Non-transgender Men Being Allowed In Women's Bathroom!

Post Reply New Topic

Who cares? From snopes.com:

http://www.snopes.com/nc-bathroom-bill-opposition-leader-a-sex-offender/

nurseangela, again: Please stop.

Next. I don't comment to people who talk down to me.

Angela she's posted a link to an article debunking the article you posted. That is reasonable because it begs the question did you post misinformation? (al-be-it innocently not realising it was such).

We can't just find things that support our own ideas and post them without checking the source.

That's one of the first things we learned in school history classes. Is your source an accurate source? If it isn't it undermines your argument.

I don't think the counter-article debunked the original assertion.

The counter-article states:

1) The guy was president of the LGBT department of the Charlotte's Chamber of Commerce when the article was published. He made public statements against the law, using his position as "president".

2) He's a convicted sex offender of boys.

Last edited by LoveNotHate on 21 May 2016, 3:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

See this is how we continue a discussion not just shutting someone down and saying "next"

I was arguing that there's no point ignoring other points and not arguing back. I said it begs a question not proves it. And the question required a response.

You've proved my point.

I don't intend it as a straw man at all. If we accept that women and girls have no right to be protected from seeing penises in locker rooms (and men from vaginas and breasts), then why is it different anywhere else? Why have any laws against the exposure of any body parts? If some people don't want to cover themselves on the street, why force it?

The Breitbart citation positioned him as leading the, "Transgender Rights Effort in North Carolina". In reality, when Breitbart published, Chad Sevearance-Turner (now married) was already the *former* president of the "Charlotte LGBT Chamber of Commerce" - not the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce. It would appear that once his history was discovered, the board of the CLGBTCC made the moral and ethical choice and got rid of him.

Really, this has absolutely nothing to do with the transgender people's right to public accommodations. It was a clumsy attempt at pushing the argument that because someone promoting LGBT equality is a bad person, the entire right for equality must therefore be wrong. That's a fallacy, and a cheap shot.

It would be trivial to post hundreds upon hundreds of people who actually are leaders of movements attempting to legally oppress LGBT people and trans people in particular, who have been caught doing evil and/or immoral acts. There are web sites that compete over who has the longer list of such GOP politicians and conservative Christian leaders. But just like in this instance, that has nothing to do with the actual issue at hand, the right to access public accommodations by trans people.

The point was that you were implying that since one LGBT person was a sex offender than they must all be. I can make the same argument. If I can find a list of this many Republicans who are sex offenders then how many more are out there? Maybe Republicans should be banned from using public restrooms.

I get that it's deeply-ingrained and nearly universal (in many cultures, anyways), but if you trace back the roots of where that lesson (because it is something that is taught -- it is not innate, people are not born feeling this way) comes from, it is all about assuming that nudity = sex and that everyone is heterosexual.

Just because something has been done/taught a certain way and created strong feelings doesn't mean it is right or makes any kind of logical or moral sense, and I personally don't believe that strong feelings are enough to justify discrimination.

Also, nobody is being forced to allow anyone to see them naked .... and I'm sure that there are ways of changing locker room practice (like just installing lots of curtains and expecting everyone to use a curtain cubicle) so that nobody even perceives that they are being forced to allow anyone to see them naked.



I never said it was, nor did I intend to imply that it was.

Your argument was that the problem was transwomen having "different genitals" -- which to me sounded like the key problem was not having "normal" shaped genitals. If the key is just "normal" then it doesn't really matter how the body part is different or why it is different, does it?

However, since you brought this up I will point out that the penis and the clitoris are analogous, developed from the same tissue and with more similarities than differences in function (and even basic form, although the differences that do exist are significant -- I'm not saying they aren't). So in a way, a penis is just a differently formed clitoris (in the same way that a scrotum is differently formed labia and testicles are differently formed ovaries....we all start out with the same tissue -- including sexually dimorphic tissue in the brain). Also, a transwoman might actually prefer to think of her penis as a "deformed" clitoris rather than thinking of it as a penis at all -- and given the similar origins of the tissue, and the immense likelihood that her sexually dimorphic brain structures are female, that would make sense to me. (I say "immense likelihood" not because I doubt it -- I would be really, seriously shocked if it turned out transpeople didn't have brain gender that matched their gender identity -- but because I am not aware that there is enough research yet for anyone to point to a specific part/parts of the brain and say conclusively, "Those are the ones that create gender identity, here are the specific differences that lead to these gender identities". Also please note that I think that having different parts of your body differently gendered/not-clearly-male-or-female is just a normal part of human variation, but it also makes sense to me that if your gender identity is at odds with the genitals you were born with then you might consider your birth-genitals as more like a birth defect rather than normal anatomy and I think that perspective/conceptualization is 100% valid.....it's complicated stuff. I also know that transpeople have varied feelings about their bodies.)

Also, I again point out that there are people born with phalluses that are neither obviously clitorises nor penises .... they often have clear male or female gender identity just like people with non-ambiguous genitalia often do. I ask you again, where do those people fit? Does it depend on how masculine versus feminine their genitals appear to onlookers (like if a woman has a phallus that basically sits on the boundary of size/location/form between being a penis and a clitoris)? If you believe they should be allowed to use the bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity, why is that? Why should they be allowed to do that, while transpeople are not?

Also, to be clear, does your argument about protecting other women/girls from seeing male genitals, and being seen nude/semi-nude by people with male genitals even when those people are also women/girls, mean that you would be fine with transwomen who had undergone vaginoplasty using the women's locker rooms and bathrooms? If not, why not?

Last edited by animalcrackers on 23 May 2016, 3:30 pm, edited 17 times in total.

I honestly don't know why it should be different. Keeping social order?

Personally, I wouldn't care if people went around naked.....I don't have any interest in going around nude, myself, but if other people want to it's not going to hurt me in any way. If I don't want to see a naked person, I can just look away

There are places where women being topless is not illegal. In Canada, BC and Ontario are examples.

There are also nude beaches (arguably public places) where being completely nude is accepted/tolerated....I don't know if there are laws about them but obviously people aren't being arrested for being nude on the nude beaches.

Unless everyone is allowed to use any bathroom they choose, it's a privilege, not a right. A right by definition is something everyone has. A privilege is something only a select few people have. If transgendered people have the right to use any restroom, then so do cisgendered people.

Trangendered don't have the right to use any restroom, only the one corresponding to their gender identity.

That's exactly what is happening in my area. A transgendered girl is suing to use the female locker room at a school with an open layout and open shower area. In my state gym class is mandatory, and many schools also have mandatory swim classes. So yes, she's basically suing for the right to show everyone her junk, and to look at all of theirs.



That would be great, but so far no state or federal government is offering either time or money for schools to make these adjustments. There are just edicts and lawsuits. Public schools have barely enough money to function already.

TBH I think it would be very awkward to see a penis in the women's locker room. I am fine with my husband's but I don't want to see my dad's or anyone else's. My son's I don't mind but when he is older I won't want to anymore. If I want to see penises, I will go online and look at porn or go to a nude beach. So I can understand where everyone is coming from when a trans gendered teen wants to dress and undress in the girl's locker room. Why not do it in a stall assuming the toilets have them. Also provide a private shower but no the transgendered might cry discrimination and insist why not have all the cis girls to shower privately and dress and undress in the stall. Hopefully not all of them are like this. Or why not provide only one shower curtain so they can shower privately but then discrimination would still be cried out and insist why not have all the cis girls shower in that shower. I would have to talk to my own daughter about how she feels about it of this happened in her school and then tell the school to accommodate my daughter if she didn't feel comfortable either. If other parents were also asking for the same thing because their own daughters weren't feeling comfortable, then the school has a problem.

Personally, I would be fine with that for two reasons. One, it offers a protection from straight male perverts who might pretend to be trans. Two, it means that even if the trans person strips naked, no one will be exposed to any genitalia they aren't comfortable with or expecting to see. There is still the issue of people being seen naked by someone they might regard as opposite gender, but to me if someone is willing to undergo that type of surgery they are very committedly trans, and they should be treated wholly as their preferred gender. Other people might not agree with me, though, which brings me back to two things: choice and information. Everyone should have the right to be informed in advance about what's allowed in a bathroom/locker room, and everyone should have the option to use or not use that facility based on that information without penalty.

Although LGBT people and transgenders have been around since the dawn of time, this bathroom thing is a relatively new phenomenon.

With a really easy solution.

1. USE THE HANDICAPPED OR FAMILY STALL!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! They have them at Target and basically every major store, school, or building. I use them, and I'm not transgender or handicapped. I just like the cleanliness and quietness.

2. In a situation where there is no such bathroom available, then go outside. I used to do that, when the handicapped washrooms were occupied at the college I went to. The bathrooms were filthy, they made the entire halls stink like stale urine, feces, and a thin veil of cleaning chemical which was never enough. Also, peeing on the plants is healthy for them. I used to pee in my organic homemade fertilizer, to add extra nutrients.

3. Learn self defense if you're being harrassed in a washroom.

Men and women's washrooms have been separated since the dawn of time for a reason. Privacy, and safety. If I had a daughter, who was 10, it would be inappropriate for me to take her into the mens room, like you would a smaller child (3-6?). I would not feel safe with her going to the bathroom, with a potential predator in the washroom.

Not that all transgenders or even most are predators, but there is always that 0.1% chance that some pervert is going to take advantage of this whole bathroom issue, and there are going to be assaults, harassment, and just general inappropriate behaviour.

It's not worth the 0.1% chance of that happening.

This washroom business has gone way too far. We had a transgender at our highschool, M to F, he still used the male washroom, no one bothered him for it.