Yes, that’s probably appropriate. Sorry to hijack.
Simple, because the market demands it. I’m not against separate locker rooms, but there’s a sliding scale of importance here where separating people by outward gender isn’t the most important thing anymore, nor should it be the only thing we’re looking at when deciding how to do it. My kid would understand that there are transgendered people in the world, and they will be taught that not everyone is the same on the outside as the inside. Like me, I would hope they know that the right of free expression, especially of one’s identity, takes precedent over feelings of discomfort. Rape, assault, harassment, etc. are all still illegal, whether done by a man or woman, or a man that looks like a woman, or a woman that looks like a man. I think you want to assume that because I would tell someone to “get over it” on one thing, that I must extend that to every aspect of every issue? That’s not only ignorant and stupid, but its a pretty fucking low and hateful way of thinking. Try restricting what I said to the topic at hand
It reminds me of conservatives claiming there’s voter fraud, and then going out and proving it by committing voter fraud. This guy is a troll, a shithead, and one guy. Until this happens more, I don’t think we need to do anything about the law at all. The rights of transgendered people should be stronger than what one asshole can do to it. We should not react to this guy by placing additional demands on transgendered people to prove their identity. Instead, we should make an example of him, throw him in jail, and charge him for harassment. And when he claims he’s a man identifying himself as a woman, prosecutors should show a history of him living as a man with no evidence whatsoever that he ever, at any time, claimed to be transgendered, and we’ll end up with one moron in jail for harassing women instead of reducing trans rights.
That was directed towards octopus
This was also directed towards octopus
Because in one case it would be correct and the other would not
Octopus
My nephew is transitioning from female to male. While the genitals are still female, he sports a beard and has a deep voice due to hormone treatment. I imagine if he were to use the ladies room any women in there would be alarmed and I imagine he would be mortified if he were forced to do so. He is legally male as of a few months ago.
What about a locker room where he was changing clothes? That’s the example I was talking about.
But I could just as easily say the market demands that transgender people use the bathroom or locker room of their genital sex!
Sure, but again, why couldn’t we say the same about abolishing gender-segregated bathrooms and locker rooms altogether?
No, YOU stick to the topic, because that IS the topic. If you are going to go around telling people to just “get over” their feelings about privacy and gender and all that, you can’t just turn around and expect them to assert other privacy rights. You have to be logically consistent.
You sure as hell will have to do something about it if he wins in court.
So what’s the legal definition of woman here? Is it in the law? How does this guy not fit it? This is about the law and its application, not your personal feelings. This guy may be violating the law, but he may also be exposing its flaws.
Nice circular argument.
If someone says they are a woman, they are a woman. That’s the premise. Who are you to tell someone they aren’t the gender they say they are?
Now, if the law has found a way around that, great. But I doubt it, and I doubt it has been tested.
Stop pretending this is easy.
Re: octopus - sorry, I read to fast.
This is hypothetical as he’s not a locker room type person, but I imagine he would use the men’s locker room but change his pants in a private booth or toilet stall.
You could, but that will conflict with other things we should take into account, namely that of personal liberty and civil rights. Those usually trump whatever market forces people want to take into account. So long as it doesn’t though, people are free to use market demand, within reason, to cater to certain groups. You have to imagine the whole picture and not just look at pieces of it. I’m not against capitalism when its not harmful. I’m fine with places like Curves which only cater to women, and fine with the NAACP which caters to blacks. For the same reason, I think right now, there is tremendous market forces to not seem like a bigot and most businesses and local governments know that the trend is towards inclusiveness with respect to discriminated genders and religions and other minorities.
Speaking generally, change moves slowly. There are a lot of things that are wrong and its easier to accomplish the goal of transforming America to a better, more inclusive one if we push for things slowly rather than all at once.
With respect to making unisex bathrooms and locker rooms, I don’t think there is anyone is seriously pushing for that.
What you can’t seem to be able to understand is there are some things the government should force people to draw the line at and some things we can leave to people themselves. That was the point. Its not “you draw the line here therefore you must have a line draw everywhere”, which is a semi-slippery slope argument you are going down. I can love apples but hate oranges, I don’t have to love or hate both just because they are both fruit. For the same reason, I can tell my kid to get over discomfort at sharing a bathroom with trans people but take their concerns seriously if they are being harassed. Two different topics here, I’m keeping them separate while you seem to want to pretend anything that has to do with sex and bathrooms are of the same topic.
No gain without risk. I’m afraid the atmosphere is so toxic around this subject that it was bound to have people eventually testing the boundaries, or innocent people mistaken for assholes. That doesn’t mean the law is bad, that doesn’t mean the desire to help trans people is bad, and that doesn’t mean we have to start hurting people again by forcing them into what we think is the correct bathroom
I don’t know, that’s up to the state. From the story though, it sounds like this guy was trying to make a point. I’m not worried about guys like him, not that much anyway. For someone who really wants to harass or peep at someone else, they don’t have to go under the cover of this law, some makeup and a wig would do better.
Its only circular if you assume one argument leads to the other. It doesn’t. Consider for a second that there is a right and a wrong on this issue and that I’m right. What would you suggest I say, that I’m wrong? Or that I lie to placate your argument? Assume for a second that you believe there are actual transgendered people in the world and this guy isn’t one. What do you want me to say?
There’s a limit to simply saying it when it comes into conflict with others. In this case, the guy shows no other characteristic of being a trans woman. Lies exist, you know. We can assume he’s lying based on the information we have. Now what you seem to want to say is, how can I say he’s lying when I don’t question others who claim to be trans. If that’s all you wanted to ask, you should have asked it instead of dancing around the subject
So test it, I don’t know what you expect anyone to say. If this guy is picked up, it would obviously be a test of this law
You must have been arguing with someone else who made that claim
The law is the entity that is competent to make that decision.
I didn’t say any of those things. You have the most astonishing difficulties actually reading what’s in front of you.
We can, through the law, require a sincere and dedicated, profound and pervasive declaration of the new sexual identity, which is practiced consistently and maintained permanently.
Just saying, “Well, on Tuesday I felt like a woman, but it’s Friday now, and I’m pretty sure I’m a man again” is not going to be tolerated. The law has the right, power, and duty to enforce against this.
Loath as I am to interrupt this thread hijack, but can we really discuss a stupid Republican idea?
Probably one of his construction companies looking to build a limo parking lot.
I have the theory that besides authoritarians, Trump is going for the Discordianist vote.
Who the hell thinks the Iraqis did this? 
Donald Trump is the Golden Worm!
hail Eris fnord
Your kids? The ones who aren’t torn apart as fetuses are going to be working for my kids.
You also assume too much. I have 0 problem with transgendered, homosexual, bisexual, or polygamists. I believe people’s sexual orientation is a function of their brain and nothing they could have chose. I teach my kids to look at issues rationally. When it comes to topics like taxes I present both sides. Mostly I teach them about the shared benefits to society of things like roads, fire departments, public schools etc.
I highly doubt you do a better more impartial job with your own.
Unintended consequences of stupid leftist thinkers are what many on the right warn about. I don’t like the stupid consequences but with 1/2 the population at or below median IQ and 1/2 of the remainder voting for more and more central control stupid consequences are a foregone conclusion.
Kiss the face of God, Glenn!
How big is the parking lot?
It’s YUUUGE!!
You owe me. 
We’ll have to wait 'til tomorrow and see how he takes his hot dog to be sure.
Before he consumes it he always inscribes upon it, “To the fairest.”
In ketchup.