NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
Can you cite a few?
Why the big pendulum will soon swing back against conservatives
- Thread starter Crockett
- Start date
Can you cite a few?
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
The fact that the LGBT community was so shunned for centuries forced them to hide in the shadows. Yes, that includes gay conservative congressman masquerading as heterosexual men.
I don't run in porn circles either...however, I do have a diverse array of women in my feeds and that leads to a lot of retweeted nonsense from the trans-contingent.
A great source of information that tends not to show up in the mainstream media can be found at GenderTrender.com, which is one of MANY websites run by various feminists who serve to aggregate the worst of the worst in terms of the appropriation of all things female that the trans-brigade seeks to do.
Being in Seattle, I am SURE you had news associated with the pervert at Evergreen who sat sprawled in the women's locker room while a young women's swim team had access to the facility. His rationale for not having covered up was that he didn't have to because...laydee feelz. That is the Colleen Francis debacle.
There was an entire tranny group in Portland that sued to close a bar down because they wouldn't cater to their delusions and allow them to use the women's bathroom.
The list goes on...and we haven't even begun to site the ones suing the correctional agencies for cosmetic surgery because they feel like women...
There was a point in time where you had transsexuals and then you had everyone else that they now try to squeeze under the auspices of the "T" in the alphabet soup. If we were ONLY talking about true transsexuals, then I doubt you would see the hue and cry that exists today. They weren't out there playing the victim card and claiming people HAD to cater to them They simply went about their lives. But the trans-contingent decided to foist their umbrella concept upon GLB in the late-80's/early-90's and then it became far worse with the advent of the internet.
And yes, I have had a front row seat to this nonsense by virtue of being an L in the alphabet soup. I've had a front-row seat to being told that dyke marches HAVE to include males that claim laydee-feelz. I've lost a national music festival because the males were upset about being excluded and made it to where Lisa no longer wanted to host a PRIVATE event on PRIVATE property.
been a while since they updated the list, but here is a rather extensive list of incidents that had been compiled by one blogger in 2013.
There is also the one from Toronto that posed as a female to get into a shelter for women and assaulted two other residents in a sexual manner (Jessica Hambrook)
I mentioned the Colleen Francis one in Oregon
Paul(a) Witherspoon, a registered sex offender, was arrested in Dallas at a hospital- claims trans but never updated his registry in Texas OR Florida with his 'assumed' name.
The list seemingly never stops...
I don't see why you proponents of bathroom choice cannot even begin to fathom that predators will be able to pretend to be trans in order to gain access to women's bathrooms and women will have been cowed into not telling anyone about it. Y'all don't even bring that subject up. You *only* talk about "legitimate" trans people and how their rights are being denied.
I agree if someone is just cross dressing. If someone begins removing body parts or injecting themselves with hormones, they are physically harming themselves. That's a huge difference between gay and trans people that have surgery.
Actually, I have no religious opinion on this one. I dont think religion, unless you believe in reincarnation which would support transgendered, comes into play for me here. I do not know if it's because Ive been in caught up on trying to get the other side for years on this or what, but I just focus on genetics and psychology when I think about the trans issue. As ive already stated, I dont think about it similarly to gay marriage (as far as grouping the two together). I know the LGBT community has grouped themselves together, but having different sexual desires does not seem to be the same as a belief in which sex you are. I think these are separate things to be analyzed differently.
Either way, I still support leaving it up to the bathroom owner rather than either side imposing their will on everyone like BOTH sides are trying to do. Also, no, I do not support this no government involvement because I think it will support discrimination. I think people's opinions are mixed and there will be a mix of policies on this most places that arent extremely far one way or the other. It's not perfect, but I do not have a better solution and do not think the government imposing one social order or the other is better.
Last edited:
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
There are two versions of the Colleen Francis story out there:
(A) Colleen Francis paraded around a locker room with her man-parts uncovered, exposing herself to a young girl's swim team (kids from age 6 to teenager). If this version were true, it would present a huge problem that should be dealt with swiftly and decisively. However, based on the evidence I have seen, this version appears to be entirely fictional.
(B) Colleen Francis walked through a locker room with a towel covering herself, then went into the sauna and took her towel off. Two girls strayed into the sauna area (where they weren't supposed to be) and saw Colleen's man-parts through the window-slit in the door. This appears to be the truth. I think it still presents valid concerns that need to be addressed, but it isn't nearly the scare-mongering type of story that the crazy right wants to scare you with.
(B) Colleen Francis walked through a locker room with a towel covering herself, then went into the sauna and took her towel off. Two girls strayed into the sauna area (where they weren't supposed to be) and saw Colleen's man-parts through the window-slit in the door. This appears to be the truth. I think it still presents valid concerns that need to be addressed, but it isn't nearly the scare-mongering type of story that the crazy right wants to scare you with.
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
I'm not sure I agree 100%, but I have no major issue with this solution.
But what about government-owned bathrooms, especially in schools? This presents a much more difficult problem. Neither the right's solution ("pee where your birth-parts would suggest") nor the left's solution ("pee wherever you please") is at all satisfying to me.
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
I can't speak for others, but I don't pretend that it isn't an issue. It is an issue, and one that any thoughtful solution must address. But it isn't such a big issue that it is the be-all and end-all factor in the discussion.
Roger
1,000+ Posts
This is why I think with new construction (especially schools) you will start a lot more gender neutral bathrooms and lockers rooms with private stalls and showers.
Transgender folks make up about 0.5% of our population, and that figure is being generous. Why are you proponents wanting to dismiss the legitimate security concerns of 50% of the population so that <0.5% can feel good about their lifestyle choice?
This is probably the most sensible approach, we already have "family" bathrooms in addition to the traditional male/female. However, I have a hard time justifying the cost given the VERY low usage numbers.
Little known fact - when the the Buc-ee's in Giddings opened about 20 years ago, it had unisex bathrooms. Basically every urinal and toilet was an enclosed closet, of sorts, with full walls and a locking door. The only thing shared was the sinks. They changed it to traditional male/female bathrooms after about a year or so - women did not like the arrangement. Beaver Aplin - a man ahead of his time.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Unisex bathrooms are already common throughout the EU. I'm seeing them a lot more in the "hipster" restaurants much to the chagrin of my wife who doesn't like the fact that aiming for the toilet isn't as easy as it looks.
The sanitized version of the Francis story tends to be the narrative that TransInc wants people to believe. it is NOT the version consistent with the persons who filed the original report...
And as a female that does not want males in my locker-room, I do take offense to my opposition being reduced to 'scare-mongering' from 'the crazy right.'
mb227: Do you think it better that the person in the thread starter, a bearded trans "genetically female" should be in your locker room, mine or neither?
I think common sense should rule the day, but when you have to "write a law" then common sense often gets waylaid. It's dated now but Philip K Howard's book decrying substitution of rules and laws for good judgment, The Death of Common Sense, was a great read 20-25 years ago.)
I think common sense should rule the day, but when you have to "write a law" then common sense often gets waylaid. It's dated now but Philip K Howard's book decrying substitution of rules and laws for good judgment, The Death of Common Sense, was a great read 20-25 years ago.)
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
Here's the actual report. I'm not sure how to post pages 2 and 3 so you'll have to use the link.
http://www.adfmedia.org/files/EvergreenPoliceReport.pdf
Last edited:
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
Displaying male genetalia in any part of a women's locker room is objectionable, and it is perfectly rational to complain about that. But inventing additional details that make the story 100 times worse is a classic example of fear-mongering.
so what's the big beef here?
That different people are treated differently?
or that some different people expect to be treated specially?
If these issues of gender and sexuality are no more a choice than the sun's rising in the East, what, then? Am I supposed to understand these folks are therefore akin to "special needs" people?
They just want to be accepted, too ... but often are unable to communicate that.
i have both in my family and I'm just not seeing the equivalence between my nephew's genetic condition called tuberous sclerosis and my BNL's pursuit of perversion ... because the equivalence is NOT there.
That different people are treated differently?
or that some different people expect to be treated specially?
If these issues of gender and sexuality are no more a choice than the sun's rising in the East, what, then? Am I supposed to understand these folks are therefore akin to "special needs" people?
They just want to be accepted, too ... but often are unable to communicate that.
i have both in my family and I'm just not seeing the equivalence between my nephew's genetic condition called tuberous sclerosis and my BNL's pursuit of perversion ... because the equivalence is NOT there.
Last edited:
I have no qualms with that misguided soul who has elected to poison their body with synthetic testosterone being in my locker room precisely because they are still female. It is the same reason they were still welcome at MichFest...
Right. So if this is true, why would a "libertarian" run to the federal government seeking redress for an issue like this? Would a real libertarian seek to impose their potty time preferences on everybody?
The solution is simple.
One bathroom for XX types - and only XX types.
One bathroom for XY types - and only XY types.
One bathroom for anybody who cares to enter. These already exist in many public locales and they were set up so mommy could take her young boy (or daddy his young daughter) into a restroom under supervision.
The libertarian in me says that solution does not need to be imposed under the threat of fine or imprisonment by some faceless, soulless bureaucratic dictate.
Dagnabbit, Sangre!
The emperor has beautiful clothes and don't you forget it! (TIC)
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
This is where so many of the activists lose me. You can't have it both ways. "I just want to be left to live my life. So why can't all of you just change the way you live, put aside your own idea of privacy and let me do what I want to do so that I can feel accepted?"
This is what it boils down to for these people - we do not make them feel good about their life choices, and so we must be brought to heel.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
I'd wager dollars to donuts that the same logic was used to discriminate against African Americans. Change is hard. This particular challenge for LGBT rights has been going on since for 30+ years. Ultimately, they want the same rights as you or I.
It should be noted that Washington State has allowed Transgendered individuals to use the bathroom of their gender choice without issue. Or at least, without significant issue given incident above in which the facts are clearly in question. It may also be noteworthy that Evergreen College may be the most liberal of colleges in the US. The sanity of any secondary or primary school that would choose to share the facilities with them would have to be questioned.
Someone that thinks they are the opposite gender based on feelings is not the same thing or exactly like African Americans or someone born with dark skin. What a generalization!
I do not want to the right to go into the bathroom of my choice, nor does anyone on this side. A transgendered is not asking for equal treatment. He is asking for special treatment. The transgendered are asking for their choice of bathroom, something I nor anyone else has.
Right now a transgendered person with male genetics and I both have the right to enter a men's restroom. We have the equal rights based on the way we were born! I do not want the right to go into the women's restroom, and if someone tries to throw me out be able to say "I identify as a woman today so I am suing you!" Such laws wouldnt make things equal, it would just create legal chaos because less than 0.05% of the population MIGHT not just be delusional.
[Change is hard]
Change for the sake of change is not an argument. One arguing to bring back segregation could say "change is hard."
You have to look at what we are changing. You have to look at the issue specifically. "This is sort of like with african americans kind of" is not a well thought out way to address an issue. Your premise that african americans, gay people and transgendered people are all "likes" is incorrect and all want the same "equality" is not correct.
Last edited:
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
With all due respect, you haven't addressed a single one of the issues I've brought up. You just keep coming back to this parallel, and it's a false one.
The difference here is that no one is denying rights to the LGBT community which are not available to anyone else. There are no biological men who are allowed into women's restrooms. It's not discriminating to say a transgender who is biologically male cannot enter a women's restroom, because that's not a right given to the "more privileged" majority. They are not, in fact, treated differently.
I'll ask it again - maybe it wasn't specifically addressed as a question that I'd like answered, so I'll rephrase it:
What is the issue for a biological man who identifies as a woman in using a men's bathroom - one which presumably he has been using all his life up until now? Is he ashamed of sharing the space with other men? Is he afraid of being attacked in some way? Is he insulted that the world refuses to acknowledges the female nature that he claims for himself? What is the issue at play here? I honestly don't know, and would love to hear more about it.
If it's shame, then why is that person afforded relief at the expense of someone who feels the EXACT SAME WAY? A woman who feels a sense of shame or invasion of privacy when an unidentified man enters that space is now told that she is out of line, that she needs to just deal with it. And yet that is considered horribly intolerant when the exact same logic is applied to the transgender man when required to use a men's room.
If it's fear of being attacked, then again I ask: why is that man more at risk than a woman? If a man is still biologically a man, then unless he's cross-dressing, his condition won't even be recognized.
If it's insult at not being recognized, then that's not really wanting to just be left alone to live how they want to live. That's being angry that I am not supporting and affirming them at the expense of what other people may want.
In any other context, if a woman felt threatened by male presence, they would be supported and their emotional state would be considered a priority. Why all of a sudden is that idea thrown out the window? If we're about creating places where women feel safe, why when they speak up and say "this makes me feel unsafe" do we just say "tough?"
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Ahh...but you have limited the right by putting the term "biological" in front of it. If it's just men and women restroom, there isn't an issue. Transgender individuals feel and act like the opposite gender.
How comfortable do you feel using a woman's bathroom while other women are in there? There you have an answer. Better yet, throw on a dress with stockings and walk into a men's bathroom at your local pub. Heck, I'm sure you've been in a bar where a drunk woman says "eff the line" to the women's restroom and decides to do her business in the men's restroom. Think the woman drew some looks of disdain?
If we are all honest, we'll all be uncomfortable with a transgendered person using our bathroom, male/female/"Pat" (see SNL). My stance is that in most cases you won't know they are transgendered using the bathroom of the gender they identify with. You will CLEARLY know if they use their biological bathroom. Keep in mind that for most transgendered people they don't want to standout. So, if you're trying to go with "comfort" then wouldn't it be more comfortable to let them use the gender they identify with? Look again at the picture in the OP. More comfortable in a womens or mens bathroom for the heterosexual bathroom users?
I'm not following. Are you saying that transgendered man won't be dressing like a woman? Clearly you haven't been exposed to many transgendered people then. Transgendered men generally don't dress like butch lesbian women, at least none that I've met. Typically they wear more dresses and paint their nails much more often than most wives. Oh, and yes, a transgendered man in a male restroom is very much at risk of harassment just as a woman in the opposite situation.
To look at it another way, you are forcing them and others into uncomfortable situations. You are throwing their transgendered status into the public sphere any time they choose to use a restroom.
I do understand this position. As a father of 3 boys, I relate as well. There was a girl on the HS football team this past season. She would change in the girls locker room then enter the boys locker room for their daily pre-practice meetings. My eldest son told me he felt "uncomfortable" enough changing in the locker room for Cross Country practice that he often changed in his car. I'm sharing this story to show that I do understand.
The difference I believe is about perspective. I'm entering this conversation with an expectation that transgendered looks like the picture in the OP. Unless you KNOW that person is female, you wouldn't think twice about that guy walking into a stall and sitting down. The impression I get from some on this thread is that transgendered is some middle-aged cross-dressing man with a beard and a dress walking into the women's bathroom. Does that man exist? Sure. Is that the rare exception? Yes based on my experience.
Is there a risk for some pervert to abuse any rules that allow a transgendered person to use the bathroom of the gender choice? Absolutely. Should that risk but used as an excuse to discriminate? I don't think so.
then how bout this ... just do it.
don't make a big fuss about it. If you're telling me I can't tell if a tranny uses the facility with my wife or daughter and they aren't able to discover ... then what's the hubub about?
If I can't tell the sheerah on Big T pills and hair grower but is just "one of those" who always uses the stall & not the urinal ... then why do I need to be concerned bout it?
Because, like Prodigal said ... it's a requirement I endorse the perversion.
don't make a big fuss about it. If you're telling me I can't tell if a tranny uses the facility with my wife or daughter and they aren't able to discover ... then what's the hubub about?
If I can't tell the sheerah on Big T pills and hair grower but is just "one of those" who always uses the stall & not the urinal ... then why do I need to be concerned bout it?
Because, like Prodigal said ... it's a requirement I endorse the perversion.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
Black Lives Matter; The Cerebral Warlords of Our Time
- Started by iatrogenic
- Replies: 1K
- West Mall
-
New Jaguar TV Commercial!?
- Started by WorsterMan
- Replies: 3
- West Mall
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
