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.
Like I said, since I won't legally be allowed inside the woman's restroom since I am a real man I will politely ask the man to stay outside while my wife and daughter are using the restroom. If he responds that he has the right to enter, WHACK! Right across the face with a board.
That's what it's coming to in the country. Y'all P/C'ers keep playin' around.
Cool, then you'll get arrested for battery. Keep playin' around and you'll see what happens inside a jail bathroom.
Cool, then you'll get arrested for battery. Keep playin' around and you'll see what happens inside a jail bathroom.
Do they have special accommodations for Transgenders in jails? If not, how come?
It's such a shame that so many people are glued to their political ideology and refuse to see BOTH sides of the issue here and choose to demonize people for their feelings. Not very open minded and inclusive at all.
With minimum wage: If the state controls it, I could see them holding a city "hostage" or use it as a huge bargaining chip. Maybe a city referendum would be better. Because there is a huge difference in the minimum wage in rural NE NC, vs Charlotte.
The state should have final say, simply because raising the minimum wage in one city does have some impact on the other cities within the state, so even if a city would have the right to propose a minimum wage increase, they shouldn't be able to do it on their own. You look at it like the state couldn't be trusted with this, even though the state has been in charge of the minimum wage for probably at least a half of century by now. I look at it as, what would stop the cities from arbitrarily raising the minimum wage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBojangles
With responding to a "woman going into a male bathroom". You explain it the same way you explain everything else. People are different and that is OK. What do you say when your child sees someone with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis? You tell this everyone is different, and stop staring. Just because someone can't explain something to their child, isn't enough to keep that thing outlawed.
Whoa, wait a minute. So, how is it that one would not be able to explain why what appears to be a man is using the ladies room (because she hasn't went through the surgery), but you can simply explain that the woman in my example is just simply different (completely a woman, hasn't taken treatments, no surgerys, but in her mind, she was born with the wrong gender...) and that's OK, and my children are supposed to accept that? Do you not see how hypocritical and confusing that is?
Do they have special accommodations for Transgenders in jails? If not, how come?
It's such a shame that so many people are glued to their political ideology and refuse to see BOTH sides of the issue here and choose to demonize people for their feelings. Not very open minded and inclusive at all.
That's not an argument. That's a false equivalency fallacy. There aren't two sides to every issue. We can't all be right. There are plenty issues we can disagree on. Plenty issues still up for debate. Nobody knows for sure what the best way is to organize our economy. We also have different ideas of what kind of governmental system is best. We can disagree on what the meaning of life is, how the universe came about, what happens after death, sure. Many of these things are unsolved and there are plenty debates to be had about them. And there are social issues that are grey areas as well...
But there are some things that are not real arguments anymore. We've all agreed murder is bad (except a few borderline cases). And we're all generally in agreement that gravity is a thing. I think we're all on the same page that Santa Claus isn't real either. Many people here think treating people with respect and tolerance is also something we should all be on the same page on, if their actions are compatible with society and not harming anyone else.
How is that unreasonable?
What is the problem with treating transgendered individuals as the gender they identify with for public restrooms? I'm willing to consider your perspective if you can make a compelling argument for it. But so far, you are hiding behind assumptions that the rest of us don't know what our state constitution says (I've read it by the way. I cannot find any provisions limiting the power of municipalities to deal with issues that are not legally covered by state or federal law. How about you post it since you seem to know something about it?). Your other argument is claiming there are hordes of bearded old men in sundresses running into women's rooms, and this is purely an irrational appeal to fear. There is NO EVIDENCE for that, and there is plenty evidence to suggest the opposite, so... you appear to be wasting all of our time. Also, how are you not a huge hypocrite asking for tolerance for your view of showing none for someone else? Why should we be obligated to treat you by the same rules in a game you refuse to play by the rules yourself? We can call out hypocrisy. That's not narrow mindedness.
What is the problem with treating transgendered individuals as the gender they identify with for public restrooms? There's no evidence that causes any harm, and there's a lot of evidence that treating them like they have a mental disorder, or like they're freaks, causes a lot of harm. So explain to me what the other side of this argument is, because I see zero evidence to support any other side. You keep claiming there are hordes of bearded old men in sundresses running into women's rooms, but this is purely an irrational appeal to fear. There is NO EVIDENCE for that, and there is plenty evidence to suggest the opposite, so... you're wasting all of our time. Also, how are you not a huge hypocrite asking for tolerance for your view of showing none for someone else? Why should we be obligated to treat you by the same rules in a game you refuse to play by the rules yourself? We can call out hypocrisy. That's not narrow mindedness.
The biggest problem is that you assume being transgender is just limited to those who have went through gender reassignment or in the progress of. I suppose when someone limits their definition to that, then it's easy to be dismissive of other possible issues that might arise from this. Problem is, it's a very narrow-minded viewpoint for a very broad term. Others who give pause to this issue do so because they understand how inclusive the term transgender is. So, when someone talks about taking issue with a man going into a women's restroom or the other way around, that actually is a very legitimate concern. Which is why I have said before, to work toward a solution that best works for everyone, there needs to be a clear, legal definition of what a transgender is in the eyes of the law. Otherwise, you can't really create laws for transgenders and expect no confusion or no issues at all.
Well said Kthnry.......Only correction is that it is 160 major companies instead of 80. When people read and think about the facts many have and will continue to side with repealing the bill. There is also many who will continue to have blinders and hands over ears all the while saying their children and wives are in danger. Sadly many NC people who should not be punished are paying the price with the states reputation going down the tubes.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,678,989 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfwuno
Well said Kthnry.......Only correction is that it is 160 major companies instead of 80. When people read and think about the facts many have and will continue to side with repealing the bill. There is also many who will continue to have blinders and hands over ears all the while saying their children and wives are in danger. Sadly many NC people who should not be punished are paying the price with the states reputation going down the tubes.
I'm a boomer. I was talking with a man in a supermarket last week who is also a boomer. He seemed very religious & he brought up the bathroom situation & asked my opinion. I told him that I have never heard of an incident with a transgender person in a bathroom. Then I said that I know I've been in ladies rooms with transgender women & was never concerned but HB2 does concern me because it's mandating transgender men to go into ladies rooms.
Then he said that he & his wife were discussing that very thing. He said that he had worked with someone who was transitioning from male to female, years ago, & understood that it's an uncomfortable situation for the person who is transitioning. He said that HB2 made his wife uncomfortable also. Then he proceeded to say that he thought that HB2 was a sign of the apocalypse.
There you have it. That's the demographic that's supposed to be thrilled with HB2.
That's not an argument. That's a false equivalency fallacy. There aren't two sides to every issue. We can't all be right. There are plenty issues we can disagree on. Plenty issues still up for debate. Nobody knows for sure what the best way is to organize our economy. We also have different ideas of what kind of governmental system is best. We can disagree on what the meaning of life is, how the universe came about, what happens after death, sure. Many of these things are unsolved and there are plenty debates to be had about them. And there are social issues that are grey areas as well...
But there are some things that are not real arguments anymore. We've all agreed murder is bad (except a few borderline cases). And we're all generally in agreement that gravity is a thing. I think we're all on the same page that Santa Claus isn't real either. Many people here think treating people with respect and tolerance is also something we should all be on the same page on, if their actions are compatible with society and not harming anyone else.
How is that unreasonable?
What is the problem with treating transgendered individuals as the gender they identify with for public restrooms? I'm willing to consider your perspective if you can make a compelling argument for it. But so far, you are hiding behind assumptions that the rest of us don't know what our state constitution says (I've read it by the way. I cannot find any provisions limiting the power of municipalities to deal with issues that are not legally covered by state or federal law. How about you post it since you seem to know something about it?). Your other argument is claiming there are hordes of bearded old men in sundresses running into women's rooms, and this is purely an irrational appeal to fear. There is NO EVIDENCE for that, and there is plenty evidence to suggest the opposite, so... you appear to be wasting all of our time. Also, how are you not a huge hypocrite asking for tolerance for your view of showing none for someone else? Why should we be obligated to treat you by the same rules in a game you refuse to play by the rules yourself? We can call out hypocrisy. That's not narrow mindedness.
Actually, I am one of the few who is asking that we consider BOTH the Transgender community AND the biological male or female communities who have issues about this, many due to some very deeply personal and tragic situations. I am not insulting anyone. Others are.
"The term "transgender" usually refers to the entire spectrum of people who are cross dressers, Transvestite, Transsexual, Drag Queens, intersexed (often called "hermaphrodites," but the exact definition is another whole discussion), asexual people, androgynous folk, etc."
I think it's important for people to understand who they are arguing for or against. Most of you are only arguing for a small group of people under the transgender umbrella.
"To me, the choice is a difference between being comfortable with yourself or making others feel comfortable. When in serious doubt, I use the Mens room. Why? If I am seen as a guy in a dress, then am I making anyone feel threatened by using the Mens room? Of course not. If I am seen as a guy in a dress, then am I making anyone feel threatened by using the Womans room? Perhaps. I can't make people feel one way or another about gender without a chance to talk with them for a while - and that isn't likely to happen with a stranger in a public restroom. If I am in the Mens room, then any discomfort will likely be in me. If I am in the Ladies room, then some women who do not understand about gender issues may misunderstand me and think that I am some sort of pervert and therefore they may be fearful. In short, if I do not feel that am not very passable and I use the Men's room, then the discomfort is pretty much only with me. If I am not passable and I use the Ladies room, then the discomfort may very well be with the others using the same restroom. Generally, the most considerate action is for me to use the Men's room."
Most of you are arguing from the angle of transsexuals, not all transgenders. Pretty much none of us would give a transsexual a second thought, because we wouldn't know they were the other gender and none of us are going to inspect. It's pretty much a non-issue with them, unless we're talking about showering facilities. But, as far as the cross-dresser, I would just about bet that a man dressed like a woman who decides to shower in the women's locker room at the gym is probably going to be frowned upon by many. Even if they had the legal right to do so, it's going to cause a lot of disruption with the business.
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.
