Really, Houston?? (Mart: population, rain, job)

[3shipguy]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Which conveniently leaves out transgendered people for obvious reasons. They don't really fit into any of those categories. So your solution is to deny them access altogether?

Huh? I think Pedro was quite clear.

[curbur]

Originally Posted by PedroMartinez

The majority of people included in HERO are already included in federal and state laws. It was written in very vague terms. Finally, enforcement would be extremely subjective and places too high of a burden on businesses due to the vagueness of the poorly written ordinance.

Originally Posted by PedroMartinez

No, I never said they would be protected after it's passage. Read what I wrote again.

So when you stated "The majority of people included in HERO are already included in federal and state laws", that isn't a tacit admission that there is a minority of people that HERO included that do not currently receive any federal or state protections?

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by PedroMartinez

Are you claiming transgender people don't have genitalia?

Let's take Bruce Jenner for an example. Does Bruce have a p3n1s, a v@g1na or both?

Tell me what he has, and I'll illustrate how he can legally use the same restroom that anybody else with that body part can use.

If you don't want to use Jenner, or even any specific person, just make up a hypothetical transgender person and tell me what genitalia they have, and I'll work through it for you.

For most transgendered people, it can take years to get to the point of surgery, if they're even ever able to afford it. Yet most end up living as their identified sex long before that. So a tg who identifies as a woman, may dress and otherwise appear female, but still has a p*nis, under your plan, would still have to use the men's restroom, right? So you're not really considering them at all. In fact, I would imagine it would be pretty humiliating for them.

[PedroMartinez]

Originally Posted by curbur

So when you stated "The majority of people included in HERO are already included in federal and state laws", that isn't a tacit admission that there is a minority of people that HERO included that do not currently receive any federal or state protections?

No, it's not.

I was very clear.

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

For most transgendered people, it can take years to get to the point of surgery, if they're even ever able to afford it. Yet most end up living as their identified sex long before that. So a tg who identifies as a woman, may dress and otherwise appear female, but still has a p*nis, under your plan, would still have to use the men's restroom, right? So you're not really considering them at all. In fact, I would imagine it would be pretty humiliating for them.

You don't seem to understand that when everybody with a p3n1s is using the same restroom, than everybody is being treated the same.

Yes, it really is that simple.

[Tassy001]

Originally Posted by PedroMartinez

No, it's not.

I was very clear.



You don't seem to understand that when everybody with a p3n1s is using the same restroom, than everybody is being treated the same.

Yes, it really is that simple.

Exactly. Everyone in that bathroom has the same body parts.

What is wanted is Special Privileges for those who 'choose' to be a different gender.

[AnywhereElse]

Originally Posted by PedroMartinez

Are you claiming transgender people don't have genitalia?

Let's take Bruce Jenner for an example. Does Bruce have a p3n1s, a v@g1na or both?

Tell me what he has, and I'll illustrate how he can legally use the same restroom that anybody else with that body part can use.

If you don't want to use Jenner, or even any specific person, just make up a hypothetical transgender person and tell me what genitalia they have, and I'll work through it for you.

I know, I thought everyone had one or the other. Jenner claims to not want to give up his penis which I never understood how one could feel like a woman with that.

Originally Posted by 3shipguy

Huh? I think Pedro was quite clear.

Maybe instead of a "man/male" or "female/woman" they should just picture the genitalia on the door and hopefully, everyone will recognize something that is a match.

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

For most transgendered people, it can take years to get to the point of surgery, if they're even ever able to afford it. Yet most end up living as their identified sex long before that. So a tg who identifies as a woman, may dress and otherwise appear female, but still has a p*nis, under your plan, would still have to use the men's restroom, right? So you're not really considering them at all. In fact, I would imagine it would be pretty humiliating for them.

Pedro is very clear and as you can tell by the vote and the fact that this is the 3rd city to overturn this, most agree. They have two types of facilities, one for people with a penis and the other for people with a vagina. I don't see any way that anyone can make that more clear. I don't care how they feel or how they dress, public facilities have that breakdown.

I really have zero sympathy. I am a 61 year old woman who takes a 29 year old male everywhere I go in public. He functions at the 40 month level. Since I cannot take him in the women/female bathroom and am not comfortable sending him alone in the man/male bathroom because he won't necessarily come back on in a timely fashion requiring me to go and get him, I plan accordingly. We have a "special" situation and I don't expect that males would welcome me coming in the bathroom or in a locker room with him or that females would want him in the female facilities. I don't expect the rest of the world to change to accommodate us.

I don't want a man in a dress in the restroom, showers or dressing room with me. I don't care how someone feels, biology is biology.

I was thrilled to see this repealed as a lesson to other cities. You don't mess with biology.

[jbcmh81]

PedroMartinez;41807905]

You don't seem to understand that when everybody with a p3n1s is using the
same restroom, than everybody is being treated the same.

Yes, it really is that simple.

This is about as dumb as the argument that gay marriage didn't need to happen because everyone could marry someone of the opposite sex, so there was no discrimination.

You definitely don't understand anything about transgender people. Educate yourself for once instead of being led by fear.

[jbcmh81]

AnywhereElse;41807975]I know, I thought everyone had one or the other. Jenner claims to not want to give up his penis which I
never understood how one could feel like a woman with that.

Maybe instead of a "man/male" or "female/woman" they should just picture the
genitalia on the door and hopefully, everyone will recognize something that is a
match.

Pedro is very clear and as you can tell by the vote and the fact that this is
the 3rd city to overturn this, most agree. They have two types of facilities,
one for people with a penis and the other for people with a vagina. I don't see
any way that anyone can make that more clear. I don't care how they feel or how
they dress, public facilities have that breakdown.

I really have zero sympathy. I am a 61 year old woman who takes a 29 year
old male everywhere I go in public. He functions at the 40 month level. Since
I cannot take him in the women/female bathroom and am not comfortable sending
him alone in the man/male bathroom because he won't necessarily come back on in
a timely fashion requiring me to go and get him, I plan accordingly. We have a
"special" situation and I don't expect that males would welcome me coming in the
bathroom or in a locker room with him or that females would want him in the
female facilities. I don't expect the rest of the world to change to
accommodate us.

I don't want a man in a dress in the restroom, showers or dressing room with
me. I don't care how someone feels, biology is biology.

I was thrilled to see this repealed as a lesson to other cities. You don't
mess with biology.

Transgender issues are biological. As are gay. If you don't know what the hell you're talking about, then perhaps you should take the advice I gave Pedro- try educating yourself. I am never surprised that older people have issues with gay/tg, or basically anything different than stereotypical Nuclear Families, but you're never actually too old to learn something.

[DSL_PWR]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Transgender issues are biological. As are gay. If you don't know what the hell you're talking about, then perhaps you should take the advice I gave Pedro- try educating yourself. I am never surprised that older people have issues with gay/tg, or basically anything different than stereotypical Nuclear Families, but you're never actually too old to learn something.

educate away.. everyone is listening.

[PedroMartinez]

Originally Posted by AnywhereElse

I really have zero sympathy. I am a 61 year old woman who takes a 29 year old male everywhere I go in public. He functions at the 40 month level. Since I cannot take him in the women/female bathroom and am not comfortable sending him alone in the man/male bathroom because he won't necessarily come back on in a timely fashion requiring me to go and get him, I plan accordingly. We have a "special" situation and I don't expect that males would welcome me coming in the bathroom or in a locker room with him or that females would want him in the female facilities. I don't expect the rest of the world to change to accommodate us.

First, taking on such a responsibility is extremely noble.

Out of curiosity, have you ever spoken to the manager at a restaurant or business and asked them to temporarily close the men's room in order to accommodate your situation? If so, what was the response.

I know that if I were at a restaurant and an employee asked me to briefly wait while another customer with a special situation could address their needs, I would have no issue with that. Hopefully, if you have chosen to make such requests, other people have been understanding.

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

This is about as dumb as the argument that gay marriage didn't need to happen because everyone could marry someone of the opposite sex, so there was no discrimination.

You definitely don't understand anything about transgender people. Educate yourself for once instead of being led by fear.

I'm sorry, but if you don't know that transgender people have genitalia, you might want to educate yourself.

Now, as far a the comparison to gay marriage, two men getting married has no affect on myself or my family; whereas, a man going into a women's room where my little girl might be does have affect me.

I have no problem with gay marriage or even group marriage. It doesn't affect me at all.