Bathroom bill/ HB 502

[DeletedUser]

Moreover, I never mentioned a HOMOSEXUAL SEX OFFENDER, I mentioned a HETEROSEXUAL SEX OFFENDER. A STRAIGHT DUDE WHO'S A SEX OFFENDER. And he PRETENDS to be gay, re-worded, he CLAIMS HE IDENTIFIES WITH the FEMALE gender. Therefore, he can gain access to a FEMALE RESTROOM.

I have never seen a woman's restroom that required people to pass a gender test before entry.... no gender police at the door. I have seen mom's dragging their sons into the ladies' room, because they don't want to let them go into the men's room alone. I have seen women that looked somewhat manly, and people who are androgynous enough to make you wonder... I have also seen women that I thought could be men. The point is that people can already go into the restroom of their choice. Some people would just like the elegant knowledge that it's legal.

A man (or woman) who enters the ladies' room with something in mind other than to use the facilities, is someone who enters with stealth when no one is around, and hides in wait for a victim. This is the same thing that happens in most other circumstances where person to person crimes are committed. So really no "gender disguise" is necessary. Often the kinds of assaults you are talking about are crimes of opportunity - and the whole disguise idea takes a lot of preparation and advance planning. Of course no law need be passed to allow this kind of criminal behavior - with or without the disguise.

The law is simply about granting dignity to a segment of the population that is currently marginalized by society.

 

[DeletedUser]

and about being politically correct.

 

[DeletedUser]

and about being politically correct.

Ugh, seriously, you think this is about being politically correct?!?

It is not politically popular to recognize or accept deviations to sexual norms. There are presently only "6" States authorizing same-sex marriage (with those marriages not being recognized, nor accepted, in the remaining 44 States), newborn transgenders are still being routinely "hacked" to define sexuality as male or female, men in women's clothing have not been voted into any political office and, except for a handful of unique cases, homosexuals have to hide their proclivities in order to obtain political prominence (and let's not forget Harvey Milk, assassinated by a co-politician), quite often presenting a gay-bashing front (article) to remain politically viable.

So really, politically correct?!?!

 

[DeletedUser]

popularity does not equate to correctness, but that's besides the point. just consider the fact that it's actually made into a bill and being considered, regardless of if it's shot down or not.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hehe, do you know how many bills are presented? Anyway, do not confuse legal correctness with political correctness.

 

[DeletedUser]

Changing the word doesn't change the argument. For the purposes of this argument, a sex crime is a sex crime.

My argument was getting flak for NUMBER 1, the mention of Rape, and number 2 nobody getting my context. I never argued about what a sex crime was. It was all about crimes in restrooms. So yes it does.

I have never seen a woman's restroom that required people to pass a gender test before entry.... no gender police at the door.

I never mentioned a gender test, gender police, anything. It is simply taboo for a male to enter a female bathroom. If an adult male enters a female bathroom, what do you think he's going to do? If HB 502 is set up, then he has the perfect excuse, no?

I have seen mom's dragging their sons into the ladies' room, because they don't want to let them go into the men's room alone. I have seen women that looked somewhat manly, and people who are androgynous enough to make you wonder... I have also seen women that I thought could be men. The point is that people can already go into the restroom of their choice. Some people would just like the elegant knowledge that it's legal.

Adult man enters a woman's restroom. I could explain it further, but the weed's going bad.

A man (or woman) who enters the ladies' room with something in mind other than to use the facilities, is someone who enters with stealth when no one is around, and hides in wait for a victim. This is the same thing that happens in most other circumstances where person to person crimes are committed. So really no "gender disguise" is necessary. Often the kinds of assaults you are talking about are crimes of opportunity - and the whole disguise idea takes a lot of preparation and advance planning. Of course no law need be passed to allow this kind of criminal behavior - with or without the disguise.

Is it REALLY this hard to get what I am saying? Straight people can abuse the HB 502 law easilly. If there's no penis police like you said, then I can claim, IF ANYONE ASKS, that I identify with the female gender and then get into a female bathroom and do whatever. None of you know how easy it is to commit and get away with simple crimes.

The law is simply about granting dignity to a segment of the population that is currently marginalized by society.

Do you think that this is really about granting dignity?

 

[DeletedUser]

My argument was getting flak for NUMBER 1, the mention of Rape, and number 2 nobody getting my context. I never argued about what a sex crime was. It was all about crimes in restrooms. So yes it does.

No it doesn't, because the statistics still address "sex crimes" and contradict your claims. In fact, it does not differentiate between rape or any other type of sex crime. Perhaps you should review those statistics you foolishly brought to the table earlier, because they're really tripping up your continuously morphing arguments.

None of you know how easy it is to commit and get away with simple crimes.

Ah, the ignorance claim. So, because we're not all a bunch of criminals, we don't know how easy it is to commit simple crimes? Well gee, I guess my studies in criminology were a waste of time because I'm not a career criminal. *smirk*

Look, yes it's easy to commit a crime. It's not as easy to get away with the commission of that crime. But even then, this particular bill (eventual law) has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME. Geez, seriously. You're attempting to make a correlation, but you have failed to present your evidence in support of your assertion. I.e., it's a false correlation.

Do you think that this is really about granting dignity?

Instead of asking that question, why don't you tell us what it is about.

 

[DeletedUser28032]

The thing I can't quite get is; this man who is intent on committing a crime in the ladies room be it rape, assault, etc decides to walk in under the excuse of using this law.
Who is he actually going to tell his rather poor lie of I am transgender to? because if there is more than one person in that ladies room then he isn't going to commit a crime and he certainly isn't going to use it against his victim. So essentially there is no reason for him to even consider exploiting this particular law because if you're caught assaulting someone being in the wrong gender restroom is the least of your worries

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm loving the irony that the same people who usually say the government is always interfering in our lives, eroding our rights and over-regulating and argue for personal freedoms, deregulation and laissez-faire, when presented with a bill that allows people the liberty to choose the bathroom they consider most appropriate for them are suddenly flapping their arms and hollering "Whoa.....if you give folks even that much responsibility the perverts will take over the world".
These guys (for they usually are) talk of protecting their families when it's generally other people (transvestites, people undergoing gender-reorientation/alignment etc.) who need the protection from THEM. Have they ever thought how perverted it could seem for men to line up in rows and get their weenuses out in full view of one another? But it happens all the time in men's washrooms and they probably participate themselves and , guess what?, no great dramas usually occur. People are in general more mature, considerate, decent and respectful than these wingnuts can possibly imagine.

 

[DeletedUser]

weenuses

the small flab of skin on the end of your elbow? who flaunts that?

poll: do you flaunt your weenus?

 

[DeletedUser]

I once used the verb "dicker", meaning "to haggle" in a post and it was asterisked out, so I avoided the noun I would have preferred.

 

[DeletedUser]

The rest of my argument is a dead horse that I will no longer beat up because I'm not like that. It's a carcass as you already know

However;

Instead of asking that question, why don't you tell us what it is about.

Think about it. It's an unnecessary law that we don't need. If some man has a sex change, then they can already use the woman's bathroom because they can qualify as a woman (though not my type of woman...).

If they have a penis, they are a man. So tell me, WHY ON EARTH would a man need to use the woman's restroom with claim that they identify with women? Other than not being able to afford a sex-change operation, or the men's restroom being full, there's no reason for them to go with a woman's restroom. Because Gay men are attracted to the same sex, so why not just stick with the men's bathroom cause I sure as hell would (If I was gay anywho.)!

But because if one simply 'identifies' with the sex, yet still has a penis, I'm shaking my head there. It doesn't make any sense to me unless you'd want to catch a glimpse of a woman taking a dumper on the toilet, and if you have a penis, I don't see how you can 'identify' with the female gender. There's totally different machinery down there. As said, it can be changed with a sex-change.

As for a 'penis police' that will 'pull up all of the dinosaurs skirts' (Jurassic Park, Jeff Goldblum) to check gender, I doubt that would occur. But as said, it's not the norm for a man to go into the woman's bathroom. Someone's bound to call the cops unless he was dressed up like a woman... The new proposed system's still open to some abuse since it would be in a sense, less strict, with the new law. I would if I was a chick and some dude marched into the girl's bathroom, I'd be creeped the hell out.
(You could have something like this happen, on a whole different level.
http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-mcdonalds-transgender-attack,0,774274.story )


I think a wiser solution would be to just get rid of all seperate sex bathrooms and make it all one big unisex one. The full 9 yards. That would get rid of the taboo pretty quick. As a woman I would never use a public restroom again though. Do you know how awkward it would be, trying to take a dumper in peace in a bathroom full of guys you'd want to impress? "Oh hey, that girl's pretty! But dang is she rootin' tootin'!" I'm saying this is wiser. I still disagree with it.

Oh, and my creative writing's getting better, at the price that my computer lost all the files after I contacted a writing agent and got a good review for a decent plot-and advice for a total rewrite for writing mechanics. So now, I'm forced to do it all over again regardless, lol.

 

[DeletedUser]

I think a wiser solution would be to just get rid of all seperate sex bathrooms and make it all one big unisex one. The full 9 yards. That would get rid of the taboo pretty quick. As a woman I would never use a public restroom again though. Do you know how awkward it would be, trying to take a dumper in peace in a bathroom full of guys you'd want to impress? "Oh hey, that girl's pretty! But dang is she rootin' tootin'!" I'm saying this is wiser. I still disagree with it.

could always add a 3rd bathroom and make it a unisex bathroom for those who wish to use it.

 

[DeletedUser]

could always add a 3rd bathroom and make it a unisex bathroom for those who wish to use it.

That is an epic idea. Why didn't I think of that??? :laugh:

 

[DeletedUser]

That is an epic idea. Why didn't I think of that??? :laugh:

o snap I thought I quoted the other line above it. you must have edited it after I read it and didn't see it.

 

[DeletedUser]

As for a 'penis police' that will 'pull up all of the dinosaurs skirts' (Jurassic Park, Jeff Goldblum) to check gender, I doubt that would occur. But as said, it's not the norm for a man to go into the woman's bathroom. Someone's bound to call the cops unless he was dressed up like a woman... The new proposed system's still open to some abuse since it would be in a sense, less strict, with the new law. I would if I was a chick and some dude marched into the girl's bathroom, I'd be creeped the hell out.

I don't think there's really any way of knowing how often men dressed as women use the women's bathrooms (or how many women may be using men's bathrooms, although that would be harder to disguise). I've seen males who look more feminine than a lot of females, and some females who look more masculine than a lot of males. The problem comes when someone else knows that one of those guys isn't female yet (surgery normally requires a lot of money and years of counseling and hormone treatment before it can happen). I've heard of (and seen videos of) what can happen to those who are discovered, and it's not usually a pretty sight. Unfortunately, I doubt that a change in the law would make much difference though; assault is already illegal, but it doesn't stop the attacks.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

I think the problem is close to what you mentioned, assault is already illegal yet it happens. What people have to defend themselves against these assaults is to be aware of their surroundings and be proactive in their actions like a woman leaving a secluded area with some strange guy in it for an area with more people around.

Well, if this bathroom bill becomes law, one of those things they would be aware of, just became the norm. This means that a women in the woman's restroom will have to accept that it might be normal for a man to walk into it. Right now, that would be the prime cause of concern for her and she could attempt to do something as simple as leave, or call the police, or reach in her purse for the stun gun or pepper spray or whatever. But if she has to accept that a man will be walking into the woman's restroom, then her options have become either not use it herself, or put up with the added risk that seems to go against everything surrounding the situation that she has been told since she can remember.

And you can supplant women for guys or whatever. There are some women who can take large men out and men who might have problems with small women. It just doesn't seem right accept situations that would normally be throwing alarm bells if you were aware of to avoid being a victim.

 

[DeletedUser]

could always add a 3rd bathroom and make it a unisex bathroom for those who wish to use it.

Or we could do this, as suggested on page 1:

Make all bathtrooms unisex.
Problem solved.

NEXT!

 

[DeletedUser]

I find it amazing that "transgender" has been completely removed from this debate, just so people can debate on "principle," rather than on merit. Absolutes is, and always has been, the fallacy when it comes to gender debates.

Ah well... have fun with your debates.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ugh, seriously, you think this is about being politically correct?!?

It is not politically popular to recognize or accept deviations to sexual norms. There are presently only "6" States authorizing same-sex marriage (with those marriages not being recognized, nor accepted, in the remaining 44 States)

And the fact that Massachusetts, the subject of this thread, is one of those states is irrelevant? There's no PC rulebook. Every single subscriber to PC idiocy doesn't feel exactly the same way about every single particular issue.