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.
So we still have the problem, and you haven't provided an answer... A girl/woman complains about a suspicious male in the girls'/women's facilities, and he "says" he's "transgender" so he has every right to be there staring at her or making her uncomfortable with his advances. Now what?
I didn't say how likely it was, I said that a woman can be a sexual predator too, therefore if even a woman or transgender woman is doing inappropriate things, then that counts too.
Transgender women and women do not have any right to stare at other women or make her uncomfortable with their advances. You cannot sit in a locker room staring at other women being changed, even though you are a woman, you would be asked to leave.
Why isn't this sinking in? I have given you this answer as plainly as I can. You cannot stare or making unwanted advances towards others in restrooms and locker rooms regardless of your genitalia.
So we still have the problem, and you haven't provided an answer... A girl/woman complains about a suspicious male in the girls'/women's facilities, and he "says" he's "transgender" so he has every right to be there staring at her or making her uncomfortable with his advances. Now what?
So we still have the problem, and you haven't provided an answer... A girl/woman complains about a suspicious male in the girls'/women's facilities, and he "says" he's "transgender" so he has every right to be there staring at her or making her uncomfortable with his advances. Now what?
Yes, but you do understand that the rules apply to women as well. A woman cannot stare or make uncomfortable advances towards other women. So even if a man claims to be a woman is doing these things, it is still illegal and can warrant being asked to leave or arrested.
You can deny this all you want, but this is the reality.
Yes, but you do understand that the rules apply to women as well.
Of all sexual offenders against an individual, 99% are men, 1% are women.
I posted the link to the University of Michigan study.
So, again, I'll ask you...
A girl/woman complains about a suspicious male in the girls'/women's facilities, and he "says" he's "transgender" so he has every right to be there staring at her or making her uncomfortable with his advances.Now what?
Yes, but you do understand that the rules apply to women as well. A woman cannot stare or make uncomfortable advances towards other women. So even if a man claims to be a woman is doing these things, it is still illegal and can warrant being asked to leave or arrested.
You can deny this all you want, but this is the reality.
And the overwhelming majority of the populace is heterosexual, with a greater number of advances (both wanted and unwanted) being male upon female while female upon female is minuscule. Men are generally stronger than women too.
You can deny this all you want, but this is the reality.
No, my response was in fact an answer because both questions have the same answer. It shouldn't be hard for anyone to figure out what that answer is.
Then your previous answer sounds like a witness on the witness stand who doesn't agree with the point the attorney is trying to make with the questioning and asks the attorney a question, rather just answering the question. You are trying to turn the tables, but it is still question dodging because you didn't provide a direct answer. I wish IC had used the age 18 cisgender male/under 18 cisgender female high school example she has used before, rather than being more general, because then your 'answer' would be wrong.
A man claiming to be a female who makes others feel uncomfortable can still be evicted from restrooms/changing rooms/ etc because the same rule applies to women. A woman who is making others feel uncomfortable by staring at other women....is also wrong and ground for evicting them from the facilities or pressing charges.
Quote:
it is illegal for a woman to peep and stare at other women while they are changing. I bet you would get some dirty remarks and be asked to leave if you went into a women's locker room and just stared at other women changing.
What specific criteria would you suggest would constitute a violation and who is to be believed initially in order to take any action. Lvmensch has already admitted that enforcement re the the peeping part of this issue might be problematic.
No that is not what the letter says...it actually reads...
**********
The Departments interpret Title IX to require that when a student or the student’s parent or guardian, as appropriate, notifies the school administration that the student will assert a gender identity that differs from previous representations or records, the school will begin treating the student consistent with the student’s gender identity.
************
So there is a formality to be observed. And you don't simply say you're "transgender". It has to be a formal notification of the school administration.
That would require the student or parent or guardian to have some standing to notify the school. Old Tom the pervert passing by will not qualify.
Good point . This issue may have 'gone nationwide' in 2016, but became an issue in California with a state law that passed in 2013 (AB 1266).
Are schools in California to follow the letter of AB 1266 or the letter of the Obama administrations new letter?
In other words, re the Supremacy Clause, does the Obama administration's new letter carry the same weight as a federal statute?
So we still have the problem, and you haven't provided an answer... A girl/woman complains about a suspicious male in the girls'/women's facilities, and he "says" he's "transgender" so he has every right to be there staring at her or making her uncomfortable with his advances. Now what?
First statement in the report.
************************* This article has been archived. It is still available for reference purposes, but may contain out of date information.
*************************
And it obviously is directed at the peer to peer sexual attack problem not predators looking to invade girls locker rooms. They would have vastly different characteristics.
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.
Then your previous answer sounds like a witness on the witness stand who doesn't agree with the point the attorney is trying to make with the questioning and asks the attorney a question, rather just answering the question. You are trying to turn the tables, but it is still question dodging because you didn't provide a direct answer. I wish IC had used the age 18 cisgender male/under 18 cisgender female high school example she has used before, rather than being more general, because then your 'answer' would be wrong.
. This issue may have 'gone nationwide' in 2016, but became an issue in California with a state law that passed in 2013 (AB 1266). 
