So, you think that this law will stop "freaks and pedophiles" from "using the bathroom as a hunting ground?" Really? This law only stops law-abiding people from using the bathroom that they identify with. (Hm... this is starting to sound a lot like the GOP's argument against gun control laws: since criminals don't obey the gun laws, so why do we need common sense laws restricting firearms, since they only encroach on my 2nd amendment rights). What's good for the goose is good for the gander, eh? Sorry, but you need to check the law (Part 1, Section 1.3, Paragraph "d")... I'm pretty sure that it explicitly gives any male permission to enter a ladies room (even with your prepubescent daughter) "to accompany a person needing assistance." This means that "freaks and pedophiles" can continue to "use the bathroom as a hunting ground" as long as they bring a minor child or impaired adult with them. The law does nothing to protect you or your prepubescent daughter. It is hate-inspired legislation designed to impress the far-right as we enter the political season.
Don't be obtuse. No, this will not stop people who don't belong in a ladies room from entering. It happens, hopefully people see it, and either question the person or report them to the business owner. However, if you open the flood gates, the perverts will come out of the woodwork because no one will question it. The law is designed to protect my child, and me too for that matter. It's not hate inspired. I don't think you'll find any rational person who would be opposed to anyone, regardless of who/what they are/identify with, using a single stall unisex bathroom. In the meantime, I can assure you that those of us who do believe in the 2nd Amendment, and our own safety in restrooms, will continue to fight for both.
I think Jesse is right. I don't agree with the new law. However, I think the flip side is requiring businesses to build a 3rd or 4th bathroom to accommodate everybody.
But I don't think you can require private businesses to do that. Shoot, some businesses don't even have public restrooms.
Sorry, but that's simply not true. More than 200 municipalities have passed anti-discrimination laws, similar to Charlotte's. In no case (you can see for yourself) was there an increase in bathroom attacks because "the perverts [came] out of the woodwork." Some examples: In Des Moines, Iowa, when asked if there was an increase in sexual assaults related to the state's non-discrimination ordinance, the police chief replied, "We have not seen that. I doubt that's gonna encourage the behavior. If the behavior's there, [sexual predators are] gonna behave as they're gonna behave no matter what the laws are." Cambrige, Mass has had a similar ordinance in effect since 1997. The Cambridge Police Superintendent reported "No incidents of transgender protections being abused [as an excuse for assaults]." The spokeswoman for the state victims's advocacy group (Jane Doe, Inc.) was quoted as saying, "The argument that providing transgender rights will result in an increase of sexual violence against women or men in public bathrooms is beyond specious. We have not heard of any problems ... nor do we expect this to be a problem." The Minneapolis, Minn Police Department says that fears about sexual assault are "Not Even Remotely" a problem, since the passage of Minnesota's transgender non-discrimination law in 1993. I am a staunch defender of the 2nd Amendment. Feel free to open-carry in public restrooms, I do. But I'm also a firm believer in the 14th Amendment, especially the Equal Protection Clause. History will show that HB2 is wrong.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Forgive me if I don't take a website that touts itself as politically progressive as being the "be all, know all" of women's bathrooms issues. Do you know how many sexual assaults go unreported? Most media (liberal and conservative) agree that's its at least 60%. My point is that you don't know, you can't know, how this will affect that. And I'm perfectly ok with the 14th amendment. And that's why we're having this conversation, because my daughter and I deserve equal protection, just the same as Bill, who was born Bonnie.
So, now we're transitioning from "perverts attacking people in bathrooms" to sexual assaults in general? Please, let's stay on subject. Where are the statistics showing that cities that have passed similar laws have seen an increase in bathroom attacks by people who have used the law to gain access to the opposite sex's bathroom. It doesn't happen. No, the point is that we do know. We have decades of evidence from hundreds of other cities that your fears are unfounded.[/QUOTE]
You can't ask for statistics of unreported sexual assaults. Hint, they're unreported. My fears are just as real as a man identifying to be a woman and "fearing" shame using the mens room.
So you can offer no proof of your fears because they're all unreported? That's your argument, really? Again, I'm not asking for examples of "unreported sexual assaults," only for you to show that there's a reason for your fears: that perverts would have used Charlotte's anti-discrimination law as cover to attack women in bathrooms. No, they're not. It isn't "shame" they fear, but violence. Transgender people have been attacked in bathrooms. Show us why you fear that perverts would have used this law to attack you in the bathroom.
Is this something like Schrodinger's sexual assault. Or perhaps if a sexual assault occurs in a forest did it make a sound? Not making light of sexual assault, but I am making light of this particular argument.
A simple google search will do... A child- http://wishtv.com/2016/02/09/man-attacks-6-year-old-girl-in-womens-bathroom/ Here's one of someone "pretending" to be transgender- https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/s...laiming-to-be-transgender-in-order-to-assault A few more, just for good measure- http://www.local8now.com/home/headl...ct-from-womens-bathroom-attack-223218451.html http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_acc37c3c-e290-5bfe-b87c-48f215565e67.html
Has nothing to do with the Charlotte's law. I was unaware of that one. However, the assualts appear to have happened in 2002 and 2009, before the law was passed in 2012. Again, nothing to do with the law in question. But you're doing a good job of evading the question! You said you opposed the law because "...if you open the flood gates, the perverts will come out of the woodwork because no one will question it." I'll ask for the last time... show me an instance the proves your fears (of perverts who will use the law to attack someone in the bathroom). If you're fearful of being attacked in the bathroom, that's one thing. But allowing transgender people to use the bathroom of their identity has no impact.
The problem is that the law is assumed to allow men anywhere and it does not. It allows those who IDENTIFY as a particular sex to use the restroom with which they identify. This means a man who identifies as a woman will be dressed as a woman and acting more like a woman. A woman who identifies as a man will be dressed as a man and will act more like a man. Thus, no person appearing to be a man should be in the women's restroom as a transgender and no person appearing to be a woman should be in the men's restroom as a transgender. If they are not dressed as the gender they are not identified with that gender. Unless and until you can look at the pictures posted and identify which are transgender, male, and female the assumptions of who is what are going to be flawed.
Even though I've stated that this issue is a bit outside of my comfort zone, I still believe that heterosexual men (when they misbehave) pose a much greater threat to women's safety than a few men who would rather identify as women. I've never been harassed, followed, or disrespected by a man dressed in women's clothing (It's rare that I even see them), but like most women from 15 - 45, it's part of our lives as women to be looked at, and harassed. (See the waitress harassment thread and every woman will understand the kind of b.s. that we have to put up with on a daily basis.) It's mostly just annoying most of the time, but can also sometimes be very scary. Thank God I'm over the hill now and don't get any stupid, unwanted attention anymore! So, yes, I'd be more concerned about your so-called "average man", who feels "entitled" to harassment behavior rather than a trans.
So women, here you have it. Liberals and womens rights advocates fight for your right to privacy for an abortion because it's your body and a private personal decision that the father shouldn't necessarily even be a part of, but you're just gonna have to share your restrooms with men who's sexuality is so screwed up that they don't know what they are. This is how privacy works in the liberal mind. Privacy for me but none for the.
Unsure if your comment was directed to me as I'm hardly what you would call a liberal, and I'm not ultra conservative either. I tend more on the thinking moderate side, truth be told. What I said was the plain truth about unwanted attention from men who believe it is their God-given right to bother women who are just going about their business in life. The problem as I see it, is that unwanted male attention (I won't call it "sexual harrassment" since that phrase is seen as a "liberal" phrase, and that's why there is political pushback from it now.)Call it whatever you like, but it's the same thing. Personally, I don't understand the whole "transgender thing" myself, and probably wouldn't feel comfortable sharing a bathroom with anybody who caught my attention in that way, but I maintain that regular males, when they choose to act ungentlemanly towards women, are and always have been, the ones that pose the greater threat to women in public. That is not to say that there are not many well-behaved men out there. There certainly are, and I commend them for their civility and respect towards women. They are the real heroes. But if you think that rude behavior towards women should be sanctioned as a way to express a certain politic, or rail against it's perceived opposite, well that's just boorish behavior in my humble opinion.
I........still don't understand how you are going to know whether someone has man bits or girly bits under their skirt. I am frankly not worried about a trans man/woman using the stall next to me BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO KNOW ABOUT IT. I've never, ever used a public restroom and had any reason to question someone's gender. Pervs are a whole nother issue and frankly a red herring to this issue. If a man is intent on assaulting a woman, whether or not he is legally allowed to use the women's room isn't going to stop him.
Exactly. It is a "red herring" issue. In all of my years of using the women's restroom, guess how many trans people I have seen in the women's restroom? None! And while they may exist and may use the women's restrooms, they could look so much like a natural born female, that even I wouldn't notice them! But straight male weirdos? There are plenty of them out there! Good grief! So the issue here is that while we might find it easier to vilify somebody based on their perceived "perversion", the real perverts get off scot-free and go under the radar, hiding behind their "straightness" as something morally virtuous and beyond reproach.
Go to hell you hypocrite. You don't say a word when your ilk does this but have one person who doesn't believe as you do and you pop off with this.
