Nevermind the women who don't like having men follow them in the bathroom. I guess their rights don't matter.
Who is going to win this election in November?
- Thread starter fonzob1
- Start date
- Status
Why do you think a special law is required to keep predators out of bathrooms? What makes the existing laws insufficient on that count?
1. I'd be in favor of a law that closed the loophole of a man "identifying" as a woman following women into the restroom. Fix that, and I'll be completely on your side.
2. I don't like that there's a legal defense from the law to allow men to follow women into a restroom.
3. Maybe women in North Carolina raised the issue down there.
4. See #2.
5. Any gender can go into any bathroom at my house. However, nobody follows somebody else into the bathroom when they go into the bathroom.
6. Yes, I just also support the rights of women who don't want men in the bathroom with them.
7. They can go into the restroom of the gender that they currently have. I never said that they couldn't.
Then they should be against HB2, as it legally prevents men who happen to be trans from using the men's restroom.
It also forces women to use the men's restroom.
Something that you refuse to get is that trans women are women, just with XY chromosomes. Ditto trans men are men with XX.
All for some practically non-existent boogeyman.
How about the fact that a man can go into a women's restroom and all he has to say is that he identifies as a woman and he can get off scott free.
I hope most of you realize that I won't be changing my views on men following women into the restroom.
THAT ALMOST NEVER HAPPENS.
Sticking your fingers in your ears doesn't make it so.
And in trying to prevent a problem that is so rare as to be non-existent for all practical intents and purposes, HB2 negatively impacts the lives of thousands if not tends of thousands in very real ways.
You won't be changing your views on an issue that doesn't really exist, huh? Good for you. Glad to know you privilege addressing hypothetical misbehavior over preventing actual discrimination that already happens.
I guess when black people came around asking for their civil rights, you were there to say, "Sure, I agree with all this, but I think we need some laws to protect white people from you, too."
1. I'm not talking about HB2, I'm talking about national law.
2. It prevents men who "identify" as a women from using the men's room, if they didn't abuse the system, we wouldn't have this issue.
3. I'm sure the women who have men who follow them think it's more than non-existent.
They didn't. This law was passed to negate a law Charlotte passed allowing people to go to the public restroom they self-identified with. That's the whole story. There is no rampant men following women into restroom problems here.
You have to call somebody who has a differing opinion a racist? I guess it shows your character.
Well bully for you. If it becomes national law, that doesn't make it any less discriminatory.
Nice scare quotes.
Tell me how often men "claim" to identify as women just to get into the women's restroom.
It doesn't happen except but exceedingly rarely.
Again, trans women are not men, and they are far more at risk of being abused when forced to use the men's room than cis women are from trans women, or from this farcical "men [who] 'identity' as a women [sic]." Gender is not biological sex; it derives from it, but is far more complex than just genitalia.
He can do that now by claiming to be a trans man. The law makes trans women go to the men's room and trans men go to the women's room. You can deny this all you want, but this is purely there to target transgender people, not keep men out of women's rooms. It's not keeping women safe, if anything it's intentionally hurting them. I won't change my view either, because mine are actually based on what is happening.
That's code for trans women and they aren't the ones abusing the system. Cis gender men are and apparently not that much. You have 5 possible cases and that's all you have. That's not making a mountain out of a mole hill, that's making a mountain out of 5 grains of sand. Plus putting scare quotes around identify is deeply offensive and I think that show your true character. I'm done dealing with you. Goodbye, I have things to do with my time.
No, see, crap is excreted from your body's back exit, while gender fluids are ... not.
Porn says differently.
All joking aside, you, @indycar , seem to be at least trying to be reasonable, but emotions are running rather high right now. So, let me try to explain the problem with HB2 in a calm manner:
Nobody here is saying a pervert man walking into a ladies room is okay.
However, there are very, very few cases of this actually happening. Sure, when it happens, it is not okay, but it is still a very, very rare thing. Trans-women needing to use the bathroom, though, is not rare at all, as I'm sure you will agree.
Now, aside from their birth sex, they are women. If you can imagine how uneasy women feel if a man is in the same restroom as them, I'm sure you can also imagine how uneasy they would feel if they were forced by law to use the men's room. Especially if there were cases (and far more than the pervert men walking into the ladies' room without commiting any other crime) of trans-women being assaulted, both sexually and as a hate-crime,
If there was a law that could prevent pervert men "just claiming to be women" walking into ladies' rooms without barring trans-women access to the ladies' room, and was easily enforcable without people having to carry around their birth certificate and/or have guards at the entrance to any public restroom, I'm sure nobody (except for pervert men who want to hear women farting) would have a problem with it. But no such law exists, and HB2 is certainly isn't it. Such a law is simply impossible. You are free to prove me wrong, if you can write such a law, please, go ahead.
But in the end, HB2, and any national law in the same vein, will end up harming far, far more trans-women, than any pervert man would be stopped from entering the ladies' room. You have to weigh one against the other, you cannot have both. And considering the latter happens so rarely it is a statistical anomaly when it actually happens, I choose to oppose laws like this.
A metaphor that implies I'm a racist.
I am illustrating the obtuseness of your argument.
I can see that it's still not penetrating, though.
How about this one? It's stupid to make laws to prevent things virtually nobody is doing. Is that better? Or do you just like wasting legislators' time, and thus taxpayer money?
Whatever happened to the idea that we should have smaller government?
They want that, except for things they find icky. You can't have enough laws to protect them from that. I'm surprised conservatives haven't suggested creating a new law enforcement department that inspects your genitals and scans your DNA before entering restrooms.
Mainly because the regular police don't know how to enforce North Carolina's blatant discrimination law. It's entirely based on personal opinion on who you believe is too manly to be a woman. Which will probably hurt a lot of cisgender women too.
I'd say that getting upset over posts that seem to lack human compassion or empathy shows a pretty strong character.
- Status
Similar threads
