- Joined
- Nov 11, 2013
- Messages
- 33,522
- Reaction score
- 10,826
- Location
- Between Athens and Jerusalem
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Some transgendered women have been able to win beauty pageants and you would have a hard time telling them from a genetic woman. What if such a transgendered woman was in a woman's locker room?
Oh I absolutely know, the stats on female abuse are stunning. And even if they aren't as strong as men generally, they are still pretty strong.
Here's a trangendered woman. You are saying she should be going in the men's room?
I'd love to bring you in behind a man that just strolls into a womens locker room.
You can explain to the police and the women why its not a problem, and that they are being irrational. :roll:
Im saying "she" shouldn't be going in the womens room-especially if it makes women feel unsafe.
Yes but somehow (because you say so) bakeries have to make gay wedding cakes. Interesting dichotomy. :doh
I dont think its just the appearance that bothers them.
It is rarely illegal for a person to use the "wrong" locker room/restroom. It is generally up to the person who owns the restroom, not any specific law.
I dare you to try to bring a police officer to a business that you don't own and that has a policy that allows transgendered people to use whichever locker room/restroom they feel most comfortable in, and see how far it goes. I'll give you hint, you might want to bring something to read, like a whole library, while you wait for the police to arrive.
It is not your restroom, not your locker room, nor is it the woman's.
You nor those women have a right to not feel uncomfortable, nor even unsafe when they can't rationally show why it is reasonable for them to feel unsafe by a policy allowing transgendered people to use the locker room of the sex/gender they identify as. A person cannot simply claim "I don't feel safe", and that change a policy. They have to show a rational reason for not feeling unsafe, and you have nothing except your beliefs and bigotry about transgendered people. Heck, you can't even show that more instances of violence against women occur where such policies exist.
Yes, I realize that some people know so little about running a business that they can't tell the difference between refusing a customer because they're gay and refusing a customer because they're an obnoxious bigot.
They try to cover their lack of business experience with words like "dichotomy"
Its illegal if it disturbs the peace. And regardless of a companies policies, they wont stay in business long if there are too many of those episodes.
Its interesting you make that statement when sexual harassment laws and policies specifically specifically state there need not be an actual threat, just the perception of one.
A man who claims to be female, and insists on going into women's dressing facilities, cannot be assumed to be harmless. Such behavior is prima facie proof that he is, at the very least, severely disturbed, and lacking in respect for appropriate social boundaries. If someone is so inclined to violate such boundaries to that extent, then there is no reason to assume that he will stop there.
Can you think of a better word to describe it?
It has to be a perception of a reasonable threat from a reasonable person standpoint. Just because a person claims sexual harassment because someone is staring at them, doesn't mean it actually occurred. Just because someone doesn't understand social customs of being nice, doesn't mean people are being sexually harassed.
Im saying "she" shouldn't be going in the womens room-especially if it makes women feel unsafe.
Well I'm saying I would rather have her going in the women's room than in the men's room with my nine year old son. Not only that, are we going to start making people carry gender ID's around?
Youd prefer that man dressed like a woman spend time with your 9 year old?
Another perfect example of a 100% pure bigoted, hateful, topically ignorant and evil view. Thank you.
1.)You're defending the “right” of creepy, perverted men to go into women's locker rooms
2.) and you're calling me “bigoted, hateful, topically ignorant and evil”?
You're effectively saying that:You're defending the “right” of creepy, perverted men to go into women's locker rooms, and you're calling me “bigoted, hateful, topically ignorant and evil”?
View attachment 67182842
You're effectively saying that:
Because one or two extremely disturbed male individuals are willing to pretend they are female in order to look at female bodies in various states of undress.
No one who is a male-to-female transgendered person should be allowed in.
1.) what creepy perverted man? you havent factually shown one yet?
Why do you say that?No one who is male should be allowed in a women's locker room. And whatever delusions you may entertain, a “male-to-female transgendered person” is male, not female.
You've been shown repeatedly the information about the sick pervert that calls himself “Carlotta Sklodowska”.
2.) Failure to acknowledge evidence that you have been shown does not discredit that evidence; it only discredits you.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?