Would any of THIS solve the problems with the Bathroom Policy?

[Jack4jill]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

There is a reason everyone is born as they are...

So Intersexed people we born to be, intersexed?

You have to go to college to learn to be that stupid.

XY gonadal dysgenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Tom Horn]

If you would all get over this childish fear of who is in the bathroom with you, this would not be an issue. When the cleaning woman is mopping the floor around me while I at the urinal I do not panic, I'm reminded I'm in Eurpoe, where life is greatly more sane.

Fine....go live in "Eurpoe"....bon voyage!

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

Stop being such a fucking tool of the right. They want you to be afraid of EVERYTHING so they can control you. Sorry you just can't figure that out.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

If you would all get over this childish fear of who is in the bathroom with you, this would not be an issue. When the cleaning woman is mopping the floor around me while I at the urinal I do not panic, I'm reminded I'm in Eurpoe, where life is greatly more sane.

Fine....go live in "Eurpoe"....bon voyage!

Oh fuck you and your love it or leave it.

 

[Jack4jill]

If you would all get over this childish fear of who is in the bathroom with you, this would not be an issue. When the cleaning woman is mopping the floor around me while I at the urinal I do not panic, I'm reminded I'm in Eurpoe, where life is greatly more sane.

Fine....go live in "Eurpoe"....bon voyage!

When the time is right. It grows nearer every day.

 

[Tom Horn]

When the time is right. I grows nearer every day.

Don't let the door hit ya in the ass on the way out.....oh, and enjoy converting to Islum when you get there....ask those boys if you can be a girl around them.

 

[Tom Horn]

Oh fuck you and your love it or leave it.

Why stay here in such a repressive, violent culture...maybe you and Jack/Jill can stow away in a suitcase and fly over for free.

 

[Jack4jill]

When the time is right. I grows nearer every day.

Don't let the door hit ya in the ass on the way out.....oh, and enjoy converting to Islum when you get there....ask those boys if you can be a girl around them.

Asking you to grow up would be too much I expect? So I won't.

 

[Jack4jill]

Oh fuck you and your love it or leave it.

Why stay here in such a repressive, violent culture...maybe you and Jack/Jill can stow away in a suitcase and fly over for free.

A good place to make money, and a great place to leave once you have.

 

[emilynghiem]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

There is no such thing as "biologically" male or female. You ca't use genetics to tell which is why these bills say the sex assigned at birth. Most are easy to call male or female but not all and some, who look normal, aren't.

Dear Jack4jill

1. I will trust people and their doctors to determine what biological gender each person is, and also to accept legal responsibility for assessing if someone is mentally or criminally ill and abusing this for some predatory addiction. If they don't accept legal and financial responsibility for making a bad call, then no, that person shouldn't be authorized to sign.

2. Some people HAVE been known to be born with sex organs or features of BOTH sexes, and either be hermaphrodites or some other term for this. In those cases, they pick what gender is dominant and have the other parts surgically altered. So that is between them and their doctor what gender they are biologically.

You and I are basically saying the same thing if you are going by what their designation is on their birth certificate. I'm just clarifying that in cases of ambiguity, such as where people have been born with partial or whole organs of both sexes, that can be resolved medically, so I use the term biological gender for that.

My point, similar to yours about going by birth certificate, is to use scientifically established standards,
so there is a uniform way to ensure no criminal intent or abuse goes unchecked if there is any such factor present.

People are free to have their own personal choices and spiritual process and beliefs,
but where issues of safety are involved, the policies have to account for that.

Similar to how the right to assisted suicide is opposed because legalizing this would open the door for people to get away with murder by staging it as a perfectly legal suicide.

 

[hazlnut]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

It's only a problem for homophobes and faux "christian" who misuse the bible to justify their sexual insecurities.

They are digesting people the bigoted homophobes spewing hate on LGBT people... we solve the problem by flushing these turds down the public restroom toilet.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

There are no bathroom problems.......

The problem is brain damaged liberals........

 

[emilynghiem]

Money. Walmart won't spring for extra security. I have a relative who works in Management there. Walmart is a notorious criminal hangout. It's a 24/7 store with very limited security. Criminals love it. Walmart's theft rate is astronomical. Its prices are gonna begin to inch up as a result.

But aside from that, i don't get why anyone would willingly sit their buttocks on a Walmart toilet. I mean, disease-ridden homeless folks actually live in Walmart bathrooms. Sitting on its toilets really is playing 'Russian Roulette.' Who knows what disease you'll pick up? YUCKY.

Sure, of course the cost is a factor for any business paulitician

There are ways to make the added security affordable.
There are grants and nonprofits that help with creating jobs for Vets,
and some for excons who are turning their lives around. If you pair
up a Vet with an excon, that's a win win situation. I'd recommend having
an extra pair of security guards anyway. Lives would be saved by avoiding
one on one confrontations, where two people on patrol makes all the difference.

If the point is for the federal govt to offer protections, why not offer tax breaks
for creating jobs for security. Perhaps the deterrence effect and other benefits
would be worth the investment.

Walmart's not too concerned about it. It's rakin in $Billions. It's decided not to spring for extra security. Walmarts are actually very dangerous places at certain times of the day.

Like i said, it's a notorious criminal hangout. But as long as millions of folks keep showing up to buy more cheap shitty Chinese-made shite, Walmart's just fine with the current set-up.

Walmart is very dangerous? More of this all in your head thing. With that many stores if they were very dangerous it would be all over the news. The constant stream of people actually makes them very safe. If you want danger, drop by a 7-11 at 3AM when only drunks or criminals are around.

With all your fears and paranoia, you must live in a bunker.

It is in the news. Violence at Walmart is very common. Check out the Internet and you'll find stories everyday about violence in Walmarts all across the country. It's a well-known criminal hangout.

You'd be very wise to stay away from Walmarts at certain times of the day. And for God's sake, don't sit your buttocks on a Walmart toilet. That would be just plain crazy.

I will not be living my life according to your paranoia. Thanks all the same.

And will you hear a Walmart story often enough? With something like 4,000 stores and tens of millions of people who shop there, I would imagine. It's the biggest grocery chain in the country for God's sake.

Dear Jack4jill
maybe where you are Walmarts are civilized safe places.
They used to be so nice, one of my friends would go there at night to enjoy the air conditioning
and just hang out instead of being stuck in a hot apt.

But as neighborhoods went down, so did the customer base in those areas.
Maybe your world is not as crazy as what paulitician has seen,
and the nonsense I've seen go on at understaffed stores where the late night riff raff
had torn open packages in the aisles and let children run loose playing with toys and eating food.

I was waiting in line, where there weren't enough cashiers to check out the customers,
when one manager had to tell the other worker to go clean up damage in one of the aisles.

I usually go to Walgreens or HEB (Texas grocery chain) to get things instead of waiting in long lines.
I go to Walmart when the late night access is the only place that fits my schedule.
When it's not crowded, it's no problem, the staff are generally helpful when they're not overbooked.

 

[emilynghiem]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

It's only a problem for homophobes and faux "christian" who misuse the bible to justify their sexual insecurities.

They are digesting people the bigoted homophobes spewing hate on LGBT people... we solve the problem by flushing these turds down the public restroom toilet.

Dear hazlnut
I find it's just as wrong and hurtful to collectively judge and blame ALL Christians as being the judgmental type, as it is to assume all homosexuals have some closet predatory or pedophile illness.

Some people just don't believe homosexuality is natural and don't like to be around that. Period.

If people have the sense not to take Christianity and impose it on the public through govt,
why not have the same respect for beliefs about homosexuality that is a private choice up to each person.

If people oppose the endorsement of Christianity through govt, it doesn't mean to attack or reject Christianity.
Same with opposing govt endorsing one policy or another on homosexuality issues and beliefs.
You can be completely open and accepting of homosexual and heterosexual people equally,
and still argue against such policies being mandated through govt. Just like supporting Christianity 100%
but keeping it out of govt policy. Because it is a personal faith based choice and up to individuals not govt.

 

[Clementine]

If you would all get over this childish fear of who is in the bathroom with you, this would not be an issue. When the cleaning woman is mopping the floor around me while I at the urinal I do not panic, I'm reminded I'm in Eurpoe, where life is greatly more sane.

I made a suggestion that might make everyone feel more comfortable. Apparently, you only want the transgender people to feel comfortable. Maybe they should not worry about going into a men's room if they have a penis and stop worrying about men being in there with them. Why is their comfort a concern, but everyone else wanting to feel comfortable is childish?

Even Hillary wouldn't use a bathroom with another woman in it.

Bottom line is that is you are dressed like a man then use the men's room. If you pass as a woman, use the ladies room. Not difficult and it's always been done that way. There is such a tiny percent of transgenders and no one ever cared. I have a problem with a rugged looking guy going into the women's bathroom. If he identified as a woman, he would look like one.

The odds of encountering a real transgender are small and you probably wouldn't be aware of it. Odds of encountering a pervert are much greater and they will take advantage of this.

Should have left this issue alone since transgenders handled it in the past. It was only made into an issue to solve a non-existent problem and be able to call people intolerant for not wanting Chester the Molester to follow their little girls into bathrooms and showers.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Male is male? How do you know what science does not?

How is one proven to be male?

Science is absolutely clear on what is male and what is female

How is it that you do not know what science clearly shows, and what, in my generation, nearly everyone above the age of about four or five years knew?

 

[Pop23]

Telling someone they can be something they cannot ever be is the problem.

Pity makes poor public policy.

A tran individual attempts to, through cosmetic surgery, fool the public that they are of the opposite sex, but in reality they remain incredibly more simalar to the sex listed on their birth certificate.

A trans male may dress like a female, apply makeup like a female, but it is simply a cosmetic disquise meant to deceive the public as well as themselves. They remain vastly more Male then female.

Taken to the extreme they will even have cosmetic surgery on their genitals and their chests, but even then, a male trans breasts will not function as a females, unable to fulfill the basic reason breasts exist to begin with. Simply cosmetic and vastly more closely related to a male then a female.

The male tran can have his penis surgically altered to resemble a vagina, but it will not function like one. A Woman has a vagina, but it is simply a small part of the entire female reproductive system that the male tran will never have. Again, the male tran is still vastly more closely related to the Male, and it remains debateable how exactly they are related to the female at all.

The government had no duty to recognize a cosmetically altered individual, when that individual does so voluntarily.

We have recognized that some will take advantage of the trans and passed law (Hate Crime), to address this. By doing this, the government has fulfilled its obligation to these people.

Pity makes poor public policy and even worse theropy.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Problem? There problem is we have many sexes, and even more genders.

Uh huh.....sure "we" do. What I said stands...another 9 months of the homo muslim in the WH and all this goes POOF.

Yes, we do, it's science. There are not just two sexes, and nothing at all like two genders.

When a wrong-winger uses the word “science”, it very often does not mean what sane, rational people understand it to mean. This is a perfect example. Genuine science absolutely refutes this absurd claim, but wrong-wing “science” is crafted to support it, and any other antiscientific nonsense that the wrong wing seeks to promote.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

There are no bathroom problems.......

The problem is brain damaged liberals........

In particular, as far as this issue goes, those where, as a matter of objective, provable fact, the damage is clearly in the brain, but for some reason, they assert that the damage is in their perfectly-formed, functional, and healthy reproductive organs.

 

[Moonglow]

Please reply with A, B, C, None of the Above, or Other:
Would any of these ideas solve problems with the Bathroom Policy and Transgender issues:

A/1. Similar to people having to be medically documented as having a disability for special accommodations such as handicapped parking, what if people had to have a licensed medical doctor approve they are biologically male/female if this is different from their birth certificate. And be screened to make sure they do not have any dangerous predatory criminal illness that renders them unsafe to be around children or other people in restrooms or shower facilities. Would medical/scientific documentation of BIOLOGICAL gender be good enough instead of going by psychologically what people claim (which would not work for other disability/ADA).

the same way nobody wants anyone to abuse handicap/disability designation by claiming conditions they don't have, why not allow the same medical documentation for "biological gender" so this isn't abused by criminals.

B/2. If neutrality and universal inclusion, regardless of belief or gender, are the real issue, why not
have individual stalls or unisex/neutral restrooms that don't distinguish gender at all.

Would that also prevent bullying of transgender people if nobody is in the restroom with them to harass them?

On that note, why not pass stricter laws against unwelcome contact, harassment, or other behavior to create an "unsafe hostile environment" similar to anti-harassment policies in employment standards. And protect ALL PEOPLE not just by gender, orientation, race etc. but make it clear the point is no bullying or abuse of ANYONE. IE NO special protections or treatment, but this applies to ALL people of ALL backgrounds.

C/3. if the issue is security, as it has been brought up that more rapes and assaults occur in restrooms by heterosexual criminals, why not direct funds and attention (currently expended on fighting over this conflict) toward creating jobs for retired or disabled police/vets to mentor interns in security at restroom sites.

If the security is done in pairs, this would allow male/female and experienced/training staff to work together.
Wouldn't that do more to prevent any such fears of bullying, criminal abuse, or other unsafe environment issues?

Please comment if any of these points A, B, C or Other Ideas would work for you or what you think.
D. None of the Above
E. Other

F. if your point is to make a social statement, either for or against gender/orientation or beliefs for or against one side or the other, you are free to use this thread for that, but I hope you will be honest that people on both sides are projecting their support or opposition to groups onto this issue instead of addressing it specifically.

You neglected a donkey show option. No serious discussion of this topic can be had without addressing the donkey shows.

Yeah, where is the donkey gonna pee?