Ignoring gender?

[churchmouse]

If a man is dressed as a woman and still uses the men's restroom and locker room, is that okay? Or is that guy just as bad?

Bad, not sure as that has a broad meaning.
Half a bubble or more off plumb.....maybe.

 

[CathyInBlue]

What you term violent can be measured in degrees. What you see as "OK" we do not. I am sure that Violence would not erupt right off. There would be as serious gender discussion. If this did not end well it could go anywhere from there.

IC 35-42-2-1(b) Except as provided in subsections (c) through (j), a person who
knowingly or intentionally:
(1) touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner; or
(2) in a rude, insolent, or angry manner places any bodily fluid or waste on another person;
commits battery, a Class B misdemeanor.

If any amount of violence results in touching the person of type X to whose presence your daughter objects "in a rude, insolent, or angry manner", your daughter will have committed the crime of battery. If she is reacting to the person having committed the crime of voyeurism (IC 35-45-4-5), or similar, we can let the courts sort out whose crime takes precedence. If she's just reacting to her inability mentally process the existence of gender non-conformance and its non-threatening nature, then I hope you have a good lawyer for her for her darling daughters' sake.

Predator or not some things are just off the cuff crazy to some of us simple minded folks. We all have our reasons for responding to something that to us is just not right.
To me, if harry wants to wear his moms cloths cool. Just do not come prancing into the mens room and think it is ok because to many many people it is not "OK"
I may or may not be one of those people.

To be absolutely honest I have been in a restroom on more than one occasion and had a guy in drag roll in. It is un-nerving because it just is not "Normal" in my narrow scope.
And yes, they were trolling for dates.

Wait a minute!

I thought the sturm und drang in this thread was over "drag queens" going into the women's restrooms. Now, you want to exclude them from the men's restrooms as well? Where do you want these people to squat and relieve themselves? Behind the store?

I think the onus for dealing with any problems with gender non-conforming people in public is on the people who have the problems, not on the gender non-conforming people living their lives.

 

[edporch]

If a man is dressed as a woman and still uses the men's restroom and locker room, is that okay? Or is that guy just as bad?

It's better HE use the men's locker room simply because he's a man.
Is it OK?
It's INFINITELY more "OK" than a man taking off his women's clothes in the women's locker room.

My question would be is HE OK?

 

[churchmouse]

If any amount of violence results in touching the person of type X to whose presence your daughter objects "in a rude, insolent, or angry manner", your daughter will have committed the crime of battery. If she is reacting to the person having committed the crime of voyeurism (IC 35-45-4-5), or similar, we can let the courts sort out whose crime takes precedence. If she's just reacting to her inability mentally process the existence of gender non-conformance and its non-threatening nature, then I hope you have a good lawyer for her for her darling daughters' sake.

Wait a minute!

I thought the sturm und drang in this thread was over "drag queens" going into the women's restrooms. Now, you want to exclude them from the men's restrooms as well? Where do you want these people to squat and relieve themselves? Behind the store?

I think the onus for dealing with any problems with gender non-conforming people in public is on the people who have the problems, not on the gender non-conforming people living their lives.

There are now many stores with a single non-gender specific facility.

Question.......What about "MY" life. Why do I always have to change when a group of off bubble (IMHO) people want to prance around as something they were not born to be. Where are my rights in this. Why do "I" always have to be the one to do all the bending.

Sorry CIB.....been here a hell of a long time and I am done bending for folks. Never asked them to bend for me.

I respect your opinion. You have the right to it. I also have the right to be offended by things and not want my life twisted around anymore. I can be in public with these folks and am all the time. I just do not want to be in the facility's with them and neither do the woman folk in my family. Do we not have that right........works both ways.

 

[SSGSAD]

There are now many stores with a single non-gender specific facility.

Question.......What about "MY" life. Why do I always have to change when a group of off bubble (IMHO) people want to prance around as something they were not born to be. Where are my rights in this. Why do "I" always have to be the one to do all the bending.

Sorry CIB.....been here a hell of a long time and I am done bending for folks. Never asked them to bend for me.

I respect your opinion. You have the right to it. I also have the right to be offended by things and not want my life twisted around anymore. I can be in public with these folks and am all the time. I just do not want to be in the facility's with them and neither do the woman folk in my family. Do we not have that right........works both ways.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^ Why do I have to be TOLERANT, and ACCEPTING, of anything or anyone, diverse from ME, but it never seems to be the other way around !!!!!

 

[CountryBoy19]

So, you're asking about exercising one's personal right not to associate with a person of type X in a… public school? When we engage in activities in a public place, we have to come to grips with the fact that those same public places may be occupied by people doing things with which we disagree: driving AMC Gremlins, wearing white after Labor Day, voting Leftist, etc. You must tolerate it, or, when you discover it happening in your vicinity, leave said vicinity.

I think you're way off here. You're telling me that as a heterosexual male I can just waltz right into a locker room (in a public school) full of young girls and those girls (and their parents) are at the burden of tolerating it or leaving my presence in the locker room? That's a big load of BS and you know it. There are boundaries and limitations placed upon what we have to tolerate and what we don't have to tolerate. IMHO a girl should not have to tolerate seeing a penis in her locker room at school, that is beyond the boundaries of which must be tolerated. You want an example? Lets go full public view, where we can expect to encounter LOTS of things that we don't agree with. Lets put a naked man or woman on the corner of the street and see how long it takes for them to be whisked away. And you're telling me we have to tolerate things like that? Sure, we can just drive away and we no longer have to tolerate it... but lets put the naked man on the sidewalk in front of your house. Do you have to tolerate him? Or can you call the police and have him taken away, out of your presence?

Just as there are legal balancing acts which take place between the rights of one person and the rights of another, there are balancing acts which play out within a single individual on a daily basis. You have the right not to associate with a person of type X, but you want to, are deeply desirous of, relieving one's full bowel and bladder in a convenient public restroom, which may also be occupied at the moment by a person of type X. Hmmm, decisions, decisions. You, and you alone, will have to make that decision as to which of those needs you will give priority, keeping in mind that applying fist to face or boot to ass, as I mentioned above, is an option that equates to you committing the crime of battery under Indiana law. Choose wisely.

As I said above, there are limitation upon that which must be tolerated. If we follow with your reasoning then it's simply a free-for-all and anybody can use any facility they want... have fun showering next to a fat hairy dude next time you're at the gym Don't mind when he's stroking himself while looking at you, he's free to do what he wants and you have to tolerate it...

Keep in mind that the vast majority of people in bathrooms are there for the exact same reasons you are. But then, perhaps that is the very reason you are so trepidatious about them being there with your wife and/or daughter.

You're right, the vast majority are there for the same reason. But that doesn't mean that it cannot come to harm them. As I mentioned previously, and you and snapdragon have yet to address is the mental effects of exposing a young girl to male genitalia. Just because they are only using the bathroom or showering doesn't make it harmless.

Let us stipulate that we are talking about public restroom facilities with an ample number of stalls to accommodate all concerned.

You're reducing the severity of this by placing that "stipulation" on the discussion because that simply isn't the case in many of these instances. I've never seen a school locker-room that had private changing/shower stalls. Hence a woman with a penis is an issue. If you disagree with that being an issue then certainly you wouldn't mind a strange man walking around inside your home, in front of your daughter, nieces, or second cousin twice removed naked would you?

I think a lot of people in this thread are conflating two wholly different issues: behaviour and being. A transsexual person is a being. A sexual predator is a mode of behaviour. Anyone behaving as a sexual predator, even if they happen to be a transsexual person as well, is fully deserving of a proper trouncing to eject them from the vicinity of all those who are not committing voyeuristic, or worse, crimes. Some in this thread seem to be equating the mere being of a transsexual person in a public restroom with the behaviour of a sexual predator with no further basis for such a claim, as if it's natural for everyone to make that assumption.

If you're referring to me then I believe you've misread my viewpoint and intent. The point is, it's very hard to distinguish the difference between the "being" and the "behavior" in many instances. Opening up restrooms & locker-rooms etc to transgender people, especially of the woman in a male body type opens up a fairly sizable hole for sexual predators to gain easy access to a place where girls/women should feel fairly secure.

This is 100% relevant to Girl Scouts as well. I've never been in Girl Scouts but I can say from my experience with Boy Scouts. At many of the camps etc there aren't private shower stalls and/or changing areas. How do you prevent the young girls from being exposed to things that the parents don't want them exposed to? With the right things in place its a non-issue but it does open up a can of worms that must be addressed BEFORE there are issues.

 

[JollyMon]

<---- this thread

 

[ChristianPatriot]

I think the onus for dealing with any problems with gender non-conforming people in public is on the people who have the problems, not on the gender non-conforming people living their lives.

I think this is where some of the disconnect is between how things are and how they should be. We're not afforded the same consideration as the minority. It's ok to call a Christian an immature, small-minded, homophobic hater for disagreeing with the LGBT community. But it is not ok to say anything negative in regards the LGBT community. "Live and let live" is only going one way. And it is actively going only one way. You think we're that far from pastors being told to turn in their sermons and be charged with hate crimes for preaching against homosexuality? It's around the corner.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

<---- this thread

Could not agree more.

 

[oldpink]

<---- this thread

 

[edporch]

<---- this thread

I agree.
As somebody born in the mid 50's, I never dreamed a discussion like this would ever happen.

Maybe we'll get lucky and they'll close this thread.

It's closed for me. Later

 

[Joe G]

The PROBLEM comes when somebody who is OBVIOUSLY of the opposite sex when disrobed uses a locker room or bathroom.

If I infer correctly, if a man dressed in women's clothes wants to use the women's locker room it's OK with you?
So then he in the midst of a group of women disrobes, and there stands an obviously naked man in the women's locker room, and you think that's just fine?
All because he "identifies" with women?

If a man is dressed as a woman and still uses the men's restroom and locker room, is that okay? Or is that guy just as bad?

Exactly.

If everyone has to accept a trans gender person into their bathroom/locker room etc, why not have to accept ANY person into that area? If "we" (the collective we) all need to be inclusive to those who traditionally weren't allowed into areas and clubs that were for one gender (mens room/ladies room; Boy Scouts/Girl Scouts etc) why not just open EVERYTHING up to EVERYONE - why discriminate against males who just want to go into the ladies bathrooms because their feelings tell them it's ok? Or why can't a woman go into the mens bathroom for the same reason?

I have a feeling if the collective WE had to break down ALL stereotypical areas (ie: no more mens room/ladies room) for EVERYONE to participate (not just a boy who identifies with being a girl or a woman who identifies as being a man) the proverbial poop may just hit the fan and no one will like how they smell.

I think the onus for dealing with any problems with gender non-conforming people in public is on the people who have the problems, not on the gender non-conforming people living their lives.

I have a very strong feeling you wouldn't feel the same if a group of men came into the ladies room while you were in there.

 

[Joe G]

I think you're way off here. You're telling me that as a heterosexual male I can just waltz right into a locker room (in a public school) full of young girls and those girls (and their parents) are at the burden of tolerating it or leaving my presence in the locker room? That's a big load of BS and you know it. There are boundaries and limitations placed upon what we have to tolerate and what we don't have to tolerate. IMHO a girl should not have to tolerate seeing a penis in her locker room at school, that is beyond the boundaries of which must be tolerated. You want an example? Lets go full public view, where we can expect to encounter LOTS of things that we don't agree with. Lets put a naked man or woman on the corner of the street and see how long it takes for them to be whisked away. And you're telling me we have to tolerate things like that? Sure, we can just drive away and we no longer have to tolerate it... but lets put the naked man on the sidewalk in front of your house. Do you have to tolerate him? Or can you call the police and have him taken away, out of your presence?


As I said above, there are limitation upon that which must be tolerated. If we follow with your reasoning then it's simply a free-for-all and anybody can use any facility they want... have fun showering next to a fat hairy dude next time you're at the gym Don't mind when he's stroking himself while looking at you, he's free to do what he wants and you have to tolerate it...


You're right, the vast majority are there for the same reason. But that doesn't mean that it cannot come to harm them. As I mentioned previously, and you and snapdragon have yet to address is the mental effects of exposing a young girl to male genitalia. Just because they are only using the bathroom or showering doesn't make it harmless.



You're reducing the severity of this by placing that "stipulation" on the discussion because that simply isn't the case in many of these instances. I've never seen a school locker-room that had private changing/shower stalls. Hence a woman with a penis is an issue. If you disagree with that being an issue then certainly you wouldn't mind a strange man walking around inside your home, in front of your daughter, nieces, or second cousin twice removed naked would you?


If you're referring to me then I believe you've misread my viewpoint and intent. The point is, it's very hard to distinguish the difference between the "being" and the "behavior" in many instances. Opening up restrooms & locker-rooms etc to transgender people, especially of the woman in a male body type opens up a fairly sizable hole for sexual predators to gain easy access to a place where girls/women should feel fairly secure.

This is 100% relevant to Girl Scouts as well. I've never been in Girl Scouts but I can say from my experience with Boy Scouts. At many of the camps etc there aren't private shower stalls and/or changing areas. How do you prevent the young girls from being exposed to things that the parents don't want them exposed to? With the right things in place its a non-issue but it does open up a can of worms that must be addressed BEFORE there are issues.

 

[CathyInBlue]

There are now many stores with a single non-gender specific facility.

Question.......What about "MY" life. Why do I always have to change when a group of off bubble (IMHO) people want to prance around as something they were not born to be. Where are my rights in this. Why do "I" always have to be the one to do all the bending.

Sorry CIB.....been here a hell of a long time and I am done bending for folks. Never asked them to bend for me.

I respect your opinion. You have the right to it. I also have the right to be offended by things and not want my life twisted around anymore. I can be in public with these folks and am all the time. I just do not want to be in the facility's with them and neither do the woman folk in my family. Do we not have that right........works both ways.

Do you not?

Do we as firearm owners and public handgun carriers not demand that people around us in public tolerate the presence of our carry pieces?

Is that any different than the transgendered dressing as they see fit?

You think the ultra-hoplophobic don't feel at least as passionately about the issue of OC as you do about queers in public restrooms? Ask the whacko Warthog encountered at Office Max.

You think you are any different from that whacko when you get so bent out of shape about "Why would any male want to mutilate their body to look like a female? Why would any female want to mutilate their body to look like a male?" Those hoplophobes get bent out of shape about "Why would anyone want to carry a gun in public? Isn't that what we have police for?"

To me, they sound as ridiculous as you do, and you sound as ridiculous as they do.

Over in the Survival and Disaster Preparedness forum, we talk about how all of civilization is only three meals away from total chaos. I disagree. There's something much more fundamental that prevents civilization from dissolving into chaos, without which it can do so so much faster than the span of three meals. Mutual respect. You expect the wierdoes and the freaks to respect your RKBA? You have no less an obligation to civilization to respect their right to let their freak flags fly, regardless what they paint on those flags. To me, normal people be whack. Someone who is completely average and middle of the road and moderate and bland and unnoteworthy in every respect? I never want to meet a normal person. Bring me the weirdoes. Those are the people with stories worth listening to.

The anti-gun left can expect us to act responsibly with our firearms in the restroom (unless, you know, you're like a police officer or a U.S. Marshall. They leave their carry pieces alone in the stalls all the time.). You have a right to expect the gender non-conforming to act responsibly in the restrooms as well, but you cannot exclude them from the restrooms. Your mere presence with your gun and holster is not a threat to Mr. and Mrs. Anti-Gun. Uncle Janet's mere presence with his penis and sundress is not a threat to you. Get some perspective.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Do we as firearm owners and public handgun carriers not demand that people around us in public tolerate the presence of our carry pieces?

No? I don't demand anyone tolerate me. I go about my business regardless. Not sure if this was a great example, unless I'm interpreting it wrong...

 

[Dead Duck]

Do you not?

Do we as firearm owners and public handgun carriers not demand that people around us in public tolerate the presence of our carry pieces?

Is that any different than the transgendered dressing as they see fit?

You think the ultra-hoplophobic don't feel at least as passionately about the issue of OC as you do about queers in public restrooms? Ask the whacko Warthog encountered at Office Max.

You think you are any different from that whacko when you get so bent out of shape about "Why would any male want to mutilate their body to look like a female? Why would any female want to mutilate their body to look like a male?" Those hoplophobes get bent out of shape about "Why would anyone want to carry a gun in public? Isn't that what we have police for?"

To me, they sound as ridiculous as you do, and you sound as ridiculous as they do.

Over in the Survival and Disaster Preparedness forum, we talk about how all of civilization is only three meals away from total chaos. I disagree. There's something much more fundamental that prevents civilization from dissolving into chaos, without which it can do so so much faster than the span of three meals. Mutual respect. You expect the wierdoes and the freaks to respect your RKBA? You have no less an obligation to civilization to respect their right to let their freak flags fly, regardless what they paint on those flags. To me, normal people be whack. Someone who is completely average and middle of the road and moderate and bland and unnoteworthy in every respect? I never want to meet a normal person. Bring me the weirdoes. Those are the people with stories worth listening to.

The anti-gun left can expect us to act responsibly with our firearms in the restroom (unless, you know, you're like a police officer or a U.S. Marshall. They leave their carry pieces alone in the stalls all the time.). You have a right to expect the gender non-conforming to act responsibly in the restrooms as well, but you cannot exclude them from the restrooms. Your mere presence with your gun and holster is not a threat to Mr. and Mrs. Anti-Gun. Uncle Janet's mere presence with his penis and sundress is not a threat to you. Get some perspective.

If I ever unholster my 1911 and it's wearing lipstick and a dress, only then I will respond to your comments.

 

[CathyInBlue]

I think you're way off here. You're telling me that as a heterosexual male I can just waltz right into a locker room (in a public school) full of young girls and those girls (and their parents) are at the burden of tolerating it or leaving my presence in the locker room? That's a big load of BS and you know it. There are boundaries and limitations placed upon what we have to tolerate and what we don't have to tolerate. IMHO a girl should not have to tolerate seeing a penis in her locker room at school, that is beyond the boundaries of which must be tolerated. You want an example? Lets go full public view, where we can expect to encounter LOTS of things that we don't agree with. Lets put a naked man or woman on the corner of the street and see how long it takes for them to be whisked away. And you're telling me we have to tolerate things like that? Sure, we can just drive away and we no longer have to tolerate it... but lets put the naked man on the sidewalk in front of your house. Do you have to tolerate him? Or can you call the police and have him taken away, out of your presence?


As I said above, there are limitation upon that which must be tolerated. If we follow with your reasoning then it's simply a free-for-all and anybody can use any facility they want... have fun showering next to a fat hairy dude next time you're at the gym Don't mind when he's stroking himself while looking at you, he's free to do what he wants and you have to tolerate it...

IC 35-45-4-1
Public indecency
Sec. 1. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally, in a public place:
(1) engages in sexual intercourse;
(2) engages in other sexual conduct (as defined in IC 35-31.5-2-221.5);
(3) appears in a state of nudity with the intent to arouse the sexual desires of the person or another person; or
(4) fondles the person's genitals or the genitals of another person;
commits public indecency, a Class A misdemeanor

*mic drop* We really need to get an emoji for that.

You're right, the vast majority are there for the same reason. But that doesn't mean that it cannot come to harm them. As I mentioned previously, and you and snapdragon have yet to address is the mental effects of exposing a young girl to male genitalia. Just because they are only using the bathroom or showering doesn't make it harmless.

How about you stipulate the harm you imagine the mere image of male genitalia is bound to cause a little girl's psyche. While you're at it, stipulate the harm you imagine the mere image of female genitalia is bound to cause to a little boy's psyche.

You're reducing the severity of this by placing that "stipulation" on the discussion because that simply isn't the case in many of these instances. I've never seen a school locker-room that had private changing/shower stalls. Hence a woman with a penis is an issue. If you disagree with that being an issue then certainly you wouldn't mind a strange man walking around inside your home, in front of your daughter, nieces, or second cousin twice removed naked would you?

How completely ridiculous can you get? If we're talking about a mother with child in a single-use public restroom and another person, whether of type X or otherwise, attempting to insist on using the facilities at the same time, this becomes a whole different conversation. Also, my private home is not a public restroom. If you need any assistance in comprehending the dichotomy in that, you will have to seek professional help, because I can offer none for you myself.

If you're referring to me then I believe you've misread my viewpoint and intent. The point is, it's very hard to distinguish the difference between the "being" and the "behavior" in many instances. Opening up restrooms & locker-rooms etc to transgender people, especially of the woman in a male body type opens up a fairly sizable hole for sexual predators to gain easy access to a place where girls/women should feel fairly secure.

And if voyeurism and indecent exposure in public restrooms ever becomes an actual problem with gender non-conforming people on a per-capita basis greater than it is with gender conforming people, I'll pay you my entire year's salary. Someone mentioned someone who was apparently completely hetero and cis crawling into an outhouse basin. That would be an example of the perversity of the majoritarian side of that equation, not of the transgendered side. Do you have any examples of actual transgendered people perving in public restrooms?

This is 100% relevant to Girl Scouts as well. I've never been in Girl Scouts but I can say from my experience with Boy Scouts. At many of the camps etc there aren't private shower stalls and/or changing areas. How do you prevent the young girls from being exposed to things that the parents don't want them exposed to? With the right things in place its a non-issue but it does open up a can of worms that must be addressed BEFORE there are issues.

Let the parents choose to or not to allow their little darlings to participate in programs wherein they will be exposed to X, for some definition of X. If their summer camps are co-ed/trans-inclusive, and the parents don't want them exposed to that, let them forbid the child to participate. I think I've been pretty conclusively in favour of the right to (not) associate as one sees fit. If you want to complain to the camp admins for private changing/bathing facilities for all campers, you are entirely free to do that. If they want to accede to those wishes, or refuse, they are entirely free to do that too. And you are entirely free to respond as you will to their response. What you are not free do to is to enforce your desire that a camp program that is committed to co-ed/gender-inclusiveness change their entire program with authority you do not have.

 

[17 squirrel]

If I ever unholster my 1911 and it's wearing lipstick and a dress, only then I will respond to your comments.

Lol... When I unholster in a crowd the the theme song for " Shaft " starts playing.




Who's the man...... Shaft..

 

[CathyInBlue]

I think this is where some of the disconnect is between how things are and how they should be. We're not afforded the same consideration as the minority. It's ok to call a Christian an immature, small-minded, homophobic hater for disagreeing with the LGBT community. But it is not ok to say anything negative in regards the LGBT community. "Live and let live" is only going one way. And it is actively going only one way. You think we're that far from pastors being told to turn in their sermons and be charged with hate crimes for preaching against homosexuality? It's around the corner.

Oh, I've seen some LGBT people act very immaturely toward salt of the Earth type folks. I find most gay pride parades to be distasteful for this very reason. That street goes both ways. But, insisting on being left alone to live their lives when they are doing nothing more offensive than existing, that is not a disconnect.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Oh, I've seen some LGBT people act very immaturely toward salt of the Earth type folks. I find most gay pride parades to be distasteful for this very reason. That street goes both ways. But, insisting on being left alone to live their lives when they are doing nothing more offensive than existing, that is not a disconnect.

Agreed. I've heard and seen things done on my side of the aisle that make me shake my head and think, "well no wonder people think we're spiteful bible-thumpers!"