And in New York, the business could be fined hugely if an employee said 'Hey, mister, that’s the women’s room" to a transgender woman. Words like ‘ze’ and ‘hir’? What does that even mean? Of course the whole proposed law is completely and totally unconstitutional. Not to mention fascist.
“The point is not whether there has been or will be an epidemic of voyeur-jerks, but that now you cannot legally keep them out. There’s no legal standard to who can declare themselves to be trans.”
In NC and other states with this law it’ll be easier for creepy men to use the ladies room as trans men, who are required by the law to use the ladies room, look just like a cis-man and no one that I know of has x-Ray vision to tell them apart?
Tell me how anyone is going to be able to tell the difference between a trans man and a cis man who walks into the ladies room in states with this law?
Yet the point I was attempting to make has been generally understood. Which makes me suspect that the pettifoggery of gender studies professionals is mostly about wanting to control the discussion.
As to that point… I think it’s been made. That not everyone is indelibly imprinted by abuse (which I believe I already addressed) is irrelevant. If you accept that formative experiences have lasting weight, that hair-splitting as to how many is kind of beside the point: which is that sexual orientation, preference, enjoyment, whatever… isn’t completely dependent on biology.
“And in New York, the business could be fined hugely if an employee said 'Hey, mister, that’s the women’s room” to a transgender woman. Words like ‘ze’ and ‘hir’? What does that even mean? Of course the whole proposed law is completely and totally unconstitutional. Not to mention fascist."
I think it’s a sign of disrespect if one has been told what someone prefers to be called and I can’t understand why anyone would refuse to call them what they have asked?
I’m sure you wouldn’t be happy if your boss or someone else you work with professionally called you "sweetie, or “honey,” or “doll,” after you asked them not to. You probably could bring a suit against them for harassment.
Racheal Dolezal identifies as black. Should she be eligible for special programs that benefit black people?
^oh no, you didn’t!
There is a valid scientific basis for the fact that some people’s brains are oriented differently than their apparent gender. That is not true with race in any way.
You’re smarter than that.
No one has ever, in any way, suggested evidence that people are born “knowing” they’re one race or another, independent of apparent appearance and family background. Knowledge of what race they’re assigned to is based on family background. That is not true of gender, since obviously everyone is born of more than one.
There are so many ways that that is a facile, cheap comparison, that I’m surprised to still hear it.
@TatinG “ze” and “hir” are pronouns that some people in the nonbinary community use. They are the same part of speech as he/she/they though they’re not commonly used. Many nonbinary people who use “ze” or “hir” are also fine with “they” because people are more familiar with “they” than “ze” or “hir”
Also respecting people’s pronouns is incredibly important and purposeful (or even accidental) misgendering can result in anxiety or dysphoria.
@TatinG “How would you keep male voyeurs out of women’s locker rooms? Let’s not pretend there aren’t creepers out there who will take advantage of all this.”
Once again: WHAT STOPS THEM NOW??? Any pervert can dress up like a woman right this moment and walk into any women’s bathroom in North Carolina. Why the &^%$ do people think that a law permitting a trans woman to use a public womens’ bathroom is going to suddenly increase the odds of this happening? Trans women are not out to molest innocent women and children - they simply want to pee. They are not going to hurt anyone and them seeing you naked is no different from a (less identifiable than some trans women) lesbian seeing you naked - do you want lesbians banned as well? And obviously not all trans women are lesbian, the heterosexual trans women really don’t care about your naked body; they prefer men’s bodies. Forcing a trans woman to enter a mens room dressed in a skirt or other women’s clothing, on the other hand, presents a much higher probability of her being attacked.
Once again. I do not care about bathrooms. I care only about keeping voyeurs out of places where women may be undressed. If legally someone is a woman, I have no problem. If IDs could be checked, not birth certificates, I have no problem.
As for the speech police, it is completely unconstitutional for the government to punish anyone for using the ‘wrong’ pronoun. It’s hard to believe that anyone who understands the First Amendment would support that for a second.
So far, but that still only leaves us a sample of 2.
If by abuse you mean the many methods of non-consent: drugs, alcohol, peer pressure from whomever you’ve fell in with in your teen years, weaker personality seeking approval from a dominant one… yes, that is what I was speaking of.
“Once again. I do not care about bathrooms. I care only about keeping voyeurs out of places where women may be undressed. The diff is that it is no longer acceptable to stop someone to prove they are ei”
How does a law passed like the one in NC prevent that? If, for instance, a trans man is required to use a ladies locker room (as they are now required to use a ladies bathroom,) how would you know if it was a trans man or a cis man in there? I still don’t know how someone can tell the difference?
Why do so many people reject the preponderance of research which suggests that sexual orientation is biologically based vs. some degenerate choice?
I wonder if the urge to judge and/or express fear and disgust with others who are different is inborn, a result of environmental factors, or “a choice.”
432 Because the person supervising a locker room is no longer able to deny admittance to someone who looks male, or who is in the women's locker room and looks male because that person could be transgender. If the person is in fact transgender and has changed his legal sex to female, then that person is legitimately transgender. With that I have no problem. I was already admonished on this forum for saying that 'who is going to know' because transgender females can look very female. I was told that some are not female looking. So if they don't look like females how do security, attendants, etc. keep non-female looking people out of the women's locker room. If they guess wrong and keep a legitimate transgender woman out, you can be sure a civil suit will be brought. If they do nothing, and a man enters the women's locker room, trouble of another sort could happen and end in other types of lawsuits against the business that let a male enter the women's area.
In light of the fact that that there are separate arenas for male/female (bathrooms, sports, scholarships, affirmative action for government contracts, etc.) I don’t see what the big deal is to have transgendered people legally commit to a gender change before having access to gender-specific entitlements.
The IOC requires a 4-yr commitment and testosterone checking for trans female athletes. Trans women don’t get to participate in competitive sports just because they say they’re female. People who seek privileges designated for Native Americans have to be officially recognized and “legalized” by the tribe.
Should trans women be eligible for female designated scholarships & government contracts? Right now outside of sports, there are no standards for trans identity other than sartorial ones.
Posters here are confusing want for **certification **of trans identify with discrimination against trans people.
Is OK for a trans man without “certification” to use a men’s restroom that has urinals? I am not hearing that complaint. And can he use the men’s locker room?
“#432 Because the person supervising a locker room is no longer able to deny admittance to someone who looks male, or who is in the women’s locker room and looks male because that person could be transgender.”
But that is because laws like the NC law require trans men to use the ladies room! Before they would use the mens room and so if a man walked in it would be a cis man! No trans man would willingly use a ladies room or a ladies locker room because they are men! Now it’s easy peasy for a creepy cis man, at least in NC, to use the ladies facility - exactly the opposite of what you think a law like this prevents.
Trans men in NY use the men’s room and the men’s locker rooms. Trans women use the ladies room and ladies locker rooms. It’s easy to spot a cis person of the opposite sex in either place. It’s in NC where you won’t be able to tell.
I’m still waiting for an answer on whether trans females should be eligible for female designated scholarships & government contracts, etc, w/o some certification of their gender commitment.
How is a locker room attendant supposed to tell whether a person is legitimately transgender without asking for legal ID showing his/her legal sex?