Transgender bathroom rights are going down the toilet

[the_mother_thing]

Missy statements made perfect sense. If you fail to understand that the subject of this thread is a basic human rights issue, Im not sure how anyone will be able to get you to see this.

Is it?

http://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/

What are your human rights?

Let’s start with some basic human rights definitions:

Human: noun
A member of the Homo sapiens species; a man, woman or child; a person.

Rights: noun
Things to which you are entitled or allowed; freedoms that are guaranteed.

Human Rights: noun
The rights you have simply because you are human.

Even this "human rights" organization defines 'humans' by gender.

No one is saying someone cannot go to the bathroom. And the UN's list of 30 universal human rights does not note 'bathroom choice' to be a "human right", and even makes gender-based references in it's various articles, so I'm not clear on how exactly this issue IS a "human rights" issue. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf

Furthermore, if it was a "basic human right", why did the previous administration then need to provide guidance on it via an EO?

 

[lovedogs]

Missy statements made perfect sense. If you fail to understand that the subject of this thread is a basic human rights issue, Im not sure how anyone will be able to get you to see this.

Is it?

http://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/

What are your human rights?

Let’s start with some basic human rights definitions:

Human: noun
A member of the Homo sapiens species; a man, woman or child; a person.

Rights: noun
Things to which you are entitled or allowed; freedoms that are guaranteed.

Human Rights: noun
The rights you have simply because you are human.

Even this "human rights" organization defines 'humans' by gender.

No one is saying someone cannot go to the bathroom. And the UN's list of 30 universal human rights does not note 'bathroom choice' to be a "human right", and even makes gender-based references in it's various articles, so I'm not clear on how exactly this issue IS a "human rights" issue. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf

Furthermore, if it was a "basic human right", why did the previous administration then need to provide guidance on it via an EO?

I think again this somewhat misses the point. No one argued that trans people have multiple genders. So defining "humans" by gender isn't the problem. The problem is that trans people were born the WRONG gender, and are changing that gender. Also, it's not bathroom "choice". We aren't arguing that trans people should get to use ALL THE BATHROOMS and the rest of us are "stuck" with the one for our gender. We are arguing that trans people should use the bathroom of the gender that is CORRECT for them.

 

[monarch64]

Missy statements made perfect sense. If you fail to understand that the subject of this thread is a basic human rights issue, Im not sure how anyone will be able to get you to see this.

Is it?

http://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/

What are your human rights?

Let’s start with some basic human rights definitions:

Human: noun
A member of the Homo sapiens species; a man, woman or child; a person.

Rights: noun
Things to which you are entitled or allowed; freedoms that are guaranteed.

Human Rights: noun
The rights you have simply because you are human.

Even this "human rights" organization defines 'humans' by gender.

No one is saying someone cannot go to the bathroom. And the UN's list of 30 universal human rights does not note 'bathroom choice' to be a "human right", and even makes gender-based references in it's various articles, so I'm not clear on how exactly this issue IS a "human rights" issue. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf

Furthermore, if it was a "basic human right", why did the previous administration then need to provide guidance on it via an EO?

I think again this somewhat misses the point. No one argued that trans people have multiple genders. So defining "humans" by gender isn't the problem. The problem is that trans people were born the WRONG gender, and are changing that gender. Also, it's not bathroom "choice". We aren't arguing that trans people should get to use ALL THE BATHROOMS and the rest of us are "stuck" with the one for our gender. We are arguing that trans people should use the bathroom of the gender that is CORRECT for them.

Careful now, LD. Everyone knows God never makes mistakes.

 

[Calliecake]

Loves Dogs, I feel like this

 

[redwood66]

Loves Dogs, I feel like this

You are not alone.

 

[kenny]

That proves the point I was making before. If you think comparing one's very identity to something like anxiety while driving well enough said. I'm taking kenny's recommendations to heart. Sharing my thoughts and that is enough because some of you don't really listen or care to try to get it.

Hi missy.

FWIW, I was not making recommendations when I posted about just stating my position and avoiding going back and forth.
I was just stating what I usually do.

Misinterpreting opinion as a recommendation is very common, but IMO we should resist.

 

[Calliecake]

That proves the point I was making before. If you think comparing one's very identity to something like anxiety while driving well enough said. I'm taking kenny's recommendations to heart. Sharing my thoughts and that is enough because some of you don't really listen or care to try to get it.

Hi missy.

FWIW, I was not making recommendations when I posted about just stating my position and avoiding going back and forth.
I was just stating what I usually do.

Misinterpreting opinion as a recommendation is very common, but IMO we should resist.

Kenny, Missy and I were talking this morning about how helpful your voice of reason is! Thank you!

 

[Missy]

That proves the point I was making before. If you think comparing one's very identity to something like anxiety while driving well enough said. I'm taking kenny's recommendations to heart. Sharing my thoughts and that is enough because some of you don't really listen or care to try to get it.

Hi missy.

FWIW, I was not making recommendations when I posted about just stating my position and avoiding going back and forth.
I was just stating what I usually do.

Misinterpreting opinion as a recommendation is very common, but IMO we should resist.

Your point is well taken. Let me amend what I wrote. The smart thing for me to do would be to share my thoughts and then stop posting when it involves certain individuals. You are not one of those FYI.

 

[the_mother_thing]

And it boggles my mind that so many have come to the conclusion that anyone here is against basic human rights. PS is not an echo chamber for your ideas and viewpoint.

It's truly boggling my mind how bathroom "choice" is even perceived to be a "basic human right".

In the late 90s, I had to spread my legs & cop a squat over a filthy, dingy, disgusting hole in the floor in a multi-person unisex bathroom, bracing myself on the walls of the stall with my butt subsequently below the stall walls just to "aim" and not "dribble".

This was not at some far off, desolate, bare-bones, military base/camp; it was a public restroom in Venice, Italy.

I lived.

I think again this somewhat misses the point. No one argued that trans people have multiple genders. So defining "humans" by gender isn't the problem. The problem is that trans people were born the WRONG gender, and are changing that gender. Also, it's not bathroom "choice". We aren't arguing that trans people should get to use ALL THE BATHROOMS and the rest of us are "stuck" with the one for our gender. We are arguing that trans people should use the bathroom of the gender that is CORRECT for them.

Earlier you said this issue isn't about "legal gender", then you said it was a human rights issue, now you're saying defining gender isn't a problem while completely ignoring my question about WHICH human right is supposedly being "violated". So is it or isn't it a "basic human rights" issue; and if it is, which UN human rights article is it you feel is at risk of being violated, and why?

I've said all along a TG person certainly should be free to use the facility that coincides with their (new) legal gender, and a person who is not TG should also use the facility that coincides with their legal gender. That is fair & applies the same "rule" to everyone - EQUALLY. Isn't 'equality' what we're after here?

Careful now, LD. Everyone knows God never makes mistakes.

And now it's apparently "God's fault".

It's quite evident reading here that She - indeed - does.

 

[partgypsy]

Somehow this is making me recall Hidden Figures, where one of the female protagonists had to make long bathroom runs, because there were no colored women bathrooms near her place of work. Watching that now, should make us squirm and feel uncomfortable. Think about a transgender person. Who knows where they are in their transition, and whether they have legally changed their gender. These new laws say they HAVE to use the bathroom that corresponds to their biological identity. Say if they were male, and now female, for them to go to the male bathroom would be like us being forced to use the opposite sex bathroom.
We also know there is a high level of violence against these people. So while the "ability to use the bathroom" may not be in the constitution, we can also agree it creates a hostile environment for these people and is discriminatory.

Again Jo Cole Jenn, if you read the article the HB2 bathroom bill didn't just have bills specifying you could be arrested for using the wrong bathroom. It also said that local communities and cities were PROHIBITED from makes laws that would prohibit discrimination of gay, lesbian, bi, transgender EMPLOYEES and CUSTOMERS.

That means if a gay person went to a store, or a restaurant, or anywhere, and the owner or clerk refused to serve them, because they even thought they were gay, whatever, HB2 bills says, that person has no recourse. Suck it up.

Can't you see how hostile the Hb2 bills, and bills like this in general are to a whole class of people?

I always thought that conservatives were for getting government OUT of people's lives. Instead I now live in a state someone can ask to see my birth certificate when I use the bathroom

 

[OreoRosies86]

The next time a trans person deals with this issue, I am going to roll my eyes and tell them about the time I had to use a porta potty at the fairgrounds. That will school these snowflakes.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Again Jo Cole Jenn, if you read the article the HB2 bathroom bill didn't just have bills specifying you could be arrested for using the wrong bathroom. It also said that local communities and cities were PROHIBITED from makes laws that would prohibit discrimination of gay, lesbian, bi, transgender EMPLOYEES and CUSTOMERS.

I read the article, AND the bill: http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015E2/Bills/House/PDF/H2v4.pdf

Articles by the press do not make laws; legislatures do, so I am referencing the actual law. And AGAIN, the law does NOT prohibit local governments "from making laws to prohibit discrimination". It states very clearly:

PART III. PROTECTION OF RIGHTS IN EMPLOYMENT AND PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS
SECTION 3.1. G.S. 143-422.2 reads as rewritten: "§ 143-422.2. Legislative declaration.
(a) It is the public policy of this State to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain and hold employment without discrimination or abridgement on account of race, religion, color, national origin, age, biological sex or handicap by employers which regularly employ 15 or more employees.
(b) It is recognized that the practice of denying employment opportunity and discriminating in the terms of employment foments domestic strife and unrest, deprives the State of the fullest utilization of its capacities for advancement and development, and substantially and adversely affects the interests of employees, employers, and the public in general.
(c) The General Assembly declares that the regulation of discriminatory practices in employment is properly an issue of general, statewide concern, such that this Article and other applicable provisions of the General Statutes supersede and preempt any ordinance, regulation, resolution, or policy adopted or imposed by a unit of local government or other political subdivision of the State that regulates or imposes any requirement upon an employer pertaining to the regulation of discriminatory practices in employment, except such regulations applicable to personnel employed by that body that are not otherwise in conflict with State law."

...

"Article 49B.
"Equal Access to Public Accommodations.
"§ 143-422.10. Short title.
This Article shall be known and may be cited as the Equal Access to Public Accommodations Act.
"§ 143-422.11. Legislative declaration.
(a) It is the public policy of this State to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all individuals within the State to enjoy fully and equally the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of places of public accommodation free of discrimination because of race, religion, color, national origin, or biological sex, provided that designating multiple or single occupancy bathrooms or changing facilities according to biological sex, as defined in G.S. 143-760(a)(1), (3), and (5), shall not be deemed to constitute discrimination.
(b) The General Assembly declares that the regulation of discriminatory practices in places of public accommodation is properly an issue of general, statewide concern, such that this Article and other applicable provisions of the General Statutes supersede and preempt any ordinance, regulation, resolution, or policy adopted or imposed by a unit of local government or other political subdivision of the State that regulates or imposes any requirement pertaining to the regulation of discriminatory practices in places of public accommodation.
"§ 143-422.12. Places of public accommodation – defined.
For purposes of this Article, places of public accommodation has the same meaning as defined in G.S. 168A-3(, but shall exclude any private club or other establishment not, in fact, open to the public.
"§ 143-422.13. Investigations; conciliations.
The Human Relations Commission in the Department of Administration shall have the authority to receive, investigate, and conciliate complaints of discrimination in public accommodations. Throughout this process, the Human Relations Commission shall use its good offices to effect an amicable resolution of the complaints of discrimination. This Article does not create, and shall not be construed to create or support, a statutory or common law private right of action, and no person may bring any civil action based upon the public policy expressed herein."

In other words, discrimination/employment rights/access to public accommodations are a state-wide concern (not city and county); and, laws should apply to all in the state equally (not based on local "niceties"); therefore, a local government cannot enact a law/ordinance/etc that conflicts with the state's anti-discrimination laws unless it is something not already covered by a state law.

Just like people in this thread have argued the "states shouldn't regulate discriminatory practices," the NC legislature resolved that very matter within NC by having every NC resident afforded the same opportunities, protections and access as every other NC resident, regardless of where in the state they live. That's how it SHOULD be, shouldn't it? Or do you feel one county should have a set of discrimination rules that differ from another county?

 

[Tekate]

Again Jo Cole Jenn, if you read the article the HB2 bathroom bill didn't just have bills specifying you could be arrested for using the wrong bathroom. It also said that local communities and cities were PROHIBITED from makes laws that would prohibit discrimination of gay, lesbian, bi, transgender EMPLOYEES and CUSTOMERS.

I read the article, AND the bill: http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015E2/Bills/House/PDF/H2v4.pdf

Articles by the press do not make laws; legislatures do, so I am referencing the actual law. And AGAIN, the law does NOT prohibit local governments "from making laws to prohibit discrimination". It states very clearly:

PART III. PROTECTION OF RIGHTS IN EMPLOYMENT AND PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS
SECTION 3.1. G.S. 143-422.2 reads as rewritten: "§ 143-422.2. Legislative declaration.
(a) It is the public policy of this State to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain and hold employment without discrimination or abridgement on account of race, religion, color, national origin, age, biological sex or handicap by employers which regularly employ 15 or more employees.
(b) It is recognized that the practice of denying employment opportunity and discriminating in the terms of employment foments domestic strife and unrest, deprives the State of the fullest utilization of its capacities for advancement and development, and substantially and adversely affects the interests of employees, employers, and the public in general.
(c) The General Assembly declares that the regulation of discriminatory practices in employment is properly an issue of general, statewide concern, such that this Article and other applicable provisions of the General Statutes supersede and preempt any ordinance, regulation, resolution, or policy adopted or imposed by a unit of local government or other political subdivision of the State that regulates or imposes any requirement upon an employer pertaining to the regulation of discriminatory practices in employment, except such regulations applicable to personnel employed by that body that are not otherwise in conflict with State law."

...

"Article 49B.
"Equal Access to Public Accommodations.
"§ 143-422.10. Short title.
This Article shall be known and may be cited as the Equal Access to Public Accommodations Act.
"§ 143-422.11. Legislative declaration.
(a) It is the public policy of this State to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all individuals within the State to enjoy fully and equally the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of places of public accommodation free of discrimination because of race, religion, color, national origin, or biological sex, provided that designating multiple or single occupancy bathrooms or changing facilities according to biological sex, as defined in G.S. 143-760(a)(1), (3), and (5), shall not be deemed to constitute discrimination.
(b) The General Assembly declares that the regulation of discriminatory practices in places of public accommodation is properly an issue of general, statewide concern, such that this Article and other applicable provisions of the General Statutes supersede and preempt any ordinance, regulation, resolution, or policy adopted or imposed by a unit of local government or other political subdivision of the State that regulates or imposes any requirement pertaining to the regulation of discriminatory practices in places of public accommodation.
"§ 143-422.12. Places of public accommodation – defined.
For purposes of this Article, places of public accommodation has the same meaning as defined in G.S. 168A-3(, but shall exclude any private club or other establishment not, in fact, open to the public.
"§ 143-422.13. Investigations; conciliations.
The Human Relations Commission in the Department of Administration shall have the authority to receive, investigate, and conciliate complaints of discrimination in public accommodations. Throughout this process, the Human Relations Commission shall use its good offices to effect an amicable resolution of the complaints of discrimination. This Article does not create, and shall not be construed to create or support, a statutory or common law private right of action, and no person may bring any civil action based upon the public policy expressed herein."

In other words, discrimination/employment rights/access to public accommodations are a state-wide concern (not city and county); and, laws should apply to all in the state equally (not based on local "niceties"); therefore, a local government cannot enact a law/ordinance/etc that conflicts with the state's anti-discrimination laws unless it is something not already covered by a state law.

Just like people in this thread have argued the "states shouldn't regulate discriminatory practices," the NC legislature resolved that very matter within NC by having every NC resident afforded the same opportunities, protections and access as every other NC resident, regardless of where in the state they live. That's how it SHOULD be, shouldn't it? Or do you feel one county should have a set of discrimination rules that differ from another county?

I'm late to this and haven't really read all the replies so I may be wrong Jo, but is this saying the state cannot discriminate based on the biological sex? so does mean they can discriminate against a transexual person? In that case, while many transexual people may not like it, they should be covered under disability, I think people born looking like one sex but feel like th opposite are disabled in having a full life, for one they cannot use the restroom of their needs.. Like I said, I could be misreading this whole thing. I've never met a transexual person so I don't know exactly how they think on this subject, but I would guess, a person who is transitioning would feel great pain at being forced to go to the womans room when they look much more male.. ??? I may be missing something.

 

[the_mother_thing]

The next time a trans person deals with this issue, I am going to roll my eyes and tell them about the time I had to use a porta potty at the fairgrounds. That will school these snowflakes.

And the next time a victim of sexual assault deals with this issue or feels unsafe in a facility, be sure to also roll your eyes and tell them their feelings are less important/valid than the trans person's "basic human rights" (if lovedogs ever clarifies how exactly this is a "human rights issue").

 

[kenny]

That proves the point I was making before. If you think comparing one's very identity to something like anxiety while driving well enough said. I'm taking kenny's recommendations to heart. Sharing my thoughts and that is enough because some of you don't really listen or care to try to get it.

Hi missy.

FWIW, I was not making recommendations when I posted about just stating my position and avoiding going back and forth.
I was just stating what I usually do.

Misinterpreting opinion as a recommendation is very common, but IMO we should resist.

Your point is well taken. Let me amend what I wrote. The smart thing for me to do would be to share my thoughts and then stop posting when it involves certain individuals. You are not one of those FYI.

Yeah, whom I'm speaking to makes tons of difference when it comes to how long I'll do the old back and forth.
I've threadjackedoffed enough in this bathroom thread
Maybe when I have time I'll start a thread about it crap posters pull that gets me to just walk away.

This is a huge topic for me, very complex and nuanced and difficult to articulate.

 

[monarch64]

The next time a trans person deals with this issue, I am going to roll my eyes and tell them about the time I had to use a porta potty at the fairgrounds. That will school these snowflakes.

So many people have never even encountered a trans person. This whole issue is rife with ignorance and subsequent fear, and I have to give weight on the side I disagree with because of this. I live in a very diverse area and am in contact with or around trans people frequently, so for me it's not a big deal at all to share space. However, many people living in more remote areas where trans people aren't "out" or the area is populated sparsely enough that it just doesn't seem like "they" are there.

Ruby posted recently that she experienced sharing a public restroom with a trans person and everything went fine. Ok, that's one person who learned by experience. We can't all do that. But it is those who have's responsibility to try to spread the word that nobody died when they shared a bathroom with a trans person.

SO RUBY WHERE YOU AT? LOL

 

[kenny]

That proves the point I was making before. If you think comparing one's very identity to something like anxiety while driving well enough said. I'm taking kenny's recommendations to heart. Sharing my thoughts and that is enough because some of you don't really listen or care to try to get it.

Hi missy.

FWIW, I was not making recommendations when I posted about just stating my position and avoiding going back and forth.
I was just stating what I usually do.

Misinterpreting opinion as a recommendation is very common, but IMO we should resist.

Kenny, Missy and I were talking this morning about how helpful your voice of reason is! Thank you!

You may send rather large cashier's checks.

 

[redwood66]

The next time a trans person deals with this issue, I am going to roll my eyes and tell them about the time I had to use a porta potty at the fairgrounds. That will school these snowflakes.

So many people have never even encountered a trans person. This whole issue is rife with ignorance and subsequent fear, and I have to give weight on the side I disagree with because of this. I live in a very diverse area and am in contact with or around trans people frequently, so for me it's not a big deal at all to share space. However, many people living in more remote areas where trans people aren't "out" or the area is populated sparsely enough that it just doesn't seem like "they" are there.

Ruby posted recently that she experienced sharing a public restroom with a trans person and everything went fine. Ok, that's one person who learned by experience. We can't all do that. But it is those who have's responsibility to try to spread the word that nobody died when they shared a bathroom with a trans person.

SO RUBY WHERE YOU AT? LOL

I have many times which is why I agreed with EB that this is a solution in search of a problem. I don't live in NC so I have no idea about this bathroom bill issue. It sounds like it was made much more complicated thanks to bureaucrats. I think everyone should mind their own damn business in the bathroom.

Edit - And everywhere else for that matter. Stay out of my business and I will stay out of yours. And I ain't an activist telling everyone else how immoral and intolerant they are if they don't agree with me.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I'm late to this and haven't really read all the replies so I may be wrong Jo, but is this saying the state cannot discriminate based on the biological sex? so does mean they can discriminate against a transexual person? In that case, while many transexual people may not like it, they should be covered under disability, I think people born looking like one sex but feel like th opposite are disabled in having a full life, for one they cannot use the restroom of their needs.. Like I said, I could be misreading this whole thing. I've never met a transexual person so I don't know exactly how they think on this subject, but I would guess, a person who is transitioning would feel great pain at being forced to go to the womans room when they look much more male.. ??? I may be missing something.

The law defines:

Biological sex. – The physical condition of being male or female, which is stated on a person's birth certificate.

If someone has undergone transformation, they would have their birth certificate changed to reflect their new gender (I don't know what the point in process is when that may be done). It's done via county offices, just like a marriage license, drivers license, name change, etc. Personally, I feel that the law should have stated "legal gender" vs. "biological gender", but Pat and the legislators didn't consult me during the drafting and signing of it.

IMO, "legal gender" would have been more conducive to those undergoing transformation so they may do so (change their 'legal gender') at a point in the process that is best for them personally; not just once they are "officially transformed". The law does not force a transgender person to use a "disability" basis that I can infer, though I suppose they could if they wished to do so.

I agree that if I were undergoing transformation, and my primary concern was safety (from harassment, assault, etc), I'd continue using the facility I most "appeared" to be until such time as I felt I was less "at risk" of such by virtue of my progress in the process. Alternatively, if the idea of using my same-gender facility "distressed me" such that I wanted to instead use the men's room from the get-go, I'd think that would then increase my risk of harassment, assault, etc. So it comes down to (as we talked about earlier in the thread) which is more concerning for society as a whole: individual feelings about gender vs. individual safety.

 

[ruby59]

The next time a trans person deals with this issue, I am going to roll my eyes and tell them about the time I had to use a porta potty at the fairgrounds. That will school these snowflakes.

So many people have never even encountered a trans person. This whole issue is rife with ignorance and subsequent fear, and I have to give weight on the side I disagree with because of this. I live in a very diverse area and am in contact with or around trans people frequently, so for me it's not a big deal at all to share space. However, many people living in more remote areas where trans people aren't "out" or the area is populated sparsely enough that it just doesn't seem like "they" are there.

Ruby posted recently that she experienced sharing a public restroom with a trans person and everything went fine. Ok, that's one person who learned by experience. We can't all do that. But it is those who have's responsibility to try to spread the word that nobody died when they shared a bathroom with a trans person.

SO RUBY WHERE YOU AT? LOL

After I was so lovingly referred to in another thread as the poster who starts so many threads just to bait people, I decided to just read instead.

But to the issue at hand. I can see both sides of it. I was bothered as a child. I did not feel safe with a male walking into the women's room.

Now if I had seen that transgender person walk in ahead of me, would I have returned to my seat? Would I have then avoided using that bathroom all together if I did not have an old lady bladder.

What if the person in that bathroom had looked more male and threatening?

I can understand the natural born female's side as well as the transgender women's side as both, in most cases just want to pee in peace.

But there are exceptions that have to be taken into consideration, as people vary on both sides of the issue.

Now my situation:

Big restaurant. This transgender woman entered from one direction, me another. We were both in there and obviously had to the use the rest room then and now. She minded her business. I minded mine.

But I am not going to speak for other people, whose circumstances may be different.

I will just say that in my case, it was a non issue.

 

[telephone89]

Ruby, glad to hear you weigh in on this. I was so happy to hear of your experience when you posted it originally.


Now, question for people. I'm going to assume everyone knows the difference between sex and gender - so what about intersex people? People with both male & female parts? Which bathroom should they use?

 

[the_mother_thing]

So many people have never even encountered a trans person. This whole issue is rife with ignorance and subsequent fear, and I have to give weight on the side I disagree with because of this. I live in a very diverse area and am in contact with or around trans people frequently, so for me it's not a big deal at all to share space. However, many people living in more remote areas where trans people aren't "out" or the area is populated sparsely enough that it just doesn't seem like "they" are there.

I grew up in the LGBT capitol of the east coast. It's definitely not new to me to 'co-exist with the community'; it was 'normal' (to me) looooong before it ever became the Left's "pet cause" and PC to do so. But you're right; 'tolerance' is warranted ALL around for everyone.

 

[OreoRosies86]

The next time a trans person deals with this issue, I am going to roll my eyes and tell them about the time I had to use a porta potty at the fairgrounds. That will school these snowflakes.

And the next time a victim of sexual assault deals with this issue or feels unsafe in a facility, be sure to also roll your eyes and tell them their feelings are less important/valid than the trans person's "basic human rights" (if lovedogs ever clarifies how exactly this is a "human rights issue").

I'm a survivor of sexual assault, and I am also smart enough to differentiate the two issues. What else ya got?

 

[redwood66]

Ruby, glad to hear you weigh in on this. I was so happy to hear of your experience when you posted it originally.


Now, question for people. I'm going to assume everyone knows the difference between sex and gender - so what about intersex people? People with both male & female parts? Which bathroom should they use?

Whichever one they feel most comfortable in. I have been around such a person and the bathroom was the least of their worries btw. They used to be called hermaphrodites.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I'm a survivor of sexual assault, and I am also smart enough to differentiate the two issues. What else ya got?

That's great ... for you.

But not everyone experienced the same exact thing as you, nor feels the same way you do. That's the point - tolerance for others. Your statement suggests EVERY victim of sexual assault should be/behave/think like you. That's insulting.

 

[OreoRosies86]

I'm a survivor of sexual assault, and I am also smart enough to differentiate the two issues. What else ya got?

That's great ... for you.

But not everyone experienced the same exact thing as you, nor feels the same way you do. That's the point - tolerance for others. Your statement suggests EVERY victim of sexual assault should be/behave/think like you. That's insulting.

No actually, what's insulting is to state "I lived" because you once had to crouch in a dirty unisex bathroom overseas, and you know it. It's minimizing and insulting. And when people call it out you cry intolerance. It's also insulting to call gay/trans rights PC liberalism's "pet cause", implying fake concern out of pushing an agenda, and you know better because of where you grew up. Your constant emoji laden, dismissive, taunting? That's insulting. It's insulting to basically everyone here.

Should I break out the slow claps the next time you tell a story about your anxiety as you just did about my rape?

 

[the_mother_thing]

I'm a survivor of sexual assault, and I am also smart enough to differentiate the two issues. What else ya got?

That's great ... for you.

But not everyone experienced the same exact thing as you, nor feels the same way you do. That's the point - tolerance for others. Your statement suggests EVERY victim of sexual assault should be/behave/think like you. That's insulting.

No actually, what's insulting is to state "I lived" because you once had to crouch in a dirty unisex bathroom overseas, and you know it. It's minimizing and insulting. And when people call it out you cry intolerance. It's also insulting to call gay/trans rights PC liberalism's "pet cause", implying fake concern out of pushing an agenda, and you know better because of where you grew up. Your constant emoji laden, dismissive, taunting? That's insulting. It's insulting to basically everyone.

Should I break out the slow claps the next time you tell a story about your anxiety as you just did about my rape?

1) I'm responsible for what I say; not how you choose to interpret it. I shared an experience I had in a public bathroom; it IS related to this topic, as it pertains to 'dignity'.

2) Your own posts in this thread & choice of words referencing your own assault by saying "what else ya got" was as sarcastic & flippant as anything I've posted.

So clap away if you want; it's your human & constitutional right, after all. The very rights I CHOSE to help defend.

PS - my comment to you, with the , actually WAS meant with sincerity (as in "I'm glad you could overcome ..."). That you chose to interpret it as an insult demonstrates your insistent negative view on everything posted by anyone who doesn't agree with you.

 

[OreoRosies86]

Oh please don't misunderstand. You have the right to tell me your opinion, and I have the right to tell you what I think of it and how you express it. That doesn't bother me.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Oh please don't misunderstand. You have the right to tell me your opinion, and I have the right to tell you what I think of it and how you express it. That doesn't bother me.

You do, indeed, have the right to assume whatever your heart desires.

That does not, however, make you right about your assumptions or whatever you *think* "I know", as your post suggested. I'm sure you are also smart enough to know what they say about people who "assume" and their "opinions".

 

[sstephensid]

Men and women can sexually assault people. It is horrible. However, woman may be triggered by women or men by men.

Also, what about MTF who have the chest of a female but haven't fully transitioned the nether regions to female yet? Guess they don't get to use a restroom.