Seattle man starts using women's locker room

[Blackrook]

You treat this as a non-zero sum game, but in each instance there is a good chance that there are people on both sides who will be uncomfortable, either with the man using the women's locker room, or the man (who thinks he is a woman) being denied access and being told to use the men's locker room.

My question is, why does his discomfort outweigh the women's/girl's discomfort?

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

BULLDOG, just admit that your liberal agenda has now led to a result that a man who may or may not be a pedophile now has access to the women's room and can watch little girls taking off their clothes.

No. I'm saying a law was poorly written.

BULLDOG, the law was written exactly as intended. The liberals who run Washington state wanted to give men access to women's rooms and so they passed a law making that legal. BULLDOG, since you are a liberal and back it's agenda, this situation is entirely your fault. It is your fault that pedophile men will now be allowed to watch little girls take showers and upload their photos to kiddie porn websites.

You're funny. Stupid, but funny.

You just abandoned the debate and started insulting me instead. That means you lose and I win.

 

[BULLDOG]

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

BULLDOG, just admit that your liberal agenda has now led to a result that a man who may or may not be a pedophile now has access to the women's room and can watch little girls taking off their clothes.

No. I'm saying a law was poorly written.

BULLDOG, the law was written exactly as intended. The liberals who run Washington state wanted to give men access to women's rooms and so they passed a law making that legal. BULLDOG, since you are a liberal and back it's agenda, this situation is entirely your fault. It is your fault that pedophile men will now be allowed to watch little girls take showers and upload their photos to kiddie porn websites.

You're funny. Stupid, but funny.

You just abandoned the debate and started insulting me instead. That means you lose and I win.

You saying that liberals want to give men access to women's rooms ended any debate and flew off to crazy land. It was funny, though.

 

[martybegan]

So, they need to refine the law to prevent lecherous actions. Just because the law was poorly written doesn't mean it can't be changed to reflect the intended goal.

Protecting young girls comes before a man's need to think he's a woman for a day. Fact.

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

You treat this as a non-zero sum game, but in each instance there is a good chance that there are people on both sides who will be uncomfortable, either with the man using the women's locker room, or the man (who thinks he is a woman) being denied access and being told to use the men's locker room.

My question is, why does his discomfort outweigh the women's/girl's discomfort?

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

It has to be one or the other, someone is gonna have either their feelings hurt, or going to feel uncomfortable in the situation.

 

[hadit]

Protecting young girls comes before a man's need to think he's a woman for a day. Fact.

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

Simple solution, but it costs more. Put up a non-gender specific locker room for adults only. I wonder how many women would use it.

I guess that might be one solution, but I;m sure there is a better one. Nobody said writing good laws was easy, but they claimed they could do it when they asked to be elected. Now they need to show us that skill they claimed.

What better way is there? You have two rooms in which people get naked and some of those people are children. I guess you could set times and no transgenders allowed in either during the time most children would be in there, but that gets complicated too. I can also guarantee that there would not be many, if any, women in the womens' room during transgender hours. It wouldn't work.

I have no idea what better way might be available. Fortunately, anonymous people on the interwebs aren't responsible to determine that. We elected people to make those decisions, so now, they need to do their job.

I have a better way. If you're a man, with male physical characteristics, use the men's locker room. If you are a woman, with female physical characteristics, use the women's locker room.

 

[hadit]

So, they need to refine the law to prevent lecherous actions. Just because the law was poorly written doesn't mean it can't be changed to reflect the intended goal.

Protecting young girls comes before a man's need to think he's a woman for a day. Fact.

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

You treat this as a non-zero sum game, but in each instance there is a good chance that there are people on both sides who will be uncomfortable, either with the man using the women's locker room, or the man (who thinks he is a woman) being denied access and being told to use the men's locker room.

My question is, why does his discomfort outweigh the women's/girl's discomfort?

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

BULLDOG, just admit that your liberal agenda has now led to a result that a man who may or may not be a pedophile now has access to the women's room and can watch little girls taking off their clothes.

It doesn't even have to be a pedophile, it could just be a man getting his jollies pretending he thinks he's a woman so he can perv on naked women.

 

[Slyhunter]

I'm a lesbian in a man's body.

 

[BULLDOG]

So, they need to refine the law to prevent lecherous actions. Just because the law was poorly written doesn't mean it can't be changed to reflect the intended goal.

Protecting young girls comes before a man's need to think he's a woman for a day. Fact.

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

You treat this as a non-zero sum game, but in each instance there is a good chance that there are people on both sides who will be uncomfortable, either with the man using the women's locker room, or the man (who thinks he is a woman) being denied access and being told to use the men's locker room.

My question is, why does his discomfort outweigh the women's/girl's discomfort?

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

It has to be one or the other, someone is gonna have either their feelings hurt, or going to feel uncomfortable in the situation.

That's the way it stands now, but I'm not ready to say something better can be done. No, I don't know what that something better is, but there are a lot of smart people around, and I'm willing to see what they might have to say.

 

[jc456]

So, they need to refine the law to prevent lecherous actions. Just because the law was poorly written doesn't mean it can't be changed to reflect the intended goal.

Protecting young girls comes before a man's need to think he's a woman for a day. Fact.

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

Simple solution, but it costs more. Put up a non-gender specific locker room for adults only. I wonder how many women would use it.

I guess that might be one solution, but I;m sure there is a better one. Nobody said writing good laws was easy, but they claimed they could do it when they asked to be elected. Now they need to show us that skill they claimed.

not everything has a solution, and it is a common problem for libturds.

 

[martybegan]

Protecting young girls comes before a man's need to think he's a woman for a day. Fact.

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

You treat this as a non-zero sum game, but in each instance there is a good chance that there are people on both sides who will be uncomfortable, either with the man using the women's locker room, or the man (who thinks he is a woman) being denied access and being told to use the men's locker room.

My question is, why does his discomfort outweigh the women's/girl's discomfort?

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

It has to be one or the other, someone is gonna have either their feelings hurt, or going to feel uncomfortable in the situation.

That's the way it stands now, but I'm not ready to say something better can be done. No, I don't know what that something better is, but there are a lot of smart people around, and I'm willing to see what they might have to say.

The only solution that lets guys with their twig and berries still on use the ladies room is to somehow make the women no longer uncomfortable with that situation. Short of "re-education" or brainwashing, good luck with that.

The solution is you use the locker room your parts dictate, or places start adding ????? locker rooms that anyone can use as a 3rd option.

 

[martybegan]

So, they need to refine the law to prevent lecherous actions. Just because the law was poorly written doesn't mean it can't be changed to reflect the intended goal.

Protecting young girls comes before a man's need to think he's a woman for a day. Fact.

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

Simple solution, but it costs more. Put up a non-gender specific locker room for adults only. I wonder how many women would use it.

I guess that might be one solution, but I;m sure there is a better one. Nobody said writing good laws was easy, but they claimed they could do it when they asked to be elected. Now they need to show us that skill they claimed.

not everything has a solution, and it is a common problem for libturds.

I find it that the issue becomes there is a solution, but it's a bad one that favors whatever side whines the loudest, or has the higher tier of victimhood claims.

 

[BULLDOG]

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

You treat this as a non-zero sum game, but in each instance there is a good chance that there are people on both sides who will be uncomfortable, either with the man using the women's locker room, or the man (who thinks he is a woman) being denied access and being told to use the men's locker room.

My question is, why does his discomfort outweigh the women's/girl's discomfort?

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

It has to be one or the other, someone is gonna have either their feelings hurt, or going to feel uncomfortable in the situation.

That's the way it stands now, but I'm not ready to say something better can be done. No, I don't know what that something better is, but there are a lot of smart people around, and I'm willing to see what they might have to say.

The only solution that lets guys with their twig and berries still on use the ladies room is to somehow make the women no longer uncomfortable with that situation. Short of "re-education" or brainwashing, good luck with that.

The solution is you use the locker room your parts dictate, or places start adding ????? locker rooms that anyone can use as a 3rd option.

I don't claim this is the answer, but if the transgender could show other efforts made in their change, I'm sure that would smooth things quite a bit. If someone is truly transgender, they have made more changes than just which bathroom they use.

 

[jc456]

You treat this as a non-zero sum game, but in each instance there is a good chance that there are people on both sides who will be uncomfortable, either with the man using the women's locker room, or the man (who thinks he is a woman) being denied access and being told to use the men's locker room.

My question is, why does his discomfort outweigh the women's/girl's discomfort?

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

BULLDOG, just admit that your liberal agenda has now led to a result that a man who may or may not be a pedophile now has access to the women's room and can watch little girls taking off their clothes.

No. I'm saying a law was poorly written.

BULLDOG, the law was written exactly as intended. The liberals who run Washington state wanted to give men access to women's rooms and so they passed a law making that legal. BULLDOG, since you are a liberal and back it's agenda, this situation is entirely your fault. It is your fault that pedophile men will now be allowed to watch little girls take showers and upload their photos to kiddie porn websites.

You're funny. Stupid, but funny.

and spot on. What isn't true with what he posted?

 

[martybegan]

You treat this as a non-zero sum game, but in each instance there is a good chance that there are people on both sides who will be uncomfortable, either with the man using the women's locker room, or the man (who thinks he is a woman) being denied access and being told to use the men's locker room.

My question is, why does his discomfort outweigh the women's/girl's discomfort?

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

It has to be one or the other, someone is gonna have either their feelings hurt, or going to feel uncomfortable in the situation.

That's the way it stands now, but I'm not ready to say something better can be done. No, I don't know what that something better is, but there are a lot of smart people around, and I'm willing to see what they might have to say.

The only solution that lets guys with their twig and berries still on use the ladies room is to somehow make the women no longer uncomfortable with that situation. Short of "re-education" or brainwashing, good luck with that.

The solution is you use the locker room your parts dictate, or places start adding ????? locker rooms that anyone can use as a 3rd option.

I don't claim this is the answer, but if the transgender could show other efforts made in their change, I'm sure that would smooth things quite a bit. If someone is truly transgender, they have made more changes than just which bathroom they use.

Again, why are the police, officials, and everyone else wasting so much freaking time just so some idiot can feel validated by using the wrong locker room?????

These people need to be kindly told to "piss off", no pun intended.

 

[BULLDOG]

I don't think it has to be either/or . If no solution is forthcoming, the children have to be protected at all costs, but I;m not sure we are at that point yet.

BULLDOG, just admit that your liberal agenda has now led to a result that a man who may or may not be a pedophile now has access to the women's room and can watch little girls taking off their clothes.

No. I'm saying a law was poorly written.

BULLDOG, the law was written exactly as intended. The liberals who run Washington state wanted to give men access to women's rooms and so they passed a law making that legal. BULLDOG, since you are a liberal and back it's agenda, this situation is entirely your fault. It is your fault that pedophile men will now be allowed to watch little girls take showers and upload their photos to kiddie porn websites.

You're funny. Stupid, but funny.

and spot on. What isn't true with what he posted?

You really think anybody wanted to give men access to women's rooms, that's just nuts. Not much different than most claims made by right wingers though.

 

[jc456]

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

Simple solution, but it costs more. Put up a non-gender specific locker room for adults only. I wonder how many women would use it.

I guess that might be one solution, but I;m sure there is a better one. Nobody said writing good laws was easy, but they claimed they could do it when they asked to be elected. Now they need to show us that skill they claimed.

What better way is there? You have two rooms in which people get naked and some of those people are children. I guess you could set times and no transgenders allowed in either during the time most children would be in there, but that gets complicated too. I can also guarantee that there would not be many, if any, women in the womens' room during transgender hours. It wouldn't work.

I have no idea what better way might be available. Fortunately, anonymous people on the interwebs aren't responsible to determine that. We elected people to make those decisions, so now, they need to do their job.

I have a better way. If you're a man, with male physical characteristics, use the men's locker room. If you are a woman, with female physical characteristics, use the women's locker room.

isn't that the way it's always been?

 

[jc456]

Protecting young girls comes before a man's need to think he's a woman for a day. Fact.

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

Simple solution, but it costs more. Put up a non-gender specific locker room for adults only. I wonder how many women would use it.

I guess that might be one solution, but I;m sure there is a better one. Nobody said writing good laws was easy, but they claimed they could do it when they asked to be elected. Now they need to show us that skill they claimed.

not everything has a solution, and it is a common problem for libturds.

I find it that the issue becomes there is a solution, but it's a bad one that favors whatever side whines the loudest, or has the higher tier of victimhood claims.

well that's it right? there is no solution that will satisfy both genders. NO FKN way. The libturds live in this fantasy land that they think they have all the answers. It is what drives me mostly nuts about libturds.

They use no cognoscente thought process. They are all about making a side happy and pissing the living shit out of the other and then saying too fkn bad.

 

[jc456]

BULLDOG, just admit that your liberal agenda has now led to a result that a man who may or may not be a pedophile now has access to the women's room and can watch little girls taking off their clothes.

No. I'm saying a law was poorly written.

BULLDOG, the law was written exactly as intended. The liberals who run Washington state wanted to give men access to women's rooms and so they passed a law making that legal. BULLDOG, since you are a liberal and back it's agenda, this situation is entirely your fault. It is your fault that pedophile men will now be allowed to watch little girls take showers and upload their photos to kiddie porn websites.

You're funny. Stupid, but funny.

and spot on. What isn't true with what he posted?

You really think anybody wanted to give men access to women's rooms, that's just nuts. Not much different than most claims made by right wingers though.

what else is it? A transgender still has male parts fool. WTF is wrong with you?

And I would have to bet they still enjoy a good climax.

 

[bucs90]

So a grown man got to walk into a girls rest room as a young girls swim team was changing clothes? Hmmm. Libs are ok with this I suppose.

But....God forbid you spank your child....libs want child protective services to come take the kid away.

 

[BULLDOG]

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

Simple solution, but it costs more. Put up a non-gender specific locker room for adults only. I wonder how many women would use it.

I guess that might be one solution, but I;m sure there is a better one. Nobody said writing good laws was easy, but they claimed they could do it when they asked to be elected. Now they need to show us that skill they claimed.

not everything has a solution, and it is a common problem for libturds.

I find it that the issue becomes there is a solution, but it's a bad one that favors whatever side whines the loudest, or has the higher tier of victimhood claims.

well that's it right? there is no solution that will satisfy both genders. NO FKN way. The libturds live in this fantasy land that they think they have all the answers. It is what drives me mostly nuts about libturds.

They use no cognoscente thought process. They are all about making a side happy and pissing the living shit out of the other and then saying too fkn bad.

Typical childish right winger. Throw your hands up and whine "it's too hard" No wonder you end up with such childish primary candidates.

 

[martybegan]

Of course. It's not a matter of deciding to protect the rights of either transgender or the girls, but not both. It's a matter of protecting both. I fully support LGBT rights, but this law should be rescinded until it is fixed.

Simple solution, but it costs more. Put up a non-gender specific locker room for adults only. I wonder how many women would use it.

I guess that might be one solution, but I;m sure there is a better one. Nobody said writing good laws was easy, but they claimed they could do it when they asked to be elected. Now they need to show us that skill they claimed.

not everything has a solution, and it is a common problem for libturds.

I find it that the issue becomes there is a solution, but it's a bad one that favors whatever side whines the loudest, or has the higher tier of victimhood claims.

well that's it right? there is no solution that will satisfy both genders. NO FKN way. The libturds live in this fantasy land that they think they have all the answers. It is what drives me mostly nuts about libturds.

They use no cognoscente thought process. They are all about making a side happy and pissing the living shit out of the other and then saying too fkn bad.

Right now transgenders are at the top of the victim pole, so I guess their whines hold more weight than other whines.