Sign in to follow this  
Shootist Jeff

The serious transgender bathroom issue discussion

Recommended Posts

I guess now if we want to keep women's and men's sports segregated, we must do a junk check when we pee. Thanks a lot nanny government types.

 

Ya gotta pee for the drug test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

<SNIP>

"males that self-ID".

 

About that question on dangly girl weenies in girls locker rooms.... You seem to think that answering questions is important...for me.

 

 

It's an issue at the IL school mentioned earlier. It's reasonable to expect an increase in such incidents once a precedent has been established that favors the perspective of the gender-confused kids over that of the other students.

 

I don't want to see any kids discriminated against for anything that's beyond their control. That said - there are physical realities that cannot and should not be ignored. It's pretty hard for a blind kid to make the school basketball team - is that discrimination? A kid in a wheelchair has a helluva time negotiating stairs, so ramps/elevators are installed so that the kid can still get around. Is that kid being discriminated against or ostracized because their physical condition warrants different treatment?

 

The Dept of Education nixed the Separate but Equal plan because it would have ostracized the kid, so it wasn't the same thing as what I was asking about. There have been transgendered people as long as there have been people. The reason it hasn't been a problem is that when people mind their own business, it isn't an issue.

 

I agree that the locker room issue is the toughest part of it all. Bathrooms are not an issue at all. But the fact that we have made it this long in our history without it being a problem, just by letting people go about their business, until one school in Ill tried to single a kid out with a separate but equal plan, tells me that left to our own devices (or perhaps left to local schools solving local problems), things work out alright, albeit without division we've seen of late.

 

In terms of the bigger picture, there is a big part of me that thinks that it is precisely because these people take me/us out of my/our comfort zones that they likely need protection.

 

 

Sol - it's the kid and his/her parents that had issue with the biological boy not being allowed into the girl's locker room, and forcing the issue. I suspect that the local school did the best that they could to accommodate the boy who didn't want to use the boy's facilities, and that wasn't good enough.

The school in IL wasn't trying to single anyone out. I think that the reason it hasn't been a problem previously is because the gender confused kids accepted that they were different than conventional role definitions, and didn't expect everyone else to adjust to accommodate them in that difference.

As to his being ostracized? You don't think that it's going to be worse after this? To my earlier point - is the kid in the wheelchair ostracized or discriminated against by having to use a ramp or an elevator to get around? No - it's simply a recognition of accommodating that kid's different needs.

 

The only fix that I see to this is that we pretend that there aren't any differences between males/females/wherever you decide you fall on the gender spectrum, and do away with the idea that gender separation in juvenile settings is no longer warranted, and that the behavioral deterrent provided by that separation is no longer necessary.

 

Notice I said to "pretend" - because whether anyone wants to accept it or not, there are indeed differences, and I think that it's a wrong approach to act like there isn't, trying to force a melding of them instead of recognizing and embracing those differences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And the LPGA lunch counter?

 

 

 

 

 

Sports. What about the sports question? Guy in a dress wants to join the LPGA...

 

That would be up to the LPGA. You nanny government types want to force them to accept guys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Jeff must have been traumatized or tantalized by swinging dicks in his face as a youth. He doesn't want to answer whether its appropriate to swing your dick in front of boys.

 

Look, this stuff takes people out of their comfort zones. Anything involving differences does that. My first inclination when faced with something outside of my comfort zone is to learn about it, instead of outlawing it. The internet makes that pretty easy. There are people here who I think operate in bad faith, to try to obscure issues or otherwise distract from topics of conversation. There are others who converse in good faith and do not need to resort to fallacy. Jeff belongs in the latter group. I think he is falling for a fallacy here, but that by no means indicates that he is conversing in bad faith.

 

re learning about it. Here's one place with a bit of information on the topic.

http://www.transgendercare.com/guidance/what_is_gender.htm

 

 

Thanks. I am being sincere about this topic. And as I've said, I am not outraged by it and think the NC legislature went too far.

 

I don't think I am falling for a fallacy here. Which one am I supposedly falling for? And yes, I think the shower room is the worst case scenario. But its not an outlandish or unlikely scenario in the slightest. YMCA, sailing club, HS..... not of those are out of the realm of normal.

 

I'm simply saying that before we rush into all this group hugging and congratulating ourselves on how tolerant and open-minded we are - that there may be some real world consequences of those actions. Is it right to bend over backwards to make a tiny fraction of the population feel "comfortable" while making the vast majority of the rest uncomfortable when there are viable solutions that accommodate both? I don't personally think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sports. What about the sports question? Guy in a dress wants to join the LPGA...

 

 

The case of Renee Richards offers interesting views on transgender women in women's sports.

 

My own opinion is that it is a matter of competitive fairness and is a complex question. An opinion I think Renee herself adopted reflecting back on her career.

 

I would be more inclined to say that a transgender high school female student should play on a JV basketball team than I would say that a transgender woman should be the number one golfer in the world. But is that fair? I wouldn't say that the same JV player should be allowed to double dribble because she isn't a top competitor.

 

But more importantly to this discussion, I don't think who should compete in women's sports and at what levels is relevant to the question of bathroom usage. Though as a nod to Jeff, I think it is worth talking about why it isn't relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

<SNIP>

"males that self-ID".

 

About that question on dangly girl weenies in girls locker rooms.... You seem to think that answering questions is important...for me.

 

 

It's an issue at the IL school mentioned earlier. It's reasonable to expect an increase in such incidents once a precedent has been established that favors the perspective of the gender-confused kids over that of the other students.

 

I don't want to see any kids discriminated against for anything that's beyond their control. That said - there are physical realities that cannot and should not be ignored. It's pretty hard for a blind kid to make the school basketball team - is that discrimination? A kid in a wheelchair has a helluva time negotiating stairs, so ramps/elevators are installed so that the kid can still get around. Is that kid being discriminated against or ostracized because their physical condition warrants different treatment?

 

The Dept of Education nixed the Separate but Equal plan because it would have ostracized the kid, so it wasn't the same thing as what I was asking about. There have been transgendered people as long as there have been people. The reason it hasn't been a problem is that when people mind their own business, it isn't an issue.

 

I agree that the locker room issue is the toughest part of it all. Bathrooms are not an issue at all. But the fact that we have made it this long in our history without it being a problem, just by letting people go about their business, until one school in Ill tried to single a kid out with a separate but equal plan, tells me that left to our own devices (or perhaps left to local schools solving local problems), things work out alright, albeit without division we've seen of late.

 

In terms of the bigger picture, there is a big part of me that thinks that it is precisely because these people take me/us out of my/our comfort zones that they likely need protection.

 

 

Sol - it's the kid and his/her parents that had issue with the biological boy not being allowed into the girl's locker room, and forcing the issue. I suspect that the local school did the best that they could to accommodate the boy who didn't want to use the boy's facilities, and that wasn't good enough.

The school in IL wasn't trying to single anyone out. I think that the reason it hasn't been a problem previously is because the gender confused kids accepted that they were different than conventional role definitions, and didn't expect everyone else to adjust to accommodate them in that difference.

As to his being ostracized? You don't think that it's going to be worse after this? To my earlier point - is the kid in the wheelchair ostracized or discriminated against by having to use a ramp or an elevator to get around? No - it's simply a recognition of accommodating that kid's different needs.

 

The only fix that I see to this is that we pretend that there aren't any differences between males/females/wherever you decide you fall on the gender spectrum, and do away with the idea that gender separation in juvenile settings is no longer warranted, and that the behavioral deterrent provided by that separation is no longer necessary.

 

Notice I said to "pretend" - because whether anyone wants to accept it or not, there are indeed differences, and I think that it's a wrong approach to act like there isn't, trying to force a melding of them instead of recognizing and embracing those differences.

 

 

This^^ All of it.

 

To the bolded part.... its interesting that I've been calling for a race neutral society for as long as I can remember yet the liberals here say that's a bad thing. Yet these same liberals are essentially calling for a gender neutral society where there are no divisions or recognition of discrete sexes.

 

Can't have it both ways........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Sol - it's the kid and his/her parents that had issue with the biological boy not being allowed into the girl's locker room, and forcing the issue. I suspect that the local school did the best that they could to accommodate the boy who didn't want to use the boy's facilities, and that wasn't good enough.

The school in IL wasn't trying to single anyone out. I think that the reason it hasn't been a problem previously is because the gender confused kids accepted that they were different than conventional role definitions, and didn't expect everyone else to adjust to accommodate them in that difference.

As to his being ostracized? You don't think that it's going to be worse after this? To my earlier point - is the kid in the wheelchair ostracized or discriminated against by having to use a ramp or an elevator to get around? No - it's simply a recognition of accommodating that kid's different needs.

 

The only fix that I see to this is that we pretend that there aren't any differences between males/females/wherever you decide you fall on the gender spectrum, and do away with the idea that gender separation in juvenile settings is no longer warranted, and that the behavioral deterrent provided by that separation is no longer necessary.

 

Notice I said to "pretend" - because whether anyone wants to accept it or not, there are indeed differences, and I think that it's a wrong approach to act like there isn't, trying to force a melding of them instead of recognizing and embracing those differences.

 

There are differences, and there always have been. My suggestion is to leave people to their own devices to pick for themselves where they want to go and what they want to do, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. If they hurt someone, crack down on them. Otherwise, go about our business. In no instance should we remove their right to go to court to seek their civil rights, or remove their civil rights from them. We are better than that, I would hope.

 

Re the Chicago student. Transgender student undergoing female hormone therapy, who identifies as a female, but not yet surgically changed. Cite. So we're talking about someone who looks like a girl until the panties are pulled down, right? I'm not sure I want to see her going into a boy's locker room if she's my kid. About the Title IX decision the child responded:

 

 

“This decision makes me extremely happy — because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others,” she said. “The district’s policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a ‘normal person.’ ”

So yeah, the separate but equal option is great for singling people out so that everyone knows who is different and needs to be stomped, as would the choice to send someone who looks like a girl into the boy's locker room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Sol - it's the kid and his/her parents that had issue with the biological boy not being allowed into the girl's locker room, and forcing the issue. I suspect that the local school did the best that they could to accommodate the boy who didn't want to use the boy's facilities, and that wasn't good enough.

The school in IL wasn't trying to single anyone out. I think that the reason it hasn't been a problem previously is because the gender confused kids accepted that they were different than conventional role definitions, and didn't expect everyone else to adjust to accommodate them in that difference.

As to his being ostracized? You don't think that it's going to be worse after this? To my earlier point - is the kid in the wheelchair ostracized or discriminated against by having to use a ramp or an elevator to get around? No - it's simply a recognition of accommodating that kid's different needs.

 

The only fix that I see to this is that we pretend that there aren't any differences between males/females/wherever you decide you fall on the gender spectrum, and do away with the idea that gender separation in juvenile settings is no longer warranted, and that the behavioral deterrent provided by that separation is no longer necessary.

 

Notice I said to "pretend" - because whether anyone wants to accept it or not, there are indeed differences, and I think that it's a wrong approach to act like there isn't, trying to force a melding of them instead of recognizing and embracing those differences.

 

 

This^^ All of it.

 

To the bolded part.... its interesting that I've been calling for a race neutral society for as long as I can remember yet the liberals here say that's a bad thing. Yet these same liberals are essentially calling for a gender neutral society where there are no divisions or recognition of discrete sexes.

 

Can't have it both ways........

 

Who called for a gender neutral society? Where?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And no, goddamn it, do not throw up your hands and call for one set of facilities and run away. Y'all opened this can, lets eat it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

“This decision makes me extremely happy — because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others,” she said. “The district’s policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a ‘normal person.’ ”

So yeah, the separate but equal option is great for singling people out so that everyone knows who is different and needs to be stomped, as would the choice to send someone who looks like a girl into the boy's locker room.

 

 

Sorry - that kid is NOT a normal person. That the kid isn't normal, like the kid in the wheelchair, or the blind kid, isn't a value judgement, and doesn't mean that the kid ought to be treated poorly. If that kid has different needs, then those needs ought to be accommodated to the extent that it's reasonably possible. Forcing girls to accept a boy in the girl's locker room so that he can feel "normal" goes beyond reasonable, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

“This decision makes me extremely happy — because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others,” she said. “The district’s policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a ‘normal person.’ ”

So yeah, the separate but equal option is great for singling people out so that everyone knows who is different and needs to be stomped, as would the choice to send someone who looks like a girl into the boy's locker room.

 

 

Sorry - that kid is NOT a normal person. That the kid isn't normal, like the kid in the wheelchair, or the blind kid, isn't a value judgement, and doesn't mean that the kid ought to be treated poorly. If that kid has different needs, then those needs ought to be accommodated to the extent that it's reasonably possible. Forcing girls to accept a boy in the girl's locker room so that he can feel "normal" goes beyond reasonable, IMHO.

 

So your conclusion is that the kid is a boy and that is the end of it. I can see that, but the child in question does not agree with you. There is a much greater likelihood that other kids will experience discomfort if the kid uses the boys locker room looking like a girl, than if a girl with a penis that otherwise looks like a girl uses the girl's locker room. This is not the first such child to experience this. If they had a propensity to wave their junk around for all to see while yelling "hey, take note of my dick!" we would have heard about it by now. The kid just wants to go on with her life and be left alone, like most folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a conundrum for sure. What the SOLution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a conundrum for sure. What the SOLution?

Pretty much the same as the Solution to the same sex marriage issue. Mind our own business, stop telling people what to do or not do (other than hurting other people) and everything will be fine. Heterosexuals' marriages didn't magically go poof the night after the Sup Ct. rendered their decision, and the world won't end here. It hasn't been an issue before, it won't be again. And under no circumstances should rights be taken away from anyone, whether it be rights to sue, civil rights, rights to privacy, etc. Keep in mind that gender and sexuality are different. If a kid goes in the girls room and runs around oggling titties, that is not acceptable, but that has not been an issue before, and I do not expect it to be. We're not talking about letting little Sol Jr. put on a dress and run into the locker room to go peep some boobies, though quite frankly I am a bit shocked that I didn't think of that when I was a kid.

 

Education is the answer. The only good thing about this silliness is that it got me to read up on the topic of gender. Government forms like Birth Certificates give easy choices. Two boxes, check one. Life, the world and biology is a bit more complicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're not talking about letting little Sol Jr. put on a dress and run into the locker room to go peep some boobies, though quite frankly I am a bit shocked that I didn't think of that when I was a kid.

 

 

 

I don't disagree with any of that.

 

But what you state above WILL happen. And how do you prove otherwise unless the kid is being a total dick (pun intended)? If he says he IDs as a girl that day, who are we to judge otherwise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We're not talking about letting little Sol Jr. put on a dress and run into the locker room to go peep some boobies, though quite frankly I am a bit shocked that I didn't think of that when I was a kid.

 

 

 

I don't disagree with any of that.

 

But what you state above WILL happen. And how do you prove otherwise unless the kid is being a total dick (pun intended)? If he says he IDs as a girl that day, who are we to judge otherwise?

 

Of course it is going to happen. And I hope it does very soon to highlight this gender-neutral PC idiocy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We're not talking about letting little Sol Jr. put on a dress and run into the locker room to go peep some boobies, though quite frankly I am a bit shocked that I didn't think of that when I was a kid.

 

 

 

I don't disagree with any of that.

 

But what you state above WILL happen. And how do you prove otherwise unless the kid is being a total dick (pun intended)? If he says he IDs as a girl that day, who are we to judge otherwise?

 

Schools have been handling such issues for quite some time, and will continue to do so. The closer to the local level the decision is made, the better. They don't want any of their kids hurt.

 

Looking back, there could have been a transgender kid with a vagina in my locker room and I would have never known it. I don't ever recall checking packages in the locker room. Went in, did my business, left. A vagina in a group shower? Yeah, that would probably show up even peripherally, but methinks that such a kid would be careful to shower alone. I really don't see it as much of a problem, or it would have popped up (sorry, had to make a McPoopie Pants pun) earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm simply saying that before we rush into all this group hugging and congratulating ourselves on how tolerant and open-minded we are - that there may be some real world consequences of those actions. Is it right to bend over backwards to make a tiny fraction of the population feel "comfortable" while making the vast majority of the rest uncomfortable when there are viable solutions that accommodate both? I don't personally think so.

 

Yeah, lots of real world consequences when the nanny government types want you to present your birth certificate to take a shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

We're not talking about letting little Sol Jr. put on a dress and run into the locker room to go peep some boobies, though quite frankly I am a bit shocked that I didn't think of that when I was a kid.

 

 

 

I don't disagree with any of that.

 

But what you state above WILL happen. And how do you prove otherwise unless the kid is being a total dick (pun intended)? If he says he IDs as a girl that day, who are we to judge otherwise?

 

Of course it is going to happen. And I hope it does very soon to highlight this gender-neutral PC idiocy.

 

Who said anything about gender neutral, Nanny? Cite please. You're not making that up, are you? Making things up was important to you, yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

“This decision makes me extremely happy — because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others,” she said. “The district’s policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a ‘normal person.’ ”

So yeah, the separate but equal option is great for singling people out so that everyone knows who is different and needs to be stomped, as would the choice to send someone who looks like a girl into the boy's locker room.

 

 

Sorry - that kid is NOT a normal person. That the kid isn't normal, like the kid in the wheelchair, or the blind kid, isn't a value judgement, and doesn't mean that the kid ought to be treated poorly. If that kid has different needs, then those needs ought to be accommodated to the extent that it's reasonably possible. Forcing girls to accept a boy in the girl's locker room so that he can feel "normal" goes beyond reasonable, IMHO.

 

So your conclusion is that the kid is a boy and that is the end of it. I can see that, but the child in question does not agree with you. There is a much greater likelihood that other kids will experience discomfort if the kid uses the boys locker room looking like a girl, than if a girl with a penis that otherwise looks like a girl uses the girl's locker room. This is not the first such child to experience this. If they had a propensity to wave their junk around for all to see while yelling "hey, take note of my dick!" we would have heard about it by now. The kid just wants to go on with her life and be left alone, like most folks.

 

 

No sir - I must not be being clear in my explanation, and I apologize for that. The kid has special needs that truly can't be met treating him as either "just a boy" or "just a girl". His presence in EITHER locker room is going to create discomfort for everyone else.

 

He is different, and being so should not have him singled out for ridicule/poor treatment, and I don't think that providing him with special changing accommodations does that. Going back to the wheelchair analogy - should we expect the track team to do the 440 in wheelchairs so the kid in the wheelchair doesn't feel different? I don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why stop with bathrooms. Where does this nonsense end?

 

How about sports? What is to prevent a biological male from claiming female identity now and competing in a women's sport? Tennis anyone?

 

59029.jpg

 

pearl-harbor.jpg

 

That would be up to the Tennis authorities, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

No sir - I must not be being clear in my explanation, and I apologize for that. The kid has special needs that truly can't be met treating him as either "just a boy" or "just a girl". His presence in EITHER locker room is going to create discomfort for everyone else.

 

He is different, and being so should not have him singled out for ridicule/poor treatment, and I don't think that providing him with special changing accommodations does that. Going back to the wheelchair analogy - should we expect the track team to do the 440 in wheelchairs so the kid in the wheelchair doesn't feel different? I don't think so.

 

You assume the discomfort of everyone else. Most people are live and let live types. I'm not talking about the nanny government types, but the reasonable Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We're not talking about letting little Sol Jr. put on a dress and run into the locker room to go peep some boobies, though quite frankly I am a bit shocked that I didn't think of that when I was a kid.

 

 

 

I don't disagree with any of that.

 

But what you state above WILL happen. And how do you prove otherwise unless the kid is being a total dick (pun intended)? If he says he IDs as a girl that day, who are we to judge otherwise?

 

How can you say it WILL happen, when it hasn't?

 

except on bad sitcoms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

No sir - I must not be being clear in my explanation, and I apologize for that. The kid has special needs that truly can't be met treating him as either "just a boy" or "just a girl". His presence in EITHER locker room is going to create discomfort for everyone else.

 

He is different, and being so should not have him singled out for ridicule/poor treatment, and I don't think that providing him with special changing accommodations does that. Going back to the wheelchair analogy - should we expect the track team to do the 440 in wheelchairs so the kid in the wheelchair doesn't feel different? I don't think so.

 

But the ADA makes facilities accessible for the kid in the wheelchair to be able to use the same locker room, right? Hell, even our law office has to have ADA compliance. it cost a shitload to update it, probably more than the building was worth (and there's some cocksucker in S.FL who does nothing but spray lawsuits around at any place he can find who he deems non compliant.)

 

I agree that the transgender kid is different (though I can see where the kid who had to live that way for a lifetime might not feel any different). The separate facility guarantees that the kid gets singled out. A tacit agreement to use a stall to change clothes while using the same locker room as those whose appearance the kid shares? Who knows. I just know that we've made it this far without a huge explosion of problems, which tells me that it isn't much of a problem, or if it is, it is being handled pretty well on the local level, where it should be handled. I do know this...probably every state legislature in the nation is in the pocket of any number of interest groups, so any solution from that level will suck for one side or the other, as the NC solution does. It's harder for interests groups to buy all the local school administrators....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

No sir - I must not be being clear in my explanation, and I apologize for that. The kid has special needs that truly can't be met treating him as either "just a boy" or "just a girl". His presence in EITHER locker room is going to create discomfort for everyone else.

 

He is different, and being so should not have him singled out for ridicule/poor treatment, and I don't think that providing him with special changing accommodations does that. Going back to the wheelchair analogy - should we expect the track team to do the 440 in wheelchairs so the kid in the wheelchair doesn't feel different? I don't think so.

 

But the ADA makes facilities accessible for the kid in the wheelchair to be able to use the same locker room, right? Hell, even our law office has to have ADA compliance. it cost a shitload to update it, probably more than the building was worth (and there's some cocksucker in S.FL who does nothing but spray lawsuits around at any place he can find who he deems non compliant.)

 

I agree that the transgender kid is different (though I can see where the kid who had to live that way for a lifetime might not feel any different). The separate facility guarantees that the kid gets singled out. A tacit agreement to use a stall to change clothes while using the same locker room as those whose appearance the kid shares? Who knows. I just know that we've made it this far without a huge explosion of problems, which tells me that it isn't much of a problem, or if it is, it is being handled pretty well on the local level, where it should be handled. I do know this...probably every state legislature in the nation is in the pocket of any number of interest groups, so any solution from that level will suck for one side or the other, as the NC solution does. It's harder for interests groups to buy all the local school administrators....

 

 

I agree that it appears that it hasn't been a problem, until this kid's parents in IL decided to make it one, being unsatisfied w/the local school's accommodations. I can easily surmise that this kid's behavior caused him to be "singled out" by his peers long before any discussion of him using the girl's facilities came about, which IMHO negates any negative impact to him feeling "singled out" by being provided with separate facilities.

 

Like the blind kid, wheelchair kid, etc - providing the individual accommodations that the kid needs shouldn't adversely impact the other students in the school - and I truly believe that this "solution" does.

 

I also believe that if people are reasonable, that this absolutely should be a local decision - and that the correctness of any local decision is very dependent upon the differing local circumstances in each situation.

 

I am honestly worried about the ramifications of the precedent that I see this IL case establishing, for folks on both sides of the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

No sir - I must not be being clear in my explanation, and I apologize for that. The kid has special needs that truly can't be met treating him as either "just a boy" or "just a girl". His presence in EITHER locker room is going to create discomfort for everyone else.

 

He is different, and being so should not have him singled out for ridicule/poor treatment, and I don't think that providing him with special changing accommodations does that. Going back to the wheelchair analogy - should we expect the track team to do the 440 in wheelchairs so the kid in the wheelchair doesn't feel different? I don't think so.

 

But the ADA makes facilities accessible for the kid in the wheelchair to be able to use the same locker room, right? Hell, even our law office has to have ADA compliance. it cost a shitload to update it, probably more than the building was worth (and there's some cocksucker in S.FL who does nothing but spray lawsuits around at any place he can find who he deems non compliant.)

 

I agree that the transgender kid is different (though I can see where the kid who had to live that way for a lifetime might not feel any different). The separate facility guarantees that the kid gets singled out. A tacit agreement to use a stall to change clothes while using the same locker room as those whose appearance the kid shares? Who knows. I just know that we've made it this far without a huge explosion of problems, which tells me that it isn't much of a problem, or if it is, it is being handled pretty well on the local level, where it should be handled. I do know this...probably every state legislature in the nation is in the pocket of any number of interest groups, so any solution from that level will suck for one side or the other, as the NC solution does. It's harder for interests groups to buy all the local school administrators....

 

 

I agree that it appears that it hasn't been a problem, until this kid's parents in IL decided to make it one, being unsatisfied w/the local school's accommodations. I can easily surmise that this kid's behavior caused him to be "singled out" by his peers long before any discussion of him using the girl's facilities came about, which IMHO negates any negative impact to him feeling "singled out" by being provided with separate facilities.

 

Like the blind kid, wheelchair kid, etc - providing the individual accommodations that the kid needs shouldn't adversely impact the other students in the school - and I truly believe that this "solution" does.

 

I also believe that if people are reasonable, that this absolutely should be a local decision - and that the correctness of any local decision is very dependent upon the differing local circumstances in each situation.

 

I am honestly worried about the ramifications of the precedent that I see this IL case establishing, for folks on both sides of the issue.

 

We don't know where it started in IL. We know that the state Dept of Ed got involved and the kid protested their decision. That involvement was probably to review a decision of the local school board. We don't know who started it, only that the kid protested the Dept. of Ed decision.

 

I don't see the slippery slope here, other than the trend of getting higher levels of government involved in the process, which is almost always bad (see for instance the reprehensible Terry Schiavo episode). It hasn't been a problem before, but getting the govt involved at a high level will certainly make it one. Now the courts will give a one size fits all decision, and fitting it will hurt some more than others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<SNIP>

We don't know where it started in IL. We know that the state Dept of Ed got involved and the kid protested their decision. That involvement was probably to review a decision of the local school board. We don't know who started it, only that the kid protested the Dept. of Ed decision.

 

I don't see the slippery slope here, other than the trend of getting higher levels of government involved in the process, which is almost always bad (see for instance the reprehensible Terry Schiavo episode). It hasn't been a problem before, but getting the govt involved at a high level will certainly make it one. Now the courts will give a one size fits all decision, and fitting it will hurt some more than others.

 

 

Yeah - we do, and it was with the parents/gender confused kid. I can pretty well promise you that every local school board in the country has plenty to deal with without seeking out some kid to make a point.

 

I do agree that the "one-size-fits-all" result of higher level govt involvement won't work well for any of the involved parties, and won't be surprised if before too long the IL parents wish they had helped their son/daughter feel better about using the separate facilities instead of forcing everyone into an even more uncomfortable situation.

 

Then again, who knows? Each year brings teachers into contact with parents who seem to thrive on sowing friction and discontent, and it's those folks who consume what I consider to be an inordinate amount of time and attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

No sir - I must not be being clear in my explanation, and I apologize for that. The kid has special needs that truly can't be met treating him as either "just a boy" or "just a girl". His presence in EITHER locker room is going to create discomfort for everyone else.

 

He is different, and being so should not have him singled out for ridicule/poor treatment, and I don't think that providing him with special changing accommodations does that. Going back to the wheelchair analogy - should we expect the track team to do the 440 in wheelchairs so the kid in the wheelchair doesn't feel different? I don't think so.

 

But the ADA makes facilities accessible for the kid in the wheelchair to be able to use the same locker room, right? Hell, even our law office has to have ADA compliance. it cost a shitload to update it, probably more than the building was worth (and there's some cocksucker in S.FL who does nothing but spray lawsuits around at any place he can find who he deems non compliant.)

 

I agree that the transgender kid is different (though I can see where the kid who had to live that way for a lifetime might not feel any different). The separate facility guarantees that the kid gets singled out. A tacit agreement to use a stall to change clothes while using the same locker room as those whose appearance the kid shares? Who knows. I just know that we've made it this far without a huge explosion of problems, which tells me that it isn't much of a problem, or if it is, it is being handled pretty well on the local level, where it should be handled. I do know this...probably every state legislature in the nation is in the pocket of any number of interest groups, so any solution from that level will suck for one side or the other, as the NC solution does. It's harder for interests groups to buy all the local school administrators....

 

 

I agree that it appears that it hasn't been a problem, until this kid's parents in IL decided to make it one, being unsatisfied w/the local school's accommodations. I can easily surmise that this kid's behavior caused him to be "singled out" by his peers long before any discussion of him using the girl's facilities came about, which IMHO negates any negative impact to him feeling "singled out" by being provided with separate facilities.

 

Like the blind kid, wheelchair kid, etc - providing the individual accommodations that the kid needs shouldn't adversely impact the other students in the school - and I truly believe that this "solution" does.

 

I also believe that if people are reasonable, that this absolutely should be a local decision - and that the correctness of any local decision is very dependent upon the differing local circumstances in each situation.

 

I am honestly worried about the ramifications of the precedent that I see this IL case establishing, for folks on both sides of the issue.

 

 

 

Both sides of what issue?

 

There isn't an issue!

 

It's one kid.

 

One

 

 

This is not a challenge to judeo-christian society. Take a fucking chill pill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No issue? Yeah - OK Flash.

 

I've said my piece, and I've listened to everyone else's input - and I suppose that's that.

 

1 kid in 300+ milion people. 1 town says "no discrimination" - Over the last couple of centuries.

 

Yeah, it's a fucking train wreck I tell you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions, that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make-believe. We are not asked just to follow the humane policy of live and let live, exhibiting acceptance and tolerance as well as fighting for their rights as human beings, but we are required to act as their enablers, enter into their fantasies, protect them from the truth of a devastating fallacy. We are expected both to support them politically, an easy task for most liberals, and affirm their deeply guarded conceptions of selfhood, something that lies well outside the province of the struggle for equal protection under the law—in truth, that lies firmly in the field of counseling or psychotherapy. I know of no other human-rights movement in which supporters are adjured, not only to advocate for the greater civil liberties of a minority, but to aid and reinforce its self-delusions, to guard those who harbor them from the truth"...Daniel Harris

 

http://review.antiochcollege.org/sacred-androgen-transgender-debate-daniel-harris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions, that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make-believe. We are not asked just to follow the humane policy of live and let live, exhibiting acceptance and tolerance as well as fighting for their rights as human beings, but we are required to act as their enablers, enter into their fantasies, protect them from the truth of a devastating fallacy. We are expected both to support them politically, an easy task for most liberals, and affirm their deeply guarded conceptions of selfhood, something that lies well outside the province of the struggle for equal protection under the law—in truth, that lies firmly in the field of counseling or psychotherapy. I know of no other human-rights movement in which supporters are adjured, not only to advocate for the greater civil liberties of a minority, but to aid and reinforce its self-delusions, to guard those who harbor them from the truth"...Daniel Harris

 

http://review.antiochcollege.org/sacred-androgen-transgender-debate-daniel-harris

 

 

I'd like to hear one actual story from this guy where he, personally had to accommodate a transgender person.

 

How about you Dog. When have you had to make an accommodation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not the actual accommodation they are outraged by, its the perceived accommodation they might have to give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions, that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make-believe. We are not asked just to follow the humane policy of live and let live, exhibiting acceptance and tolerance as well as fighting for their rights as human beings, but we are required to act as their enablers, enter into their fantasies, protect them from the truth of a devastating fallacy. We are expected both to support them politically, an easy task for most liberals, and affirm their deeply guarded conceptions of selfhood, something that lies well outside the province of the struggle for equal protection under the law—in truth, that lies firmly in the field of counseling or psychotherapy. I know of no other human-rights movement in which supporters are adjured, not only to advocate for the greater civil liberties of a minority, but to aid and reinforce its self-delusions, to guard those who harbor them from the truth"...Daniel Harris

 

http://review.antiochcollege.org/sacred-androgen-transgender-debate-daniel-harris

Just a bunch of different people playing masquerade.

Lower than us, no doubt.

Here...how about this slight edit...

"The political agenda of the transgender religious community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions, that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make-believe. We are not asked just to follow the humane policy of live and let live, exhibiting acceptance and tolerance as well as fighting for their rights as human beings, but we are required to act as their enablers, enter into their fantasies, protect them from the truth of a devastating fallacy. We are expected both to support them politically, an easy task for most liberals, and affirm their deeply guarded conceptions of selfhood, something that lies well outside the province of the struggle for equal protection under the law—in truth, that lies firmly in the field of counseling or psychotherapy. I know of no other human-rights movement in which supporters are adjured, not only to advocate for the greater civil liberties of a minority, majority but to aid and reinforce its self-delusions, to guard those who harbor them from the truth"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

No sir - I must not be being clear in my explanation, and I apologize for that. The kid has special needs that truly can't be met treating him as either "just a boy" or "just a girl". His presence in EITHER locker room is going to create discomfort for everyone else.

 

He is different, and being so should not have him singled out for ridicule/poor treatment, and I don't think that providing him with special changing accommodations does that. Going back to the wheelchair analogy - should we expect the track team to do the 440 in wheelchairs so the kid in the wheelchair doesn't feel different? I don't think so.

 

You assume the discomfort of everyone else. Most people are live and let live types. I'm not talking about the nanny government types, but the reasonable Americans.

 

 

But not the transgendered apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions, that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make-believe. We are not asked just to follow the humane policy of live and let live, exhibiting acceptance and tolerance as well as fighting for their rights as human beings, but we are required to act as their enablers, enter into their fantasies, protect them from the truth of a devastating fallacy. We are expected both to support them politically, an easy task for most liberals, and affirm their deeply guarded conceptions of selfhood, something that lies well outside the province of the struggle for equal protection under the law—in truth, that lies firmly in the field of counseling or psychotherapy. I know of no other human-rights movement in which supporters are adjured, not only to advocate for the greater civil liberties of a minority, but to aid and reinforce its self-delusions, to guard those who harbor them from the truth"...Daniel Harris

 

http://review.antiochcollege.org/sacred-androgen-transgender-debate-daniel-harris

 

 

I'd like to hear one actual story from this guy where he, personally had to accommodate a transgender person.

 

How about you Dog. When have you had to make an accommodation?

 

Beyond being asked to pretend their affliction is normal I have made no accommodation. But Daniel Harris, author of Diary of a Drag Queen is much closer to the action so I wouldn't be surprised if he has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions, that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make-believe. We are not asked just to follow the humane policy of live and let live, exhibiting acceptance and tolerance as well as fighting for their rights as human beings, but we are required to act as their enablers, enter into their fantasies, protect them from the truth of a devastating fallacy. We are expected both to support them politically, an easy task for most liberals, and affirm their deeply guarded conceptions of selfhood, something that lies well outside the province of the struggle for equal protection under the law—in truth, that lies firmly in the field of counseling or psychotherapy. I know of no other human-rights movement in which supporters are adjured, not only to advocate for the greater civil liberties of a minority, but to aid and reinforce its self-delusions, to guard those who harbor them from the truth"...Daniel Harris

 

http://review.antiochcollege.org/sacred-androgen-transgender-debate-daniel-harris

 

 

I'd like to hear one actual story from this guy where he, personally had to accommodate a transgender person.

 

How about you Dog. When have you had to make an accommodation?

 

Beyond being asked to pretend their affliction as normal I have made no accommodation. But Daniel Harris, author of Diary of a Drag Queen is much closer to the action so I wouldn't be surprised if he has.

 

has someone asked you to "pretend"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

"The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions, that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make-believe. We are not asked just to follow the humane policy of live and let live, exhibiting acceptance and tolerance as well as fighting for their rights as human beings, but we are required to act as their enablers, enter into their fantasies, protect them from the truth of a devastating fallacy. We are expected both to support them politically, an easy task for most liberals, and affirm their deeply guarded conceptions of selfhood, something that lies well outside the province of the struggle for equal protection under the law—in truth, that lies firmly in the field of counseling or psychotherapy. I know of no other human-rights movement in which supporters are adjured, not only to advocate for the greater civil liberties of a minority, but to aid and reinforce its self-delusions, to guard those who harbor them from the truth"...Daniel Harris

 

http://review.antiochcollege.org/sacred-androgen-transgender-debate-daniel-harris

 

 

I'd like to hear one actual story from this guy where he, personally had to accommodate a transgender person.

 

How about you Dog. When have you had to make an accommodation?

 

Beyond being asked to pretend their affliction as normal I have made no accommodation. But Daniel Harris, author of Diary of a Drag Queen is much closer to the action so I wouldn't be surprised if he has.

 

has someone asked you to "pretend"?

 

Yes, we all have been asked to pretend, that's what allowing them to use whatever bathroom they feel like is, pretending. I have been willing out of compassion to play along some but I'm beginning to understand that accommodating the dysphoria is really not helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

On all available evidence, that would be the Republican State legislature that couldn't stand the locals dealing with their local issues. After all, if local Charlotte residents wanted the ordinance changed, they can avail themselves of the democractic powers invested in them as residents of the city, vote out the council members they don't agree with and vote in the ones they do. Instead, the state "gubmint" has decided that locals aren't qualified to do that. Funny how small government is a good thing for right-wingers right up until the social issues they don't like become acceptable to the public. :rolleyes:

 

 

This is a fair point. I do generally favor more local control and would prefer locals to respond to a city council passing a law to address what the leftists here argue is a non-existent problem. And now the federal gubmit has decided that state officials aren't qualified so they want to stick their noses into it too.

 

It's a shame you only seem to act on this belief when the "gubmint" is on the side of folks like the LGBT. The integrity of your desire to allow "locals to handle local issues" might be somewhat easier to believe if you had been complaining about the state legislature before the federal government stepped in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

y do u care

Why does that matter? Don't tell me you're going to become another tired troll deciding to make me the issue of every thread I post in too...

 

Did you look at duh list of hobbies you might think about?

Nope. I don't think I have the stomach to go through a list of hobbies you might find appealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

"The political agenda of the transgender community often seems to demand that we be complicit in their convictions, that we humor them, pretend that we view them as the genuine article when in fact they seem to be staging a kind of masquerade, dressing in a costume, playing at make-believe. We are not asked just to follow the humane policy of live and let live, exhibiting acceptance and tolerance as well as fighting for their rights as human beings, but we are required to act as their enablers, enter into their fantasies, protect them from the truth of a devastating fallacy. We are expected both to support them politically, an easy task for most liberals, and affirm their deeply guarded conceptions of selfhood, something that lies well outside the province of the struggle for equal protection under the law—in truth, that lies firmly in the field of counseling or psychotherapy. I know of no other human-rights movement in which supporters are adjured, not only to advocate for the greater civil liberties of a minority, but to aid and reinforce its self-delusions, to guard those who harbor them from the truth"...Daniel Harris

 

http://review.antiochcollege.org/sacred-androgen-transgender-debate-daniel-harris

 

 

I'd like to hear one actual story from this guy where he, personally had to accommodate a transgender person.

 

How about you Dog. When have you had to make an accommodation?

 

Beyond being asked to pretend their affliction as normal I have made no accommodation. But Daniel Harris, author of Diary of a Drag Queen is much closer to the action so I wouldn't be surprised if he has.

 

has someone asked you to "pretend"?

 

Yes, we all have been asked to pretend, that's what allowing them to use whatever bathroom they feel like is, pretending. I have been willing out of compassion to play along some but I'm beginning to understand that accommodating the dysphoria is really not helpful.

 

 

Well, it's possible that I've been asked to pretend and didn't know it, I suppose. I can't say I really care about the crotch jewelry of other folks in the shitter.

 

I'm not sure why you righties do, it seems to be a pre-occupation of yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Why do you consider it a tragedy and horrendous if your daughter sees a dick? I'm having a hard time seeing the harm.

People feel more comfortable separating the sexes, that's why it has been a widely accepted practice for a very long time and across the globe. I'll ask you the question I asked PS...

Should we just have one big facility and everyone showers together?

I don't think the government should dictate it or protect you from seeing someone else's junk.
Flashing young children should be legal? That's kinda weird Special.

Drying off your package is now considered flashing? Should this flashing be banned in all locker rooms? You really are stretching to find something to be outraged by.

You are the one who posted the government shouldn't pass laws protecting one from seeing someone else's junk. I take that as you believe flashing your junk to girls and women should not be illegal. How else should that be taken?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The high school girls locker room has been a place where the diversity has made for great stress for as long as the undressing and showering part has gone on.

The body types and potential for embarrassment and teasing is overwhelming.

There are already skinny, obese, hairy, wide ass, muscles, a full range of breast sizes, acne, birthmarks, twisted spines, and whatever other abnormalities those girls may have carefully clothed over to avoid detection and harassment.

The girl with a penis will likely be unique in any given class but certainly that feature is not the most prominent visible or gross oddity the girls will observe in any given group.

 

Like most social situations in our schools, the degreed professionals who make up the entire staff of teachers and administrators who actually interact with the individual students on a daily basis are WAY more qualified to properly deal with the situations than the journalists and politicians whose careers are in fundraising and media manipulation.

 

My guess is most of those posting here have spent zero years as full time teachers. In fact, I bet most do not have a single college credit hour in school psychology, school sociology, or any college course specifically designed to prepare teachers for the difficulties related to managing the student interactions.

The original case that started all this who showers where uproar was handled by the original school by setting up a special facility for the unique student.

The parents did not wish to have their child treated as a unique individual and sued.

The judge ruled the kid must be treated as a girl and the media went into full on grab attention and sell advertising mode.

Suddenly everyone was an expert EXCEPT the teachers and parents and judge.

 

I wonder what else all these people could have been doing with their time and how much better the world would be today if we had simply let the one student and one school staff and one set of parents and even that judge just solve this one problem as well as they could.

I don't see how the media frenzy has helped or could help.

Pretty funny Gouv - a boy in a school girls shower wouldn't be a standout oddity. For one who professes to be an expert at children's behavior because of your specific education you've lost me when saying educators are the best to determine is best for the kids regarding who they should undress in front of.

 

By the way...I had a few elective university classes with some education majors. I was less than impressed with their brilliance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you consider it a tragedy and horrendous if your daughter sees a dick? I'm having a hard time seeing the harm.

People feel more comfortable separating the sexes, that's why it has been a widely accepted practice for a very long time and across the globe. I'll ask you the question I asked PS...Should we just have one big facility and everyone showers together?
I don't think the government should dictate it or protect you from seeing someone else's junk.

Flashing young children should be legal? That's kinda weird Special.

Drying off your package is now considered flashing? Should this flashing be banned in all locker rooms? You really are stretching to find something to be outraged by.

 

You are the one who posted the government shouldn't pass laws protecting one from seeing someone else's junk. I take that as you believe flashing your junk to girls and women should not be illegal. How else should that be taken?

You do understand the difference between flashing and hygiene?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sol - it's the kid and his/her parents that had issue with the biological boy not being allowed into the girl's locker room, and forcing the issue. I suspect that the local school did the best that they could to accommodate the boy who didn't want to use the boy's facilities, and that wasn't good enough.

The school in IL wasn't trying to single anyone out. I think that the reason it hasn't been a problem previously is because the gender confused kids accepted that they were different than conventional role definitions, and didn't expect everyone else to adjust to accommodate them in that difference.

 

As to his being ostracized? You don't think that it's going to be worse after this? To my earlier point - is the kid in the wheelchair ostracized or discriminated against by having to use a ramp or an elevator to get around? No - it's simply a recognition of accommodating that kid's different needs.

 

The only fix that I see to this is that we pretend that there aren't any differences between males/females/wherever you decide you fall on the gender spectrum, and do away with the idea that gender separation in juvenile settings is no longer warranted, and that the behavioral deterrent provided by that separation is no longer necessary.

 

Notice I said to "pretend" - because whether anyone wants to accept it or not, there are indeed differences, and I think that it's a wrong approach to act like there isn't, trying to force a melding of them instead of recognizing and embracing those differences.

 

There are differences, and there always have been. My suggestion is to leave people to their own devices to pick for themselves where they want to go and what they want to do, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. If they hurt someone, crack down on them. Otherwise, go about our business. In no instance should we remove their right to go to court to seek their civil rights, or remove their civil rights from them. We are better than that, I would hope.

 

Re the Chicago student. Transgender student undergoing female hormone therapy, who identifies as a female, but not yet surgically changed. Cite. So we're talking about someone who looks like a girl until the panties are pulled down, right? I'm not sure I want to see her going into a boy's locker room if she's my kid. About the Title IX decision the child responded:

 

This decision makes me extremely happy because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others, she said. The districts policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a normal person.

So yeah, the separate but equal option is great for singling people out so that everyone knows who is different and needs to be stomped, as would the choice to send someone who looks like a girl into the boy's locker room.

A boy in a girls shower wouldn't be known to be 'different'?

 

"One of these things is not like the other..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

This decision makes me extremely happy because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others, she said. The districts policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a normal person.

So yeah, the separate but equal option is great for singling people out so that everyone knows who is different and needs to be stomped, as would the choice to send someone who looks like a girl into the boy's locker room.

Sorry - that kid is NOT a normal person. That the kid isn't normal, like the kid in the wheelchair, or the blind kid, isn't a value judgement, and doesn't mean that the kid ought to be treated poorly. If that kid has different needs, then those needs ought to be accommodated to the extent that it's reasonably possible. Forcing girls to accept a boy in the girl's locker room so that he can feel "normal" goes beyond reasonable, IMHO.

How can a boy in a girls locker room be considered normal? It isn't normal.

 

Obviously that kid doesn't give two shits about how the girls feel - only himself. Selfish. He can fuck off.

 

If he thinks it's normal for a boy to be in the girls locker room he must also believe it's normal for a girl to be in the boys locker room. Since he thinks he's a girl it would be normal for him to be in the boys locker room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This decision makes me extremely happy because of what it means for me, personally, and for countless others, she said. The districts policy stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a normal person.

So yeah, the separate but equal option is great for singling people out so that everyone knows who is different and needs to be stomped, as would the choice to send someone who looks like a girl into the boy's locker room.

Sorry - that kid is NOT a normal person. That the kid isn't normal, like the kid in the wheelchair, or the blind kid, isn't a value judgement, and doesn't mean that the kid ought to be treated poorly. If that kid has different needs, then those needs ought to be accommodated to the extent that it's reasonably possible. Forcing girls to accept a boy in the girl's locker room so that he can feel "normal" goes beyond reasonable, IMHO.

So your conclusion is that the kid is a boy and that is the end of it. I can see that, but the child in question does not agree with you. There is a much greater likelihood that other kids will experience discomfort if the kid uses the boys locker room looking like a girl, than if a girl with a penis that otherwise looks like a girl uses the girl's locker room. This is not the first such child to experience this. If they had a propensity to wave their junk around for all to see while yelling "hey, take note of my dick!" we would have heard about it by now. The kid just wants to go on with her life and be left alone, like most folks.

So when you were in school you couldn't tell the difference between a naked boy or naked girl?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sol, you sorta ignored his question. Should males that self-ID as females be allowed to play women's sports in HS, college, or the Olympics?

Is this related to the topic because transgender women might have a competitive edge in using the bathroom?

Yeah, I think so. We've gotten to the point in this discussion where the trenches have been dug and no one is moving on this issue. A legitimate question was raised about where then do you draw the line? Trannies want to be treated equally and have access to everything they "self-ID with". OK, so where's the line? Is there even ever a line? I just want to know where it ends or if it doesn't.

You're wrong again. This isn't all in people's minds. Some folks are not born with XX or XY chromosomes. Some have XYY or XXY (Klinefelder's, 1 in 500 have it), or XO.

 

 

Not everyone is just like us.

Some people are born with half a brain.

And yet you are allowed to post here as an equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

On all available evidence, that would be the Republican State legislature that couldn't stand the locals dealing with their local issues. After all, if local Charlotte residents wanted the ordinance changed, they can avail themselves of the democractic powers invested in them as residents of the city, vote out the council members they don't agree with and vote in the ones they do. Instead, the state "gubmint" has decided that locals aren't qualified to do that. Funny how small government is a good thing for right-wingers right up until the social issues they don't like become acceptable to the public. :rolleyes:

 

 

This is a fair point. I do generally favor more local control and would prefer locals to respond to a city council passing a law to address what the leftists here argue is a non-existent problem. And now the federal gubmit has decided that state officials aren't qualified so they want to stick their noses into it too.

 

It's a shame you only seem to act on this belief when the "gubmint" is on the side of folks like the LGBT. The integrity of your desire to allow "locals to handle local issues" might be somewhat easier to believe if you had been complaining about the state legislature before the federal government stepped in.

 

No, it's not a shame. You will either draw your conclusions about me based on what I say or you will make them up. Either way no one cares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents

 

I don't trust a news source that can't differentiate between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

 

Co-Ed bathrooms in a college dorm might be a bad idea but that doesn't mean that allowing transgender individuals to choose what facilities they want to use will have the same problem.

 

The article doesn't make the case that it pretends to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents

 

I don't trust a news source that can't differentiate between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

 

Co-Ed bathrooms in a college dorm might be a bad idea but that doesn't mean that allowing transgender individuals to choose what facilities they want to use will have the same problem.

 

The article doesn't make the case that it pretends to.

 

There is no difference between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a bathroom is for women only, even if transgender women can use it, I can't say, "Hey I am a man and I am using this bathroom."

 

If a bathroom is gender neutral, I can do that.

 

You could argue that there isn't a functional difference between the two but when we talk about functional difference data beats the hypothetical. The article dealt with a gender neutral bathroom. Can you find the same thing happening in a bathroom that isn't gender neutral? An example of someone saying they are transgender and then spying on the other people using the facility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First it's the homos destroying the sanctity of our marriages by getting married, now it's the trannies destroying the sanctity of our bathrooms by pooping.

 

I am depressed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WE NEED TO SPEND MORE ON EDUCATION.

 

But, first a billion or two on bathroom construction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WE NEED TO SPEND MORE ON EDUCATION.

 

But, first a billion or two on bathroom construction.

This is the serious thread. Thanks Obama, we are back where we were a month ago. No new bathrooms needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only in the USSA..

 

Transgender five year olds!

 

Thanks obummer your legacy is now complete!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a bathroom is for women only, even if transgender women can use it, I can't say, "Hey I am a man and I am using this bathroom."

 

If a bathroom is gender neutral, I can do that.

 

You could argue that there isn't a functional difference between the two but when we talk about functional difference data beats the hypothetical. The article dealt with a gender neutral bathroom. Can you find the same thing happening in a bathroom that isn't gender neutral? An example of someone saying they are transgender and then spying on the other people using the facility?

If a bathroom is for women and men pretending to be women, it's gender neutral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents

 

I don't trust a news source that can't differentiate between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

 

Co-Ed bathrooms in a college dorm might be a bad idea but that doesn't mean that allowing transgender individuals to choose what facilities they want to use will have the same problem.

 

The article doesn't make the case that it pretends to.

 

 

We had a number of co-ed bathrooms in the co-ed dorms when I was in school. It was really a non-issue. Though maybe a few of the guys I knew were worried about making a monster stink in there when a girl they wanted to impress was nearby, there were no issues. One year the men's room on my floor became de-facto coed, as the women's was all the way on the other end of the floor and there were a handful of women assigned rooms right next to it. So it wasn't uncommon to walk in there and bump into one of the ladies.

 

There was also one guy on the floor who was rather effeminate, and wore skirts most of the time. Now, based on his appearance and what I remember of him and his appearance I suspect he might actually have been Fijian, due to his appearance, and that his skirt choices were very reminiscent of the traditional sulu worn by men there. But it was irrelevant - he shard the bathroom too.

 

No one really cared, it wasn't a big deal.

 

I don't know what all of a sudden who craps where opens the door on sexualizing bathrooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents

 

I don't trust a news source that can't differentiate between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

 

Co-Ed bathrooms in a college dorm might be a bad idea but that doesn't mean that allowing transgender individuals to choose what facilities they want to use will have the same problem.

 

The article doesn't make the case that it pretends to.

 

 

We had a number of co-ed bathrooms in the co-ed dorms when I was in school. It was really a non-issue. Though maybe a few of the guys I knew were worried about making a monster stink in there when a girl they wanted to impress was nearby, there were no issues. One year the men's room on my floor became de-facto coed, as the women's was all the way on the other end of the floor and there were a handful of women assigned rooms right next to it. So it wasn't uncommon to walk in there and bump into one of the ladies.

 

There was also one guy on the floor who was rather effeminate, and wore skirts most of the time. Now, based on his appearance and what I remember of him and his appearance I suspect he might actually have been Fijian, due to his appearance, and that his skirt choices were very reminiscent of the traditional sulu worn by men there. But it was irrelevant - he shard the bathroom too.

 

No one really cared, it wasn't a big deal.

 

I don't know what all of a sudden who craps where opens the door on sexualizing bathrooms.

 

 

So, why are the transgendered whining about where they go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents

 

I don't trust a news source that can't differentiate between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

 

Co-Ed bathrooms in a college dorm might be a bad idea but that doesn't mean that allowing transgender individuals to choose what facilities they want to use will have the same problem.

 

The article doesn't make the case that it pretends to.

 

 

We had a number of co-ed bathrooms in the co-ed dorms when I was in school. It was really a non-issue. Though maybe a few of the guys I knew were worried about making a monster stink in there when a girl they wanted to impress was nearby, there were no issues. One year the men's room on my floor became de-facto coed, as the women's was all the way on the other end of the floor and there were a handful of women assigned rooms right next to it. So it wasn't uncommon to walk in there and bump into one of the ladies.

 

There was also one guy on the floor who was rather effeminate, and wore skirts most of the time. Now, based on his appearance and what I remember of him and his appearance I suspect he might actually have been Fijian, due to his appearance, and that his skirt choices were very reminiscent of the traditional sulu worn by men there. But it was irrelevant - he shard the bathroom too.

 

No one really cared, it wasn't a big deal.

 

I don't know what all of a sudden who craps where opens the door on sexualizing bathrooms.

 

 

So, why are the transgendered whining about where they go?

 

 

Because people are trying to stop them from using the bathrooms for their gender, and force trans women into the men's room and trans men into the ladies' room.

 

 

Maybe what we need is an automatic genetic scanner at every bathroom, eh? Stick your had in, it takes a pinprick of blood and checks your chromosomes before letting you in the M or the F bathroom that shows up on the results, no matter your actual gender.

 

Idiocy. I'd rather my son or daughter share than bathroom with a trans person of any gender than Denny Hastert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents

 

I don't trust a news source that can't differentiate between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

 

Co-Ed bathrooms in a college dorm might be a bad idea but that doesn't mean that allowing transgender individuals to choose what facilities they want to use will have the same problem.

 

The article doesn't make the case that it pretends to.

 

 

We had a number of co-ed bathrooms in the co-ed dorms when I was in school. It was really a non-issue. Though maybe a few of the guys I knew were worried about making a monster stink in there when a girl they wanted to impress was nearby, there were no issues. One year the men's room on my floor became de-facto coed, as the women's was all the way on the other end of the floor and there were a handful of women assigned rooms right next to it. So it wasn't uncommon to walk in there and bump into one of the ladies.

 

There was also one guy on the floor who was rather effeminate, and wore skirts most of the time. Now, based on his appearance and what I remember of him and his appearance I suspect he might actually have been Fijian, due to his appearance, and that his skirt choices were very reminiscent of the traditional sulu worn by men there. But it was irrelevant - he shard the bathroom too.

 

No one really cared, it wasn't a big deal.

 

I don't know what all of a sudden who craps where opens the door on sexualizing bathrooms.

 

 

So, why are the transgendered whining about where they go?

 

 

Because people are trying to stop them from using the bathrooms for their gender, and force trans women into the men's room and trans men into the ladies' room.

 

 

Maybe what we need is an automatic genetic scanner at every bathroom, eh? Stick your had in, it takes a pinprick of blood and checks your chromosomes before letting you in the M or the F bathroom that shows up on the results, no matter your actual gender.

 

Idiocy. I'd rather my son or daughter share than bathroom with a trans person of any gender than Denny Hastert.

 

You mean we should use a biological criteria rather than a psychological criteria?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents

 

I don't trust a news source that can't differentiate between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

 

Co-Ed bathrooms in a college dorm might be a bad idea but that doesn't mean that allowing transgender individuals to choose what facilities they want to use will have the same problem.

 

The article doesn't make the case that it pretends to.

 

 

We had a number of co-ed bathrooms in the co-ed dorms when I was in school. It was really a non-issue. Though maybe a few of the guys I knew were worried about making a monster stink in there when a girl they wanted to impress was nearby, there were no issues. One year the men's room on my floor became de-facto coed, as the women's was all the way on the other end of the floor and there were a handful of women assigned rooms right next to it. So it wasn't uncommon to walk in there and bump into one of the ladies.

 

There was also one guy on the floor who was rather effeminate, and wore skirts most of the time. Now, based on his appearance and what I remember of him and his appearance I suspect he might actually have been Fijian, due to his appearance, and that his skirt choices were very reminiscent of the traditional sulu worn by men there. But it was irrelevant - he shard the bathroom too.

 

No one really cared, it wasn't a big deal.

 

I don't know what all of a sudden who craps where opens the door on sexualizing bathrooms.

 

 

So, why are the transgendered whining about where they go?

 

they aren't. Sorry for your confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the basis for the folks who think that the guidance the feds are now giving will not result in cases that we don't see today. The guidance on what is appropriate has changed in a dramatic way. If the guidance is that a person must be allowed to use whatever facilities they identify with, it leaves no wiggle room for the schools to work out something that makes sense for their community. It means that if you have a student has problems with sexual deviancy, he will have cover that he did not have before. There is no space for a school to make a judgement call, they would be sued. The effect is that anyone will be able to enter any shower or locker room for any reason. That it has not happened before is not surprising and irrelevant to whether it is likely to happen in the future. We have never had the set of circumstances we have now in the past. It is a different game now. I have already said I don't think it is the end of the world as we know it, but there will be unintended consequences that nobody likes. Sometimes it is better to walk than run, and right now we seem to be running full out towards an uncertain outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents

 

I don't trust a news source that can't differentiate between gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms that transgender individuals are allowed to use.

 

Co-Ed bathrooms in a college dorm might be a bad idea but that doesn't mean that allowing transgender individuals to choose what facilities they want to use will have the same problem.

 

The article doesn't make the case that it pretends to.

 

 

We had a number of co-ed bathrooms in the co-ed dorms when I was in school. It was really a non-issue. Though maybe a few of the guys I knew were worried about making a monster stink in there when a girl they wanted to impress was nearby, there were no issues. One year the men's room on my floor became de-facto coed, as the women's was all the way on the other end of the floor and there were a handful of women assigned rooms right next to it. So it wasn't uncommon to walk in there and bump into one of the ladies.

 

There was also one guy on the floor who was rather effeminate, and wore skirts most of the time. Now, based on his appearance and what I remember of him and his appearance I suspect he might actually have been Fijian, due to his appearance, and that his skirt choices were very reminiscent of the traditional sulu worn by men there. But it was irrelevant - he shard the bathroom too.

 

No one really cared, it wasn't a big deal.

 

I don't know what all of a sudden who craps where opens the door on sexualizing bathrooms.

 

 

So, why are the transgendered whining about where they go?

 

they aren't. Sorry for your confusion.

 

 

Sure they are, that's why Charlotte passed the ordinance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean we should use a biological criteria rather than a psychological criteria?

 

 

 

 

You want to change the bathroom rules to sex(chromosome) - because, for some reason, you see taking a shit as sexual

 

Whereas for millennia it's been gender.

 

What was wrong with how it was a month ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You mean we should use a biological criteria rather than a psychological criteria?

 

 

 

 

You want to change the bathroom rules to sex(chromosome) - because, for some reason, you see taking a shit as sexual

 

Whereas for millennia it's been gender.

 

What was wrong with how it was a month ago?

 

 

Where have I said that I wanted to change the bathroom rules.

 

There weren't any but male/female and handicapped/family before the whining started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You mean we should use a biological criteria rather than a psychological criteria?

 

 

 

 

You want to change the bathroom rules to sex(chromosome) - because, for some reason, you see taking a shit as sexual

 

Whereas for millennia it's been gender.

 

What was wrong with how it was a month ago?

 

It's been men (males) and women (females) for millennia and there is nothing wrong with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You mean we should use a biological criteria rather than a psychological criteria?

 

 

 

 

You want to change the bathroom rules to sex(chromosome) - because, for some reason, you see taking a shit as sexual

 

Whereas for millennia it's been gender.

 

What was wrong with how it was a month ago?

 

It's been men (males) and women (females) for millennia and there is nothing wrong with it.

 

 

That chile ain't too sharp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You mean we should use a biological criteria rather than a psychological criteria?

 

 

 

 

You want to change the bathroom rules to sex(chromosome) - because, for some reason, you see taking a shit as sexual

 

Whereas for millennia it's been gender.

 

What was wrong with how it was a month ago?

 

 

Where have I said that I wanted to change the bathroom rules.

 

There weren't any but male/female and handicapped/family before the whining started.

 

 

Incorrect! Transgenders have been using bathrooms that matched gender forever....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites