explain the NC law to me - why are we so obsessed with bathrooms?

[Anonymous]

OP, this isn't about bathrooms or trying to protect anyone.

It's about legislating hatred against a minority of people.

People are small-minded. People in South, particularly, are small-minded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are so naïve, I'm not sure how you make it through the day.

Not one reported incident of a trans person assaulting someone in the restroom. Not one. Who's naive?

http://m.mic.com/articles/114066/statistics-show-exactly-how-many-times-trans-people-have-attacked-you-in-bathrooms#.s9UPvl8xw

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, this isn't about bathrooms or trying to protect anyone.

It's about legislating hatred against a minority of people.

People are small-minded. People in South, particularly, are small-minded.

You’ve gotta love sweeping statements like this. No stereotyping here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are so naïve, I'm not sure how you make it through the day.

Yes I was thinking the same thing. They think this is abot bathrooms.

No we don't. We think it is about small minded reactionary bigots trying to find any way to legally register their disgust for LGBTQ citizens in a post marriage equality America. And we are not wrong.

I guess I was confused. I agree with you. That's why it's not about bathrooms. It's about finding a way to take a way to make trans people "illegal". Not bathrooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are so naïve, I'm not sure how you make it through the day.

Yes I was thinking the same thing. They think this is abot bathrooms.

No we don't. We think it is about small minded reactionary bigots trying to find any way to legally register their disgust for LGBTQ citizens in a post marriage equality America. And we are not wrong.

I guess I was confused. I agree with you. That's why it's not about bathrooms. It's about finding a way to take a way to make trans people "illegal". Not bathrooms.

Shit I'm going to quit this thread and try to communicate after I have some coffee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, what happens when a trans woman (with male genitalia) enters a mens' bathroom dressed as woman? How will police ensure compliance? Are all people at the risk of an on-the-spot strip search?

Homeland Security will develop an app to scan, analyze and classify genitalia.

There's also ways know if they were born locally or stay here illegally.

And this is a win for small government?

I also don't get it, OP. Neither the enforcement nor why it is needed. Someone who looks like a woman (but has male genitalia) goes into a women's bathroom. If they're there to pee, they go into a stall and no one is the wiser. If they are there to harass or assault women, they'd do that regardless of whether they were dressed as a woman. Ditto the men's room. And a trans man is far likely to be threatened in the men's room rather than be a threat. I really don't understand why this is taking up so much time and attention. I am a woman and I do not care if a trans woman wants to use the women's bathroom. If h/she feels like a woman and wants to pee in a stall where I don't see her anyway, why do I care?

You're right, I don't understand it either. Know why? Because it's not about bathrooms at all - it's about pushing an agenda, based on what do-gooders believe is 'non-hate', when in reality, it's causing more attention and more problems as a result. The solution is simply to continue to put third bathrooms in, non-gender family bathrooms so to speak. This solves a lot of additional problems, such as when my 5 year old son insisted on going into the men's room at Jersey Turnpike rest stops and I could not go in with him. This completely eliminates the awkwardness and safety issues for trans-gender individuals as well.

Now - wait for the outrage at my statements from people here and you'll see what I mean about forcing an agenda over safety for all parties.

He's a five year old. Who is in charge here? In public my 6 year old
son goes with me, his mother, to use the restroom. Be a parent, be in charge, take responsibility. We don't need laws for that. YOU just need common sense and better ways to spend your mental energy.

He did go with me but it made things more difficult than it needed to be on a large car trip. What if the kid is 8? 10? Does the risk go down, allowing a child in the bathroom like that? I don't think so. And taking them in the women's room at 10 is a completely new ball game. A family bathroom solves that issue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, this isn't about bathrooms or trying to protect anyone.

It's about legislating hatred against a minority of people.

People are small-minded. People in South, particularly, are small-minded.

By stomping on the privacy rights of a the vast majority of people, not only in bathrooms but also in locker rooms.

[Anonymous]

I thought conservatives hated intrusive big government regulation.

This is clearly the worst form of intrusive big government regulation.

Yet more hypocrisy from the right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is nonsensical is that we have gotten to a place where this law is needed to protect the general good and welfare of the public, in the first place. When we have to have laws stating, essentially, that persons born with a penis are males, and persons born with a vagina are females, and they are to use separate (but of course equal) facilities, it shows that the public mindset has truly gone mad.

Poor choice of words, my friend. Poor choice.

[Anonymous]

The transgender craze (and yes, it's a craze) is insane:

http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/06/03/this-poor-child-is-confused-not-transgendered/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought conservatives hated intrusive big government regulation.

This is clearly the worst form of intrusive big government regulation.

Yet more hypocrisy from the right.

Isn't it insane that regulation is needed to protect the masses from progressivism gone mad?

[Anonymous]

This is probably one of the best articles around regarding transgenderism. Did you know 70-80% of teens who think they are the wrong sex lose those feelings? This is according to John's Hopkins University studies, mind you. And yet there are laws being passed allowing for gender reassignment surgeries on 15 year olds without parental consent? Madness!

http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/26/indulging-transgender-fantasies-makes-them-worse/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are so naïve, I'm not sure how you make it through the day.

Yes I was thinking the same thing. They think this is abot bathrooms.

No we don't. We think it is about small minded reactionary bigots trying to find any way to legally register their disgust for LGBTQ citizens in a post marriage equality America. And we are not wrong.

I guess I was confused. I agree with you. That's why it's not about bathrooms. It's about finding a way to take a way to make trans people "illegal". Not bathrooms.

You don't think some women are uncomfortable sharing a public restroom with a man dressed as a woman (who is obviously a man)? You are kidding yourself. That would make me uncomfortable. Of course, if I can't tell it's a man, then I can't tell.

[Anonymous]

How would you know you were sharing the bathroom with a trans man? Many women (like my Auntie Gertie) look masculine and vice versa. I'm sure you have already shared a public bathroom with trans man dozens of times. It's a total non-issue.

[Anonymous]

ok what this is really about a discussion about whether to make GLBT a protected class
A continuation of the abortion/gay marriage/now trans issue

Some Christians want protection from having to perform services that support gay marriage and if you make GLBT a protected class you could face fines or jail time
It's the same sort of thing that is at the supreme court currently about whether Christian organizations have to provide contraception as part of health insurance

That is why this is an issue