Now we're comparing the holocaust to labeling bathrooms male and female.  lol common sense

 

Is jj your reading coach?  That is not what I said at all.  Do you want to go back and try again?  

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

Thats the point I was getting it. This door only swings one way apparently.

 

Tell me more about how other people peeing and pooing inconveniences you...

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

The smaller percentage of trans people are not being "inconvenienced."  They are being intimidated and attacked.  You can look this [BAD WORD REMOVED] up I promise. 

 

As for the larger percentage of the population.. how are they being inconvenienced?  Really answer that..   The worst complaint I have ever heard is some variation of...  "it makes me uncomfortable" or "I don't think it's acceptable."    If you are in a bathroom and a person you perceive to be trans comes in, are you going to be so freaked out you cannot relieve your bladder?  If so..  you have some major issues.   I acknowledge your right to not agree with or like LGBT people.  But this perceived persecution is ridiculous. You are not being inconvenienced.  

 

Thank you for clarifying your double standard.  Not required was the veiled attack. 

---

Thank you for clarifying your double standard. Not required was the veiled attack.

So... how are you being inconvenienced?


(And how does that compare to people being regularly intimidated and attacked in bathrooms?)


I'm not creating a double standard. I'm asking a question which nobody will answer.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jj82284" data-cid="735631" data-time="1461785224">
We express concern that this may give straight anatomical men who, sincerely or not, identify or dress as a woman improper access to what should be safe places for women. You linked to an article with 25 instances of men being in bathrooms. ONE [BAD WORD REMOVED] INCIDENT of a male dressing up as a woman. He was a predator trying to be slick. Newsflash.. peeping Toms and unsavory men have been doing stuff like this since long before you were born. Using that as a keystone to your argument proves how weak a foundation your argument is built upon. Again.. the article YOU linked to, you did not even read. ONE incident of a dude dressed up as a woman. That one guy, a documented predator, has you [BAD WORD REMOVED] petrified.



You say were crazy fear mongerers and that could never happen. I didn't say it couldn't. I said it doesn't. Not on any scale which would cause public risk or alarm. One dude with bad intentions who was not slick and got caught. If you are allowing that one guy to incite irrational levels of fear, you are paranoid.



You are then presented with examples of straight anatomical men who, sincerely or not, dressed or identified as women and abused improper access to women's facilities and violated their privacy. You presented ONE incident of a straight guy who had bad intentions and it was all it took for your imagination to create a [BAD WORD REMOVED] army of them. If this was an epidemic, I assure you it would be all over the news every day. It isn't. This entire facet of your argument is bunk. It is NOT happening on a grand scale or a small scale. It was attempted ONE time per your own documented link from [BAD WORD REMOVED] Breitbart.



Your response is. Well those aren't REAL trans people. They are just <del>individuals</del> an individual (FIFY)
who (as we predicted) abused improper access to women's facilities and abused their privacy. You even went on to say, well what do you expect the guy was a predator. You don't even stop to think that the policy you advocate gave the predator access to the restroom to begin with. Once upon a time, I didn't know you were an absolute troll.. I offered to meet you face to face to give you an honest education on a subject you are clearly out of your element on. You gave me some "I'm alright bro" type response. You can use Google to look up the difference between transgender, transvestite, cross dresser, sexual predator and pedophile, but you may have to do actual leg work to learn the difference. (but I am quite sure you won't). Hell.. you won't even read any of this response. You propose discriminating against an entire demographic because of this one guy. That is absurd.



I can engage in a reasoned cost risk analysis. I know there are a lot of people just looking for a safe place to relieve themselves. I may disagree with their lifestyle choice but I don't have to dismiss their concerns out of hand. Your "cost risk analysis" deems this ONE person to outweighs the liberties of the entire trans population. How is that reasoned? You're reaching...



You on the otherhand only care about calling someone a fearmonger homophone trandaphobe and can't acknowledge the potential abused of the system you advocate. That's real zealotry. I never called you a fear monger. I said you are allowing the fear machine (via that article you linked to) to plant irrational fears in your head. I acknowledged that ONE guy was trying to be clever by taking advantage of what is trying to be done for trans people. Will you acknowledge that what that guy tried to do IS NOT HAPPENING ON ANY LEVEL ANYWHERE? No.. of course you won't. You are a troll. You will respond to this post with some retort that does not reference any of what I have said. Or some cryptic one liner that only you understand.

</blockquote>


There were multiple instances of men posing as women, others where men claimed general protection as transgender and one instance where the university of Toronto had to suspend their gender neutral bathroom system because of abuse.


What u refuse to acknowledge is that if the policy encourages or allows "straight dudes with bad intentions" greater or unfettered access to women's facilities then that is a problem.


Yo go so far as to dismiss a sex offender being allowed into a woman's restroom. If you can't keep people with Proven records of sexual assault from entering a restroom under this policy then it needs to be seriously rethought.


Frankly its callous to sit in the face of real violations of women's privacy and try and waive an urban dictionary at the victims to lecture then on trans transvestitism etc. (I provided a link with definitions above that you obviously missed.) It speaks to an inability to empathize with anyone who doesn't fit your narrow world view.


I'm glad you know trans people you think highly of. That doesn't change the possibility of your system being abused. I know a lot of straight guys that seem okay. Does that invalidate any and all trans concerns about their safety?

---

Tell me more about how other people peeing and pooing inconveniences you...

I never made that argument at all. Don't pull things out of thin air to create an argument.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

So... how are you being inconvenienced?


(And how does that compare to people being regularly intimidated and attacked in bathrooms?)


I'm not creating a double standard. I'm asking a question which nobody will answer.

You are right, you didn't create it. It is already in place and has been.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

You're venturing into an area about which you have no idea.

This isn't the only area in which he ventures unwittingly.


I gotta admit, I'm enjoying reading this debate. All the fear mongers are getting blown the heck out.


There really is no true debate here. From a public safety prospective, it would cause more anger and violence for a trans to use the "gender correct" bathroom.


From a political/policy perspective, this is yet another hypocritical failure by the conservative fear mongers. There are already sexual predator laws. This law is merely a cynical ploy to find a new wedge issue, and of course, it's blowing back on them.

---

lol "fear mongers"

 

You're a fear monger.  Poor kids are afraid somebody might have to use the bathroom they're supposed to.

---

OH GOD POOR CHRIS WHO IS NOW CHRISTINA MIGHT HAVE TO PEE IN THE MENS ROOM. NOOOOOOO THIS IS THE WORST KIND OF OPPRESSION

---

There were multiple instances of men posing as women, others where men claimed general protection as transgender and one instance where the university of Toronto had to suspend their gender neutral bathroom system because of abuse.


What u refuse to acknowledge is that if the policy encourages or allows "straight dudes with bad intentions" greater or unfettered access to women's facilities then that is a problem.


Yo go so far as to dismiss a sex offender being allowed into a woman's restroom. If you can't keep people with Proven records of sexual assault from entering a restroom under this policy then it needs to be seriously rethought.


Frankly its callous to sit in the face of real violations of women's privacy and try and waive an urban dictionary (a) at the victims to lecture then on trans transvestitism etc. (I provided a link with definitions above that you obviously missed.) It speaks to an inability to ( B) empathize with anyone who doesn't fit your narrow world view.


I'm glad you know trans people you think highly of. That doesn't change the possibility of your system being abused. I know a lot of straight guys that seem okay. Does that invalidate any and all trans concerns about their safety?

 

Ok...this is actually an overall good statement. I do maintain that you are still attempting to paint transgender persons with a very broad and ill-fitting brush but your fundamental point is not lost on me...for what that's worth.

 

However:

 

a ) You, as a hetereosexual male, are NOT a victim here and likely never will be.

 

Your definitions are incomplete at best and not in any way indicative of who these people actually are. Random straight dude who puts on a tennis skirt to skeeve into the ladies' room for lurid activity is not the same as a transwoman. That's where you keep missing the boat. That notwithstanding, that random straight dude who puts on a tennis skirt to skeeve into the ladies' room is a potential problem and not a single person here is saying he isn't. The question I posit is how to we account for this feminine hygiene product without impugning on the liberties of an entire group of people?

 

b )The hypocrisy contained in this statement is staggering. You aren't a dumb dude at all. You can do better than this. Can you not see that pretty much any oppressed minority group can use the exact same statement when advocating for their rights? Basically, the entire LGBT community (not just transgender persons) would give you a collective "really, female dog...really?!?" In all honesty, both sides of this particular discussion are guilty of committing this error. I wish I knew why but I don't have an answer for that.

 

Finally, it's been mentioned before, by both rollerjag and myself, but seriously...riddle me this: What do you honestly think would happen if Buck Angel pimp struts into a NC ladies room to tinkle? I acknowledge, Buck is an extreme case but we seem to only be focused on the extreme cases so why stop now?

---

<i>Behold man's final mad disgrace.</i>

<i>He chops his nose to spite his face.</i>

 

-Etrigan the Demon

 

OH GOD POOR CHRIS WHO IS NOW CHRISTINA MIGHT HAVE TO PEE IN THE MENS ROOM. NOOOOOOO THIS IS THE WORST KIND OF OPPRESSION

First world problems

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Ok...this is actually an overall good statement. I do maintain that you are still attempting to paint transgender persons with a very broad and ill-fitting brush but your fundamental point is not lost on me...for what that's worth.

 

However:

 

Proceeds to rip the post....

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

lol "fear mongers"


You're a fear monger. Poor kids are afraid somebody might have to use the bathroom they're supposed to.

Noooooooooooooo u r


Lol, that's the best you got? Like I said, blown the heck out

---

Proceeds to rip the post....

Lol, well ya, it's called a debate. If you can't stand the heat, get the heck out the kitchen....


Don't be upset when the correct answer totally rips (your words) a weak argument!

---

Ok...this is actually an overall good statement. I do maintain that you are still attempting to paint transgender persons with a very broad and ill-fitting brush but your fundamental point is not lost on me...for what that's worth.


However:


a ) You, as a hetereosexual male, are NOT a victim here and likely never will be.


Your definitions are incomplete at best and not in any way indicative of who these people actually are. Random straight dude who puts on a tennis skirt to skeeve into the ladies' room for lurid activity is not the same as a transwoman. That's where you keep missing the boat. That notwithstanding, that random straight dude who puts on a tennis skirt to skeeve into the ladies' room is a potential problem and not a single person here is saying he isn't. The question I posit is how to we account for this feminine hygiene product without impugning on the liberties of an entire group of people?


b )The hypocrisy contained in this statement is staggering. You aren't a dumb dude at all. You can do better than this. Can you not see that pretty much any oppressed minority group can use the exact same statement when advocating for their rights? Basically, the entire LGBT community (not just transgender persons) would give you a collective "really, female dog...really?!?" In all honesty, both sides of this particular discussion are guilty of committing this error. I wish I knew why but I don't have an answer for that.


Finally, it's been mentioned before, by both rollerjag and myself, but seriously...riddle me this: What do you honestly think would happen if Buck Angel pimp struts into a NC ladies room to tinkle? I acknowledge, Buck is an extreme case but we seem to only be focused on the extreme cases so why stop now?

The term victim was talking about women who have been taken advantage of.


In not painting anyone. My point is that there has to be am effort to mitigate the potential for bad actors which does exist.


U have also said for the most part people will choose the facility that's appropriate. At the same time if someone is obviously making a scene or posing a threat it shouldn't be taboo to point it out.

---

Noooooooooooooo u r


Lol, that's the best you got? Like I said, blown the heck out

 

Look I understand you think you're really a woman, but that's a little weird and you should probably get help

---

Lol, well ya, it's called a debate. If you can't stand the heat, get the heck out the kitchen....


Don't be upset when the correct answer totally rips (your words) a weak argument!

Wasn't my argument. And everyone is entitled to their opinions on the matter. To say the "correct answers" is completely wrong. Not upset for a second over an internet debate. Simply made an observation.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Look I understand you think you're really a woman, but that's a little weird and you should probably get help

Ohhhhh. Sick burn!!


I'm just waiting for you to use the ace up your sleeve--the "I'm rubber you're glue" counter offensive-- and totally win the inter webs for the day.


:-)

---

Ohhhhh. Sick burn!!


I'm just waiting for you to use the ace up your sleeve--the "I'm rubber you're glue" counter offensive-- and totally win the inter webs for the day.


:-)

 

I guess it's time for you and twisted sister to take the streets and cause havoc.  "Were not gonna take it!"

 

Get out the baseball bats like beyonce and start smashing things cause you didn't get your way.  That's what you people are good at.

---