The North Carolina law is just a smokescreen to prevent local cities from enacting progressive policies. They are using homophobia and transphobia to scare people who have already been brainwashed to believe their religion is under threat, that evil outsiders are trying to destroy Christianity, destroy America, etc.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Ever notice how all of the controversy is about trans women and not trans men? Ever notice how people keep thinking that trans women are just cross dressing males who are dangerous sexual deviants rather than female individuals with female brains who unfortunately have bodies that didn't develop properly? Ever notice how they won't listen no matter what medical and scientific evidence you try and show them? It's just a big show to make people think they standing up for Christian values and religion -- like the infamous "Army of Helaman" stripling warrior" youth march in 2013:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urdESatvy6s


Perhaps this is a better example -- Gov. George Wallace's infamous "stand in the schoolhouse door" of 11 June 1963.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1rd6xfGg5s



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/09/2016 05:54PM by anybody.

Hatred--it is all about hating those who are different than your own little "perfect" self.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-sues-north-carolina-over-transgender-bathroom-law/ar-BBsOiow?li=BBnb7Kz

Now the Fed is suing.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/aclu-sues-over-mississippi-law-that-oks-denying-services-to-gays/ar-BBsOyhh?li=BBnbcA1

And the ACLU in Mississippi.

I think legislators need to be personally responsible financially if their laws are found unconstitutional. That would stop these laws very fast.

seg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think legislators need to be personally
> responsible financially if their laws are found
> unconstitutional. That would stop these laws very
> fast.

+++

Absolutely. Let 'em put their money where their mouths are. They swore an oath to the Constitution, and failure to understand the phrase, "all men..." is nothing less than gross negligence of duty.

They need to pay ALL the legal bills and court costs, not put it on the tab of the entire US population. Let them sell the farm if they have to.

I could not be more sickened by this evil waste of valuable resources. What are the going to do... force husband and trans wife to use the same restroom? Won't that be the quandry. I can here it now - "Noooooo.... OMG they were having trans sex in there!!!!"

There is no end to the bogey man for these idiots.

They're so stupid.

These homophobic and transphobic idiots expect this transgender woman to go in the Men's room:
http://marieclaire.media.ipcdigital.co.uk/11116/00008c59f/ead9_orh1000w646/Tara-Hudson-Landscape.jpg

And this transgender man to go in the Women's room:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/11/14/1415964231166_wps_9_Pic_By_HotSpot_Media_NO_O.jpg

The city of Seattle has announced that in an effort to be more inclusive, they are mandating that all public access buildings of 3000 square feet or less be emptied of tenants and converted to 62 gender-specific rest rooms. These restrooms will feature the 58 gender choices offered on Facebook, and reserve an additional 4 restrooms for those that feel the 58 pre-designated gender choices too restrictive for their personal gender choices. Building owners cheered the loss of paying tenants in favor of inclusiveness.

Meanwhile, In the homophobic, bigoted, hateful state of Texas, they've adopted a scientific approach to restrooms. Since humans actually have a specific, verifiable sex that follows them throughout their lives, they have decided to establish sex-based restrooms where people will use the restroom that corresponds with their actual sex. They're offering restrooms for men and women only. Though this practice has been common in public accommodations for hundreds of years, it has only recently been discovered to be motivated out of a seething hatred birthed in the theocratic leanings of small minded religious bigots.

Oh the humanity.

Do you have a source for anything you've said about Seattle? All I can find is that they are requiring that "all public spaces–both those controlled by the city and those of private businesses–to designate any existing and future single-stall restrooms as all-gender" (http://fortune.com/2015/08/13/seattle-gender-neutral-restrooms/)

I see nothing about requiring "that all public access buildings of 3000 square feet or less be emptied of tenants and converted to 62 gender-specific rest rooms" as you state and certainly nothing about "58 gender choices offered on Facebook"

If you want to get the info from the state, see: http://www.seattle.gov/civilrights/gender-justice-project/all-gender-restrooms/frequently-asked-questions

I don't quite understand the horror at a single stall bathroom that allows anyone to use it, but I guess there's a phobia for everything...

Or... Perhaps, your sources might be less than accurate...

As for Texas, well, it's been repeatedly shown, as anybody states below that human sexuality is far more complex than you state. The Federal Government agree's which is why they are bringing a lawsuit against North Carolina, which I believe will be a test case for the rest of the states that have these laws.

At least you got "homophobic, bigoted, hateful" part right, though I don't think the whole state is that way, just the people making these laws.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2016 11:03AM by Finally Free!.

I found the information about Seattle's new restroom laws on the Internet. Here's just one source: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1812944,1813293#msg-1813293

A person's sex can be determined as early as the 7th week of gestation, and can never be changed. It's part of our DNA. Bathrooms and changing rooms have historically been based upon sex, not social identity.

http://www.pregnancy.org/article/blood-test-determines-gender-at-seven-weeks

I think you've posted something in error... Your "source" is your own post... My source is the City's website, so, you can imagine which one I'm going to put the most weight on...

Also, a baby's physical sex can be determined that early, their gender, which is defined as "the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex" (see http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender) can not.

Gender is psychological, it can not be determined at birth. The vast majority of people's gender matches their physical sex, so for the most part that works. But, as stated and science agrees, sexuality is not binary, it's also not easily understood with genetics, we do not fully understand all the mechanisms involved.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2016 11:38AM by Finally Free!.

Finally Free! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think you've posted something in error... Your
> "source" is your own post... My source is the
> City's website, so, you can imagine which one I'm
> going to put the most weight on...

You should do a few more Google searches. I'm sure it's there.

>
> Also, a baby's physical sex can be determined that
> early, their gender, which is defined as "the
> behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits
> typically associated with one sex" (see
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender)
> can not.
>

True!

> Gender is psychological, it can not be determined
> at birth. The vast majority of people's gender
> matches their physical sex, so for the most part
> that works. But, as stated and science agrees,
> sexuality is not binary, it's also not easily
> understood with genetics, we do not fully
> understand all the mechanisms involved.

This is the beauty of a bathroom. Passing waste from our bodies is not a social activity, nor is it dependent upon any social construct to take place. It functions with alarming regularity across all races, genders, and nationalities. We don't need to consult with our parents to learn about it, nor do we need to seek anyone's approval for it. We eat, then we eliminate. It's simple science.

As an obscure 19th century philosopher once said, "shit happens." And as a society we've recognized that women and men do these things a bit differently from one another, and each finds it desirous to have privacy while doing it. Thus the sign on the restrooms outside a gas station in Biloxi, Mississippi: "<--Pointers | Setters-->"

"You should do a few more Google searches. I'm sure it's there."

You should post your own sources if you're going to make claims. I did google, I found the city's website (see the link I posted) which posts nothing like you state. I also found other news articles (one of which I also reference), which are also nothing like what you state.

I suspect that we're never going to agree on the bathroom law... It's sad that you can't even agree that a all gender, single-stall bathroom is acceptable (I mean, isn't that what you have in your own home??? Or, do you have a specific "male" and "female" bathroom and you decide who uses which?).

The Federal government has stated that it's a civil rights no-no to block transgender people from using the bathroom that they most identify with. I'll be watching the case with interest to see how things turn out.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2016 06:04PM by Finally Free!.

oh-no.

"Since humans actually have a specific, verifiable sex that follows them throughout their lives..."

This is not true. Sex in humans is very complex and is not binary. Legal and social sex is not the same as biological sex which is a spectrum of many different components.


This woman, Georgia Ziadie, Lady Colin Campbell, was assigned male sex at birth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Colin_Campbell#Early_life



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2016 11:04AM by anybody.

You can determine someone's sex through a DNA test. It's immutable and unchangeable. Plumbing and clothing can be altered, but not the DNA. In an age of science, let's be clear about what is and isn't verifiable truth.

Social constructs surrounding sex do nothing to modify a person's genetic structure.

Lady Colin Campbell was assigned a male identity due to a genital malformation. She was never actually a male.

It's actually not a simple matter to define sex.

All foetuses begin as female. Some develop into males -- to varying degrees.

For example, many women who possess all of the alluring feminine traits -- tall, slim, long legs, small waist, etc -- that are so desired by society are actually genetically XX males with AIS that have external female genitalia. There are all sorts of intersex conditions and they are much more common than you realise.

So, there's a good chance that some of those FHM or Playboy centrefolds were not what you thought they were.

You want some kind of simple "sex" (for legal and social purposes of the human society binary sex dynamic) determination test. There isn't one. Biological sex (chromosomes, DNA) are only one component of that -- not the sole component. This is also the majority medical opinion. In cases of indeterminate sex or gender, the individuals innate gender identity should be the determining factor.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2016 12:14PM by anybody.

anybody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's actually not a simple matter to define sex.
>
>
> All foetuses begin as female. Some develop into
> males -- to varying degrees.

Not true. This is a bit like saying all humans begin as quadruple amputees because their limbs have not developed yet. It's a popular myth since sexual differentiation doesn't appear for several weeks, but the sex of the developing human is determined at the moment of conception. It's all in the genes, and all the information is there at the moment of conception.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_differentiation_in_humans


>
> For example, many women who possess all of the
> alluring feminine traits -- tall, slim, long legs,
> small waist, etc -- that are so desired by society
> are actually genetically XX males with AIS that
> have external female genitalia. There are all
> sorts of intersex conditions and they are much
> more common than you realise.
>

Well, not many. About 20-50 cases per million. AIS is a verifiable genetic medical condition that only affects males. Are you suggesting that transgender men suffer from an illness?

To put this in perspective, Achondroplasia, a rare form of short limbed dwarfism occurs more frequently than AIS. Think of how often in your regular life you meet someone with Achondroplasia, and you're seeing perhaps twice as many of them as those with AIS.

You may also be confusing social traits we commonly view as femininity and masculinity. These have nothing to do with a person's sex. I have a cat that meows exactly the same as a Chihuahua barks. He is still a cat, and always will be.

> So, there's a good chance that some of those FHM
> or Playboy centrefolds were not what you thought
> they were...

Perhaps, but their DNA would betray the truth. From the moment they were conceived until their dying day, they are scientifically, verifiably, and immutably, whatever sex they were from the start.

Legal and social sex is not the same as biological sex -- and is only one component of what we call "gender." You keep calling trans women "men" when they are female -- just as XX people with AIS, MKRH, etc are female in our social sex binary dynamic. They have female brains so that's the determining factor.


I've also noticed that you have little to say about trans men. Why are you so concerned about who is legally classified as female?

I've debated this issue many times with many different people and it usually comes down to this: they deny the existence of transsexualism or any sort of brain/body mis-match -- despite the overwhelming evidence that the condition is real and that it exists.

anybody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Legal and social sex is not the same as biological
> sex -- and is only one component of what we call
> "gender." You keep calling trans women "men" when
> they are female -- just as XX people with AIS,
> MKRH, etc are female in our social sex binary
> dynamic. They have female brains so that's the
> determining factor.
>
>
> I've also noticed that you have little to say
> about trans men. Why are you so concerned about
> who is legally classified as female?

You're perhaps projecting from other conversations. My main concern in these conversations has actually been with deviant heterosexual men. The most noteworthy thing that's happened since laws opening the usage of bathrooms to any sex has been predatory men entering women's restrooms and changing rooms.

>
> I've debated this issue many times with many
> different people and it usually comes down to
> this: they deny the existence of transsexualism
> or any sort of brain/body mis-match -- despite the
> overwhelming evidence that the condition is real
> and that it exists.

I don't deny the existence, but it's much more complex than some would wish to believe. Science shows that there is much more at work than a brain/body mismatch since sex change operations have shown to have virtually zero statistical impact on the well-being of those who feel they were born with the wrong sex.

http://genderanalysis.net/2015/09/paul-mchugh-is-wrong-transitioning-is-effective-gender-analysis-10/

http://www.glaad.org/cap/paul-mchugh

Dr. McHugh is the "go to" Catholic who is always cited to deny the existence of transsexualism or gender dysphoria.

because there are zero cases of trans people ever sexually assaulting anyone in a public restroom.

One cannot say the same about Republican senators, however. Or catholic priests...

"My main concern in these conversations has actually been with deviant heterosexual men. The most noteworthy thing that's happened since laws opening the usage of bathrooms to any sex has been predatory men entering women's restrooms and changing rooms."

Other than Christianist Reactionairies of late, how big of a problem has this historically been? So big a problem than we need this set of laws? How many incidents across the US?

And these kind of laws wouldn't have stopped Jimmy Savile, Larry Craig, Dennis Hastert or Jerry Sandusky. It's faith-based fear creating an unenforceable, unworkable, discriminatory solution to a problem that didn't exist...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2016 05:59PM by anybody.