Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should it be allowed
NO 109 64.50%
YES 60 35.50%
Voters: 169. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-21-2016, 12:41 PM
 
2,851 posts, read 3,475,909 times
Reputation: 1200

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewGuy2016 View Post
So the crimes the person you quoted have no tool involved, other than themselves. Now you want to mention more illegal activities and bring into one of a plethora of tools that the criminal could use to commit such crime. Why target the tool and not the individual?
So a ban on wearing women's clothes as a man, since they are "tools". Or sex change.


You're being obtuse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
I am a gun owner, and have discussed gun laws all over the place, but if you want to discuss gun laws start a thread about gun laws.

But I'm willing to bet that you are against "gun free zones" as the person that is going to break the law by killing people would not be stopped by the fact that they weren't supposed to be there in the first place. This is the same thing, people who plan on molesting or raping women are not going to be stopped by a law that says that they can not go into the room.
I am pointing out the principle. People think that this ban is the Devils own, but A-OK with their firearms counterparts. I hate hypocrisy with a passion.

 
Old 04-21-2016, 12:43 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,049 posts, read 44,853,831 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 View Post
You're being obtuse.

I am pointing out the principle. People think that this ban is the Devils own, but A-OK with their firearms counterparts. I hate hypocrisy with a passion.
As do I.
 
Old 04-21-2016, 12:47 PM
 
1,100 posts, read 634,140 times
Reputation: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 View Post
So a ban on wearing women's clothes as a man, since they are "tools". Or sex change.



I am pointing out the principle. People think that this ban is the Devils own, but A-OK with their firearms counterparts. I hate hypocrisy with a passion.

Clothes are not a tool. Let's try again.

I said focus on the individual. And I fail to see where you're going with the sex change statement...unless you're advocating a ban on that? If so, that's ridiculous - even in Iran, which is up there with Saudi Arabia and a few other Arab countries, as some of the most bigoted and oppressive regimes towards the LGBT community, they allow sex changes....actually they essentially give the person a choice - die being a homosexual or have a sex change. Which in itself is beyond understanding - forcing an individual to be something they aren't and don't identify with.

Last edited by NewGuy2016; 04-21-2016 at 12:51 PM.. Reason: because the person I quoted is ridiculous
 
Old 04-21-2016, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,214,925 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 View Post
So a ban on wearing women's clothes as a man, since they are "tools". Or sex change.


You're being obtuse.


I am pointing out the principle. People think that this ban is the Devils own, but A-OK with their firearms counterparts. I hate hypocrisy with a passion.
And many think that this ban is a-ok but think that any regulation on guns is the devils own.


Since you seem to think that gun regs are a no go, do you also think that this ban is a bad thing?
 
Old 04-21-2016, 01:25 PM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,261 posts, read 23,746,924 times
Reputation: 38659
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
If they are gong to rape someone, which is illegal, why would the sign on the door stop them?

Do gun free zone signs stop people who go to schools and kill people? No. According to you that should stop them since it is illegal for them to have a gun there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
So... why give them a LEGAL reason for being in the girls'/women's facilities in the first place? YOU and other SWJs want to make it LEGAL for them to do so if they merely "say" they "identify" as female. Idiotic and VERY dangerous, to say the least.
No, it's not going to stop them, but I have a much easier time of reporting it when some peeping tom IS in the bathroom.....as happened when I was in college. A friend and I were getting changed in one of the restrooms in college after class so that we could go to a nearby track for exercise. Someone was in the middle stall, we went to the left and right stalls. As I was putting on my shirt, I just happened to glance up and see someone peering over the side. He quickly ducked back down, but now he was caught.

I got out of the stall and stood in front of the middle one to protect my friend from being peeped on, and the jack arse knew I was there. I even made remarks to my friend: Ever feel like you're being spied on?

She was oblivious and asked me, "Why, are you looking at me?" with a laugh. I replied that I was not and let that perv sweat it out. When my friend got out, I motioned for her to go to the door and out of the restroom. We then waited for the perv. About 2 minutes later, he came rushing out, I reached out to grab him...I was pissed off enough that I would have fought him. Didn't matter to me at the time if I would lose, I was going to fight him.

I managed to get his shirt, but he was moving so quick that I couldn't get a good grip. NONETHELESS, we were able to run after him to get a good ID on him. He was dressed up in a wig.

Back then, me going to report that there was a male in the bathroom dressed like a female who was spying on us MEANT SOMETHING. (And yes, they did catch him.)

Today? With these changes that a very tiny fraction actually support, I would have been told: Well, if he's identifying as a female, there's nothing we can do.

AND YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT! That's what pisses me off about those who support this. No, the door saying "females only" does not stop them, but it sure as hell makes it a lot easier to have someone listen to you when you tell them a perv is in the bathroom with you! God, get it through your thick skull!
 
Old 04-21-2016, 01:29 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,214,925 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
No, it's not going to stop them, but I have a much easier time of reporting it when some peeping tom IS in the bathroom.....as happened when I was in college. A friend and I were getting changed in one of the restrooms in college after class so that we could go to a nearby track for exercise. Someone was in the middle stall, we went to the left and right stalls. As I was putting on my shirt, I just happened to glance up and see someone peering over the side. He quickly ducked back down, but now he was caught.

I got out of the stall and stood in front of the middle one to protect my friend from being peeped on, and the jack arse knew I was there. I even made remarks to my friend: Ever feel like you're being spied on?

She was oblivious and asked me, "Why, are you looking at me?" with a laugh. I replied that I was not and let that perv sweat it out. When my friend got out, I motioned for her to go to the door and out of the restroom. We then waited for the perv. About 2 minutes later, he came rushing out, I reached out to grab him...I was pissed off enough that I would have fought him. Didn't matter to me at the time if I would lose, I was going to fight him.

I managed to get his shirt, but he was moving so quick that I couldn't get a good grip. NONETHELESS, we were able to run after him to get a good ID on him. He was dressed up in a wig.

Back then, me going to report that there was a male in the bathroom dressed like a female who was spying on us MEANT SOMETHING. (And yes, they did catch him.)

Today? With these changes that a very tiny fraction actually support, I would have been told: Well, if he's identifying as a female, there's nothing we can do.

AND YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT! That's what pisses me off about those who support this. No, the door saying "females only" does not stop them, but it sure as hell makes it a lot easier to have someone listen to you when you tell them a perv is in the bathroom with you! God, get it through your thick skull!
And a person peeping would still be illegal. You could still report him. He could still be prosecuted in court. If it was a woman doing the same you could have reported them, and they had the legal right to be in there.

God, get it through your thick skull! If someone is going to break the law, a law about who can go in the room won't matter.
 
Old 04-21-2016, 02:51 PM
 
11,186 posts, read 6,510,171 times
Reputation: 4622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post

Incidentally, who's going to decide who's a "legitimate" transgender and who isn't?
These laws can't be enforced. There's no test for transgender, even less when the laws use terms like gender identity or gender expression.

Being an old-fashioned male, I've never been in a women's bathroom. Now in some places I could check one out and there's nothing old-fashioned women could do about it. I suppose women could question me, try to detain me, or call the cops. A police dep't. or a DA could devote their resources trying to prove what my identity or expression really, truly is, but somehow I don't think that's a priority. Trying to detain or harass me places the women at risk of violating my rights, or even illegal detainment.

In a way, the word transgender is not quite accurate. I use the analogy of 'gay' marriage, which is really same gender marriage. These 'transgender' laws are similarly not precise; more like men can use what were designated women's facilities, and vice-versa.
 
Old 04-21-2016, 03:49 PM
 
Location: Boston, MA
14,483 posts, read 11,287,685 times
Reputation: 9002
Quote:
Originally Posted by katzpaw View Post
The British Government has travel advice for LGBT visitors to North Carolina & Mississippi

https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-ad...ws-and-customs

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/lesbian-...-travel-advice

"The US is an extremely diverse society and attitudes towards LGBT people differ hugely across the country. LGBT travellers may be affected by legislation passed recently in the states of North Carolina and Mississippi. Before travelling please read our general travel advice for the LGBT community. "
And the French government has warned its citizens to stay out of my neighborhood here in Boston.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...itizens-about/
 
Old 04-21-2016, 08:26 PM
 
Location: S.E. US
13,163 posts, read 1,700,406 times
Reputation: 5132
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
And a person peeping would still be illegal. You could still report him. He could still be prosecuted in court. If it was a woman doing the same you could have reported them, and they had the legal right to be in there.

God, get it through your thick skull! If someone is going to break the law, a law about who can go in the room won't matter.
And you don't understand that these kinds of laws make it easier for more people to do this in the future?

Here are examples of what the policy can lead to:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.2535150

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/se...der-to-assault

http://ktla.com/2013/05/14/da-cross-...#ixzz2TKsMicgJ

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/l...123472564.html
 
Old 04-22-2016, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,261 posts, read 23,746,924 times
Reputation: 38659
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
And a person peeping would still be illegal. You could still report him. He could still be prosecuted in court. If it was a woman doing the same you could have reported them, and they had the legal right to be in there.

God, get it through your thick skull! If someone is going to break the law, a law about who can go in the room won't matter.
Listen, you can lie to everyone else on here, but you know damn good and well that is EXACTLY what they would say. ESPECIALLY in this disgustingly overly PC horse crap environment. Wouldn't want to take the chance of hurting a perv's feeling just in case they might be transgender. Get the hell out of here with your bs. GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:39 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top