# Stupid Republican idea of the day **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 26, 2009, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897 "2009-03-26T18:48:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1374
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27462 "2016-02-18T16:13:33Z")
> [@andros](#): > > Trolling is unbecoming on you, sparky. And you’re not very good at it. I’m not trolling. I’m starting a discussion and challenging opinions and exposing holes and playing devil’s advocate. And I’m really good at it. Relax and let the conversation flow. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27463 "2016-02-18T16:16:42Z")
And just like that, [a Seattle man announces a new campaign](http://www.king5.com/story/news/politics/state/2016/02/18/campaign-launched-repeal-bathroom-rule/80542616/)to try and put transgenders back in the closet. > [@](#): > > A state rule allowing transgender people to use the restroom consistent with their gender identity concerns Joseph Backholm. > > “People in Washington no longer have the right to privacy in locker room and bathroom facilities,” said Backholm. > > He’s launched the Just Want Privacy campaign with a website that calls the state’s bathroom rule dangerous. > > “The idea that when I send my kids to school, that I don’t have the right to expect if they are changing in the girls’ locker room that there will not be a naked boy next to them who identifies as a female,” said Backholm. Hmm. I wonder where Joseph Backholm was this Monday evening? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27464 "2016-02-18T16:19:52Z")
> [@Not\_Carlson](#): > > So, he didn’t even have the balls to claim he identifies as a woman. Suppose he did though. “Are you a woman?” “Yes.” Is that all that this requires? Or must one somehow prove they are a woman? How? They have male genitals, so that won’t help. Mode of dress? Does it make sense to abolish sex as a criteria, yet replace it with something more arbitrary and totally socially constructed as mode of dress and appearance? If we can do away with the idea that a woman is only someone with female genitals, how can we turn around and declare that a woman is only someone who wears traditional women’s dress or hairstyles? Or is it only about what one believes or identifies with? Well, how do you know that for sure? How do you know they are being truthful? Do they need to show past evidence of it so they can prove they aren’t making it up? Would you arrest this person and then expect them to prove in a courtroom that they really do think of themselves as a woman? And couldn’t the person use the paragraph above, about appearance, as a defense if there wasn’t evidence he/she had dressed like a woman in the past? I’m not saying this guy is anything more than a troll. I’m just pointing out that his trolling exposes flaws in this issue and the law, and its not as easy to deal with as people seem to think. And when that’s done, we can talk about people who don’t identify as any gender at all, or frequently switch identities, and how to respect their rights to do so when it comes to bathrooms and locker rooms. ---
**Author:** ![OffByOne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/45deac/32.png) [@OffByOne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OffByOne)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27465 "2016-02-18T16:31:00Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > I find that hard to believe. I know he said he didn’t care, but I think that was probably disinformation. I think he would have loved to have caught him. My thinking at the time was that Bush needed a bogeyman in order to keep Americans frightened, so they would allow him to dismantle the Bill of Rights. Bin Laden was that bogeyman. Capturing or killing him would have meant great prestige heaped upon Bush, but that would have been a one-time thing. Keeping him alive meant that Bush never had to hunt for another bogeyman. ---
**Author:** ![OffByOne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/45deac/32.png) [@OffByOne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OffByOne)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27466 "2016-02-18T16:36:33Z")
> [@Abe\_Babe](#): > > This is what made me laugh the most here: > > I can’t remember ever getting an answer from him Oh, he gives answers, alright, just not to the questions asked. In fact, you don’t even need to ask him a question first. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27467 "2016-02-18T16:41:13Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > “The idea that when I send my kids to school, that I don’t have the right to expect if they are changing in the girls’ locker room that there will not be a naked boy next to them who identifies as a female,” said Backholm. " So how would you, or anyone else here, respond to that exactly? I’m not saying Washington shouldn’t have this law. I’m saying it may not be as easy as one might want it to be. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27468 "2016-02-18T16:44:39Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So how would you, or anyone else here, respond to that exactly? I’d say that he spends too much time thinking about naked boys. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27469 "2016-02-18T16:49:11Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Why is the point dumb? > > Who are you to say he isn’t a woman or doesn’t identify as one? > > If this is about the freedom to identify as a gender and use the locker rooms without the burden of which genitals you have or how you look or dress, how can we tell him he’s wrong? > > Or is gender strictly defined by how one dresses or appears? Isn’t it strange to assert the freedom to have a gender regardless of genitals or chromosomes and then turn around and demand that it be defined by social norms related to clothing and hairstyle? > > Would a female who identifies as a woman, but looks and dresses just like a man, be a problem in a women’s locker room? So far there appears to be no evidence he identifies as female. That’s the issue here. If he (she, in that case) identifies as female, then she did nothing wrong. But by all indications I’ve seen, he does not, and it’s a shitty and harassing thing to do, if one identifies as male, to go into a ladies room with others present and undress. Do you agree or disagree, that this is shitty and harassing, if he does not identify as female? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27470 "2016-02-18T17:01:10Z")
It’s always funny when the consequences of a loony left wing idea manifest and cause whining from those who enabled such consequences. Free speech has consequences? So does the implementation of retarded policy. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27471 "2016-02-18T17:09:04Z")
This isn’t the “consequence of a loony left wing idea” any more than Social Security fraud is. It’s the consequence of one dude being a troll. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27472 "2016-02-18T17:11:34Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > So far there appears to be no evidence he identifies as female. There also appears to be no evidence this guy identifies as Republican. So if lance wants to play devils advocate could everyone take this topic to another thread? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27473 "2016-02-18T17:20:57Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So how would you, or anyone else here, respond to that exactly? > > I’m not saying Washington shouldn’t have this law. I’m saying it may not be as easy as one might want it to be. I’d tell her if that person truly identifies as a female, then my kid will just have to get used to it. There are worse things than being glanced at, and my kid will not grow up ashamed of their body. But I don’t have to teach my kid how to identify transgendered people, I just have to teach them how to identify assholes. > [@octopus](#): > > It’s always funny when the consequences of a loony left wing idea manifest and cause whining from those who enabled such consequences. Free speech has consequences? So does the implementation of retarded policy. The retardedness comes from idiots trying to push the boundaries of the law. Any law, unless went over fine-toothed comb by a dozen lawyers, has loopholes. A free and open society has many opportunities for people to abuse these, but they are generally rare enough not to warrant laws covering them. If this was Iraq, we’d probably have laws preventing one from leaving their backpacks in parks or on buses, for fear that it would be a bomb. There’s no law against that because we don’t have people trying to bomb others every day. Likewise, your naive spittle directed towards the transgendered would force [this man](http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/130822141327-chaz-bono-dwts-horizontal-large-gallery.jpg) or [this woman](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Laverne_Cox_by_Sachyn_Mital.jpg) to use the locker room of their birth gender. How about you tell us what you will tell your daughter when [this man](http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2186303.1429118850!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_635/menshealth16n-5-web.jpg) is changing besides her in the locker room, or using the next stall? “Hey little octopus, don’t worry about her, she’s really a woman, just ignore the muscular build, the facial hair, and the obvious penis. Remember an operation doesn’t turn you into the opposite gender!” Its not liberals who will have to answer uncomfortable questions, but moronic conservatives like you. Our kids won’t grow up to be weirded out by sex or ashamed of their bodies like your kids. For all the conservative blather about men being in women’s locker rooms or bathrooms, they forget that plenty of people have transitioned already and there will be, if your version of the law passes, lots of butch, mannish guys who have had surgeries showering next to your precious little flowers. And you asked for it to be that way ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27474 "2016-02-18T17:50:52Z")
> [@OffByOne](#): > > My thinking at the time was that Bush needed a bogeyman in order to keep Americans frightened, so they would allow him to dismantle the Bill of Rights. Bin Laden was that bogeyman. > > Capturing or killing him would have meant great prestige heaped upon Bush, but that would have been a one-time thing. Keeping him alive meant that Bush never had to hunt for another bogeyman. So it wasn’t a \*stupid \*Republican idea, just an incredibly cynical, politics-before-country-or-even-motherfucking-safety-of-citizens, dickish and abhorrent Republican idea. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27475 "2016-02-18T17:52:38Z")
They asked, “What are you doing in here?” I replied, “I saw a door marked ‘WOMEN’ and thought, yeah, I need a woman just now …” ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27476 "2016-02-18T18:20:24Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > I’d say that he spends too much time thinking about naked boys. So if a naked boy is in a room with your underage daughter, you wouldn’t think about it? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27477 "2016-02-18T18:22:47Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > So far there appears to be no evidence he identifies as female. That’s the issue here. If he (she, in that case) identifies as female, then she did nothing wrong. But by all indications I’ve seen, he does not, and it’s a shitty and harassing thing to do, if one identifies as male, to go into a ladies room with others present and undress. > > Do you agree or disagree, that this is shitty and harassing, if he does not identify as female? Yes, of course. But is all he (she) needs to do is say “I identify as female” and you then have no problem with it? Even if he looks and “acts” male? Even if he might be lying? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27478 "2016-02-18T18:23:02Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So if a naked boy is in a room with your underage daughter, you wouldn’t think about it? What does that have to do with transgender bathroom use? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27479 "2016-02-18T18:38:38Z")
> [@YogSothoth](#): > > I’d tell her if that person truly identifies as a female, then my kid will just have to get used to it. There are worse things than being glanced at, and my kid will not grow up ashamed of their body. But I don’t have to teach my kid how to identify transgendered people, I just have to teach them how to identify assholes. So why have separate locker rooms at all? What’s stopping you from saying we should have just one big locker room and telling everyone to “get used to it?” > [@](#): > > The (insult redacted) comes from idiots trying to push the boundaries of the law. Any law, unless went over fine-toothed comb by a dozen lawyers, has loopholes. Sure, but this one has so many loopholes, and brings up so many new problems and questions, that you could drive a truck through it. As this guy is proving. And it introduces new problems for everyone else, such as the idea that they must just “get used to” the idea that a naked male looking at them in a locker room is not really a man and they shouldn’t care. That’s a great deal to expect of people. Someone can not hate, or even fully accept, transgender people and still feel uncomfortable with that. > [@](#): > > Likewise, your naive spittle Please refrain from emotional outbursts. I am trying to explore this issue and challenge opinions, and you can handle it. I am not naive either. > [@](#): > > directed towards the transgendered would force [this man](http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/130822141327-chaz-bono-dwts-horizontal-large-gallery.jpg) or [this woman](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Laverne_Cox_by_Sachyn_Mital.jpg) to use the locker room of their birth gender. I didn’t say I oppose this law. But I believe Chaz Bono has had sex reassignment surgery. Obviously that makes him more than just “identifying” as male - he became male. This is about transgender people who are still the opposite sex, physically. My point is that your position is that a woman or girl must be forced to use a locker room with someone with male genitals, perhaps with both of them nude. Is that better? How is it a terrible injustice on the one hand, and something others have to “get used to” on the other? Either way, someone is forced into a situation that makes them very uncomfortable. Why should one side prevail? > [@](#): > > How about you tell us what you will tell your daughter when [this man](http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2186303.1429118850!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_635/menshealth16n-5-web.jpg) is changing besides her in the locker room, or using the next stall? “Hey little octopus, don’t worry about her, she’s really a woman, just ignore the muscular build, the facial hair, and the obvious penis. Remember an operation doesn’t turn you into the opposite gender!” How is that any different from telling your daughter that the person with male genitals in the locker room above is really a woman? > [@](#): > > Its not liberals who will have to answer uncomfortable questions, but moronic conservatives like you. I am not a conservative. Like I said, drop the attitude and the insults please and have a rational discussion. Consider me devil’s advocate. I’ve ignored the rest of your post because it didn’t apply to me since I’m not a conservative and don’t hold the views you pinned on me. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27480 "2016-02-18T18:44:27Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > What does that have to do with transgender bathroom use? It refers to the case in question - a locker room. It refers to my question about how we can determine whether a transgender woman is real, or just faking, and whether we can consider appearance in that. Who is to say a woman must look or act or dress a certain way? If a woman (born female) has a right to dress or act like a male, shouldn’t a transgender woman have the same right? So what’s to stop a person who was born male and honestly identifies as a woman from not undergoing the physical transformation, dress, etc. that we expect her to undergo? Who are we to define what “woman” means, especially since we can’t even use actual sex? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2016, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897/27481 "2016-02-18T18:45:51Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > And it introduces new problems for everyone else, such as the idea that they must just “get used to” the idea that a naked male looking at them in a locker room is not really a man and they shouldn’t care. Do you find that naked men looking at you in locker rooms is a common occurrence? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897.md?page=1373) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-republican-idea-of-the-day/490897.md?page=1375)