This is where we're heading.

[rambone]

Master of the obtuse strikes again.

.....

 

[Ted]

True enough. Why? Could it be (again) because of their parents' preoccupation with or fear of their own sexuality? George Carlin once said that he fully understood politicians' fear of their own bodies: "...LOOK at them!" (and yes, I'm aware he was poking fun at Republicans and/or Conservatives primarily) My point is that still, even in light of Ted's post above, this still comes back to the parents' puritanicalism (and if that's not a word, it is NOW!)

I'm aware this can come across as blaming the victim, however, that's not my intention, even if I believed there was a victim in this case. I think that while this self-described TG thinks he has been victimized by not being allowed in the locker rooms, he has not been. I think if I had had a son and the two of us had gone into a public locker room to change to swim, to exercise, or whatever, I'd probably not want him seeing another man lying sprawled out nude in a sauna. I'd also not want a pre-operative TG man (who still had female parts) displaying him/herself to that same hypothetical son.... Not because I fear nudity, but because I think that as his parent, it's my job to teach him what I believe to be correct... That those parts of the body are private and special and intended to be shared with someone special to you. As an adult, thankyouverymuch.

I also tend to agree that this person is a predator and should be dealt with.

Blessings,
Bill

You'll notice that I didn't disagree with you, either time, regarding parents who demonize mere nudity. Though I also know, and believe you do as well, that there is also differences between art and pornography; as well as that of free expression and criminal activity.

The former in each difference is acceptable, while the latter has very much a negative effect upon a child's healthy development......and while a parent may over react to the same former, it is because of the same latter.

It would be so much worse if a parent didn't take a stand upon the matter.

 

[steveh_131]

.....

Come on, man. I know you took geometry.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

You'll notice that I didn't disagree with you, either time, regarding parents who demonize mere nudity. Though I also know, and believe you do as well, that there is also differences between art and pornography; as well as that of free expression and criminal activity.

But peoples ideas of pornography differ. What supreme court justice stated "I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it"? Or something very near that.

I've known people who believe that Michelangelo's David is pornographic. Or most of Rodin's. Wasn't there a Pope that demanded the removal of all the Penises from the statutes at the Vatican? I've heard of rumors that there are still barrels of them stored there. I also seem to remember that fig leafs at one point were required by law to be placed on statues in the public view.

I don't know about you, but to me this is definitely art.

 

[Shootin'IN]

If the man in question wants to become a woman that is ok but he is still considered male until he gets his body part removed.
When hunting if you shoot a female turkey with a beard it is reported as a tom. And if you shoot a doe with antlers it is counted as a buck.
If a person has the male body parts it is considered a male & if it doesn't it is considered female.
The man should at least be charged use of the wrong locker room or indecent exposure. If he does it again then charge it as a sex crime.
If he wants to be a woman make him one by removing his problem parts & problem solved.
This is the same society that thinks a child wearing a t-shirt with a picture of an AK on it should not be worn to school.

 

[mr hucky]

i like the part where we shoot him the rest is just filler

 

[IndyDave1776]

I see a few issues which have not been raised:

If I get caught pissing behind a tree, building, or other form of camouflage, I get rolled for indecent exposure regardless of the fact I did my best to hide while dealing with my overpressurized bladder. We are confronted with the notion that a man presenting himself as a woman has a RIGHT to do his business in an area reserved for the opposite gender, including children. I am not going along with anyone else's delusions for the sake of political correctness. If it has a dick it is male. I will also say that the claim that we as a society are too puritanical is irrelevant. It makes a pretty weak claim to support liberty when we are going to allow a select few to run roughshod over the majority. I thoroughly support protections that have historically proven necessary to prevent majorities from running over minorities, but that doesn't mean that the reverse pattern is acceptable.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I don't know about you, but to me this is definitely art.

I had a picture posted but I know longer see it or anything about my post being edited. What I had posted was a picture of Rodin's The Kiss. What confuses me is that I don't see the picture of any tags to it, nor anything about by post being edited or any IMs or messages from mods if they altered my post. Is my post changed or is my computer messed up?

 

[The Bubba Effect]

So, does this mean that I can put on a dress, go the the HPER (student athletic facilities @IU Bloomington) and start using the Women's locker room while insisting that I am a woman?