That certain accomodations like ramps and elevators are widely used. Handicapped parking spaces are used and the cost is minimal. But for some accomodations, like the lifts by every pool, the cost-benefit analysis falls short. Money spent on things that are not used could better be spent on things that are used. (Yes, off topic).
@awcntdb This statement “The intent of the transgender person is irrelevant; it is the effect that matters, and that is what so many here seem not to get. And, more importantly, the effect is from differing beliefs, not hate of the person.”
Has absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LAWS IN NC AND MS OR TITLE IX … this is just your opinion and it isn’t even offered up in the court cases going on now… at all FYI
Okay, it’s not the costs of the ADA you are concerned about. It is only the cost of lifts which enable disabled people to swim.
The laws about transgender students in school are about accepting transgender students as they are …not keeping them from being unable to participate fully in school… THE EFFECT THAT MATTERS IS THE EFFECT OF THESE LAWS ON TRANSGENDER STUDENTS… not on your opinion of nudity or genitalia… There is no “intent” of a transgender person other than to be themselves and to express their gender identity… and every big medical and professional counseling organization has weighed in and agrees with these rulings…
“We commend the Department of Justice for taking the steps necessary to uphold the promise of Title IX and ensure that transgender students are affirmed and supported in school. Allowing schools to discriminate by forcing transgender students to use a separate restroom is demeaning and exposes them to relentless harassment and abuse from peers. The federal government’s position is not only consistent with decades of legal precedent, but also the experiences of many school districts throughout the country that are implementing inclusive policies without incident. As those districts have learned, affirming a transgender student’s gender identity is an important part of creating a safe and inclusive school where all students can thrive.”
“We hear from hundreds of students each year who simply want to be themselves and learn at school,” said Masen Davis, Executive Director of Transgender Law Center. ”Sadly, many schools continue to exclude transgender students from being able to fully participate. Now, every school in the nation should know they are required to give all students, including transgender students, a fair chance at success.”
Increasingly, courts and federal agencies are making clear that transgender and gender nonconforming people–people who do not conform to stereotypical notions of masculinity or femininity–are covered under laws that protect people from discrimination based on sex. In 2012 the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ruled, in a case brought by Transgender Law Center, that transgender people are protected from discrimination in the workplace under Title VII, the parallel federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in employment. In 2013 the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights and U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division settled a lawsuit brought by a transgender student against the Arcadia Unified School District for denying him access to the same facilities and activities as other boys. The settlement referenced the EEOC
The department of Justice, The EEOC, the OCR and the Commission on Civil Rights have all weighed in… the people being harmed are transgender individuals… not people afraid of what could possibly happen in a restroom if we allow transgender individuals their civil rights…
Actually, it has everything to do with the laws because the transgender issue is trying to make others change their behavior/moral code to accept the transgender’s belief that being nude around people of the opposite sex without their OK is somehow a right that the transgender has. Sorry, a transgender has no such right to impose on others in that way.
Specifically, the transgender is trying to do so under the guise that his intent is to be comfortable in his person by using the facility of his choice. (It is interesting to note the construct of the transgender issue seem not to respect that this behavior makes many others uncomfortable and goes against others beliefs.)
A transgender has no special right to be comfortable and definitely has not special right to make others uncomfortable, so he can be comfortable. Therefore, legally, the transgender’s intent to be comfortable is irrelevant to the issue of what rights he has under the law. The transgender has the right to be accommodated, but no right to impose on others an activity they choose not to partake in and in which they expressly do not believe.
The laws are an attempt to highlight that the intent of the transgender to be comfortable and use the facility of choice does not override the rights of others not to be subject to certain things, which they choose not to be exposed, with nude opposite sex body parts being one. A transgender has no special right to impose himself on another person in that way. Why you think that is the case is quite fascinating.
You seem not to comprehend that being in a protected class does not give one more rights than any other American, and it certainly does not give one a trump card over another person’s rights either. What protected class provides is legal assurances that one should be reasonably accommodated and that one should not be discriminated against for X beliefs. These legal assurances are far different than making others have change their lives to match your beliefs and to do and say things they do not believe in, while the transgender gets to live out his beliefs freely. You seem to think protected class is akin to “I get to ride all over your beliefs and make you do things you do not believe in and anything you do that I disagree with I can call discrimination” - very far from it, and you could not be more wrong.
@MidwestDad3 It’s not about ramps or cakes or bathrooms. It’s about fear and resentment, and getting votes from the fearful and resentful.
You seem very angry about this. I’m also angry as the mother of a gay child I expect him to be treated fairly with the same opportunities as everyone else. I expect him to be safe at school. I expect grown adults to not overreact to something that never happens.
If we start having men jumping around naked in girls facilities then we can address laws, but I can assure you no transgender person acts that way. They just want a peaceful life, not to be assaulted and not to be included in the high murder/suicide rate associated with being transgender.
These people did not chose to be ostracized and humiliated just for living.
awc: From all news reports I can find, a cis male exposed himself in the women’s locker room, not a trans woman.
It is the cis males posing a danger to moms and little girls. This is true throughout society. That doesn’t mean all cis males are a potential danger, just some, and maybe just a few statistically, even though most shootings and rapes are perpetrated by cis males.
Since I can only find that one cis male exposed himself in a women’s locker room or toilet, I’m not willing to go overboard on condemning them all as flashers in those circumstances.
…
regarding Europe vs USA: I always thought the USA was supposed to be about inclusiveness?
Hanging partition curtains for ALL who want them to use is NOT expensive. Partition curtains are welcome by all kinds of people: families who want to change together, with help for the younger kids; teenagers; groups; individuals with distinct physical characteristics, which may be underweight or overweight, scars, birthmarks, etc. Partition curtains don’t have to be reserved for transgender individuals and would be appreciaed by a lot of others. Anyone could use a partitioned area, no need to have a birth certificate to prove you “need” it. And it’s inexpensive - not free, but better than nothing, and much cheaper than creating new stalls etc.
On both sides. Anyone who thinks that hate, resentment, rage and irrationality aren’t coming from both sides is deluding him or herself.
There are actually quite a few cases of flashing and assault, but as I said earlier, those have nothing to do with the trans people - they aren’t the perpetrators. It’s unfortunate that criminals use the legitimate needs of trans people to commit crimes, but that’s what criminals do, no?
The issue is giving those criminals easy access to women and girls in vulnerable spaces without any sort of plan in place to protect against that. Putting one’s fingers in the ears and squealing “I can’t hear you” doesn’t solve a problem. This is an unintended consequence. It is not the fault or responsibility of the trans people whose needs must be met. However, it is something that any reasonable person could see coming and should have planned for. Imagine a world in which when a concern was raised, the response was “I can see why you would be concerned about that. How can we prevent it?” But when the default discussion position is to mock and belittle reasonable concerns (“icky!”) or to demonize anyone who raises a concern (“paranoid!”), then even reasonable concerns can’t be addressed. People on both sides who swear they are right are behaving exactly the same way for exactly the same reasons. It would be amusing if it weren’t so sad.
I’ve never seen a lift at a hotel pool. I was in one last week!
This whole “perverts will expose themselves to little girls so trans women can’t use the women’s room” argument is like arguing that black students can’t attend school with white students because someone might dress up in blackface and graffiti the school.
What evidence is there that a TG person has ever exposed him or herself in the bathroom or locker room? The (admittedly few) TG people I know are very, very private. The last thing they’d want to do is call attention to themselves in the changing room.
I can’t possibly see how bathrooms are an issue aside from the “it makes me feel icky to share a space with one of them” factor, a factor that doesn’t disappear when you force people to use the bathroom for their assigned-at-birth gender. Are men really going to be more comfortable whipping it out in front of someone with breasts dressed in full makeup, heels and a dress? Are mothers going to feel less protective of their girls when a guy with a beard walks into the ladies room? Beyond that, how can it be an issue? TG men don’t use urinals, TG women would be using a bathroom with stalls.
Who said that? Can you point to that post?
Zoos, that’s the stated reason for the NC law.
@zoosermom I’m not so delusional as to fail to recognize that the power generally lies on the side of the straight, able-bodied, status quo. State legislators are proving this over and over.
What I am suffering from is inertia fatigue. I resent those in power who put things off when real problems affecting real people need attention now. I resent those who are determined to take two steps backward instead of one step forward, who continually talk about undoing programs but have all the excuses in the world for having failed to put forth workable programs of their own. This country has always been at its best when it has given a voice to the marginalized.
As for ramps, for a long time no one in my family needed them. But my MIL needs them now. I’m thankful that we have them, and if someone wants to resent me for that, fine.
Seems a bit hypocritical that the people who scream “big government is bad” will pass laws that prohibit municipalities from implementing non-discrimination laws. By my god, if you talked about a math standard for a 4th grader, they’d cry all day long about “gummit interference”
^^My family needs ramps as well. If we live long enough, most of us may be relieved they exist.
Even if we don’t think disabled children and young adults are a good enough reason to spend the money.
I have to say, I’m pretty tired of this discussion. There don’t seem to be many people who are interested in trying to understand more than one point of view, or in recognizing that answers aren’t always easy. I note how few people even wanted to respond to the question of whether a compromise on bathrooms and locker rooms might be acceptable. If we can’t seek compromise, decisions will be made by people who have a vested interest in dividing us.
Hunt, see my post #694 for my own experience with a real-life example that worked.
704 - re. college shared gender rest rooms
In my opinion, these bathroom issues don’t bother our kids. Many learn how to share space comfortably with the opposite sex while in college. It’s parents who have issues. All these issues go away as we die off. We are sort of talking to ourselves about problems that are fast disappearing, in spite of recent laws. We are dinosaurs.