The serious transgender bathroom issue discussion

[Guest]

Man in the women's locker room, or transgender woman? Nobody has suggested that people be allowed to use facilities for a gender that does not match their gender identity.

To which fallacy will you return us now?

I understand all of the rest you posted and am not going to get bogged down in the legal shitfight. The courts will settle it one way or 'tother. Makes no difference to me and I'll be happy either way.

My question about a man in the ladies locker room is not a fallacy. Everyone keeps saying that a man (not a transgender woman) should not be allowed into a ladies locker room. Ok, but why? Why shouldn't they be allowed? I honestly don't see what gender ID has to do with anything here. If the issue is, as you state above using your race analogy that these girls who are uncomfortable being naked with a trans there and they should get over it just like the whites had to get over having to sit next to a mongrel at a southern lunch counter - then shouldn't they also have to get over having a real man being naked next to them too? How is that any different that what you suggest wrt to the trans girl with a penis next to the girls in the locker room?

If there IS a difference, please explain to me why a man in the girl's locker room is a bad thing and why they should be segregated in the first place? That is a serious question Sol, because I'm honestly not seeing the distinction.

 

[Bent Sailor]

The difference is that you are arguing about a social expectation and then using that as an invalid basis against the legal argument of whether one has the right to privacy in a public amenity. A social expectation that one can discriminate based on a protected class (be it race or gender) is not protected by the US Constitution. Perhaps it was meant to, but it is very difficult to argue that SCOTUS has been interpreting it that way in recent decades.

Should a man, who identifies as a man, walk into the ladies bathroom and use their showers? Probably not as the social expectation is that it is used by people who identify as women. That doesn't, however, make that expectation a right any more than if the social expectation was that negroes stay out of the ladies room to allow those frail Southerners the comfort of shitting without the presence of a black person in their vicinity.

We have a million social expectations which we abide by everyday. The vast majority of these social rules have no legal weight behind them and shouldn't unless you really want than nanny government you keep complaining about.

 

[Guest]

After doing some research, the law appears to be silent in most states on the question of whether its illegal for a man to use a woman's bathroom - with the exception of NC and a few other states that have recently enacted statutes to prohibit that practice. I would assume that also applies to locker rooms and shower/changing rooms.

As a result - Expect to see many more cases like this: http://dailysignal.com/2016/02/23/man-allowed-to-use-womens-locker-room-at-swimming-pool-without-citing-gender-identity/

According to Seattle Parks and Recreation, women alerted staff at Evans Pool staff when a man wearing swim trunks entered the women’s locker room and took off his shirt.

When staff told him to leave, the man reportedly said “the law has changed and I have a right to be here.”

Employees told Seattle’s King 5 News the man didn’t attempt to identify as female but cited a new Washington state rule allowing individuals to choose their bathroom based on their gender identity.

Police were not called to respond to the Feb. 8 incident, although the man returned to the locker room while young girls were changing for swimming practice, King 5 reported.

You can thank the LGBT community for making it perfectly fine for a man to shower and change with your little girls at the public swimming pool. Thank Obama too.....

Cool, I'm glad this is finally settled.

 

[GRUMPY]

18 years ago...

 

[Dog]

After doing some research, the law appears to be silent in most states on the question of whether its illegal for a man to use a woman's bathroom - with the exception of NC and a few other states that have recently enacted statutes to prohibit that practice. I would assume that also applies to locker rooms and shower/changing rooms.

As a result - Expect to see many more cases like this: http://dailysignal.com/2016/02/23/man-allowed-to-use-womens-locker-room-at-swimming-pool-without-citing-gender-identity/

According to Seattle Parks and Recreation, women alerted staff at Evans Pool staff when a man wearing swim trunks entered the women’s locker room and took off his shirt.

When staff told him to leave, the man reportedly said “the law has changed and I have a right to be here.”

Employees told Seattle’s King 5 News the man didn’t attempt to identify as female but cited a new Washington state rule allowing individuals to choose their bathroom based on their gender identity.

Police were not called to respond to the Feb. 8 incident, although the man returned to the locker room while young girls were changing for swimming practice, King 5 reported.

You can thank the LGBT community for making it perfectly fine for a man to shower and change with your little girls at the public swimming pool. Thank Obama too.....

Cool, I'm glad this is finally settled.

How fucking stupid are we?.....Thanks Obama.

 

[Guest]

Based on the above successful example of a guy using the girls facilities, I used the ladies restroom at a Resturant today. I felt I needed to get in touch with my inner feminine side.

 

[Spatial Ed]

Based on the above successful example of a guy using the girls facilities, I used the ladies restroom at a Resturant today. I felt I needed to get in touch with my inner feminine side.

Did you dangle your dick in anyone's face?

 

[Sol Rosenberg]

After doing some research, the law appears to be silent in most states on the question of whether its illegal for a man to use a woman's bathroom - with the exception of NC and a few other states that have recently enacted statutes to prohibit that practice. I would assume that also applies to locker rooms and shower/changing rooms.

As a result - Expect to see many more cases like this: http://dailysignal.com/2016/02/23/man-allowed-to-use-womens-locker-room-at-swimming-pool-without-citing-gender-identity/

According to Seattle Parks and Recreation, women alerted staff at Evans Pool staff when a man wearing swim trunks entered the women’s locker room and took off his shirt.

When staff told him to leave, the man reportedly said “the law has changed and I have a right to be here.”

Employees told Seattle’s King 5 News the man didn’t attempt to identify as female but cited a new Washington state rule allowing individuals to choose their bathroom based on their gender identity.

Police were not called to respond to the Feb. 8 incident, although the man returned to the locker room while young girls were changing for swimming practice, King 5 reported.

You can thank the LGBT community for making it perfectly fine for a man to shower and change with your little girls at the public swimming pool. Thank Obama too.....

Cool, I'm glad this is finally settled.

You absolutely can expect to see more of this, now. Was the man a member of the LGBT community?

 

[Dog]

After doing some research, the law appears to be silent in most states on the question of whether its illegal for a man to use a woman's bathroom - with the exception of NC and a few other states that have recently enacted statutes to prohibit that practice. I would assume that also applies to locker rooms and shower/changing rooms.

As a result - Expect to see many more cases like this: http://dailysignal.com/2016/02/23/man-allowed-to-use-womens-locker-room-at-swimming-pool-without-citing-gender-identity/

According to Seattle Parks and Recreation, women alerted staff at Evans Pool staff when a man wearing swim trunks entered the women’s locker room and took off his shirt.

When staff told him to leave, the man reportedly said “the law has changed and I have a right to be here.”

Employees told Seattle’s King 5 News the man didn’t attempt to identify as female but cited a new Washington state rule allowing individuals to choose their bathroom based on their gender identity.

Police were not called to respond to the Feb. 8 incident, although the man returned to the locker room while young girls were changing for swimming practice, King 5 reported.

You can thank the LGBT community for making it perfectly fine for a man to shower and change with your little girls at the public swimming pool. Thank Obama too.....

Cool, I'm glad this is finally settled.

You absolutely can expect to see more of this, now. Was the man a member of the LGBT community?

Why, does the LGBT community enjoy special rights?

 

[Sol Rosenberg]

After doing some research, the law appears to be silent in most states on the question of whether its illegal for a man to use a woman's bathroom - with the exception of NC and a few other states that have recently enacted statutes to prohibit that practice. I would assume that also applies to locker rooms and shower/changing rooms.

As a result - Expect to see many more cases like this: http://dailysignal.com/2016/02/23/man-allowed-to-use-womens-locker-room-at-swimming-pool-without-citing-gender-identity/

According to Seattle Parks and Recreation, women alerted staff at Evans Pool staff when a man wearing swim trunks entered the women’s locker room and took off his shirt.

When staff told him to leave, the man reportedly said “the law has changed and I have a right to be here.”

Employees told Seattle’s King 5 News the man didn’t attempt to identify as female but cited a new Washington state rule allowing individuals to choose their bathroom based on their gender identity.

Police were not called to respond to the Feb. 8 incident, although the man returned to the locker room while young girls were changing for swimming practice, King 5 reported.

You can thank the LGBT community for making it perfectly fine for a man to shower and change with your little girls at the public swimming pool. Thank Obama too.....

Cool, I'm glad this is finally settled.

You absolutely can expect to see more of this, now. Was the man a member of the LGBT community?

Why, does the LGBT community enjoy special rights?

Why won't the nigras just sit in the back of the bus and shut up, Senator Thurmond, why must they demand special rights?

 

[Bent Sailor]

States don't have laws about who can go into which bathroom - blame the LGBT.

States have a law that allows people who identify as female to use the female changeroom and man breaks that law - blame the LGBT.

States make a law about who can go into which changeroom that states the LGBT must stick to biological plumbing, causing the issue to become international news instead of a local ordinance no one has heard of - blame the LGBT.

Some people here must be real insecure about something to be so irrational about them.

 

[Bent Sailor]

Why, does the LGBT community enjoy special rights?

They don't. As JBSF pointed out, everyone has the same rights to use the bathroom they see fit to. Wasn't an issue until the Republicans saw fit to deny it to the LGBT.
Unintended consequences suck. Might have been better all round for the Republicans to stop being the party of nanny government for that one.

 

[Dog]

Why, does the LGBT community enjoy special rights?

They don't. As JBSF pointed out, everyone has the same rights to use the bathroom they see fit to. Wasn't an issue until the Republicans saw fit to deny it to the LGBT.
Unintended consequences suck. Might have been better all round for the Republicans to stop being the party of nanny government for that one.

[SIZE=11pt]Dude...This incident followed a change in the law in Seattle allowing individuals to use bathrooms based on gender identity. You can hardly pin it on Republicans.[/SIZE]

 

[Spatial Ed]

Why, does the LGBT community enjoy special rights?

They don't. As JBSF pointed out, everyone has the same rights to use the bathroom they see fit to. Wasn't an issue until the Republicans saw fit to deny it to the LGBT.Unintended consequences suck. Might have been better all round for the Republicans to stop being the party of nanny government for that one.

Dude...This incident followed a change in the law in Seattle allowing individuals to use bathrooms based on gender identity. You can hardly pin it on Republicans.

So the LGBT turned the GOP into nanny goverment suckers. Was that their agenda all along?

 

[Dog]

Why, does the LGBT community enjoy special rights?

They don't. As JBSF pointed out, everyone has the same rights to use the bathroom they see fit to. Wasn't an issue until the Republicans saw fit to deny it to the LGBT.Unintended consequences suck. Might have been better all round for the Republicans to stop being the party of nanny government for that one.

Dude...This incident followed a change in the law in Seattle allowing individuals to use bathrooms based on gender identity. You can hardly pin it on Republicans.

So the LGBT turned the GOP into nanny goverment suckers. Was that their agenda all along?

I'm feel more qualified to comment on stupid than the LGBT agenda.

 

[Spatial Ed]

I knew they had an agenda, been told that over and over. Never thought it was to make conservatives look stupid.

 

[Dog]

I knew they had an agenda, been told that over and over. Never thought it was to make conservatives look stupid.

Keep it up...You haven't figured out who is looking stupid yet.

 

[slatfatf]

unintended consequences

 

[A guy in the Chesapeake]

The agenda IMHO, is to force social acceptance of what I think is considered by many to be deviant behavior, and to force that acceptance thru legislation. (ie. expansion of protected classes to include behaviors, hate speech laws, etc).

Do what you want - that doesn't mean that anyone else should have to pretend to like or abide by that behavior.

 

[Rockdog]

Yep, I agree with that. I've never heard of a lawsuit against a school district or other government agency requiring minor children to undress in the company of same sex schoolmates.

And your point is what exactly? Either being forced to get naked in front of someone is a violation of one's right to privacy or it isn't. Once again, like it or not, rights are not gender specific - if doing something as a male is a violation, it's a violation as a female too. See the recent same sex marriage decision that some are still smarting over if you think that's somehow in question.

The government requiring minor children to undress in the company of opposite sex classmates will bring the end of PE altogether.

If transgenders don't FEEL normal in a locker room we'll just have eliminate locker rooms. Thanks Transgenders - hope you FEEL better!

Or, you know, you can do what we've been doing for decades - provide stalls for those that don't want to get changed in the open space where everyone can see them. Are you really so stuck on seeing other men naked in the change rooms you didn't think of that solution?

Truth is unless there is someone saying the government cannot require people to do something they've done for decades (meaning people agree with it) the Gov can REQUIRE it.

I agree the only way around it will be either the government can't require minor to undress in the company of a member of the opposite sex or the government can't require a minor child to undress in front of anyone at all. Due to obvious financial, facility, and time constraints the 'provide private' changing areas for all' won't work for a lot of schools and will result in an end of girls PE.

The 'provide private changing facilities' solution is a great 'on paper' solution but is not reasonable in a lot of situations.