Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,222 Year: 5,479/9,624 Month: 504/323 Week: 1/143 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   This Bathroom Law Confusion
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 7 of 166 (782865)
04-29-2016 4:03 PM


It's simple.
It's election and fund raising time so any way that a pot can be stirred is the right thing to do. What, got no issues? Make one up.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 22 of 166 (782884)
04-30-2016 8:23 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Faith
04-30-2016 4:13 AM


But what you call pro-LGBT laws are laws that only PROtect LGBT folk from discrimination; laws that say you can't refuse service or fire someone simply for being LBGT.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Faith, posted 04-30-2016 4:13 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Faith, posted 04-30-2016 8:58 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 25 of 166 (782891)
04-30-2016 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Faith
04-30-2016 8:58 AM


Two subjects, the LBGT laws related to bathrooms and the other subject the earlier LBGT laws related to protection.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Faith, posted 04-30-2016 8:58 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 04-30-2016 10:43 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 29 of 166 (782898)
04-30-2016 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Faith
04-30-2016 10:43 AM


Beyond the bathroom.
There is lots more to it than just which bathroom to use. For example the issue of refusing services based on things like LBGT. In Tennessee there is a law that passed in the House and is now going to the Senate (that passed a similar earlier) that specifically allows Therapists to refuse treatment and counseling to gays. There is a similar situation in Mississippi. Florida is also pushing through similar legislation.
This attack on LBGT citizens is wide spread and pernicious.
AbE: Here is a pretty good summary of just how wide-spread the anti LBGT legislation effort is.
Edited by jar, : fix sub-title
Edited by jar, : see AbE.
Edited by jar, : fix link

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 04-30-2016 10:43 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 69 of 166 (782994)
05-02-2016 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by Faith
05-02-2016 9:05 AM


Re: No more M/F bathrooms
Faith writes:
I think mixing the sexes in bathrooms is barbaric. Families don't allow that. Sisters together, brothers together but not the two sexes together.
That would depend on the family, would it not?
In addition the example you are responding to pointed out that there were individual stalls in the bathroom in question.
What possible objections could there be in that situation? How is that different than men and women both using the same halls or drinking fountain or mirror?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Faith, posted 05-02-2016 9:05 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 05-02-2016 10:21 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 71 of 166 (783001)
05-02-2016 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Faith
05-02-2016 10:21 AM


Re: No more M/F bathrooms
Faith writes:
jar writes:
What possible objections could there be in that situation? How is that different than men and women both using the same halls or drinking fountain or mirror?
If you don't see a difference, far be it from me to try to make such an obvious point when you're only going to deny it.
But it might help us understand what it is that bothers you and maybe even others. If you never explain what it is that is the issue then how can you ever expect to convince anyone your position has merit?
The comparison I presented seems very apt.
In the bathroom being discussed the toilets are in individual stalls and so private.
How is a mirror on the wall in a bathroom different than a mirror on the wall in a hall?
How is a faucet in the bathroom different than a faucet out back or a water fountain in the hall?
How is walking in a hall different than walking in the public areas of the bathroom in question?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 05-02-2016 10:21 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Faith, posted 05-02-2016 11:03 AM jar has replied
 Message 77 by 14174dm, posted 05-02-2016 11:55 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 73 of 166 (783006)
05-02-2016 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Faith
05-02-2016 11:03 AM


Re: No more M/F bathrooms
Faith writes:
What is accomplished by forcing the sexes to be together if you have to make an effort to keep them apart even in that situation, and if no effort is made, is it really the case that you can watch someone else shower, women wash themselves at the sinks in the view of everybody, urinals are used in the view of everybody? If so, do you see no problem with that? If not, if privacy about these things matters, why not just have the usual separate bathrooms where privacy is easier to protect?
I see no problems there. If someone is washing at a sink naked then I say it's fine to watch them wash at the sink naked. Get serious.
If they (as is usually the case when washing at a sink) are clothed then no big deal.
If there is a way to peak under or over a stall to see who is next door I see no difference whether it is a same or different sex peeker. A pecker-peeker is little different than a non-pecker-peeker.
If there are shower curtains then there is privacy. Any objection would be the same as above.
Sorry Faith but no, I do not see the problem.
Also, having grown up in a house with a passel of kids if you were in the shower and someone of either sex really, really, really needed to go all that was needed was a verbal admonishment not to peek.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Faith, posted 05-02-2016 11:03 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Faith, posted 05-02-2016 11:24 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 75 of 166 (783008)
05-02-2016 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Faith
05-02-2016 11:24 AM


Re: No more M/F bathrooms
Faith writes:
As I said the women were BARE from the waist up, that's how you wash yourself, you don't wash yourself with clothes on. And that's OK with you? Good grief. Let me off this planet.
Yup, I have absolutely no problem with that.
If women are bare from the waist up washing at a sink in a multi-use bathroom then they have no expectation of privacy.
Men seldom wash at a sink bare from the waist up except in TV commercials.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Faith, posted 05-02-2016 11:24 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Faith, posted 05-02-2016 11:32 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 78 of 166 (783013)
05-02-2016 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by 14174dm
05-02-2016 11:55 AM


Re: No more M/F bathrooms
14174dm writes:
I think the intent is to at least let women know if they see an obvious male in the women's bathroom that he shouldn't be there.
But the LBGT issue is not about obvious males or obvious females. If a person wearing a dress aqnd heels (but not a kilt) came into a male washroom then I could see some issue. But that is NOT what is being discussed. The person who has transitioned from male to female or who dresses as a female appears to be a female.
If a woman saw an obvious male in a bathroom then there would be reason to file a complaint or at least feel uncomfortable.
BUT there is no law saying you should not be made to feel uncomfortable.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by 14174dm, posted 05-02-2016 11:55 AM 14174dm has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


(3)
Message 92 of 166 (783048)
05-02-2016 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by NoNukes
05-02-2016 5:27 PM


Re: No more M/F bathrooms
"Remember to leave the seat down. Remember to leave the seat down. Remember to leave the seat down."

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by NoNukes, posted 05-02-2016 5:27 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 104 of 166 (783118)
05-03-2016 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Faith
05-03-2016 4:48 PM


Faith writes:
By the way, if it's a medical problem, how about curing it instead of indulging it?
Medical condition and problem are not the same. Why would a homosexual want a cure. Why would a transgender what to be cured?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Faith, posted 05-03-2016 4:48 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


(1)
Message 108 of 166 (783152)
05-03-2016 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by Faith
05-03-2016 5:43 PM


Faith writes:
If that was true there would be no need for this discussion or for anybody getting freaked out when they see a man in women's clothing in the women's room because that would not occur. But it does, and THAT's the situation we're trying to address.
No, it doesn't occur. You gotta stop just believing folk making unsupported claims. It's not the situation you are trying to address because it simply doesn't happen.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Faith, posted 05-03-2016 5:43 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


(4)
Message 129 of 166 (783438)
05-05-2016 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by ringo
05-05-2016 12:35 PM


Maybe Ambisextrous?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by ringo, posted 05-05-2016 12:35 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 138 of 166 (788904)
08-07-2016 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by Minnemooseus
08-07-2016 2:46 AM


Minnemooseus writes:
But what if s/he is male to female transgender, and self identifies as female. Should he be using the female room?
The liberal view seems to say "Use the room of your identity". What is his/her "identity"?
I'm not sure I'd call it a liberal view but rather a practical view. In real life who could really determine the answer to that question but the person involved?
If I was using a public bathroom and some other guy walked in and went into a stall would I even notice? If it was a person dressed as a man why would I even notice?
Would not the same hold true if it was a person dressed as a woman walking to a Female bathroom and using a stall?

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-07-2016 2:46 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024