Men in women's bathrooms

[Boss]

Now if a man who is a pervert and not transgender walks into a woman's bathroom and starts whipping his penis around, then he will be arrested.

Well what if he DOESN'T do that but instead, he goes into the stall and masturbates to the sounds of women peeing around him because that turns him on? You okay with that? Or... what if he installs a hidden video camera in his shoe and he slips it over by the stall you're girlfriend, wife, mother is peeing in and videos her as she thinks it's just a shoe? Is that acceptable in your universe?

She's trying to be a woman because she feels that she should be a woman.

You don't KNOW how this individual feels and you have no way of really telling how they feel. All you can go by is what they CLAIM to feel. And that's why we can't go by how you FEEL... what's between your legs as your given genitalia is what matters. That's factually what you ARE... regardless of what you FEEL you are.

You have a vivid imagination. There is nothing stopping a perv from doing this now. You act like barring the transgendered from using the bathroom will put a stop to perverts in women's bathrooms. You're blaming the transgendered who just want to pee for all the perverts in the world. You seem to be very confused. Tell me something; we know that transgendered men to women have been using women's bathrooms for years. Why is it that now all of a sudden you are worried about it? It never caused a problem in the past, but now you are worried that it will? Again, you are very confused.

Yes there IS something stopping pervs.... Men aren't supposed to be in the ladies room! If they are caught there, they can go to jail.... or at least, they COULD. Now, who knows?

And it's certainly NOT a "vivid imagination" as there are literally dozens of stories popping up from all over America of perverts in restrooms, taking pictures, exposing themselves, the works! You've given them a convenient cover and you want to give them legal cover as well.

Whether transgenders have been using the women's restrooms is beside the point. I've never seen a tranny in the women's room but then, I don't go into the women's room! I have seen them in the men's room and it's not a big deal for me. They can have a dick and dress like a woman and use the men's room and no one cares... THAT has been the "norm" all these years. MEN being in women's restrooms hasn't.

 

[Skylar]

As we have seen in the past and will see again in the near future....laws can be changed...

Yup. As Obergefell demonstrated with same sex marriage.....laws can be changed.

 

[Skylar]

Now if a man who is a pervert and not transgender walks into a woman's bathroom and starts whipping his penis around, then he will be arrested.

Well what if he DOESN'T do that but instead, he goes into the stall and masturbates to the sounds of women peeing around him because that turns him on? You okay with that? Or... what if he installs a hidden video camera in his shoe and he slips it over by the stall you're girlfriend, wife, mother is peeing in and videos her as she thinks it's just a shoe? Is that acceptable in your universe?

She's trying to be a woman because she feels that she should be a woman.

You don't KNOW how this individual feels and you have no way of really telling how they feel. All you can go by is what they CLAIM to feel. And that's why we can't go by how you FEEL... what's between your legs as your given genitalia is what matters. That's factually what you ARE... regardless of what you FEEL you are.

You have a vivid imagination. There is nothing stopping a perv from doing this now. You act like barring the transgendered from using the bathroom will put a stop to perverts in women's bathrooms. You're blaming the transgendered who just want to pee for all the perverts in the world. You seem to be very confused. Tell me something; we know that transgendered men to women have been using women's bathrooms for years. Why is it that now all of a sudden you are worried about it? It never caused a problem in the past, but now you are worried that it will? Again, you are very confused.

Yes there IS something stopping pervs.... Men aren't supposed to be in the ladies room! If they are caught there, they can go to jail.... or at least, they COULD. Now, who knows?

And it's certainly NOT a "vivid imagination" as there are literally dozens of stories popping up from all over America of perverts in restrooms, taking pictures, exposing themselves, the works! You've given them a convenient cover and you want to give them legal cover as well.

Their actions are already illegal. It doesn't matter if someone is a transwoman, man or biological female.....if you're taking pictures of people in the next stall, you'll get arrested.

 

[Pop23]

Why worry about what doesn't happen?

Leave it to Seawytch to deny that women were the victims of rape or that they are not tormented by their assault. This poor woman suffers from PTSD from her attack and just wishes to use the bathroom without men in it. And SW's response is essentially "good bitch - you deserved it". Sickening.

"Here is my concern: as a rape survivor, who is going to compensate me for my trauma when I have to use a public restroom where a man is permitted to go in with his penis (rapists' weapon of choice) or tend to "cleanup on aisle 6" when my PTSD won't permit me to enter an area where I don't feel safe? Where is my safe zone?"

The liberals have had the real War on Women going for roughly two hundred years now. I guess they figured it was time to crank it up a notch or two.

Why would you lie about what I've said? Because your position is so weak, of course.

No rape victims are concerned about trans women in restrooms, it simply doesn't happen.

But your concern for PTSD victims is touching. I'm sure you feel the same thing about victims of PTSD that say they're are concerned about people with open carry permits, right?

Different Perspective On Gun Control: PTSD Veterans Suffer In Open Carry State - The Ring of Fire Network

Nothing but deflections

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

If you have none, you are simply babbling

 

[Pop23]

As we have seen in the past and will see again in the near future....laws can be changed...

Yup. As Obergefell demonstrated with same sex marriage.....laws can be changed.

And changed back when legal principles like "simalarily situated" are changed.

Unintended consequences perhaps?

If one man can be denied entry to a facility even though he is simalar to the other, what makes you think same sex marriage can stand under the same principle?

 

[Boss]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

 

[Boss]

Why worry about what doesn't happen?

Leave it to Seawytch to deny that women were the victims of rape or that they are not tormented by their assault. This poor woman suffers from PTSD from her attack and just wishes to use the bathroom without men in it. And SW's response is essentially "good bitch - you deserved it". Sickening.

"Here is my concern: as a rape survivor, who is going to compensate me for my trauma when I have to use a public restroom where a man is permitted to go in with his penis (rapists' weapon of choice) or tend to "cleanup on aisle 6" when my PTSD won't permit me to enter an area where I don't feel safe? Where is my safe zone?"

The liberals have had the real War on Women going for roughly two hundred years now. I guess they figured it was time to crank it up a notch or two.

Why would you lie about what I've said? Because your position is so weak, of course.

No rape victims are concerned about trans women in restrooms, it simply doesn't happen.

But your concern for PTSD victims is touching. I'm sure you feel the same thing about victims of PTSD that say they're are concerned about people with open carry permits, right?

Different Perspective On Gun Control: PTSD Veterans Suffer In Open Carry State - The Ring of Fire Network

Nothing but deflections

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

If you have none, you are simply babbling

Sorry Pops... my last post was intended for Seabitch.

 

[Pop23]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

Oh, I understand completely, it's the morons that think you can include trans males, and keep out all males that have explaining to do.

See, it works like this:

If the state can determine that one male with a penis can be excluded while not excluding another male with a penis, they have redefined the legal reasoning known as "simalarily situated" in such a severe way that Same Sex Marriage bans could again be legal.

It's incredible to me that the LGBT is not fully supporting the North Carolina law and joining in on the Target boycott

 

[Zoom-boing]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

Oh, I understand completely, it's the morons that think you can include trans males, and keep out all males that have explaining to do.

See, it works like this:

If the state can determine that one male with a penis can be excluded while not excluding another male with a penis, they have redefined the legal reasoning known as "simalarily situated" in such a severe way that Same Sex Marriage bans could again be legal.

It's incredible to me that the LGBT is not fully supporting the North Carolina law and joining in on the Target boycott

I've read your pov on this in many different threads, pop. I've noticed that not one person offers any counter argument to it.

What say you, trans-bathroom supporters? Someone? Anyone? Bueller?

 

[Yousaidwhat]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

Oh, I understand completely, it's the morons that think you can include trans males, and keep out all males that have explaining to do.

See, it works like this:

If the state can determine that one male with a penis can be excluded while not excluding another male with a penis, they have redefined the legal reasoning known as "simalarily situated" in such a severe way that Same Sex Marriage bans could again be legal.

It's incredible to me that the LGBT is not fully supporting the North Carolina law and joining in on the Target boycott

I've read your pov on this in many different threads, pop. I've noticed that not one person offers any counter argument to it.

What say you, trans-bathroom supporters? Someone? Anyone? Bueller?

They disappeared when asked should Curves have to open their doors to the trans-gendered and give them memberships and access to the shower and locker rooms.

 

[P@triot]

So prove it. Prove the creator of the video isn't from the south. (You can't)

As usual - you don't read what is written but instead see what you want to see. At no point did I say anything about whether or not he was from the south. I said is southern accent is completely fake. You can tell because he over does it at some points and loses it a bit at others. It's totally fake. Only someone like you would believe it

 

[Pop23]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

Oh, I understand completely, it's the morons that think you can include trans males, and keep out all males that have explaining to do.

See, it works like this:

If the state can determine that one male with a penis can be excluded while not excluding another male with a penis, they have redefined the legal reasoning known as "simalarily situated" in such a severe way that Same Sex Marriage bans could again be legal.

It's incredible to me that the LGBT is not fully supporting the North Carolina law and joining in on the Target boycott

I've read your pov on this in many different threads, pop. I've noticed that not one person offers any counter argument to it.

What say you, trans-bathroom supporters? Someone? Anyone? Bueller?

They disappeared when asked should Curves have to open their doors to the trans-gendered and give them memberships and access to the shower and locker rooms.

See the problem? Civil discrimination lawsuits could be oppressive and bring even the largest companies down.

And for what?

 

[P@triot]

Why worry about what doesn't happen?

Leave it to Seawytch to deny that women were the victims of rape or that they are not tormented by their assault. This poor woman suffers from PTSD from her attack and just wishes to use the bathroom without men in it. And SW's response is essentially "good bitch - you deserved it". Sickening.

"Here is my concern: as a rape survivor, who is going to compensate me for my trauma when I have to use a public restroom where a man is permitted to go in with his penis (rapists' weapon of choice) or tend to "cleanup on aisle 6" when my PTSD won't permit me to enter an area where I don't feel safe? Where is my safe zone?"

The liberals have had the real War on Women going for roughly two hundred years now. I guess they figured it was time to crank it up a notch or two.

Why would you lie about what I've said? Because your position is so weak, of course.

No rape victims are concerned about trans women in restrooms, it simply doesn't happen.

But your concern for PTSD victims is touching. I'm sure you feel the same thing about victims of PTSD that say they're are concerned about people with open carry permits, right?

Different Perspective On Gun Control: PTSD Veterans Suffer In Open Carry State - The Ring of Fire Network

No. I don't. At all. You know why? Because I have a Constitutional right to carry firearms and protect myself from idiot cross-dressers like you. But there is no constitutional right to use the restroom of the opposite sex. As always you're an idiot who doesn't understand the Constitution, the law, or basic common sense.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

Oh, I understand completely, it's the morons that think you can include trans males, and keep out all males that have explaining to do.

See, it works like this:

If the state can determine that one male with a penis can be excluded while not excluding another male with a penis, they have redefined the legal reasoning known as "simalarily situated" in such a severe way that Same Sex Marriage bans could again be legal.

It's incredible to me that the LGBT is not fully supporting the North Carolina law and joining in on the Target boycott

I've read your pov on this in many different threads, pop. I've noticed that not one person offers any counter argument to it.

What say you, trans-bathroom supporters? Someone? Anyone? Bueller?

They disappeared when asked should Curves have to open their doors to the trans-gendered and give them memberships and access to the shower and locker rooms.

See the problem? Civil discrimination lawsuits could be oppressive and bring even the largest companies down.

And for what?

Chicks with dicks

 

[P@triot]

Of course they have. Where do you think they've been peeing? Assholes like you try to stop them from doing so which is why protections from discrimination are needed. There are ACTUALLY incidents of being being harassed in restrooms unlike your fantasy of children being in danger from trans folk.

You're so dumb - you keep defeating your own argument. First you claim that we can't tell that a man is dressed up like a woman. You've insisted it. Next you claim they've been using the wrong restrooms for decades. But in the same breath, you then claim that cross-dressers need laws because they are being "harassed". Wait....how can they be "harassed" when we can't tell who they are and they have been using the restroom of the opposite sex for decades?!?

Seawytch....taking stupid to a whole new level since birth. Nobody defeats her own position like Seawytch. I guess when one is a hateful, angry bigot out to get "straight" people, one doesn't think very clearly.

 

[Pop23]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

Oh, I understand completely, it's the morons that think you can include trans males, and keep out all males that have explaining to do.

See, it works like this:

If the state can determine that one male with a penis can be excluded while not excluding another male with a penis, they have redefined the legal reasoning known as "simalarily situated" in such a severe way that Same Sex Marriage bans could again be legal.

It's incredible to me that the LGBT is not fully supporting the North Carolina law and joining in on the Target boycott

I've read your pov on this in many different threads, pop. I've noticed that not one person offers any counter argument to it.

What say you, trans-bathroom supporters? Someone? Anyone? Bueller?

They disappeared when asked should Curves have to open their doors to the trans-gendered and give them memberships and access to the shower and locker rooms.

I started a thread earlier on this thinking the lefties would address the issue, none bothered

 

[P@triot]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

Oh, I understand completely, it's the morons that think you can include trans males, and keep out all males that have explaining to do.

See, it works like this:

If the state can determine that one male with a penis can be excluded while not excluding another male with a penis, they have redefined the legal reasoning known as "simalarily situated" in such a severe way that Same Sex Marriage bans could again be legal.

It's incredible to me that the LGBT is not fully supporting the North Carolina law and joining in on the Target boycott

I've read your pov on this in many different threads, pop. I've noticed that not one person offers any counter argument to it.

What say you, trans-bathroom supporters? Someone? Anyone? Bueller?

I can't believe you just said that Zoom. Do you not realize that people like Wytch aren't smart enough to understand the issue or Pop23's post? If they were smart enough to understand it, they wouldn't have the insane position that it's ok for cross-dressers and predators to use the restroom of the opposite sex.

 

[P@triot]

So, what legal basis do you use to deny all males from using women only restrooms while allowing a select few to use women only facilities.

It's called a PENIS... look between you legs for a flabby bit of flesh, generally accompanied by two testicles, also known as balls. If you have such equipment, by definition and convention, you have no business in a "womens" restroom, bathroom, shower, changing room, or anything else designated for the use of WOMEN. ....Did momma and daddy not teach you this????

Oh, I understand completely, it's the morons that think you can include trans males, and keep out all males that have explaining to do.

See, it works like this:

If the state can determine that one male with a penis can be excluded while not excluding another male with a penis, they have redefined the legal reasoning known as "simalarily situated" in such a severe way that Same Sex Marriage bans could again be legal.

It's incredible to me that the LGBT is not fully supporting the North Carolina law and joining in on the Target boycott

I've read your pov on this in many different threads, pop. I've noticed that not one person offers any counter argument to it.

What say you, trans-bathroom supporters? Someone? Anyone? Bueller?

They disappeared when asked should Curves have to open their doors to the trans-gendered and give them memberships and access to the shower and locker rooms.

I started a thread earlier on this thinking the lefties would address the issue, none bothered

And none will....because nobody can defend the indefensible. That's exactly what makes it indefensible.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

You and I both knew they would run.

If trans-gendered are given access to women's restrooms then they cannot deny trans-gendered into Women's only businesses and that includes showers and locker rooms.

They will be showering and changing in public pool facilities and other related facilities.

 

[P@triot]

Seawytch "logic" 101:

"Transgenders are completely and totally indistinguishable from anybody else. They've been using the restrooms of the opposite sex for decades and none of you could tell."

"We needs laws granting transgenders access to the restrooms of the opposite sex because you bad people pick them out of the crowd and harass them. I have "proof" of these incidents."

Yes folks....she really is that stupid. Only an angry, hateful bigot could make these exact arguments in the same thread, in the same posts, and sometimes, even in the same breath....