Men in women's bathrooms

[Silhouette]

The term racist and bigot should only be used for people that use hateful and discriminatory language. I haven't heard that from you on this board but I have head it from many others and I imagine you have too.

Who cares? We're discussing facts. If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen. Calling the old salty cooks here "bigot" is like spitting in a fan.

Fact: men playing pretend aren't going to get dominant rights to 17 million rape survivors behind shower and bathroom doors marked "women".

Accept it. Take your mutilee/halfling advocacy elsewhere. People have had enough insanity for one century, thanks..

 

[Seawytch]

Dems love to regulate things....
How are they going to regulate this????

Some hairy dude walks in to a ladies rest room and who is there to check under the hood to see if
he is a she?.....
Or does he just have to say that he's in touch with his feminine side that day
as he moves to the stall to take a nasty dump....

Democrats did not create the NC pecker checker law, Republicans did. It's the Republicans that want to tell trans folks they can't use the appropriate restroom for their gender identity and created the regulation of it.

 

[Slade3200]

I didn't compare the two... I was talking about Sill's references to Mutilee's and Halflings as he claimed they were appropriate and accurate terms.

They are accurate and completely fair terms. "Mutilees" and "Halflings" are as close as one sex can get to the other in the natural world with the help of "MDs" who belong in prison.

You can stop using that 17 million rape victim number as there are numerous rape victim and abused women groups that support the transgender movement and are condemning the politicalization of it. I posted a link earlier that I believe you responded with a strawman retort... Yes there are also groups that oppose the transgender movement as well. But lets be honest it isn't 17million.

Did you get that folks? Supreme mutilee/halfling advocate "Slade" believes that the rights and considerations of 17 million rape survivors having to shower next to naked men behind doors marked "women" is a "strawman"...a non-issue in this debate. He's asserting here that "many of these rape survivors are OK showering naked next to a strange man". Do you believe him? And, what else will he lie about to shove his agenda through?

Ergo, Slade is a misogynist and a pervert.

Haha, nice try... reread what I wrote... You called my link to multiple rape victim groups that are speaking out agains the politicalization of this issue and that support transgenders as a strawman. Fact is there are rape victims that fall on both sides of this issue... You paint them all into the side of anti-trans in the bathrooms. Its just not true. Keep up with the spin though, you're doing a horrible job.

 

[Rozman]

Dems love to regulate things....
How are they going to regulate this????

Some hairy dude walks in to a ladies rest room and who is there to check under the hood to see if
he is a she?.....
Or does he just have to say that he's in touch with his feminine side that day
as he moves to the stall to take a nasty dump....

Don't forget either... this isn't JUST about bathrooms. It's about showers, dorms, locker rooms...the whole gamut.

I know.....

Outraged Shopper: TX Dept Store Let Man Use Women's Dressing Room

 

[Slade3200]

The term racist and bigot should only be used for people that use hateful and discriminatory language. I haven't heard that from you on this board but I have head it from many others and I imagine you have too.

Who cares? We're discussing facts. If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen. Calling the old salty cooks here "bigot" is like spitting in a fan.

Fact: men playing pretend aren't going to get dominant rights to 17 million rape survivors behind shower and bathroom doors marked "women".

Accept it. Take your mutilee/halfling advocacy elsewhere. People have had enough insanity for one century, thanks..

It goes to the tone of the argument... and you wonder why people don't respect your arguments. Thats your answer

 

[Silhouette]

Democrats did not create the NC pecker checker law, Republicans did. It's the Republicans that want to tell trans folks they can't use the appropriate restroom for their gender identity and created the regulation of it.

And a good thing too. Because it's self-diagnosed, the mile-wide loophole that would affect the 17 million rape survivors behind shower and bathroom doors marked "women" outside NEEDS regulation. If a woman spots a man in her shower or restroom. OUT HE GOES. With legal force behind it. Thank God. Otherwise these poor women would have to choose each time between feeling like she was in imminent danger of assault/PTSD & the fear of being sued for attempting to protect herself.

It goes to the tone of the argument... and you wonder why people don't respect your arguments. Thats your answer

Then what are all the "winner" "thanks" and "agree" marks I get on my posts for? I got your number pal. You're a lyin' little snakeoil salesman..

 

[ChrisL]

That is a great question and the heart of the debate. I would seek input from the transgender community as to what they propose as this discussion revolves around their lifestyle. They should consider the fears and anxieties that surround men, women, and children and make a common sense proposal with everybody's concerns in mind. Im just an advocate for tolerance and equality. This debate doesn't have a direct effect on me so ultimately it should be decided between the transgender community and those that feel like their rights or privacy is being infringed.

From my limited experience and exposure to the issue, i'd suggest that for somebody to be considered a transgender man or women they would have had to gone through some form or therapy or counseling that addresses the underlying issues and through that process it was decided that transition is the best option for their mental health. They should be living the transitioned lifestyle, which means they take on the opposite sexes appearance, both in physical appearance and in dress. If there is controversy surrounding somebodies use of a facility and police get involved, there can be verification from the persons doctor that the above steps have been taken to give credibility to the "gender identity".

These are off the top of my head ideas, but I think its start to providing a structured system that addresses both parties concerns and solves the issue of a man saying "I feel like a woman today so I'll use the woman's restroom"

Additionally schools would undergo a more extensive process, where the child would undergo a series of steps to qualify as a transitioned

McHugh was not discredited in any way. Lol. Your "theories" are not any valid than Dr. McHugh's or my own. Yes, when someone is sick, they need to know they are sick so that they can seek out the proper treatment. Feeding a delusion is the WORST thing you can do.

Why do you think our suicide rates are SO much more prevalent now than ever in the past? Because your "treatments" are working. Hmm. Interesting because the statistics would say NO.

I am posting on this topic because basically, I think you are a bunch of monsters. These people need therapy, not people encouraging them to surgically deform themselves.

I don't know where you get this "encouragement" term. I think therapy first to help identify issues and work on coping mechanisms so they can feel good about who they are. Im not a doctor or a therapist, but ive heard many stories, in some cases therapy resolves issues and others not. Did you watch that video I posted twice yesterday?

Nope. I don't have time to sit and watch a video! I have important postings to make and texting to do!

yeah, totally... I think Dr McHughs has another article out... Spend your time just exploring things that support your argument and spend no time looking at the other side with an open mind. Brilliant approach.

Oh, because you are here to "teach" me, because I don't know anything? Lol. Sorry, I can't think of anything you or anyone else would say that would make me accept that being a transgender is "normal." Take that to the BANK.

If the child on your video is having "gender identity problems" then a psychiatrist is the appropriate route to take.

If it was your child, what would you do? Give him or her dangerous hormones and prepare him or her for surgery?

Also, what on earth does a CHILD know? Quite normal for them to be confused especially when there is a history of abuse and/or mental illness. Not to mention, studies say that 70 to 80% of them "grow out of it" by adulthood.

Why don't you just admit that you people are monsters who are trying to create "monsters" who really don't fit into any "gender" category? You are an advocate for that.

The fact that you are still judging the child in a video that you HAVEN'T EVEN WATCHED, baffles me. Do you realize how dumb that makes you sound. The family did years of counseling and drug treatment. I've clicked and read your links before responding. I give credit when credit is do... I send you some information and you ignore it then critique it, then continue with your uneducated rants... then you criticize me for sending it to you thinking I'm trying to TEACH you? You're looney...

Take a ******* minute and see what this family went through and feel free to critique. The video backs up some of your points and showcases the risks with child transitions.

Sorry, I'm BUSY. Do you understand that?

How could that young child have gone through "years" of therapy? Give me a break. I will look at the video on MY time. Got it?

 

[ChrisL]

From my limited experience and exposure to the issue, i'd suggest that for somebody to be considered a transgender man or women they would have had to gone through some form or therapy or counseling that addresses the underlying issues and through that process it was decided that transition is the best option for their mental health. They should be living the transitioned lifestyle, which means they take on the opposite sexes appearance, both in physical appearance and in dress. If there is controversy surrounding somebodies use of a facility and police get involved, there can be verification from the persons doctor that the above steps have been taken to give credibility to the "gender identity".

These are off the top of my head ideas...

OK, for purposes of legal clarity...

"transgender" is still a muddy term. We could call them "multilees" or "halflings" or ? which would describe more completely, openly and accurately what they really are after MDs agree to drug and or cut them up.

"transition". You mean from a man to a mutilated man? How long does "transition" take? How long and at what stages would women rape survivors be required to shower with them? Before or after the criminal MDs amputate their male genitals to "cure a mental illness"?

If you don't want to be called a bigot then you can chose your words more wisely... multilees and halflings, cut them up are derogatory and unnecessary terms... Unless you intend to offend your opposition during debate, there is no point in talking like that... Would you say the same to a breast cancer victim who had a mastectomy?

Per your questions: My idea would be to break the "transition" into phases: 1. meet with doctor or therapist to discuss issues 2. If decided by doctor that transition is best move for mental health then they go through a period by living the lifestyle of opposite sex. 3. Drug therapy 4. Surgical procedure. Hopefully 3 and 4 can be avoided by effective methods in 1 and 2.

As for the shower rule... I really don't think transgenders desire to shower or get naked in public, especially if they have different anatomy. But that may be a consideration that is discussed. No showering or exposure if you have opposite anatomy as the labeled facility... Again the debate needs to be had between the Trans group and the ones that feel their presence violates their privacy. I don't know everything that Trans people are looking for and I don't know all the fears that women may have. Me personally I don't really care and think most of these things work themselves out without the need for laws to define it all. If I see a creeper in the bathroom, I just leave. There has been many of times that a homeless person, or a drunk person, a looney tune has been in the restroom... If they made me feel uncomfortable I just waited for them to leave. Not a big deal...

Good, now care to explain to me why the 99.5% have to leave a bathroom if a member of the .05% makes them uncomfortable, rather than the other way around?

I'm serious here, do you understand the lack of logic in an argument that argues that it's okay to by law make the majority uncomfortable for the comfort of the minority?

What you say is true. If you're in the bathroom and person who makes you uncomfortable walks in , YOU CAN LEAVE. Same thing holds true for the mentally ill, they can use the gender correct bathroom or if they feel uncomfortable LEAVE.

You have yourself said this is an option, it all depends on which person you think should be made to leave.

This argument is ******* stupid. Quite frankly any person who thinks the government should be telling private companies what bathroom policy they should have should be taken out back and shot in the head. That goes for whether you believe the government should mandate gender specific bathrooms OR gender neutral bathrooms. Either way.

As for government facilities, that's easy, make one bathroom in each building gender neutral and tell people "there if you don't want to be identified as a certain gender based on which bathroom you use, THAT's the bathroom you use, no you may not demand that ALL bathrooms be gender neutral"

PROBLEM ******* SOLVED.

Valid points and I agree... except I don't think 99.5% feel uncomfortable with transgenders using the bathroom they identify with. Some also feel that it is a civil rights issue. Also, my example was related to actions people do to make me feel uncomfortable... The Transgender situation has nothing to do with their actions, it has to do with their presence... It is a different argument.

I like your Unisex argument for public facilities and think the Gov should butt out of private business bathrooms. The last think we need are mandates to install unisex bathrooms in our businesses.

We , of course , have no idea what the actual numbers are, but we can be pretty sure that there are far more people who are uncomfortable with the idea of being in the bathroom with the opposite sex (or more importantly to most having an adult of the opposite sex in the bathroom with their CHILD) than there are people who identify as "trans sexual" meaning the minority by far is still trying to tell the majority here " you have to be uncomfortable here to make me comfortable"

That's really what this boils down to a small group of people have convinced the Dem party to defend their right to make a larger group of people uncomfortable to suit their needs. And where does that end? EVERY single time something like this happens a few conservatives will say "no, if we allow this, we know what's next" and of course they are called bigots and racists, but in the end they are proven right.

Where do we draw the line? IS there any minority group of people who have a stance that the Dems won't say "yeah you know what, they have rights?"

Take someone like myself, I seriously defended gay marriage, I don't care who marries who, and I firmly believe that it's none of the government's business, but I see the same people who were screaming that anyone who disagreed with gay marriage was a racist bigot now screaming that anyone who doesn't agree that a person should be able to use whatever bathroom they want is a racist bigot, and frankly I can't help but feel that in 6 months I'm going to be called a racist bigot when pedophiles want the right to have sex with children and I point out that they should be shot instead.

Where does it end?

This is where I draw the line between sanity and insanity. To me, this garbage is insane and is nothing more than feeding a delusion, which is extremely unhealthy.

 

[ChrisL]

Like I said, you can call me a bigot until the cows come home. I'll wear it as a badge of sanity. Just because you don't like the fact that men can never be women and women can never be men, will never affect my saying they are halflings or mutilees. That is ,in fact, what they are.

A woman with breast cancer who had her breast removed to save her life from cancer is nothing like a man who had his HEALTHY, FUNCTIONAL genitals removed to play pretend. If a woman could simply get therapy to cure her breast cancer, no doctor would amputate that breast.

According to your logic, aren't these women, technically mutilees and halflings?? Come on man, if you're gonna speak the truth then speak the truth. The motivation behind the surgery doesn't effect what it is, right?

A person with breast cancer has surgery because something is the matter with them. They have a DISEASE. Why do you keep using people who have physical well known diseases and comparing them to transgenders who have NO physical anomalies until AFTER they get this Frankenstein surgery?

I didn't compare the two... I was talking about Sill's references to Mutilee's and Halflings as he claimed they were appropriate and accurate terms.

Well personally, I think that is kind of mean, but you are probably annoying her. In any event, they are not comparable. People don't normally have surgeries for issues that could very well be and most likely are PSYCHIATRIC issues.

 

[ChrisL]

OK, for purposes of legal clarity...

"transgender" is still a muddy term. We could call them "multilees" or "halflings" or ? which would describe more completely, openly and accurately what they really are after MDs agree to drug and or cut them up.

"transition". You mean from a man to a mutilated man? How long does "transition" take? How long and at what stages would women rape survivors be required to shower with them? Before or after the criminal MDs amputate their male genitals to "cure a mental illness"?

If you don't want to be called a bigot then you can chose your words more wisely... multilees and halflings, cut them up are derogatory and unnecessary terms... Unless you intend to offend your opposition during debate, there is no point in talking like that... Would you say the same to a breast cancer victim who had a mastectomy?

Per your questions: My idea would be to break the "transition" into phases: 1. meet with doctor or therapist to discuss issues 2. If decided by doctor that transition is best move for mental health then they go through a period by living the lifestyle of opposite sex. 3. Drug therapy 4. Surgical procedure. Hopefully 3 and 4 can be avoided by effective methods in 1 and 2.

As for the shower rule... I really don't think transgenders desire to shower or get naked in public, especially if they have different anatomy. But that may be a consideration that is discussed. No showering or exposure if you have opposite anatomy as the labeled facility... Again the debate needs to be had between the Trans group and the ones that feel their presence violates their privacy. I don't know everything that Trans people are looking for and I don't know all the fears that women may have. Me personally I don't really care and think most of these things work themselves out without the need for laws to define it all. If I see a creeper in the bathroom, I just leave. There has been many of times that a homeless person, or a drunk person, a looney tune has been in the restroom... If they made me feel uncomfortable I just waited for them to leave. Not a big deal...

Good, now care to explain to me why the 99.5% have to leave a bathroom if a member of the .05% makes them uncomfortable, rather than the other way around?

I'm serious here, do you understand the lack of logic in an argument that argues that it's okay to by law make the majority uncomfortable for the comfort of the minority?

What you say is true. If you're in the bathroom and person who makes you uncomfortable walks in , YOU CAN LEAVE. Same thing holds true for the mentally ill, they can use the gender correct bathroom or if they feel uncomfortable LEAVE.

You have yourself said this is an option, it all depends on which person you think should be made to leave.

This argument is ******* stupid. Quite frankly any person who thinks the government should be telling private companies what bathroom policy they should have should be taken out back and shot in the head. That goes for whether you believe the government should mandate gender specific bathrooms OR gender neutral bathrooms. Either way.

As for government facilities, that's easy, make one bathroom in each building gender neutral and tell people "there if you don't want to be identified as a certain gender based on which bathroom you use, THAT's the bathroom you use, no you may not demand that ALL bathrooms be gender neutral"

PROBLEM ******* SOLVED.

He doesn't care about the comfort and safety of women and children. They are secondary to the trannies for him apparently.

Pssst , he doesn't care about the trannies either. This is strictly about politics for people like this.

You can always tell people who don't think for themselves, both on the left and the right, when they've never seen a position from "their side" that they wouldn't defend.

Allowing little boys to say they think they're little girls and using the girls washrooms is madness. ANY sane person would agree with that.

Now you're painting me as a lefty partisan... really?

You are buying into the left's "propaganda" hook, line and sinker. You bring up studies done in Sweden??? Do you know anything about Sweden and their liberal agenda. They want to do away with the pronouns "he" and "she." They want little boys to pee sitting down, amongst other absolute insanity. Liberals want to blur the lines between "he" and "she." They HATE traditional gender roles.

 

[Rozman]

Dems love to regulate things....
How are they going to regulate this????

Some hairy dude walks in to a ladies rest room and who is there to check under the hood to see if
he is a she?.....
Or does he just have to say that he's in touch with his feminine side that day
as he moves to the stall to take a nasty dump....

Democrats did not create the NC pecker checker law, Republicans did. It's the Republicans that want to tell trans folks they can't use the appropriate restroom for their gender identity and created the regulation of it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/u...nsgender-access-to-school-restrooms.html?_r=0

 

[Slade3200]

Like I said, you can call me a bigot until the cows come home. I'll wear it as a badge of sanity. Just because you don't like the fact that men can never be women and women can never be men, will never affect my saying they are halflings or mutilees. That is ,in fact, what they are.

A woman with breast cancer who had her breast removed to save her life from cancer is nothing like a man who had his HEALTHY, FUNCTIONAL genitals removed to play pretend. If a woman could simply get therapy to cure her breast cancer, no doctor would amputate that breast.

According to your logic, aren't these women, technically mutilees and halflings?? Come on man, if you're gonna speak the truth then speak the truth. The motivation behind the surgery doesn't effect what it is, right?

A person with breast cancer has surgery because something is the matter with them. They have a DISEASE. Why do you keep using people who have physical well known diseases and comparing them to transgenders who have NO physical anomalies until AFTER they get this Frankenstein surgery?

I didn't compare the two... I was talking about Sill's references to Mutilee's and Halflings as he claimed they were appropriate and accurate terms.

Well personally, I think that is kind of mean, but you are probably annoying her. In any event, they are not comparable. People don't normally have surgeries for issues that could very well be and most likely are PSYCHIATRIC issues.

Breast implants, nose surgery, just about all plastic surgery.

 

[ChrisL]

Like I said, you can call me a bigot until the cows come home. I'll wear it as a badge of sanity. Just because you don't like the fact that men can never be women and women can never be men, will never affect my saying they are halflings or mutilees. That is ,in fact, what they are.

A woman with breast cancer who had her breast removed to save her life from cancer is nothing like a man who had his HEALTHY, FUNCTIONAL genitals removed to play pretend. If a woman could simply get therapy to cure her breast cancer, no doctor would amputate that breast.

According to your logic, aren't these women, technically mutilees and halflings?? Come on man, if you're gonna speak the truth then speak the truth. The motivation behind the surgery doesn't effect what it is, right?

A person with breast cancer has surgery because something is the matter with them. They have a DISEASE. Why do you keep using people who have physical well known diseases and comparing them to transgenders who have NO physical anomalies until AFTER they get this Frankenstein surgery?

I didn't compare the two... I was talking about Sill's references to Mutilee's and Halflings as he claimed they were appropriate and accurate terms.

Well personally, I think that is kind of mean, but you are probably annoying her. In any event, they are not comparable. People don't normally have surgeries for issues that could very well be and most likely are PSYCHIATRIC issues.

Breast implants, nose surgery, just about all plastic surgery.

That is still not trying to change a BOY into a GIRL or vice versa.

 

[Slade3200]

If you don't want to be called a bigot then you can chose your words more wisely... multilees and halflings, cut them up are derogatory and unnecessary terms... Unless you intend to offend your opposition during debate, there is no point in talking like that... Would you say the same to a breast cancer victim who had a mastectomy?

Per your questions: My idea would be to break the "transition" into phases: 1. meet with doctor or therapist to discuss issues 2. If decided by doctor that transition is best move for mental health then they go through a period by living the lifestyle of opposite sex. 3. Drug therapy 4. Surgical procedure. Hopefully 3 and 4 can be avoided by effective methods in 1 and 2.

As for the shower rule... I really don't think transgenders desire to shower or get naked in public, especially if they have different anatomy. But that may be a consideration that is discussed. No showering or exposure if you have opposite anatomy as the labeled facility... Again the debate needs to be had between the Trans group and the ones that feel their presence violates their privacy. I don't know everything that Trans people are looking for and I don't know all the fears that women may have. Me personally I don't really care and think most of these things work themselves out without the need for laws to define it all. If I see a creeper in the bathroom, I just leave. There has been many of times that a homeless person, or a drunk person, a looney tune has been in the restroom... If they made me feel uncomfortable I just waited for them to leave. Not a big deal...

Good, now care to explain to me why the 99.5% have to leave a bathroom if a member of the .05% makes them uncomfortable, rather than the other way around?

I'm serious here, do you understand the lack of logic in an argument that argues that it's okay to by law make the majority uncomfortable for the comfort of the minority?

What you say is true. If you're in the bathroom and person who makes you uncomfortable walks in , YOU CAN LEAVE. Same thing holds true for the mentally ill, they can use the gender correct bathroom or if they feel uncomfortable LEAVE.

You have yourself said this is an option, it all depends on which person you think should be made to leave.

This argument is ******* stupid. Quite frankly any person who thinks the government should be telling private companies what bathroom policy they should have should be taken out back and shot in the head. That goes for whether you believe the government should mandate gender specific bathrooms OR gender neutral bathrooms. Either way.

As for government facilities, that's easy, make one bathroom in each building gender neutral and tell people "there if you don't want to be identified as a certain gender based on which bathroom you use, THAT's the bathroom you use, no you may not demand that ALL bathrooms be gender neutral"

PROBLEM ******* SOLVED.

He doesn't care about the comfort and safety of women and children. They are secondary to the trannies for him apparently.

Pssst , he doesn't care about the trannies either. This is strictly about politics for people like this.

You can always tell people who don't think for themselves, both on the left and the right, when they've never seen a position from "their side" that they wouldn't defend.

Allowing little boys to say they think they're little girls and using the girls washrooms is madness. ANY sane person would agree with that.

Now you're painting me as a lefty partisan... really?

You are buying into the left's "propaganda" hook, line and sinker. You bring up studies done in Sweden??? Do you know anything about Sweden and their liberal agenda. They want to do away with the pronouns "he" and "she." They want little boys to pee sitting down, amongst other absolute insanity. Liberals want to blur the lines between "he" and "she." They HATE traditional gender roles.

I don't fish in the partisan pond. You posted an article, Skyler respond to the article by posting a link to the sources used in your article denouncing your article. To the objective observer that this discredits your article. It's a simple point, I would use a different source if I were you.

 

[ChrisL]

Good, now care to explain to me why the 99.5% have to leave a bathroom if a member of the .05% makes them uncomfortable, rather than the other way around?

I'm serious here, do you understand the lack of logic in an argument that argues that it's okay to by law make the majority uncomfortable for the comfort of the minority?

What you say is true. If you're in the bathroom and person who makes you uncomfortable walks in , YOU CAN LEAVE. Same thing holds true for the mentally ill, they can use the gender correct bathroom or if they feel uncomfortable LEAVE.

You have yourself said this is an option, it all depends on which person you think should be made to leave.

This argument is ******* stupid. Quite frankly any person who thinks the government should be telling private companies what bathroom policy they should have should be taken out back and shot in the head. That goes for whether you believe the government should mandate gender specific bathrooms OR gender neutral bathrooms. Either way.

As for government facilities, that's easy, make one bathroom in each building gender neutral and tell people "there if you don't want to be identified as a certain gender based on which bathroom you use, THAT's the bathroom you use, no you may not demand that ALL bathrooms be gender neutral"

PROBLEM ******* SOLVED.

He doesn't care about the comfort and safety of women and children. They are secondary to the trannies for him apparently.

Pssst , he doesn't care about the trannies either. This is strictly about politics for people like this.

You can always tell people who don't think for themselves, both on the left and the right, when they've never seen a position from "their side" that they wouldn't defend.

Allowing little boys to say they think they're little girls and using the girls washrooms is madness. ANY sane person would agree with that.

Now you're painting me as a lefty partisan... really?

You are buying into the left's "propaganda" hook, line and sinker. You bring up studies done in Sweden??? Do you know anything about Sweden and their liberal agenda. They want to do away with the pronouns "he" and "she." They want little boys to pee sitting down, amongst other absolute insanity. Liberals want to blur the lines between "he" and "she." They HATE traditional gender roles.

I don't fish in the partisan pond. You posted an article, Skyler respond to the article by posting a link to the sources used in your article denouncing your article. To the objective observer that this discredits your article. It's a simple point, I would use a different source if I were you.

He did not post a link at all. He made statements about an article but never posted one up. Besides, the Swedish researchers (who are obviously EXTREMELY biased) have also admitted that the suicide rates are not any better than preoperatively. So what does that tell you?

Also, why are there so many more of these people killing themselves than say in the 1950s and before?

 

[ChrisL]

The fact that they are killing themselves at an exponential rate would tell any normal person that your crazy insane surgeries, trying to be Dr. Frankenstein and changing them into something they are not nor can never be are not helping but hurting them. Of course that is the case with most of these types of things.

 

[Flopper]

We don't care if you call us bigots. The phrase is tired, old and overused in so many wrong situations that it's "punch" has ceased to have any effect.

The problem you face is that men won't be allowed in the women's showers or restrooms. It's a fact. No matter what the man is thinking in his head or how delusional he is. The fact that he is experiencing delusions so severe that he fancies himself a woman despite what his eyes are telling him when he looks between his legs means that society should double-down on not letting especially these men in alone with women showering.

You have one GIANT hurdle you're facing: WOMEN behind doors marked WOMEN. They have rights too you know. You didn't? Well then you learn something new every day, don't you? Just ask Justice Ginsburg. She's going to side with women on this one. Likely Kennedy will too and possibly even Sotomayor. Breyer usually sucks up to whatever Kennedy tells him to do (what else could explain his vote to disenfranchise kids from either a mother or father for life ~Obergefell). So you're looking down the maw of possibly every Justice except the lesbian Kagan, because she is drunk with rainbow Koolaid, voting to protect women instead of delusional men.

Justice Ginsburg = WOMEN (already said she believes bathrooms should be segregated on record)

Justices Alito, Roberts & Thomas = WOMEN

Justice Kennedy = WOMEN (likely, because of the remorse he's undoubtedly feeling assigning unknown numbers of children to lives legally-deprived of either a mother or father)

Justice Breyer = WOMEN (whatever Kennedy does, see above)

Justice Sotomayer = UNKNOWN (she is catholic, a woman, but has also drunk the Rainbow Koolaid..could go either way)

Justice Kagan = MEN PRETENDING TO BE WOMEN. (Koolaid)

************

BELOW ..Slade vv you're going to lose this one. Start the grieving process now so you have a jump on it.

Your funny man, i'll give you that... You keep bringing up this women belong in the womens bathroom... Don't you understand that the argument is about "what a woman" is? One side is anatomy and birth certificates... The other side recognizes gender identity as a classification of Man/Woman. That is the whole argument. NOBODY is proposing to ever let Men in Womens restrooms. The definition of man and women is where the two sides differ.

I'm not vested enough to grieve on this one, I've stated many times that I think this is a complicated issue. I understand both sides of the argument and just want the discussion to produce a more educated acceptable and tolerant environment where the rights of men, women, children AND transgenders are all considered. I've also stated I didn't think the government should get involved and dictate bathroom policy.

You can ask Skylar and mdk if I know what the hub of the debate is about. I've been asking them to clearly define what a "transgender woman" is. And of the dozen or so requests, they have yet to answer. Instead they insert ad hominems and strawmen, hoping the question will go away.

So I'll ask you: what EXACTLY is a "transgender woman"? To establish your premise, it's incumbent upon you to convince people that a man pretending to be a women "is actually a woman".

Go.

That is a great question and the heart of the debate. I would seek input from the transgender community as to what they propose as this discussion revolves around their lifestyle. They should consider the fears and anxieties that surround men, women, and children and make a common sense proposal with everybody's concerns in mind. Im just an advocate for tolerance and equality. This debate doesn't have a direct effect on me so ultimately it should be decided between the transgender community and those that feel like their rights or privacy is being infringed.

From my limited experience and exposure to the issue, i'd suggest that for somebody to be considered a transgender man or women they would have had to gone through some form or therapy or counseling that addresses the underlying issues and through that process it was decided that transition is the best option for their mental health. They should be living the transitioned lifestyle, which means they take on the opposite sexes appearance, both in physical appearance and in dress. If there is controversy surrounding somebodies use of a facility and police get involved, there can be verification from the persons doctor that the above steps have been taken to give credibility to the "gender identity".

These are off the top of my head ideas, but I think its start to providing a structured system that addresses both parties concerns and solves the issue of a man saying "I feel like a woman today so I'll use the woman's restroom"

Sounds like you have a couple of pretty good ideas. The real issue for transsexuals in regard to restrooms is having facilities available that they can use safely. A man who is feminine or a female who is masculine in their appearance is not going fee comfortable in either facility regardless of the law. I believe the answer is more unisex restrooms that serve not only transsexuals but many people who're uncomfortable in public restrooms for any of a number of reasons.

I personally think Obama is going to far with this. Change needs to come gradually. Yes, Americans need to become more tolerant in what they believe about men and women because science is utterly destroying the old stereotypes. Males are not necessary masculine and females are not necessarily feminine. Roles that society assigns to a person based on their sex simply doesn't fit a large percent of the population today. As humans we want to classify people and attach behavior patterns to those classifications. It makes life easier and more secure. However, mother nature doesn't see things that way. She loves variations and is always throwing use curve balls.

A "large" percent? No a very small and insignificant percent.

I was not writing about just transsexuals. Society expects many thinks from a person depending on their sex. Society expects a man to be the breadwinners and the woman to manage the family but there are plenty of examples of women much more suited at earning money and men much more suited to managing the family. Men are expected to be more aggressive particularly in sex, however that is often false. In fact, just about every role other than childbearing, is slowly become unisexual.

Homosexuals whose gender may differ in a number of ways from their sex, have far less problems adapting to roles assigned by society than transsexuals. For homosexuals it usually just frustrating but for transsexuals it's devastating.

 

[Silhouette]

I was not writing about just transsexuals. Society expects many thinks from a person depending on their sex. Society expects a man to be the breadwinners and the woman to manage the family but there are plenty of examples of women much more suited at earning money and men much more suited to managing the family. Men are expected to be more aggressive particularly in sex, however that is often false. In fact, just about every role other than childbearing, is slowly become unisexual.

Men in aboriginal tribes help with the cooking and child watching. Yet they don't feel compelled to cut their dicks off and use the women's bathrooms and showers.

So, there's that. Children who reject their gender should be taught that all manner of natural behavioral variants have always existed across the globe through time for their gender. That would go leaps and bounds towards their adjustment and eventual acceptance of what they actually are.

Telling them "they're right, they weren't born in the right body" is mind-******* them.

 

[Pop23]

Dems love to regulate things....
How are they going to regulate this????

Some hairy dude walks in to a ladies rest room and who is there to check under the hood to see if
he is a she?.....
Or does he just have to say that he's in touch with his feminine side that day
as he moves to the stall to take a nasty dump....

Democrats did not create the NC pecker checker law, Republicans did. It's the Republicans that want to tell trans folks they can't use the appropriate restroom for their gender identity and created the regulation of it.

Wrong again. North Carolina would not have addressed the issue if Charlotte had not FIRST sanctioned it by passing it's ordanance.

You know that, but continue to lie.

Why am I not surprised.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The child is delusional. The parents are enablers. Anyone indulging this child further in his delusions should be fined or put in jail. Child abuse is a serious issue.

It just goes to show how depraved the wrong-wing has become, that they think that it helps their case to boast about supporting such a horrendous form of child sexual abuse.