via email. “We have guidelines that allow transgender individuals to use restrooms and locker rooms consistent with their gender identity.”
At around 5:30 p.m. on Feb. 8, an adult went into the locker room to change. Takami says that at “no time did he verbally ‘identify’ as female,” nor did he request to be treated as transgender.
At the time, a local youth swim team was using the facilities. Young girls and some of their parents “became alarmed” that the male was changing in the female locker room and alerted the front desk staff. Staff members then “asked the man to leave and offered the availability of a family changing room.”
He did not accept the offer.
After his swim, he “again entered the women’s locker room to change.” Front desk staff once again asked him to leave “and he eventually did.”
Perhaps complicating matters, a witness who contacted KIRO Radio indicated this male was wearing men’s clothing as he entered the locker room.
Takami maintains that the parks department wants everyone to feel comfortable. But if this individual was, in fact, transgender, was this situation handled correctly? And is it appropriate to call the individual a male?
If this isn’t a “transgender issue” why didn’t staffers call the police? Critics of the failed transgender bathroom bill indicate there are already rules to punish people who break the law. |
According to the law: “If another person expresses concern or discomfort about a person who uses a facility that is consistent with the person’s gender expression or gender identity, the person expressing discomfort should be directed to a separate or gender-neutral facility, if available.”
But Takami says everyone involved (the patrons complaining and the male individual) were offered a separate accommodation.
The law further states: “Any action taken against a person who is using a restroom or other gender-segregated facility, such as removing a person, should be taken due to that person’s actions or behavior while in the facility, and must be unrelated to gender expression or gender identity.”
There is no indication that this individual did anything inappropriate, if the person identifies as transgender. But Seattle Parks and Recreation did not believe he was transgender. So why didn’t they call the police?
“That was an option, but staff try to deal with issues immediately, and try not to call police as the first option,” Takami said. |
Guy Acts Like a Creep. Staff Takes the High Road. No Parties Harmed
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2016 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ruhroh. Kids are starting to figure out that the world doesn't crash if boys and girls pee next to one another.
| Quote: | Until recently, one West Seattle High School student who was born female but looks masculine didn’t feel comfortable using any of the gender-specific bathrooms at school. So she’d leave campus and cross the street to go to Hiawatha Community Center, where there are more-private bathrooms where no one would give her odd looks.
After hearing her story and many others from classmates who also feel uncomfortable using men’s or women’s bathrooms, students in West Seattle High’s Gay-Straight Alliance decided their school needed its first gender-neutral bathroom.
Last month, they succeeded, officially dedicating the bathroom with a toilet-paper-cutting ceremony, which was first reported in the West Seattle Blog.
It’s among the first gender-neutral bathrooms in a Seattle school — and the Puget Sound area.
Formerly a small unused women’s restroom with just three stalls, the bathroom is now marked “all-gender restroom” underneath a symbol of a toilet.
“We’re hoping we can nurture a school environment that is more comfortable for all our students,” said senior Ally Finn, an alliance member.
Though bathroom-access policies are in place, only a handful of schools have centrally located, gender-neutral bathrooms. In Seattle, they include Nova, Franklin and Interagency high schools along with West Seattle; Nathan Hale High will dedicate one on Tuesday.
This year, Northshore School District’s Kenmore Junior High converted staff bathrooms into two gender-neutral bathrooms for students. North Creek High School, in the same district, will have gender-neutral bathrooms when it opens in fall 2017. |
Male and Female Poop Smells the Same
20 years from now, folks will be truly puzzled about how on earth pee & poop rose to be a national issue. The stupidity of it all is truly embarrassing.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fan0Bynum17
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 15436
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2016 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Some bigots made a law, and now all of the sudden we don't know how to deal with bathrooms? We're so stupid in this country that we don't even know when we don't have a problem with something. There is no issue, there never was an issue: You go in the bathroom, evacuate waste, wash your hands, and leave. At no point should you even give a flying (bleep) about anyone else's clothes or genitalia. Cooties don't exist, grow up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
The only real reason to have separate bathrooms, is if non-trans women, generally feel more comfortable using them.
If that's the case, keep the status quo and let trans folks go wherever they feel most comfortable.
I think people get too caught up in the need to demand something rather than doing things that make the most sense for the most people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fan0Bynum17
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 15436
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | The only real reason to have separate bathrooms, is if non-trans women, generally feel more comfortable using them.
If that's the case, keep the status quo and let trans folks go wherever they feel most comfortable.
I think people get too caught up in the need to demand something rather than doing things that make the most sense for the most people. |
There really is no good reason to have gender segregated bathrooms. Sure, people will feel weird about it at first, because it's a new concept, but eventually it would become the norm and people will just go the bathroom like it's no big deal and go about their day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | The only real reason to have separate bathrooms, is if non-trans women, generally feel more comfortable using them.
If that's the case, keep the status quo and let trans folks go wherever they feel most comfortable.
I think people get too caught up in the need to demand something rather than doing things that make the most sense for the most people. |
There really is no good reason to have gender segregated bathrooms. Sure, people will feel weird about it at first, because it's a new concept, but eventually it would become the norm and people will just go the bathroom like it's no big deal and go about their day. |
Yep. Colleges across the country have been doing away with gender specific restrooms in the dorms. Guys and girls share the same restrooms and showers and the world hasn't ended, nor have women been traumatized by a penis sighting.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fan0Bynum17
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 15436
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aussiesuede wrote: | | Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | The only real reason to have separate bathrooms, is if non-trans women, generally feel more comfortable using them.
If that's the case, keep the status quo and let trans folks go wherever they feel most comfortable.
I think people get too caught up in the need to demand something rather than doing things that make the most sense for the most people. |
There really is no good reason to have gender segregated bathrooms. Sure, people will feel weird about it at first, because it's a new concept, but eventually it would become the norm and people will just go the bathroom like it's no big deal and go about their day. |
Yep. Colleges across the country have been doing away with gender specific restrooms in the dorms. Guys and girls share the same restrooms and showers and the world hasn't ended, nor have women been traumatized by a penis sighting. |
Fancy that, women aren't delicate little flowers that need to be shielded from men. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Tue May 17, 2016 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | | Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | The only real reason to have separate bathrooms, is if non-trans women, generally feel more comfortable using them.
If that's the case, keep the status quo and let trans folks go wherever they feel most comfortable.
I think people get too caught up in the need to demand something rather than doing things that make the most sense for the most people. |
There really is no good reason to have gender segregated bathrooms. Sure, people will feel weird about it at first, because it's a new concept, but eventually it would become the norm and people will just go the bathroom like it's no big deal and go about their day. |
Yep. Colleges across the country have been doing away with gender specific restrooms in the dorms. Guys and girls share the same restrooms and showers and the world hasn't ended, nor have women been traumatized by a penis sighting. |
Fancy that, women aren't delicate little flowers that need to be shielded from men. |
Said no women's shelter ever.
At any rate, I said that IF non-trans women feel more comfortable with separate bathrooms, then I think it should be something that is considered and not wholly unreasonable. As long as it doesn't prevent other people, such as the trans community, from using restrooms also, then what's the problem?
That doesn't mean I think they're delicate little flowers. What a ridiculous thing to say.
And yes, many colleges across the country have done away with gender specific restrooms in the dorms, I went to one in fact, what's interesting though, is none of the common facilities (classrooms, cafeterias, etc) had gender specific bathrooms. Locker rooms were also male/female. Trans people have been using the bathrooms they feel most comfortable in for decades now, and the world hasn't ended nor have people been traumatized by it. Trans people aren't delicate little flowers.
There's really no need to do away with it. There is nothing gained. Change is often a good thing, even when people have a hard time with it, but sometimes, it just isn't necessary. I think people online just feel like they have to get behind something, and the status quo is essentially nothing, so you have to find some solution, however pointless, to rally around. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fan0Bynum17
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 15436
|
| Posted: Tue May 17, 2016 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: |
Said no women's shelter ever.
At any rate, I said that IF non-trans women feel more comfortable with separate bathrooms, then I think it should be something that is considered and not wholly unreasonable. As long as it doesn't prevent other people, such as the trans community, from using restrooms also, then what's the problem?
That doesn't mean I think they're delicate little flowers. What a ridiculous thing to say.
And yes, many colleges across the country have done away with gender specific restrooms in the dorms, I went to one in fact, what's interesting though, is none of the common facilities (classrooms, cafeterias, etc) had gender specific bathrooms. Locker rooms were also male/female. Trans people have been using the bathrooms they feel most comfortable in for decades now, and the world hasn't ended nor have people been traumatized by it. Trans people aren't delicate little flowers.
There's really no need to do away with it. There is nothing gained. Change is often a good thing, even when people have a hard time with it, but sometimes, it just isn't necessary. I think people online just feel like they have to get behind something, and the status quo is essentially nothing, so you have to find some solution, however pointless, to rally around. |
Shelters are about offering a place to stay so they will feel the freedom to leave abusive partners. The whole gender segregation part of it is extraneous to that, IMO. If they weren't gender specific, then abused men would plenty of places to go in order to leave abusive situations, but it's not, so they don't. Really makes you think about the whole separate but equal thing.
You may not think they're delicate little flowers (and fyi, that comment was made in general, not directed towards you per se,) but for some reason you are choosing to give special deference to what ciswomen feel comfortable with, rather than say, cismen. I think that says something about what you think of women.
I'm aware of that, I don't think it needs to change, per se, I just think it ought to change. I think there are a lot of positives that would come out of it. One would be living up to the whole "separate but equal isn't really equal" principle that we've supposedly lived by since Plessy v Ferguson. Another would be that it would eliminate this issue entirely, no would have any perceived right to complain about the gender of another person. I think it would lead to people devaluing what someone's gender is and start seeing people as people and individuals. There is way too much emphasis on what someone's gender is, and that comes from how much we segregate the genders when there is no need to. I'm not just thinking about transpeople who are firmly a woman, or firmly a man, but I'm also thinking about transpeople who are genderqueer and/or non-binary.
This isn't my specific prescription for this issue as much as it's just a change I believe in, and it also happens to leave the bigots with no room to discriminate against transpeople. I'm taking the tool of discrimination away by essentially eliminating gender segregation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Oklahoma Legislature has filed a measure asking Congress to impeach President Barack Obama.
| Quote: | Because an individual state does not have the power to impeach a president, Oklahoma lawmakers are asking for members of the U.S. House of Representatives to file articles of impeachment against Obama, the U.S. attorney general, the U.S. secretary of education and other administration officials involved in the decision to let transgender students use bathroom corresponding to the gender with which they identify, not necessarily the gender listed on their birth certificates.
Senate Concurrent Resolution 43 -- written by Sen. Anthony Sykes and Rep. John R. Bennett, both of whom are Republican -- says:
| Quote: | | The members of the United States House of Representatives elected from this state are hereby requested to file articles of impeachment against the President of the United States, the Attorney General of the United States, the Secretary of Education and any other federal official liable to impeachment who has exceeded his or her constitutional authority with respect to the letter referenced in this resolution, based upon the grounds that the Constitution of the United States does not grant the executive branch of the federal government any authority whatsoever over the public education system, nor over the use of restrooms or other facilities thereof." |
The resolution also "condemns the actions of the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice and the Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Education ... as contrary to the values of the citizens of Oklahoma and to the interests of public safety." |
Little Okie Heads Exploding All Over the Countryside
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17248
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aussiesuede wrote: | The Oklahoma Legislature has filed a measure asking Congress to impeach President Barack Obama.
| Quote: | Because an individual state does not have the power to impeach a president, Oklahoma lawmakers are asking for members of the U.S. House of Representatives to file articles of impeachment against Obama, the U.S. attorney general, the U.S. secretary of education and other administration officials involved in the decision to let transgender students use bathroom corresponding to the gender with which they identify, not necessarily the gender listed on their birth certificates.
Senate Concurrent Resolution 43 -- written by Sen. Anthony Sykes and Rep. John R. Bennett, both of whom are Republican -- says:
| Quote: | | The members of the United States House of Representatives elected from this state are hereby requested to file articles of impeachment against the President of the United States, the Attorney General of the United States, the Secretary of Education and any other federal official liable to impeachment who has exceeded his or her constitutional authority with respect to the letter referenced in this resolution, based upon the grounds that the Constitution of the United States does not grant the executive branch of the federal government any authority whatsoever over the public education system, nor over the use of restrooms or other facilities thereof." |
The resolution also "condemns the actions of the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice and the Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Education ... as contrary to the values of the citizens of Oklahoma and to the interests of public safety." |
Little Okie Heads Exploding All Over the Countryside |
Between this and their new abortion bill, it's good to see Oklahoma lawmakers focusing on the important things that really matter to the everyday lives of their constituents. /s |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52654
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | The Oklahoma Legislature has filed a measure asking Congress to impeach President Barack Obama.
| Quote: | Because an individual state does not have the power to impeach a president, Oklahoma lawmakers are asking for members of the U.S. House of Representatives to file articles of impeachment against Obama, the U.S. attorney general, the U.S. secretary of education and other administration officials involved in the decision to let transgender students use bathroom corresponding to the gender with which they identify, not necessarily the gender listed on their birth certificates.
Senate Concurrent Resolution 43 -- written by Sen. Anthony Sykes and Rep. John R. Bennett, both of whom are Republican -- says:
| Quote: | | The members of the United States House of Representatives elected from this state are hereby requested to file articles of impeachment against the President of the United States, the Attorney General of the United States, the Secretary of Education and any other federal official liable to impeachment who has exceeded his or her constitutional authority with respect to the letter referenced in this resolution, based upon the grounds that the Constitution of the United States does not grant the executive branch of the federal government any authority whatsoever over the public education system, nor over the use of restrooms or other facilities thereof." |
The resolution also "condemns the actions of the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice and the Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Education ... as contrary to the values of the citizens of Oklahoma and to the interests of public safety." |
Little Okie Heads Exploding All Over the Countryside |
Between this and their new abortion bill, it's good to see Oklahoma lawmakers focusing on the important things that really matter to the everyday lives of their constituents. /s |
Fortunately the Governor vetoed the Abortion bill today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | federal judge ruled Friday that the University of North Carolina system cannot enforce the part of the state's so-called "bathroom bill" that deals with which restrooms transgender people use, a controversial provision that prompted the Justice Department to sue the state.
Until a final decision is reached in the case, the schools -- which have said they are caught between conflicting state and federal mandates -- cannot enforce the language requiring the bathrooms, showers and other facilities people use must match the gender on their birth certificates, District Judge Thomas Schroeder wrote in an 83-page order issued Friday afternoon.
Schroeder said the plaintiffs, a group that includes the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina and transgender students and an employee of UNC, "are likely to succeed on their claim" that the bathroom provision violates Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits sex discrimination in education programs that get federal funding. |
North Carolina Battle of the Bathroom
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
