I live in NC, and I can tell you without hesitation that this is absolutely correct, as far as it goes. It really has very little to do with bathrooms as such, but it has a great deal to do with attempting to use the law as a cudgel to force people to conform ANYWHERE IN PUBLIC to a “societal norm,” defined by a certain interest group.
I can’t tell you what our white, straight, male, conservative, “Christian” Republican legislators are thinking, because what is going on is not thought. It seems to me to involve atavistic fears of castration and anal rape that are way beyond where reason can reach. As I said before, the primary “intent” of the law is to attempt to enforce public behavior (something along the lines of “Well, you feel like you want to rob somebody? The law says you can’t. You feel like you want to kill somebody? The law says you can’t. You feel like pretending to be the opposite sex? Well, the law says you can’t, so if the doctor looked at you when you were born and saw that you were a boy, put pants on, and if you were a girl, then put a dress on, and go to the right restroom.”)
I am firmly convinced that they, even if they have a tiny inkling of transgender, really cannot understand the difference between “identifying as” and “pretending to be.”
What I think they were afraid of (and so immediately passed a law against - and for anyone who doesn’t yet know this, I need to stress that the bill was introduced in a special session, voted on and signed by the governor ALL ON THE SAME DAY) when they looked at the original Charlotte ordinance extending LGBT rights, was something like this:
“Why, this’ll let any man or boy who wants to to just say he’s a female, and he can waltz on in there and ogle all the naked women he wants to. That ain’t right.”
(This is not symmetrical, I realize, but I’m as near as can be positive that this is what they were thinking:) "Why, this’ll allow any ole swishy, cross-dressing pervert to come into OUR MEN’S ROOM, WHILE OUR BACKS ARE TURNED, AND…I’ll let you finish the rest. Because, obviously (and I assure you this is the “creepy” thing that’s creeping them out), ever - a - one uh them gays is just waitin’ for the chance to rape any - an - ev’ry man he can get holt of…every day…all the time…for the Bible tells me so (check out the New Testament, book of Romans, chapter 1, verses 26-32 for the tidy little to-do list that LGBT people have to get through every day. And in verse 32, they’re pointing the finger at YOU, too. The don’t want to simply wipe all LGBT folks off the face of the earth; they also don’t want YOU to support it, or even THINK about it - or you’re goin’ ta burn in hell.
Of course, having said all that, I am also in agreement with a letter to the editor that appeared in my local paper yesterday that this is red meat for the base in an election year.
I’m curious why society must turn itself upside down in order to accommodate the feelings 0.2% of the population. Nothing stops them from using their biological sex’s restroom and if you say they’re uncomfortable using a bathroom of a gender they don’t identify as; certainly their feelings don’t trump the feelings of the people who feel uncomfortable having someone of the opposite sex in their bathroom.
So, it makes you uncomfortable to share the bathroom with someone who looks like your gender but who according to their birth certificate belongs to the opposite sex?
Feelings? Do you not read these threads you post in, or do you just ignore all posts that give facts that conflict with your set opinions? I personally know of four transgendered women that have been attacked in mens rooms, and two of them ended up in the hospital.
Look, I know that violent prejudicial nosiness is a cornerstone of our society, but unlike you I’m convinced we can remove it without turning our society upside down. Minding your own damn business in the bathroom isn’t going to bring about the apocalypse.
If treating people like humans and not examining their junk when they use the bathroom requires turning society upside down, then I’m all for turning society upside down. But I really don’t think that ‘don’t look at other people’s genitals unless they ask you to’ is really that unreasonable, or even different from other societal standards.
Also, I’m glad to see how ‘love they neighbor’ plays out in practice. “Well, if my neighbor is a small enough minority, then I can just beat the crap out of them, because what are they going to do about it?” doesn’t really sound Christlike to me, but appears to be the Christian response.
All about the numbers are you? Only .02% may be trans but that’s not really the number that matters in a democracy, is it?
And I bet you’re a big believer in democracy, am I right? Fact is, in 2016 a majority of people feel it’s time to be more inclusive of trans people.
And in this, where it really matters, you’re NOT in the majority. Sorry, I know it sucks when your beliefs get swept under a tide of new thinking, but such is life I’m afraid.
It hurts no one to allow trans men dressed as women to use the ladies, nor female trans, dressed as men, to use a men’s room. None of this interferes with your ability to use the facilities.
Family values politicians being caught in compromising sexual encounters are a much bigger problem than are incidents of opposite gender bathroom perving, according to the news!
And similarly, it hurts no one to allow gender-typical men dressed as men to use the ladies room, nor gender-typical woman dressed as women to use the men’s room.
Is anyone asking for this? Is there a pressing need for this?
Or is this just another fucking example of “Let’s take it to the 'logical” extreme!", like “If gays can get married, the polygamy should be allowed-it’s only ‘logical’'”, usually made by people trying to sabotage the original argument?
It actually does hurt people to mandate bearded men, who happen to be trans, into the ladies room. In doing so you have removed the existing social approbation of men freely entering the ladies room.
Under your chosen way men waltzing into the ladies room ( even behind your 11yr old daughter) won’t cause anyone the least concern. Do you imagine actual bathroom pervs aren’t going to enjoy their now free access?
And all because what they might be packing in their drawers icks you out.
Because it’s in the same room as you! The horror, the horror!
The 4th circuit covers North Carolina. The issue was decided based on deference to the interpretation by the department of education, rather than addressing any constitutional question. So back to the lower court.
Did I say there was a pressing need? Did I say anyone was asking for it? Pretty certain I did not.
I simply stated the fact that it hurts no one to allow gender-typical men dressed as men to use the ladies room, nor gender-typical woman dressed as women to use the men’s room, and it doesn’t.
And no, this isn’t a “logical extreme” exercise, especially because I agree with the original argument. Thanks for trying to read though!
:rolleyes: I can remember back when it still made many people “feel uncomfortable” to realize that homosexual people were sharing their bathrooms. Yikes, you might be in a restroom or even exposing your junk in the presence of someone of the same sex who finds your junk sexually appealing!! :eek: :eek:
Hell, for years and years that possibility was considered to be such a massive source of “discomfort” even to battle-hardened soldiers (whose comfort zones might be presumed to be pretty damn enlarged) that people who were known to be gay weren’t even allowed to serve in the military.
Over time, as people realized that 1) homosexual people exist, 2) they need to pee, and 3) very few of them pose any threat to other people in the restroom, the fussing over sharing restrooms with homosexual people largely died down.
Over time, as people come to realize the same things about transgender people, the fussing will die down again.
In the meantime, I can’t help finding it pretty hilarious that so many straight cisgender guys nowadays have basically accepted that they’ll sometimes be sharing urinals with big burly gay cisgender men who are attracted to their genitals, but are still freaking out about the possibility that very occasionally a male-appearing straight transgender man who has NO interest in their genitals might be sitting in the next stall.
Except that in practice, it very often does hurt people who identify and present as one gender to use the restroom designated for the other gender. Look at the stats and personal experiences cited by earlier posters about the incidence of assaults on such people.
The convenient thing about letting people who identify and present as one gender to use the restroom designated for that gender (besides the great advantage that it isn’t forcing them to ignore their own gender identity) is that the other people in the restroom will most likely never even know or wonder whether or not they were assigned that gender at birth.
So because there’s a fear of perverted straight men pretending to be transgendered so they can go into women’s bathrooms and molest little girls transgendered women have to use the same bathroom as these molesters and perverts?
See, I don’t think transmen figure into the thinking of “bathroom bill” advocates AT ALL. Nobody has yet answered when questioned about transmen like Buck Angel going into the ladies’ room. None. It’s like they don’t even see the question on their monitor.
I think it’s a huge blind spot. They just either don’t know or don’t care that there are transmen out there. They’re only concerned about the transwomen. That’s why I don’t think it’s really a sexual activity thing at all…it’s a gender subversion thing.
Hardly. The idea of unisex restrooms is a idea whose time has come. It will also shorten lines for the ladies room, at certain times, which is a good thing for everyone. Female SDMBers, what do you think?
I often see Dads bring their little daughters into the mens room. No problem.
When the line gets really super fucking long for the ladies, and none of the men, I have had the women "invade’ (their term) the mens. I only had a issue with that once, when they wouldn’t let any men in, otherwise, work for me.