- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 34,478
- Reaction score
- 17,282
- Location
- Southwestern U.S.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
My opinion on this is simple. There are so many men who are sexual predators, and just because we can't do anything about those men who prey on boys in a men's room, that doesn't mean we should make it easy for those who prey on little girls by allowing open access to a woman's restroom.
I just feel that protecting girls/women from predatory men, should take a higher priority than making sure a transgendered person feels good when they take a dump. That doesn't make me a "whatever" phobe, or a "hater"... It makes me someone who's worried about the very dangerous repercussions this could have and I feel the priority should lie with protecting children and unsuspecting women.
OK, I'm ready for it... Let the name calling begin.
I'm sure parents won't mind at all when a 40 year old man in a dress, pulls his dick out in front of their 8 year old daughter in a public rest room.
already happened, and has happened on multiple occasions.
women complained and stores said nothing they can do.
they won't risk a lawsuit.
plenty of articles have been posted on this on these forums as well.
What the **** are you talking about ? If you outlaw using a bathroom, you make those situations illegal. Do you not realize that ?
There are people that tax advantage of all types of laws to do bad things. Where does it end? If someone takes advantage of lax gun laws in one state and goes out and kills a million people should we ban guns? If someone takes advantage of the lax regulation of speeding, and goes and crashes and kills an innocent person, should we ban cars?
opcorn2:
(This should upset all the right people... BTW, I agree with the image message.)
Yes, stalls only, which is why if every public establishment went to unisex multi-use restrooms that women would soon be protesting unisex bathrooms en masse: many males don't lift the lid and females will get tired of their new public restroom experience of sitting on piss.That's not how it works. Unisex bathrooms only have stalls. What I find kind of funny about it is that it ignores why urinals were invented and used in the first place.
The laws clarify standards an how a restroom gets used. It accompanies existing laws, it does not override them. If your grandma needs you to help wipe her butt, then you can still do so, so please spare us the histrionics....
Yes, stalls only, which is why if every public establishment went to unisex multi-use restrooms that women would soon be protesting unisex bathrooms en masse: many males don't lift the lid and females will get tired of their new public restroom experience of sitting on piss.
Many males don't want to get bacteria on their hands touching a public toilet seat to lift it and then touching themselves and they don't want to exert the extra effort to lift the lid with their foot .. so they just pee away .. and some don't aim so good.
In addition, a number of males opposing Obama's edicts will intentionally have poor aim.
It won't be long before most females will be objecting to unisex restrooms too.
Maybe new unisex restrooms will eventually have seat lid lift levers that are foot-step operated .. but, the unisex restroom protestors and the inconsiderate won't use them -- females will still be sitting on piss.
Yes, Obama blew it big time on this one.
He simply didn't think it through.
Actually, it's dishonest. Very few people I see arguing this issue are arguing against trans people using the bathroom. Most express concern that someone who looks like the ultimate Hell's Angel will claim he feels like a woman on that day and wants to hang out in the ladies room and some of the trans advocates are saying, "so what, he should be able to do that" and that's what I disagree with.
There are alrady laws on the books to cover these situations.... :roll:
as a guy I am not allowed in the womens restroom, but the guy that thinks he is a women in that minute is.
you see the problem?
I doubt it.
No one is allowed to simply "hang out" in any restroom legally. Anyone, male or female, trans or cis, can be asked to leave a restroom for loitering in there.
Are you unaware that over 90% of sexual predators know their victims? Perhaps you don't realize that over 95% of sexual assaults occur in private residents, not public places. Even when they occur in public places, it is more likely to be someone the victim knows. Those rare occasions when something is done in public, it normally involves someone who is known to the victim or who is simply crazy and would ignore laws against them being in those restrooms anyway.
You're just quibbling with semantics. Answer this directly, please. Do you do think the entire Hell's Angels motorcycle gang should be able to enter and use the ladies room at, say, a roadside rest stop?
Incidentally, I'm using Hell's Angels because they're typically very large and hairy.
I don't want to misrepresent your views... Are you saying that my concerns are unwarranted, and that no such thing will happen or ever could happen?
If you are not saying that and admit that it is possible, then obviously you must have an "acceptable" number in your head, of how many women and children can be victimized and suffer to accommodate this law, that you are willing to live with... what is that number?
.
I don't want to misrepresent your views... Are you saying that my concerns are unwarranted, and that no such thing will happen or ever could happen?
If you are not saying that and admit that it is possible, then obviously you must have an "acceptable" number in your head, of how many women and children can be victimized and suffer to accommodate this law, that you are willing to live with... what is that number?
.
I'm saying that the chance of any significant increase in bathroom attacks happening based on changing laws about who can use which restroom is extremely small.
I propose a law stating that every business must now also build a male and female childrens bathroom so that adult males can't use the bathroom with little boys.
So lets hear it grim. How many little boys must be raped and abused before you support this stupid, err... I mean "family friendly" bill?
Hopefully this lets you see how dumb your argument is, but I don't have high hopes.
I have no issue with it.
What do you think they would do or who do you think would stop them at a roadside stop? If they wanted to do it, and it was against the law, I doubt they would care if there were laws saying they couldn't use those restrooms to begin with. They are the Hell's Angels afterall. And it is a roadside stop, which means there aren't going to be that many people there either. It isn't that hard to ignore anyone in the restroom, unless they are trying to do something to you, which is against the law.
OK, you've now acknowledged that the threat exists, so I ask again:
What is an "acceptable" number in your head, of how many women and children can be victimized and suffer to accommodate this law, that you are willing to live with?