Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would you google transgender men and next transgender women and then go to images and maybe you can pick which ones you want to go where.
The ones who fit in unnoticed are not an issue, We do not gaze at women in restrooms, It is not an issue when there is no notice. Therefore the rule needs to apply to the obvious. I never noticed anyone looking like a man in a public restroom, that being so, there may have been some of these persons? The issue is when one obvious looks male, using a restroom that he does not belong. The law is unnecessary if it defend only those who look as normal females, yet it seems to imply protected persons who think they are female, yet look like males.
I do not need to look at more in this, i know enough about it. I have seen cases since the 60s.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,670,113 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDocKat
The ones who fit in unnoticed are not an issue, We do not gaze at women in restrooms, It is not an issue when there is no notice. Therefore the rule needs to apply to the obvious. I never noticed anyone looking like a man in a public restroom, that being so, there may have been some of these persons? The issue is when one obvious looks male, using a restroom that he does not belong. The law is unnecessary if it defend only those who look as normal females, yet it seems to imply protected persons who think they are female, yet look like males.
I do not need to look at more in this, i know enough about it. I have seen cases since the 60s.
Upon occasion I've been in ladies rooms with some of these individuals. I never once realized it until a lightbulb came on later, because of a mannerism or the fact that the individual was jittery.
My problem with HB2 is that it's mandating that individuals who look like men but still have the female plumbing should be going to ladies rooms. Then the clowns in Raleigh pat themselves on their backs & say that they've made women safe!?! They have made me unsafe. They are blithering idiots!
That's not going to happen. I see you do not have a clear understanding of contract law. Entertainers and performers cancel concerts all the time. What they do lose is the deposits that are put down on the venues.
How the concert goers spend their money is irrelevant. What is relevant is the out of state visitors who canceled their travel plans, the hotel/motel bookings canceled, the lost revenue to nearby restaurants and T-shirt vendors, etc., the lost tax revenue.
It's not just about Springstreen. How about Ringo Starr? Three performances by Cirque du Soleil? Pearl Jam?
What about the conventions and conferences that have been canceled?
Today the president of Duke University penned a strongly worded letter to Governor McCrory insisting on the repeal of HB2 in it's entirety.
It amazes me how some people are in denial about the economic consequences of this (HB2) disastrous piece of legislation.
Couldn't rep you again, Clark.
If it was really about bathrooms/locker rooms, then HB2 would have just addressed bathrooms/locker rooms - which would be completely unenforceable in the real world.
So then, do you favor Charlotte's action, or the Governor's action?
The issue at hand, is making *mandatory* a patron's usage in *all* facilities.
If a private business wants to dictate policies that I don't agree with, I am free to frequent a business that does.
But when you make policy mandatory...
The shower room/locker mandate is a bit sketchy.
Patrons that don't agree with the shower room mandate would have to frequent facilities outside of the City.
Is there any poster that thinks that this is a reasonable demand?
You don't have to agree with the CCC's action to disagree with HB2.
Honestly the transgender bathroom/locker room usage scenario is effectively a non-issue. If a woman who is transgendered goes into the men's room, it's not like "he" can use the urinal, regardless. "He" will go into a stall and no one will be the wiser. Vice versa for a transgendered man, "she" will go into a stall, just like all the other ladies and everything is hunky dory.
Locker rooms, especially school locker rooms, can be a stickier wicket - although I made it through my entire high school career, including being a 3 sport athlete, without getting naked on school grounds - but I question how often high school kids today are actually showering in front of one another.
Upon occasion I've been in ladies rooms with some of these individuals. I never once realized it until a lightbulb came on later, because of a mannerism or the fact that the individual was jittery.
My problem with HB2 is that it's mandating that individuals who look like men but still have the female plumbing should be going to ladies rooms. Then the clowns in Raleigh pat themselves on their backs & say that they've made women safe!?! They have made me unsafe. They are blithering idiots!
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,670,113 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan
Bingo.
The maddening part is that their mandate about bathrooms is unenforceable but makes it impossible for me to feel safe because it opens the doors to perverts, which the Charlotte law did not. Then, in an unrelated move, but crammed into the same bill, they took rights from everyone.
The law is an unseemly hodgepodge.
The last time they did this crap with the "I don't want to marry you but I still want my paycheck." bill, they scared off Volvo. Now they're costing us big bucks.
The ones who fit in unnoticed are not an issue, We do not gaze at women in restrooms, It is not an issue when there is no notice. Therefore the rule needs to apply to the obvious. I never noticed anyone looking like a man in a public restroom, that being so, there may have been some of these persons? The issue is when one obvious looks male, using a restroom that he does not belong. The law is unnecessary if it defend only those who look as normal females, yet it seems to imply protected persons who think they are female, yet look like males.
I do not need to look at more in this, i know enough about it. I have seen cases since the 60s.
And who will be in charge of determining who by looks qualifies for which room. Some Republicans thought a fast approved bill would go with little fanfare and show teabagistan they were doing something.
Moderate Republicans were caught in the crossfire and had to go along with the others. I guess we will have to have Mabel down at the MVD have an extensive two day training session and be in charge of issuing bathroom cards with drivers licenses.
Locker rooms, especially school locker rooms, can be a stickier wicket - although I made it through my entire high school career, including being a 3 sport athlete, without getting naked on school grounds - but I question how often high school kids today are actually showering in front of one another.
This isn't specific to school bathroom usage, for there are many adult gyms, YMCA's, and such, that have shower and locker room facilities.
If the City had written the ordinance in such a way as to allow individual facilities the freedom to govern as they so choose, I would not have had an issue with the City's ordinance.
For if my Wife ever found herself in an uncomfortable situation, she would then have the option to go to another facility that caters to her tastes.
But in one sweeping move, the City made mandatory certain policies. As such, any woman who found themselves in an uncomfortable situation, would have no other recourse but to not use any facility in the entire City of Charlotte.
This isn't specific to school bathroom usage, for there are many adult gyms, YMCA's, and such, that have shower and locker room facilities.
If the City had written the ordinance in such a way as to allow individual facilities the freedom to govern as they so choose, I would not have had an issue with the City's ordinance.
For if my Wife ever found herself in an uncomfortable situation, she would then have the option to go to another facility that caters to her tastes.
But in one sweeping move, the City made mandatory certain policies. As such, any woman who found themselves in an uncomfortable situation, would have no other recourse but to not use any facility in the entire City of Charlotte.
Do women in Charlotte find this acceptable?
As I said, you don't have to agree with the CCC's actions in order to oppose HB2. MOST of the objectionable things in HB2 have NOTHING to do with bathrooms/locker rooms.
I've never showered/gotten completely naked in a commercial gym locker room, either. I suspect the tiny amount of transgendered folks in and around Charlotte would answer the same, but I don't know any "t" folks, that I'm aware of.
The bigger point is that I'm certain adult trans folks have being changing in the locker rooms and using the bathrooms of the sex they identify as, regardless, for years. So, again, I'm suspecting this is a complete non-issue.
Pearl Jam has cancelled their concert due to this law as well. NC is losing money left and right. What gives??
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
