Bathroom bill/ HB 502

DeletedUser

Here in Massachusetts there is a bill going through the house known as HB 502 more commonly known as the bathroom bill that would let anyone enter the bathroom/locker room of the Gender they identify with. my question is what would prevent a male sexual predator from pretending that he is confused about his sex to gain access to a women’s bathroom or private facility? I mean sure men are men and they are going to do it anyway. so why give them another excuse to do it?

Discuss.
 

DeletedUser15057

OK we are gunna need some background to this one gizmo!!
Unless the good state of Massachusetts is all in favor of a one-sex free for all??.
 

DeletedUser

Doc Paine said:
OK we are gunna need some background to this one gizmo!!
Unless the good state of Massachusetts is all in favor of a one-sex free for all??.
Click to expand...

as I quickly post this here is the full text of the bill other states have similar bills going through.

http://www.malegislature.gov/Bills/187/House/H00502
SECTION 1. Section 67 of chapter 3 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2008 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking out the words “commission on gay and lesbian youth”, in lines 1 and 2, and inserting in place thereof the following words:- commission on gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender youth.

SECTION 2. Said section 67 of said chapter 3, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by striking out the words “parent of a gay or lesbian person”, in line 16, and inserting in place thereof the following words:- parent of a gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender person.

SECTION 3. Said section 67 of said chapter 3, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by inserting after the words “sexual-orientation”, in lines 19 and 20, the following words:- gender identity or expression.

SECTION 4. Said section 67 of said chapter 3, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by striking out the words “gay and lesbian organizations”, in lines 29 and 30, and inserting in place thereof the following words:- gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender organizations.

SECTION 5. Section 67 of said chapter 3, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by striking out the words “gay and lesbian,” in lines 45, 50, 52, and 56, and inserting in place thereof in each instance the following words:- gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender.

SECTION 6. Section 56 of chapter 6 of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “women”, in line 44, the following words:- ; people of diverse gender identities or expressions.

SECTION 7. Section 32 of chapter 22C of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “gender”, in line 12, the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 8. Section 89 of chapter 71 of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting in each instance after the word “sex”, in lines 53 and 143, the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 9. Section 5 of chapter 76 of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in line 10, the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 10. Section 12B of said chapter 76, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in line 185, the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 11. Section 1 of chapter 151B of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after subsection 23 the following subsection:

24. The term “gender identity or expression” shall mean a gender-related identity, appearance, expression, or behavior of an individual, regardless of the individual’s physiology or assigned sex at birth.

SECTION 12. Section 3 of said chapter 151B, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting in each instance after the word “sex”, in lines 17 and 61, the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 13. Said section 3 of said chapter 151B, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “women”, in line 53, the following words:- ; people of diverse gender identities or expressions.

SECTION 14. Section 4 of said chapter 151B, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting in each instance after the word “sex”, in lines 3, 69, 82, 87, 96, 103, 136, 163, 169, 179, 226, 233, 243, 339, 349, 353, 359, 474, 484, 494, 650 and 659 the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 15. Section 39 of chapter 265 of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the words “sexual orientation”, in line 4, the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 16. Said section 39 of said chapter 265, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by adding the following sentence at the end of subsection (a):-

For the purposes of this section, the term “gender identity or expression” shall have the same meaning as that term is defined in subsection 24 of section one of chapter one hundred and fifty-one B.

SECTION 17. Section 92A of chapter 272 of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in line 9, the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 18. Said section 92A of said chapter 272, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by inserting the following sentence at the end of the second paragraph:-

Notwithstanding the provisions of this section or any other special or general law to the contrary, all otherwise lawfully sex-segregated facilities, accommodations, resorts and amusements shall grant persons admission to and the full enjoyment of such facilities, accommodations, resorts and amusements consistent with their gender identity or expression.

SECTION 19. Section 98 of said chapter 272, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in line 2, the following words:- , gender identity or expression.

SECTION 20. If any provision of this Act is deemed invalid or unconstitutional, such a determination will not affect the validity of any other provision of this Act.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Seems like a perfectly sensible attempt to update existing legislation in line with contemporary mores and bio-technology and a victory for tolerance. People who like freaking out may well freak out, but to me it's a non-issue. 99.99% of the population would not have the least interest in trying to exploit loopholes in this legislation and I, for one, wouldn't worry about it. For the remaining 0.01% there are already tried and tested existing laws and restraints that are quite adequate.
 

DeletedUser9470

Eli Makepeace said:
Seems like a perfectly sensible attempt to update existing legislation in line with contemporary mores and bio-technology and a victory for tolerance. People who like freaking out may well freak out, but to me it's a non-issue. 99.99% of the population would not have the least interest in trying to exploit loopholes in this legislation and I, for one, wouldn't worry about it. For the remaining 0.01% there are already tried and tested existing laws and restraints that are quite adequate.
Click to expand...

99.99%?
As I like to consider cases on the merit of 'facts' and not unchecked assertions made pseudonymously on the internet somewhere, it would be nice to have a link to the relevant survey that shows these figures.
 

DeletedUser

common sense dictates that societal constraints will prevent most people from exploiting this loophole
 

DeletedUser

I love Massachusetts. Homestate and it comes up with the craziest laws.

Anyways, I think the law is bogus. Look, women's restrooms are for women and men's restrooms are for men. It doesn't matter if your a homosexual, a heterosexual, or somewhere in the middle, you go in the restroom for your sex. End of discussion. Theres my two cents right there.
 

DeletedUser

James the Hunter said:
It doesn't matter if your a homosexual, a heterosexual, or somewhere in the middle, you go in the restroom for your sex. End of discussion. Theres my two cents right there.
Click to expand...

The bill sounds like it's more about transgendered individuals (but it might have gotten out of control). By your logic, a woman with a beard should be using the ladies' room. You can't see how that could cause problems?
 

DeletedUser

I can see problems with this, as "gender identity or expression" means someone can claim they identify as the opposite sex, and there's no means to contradict that in a court of law. The whole idea of "peeping" will take on a far more problematic meaning.
 

DeletedUser

John Rose said:
Make all bathtrooms unisex.
Problem solved.

NEXT!
Click to expand...

the problem wouldn't be solved. if you added a third bathroom and call it a unisex bathroom then yes it would be solved but turning all bathrooms into unisex bathrooms would be a bad idea. the unisex bathroom would be an enter at your own risk.
 
nashy19

nashy19

Nashy (as himself)
gizmo501 said:
the problem wouldn't be solved. if you added a third bathroom and call it a unisex bathroom then yes it would be solved but turning all bathrooms into unisex bathrooms would be a bad idea. the unisex bathroom would be an enter at your own risk.
Click to expand...

You didn't say why it was a "bad idea" and risk of what?
 

DeletedUser

the whole thing is a bad idea

just use the original system and don't change anything (if it isn't broken to bad then don't fix it)
 

DeletedUser

-Neo- said:
99.99%?
As I like to consider cases on the merit of 'facts' and not unchecked assertions made pseudonymously on the internet somewhere, it would be nice to have a link to the relevant survey that shows these figures.
Click to expand...
That quote is worthy of a genius. I wonder where it came from?:hmf:
I apologise for any spurious accuracy that may have been inferred from the use of "99.99%". At no time did I consider that someone would take it as a genuine statistic, accurate to one part in ten thousand. I merely meant it to imply an overwhelming probability close to unity. Just as we know what "100% beef" means even though there are bound to be microscopic specs of dust or airborne bacteria on it that render such a claim literally untrue.
Sometimes it's good to nitpick, and sometimes it's just nitpicking.:)
 

DeletedUser

we all know if anyone were given the opportunity to exploit a loophole in any law it will happen. so Eli and anyone else for that matter,being 100% honest here, if you were given the chance to walk into the opposite gender's bathroom, without getting arrested for any number of laws you may be braking, to get a little looking (and anything else someone might do when in there) would you do it under the premise well "I'm transgender (Gender Identity disorder, or whatever you want to cal it) so I can go it?" but again boys will be boys. right? and they are going to do it anyway so why not give them as much "protection" as they need.
 
nashy19

nashy19

Nashy (as himself)
Most people have been in the opposite genders bathroom/changing room at least once.

Has anyone ever been arrested?
 

DeletedUser

nashy19 said:
Most people have been in the opposite genders bathroom/changing room at least once.

Has anyone ever been arrested?
Click to expand...

yes very recently accentual (May 16, 2011)

http://blog.gulflive.com/mississippi-press-news/2011/05/biloxi_bathroom_stall_voyeur.html
Biloxi man charged after woman says he looked under casino bathroom stall wall

PASCAGOULA, Mississippi -- A 29-year-old Biloxi man was arrested Sunday after a woman said she caught him looking under the stall of a ladies bathroom at the Beau Rivage casino, investigator Nick Sonnier said.
The woman locked the man in the bathroom until authorities could arrive, Sonnier said.
Alexanders Tello Ortiz, of Croesus Street, was charged with voyeurism, Sonnier said.
"The investigation revealed that he had entered the women's restroom and was looking at unsuspecting women from underneath the restroom stall as they used the bathroom," Sonnier said. "The woman who found him held the stall door shut until security could arrive."
Ortiz remained in the Harrison County Adult Detention Center Monday afternoon with bail set at $5,000. Ortiz faces up to 5 years in prison, if convicted.
Click to expand...

I know blogs are not good sources but it is done by a news reported.
 

DeletedUser

The same thing would have happened if he looked under the stall in a men's room (possibly in a addition to a butt whooping), and the same thing would happen if he did it in a ladies room wearing a dress if this bill was passed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top