Would any of THIS solve the problems with the Bathroom Policy?

[emilynghiem]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

 

[The Great Goose]

They already do A. And B. Is very often an option in Australia.

As for A. Most people couldnt change sex because its ridiculously difficult to do. Thats why only people who are serious will do it. However, there are a few gender queer or political trannies about. These people arent on hormones and are really only stirring up trouble while they are in uni. I really doubt they are a sexual threat in the bathroom though, but it might be annoying. like that guy who was dressed as a middle aged liberal woman, who all the articles lied and said was a biological woman. he didnt look like a woman OR a trannie to me.

 

[SwimExpert]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

You neglected a donkey show option. No serious discussion of this topic can be had without addressing the donkey shows.

 

[Theowl32]

There is no problem with the bathroom policy. There is only another insidious way, cooked up in socialist think tanks, to further divide and conquer the country for political gain.

Promulgated and perpetuated by the socialist pets (the media) and moronic squishpots that are nothing more than pawns for their socialist leaders pushing their socialist agenda.

 

[emilynghiem]

There is no problem with the bathroom policy. There is only another insidious way, cooked up in socialist think tanks, to further divide and conquer the country for political gain.

Promulgated and perpetuated by the socialist pets (the media) and moronic squishpots that are nothing more than pawns for their socialist leaders pushing their socialist agenda.

Dear Theowl32 how is there "no problem" with laws that are dividing the nation, pitting half the city of Houston against the other while wasting millions of dollars on campaigns and legal fees that COULD HAVE GONE INTO MEANINGFUL much needed improvements, and now setting up lawsuits between state and federal govt.

The same way I see problems on BOTH SIDES of how state marriage laws either "ban" OR "impose" gay marriage through govt (since both involve personal beliefs),
of course there are PROBLEMS if state and federal govt get involved in biased bathroom policies -- whether the bias excludes whichever side.

It's the exclusion and discrimination that is causing the problems
where beliefs on BOTH sides are FAITH BASED and personal.
NOT the place for govt to impose a public policy. Both sides
infringe by passing laws that exclude the beliefs of others unnecessarily.

Both sides are right that they are being discriminated against by the other;
both sides are wrong by overcorrecting to the point they do the same.

so YES this is a PROBLEM
and it's MUTUAL.

I'm not going to act like there aren't beliefs involved,
because that's why these conflicts aren't getting resolved.
It always causes a problem where govt is mixed with people's personal beliefs that others don't share.
Bad idea, and the protests on both sides show how badly this blows up in everyone's faces. Everyone is suffering
from bad policy and the consequences that cause mutual backlash to escalate.

And Yes, you are right, that the political posturing only makes it worse.
But that doesn't mean there aren't issues underneath. Both are going on.
You are right that it's been blown up even more, especially since there is bias in beliefs on BOTH sides
which keep accusing the other.

thanks Theowl32 I appreciate your comments even though I think the problems are much deeper.

 

[martybegan]

Like changing your name, allow people to petition a court to change their gender on their birth certificate if they can show they went through the required surgery. If you want to be treated as a member of the other gender, you should have to go through the whole process. Then we can go back to the whole penis/vagina (or reasonable facsimile thereof) standard for bathroom access.

 

[emilynghiem]

They already do A. And B. Is very often an option in Australia.

As for A. Most people couldnt change sex because its ridiculously difficult to do. Thats why only people who are serious will do it. However, there are a few gender queer or political trannies about. These people arent on hormones and are really only stirring up trouble while they are in uni. I really doubt they are a sexual threat in the bathroom though, but it might be annoying. like that guy who was dressed as a middle aged liberal woman, who all the articles lied and said was a biological woman. he didnt look like a woman OR a trannie to me.

Thank you, The Great Goose

If the people are in transition, I assume they are under medical supervision.
So again, medical professionals can document that this person is going through biological treatment.
If the person is inbetween, that is why I recommend the individual stalls or the unisex/neutral facilities so there is NO NEED to harass anyone with excess testing of what gender they are.

That can remain private, and so can people's beliefs that alternative orientations are not to be imposed on them by govt to force them to change their beliefs about this.

No need to intrude on either side of this issue.

If someone is partially disabled and still doesn't qualify all the way,
they don't necessarily get a handicapped parking permit either.
this can be worked out if there are neutral or single stalls since nobody is perfect and neither is any public policy.

 

[paulitician]

Let's be real, Target has just lost Thousands of customers. Walmart especially, has benefited greatly from its bizarre decision. And Target couldn't afford to lose a single customer to Walmart. I think Target's decision was meant to be a nice PC gimmick, but it's clearly backfiring.

However that being said, you're completely out of your mind if you sit your buttocks on a Target or Walmart toilet. Target's not quite as bad, but Walmart? My God, talk about 'Russian Roulette?' Be safe, hold it in. You wont get any unexpected STD surprises, or deal with creepy dudes hangin out in the ladies room.

 

[emilynghiem]

Like changing your name, allow people to petition a court to change their gender on their birth certificate if they can show they went through the required surgery. If you want to be treated as a member of the other gender, you should have to go through the whole process. Then we can go back to the whole penis/vagina (or reasonable facsimile thereof) standard for bathroom access.

Thanks martybegan
May our nation's leaders pick more people for Judge and Court positions
who put common sense rationality above the need to make social statements through the media.

That's important, too, but should remain separate from govt policy.

People can preach Christianity all they want through the media,
but are asked to keep their biases and beliefs out of public policy.
So all things being equal, we should treat people of secular beliefs
with the same standards as we do people of religious beliefs, or else it is discrimination by creed.

If these wonderful comments keep up, I should start a separate website, linking to this thread, and just
let everyone keep posting their advice. I think other people need to hear and read this, and follow by example.

We don't need to agree or force anyone to change our beliefs or minds,
but we need to hear each other's Grievances and limits, and listen to alternatives,
instead of pushing one way and then complaining why there are objections, or worse, trying to discount those objections as having no basis.

Wish everyone could openly consult with each other on this, hear each other out,
and understand why these issues aren't getting resolved on a govt level. We need to include and involve people,
represent and resolve input and objections, not exclude and penalize anyone for their beliefs, regardless of bias or creed. Thanks!

 

[emilynghiem]

Let's be real, Target has just lost Thousands of customers. Walmart especially, has benefited greatly from its bizarre decision. And Target couldn't afford to lose a single customer to Walmart. I think Target's decision was meant to be a nice PC gimmick, but it's clearly backfiring.

However that being said, you're completely out of your mind if you sit your buttocks on a Target or Walmart toilet. Target's not quite as bad, but Walmart? My God, talk about 'Russian Roulette?' Be safe, hold it in. You wont get any unexpected STD surprises, or deal with creepy dudes hangin out in the ladies room.

Wal-Mart has had enough problems with criminals and security issues in their parking lots.
Maybe the idea of adding security guards is needed inside the store as well!
Thank you, paulitician

I will look up the Wal-Mart policy you refer to. So far this is what I found:
Walmart Adds Transgender Provisions To Employee Non-Discrimination Policy

“Wal-Mart represents a culture of intolerance and insensitivity towards LGBT employees and issues that is unwelcome in New York. Just last year more than 100 Wal-Mart stores were found to be promoting a children’s book that suggested that gay people can overcome ‘sin’ and convert to heterosexuality with the help of counseling. Wal-Mart CEO Mike Duke signed a petition in his home state of Arkansas that was aimed at preventing adoption by Gay and Lesbian parents.”

This is a red flag to me for other reasons.

I do believe that the counseling that has helped people to heal, and come out as either heterosexual or homosexual (or transgender), is being denied equal audience and hearing.

There is no need to fear this would be "automatically abused" just because there are
dangerous forms of malpractice of "faith healing" and "conversion therapy" which harm
people by coercion and abuse. The effective natural therapy is completely voluntary
and is part of recovery from abuse, and does not harm the person in any way.

I find it is just as wrongful to censor or attack the natural methods of spiritual healing and reparative therapy as it is WRONGFUL to assume that all homosexual/transgender persons
are mentally ill or pedophiles, just because there are some sick people in the world.

The advocates on the left tend to miss this point, about the healing effects of spiritual therapy that is completely natural and freely participated in as someone's spiritual process,
and even demonize people for it, when it has helped people on both sides to come out as what they naturally are.

Big flag on that. This needs to be addressed, so people don't think it's all evil.
Same with homosexuality, where some people are spiritual that way and won't change,
and it's not something evil to be feared, but something to accept if it is part of someone's spiritual path in life and meant to be that way. Many people, including Christians,
have come to peace with this as part of their process, and it isn't evil, as long as healing and forgiveness is involved, and it isn't based on denial and fear that introduces false bias.

 

[paulitician]

Let's be real, Target has just lost Thousands of customers. Walmart especially, has benefited greatly from its bizarre decision. And Target couldn't afford to lose a single customer to Walmart. I think Target's decision was meant to be a nice PC gimmick, but it's clearly backfiring.

However that being said, you're completely out of your mind if you sit your buttocks on a Target or Walmart toilet. Target's not quite as bad, but Walmart? My God, talk about 'Russian Roulette?' Be safe, hold it in. You wont get any unexpected STD surprises, or deal with creepy dudes hangin out in the ladies room.

Wal-Mart has had enough problems with criminals and security issues in their parking lots.
Maybe the idea of adding security guards is needed inside the store as well!
Thank you, paulitician

Money. Walmart won't spring for extra security. I have a relative who works in Management there. Walmart is a notorious criminal hangout. It's a 24/7 store with very limited security. Criminals love it. Walmart's theft rate is astronomical. Its prices are gonna begin to inch up as a result.

But aside from that, i don't get why anyone would willingly sit their buttocks on a Walmart toilet. I mean, disease-ridden homeless folks actually live in Walmart bathrooms. Sitting on its toilets really is playing 'Russian Roulette.' Who knows what disease you'll pick up? YUCKY.

 

[paulitician]

Let's be real, Target has just lost Thousands of customers. Walmart especially, has benefited greatly from its bizarre decision. And Target couldn't afford to lose a single customer to Walmart. I think Target's decision was meant to be a nice PC gimmick, but it's clearly backfiring.

However that being said, you're completely out of your mind if you sit your buttocks on a Target or Walmart toilet. Target's not quite as bad, but Walmart? My God, talk about 'Russian Roulette?' Be safe, hold it in. You wont get any unexpected STD surprises, or deal with creepy dudes hangin out in the ladies room.

Wal-Mart has had enough problems with criminals and security issues in their parking lots.
Maybe the idea of adding security guards is needed inside the store as well!
Thank you, paulitician

I will look up the Wal-Mart policy you refer to. So far this is what I found:
Walmart Adds Transgender Provisions To Employee Non-Discrimination Policy

“Wal-Mart represents a culture of intolerance and insensitivity towards LGBT employees and issues that is unwelcome in New York. Just last year more than 100 Wal-Mart stores were found to be promoting a children’s book that suggested that gay people can overcome ‘sin’ and convert to heterosexuality with the help of counseling. Wal-Mart CEO Mike Duke signed a petition in his home state of Arkansas that was aimed at preventing adoption by Gay and Lesbian parents.”

This is a red flag to me for other reasons.

I do believe that the counseling that has helped people to heal, and come out as either heterosexual or homosexual (or transgender), is being denied equal audience and hearing.

There is no need to fear this would be "automatically abused" just because there are
dangerous forms of malpractice of "faith healing" and "conversion therapy" which harm
people by coercion and abuse. The effective natural therapy is completely voluntary
and is part of recovery from abuse, and does not harm the person in any way.

I find it is just as wrongful to censor or attack the natural methods of spiritual healing and reparative therapy as it is WRONGFUL to assume that all homosexual/transgender persons
are mentally ill or pedophiles, just because there are some sick people in the world.

The advocates on the left tend to miss this point, about the healing effects of spiritual therapy that is completely natural and freely participated in as someone's spiritual process,
and even demonize people for it, when it has helped people on both sides to come out as what they naturally are.

Big flag on that. This needs to be addressed, so people don't think it's all evil.
Same with homosexuality, where some people are spiritual that way and won't change,
and it's not something evil to be feared, but something to accept if it is part of someone's spiritual path in life and meant to be that way. Many people, including Christians,
have come to peace with this as part of their process, and it isn't evil, as long as healing and forgiveness is involved, and it isn't based on denial and fear that introduces false bias.

Well, you can shop at Target i guess. I will admit, Target is a more enjoyable shopping experience. Walmart is a hellish nightmarish shopping experience. I don't shop there.

But Target has just lost Thousands of customers to Walmart. Most parents and women just don't feel comfortable with creepy dudes hangin in the ladies room. It isn't really about politics, or even religion. It's just how most folks feel.

 

[Jack4jill]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

There is no such thing as "biologically" male or female. You ca't use genetics to tell which is why these bills say the sex assigned at birth. Most are easy to call male or female but not all and some, who look normal, aren't.

 

[emilynghiem]

Well, you can shop at Target i guess. I will admit, Target is a more enjoyable shopping experience. Walmart is a hellish nightmarish shopping experience. I don't shop there.

But Target has just lost Thousands of customers to Walmart. Most parents and women just don't feel comfortable with creepy dudes hangin in the ladies room. It isn't really about politics, or even religion. It's just how most folks feel.

Hi paulitician
1. the people I know who boycott Wal-Mart due so because of fair labor and other business ethics issues
of gutting the competition, to put them out of business, then raising prices back up when they're gone.

2. as for Target, after this hoopla has incited problems with men deliberately entering the women's restroom
to take cell phone videos, I would opt for better security before I'd feel comfortable.

That's as bad as advertising that a place is a gun free zone, just to attract sick people
who target those places knowing people aren't armed, so they can commit massacres and suicide when the cops show up.
why create the very problems that the intent was to avoid! Like duh!

If there is natural selection and some kind of learning curve on the side of humanity,
let's learn from this before any other incidents force corrections to the problems!

 

[paulitician]

Hey let's be real, if you're taking a shite on a Walmart toilet, you're just flat-out crazy. Disease-ridden homeless folks actually live in Walmart bathrooms. Sitting your buttocks on a Walmart toilet is like playing 'Russian Roulette' with your health. You might just contract a nasty STD. And then at Target, you could run into a weird creepy dude peeping you and your family's peepies. Not a very enjoyable shopping experience.

So, what's the lesson here folks? The lesson is... hold it in. Don't use Walmart or Target bathrooms. No need to risk it. Now get out there and shop till you drop America! Because Lord knows, you definitely need more cheap shitty Chinese-made products that you'll hate as soon as you get em home. Happy Shopping.

 

[emilynghiem]

Let's be real, Target has just lost Thousands of customers. Walmart especially, has benefited greatly from its bizarre decision. And Target couldn't afford to lose a single customer to Walmart. I think Target's decision was meant to be a nice PC gimmick, but it's clearly backfiring.

However that being said, you're completely out of your mind if you sit your buttocks on a Target or Walmart toilet. Target's not quite as bad, but Walmart? My God, talk about 'Russian Roulette?' Be safe, hold it in. You wont get any unexpected STD surprises, or deal with creepy dudes hangin out in the ladies room.

Wal-Mart has had enough problems with criminals and security issues in their parking lots.
Maybe the idea of adding security guards is needed inside the store as well!
Thank you, paulitician

Money. Walmart won't spring for extra security. I have a relative who works in Management there. Walmart is a notorious criminal hangout. It's a 24/7 store with very limited security. Criminals love it. Walmart's theft rate is astronomical. Its prices are gonna begin to inch up as a result.

But aside from that, i don't get why anyone would willingly sit their buttocks on a Walmart toilet. I mean, disease-ridden homeless folks actually live in Walmart bathrooms. Sitting on its toilets really is playing 'Russian Roulette.' Who knows what disease you'll pick up? YUCKY.

Sure, of course the cost is a factor for any business paulitician

There are ways to make the added security affordable.
There are grants and nonprofits that help with creating jobs for Vets,
and some for excons who are turning their lives around. If you pair
up a Vet with an excon, that's a win win situation. I'd recommend having
an extra pair of security guards anyway. Lives would be saved by avoiding
one on one confrontations, where two people on patrol makes all the difference.

If the point is for the federal govt to offer protections, why not offer tax breaks
for creating jobs for security. Perhaps the deterrence effect and other benefits
would be worth the investment.

 

[emilynghiem]

TWO Offers To Educate e-Harmony Co-Founder After He Makes Ignorant and Offensive Anti-Gay Comments | Truth Wins Out

^ I think the education needs to be two-way ^

As many people are ignorant of the benefits of natural spiritual healing therapy,
where Christian practice and beliefs are not just "mean spirited judgment and bullying" as it is demonized in the media.

I previously posted a link describing how spiritual healing works in cases
of orientation issues tied to unnatural abuse, so when the person recovers their behavior also returns to
their normal default orientation.

How To Defeat Homosexual Activists 101 A Real Education

If Warren invested money into research into effective natural therapies
based on spiritual healing, freespiritualhealing
this would not only help solve problems with misunderstanding homosexuality
but also solve problems with a myriad of other conditions, including both mental and physical illness, that the same process of spiritual healing has been used for successful recovery and healing.

 

[paulitician]

Let's be real, Target has just lost Thousands of customers. Walmart especially, has benefited greatly from its bizarre decision. And Target couldn't afford to lose a single customer to Walmart. I think Target's decision was meant to be a nice PC gimmick, but it's clearly backfiring.

However that being said, you're completely out of your mind if you sit your buttocks on a Target or Walmart toilet. Target's not quite as bad, but Walmart? My God, talk about 'Russian Roulette?' Be safe, hold it in. You wont get any unexpected STD surprises, or deal with creepy dudes hangin out in the ladies room.

Wal-Mart has had enough problems with criminals and security issues in their parking lots.
Maybe the idea of adding security guards is needed inside the store as well!
Thank you, paulitician

Money. Walmart won't spring for extra security. I have a relative who works in Management there. Walmart is a notorious criminal hangout. It's a 24/7 store with very limited security. Criminals love it. Walmart's theft rate is astronomical. Its prices are gonna begin to inch up as a result.

But aside from that, i don't get why anyone would willingly sit their buttocks on a Walmart toilet. I mean, disease-ridden homeless folks actually live in Walmart bathrooms. Sitting on its toilets really is playing 'Russian Roulette.' Who knows what disease you'll pick up? YUCKY.

Sure, of course the cost is a factor for any business paulitician

There are ways to make the added security affordable.
There are grants and nonprofits that help with creating jobs for Vets,
and some for excons who are turning their lives around. If you pair
up a Vet with an excon, that's a win win situation. I'd recommend having
an extra pair of security guards anyway. Lives would be saved by avoiding
one on one confrontations, where two people on patrol makes all the difference.

If the point is for the federal govt to offer protections, why not offer tax breaks
for creating jobs for security. Perhaps the deterrence effect and other benefits
would be worth the investment.

Walmart's not too concerned about it. It's rakin in $Billions. It's decided not to spring for extra security. Walmarts are actually very dangerous places at certain times of the day.

Like i said, it's a notorious criminal hangout. But as long as millions of folks keep showing up to buy more cheap shitty Chinese-made shite, Walmart's just fine with the current set-up.

 

[Jack4jill]

Hey let's be real, if you're taking a shite on a Walmart toilet, you're just flat-out crazy. Disease-ridden homeless folks actually live in Walmart bathrooms. Sitting your buttocks on a Walmart toilet is like playing 'Russian Roulette' with your health. You might just contract a nasty STD. And then at Target, you could run into a weird creepy dude peeping you and your family's peepies. Not a very enjoyable shopping experience.

So, what's the lesson here folks? The lesson is... hold it in. Don't use Walmart or Target bathrooms. No need to risk it. Now get out there and shop till you drop America! Because Lord knows, you definitely need more cheap shitty Chinese-made products that you'll hate as soon as you get em home. Happy Shopping.

There is almost no risk at all to using a public toilet. Your skin protects you, that's its job. You aren't, I hope, having sex with the toilet? That could be risky but using the toilet, assuming you don't have open wounds on what you sit on, no risk worth bothering with. Your skin alone is a very effective defense.

 

[emilynghiem]

Let's be real, Target has just lost Thousands of customers. Walmart especially, has benefited greatly from its bizarre decision. And Target couldn't afford to lose a single customer to Walmart. I think Target's decision was meant to be a nice PC gimmick, but it's clearly backfiring.

However that being said, you're completely out of your mind if you sit your buttocks on a Target or Walmart toilet. Target's not quite as bad, but Walmart? My God, talk about 'Russian Roulette?' Be safe, hold it in. You wont get any unexpected STD surprises, or deal with creepy dudes hangin out in the ladies room.

Wal-Mart has had enough problems with criminals and security issues in their parking lots.
Maybe the idea of adding security guards is needed inside the store as well!
Thank you, paulitician

Money. Walmart won't spring for extra security. I have a relative who works in Management there. Walmart is a notorious criminal hangout. It's a 24/7 store with very limited security. Criminals love it. Walmart's theft rate is astronomical. Its prices are gonna begin to inch up as a result.

But aside from that, i don't get why anyone would willingly sit their buttocks on a Walmart toilet. I mean, disease-ridden homeless folks actually live in Walmart bathrooms. Sitting on its toilets really is playing 'Russian Roulette.' Who knows what disease you'll pick up? YUCKY.

Sure, of course the cost is a factor for any business paulitician

There are ways to make the added security affordable.
There are grants and nonprofits that help with creating jobs for Vets,
and some for excons who are turning their lives around. If you pair
up a Vet with an excon, that's a win win situation. I'd recommend having
an extra pair of security guards anyway. Lives would be saved by avoiding
one on one confrontations, where two people on patrol makes all the difference.

If the point is for the federal govt to offer protections, why not offer tax breaks
for creating jobs for security. Perhaps the deterrence effect and other benefits
would be worth the investment.

Walmart's not too concerned about it. It's rakin in $Billions. It's decided not to spring for extra security. Walmarts are actually very dangerous places at certain times of the day.

Like i said, it's a notorious criminal hangout. But as long as millions of folks keep showing up to buy more cheap shitty Chinese-made shite, Walmart's just fine with the current set-up.

With the holes in local economy left when Wal-Mart pulled out of small towns,
they have expressed a desire to make good on their image of helping communities.

Why not create jobs for vets? That's good PR and Wal-Mart is an expert in
getting taxpayers to foot the differences their low pay doesn't cover for workers,
so why not use those advantages for good purpose?