North Carolina, U.S., square off over transgender rights

[Espe]

Yeah, I had Espe saying I needed to take drugs and see a therapists because I was not comfortable with things he was comfortable with.

You described being anxious and constantly thinking about the gender of everyone around you, I said that I couldn't imagine what it was like to live with that kind of pervasive worry and asked if you had ever considered therapy. It was a natural reaction to your self-admitted dysfunction.

[Cthulhu 2020]

No one cares about the people they can't tell aren't the same gender as themselves. (sorry, lots of negatives there, but I think I said it right) They care about an obvious opposite-gender person entering their gender specific facility.

The law doesn't affect and wouldn't impact people who look like the other gender. Only ones who obviously don't.

Then you don't know the law. It requires that all people go into the bathroom that is their "biological sex", what they were born with. Hypothetically someone who looks like a man and has a penis would be fined for going into the men's restroom because they were born with a vagina. THAT IS THE WORDING OF THE LAW. And thus why people find it so ridiculous.

If you'd rather have a DIFFERENT law that restricts people based on appearances or current genitalia, that would be slightly less so but still ridiculous

[Melkandor]

but urinals are so useful as long as dick wads don't try and start a conversation with you

I don't fuck with urinals, the splashback is annoying to say the least.

[xanzul]

Indeed. Just hang a Trans sign on the disabled bathroom, let's be honest, they'd take offense despite disabled bathrooms always been accessible.

You don't think implying transgendered people are disabled is offensive?

[spinner981]

It is not about "I am fine", it is about basic personal freedoms. "I am offended by it" or "I feel uncomfortable due to it" is not a valid reason for banning anything. It is not "I am fine with it, so let's allow it", it is "It doesn't harm anyone directly, so there is no reason to ban it".

So I guess trespassing is fine now since it doesn't physically 'harm' somebody? When you just toss the word 'harm' around, applying it to whatever situations you please and not caring how weak your reasoning for applying it is, you won't be making very effective arguments.

The reason is to prevent perverts from perving, which can harm people, and with the laws that lets anyone use whichever bathroom they please it will be much MUCH easier to perv on people, and peeping in public restrooms will effectively be legal since you won't be able to prove it. Things like molestation will also have to be brought to court most likely because you won't be able to prove that either, and if they decide to film you it doesn't matter if they are caught because the damage is already done.

Your rant is more solutions in search of problems. Thank you for illustrating my point perfectly. There are already laws against everything else you described, there is no need to bring transgendered people up at any point.

It's almost as if this latest attack on a minority group was orchestrated by conservative politicians in order to secure more votes from their bigoted, aging, addled base. How interesting.

Still waiting to hear your thoughts on my law banning clergy from public restrooms as again, there is actually an issue with them abusing children.

Are you going to keep ignoring my points? Oh, wait, of course you are. Because that's how you pretend to win arguments.

Peeping will effectively be legal because you won't be able to prove it, and the same will go with some molestation. Going into the restroom and touching someone already boils down to he said she said, and at least now you can form an argument because they weren't supposed to be in that bathroom to begin with. As far as filming goes, the woman can't do anything to prevent it until its already happening.

You are suggesting that all you care about is catching criminals rather than preventing crimes, and not only will these policies make it impossible to prevent these things from happening, but also allow some of them to happen without the comeuppance of the criminal at all!

[Melkandor]

If you get triggered cause you really have a problem with what bathroom someone chooses to use, then that says everything about your character.

[xanzul]

Now let's assume your singular anectodal evidence means shit.

Oh wait, it doesn't. Considering I have worked with GROUPS of MTF and FTM transexuals and yeah, no. Most of them don't pass at all.

Bullshit. They haven't been called transexuals for many years now. Thank you for proving beyond a shadow of a doubt how ignorant you truly are.

[May90]

So I guess trespassing is fine now since it doesn't physically 'harm' somebody? When you just toss the word 'harm' around, applying it to whatever situations you please and not caring how weak your reasoning for applying it is, you won't be making very effective arguments.

Trespassing is banned already, and for a good reason. No need to introduce extra bans that serve no function, since everything you are so concerned with is already banned. Perving at people is banned, sexually harassing/assaulting people is banned. There is nothing this law changes legally, except for making life of some people much harder.

[spinner981]

Are you going to make any relevant points other than "men are all peepers waiting for it to be legal!"?

Because let me remind you what others have said: this has already been happening. Yet there's no rash of people rushing to peep. Other states? Don't have a trans-peeping issue. Why was this law made? Not because of a peeping issue, but because "concerned citizens" decided it'd be he perfect way for people to peep, even though there's no demonstrated problems with the way the laws current work.

This also doesn't touch on the fact that a transman with a penis is required to go to the women's restroom, penis and all, because he was born a female. Which you know, would be the problem this law is "trying to address" while forcing them to do it.


Statistically, if you want to "protect the children and women!" you'd be better served with them being in a bathroom with random strangers, male and female, that have never seen them, as friends and family are far more likely to assault, peep, and otherwise cause issues with them.

Are you just willingly ignoring parts of my posts and just not responding to them and then demanding that I make points that you ignored?

Point to the part of my post where I said "Men are all peepers waiting for it to be legal!". Point to it. If you can't, then you are abusing strawmans, and that is a fallacy.

The point is that it would be extremely easy to peep, because the woman (or man for that matter) can't do anything about it. Not only would this apply to restrooms, but locker rooms and shower rooms as well. The idea that nobody would take advantage of making things like peeping and molestation while along with someone in a bathroom effectively legal is reason enough for these changes to not be enacted. We should already try to prevent these things after all. If you want to argue "But gay people can already do that!" it doesn't really make a difference, because gays represent a minority of the population anyway, and even still that isn't actually refuting my point, because gender separated bathrooms would still reduce these occurrences.

Trespassing is banned already, and for a good reason. No need to introduce extra bans that serve no function, since everything you are so concerned with is already banned. Perving at people is banned, sexually harassing/assaulting people is banned. There is nothing this law changes legally, except for making life of some people much harder.

But trespassing doesn't harm anyone May, therefore it should be legal. That's your logic after all.

Also, it does change things. Peeping and molesting might be illegal, but if you're alone in the bathroom with somebody they become your word versus their word. If they aren't supposed to be in there to begin with you can just call for them to be removed, and their presence there would already imply unrighteous intentions. But now you can play the "But I'm trans!" card as an excuse for being there, and the other person would effectively have to take you to court.

This problem would be greatly compounded upon in locker rooms where people undress in full view of others, including children.

If you get triggered cause you really have a problem with what bathroom someone chooses to use, then that says everything about your character.

That has nothing to do with the actual discussion. But its entirely what I would expect from an SJW defending whatever social nonsense has come down the pipe that tumblr has told them to support.

Doesn't seem like most people here are in the interest of having an actual discussion, seeing as no matter how many posts I make pretty much all their responses boil down to "Omg you so dumb! I am right and you know it. You is bigot! Why don't you make any points? LOL!", except for May once again to a lesser extent than before. Hopefully these others won't rub off on them, as I see some of which already has.

[Espe]

Are you going to keep ignoring my points? Oh, wait, of course you are.

Enough with the personal attacks, spinny. It's against the forum rules, as you well know.

Peeping will effectively be legal

No it won't, wasn't before and this law has nothing to do with that.

and the same will go with some molestation

No it won't, wasn't before and this law has nothing to do with that.

You are suggesting that all you care about is catching criminals rather than preventing crimes

No, that is what you are suggesting. How does this law prevent crime in any way?

and not only will these policies make it impossible to prevent these things from happening, but also allow some of them to happen without the comeuppance of the criminal at all!

Completely false and thoroughly delusional.

As you are so concerned about "the children" I assume you support my suggested law banning clergy from public restrooms.

[xanzul]

There is no issue here, all the law does is stop people from making fusses about "MUH GENDER" get over it and shit in the hole you look like you fit in around. Case solved.

- - - Updated - - -



I do live in bongland. It's almost always a requirement for either a Disabled stall or small disabled bathroom to be on a premises.

Before this law transgendered people weren't saying anything about bathrooms and were using them just fine without anyone being harmed. Again it is the right wing bigots that turned this into an issue.

[May90]

spinner, with the current law I can go to a women's bathroom, say, "Sorry girls, I am a transman", and peep at them. It is much easier to do than it was before this law was introduced, when such pretense was impossible. So this law actually worsened safety in this regard, ironically.

[Vanyali]

Are you just willingly ignoring parts of my posts and just not responding to them and then demanding that I make points that you ignored?

Point to the part of my post where I said "Men are all peepers waiting for it to be legal!". Point to it. If you can't, then you are abusing strawmans, and that is a fallacy.

The point is that it would be extremely easy to peep, because the woman (or man for that matter) can't do anything about it. Not only would this apply to restrooms, but locker rooms and shower rooms as well. The idea that nobody would take advantage of making things like peeping and molestation while along with someone in a bathroom effectively legal is reason enough for these changes to not be enacted. We should already try to prevent these things after all. If you want to argue "But gay people can already do that!" it doesn't really make a difference, because gays represent a minority of the population anyway, and even still that isn't actually refuting my point, because gender separated bathrooms would still reduce these occurrences.

How about the part where droves of men are waiting for the current law to remain current law so they can all rush to the bathroom to peep?

Again: the new law is to change the way we've had things forever. How bad do you think peeping / molestation is in the bathroom right now, and how many men are waiting only until they're able to put on a dress and make wild claims to peep? Because the only ones currently doing that in large numbers are the ones people are sending in to show how this law is necessary.. how shocking.

[Espe]

spinner, with the current law I can go to a women's bathroom, say, "Sorry girls, I am a transman", and peep at them. It is much easier to do than it was before this law was introduced, when such pretense was impossible. So this law actually worsened safety in this regard, ironically.

Hey now, maybe that's just what spinner is into, it's not our place to judge!

[bewbew]

I'm not sure why so many so-called conservatives want to get their panties in a bunch about someone in a bathroom. It's the pinnacle of hypocrisy for anyone who says they support less government intrustion.

Less government and when some dudes try to creep inside a Women's bathroom, it will be Mob justice on the guy. Which is worse than passing a law.

[xanzul]

Folk get hung up on a lot of things. Wasting resources to sue a state over who gets to use what bathroom (for such a miniscule percentage of the population) seems like something that our highest levels of government shouldn't be doing.

This is precisely what our federal government is supposed to be doing and what it was always meant to do which is protect the interests of its citizens no matter how many of them are involved. Bigotry isn't justifiable based on the number of people it affects. Some of you have some truly appalling attitudes.

[The Whimsical Dwarf]

Enough with the personal attacks, spinny. It's against the forum rules, as you well know.

LOL hypocrite.

You described being anxious and constantly thinking about the gender of everyone around you, I said that I couldn't imagine what it was like to live with that kind of pervasive worry and asked if you had ever considered therapy. It was a natural reaction to your self-admitted dysfunction.

You implying others are delusional is just... hilarious

It's just too bad the irony will be completely lost on you.

I know it's a lot to ask from a conservative but please don't be disingenuous. You're looking to justify these disgusting and unnecessary laws after the fact. People like you have already been sending pedophiles into restrooms with young girls while trying to "find the lines."

Again, it wasn't an issue until conservative politicians made it one in an effort to drum up support among their bigoted, aging, addled voting base.

I can't imagine your situation, constantly being worried about the gender of other people around you, as being comfortable in any way. That has nothing to do with this law. I'm just curious if you had ever considered therapy or medication for the all-encompassing and unnecessary anxiety you describe.

I have, multiple times, you are either being willfully ignorant or are simply incapable of comprehension.

This wasn't an issue until a few conservative politicians made it one, champ. Whatever hypothetical scenarios you're trying to come up with after the fact as justification don't absolve them of wasting taxpayer funds in an attempt to enshrine their religious bigotry into law. It also doesn't suddenly give these disgusting laws any meaning beyond that which they already had.

Gotta get that bigoted, aging, addled voting base riled up enough to actually go out and vote, can't rely on mass voter disenfranchisement or rampant gerrymandering alone!

Attempting to enshrine religious bigotry into law doesn't stop pervs from perving.

I know that can be a hard concept for some people to grasp

[Melkandor]

I'm not a SJW I despise them, it's just silly to care about which bathroom people use.

[Espe]

LOL hypocrite.

As hard as you tried, and trust me it is pretty funny that you took all that time, I'm still not seeing any personal attacks towards another poster.

Maybe I'll just have to dig my Conservatron Goggles(TM) out of storage and look again

[xanzul]

Care to point out to me in our founding documents where bathroom use is a protected right?

Where in the founding documents did it say interacial marriage was a right? Or any other right that people have had to fight tooth and nail for simply because they are a minority while everyone else takes those same rights for granted? This very much is the federal government's role here whether you like it or not.

- - - Updated - - -

I say the rights of the many out weigh the few. I will side with NC on this one for the most part. I can't imagine having someone's daughter share the bathroom with the man from Florida.

Best solutions is to just have a Unisex private bathroom installed in new buildings and give enough time for older facilities/offices to build their own over the next decade.

So basically transgender people don't deserve the same rights as everyone else. Disgusting. Absolutely fucking disgusting.

- - - Updated - - -

One word:

Urinals.

It is almost like various plumbing fixtures can be installed in the same room or something.