OK so your 8 year old daughter is in the women's bathroom washing her hands. A man, who thinks he's a woman, walks in, whips his dick out in front of her, and takes a leak.
OK with you?
If it is, you are one sick piece of shit.
Another wonderful democratic policy to add to their list.
And Bruce Springsteen: **** You. Your music sucks and apparently you do too. Pansy Ass worthless POS.
This country is fucked.
That's not what happens and you know it. First of all, there are no open urinals in women's bathrooms. Women don't stand up to pee. Secondly, a transgender woman is going to go pee like a woman would, not stand up and pee. She's trying to be a woman because she feels that she should be a woman. You obviously have never met or associated with any transgender people, otherwise you wouldn't post something so stupid. Now if a man who is a pervert and not transgender walks into a woman's bathroom and starts whipping his penis around, then he will be arrested. Preventing transgenders from using the woman's bathroom is not going to stop a pervert. Last of all, based on what you support, you think transgender men who have facial hair and dress like men should be forced to use the woman's bathroom if they have a vagina. Now that should really go over well. Here is the thing. The transgendered have been using the bathrooms they identify with for a very long time. It's never been a problem in the past, but now all of a sudden, these people are going to whip their dicks out in front of your eight year old daughter. Give me a break.
So you don't missunderstand, it's a bit more complicated then just, it looks like a woman, so it should be allowed in the woman's restroom.
The legal principle that would allow a trans male to legally use the woman's restroom is called "simalarily situated"
A person that is very closely related to another cannot be denied the same right as the other.
So the claim is that a transgender male is closely related to a woman. So it would be discriminatory to deny the restroom use.
So now the Woman's restroom is for Woman and Transgendered Males.
So now a Non transgender male claims he's being illegally discriminated against because he's being denied access to the room that someone he's similarily situated to is allowed in.
He would be absolutely correct:
If a male, with a penis (transgendered) is allowed into a facility with women, as closely related, then the non trangendered male must be closely related to the transgendered Male and can't be denied entry.
The interesting part is this:
To deny all males entry, redefines the legal concept of "simalarily situated" and opens the States up to once again banning same sex marriage.
If one man with a penis is denied entry because he is not simalar to another man with a penis, why couldn't the same court rule that a same sex couple is not simalarily situated to an opposite sex couple and conclude they don't have to be treated equally.
It appears, if anything, the LGBTQ should be supporting the North Carolina law, not trying to get it overturned.