Men in women's bathrooms

[sealybobo]

Well we know she bothers you people but that's your problem. You tell me how she bothers you and we will both see that she really isn't bothering you at all. The problem with you is all in your fucking stupid head.

The problem is, you don't see the problem. You're imagining the problem to be some sort of prejudice against transgenders... it's not. The problem is, when you allow persons with penises into the women's restrooms, you also allow sexual predators. There is no way for us to discern if someone is a "harmless transgender" person or a sexual predator. By enabling this policy, you remove the reasonable expectation factor under the law... so now, if you have a sexual predator in the women's room, they can simply claim they were within their rights to be there (gender identity).

Look... imagine a court case where a victim claims to have been sexually molested in a women's restroom... It will all boil down to the predator's word against the victim. There is no reason for the predator not to have been there... whereas, if you have the restriction of females only, then what was he doing there? This might determine the outcome of such a case. All because we're trying to appease confused men who think they are women.

But hey... I am an open-minded guy! ...If we're going to make this law of the land, that males can go into female restrooms, then so be it... I will begin to use women's restrooms exclusively from now on! I will also encourage every virile heterosexual male out there to do the same... just claim you felt like a woman today! What are you going to do about that? Challenge my gender identity?

You ignored the relevant part of that. Nobody is saying all men should be allowed in women's restrooms.They are saying transgender. Nobody becomes transgender until they begin the transition and live their lives as a woman.That transition includes much more than putting on a dress. If you claim "I just feel like a woman today" that doesn't meet the criteria, and you know it. In your scenario, the obvious first question would be "Is the accused living as a woman, and when did that begin" . If the accused had actually begun living as a woman, then it would be a he said--she said case as you describe. If not, then every law that is in effect now could be used against him. Please tell me where you think I am wrong.

All the man has to do is say he feels like a woman

www.fpiw.org/blog/2015/12/29/wa-human-rights-commission-all-businesses-must-let-men-in-womens-bathroom

If that was all it took to be transgender, I would agree with you. There is a lot more to it than that.

I got it! If a female sees a transvestites penis in a bathroom they should be found guilty of indecent exposure just like any man would.

If she uses the stall like a lady, no harm no foul.

This is happening all over America anyways folks.

 

[Boss]

Well we know she bothers you people but that's your problem. You tell me how she bothers you and we will both see that she really isn't bothering you at all. The problem with you is all in your fucking stupid head.

The problem is, you don't see the problem. You're imagining the problem to be some sort of prejudice against transgenders... it's not. The problem is, when you allow persons with penises into the women's restrooms, you also allow sexual predators. There is no way for us to discern if someone is a "harmless transgender" person or a sexual predator. By enabling this policy, you remove the reasonable expectation factor under the law... so now, if you have a sexual predator in the women's room, they can simply claim they were within their rights to be there (gender identity).

Look... imagine a court case where a victim claims to have been sexually molested in a women's restroom... It will all boil down to the predator's word against the victim. There is no reason for the predator not to have been there... whereas, if you have the restriction of females only, then what was he doing there? This might determine the outcome of such a case. All because we're trying to appease confused men who think they are women.

But hey... I am an open-minded guy! ...If we're going to make this law of the land, that males can go into female restrooms, then so be it... I will begin to use women's restrooms exclusively from now on! I will also encourage every virile heterosexual male out there to do the same... just claim you felt like a woman today! What are you going to do about that? Challenge my gender identity?

You ignored the relevant part of that. Nobody is saying all men should be allowed in women's restrooms.They are saying transgender. Nobody becomes transgender until they begin the transition and live their lives as a woman.That transition includes much more than putting on a dress. If you claim "I just feel like a woman today" that doesn't meet the criteria, and you know it. In your scenario, the obvious first question would be "Is the accused living as a woman, and when did that begin" . If the accused had actually begun living as a woman, then it would be a he said--she said case as you describe. If not, then every law that is in effect now could be used against him. Please tell me where you think I am wrong.

What do you mean by "living as a woman"? How do women live any different than men? Criteria? WHAT criteria? You've set the criteria at "gender identity" and that's what I would use. It shouldn't matter how I "live as" ...whatever that means... or what I am wearing for that matter. And what is this "when it began" bullshit? Do transgenders have to undergo some initiation period?

It sounds like you have a more impossible task of disproving my gender identity than normal people would have in proving a transgender wasn't a woman. Am I going to be put through an interrogation every time I need to use the restroom? Are you going to judge me on the basis of how I am dressed? Are you going to question my gender identity based on your fucking opinion? No... let me tell you what you're going to do... you're going to allow ME to use the women's restroom or I will call the ACLU and my attorney and sue your ass off for violating my rights.

 

[BULLDOG]

Well we know she bothers you people but that's your problem. You tell me how she bothers you and we will both see that she really isn't bothering you at all. The problem with you is all in your fucking stupid head.

The problem is, you don't see the problem. You're imagining the problem to be some sort of prejudice against transgenders... it's not. The problem is, when you allow persons with penises into the women's restrooms, you also allow sexual predators. There is no way for us to discern if someone is a "harmless transgender" person or a sexual predator. By enabling this policy, you remove the reasonable expectation factor under the law... so now, if you have a sexual predator in the women's room, they can simply claim they were within their rights to be there (gender identity).

Look... imagine a court case where a victim claims to have been sexually molested in a women's restroom... It will all boil down to the predator's word against the victim. There is no reason for the predator not to have been there... whereas, if you have the restriction of females only, then what was he doing there? This might determine the outcome of such a case. All because we're trying to appease confused men who think they are women.

But hey... I am an open-minded guy! ...If we're going to make this law of the land, that males can go into female restrooms, then so be it... I will begin to use women's restrooms exclusively from now on! I will also encourage every virile heterosexual male out there to do the same... just claim you felt like a woman today! What are you going to do about that? Challenge my gender identity?

You ignored the relevant part of that. Nobody is saying all men should be allowed in women's restrooms.They are saying transgender. Nobody becomes transgender until they begin the transition and live their lives as a woman.That transition

Well we know she bothers you people but that's your problem. You tell me how she bothers you and we will both see that she really isn't bothering you at all. The problem with you is all in your fucking stupid head.

The problem is, you don't see the problem. You're imagining the problem to be some sort of prejudice against transgenders... it's not. The problem is, when you allow persons with penises into the women's restrooms, you also allow sexual predators. There is no way for us to discern if someone is a "harmless transgender" person or a sexual predator. By enabling this policy, you remove the reasonable expectation factor under the law... so now, if you have a sexual predator in the women's room, they can simply claim they were within their rights to be there (gender identity).

Look... imagine a court case where a victim claims to have been sexually molested in a women's restroom... It will all boil down to the predator's word against the victim. There is no reason for the predator not to have been there... whereas, if you have the restriction of females only, then what was he doing there? This might determine the outcome of such a case. All because we're trying to appease confused men who think they are women.

But hey... I am an open-minded guy! ...If we're going to make this law of the land, that males can go into female restrooms, then so be it... I will begin to use women's restrooms exclusively from now on! I will also encourage every virile heterosexual male out there to do the same... just claim you felt like a woman today! What are you going to do about that? Challenge my gender identity?

You ignored the relevant part of that. Nobody is saying all men should be allowed in women's restrooms.They are saying transgender. Nobody becomes transgender until they begin the transition and live their lives as a woman.That transition includes much more than putting on a dress. If you claim "I just feel like a woman today" that doesn't meet the criteria, and you know it. In your scenario, the obvious first question would be "Is the accused living as a woman, and when did that begin" . If the accused had actually begun living as a woman, then it would be a he said--she said case as you describe. If not, then every law that is in effect now could be used against him. Please tell me where you think I am wrong.

All the man has to do is say he feels like a woman

www.fpiw.org/blog/2015/12/29/wa-human-rights-commission-all-businesses-must-let-men-in-womens-bathroom

includes much more than putting on a dress. If you claim "I just feel like a woman today" that doesn't meet the criteria, and you know it. In your scenario, the obvious first question would be "Is the accused living as a woman, and when did that begin" . If the accused had actually begun living as a woman, then it would be a he said--she said case as you describe. If not, then every law that is in effect now could be used against him. Please tell me where you think I am wrong.

All the man has to do is say he feels like a woman

www.fpiw.org/blog/2015/12/29/wa-human-rights-commission-all-businesses-must-let-men-in-womens-bathroom

The article in your link makes that false claim, but it is not in the actual text of the Human-rights-commission finding.

 

[sealybobo]

Well we know she bothers you people but that's your problem. You tell me how she bothers you and we will both see that she really isn't bothering you at all. The problem with you is all in your fucking stupid head.

The problem is, you don't see the problem. You're imagining the problem to be some sort of prejudice against transgenders... it's not. The problem is, when you allow persons with penises into the women's restrooms, you also allow sexual predators. There is no way for us to discern if someone is a "harmless transgender" person or a sexual predator. By enabling this policy, you remove the reasonable expectation factor under the law... so now, if you have a sexual predator in the women's room, they can simply claim they were within their rights to be there (gender identity).

Look... imagine a court case where a victim claims to have been sexually molested in a women's restroom... It will all boil down to the predator's word against the victim. There is no reason for the predator not to have been there... whereas, if you have the restriction of females only, then what was he doing there? This might determine the outcome of such a case. All because we're trying to appease confused men who think they are women.

But hey... I am an open-minded guy! ...If we're going to make this law of the land, that males can go into female restrooms, then so be it... I will begin to use women's restrooms exclusively from now on! I will also encourage every virile heterosexual male out there to do the same... just claim you felt like a woman today! What are you going to do about that? Challenge my gender identity?

You ignored the relevant part of that. Nobody is saying all men should be allowed in women's restrooms.They are saying transgender. Nobody becomes transgender until they begin the transition and live their lives as a woman.That transition includes much more than putting on a dress. If you claim "I just feel like a woman today" that doesn't meet the criteria, and you know it. In your scenario, the obvious first question would be "Is the accused living as a woman, and when did that begin" . If the accused had actually begun living as a woman, then it would be a he said--she said case as you describe. If not, then every law that is in effect now could be used against him. Please tell me where you think I am wrong.

What do you mean by "living as a woman"? How do women live any different than men? Criteria? WHAT criteria? You've set the criteria at "gender identity" and that's what I would use. It shouldn't matter how I "live as" ...whatever that means... or what I am wearing for that matter. And what is this "when it began" bullshit? Do transgenders have to undergo some initiation period?

It sounds like you have a more impossible task of disproving my gender identity than normal people would have in proving a transgender wasn't a woman. Am I going to be put through an interrogation every time I need to use the restroom? Are you going to judge me on the basis of how I am dressed? Are you going to question my gender identity based on your fucking opinion? No... let me tell you what you're going to do... you're going to allow ME to use the women's restroom or I will call the ACLU and my attorney and sue your ass off for violating my rights.

Looks like don't ask don't tells coming back

 

[Boss]

If she uses the stall like a lady, no harm no foul.

You mean HE... if HE uses the stall like a lady... and that's fine with me. I don't want to sexually molest anyone or expose myself. I do admit, there is something kind of erotic about the idea of being in a women's restroom stall next to a hot babe taking a piss. Perhaps catching a glimpse of her panties around her ankles under the bottom of the stall... I've got sort of a foot fetish... Kat's avatars drive me crazy man! It's kind of turning me on a little to think about it.... so when can we get the ball rolling on this new law? I'm getting horny!

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You are so full of [sealybobo]. Must be an election year because Republicans are trying desperately to fix the unfavorable rating they have with women.

Republicans will fling any and everything at us between now and election year no matter how imaginary their arguments are just to try to win over a few votes in hope of winning the election but I promise you this aint gonna work. Republicans are too obvious.

Whether that is true or not, this is certainly a good position to take.

Democrats are lining up behind the freaks who want to let creepy male perverts into women's restrooms, locker rooms, showers, and dressing facilities.

It's a safe bet that the overwhelming vast majority of women are not, and never will be, OK with this; nor will the vast majority of men who have wives, daughters, or sisters about whom they care.

So, let the Democrats back the perverts, freaks, and degenerates on this issue. It can only help the GOP to be seen as the party that is standing against this outrageous madness and evil. OK, so perhaps we'll lose whatever meager part we might otherwise have had of the LGBpbiWTF vote, but that's nothing compared the votes we'll gain from those who truly care about the safety and well-being of women.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I'm not the one with issues here, you are.

You're a man, who thinks h'orsh'/it's a woman, and who is seeking to have h'orsh'/it's healthy, functional male reproductive system mutilated into complete dysfunction, and formed into a poor imitation of female genitalia.

You are definitely, absolutely, the one with “issues”.

 

[deltex1]

Here's some trans peeps you might meet in the shit house. You need to know their bonafides before you ask them...wtfo?

List of transgender people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Seawytch]

ACtually the ladies room works just fine.

For ladies.

Also for Renae and Renae isn't bothering anyone so why does Renae bother you? You homophobic? Do you do know most homophobes are self loathing gays, right?

How do you know he doesn't bother anyone?

I can also tell you that gays have never bothered this women other than inside her diseased brainwashed mind.

she got punished for standing by her beliefs, Springsteen gets praised for standing by his.

But the same "performers" who won't play in NC will go to muslim countries where gays are executed. WTF?

She broke civil law, Springsteen did not.

 

[Seawytch]

It's a safe bet that the overwhelming vast majority of women are not, and never will be, OK with this; nor will the vast majority of men who have wives, daughters, or sisters about whom they care.

So, let the Democrats back the perverts, freaks, and degenerates on this issue. It can only help the GOP to be seen as the party that is standing against this outrageous madness and evil. OK, so perhaps we'll lose whatever meager part we might otherwise have had of the LGBpbiWTF vote, but that's nothing compared the votes we'll gain from those who truly care about the safety and well-being of women.

You're wrong. Women have much less of a problem with trans people in restrooms than men do. Same goes for young people. Older males have the problem...they'll die out.

Exclusive: Women, young more open on transgender issue in U.S. - Reuters/Ipsos poll | Reuters

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

For ladies.

Also for Renae and Renae isn't bothering anyone so why does Renae bother you? You homophobic? Do you do know most homophobes are self loathing gays, right?

How do you know he doesn't bother anyone?

I can also tell you that gays have never bothered this women other than inside her diseased brainwashed mind.

she got punished for standing by her beliefs, Springsteen gets praised for standing by his.

But the same "performers" who won't play in NC will go to muslim countries where gays are executed. WTF?

She broke civil law, Springsteen did not.

Wait, I cannot refuse to perform a service for money, but Springsteen can?

 

[BULLDOG]

Well we know she bothers you people but that's your problem. You tell me how she bothers you and we will both see that she really isn't bothering you at all. The problem with you is all in your fucking stupid head.

The problem is, you don't see the problem. You're imagining the problem to be some sort of prejudice against transgenders... it's not. The problem is, when you allow persons with penises into the women's restrooms, you also allow sexual predators. There is no way for us to discern if someone is a "harmless transgender" person or a sexual predator. By enabling this policy, you remove the reasonable expectation factor under the law... so now, if you have a sexual predator in the women's room, they can simply claim they were within their rights to be there (gender identity).

Look... imagine a court case where a victim claims to have been sexually molested in a women's restroom... It will all boil down to the predator's word against the victim. There is no reason for the predator not to have been there... whereas, if you have the restriction of females only, then what was he doing there? This might determine the outcome of such a case. All because we're trying to appease confused men who think they are women.

But hey... I am an open-minded guy! ...If we're going to make this law of the land, that males can go into female restrooms, then so be it... I will begin to use women's restrooms exclusively from now on! I will also encourage every virile heterosexual male out there to do the same... just claim you felt like a woman today! What are you going to do about that? Challenge my gender identity?

You ignored the relevant part of that. Nobody is saying all men should be allowed in women's restrooms.They are saying transgender. Nobody becomes transgender until they begin the transition and live their lives as a woman.That transition includes much more than putting on a dress. If you claim "I just feel like a woman today" that doesn't meet the criteria, and you know it. In your scenario, the obvious first question would be "Is the accused living as a woman, and when did that begin" . If the accused had actually begun living as a woman, then it would be a he said--she said case as you describe. If not, then every law that is in effect now could be used against him. Please tell me where you think I am wrong.

What do you mean by "living as a woman"? How do women live any different than men? Criteria? WHAT criteria? You've set the criteria at "gender identity" and that's what I would use. It shouldn't matter how I "live as" ...whatever that means... or what I am wearing for that matter. And what is this "when it began" bullshit? Do transgenders have to undergo some initiation period?

It sounds like you have a more impossible task of disproving my gender identity than normal people would have in proving a transgender wasn't a woman. Am I going to be put through an interrogation every time I need to use the restroom? Are you going to judge me on the basis of how I am dressed? Are you going to question my gender identity based on your fucking opinion? No... let me tell you what you're going to do... you're going to allow ME to use the women's restroom or I will call the ACLU and my attorney and sue your ass off for violating my rights.

You do make some points, but I see no problem with relying on community standards to determine if a person is actually trans, or just a guy in a dress. It works for the definition of pornography. No reason why it shouldn't work in lieu of a better form of identification.

 

[Borillar]

OK so your 8 year old daughter is in the women's bathroom washing her hands. A man, who thinks he's a woman, walks in, whips his dick out in front of her, and takes a leak.
OK with you?
If it is, you are one sick piece of shit.
Another wonderful democratic policy to add to their list.
And Bruce Springsteen: Fuck You. Your music sucks and apparently you do too. Pansy Ass worthless POS.
This country is fucked.

You are aware, aren't you, that the ladies room doesn't have urinals or troughs where a man can whip his dick out to pee in? They have closed stalls. There is little likelihood that your poor 8 year old daughter will be scarred for life by seeing a penis. I can understand why the ladies would be upset though. There always seems to be a waiting line for the ladies room at nearly any venue, while the men usually don't have to wait.

 

[Seawytch]

Also for Renae and Renae isn't bothering anyone so why does Renae bother you? You homophobic? Do you do know most homophobes are self loathing gays, right?

How do you know he doesn't bother anyone?

I can also tell you that gays have never bothered this women other than inside her diseased brainwashed mind.

she got punished for standing by her beliefs, Springsteen gets praised for standing by his.

But the same "performers" who won't play in NC will go to muslim countries where gays are executed. WTF?

She broke civil law, Springsteen did not.

Wait, I cannot refuse to perform a service for money, but Springsteen can?

Is Springsteen a government employee paid by the taxpayer?

 

[sealybobo]

If she uses the stall like a lady, no harm no foul.

You mean HE... if HE uses the stall like a lady... and that's fine with me. I don't want to sexually molest anyone or expose myself. I do admit, there is something kind of erotic about the idea of being in a women's restroom stall next to a hot babe taking a piss. Perhaps catching a glimpse of her panties around her ankles under the bottom of the stall... I've got sort of a foot fetish... Kat's avatars drive me crazy man! It's kind of turning me on a little to think about it.... so when can we get the ball rolling on this new law? I'm getting horny!

Dress up as a woman and meet me at lifetime fitness!

 

[sealybobo]

You are so full of [sealybobo]. Must be an election year because Republicans are trying desperately to fix the unfavorable rating they have with women.

Republicans will fling any and everything at us between now and election year no matter how imaginary their arguments are just to try to win over a few votes in hope of winning the election but I promise you this aint gonna work. Republicans are too obvious.

Whether that is true or not, this is certainly a good position to take.

Democrats are lining up behind the freaks who want to let creepy male perverts into women's restrooms, locker rooms, showers, and dressing facilities.

It's a safe bet that the overwhelming vast majority of women are not, and never will be, OK with this; nor will the vast majority of men who have wives, daughters, or sisters about whom they care.

So, let the Democrats back the perverts, freaks, and degenerates on this issue. It can only help the GOP to be seen as the party that is standing against this outrageous madness and evil. OK, so perhaps we'll lose whatever meager part we might otherwise have had of the LGBpbiWTF vote, but that's nothing compared the votes we'll gain from those who truly care about the safety and well-being of women.

Wrong! Ever see orange is the new black? They get along well in women's prisons when the law rules it wouldn't be safe to put them with men. What's wrong with you?

 

[Pop23]

Well we know she bothers you people but that's your problem. You tell me how she bothers you and we will both see that she really isn't bothering you at all. The problem with you is all in your fucking stupid head.

The problem is, you don't see the problem. You're imagining the problem to be some sort of prejudice against transgenders... it's not. The problem is, when you allow persons with penises into the women's restrooms, you also allow sexual predators. There is no way for us to discern if someone is a "harmless transgender" person or a sexual predator. By enabling this policy, you remove the reasonable expectation factor under the law... so now, if you have a sexual predator in the women's room, they can simply claim they were within their rights to be there (gender identity).

Look... imagine a court case where a victim claims to have been sexually molested in a women's restroom... It will all boil down to the predator's word against the victim. There is no reason for the predator not to have been there... whereas, if you have the restriction of females only, then what was he doing there? This might determine the outcome of such a case. All because we're trying to appease confused men who think they are women.

But hey... I am an open-minded guy! ...If we're going to make this law of the land, that males can go into female restrooms, then so be it... I will begin to use women's restrooms exclusively from now on! I will also encourage every virile heterosexual male out there to do the same... just claim you felt like a woman today! What are you going to do about that? Challenge my gender identity?

You ignored the relevant part of that. Nobody is saying all men should be allowed in women's restrooms.They are saying transgender. Nobody becomes transgender until they begin the transition and live their lives as a woman.That transition includes much more than putting on a dress. If you claim "I just feel like a woman today" that doesn't meet the criteria, and you know it. In your scenario, the obvious first question would be "Is the accused living as a woman, and when did that begin" . If the accused had actually begun living as a woman, then it would be a he said--she said case as you describe. If not, then every law that is in effect now could be used against him. Please tell me where you think I am wrong.

What do you mean by "living as a woman"? How do women live any different than men? Criteria? WHAT criteria? You've set the criteria at "gender identity" and that's what I would use. It shouldn't matter how I "live as" ...whatever that means... or what I am wearing for that matter. And what is this "when it began" bullshit? Do transgenders have to undergo some initiation period?

It sounds like you have a more impossible task of disproving my gender identity than normal people would have in proving a transgender wasn't a woman. Am I going to be put through an interrogation every time I need to use the restroom? Are you going to judge me on the basis of how I am dressed? Are you going to question my gender identity based on your fucking opinion? No... let me tell you what you're going to do... you're going to allow ME to use the women's restroom or I will call the ACLU and my attorney and sue your ass off for violating my rights.

You do make some points, but I see no problem with relying on community standards to determine if a person is actually trans, or just a guy in a dress. It works for the definition of pornography. No reason why it shouldn't work in lieu of a better form of identification.

You can see the porn, you can't see into the mind

 

[Boss]

You do make some points, but I see no problem with relying on community standards to determine if a person is actually trans, or just a guy in a dress. It works for the definition of pornography. No reason why it shouldn't work in lieu of a better form of identification.

But you can't leave it up to community standards if you pass some kind of law protecting gender identity as a constitutional individual right... and that's what we're currently debating. The FACT remains, a trans IS just a guy in a dress. They identify as women... that's the whole issue here. There is no transsexual gender, that's a contradiction of terms... an oxymoron. It's like saying there are male females. You are either xx chromosome or xy chromosome... male or female. There is no "in-between" here and there never has been. Even hermaphrodites are mostly one or the other.

Now.... IF we are going to make it to where "transgenders" who are males identifying as female, are allowed to go into women's restrooms as a matter of their rights... then you must allow anyone who is male to go in because you can't tell if they are legitimately "transgender" or just pretending to be. There is no test, no defining attribute, no way to discern this and be absolutely correct always.

 

[Boss]

If she uses the stall like a lady, no harm no foul.

You mean HE... if HE uses the stall like a lady... and that's fine with me. I don't want to sexually molest anyone or expose myself. I do admit, there is something kind of erotic about the idea of being in a women's restroom stall next to a hot babe taking a piss. Perhaps catching a glimpse of her panties around her ankles under the bottom of the stall... I've got sort of a foot fetish... Kat's avatars drive me crazy man! It's kind of turning me on a little to think about it.... so when can we get the ball rolling on this new law? I'm getting horny!

Dress up as a woman and meet me at lifetime fitness!

Why in the living hell would I ever want to do that? Gross!

 

[eagle1462010]