#1 reason I will be voting straight Republican

There is not standard or measure of what constitutes being trans, therefore it means any man can be in the women's bathroom.

The claim that it being illegal to commit rape means there is no reason to try to prevent it from happening in the first place is either an amoral or immoral position of indifference to rape.

If a transwoman can get away with using the women's bathroom then s/he can. A lot of people get away with all sorts of illegal conduct. However, again, since there is no standard or measure for what constitutes being trans, it really means anyone and everyone.

 

None of these laws and statutes state any of that so what you wrote about the police is inaccurate in relation to such laws.

 

I think it is. This is 2016, we should not segregate based on race or gender. The male bathrooms are of demonstrably inferior quality.

Separate but equal should not be a viable position in 2016.

 

So you're conceding Florida?

If you go to the forum on sexuality you'd see some of the most hardcore Democrats - male and female - who continuously post ridiculing anti-Republican and anti-Trump messages also oppose these laws that effectively allow men in women's bathrooms and showers. While they will still vote Democrat, that shows how deep opposition to this goes.

People tend to be HIGHLY protective of their children and grandchildren. This election may end up being VERY close. If so, I believe this is the issue that will tip the balance and it makes Democrat politicians look like they have gone off the deep end catering to a very fringe special interest group and being totally indifferent to the wishes, rights and safety of the overwhelming majority of independents - because in fact they have.

 

Oh, and how would that be? Do you even know what a straw man argument is? Where have I ever said or wrote that “such laws only restrict “transwomen”, whatever they are, from using the womens’ bathroom? I never said or wrote such a thing. That’s yet another of your straw man arguments.
Once again for your edification and for the umpteenth time, I said:

A) If what you are advocating, requiring transgendered women to use female restrooms (i.e. people who look like and act like males), it would make it easier for male rapists and pedophiles to enter female restrooms unnoticed. Because people would become accustomed to people who look like, dress like and act like men entering female restrooms. A rapist or pedophile who actually is a man would be able to easily enter a female restroom under the guise of being a transsexual woman. And unless you have the gender police at the door visually inspecting every individual’s gender, you cannot prevent it. That’s what you are arguing for…oops. You didn’t think through the ramifications of what you are advocating which unfortunately is so very typical of the American right wing.

B) You have either been either incredibly dense or you are very dishonest or some combination thereof.

Well then you should be able to prove it. You have been repeatedly asked for evidence to support your beliefs and you have repeatedly failed to produce that evidence. I’ll ask you once again, where is the evidence that transsexual men enter female restrooms to rape women? You have none, hence all this obfuscation on your part.

Yes, that could happen if you got what you and your fellow so called conservatives are advocating. That wouldn’t happen if you didn’t discriminate against transgendered people, because no one could enter the female bathroom looking like and acting like a male lumberjack.

While I agree these laws should be very easy to understand, but apparently these laws are difficult to understand, because you seem to have a great deal of trouble understanding them.

Ok, so now you deny the existence of transgendered people. Well that explains a lot, doesn’t it? Unfortunate, but all too typical of so called “conservatives”; gotta a problem with reality, just deny it exists and call the people who confront you with the truth names. This is yet another case where so called “conservatives” are in denial of science and reality. Whither you want to admit it or not, there are transsexual people, people who dress, act and look like members of the opposite sex, and they are very real no matter how much you wish it were otherwise. Below is a link to Merrian-Webster definition of transgendered.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transgender

"of, relating to, or being a person (as a transsexual or transvestite) who identifies with or expresses a gender identity that differs from the one which corresponds to the person's sex at birth"

Unfortunately, the only person lying is you, and most importantly, I think you are lying to yourself.

 

Repeating your lies, will not make them any less of a lie. This isn't about all men. It's about transgendered men, men who dress, act, and look and identify as women. That's not all men.

Why don't you answer the question which has been repeatedly posed to you? Where is your evidence that transgendered men hide out in female restrooms in order to accost and rape women? Stop obfuscating and answer the question.

 

Do peepers and rapists respect the gender signs on bathroom doors right now in our current state?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

lol - I certainly agree with you on that last paragraph.

Yes, in the '50's cops were seriously unforgiving of anyone LGBT.

I know someone who had one parent who was same sex oriented, but married for cover - an absolutely horrible situation.

 

I found this...

http://www.dailywire.com/news/5190/...bused-women-and-children-amanda-prestigiacomo

"1. A Seattle man, citing transgender bathrooms laws, was able to gain access to a women’s locker-room at a public recreational center while little girls were changing for swim practice."

"2. A Toronto man claiming to be transgender was arrested and sentenced to jail for sexually assaulting several women in a women’s shelter after he gained access to the shelter and its shower facilitates as "Jessica."

"4. A Los Angeles man dressed in drag, entered a Macy’s department store bathroom and videotaped women under bathroom stalls."

"5. Two male students were caught at the University of Toronto exploiting “gender-neutral” facilities to peep on women in the shower with their cellphone cameras."

"3. A Virginia man was caught and arrested for peeping on and filming two women and a 5-year-old child in a women’s restroom after receiving entry by dressing in drag."

 

Were any of those men transgendered? You are making my point for me. If we do what so called conservatives are demanding, it would be very easy for men like the ones you cited to enter female restrooms under the guise of being transgendered, because transgendered women, who look like men, dress like men, and act like men would be required to use female restrooms. People who look like men entering female restrooms would become commonplace. It would make it much easier for these men you cited to enter female restrooms and not be noticed.

 

The Seattle guy CLAIMED to be transgender and, that is the whole problem. There also may be no way to identify a transgender.

I think this whole thing about transgender bathroom rights is just another liberal canard that transgenders are somehow discriminated against. I say let the bathrooms stay as they are. We don't need any new laws to protect either transgenders or straights. As I already said, the chances of one running into what comprises less than 1% of the population is almost nil. Just leave our bathrooms alone huh?

 

It's conservatives who are proposing new laws to ban transgender people...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That was a reaction to Libbies FORCING the majority to cater to less than 1% of the population and condoning men sharing bathrooms with women and little girls. Do you follow the news?

 

But,was he? Further, did he accost or rape any woman or girl in the restroom as has been alleged? No he didn't accost or rape any women or girls in the restroom. He didn't even stalk them. I think we could probably find a way to identify transgendered people if we wanted to. But I think is where a little common sense comes into play. I don't know about you, but I've never gotten naked in any public restroom nor do I ever aspire to. I've gotten naked in locker rooms, but a locker room isn't a restroom, is it? If you want to extend this to locker rooms where people get naked, then changes will need to be made.

Well of course you do. That was already pretty obvious when you used right wingnut materials. In your world everything bad or makes you uncomfortable is either a liberal canard or conspiracy. But let's remember the facts here. It wasn't liberals who created the law which makes it illegal for transgendered folks to use the restroom of the gender which they identify with. It was these so called "conservatives" who did that. Prior to that time and that law transgendered folks were using the restroom of the gender which they identify with without any problems. They used common sense. There is something to be said for common sense.

Yes Republicans (i.e. so called conservatives) should have left the law as it was. But they didn't. Ironically, Republicans who claim to be the anti-regulation party got their privates in a tough spot because they tried to increase bathroom regulation. It's really kind of funny when you think about it.

 

I don't recall it even being an issue until the anti legislation started rolling out. My trans friend has been using the men's room without issue for years. Conservatives blew this up. This wasn't a reaction to anything but gay marriage and wedding cakes. Battles were being lost so a new fight was started. The funny part is it's literally the same fight. Conservatives were worried about African Americans using the same bathrooms because all the white women would get raped or diseases would spread. Then it was gay men need to go somewhere else so they don't assault little boys or perv on straight guys. It's the same frickin' fight, just a new audience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

No actually the liberals started the issue by passing a city ordinance in Charlotte which would allow for ANYONE to enter the female bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms and shower facilities. HB2 was passed in response to that idiocy.

 

Wrong. Unless you can tell us how to differentiate the transgender who genuinely wants to use the bathroom from the straight male sexual predator who is abusing the rules to find his next victim... Then it's about BOTH transgenders and straight males.

 

Wrong, I'm not the one who wants to inspect people's genitalia. You are...remember? You are the ones who want forbid transgendered people from entering female restrooms. The only way to do that is with gender police. Transgendered women look like men, dress like men, and act like men. Requiring them to use the female restroom as you wish to do makes it very easy for miscreant males enter female restrooms. That's just a fact. It really shouldn't be that difficult to understand. But for some reason, right wingers have great difficulty understanding that very simple reality.

If you conservatives get what you are demanding, the link below shows you what the transgendered folks who will be required to use female restrooms look like.

http://www.oddee.com/_media/imgs/articles2/a98038_Buck_Angel.jpg

The only way you are going to be able to get compliance with your law is to visually inspect the genders of people entering restrooms. If you require people like Buck Angel who was born female but identifies as male use female restrooms as you say you want to do, it makes it very easy for male miscreants to enter female restrooms unnoticed. The only way to keep the miscreant males out of female restrooms, is to visually inspect their genitalia. So in order for you to effect your restroom policies, you would need gender police to visually inspect genders prior to entry to weed out the miscreant males. You so called "conservatives" really need to think through your ideas and beliefs before you buy into them.

The old practices worked fine. If you look like a male, act like a male, then you use the male restroom. If you look like a female, act like a female, then you use the female restroom. There is no need to change those practices.

 

Your argument is ridiculous.

First of all, nobody wants or needs to inspect people's genitalia. Just like we don't have to have people check men's genitalia. The reason we have these rules is two fold. It's not to keep the transgenders out of the bathroom. It's to keep the straight male sexual predators out of that bathroom. However, unless you can tell us how to differentiate the transgenders from the straight males then we have to treat them as one group for the purposes of this discussion because if you allow one in you're not going to be able to stop the other if you can't differentiate the two.

The second reason we have these rules is to protect women and children. If a sexual predator claims he's a transgender and gains access to a bathroom with a 10 year old girl in it and he gropes her. He leaves no evidence and all we have is that girls word against his. She's going to say he gropes her and he's going to say he didn't do anything wrong and he was just in there peeing.

The way that YOU folks want to have the rules, the only evidence you'll have is her word against his because you have provided that predator with LEGAL access to the bathroom. He has a legal excuse. All he has to say is he was in there peeing. The likelihood of you getting a conviction is very low.

But the way the rules are now, we can show that male shouldn't have been in the women's bathroom. As such his excuse of just using the bathroom is BS and his intentions must have been nefarious. This would result in a far higher rate of conviction.

But regardless even if you did send the predator to jail is it really worth it? He goes to jail for a few months and the little girl will be scarred for the rest of her life. All because you wanted to make sure that Gary could sit down in his dress and pee without feeling uncomfortable. Which do you think should take precedence? His comfort or the girl not getting sexually assaulted?

 

Oh to address your argument that males will be able to get access to females bathrooms by claiming to be a transgender female... While that's true, if he does that and sexually assaults someone it would be simple to prove he's NOT a transgender female. As such any excuse he might make about not attempting to do something nefarious would be destroyed. And he would most assuredly get convicted.

But in your scenario he has LEGAL access to that bathroom and a built in "reasonable doubt" by claiming he was just in there peeing.

 

And you really don't wanna start posting pictures of trans. Because I assure you that the pictures of mtf trans are far more terrifying than the ftm ones.

 

I'm willing to bet all of the statistics you quote here are from 2012 or earlier, which means all of this happened before transgender bathrooms ever became an issue. So how do laws limiting bathrooms by biological sex make anyone safer?

 

Safer as opposed to giving those predators time, opportunity and quasi private access to a space where their intended victims frequent and partially disrobe?

Absolutely it's safer.

 

So your argument is that bathrooms should be segregated by sex, which is mostly biological, rather than gender, which is a social construct. But isn't discrimination based on sex illegal?

 

Wouldn't it be safer to identify which bathroom someone should use by their general appearance (clothes, hair, body shape, mannerisms, etc.) than by their genitals?