• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Transgender bathroom choice

If someone who looks like a woman uses the womens facility in a stall. No one will know. Vice versa for some one who looks like a man.

At a high school, they will.

You said the fairy tale can't happen.

Yes, it cant. Think on why it can't.


I showed you a start.

No, a start would be showing that you can find five transgendered women who have the potential to play basketball of the same age, living in teh same location, and going to the same high school.

What you showed was a single incident that isn't even remotely close to a "start", as anyone who is even tangentially interested in intellectual honesty would attest.

You come back with 5 boys would join the girls basketball team.

DERPA DERP?!?!?!?

"Is it fair for 5 genetic girls to play 5 genetic boys in the basketball championship. "

Are you still confused as to why I came back with that? Do try to keep up with the nonsense you have been spewing.

Carnac lives.

Said the guy trying to portray fairy tales as being possible, completely oblivious to the irony of the statement.


Tell me where should I invest for the next 10 years.

Fertilizer. You are a factory of it. .


Now that is moving the goal post.

It certainly is. Why did you start off talking about five "genetic boys" on teh same team and then dishonestly try to turn it into one "genetic boy" agianst a girl? Is it because you are full of ****?

We have one, what;t to keep if from becoming two.

Reality will do a fine job of taking care of itself in that regard. Sancho says there's no need to defeat those windmills, Senor Quixote.
Or is having 2 boys on a girls team ok. What if it's three. Yes three is the max right. Leadership has to try an predict the future. It's why CEO's get the big bucks.

Windmills!!! Kill them all!!!!!!!111!!! then pretend we care about fairness!!!!!111!!!

It's really rather clownish how desperately you are trying to hold on to your fairy tales. :lol:

Title IX. Budget. Couldn't afford to comply. Not much choice when the money isn't there.

So? They made the choice. School's about education, not athletics. I'm not all that concerned.

Supply and demand. Where there are fewer scholarships given out there are fewer recipients.

There's loads of supply in schools. Literally tens of thousands of schools out there. Like I said, in reality (i.e not your magical land of make believe where the bull**** you make up actually becomes true in your mind), nobody only had the opportunity to go to college because of any sports program that got cut.

When someone focuses on examples it leads me to believe their stance is weak.

I would expect a person incapable of coming up with a single real example would make up a bull**** premise like that one and pretend that it's true. Of course, those of us in reality note that it is you who keeps coming up with examples, and I keep pointing out how they are mythical.

Thus, you should reassess your premise to be "When someone displays a near total incompetence at creating a single valid example of tehir claim, they are simply making up a load of bull**** and pretending that it's true by virtue of their ability to make it up".



"Great lengths" can be subjective.

It can also be a totally bull**** claim that you can't support. Hey wait, in this case IT IS a totally bull**** claim that you can't support!

Remember the Super Bowl Janet Jackson performance.

Wow, another unrelated example. I take it you subscribe to the "keep tossing **** at the wall until something sticks" line of mindnumbingly stupid ways to debate.

Ever since then the Super Bowl has has very bland halftime performances because people were sensitive to what happened.

whoop de doo.



Separate but equal.

Yes. This woman can use this bathroom, but this woman must use a different bathroom. this man can use this bathroom, but this kind of man cannot.

How are restrooms set up now I wonder?

Separate and unequal.


Or should we all share one big hole in the ground?


ah, the strawman fallacy. I've been waiting for that one. good on ya for not disappointing me!

But Anti-Bullying laws were so important the CA legislature decided not to address it.

Let's talk about laws governing the importation of Mexican potatoes while we're at it.

In fact a bully law would have covered more people.

Yet would have done as much to cover that which we are discussing as a law banning the importation of Mexican potatoes would.

And bullying is one of the concerns for transgender students is it not?

Bullying is certainly a concern for all students, but so is the importation of potatoes from Mexico! That affects everyone, so it's much more important than bullying laws. Why didn't California ban this practice?!?!?!? I'll talk to you about anti-bullying laws once you address these wetback potatoes!!111!!!!
 
At a high school, they will.



Yes, it cant. Think on why it can't.




No, a start would be showing that you can find five transgendered women who have the potential to play basketball of the same age, living in teh same location, and going to the same high school.

What you showed was a single incident that isn't even remotely close to a "start", as anyone who is even tangentially interested in intellectual honesty would attest.



DERPA DERP?!?!?!?

"Is it fair for 5 genetic girls to play 5 genetic boys in the basketball championship. "

Are you still confused as to why I came back with that? Do try to keep up with the nonsense you have been spewing.



Said the guy trying to portray fairy tales as being possible, completely oblivious to the irony of the statement.




Fertilizer. You are a factory of it. .




It certainly is. Why did you start off talking about five "genetic boys" on teh same team and then dishonestly try to turn it into one "genetic boy" agianst a girl? Is it because you are full of ****?



Reality will do a fine job of taking care of itself in that regard. Sancho says there's no need to defeat those windmills, Senor Quixote.


Windmills!!! Kill them all!!!!!!!111!!! then pretend we care about fairness!!!!!111!!!

It's really rather clownish how desperately you are trying to hold on to your fairy tales. :lol:



So? They made the choice. School's about education, not athletics. I'm not all that concerned.



There's loads of supply in schools. Literally tens of thousands of schools out there. Like I said, in reality (i.e not your magical land of make believe where the bull**** you make up actually becomes true in your mind), nobody only had the opportunity to go to college because of any sports program that got cut.



I would expect a person incapable of coming up with a single real example would make up a bull**** premise like that one and pretend that it's true. Of course, those of us in reality note that it is you who keeps coming up with examples, and I keep pointing out how they are mythical.

Thus, you should reassess your premise to be "When someone displays a near total incompetence at creating a single valid example of tehir claim, they are simply making up a load of bull**** and pretending that it's true by virtue of their ability to make it up".





It can also be a totally bull**** claim that you can't support. Hey wait, in this case IT IS a totally bull**** claim that you can't support!



Wow, another unrelated example. I take it you subscribe to the "keep tossing **** at the wall until something sticks" line of mindnumbingly stupid ways to debate.



whoop de doo.





Yes. This woman can use this bathroom, but this woman must use a different bathroom. this man can use this bathroom, but this kind of man cannot.



Separate and unequal.





ah, the strawman fallacy. I've been waiting for that one. good on ya for not disappointing me!



Let's talk about laws governing the importation of Mexican potatoes while we're at it.



Yet would have done as much to cover that which we are discussing as a law banning the importation of Mexican potatoes would.



Bullying is certainly a concern for all students, but so is the importation of potatoes from Mexico! That affects everyone, so it's much more important than bullying laws. Why didn't California ban this practice?!?!?!? I'll talk to you about anti-bullying laws once you address these wetback potatoes!!111!!!!

Wow Mexican potatoes. Getting desperate.

Let's go over some other fairly tales: 4min mile. Titanic sinking. Black president.

Dr's said the human heart would literally explode.
The design of the Titanic was so great even God himself count sink it.
People in this country are so racist there would never be a black president

So explain boys won't play on the girls team. You can't even say how many is to many. We've seen one so one is ok. but is it fair for 4 girls and 1 boy to play against 5 girls.

The incessant focusing on sensitivity on your part is incredible. I have tried to give examples of how other peoples feelings and sensitivity are taken into account. You seem to believe it doesn't happen. Granted it's not perfect but there has been improvement. After all you are using ****. Why? Whose feelings are you trying to protect? The CA bill was written because the legislature heard how the transgender community felt. The CA legislature was sensitive to their feelings

As far as a bathroom solution. I've brought up a point. You didn't counter. You put down. You have offered nothing in return. I offer gender neutral bathrooms (albeit I said separate, wrong word). You offer no solution of your own. You want to fight.

You have input Mexican potatoes into a discussion about transgender equality. I wanted to see a bill about bullying. But you are more interested in potatoes. A bully bill would have covered everyone not just a few. So now the fat, short, tall, thin, ugly, or any other derogatory term to wrongfully describe someone has no protection. But California wants to do something about the 1/4 to 1% of the population (NCTE estimates). Instead of saying CA should have done that first, you first said there should be a bill then went into Mexican potatoes. I don't think you want to have a discussion. You want to be heard. your looking for a fight.
 
Wow Mexican potatoes. Getting desperate.

I'm glad you agree that it's pure idiocy to bring up unrelated nonsense and then pretends it has to be discussed as an either/or dilemma. I take it this will end your attempts to try to deflect toward anti-bullying laws, then?

Let's go over some other fairly tales: 4min mile. Titanic sinking. Black president.

Those were all very real possibilities the whole time. :shrug:
Dr's said the human heart would literally explode.

All of them? Wow.


The design of the Titanic was so great even God himself count sink it.

said those who wanted to believe the fairy tale that it couldn't sink.

People in this country are so racist there would never be a black president

there was a time when it was true. :shrug:

So explain boys won't play on the girls team.

Show that it's possible for five transgender boys who are interested in playing basketball to be of the same age and live in the same area.

You can't even say how many is to many.

Because I don't care about the hypothetical fairy tales. We'll stick to reality. Find a single "normal" school with five transgendered people in it, let alone five transgenders that play basketball. Just one. I'll wait. when you give up on that impossible search, you'll perhaps see why it's a fairy tale.

We've seen one so one is ok. but is it fair for 4 girls and 1 boy to play against 5 girls.

It's five girls playing five girls, first of all. One happens to be an XY girl, but how does that give the girl a major advantage? I used to date a girl who regularly kicked my ass in basketball. And I'm actually a fairly athletic guy. She was just better at basketball than I am. :shrug:

The incessant focusing on sensitivity on your part is incredible.

:lol: applying your arguments to me. bold move. When did I bring up anything about sensitivity? I've laughed at and ridiculed your attempts to claim sensitivity = herculean effort to prevent offense.

why are you simply resorting to outright lies at this point?

I have tried to give examples of how other peoples feelings and sensitivity are taken into account.

And I pointed out how that doesn't support your initial claim.
You seem to believe it doesn't happen.

Stop lying. I've been quite clear in pointing out that your examples require little-to-no-effort. You're attempting to portray them as something they aren't. Man the **** up and admit that you made up some bull**** and are now pretending it's true.


Whose feelings are you trying to protect?

What the **** are you babbling about?

The CA bill was written because the legislature heard how the transgender community felt. The CA legislature was sensitive to their feelings

And good for them.

As far as a bathroom solution. I've brought up a point. You didn't counter. You put down.

I treated your "point" ith teh disdain it warranted.

Here's the thing, if I want to oppose something, and I make up some bull**** disaster scenario as a reaosn to oppose it, you'd be right to put that kind of idiocy down. Addressing it allows it to be treated as a valid exercise instead of pure intellectual dishonesty.

Example: let's say I oppose genetically modified foods. Let's say that my argument was little more than "You don't know if the genetic modification could create a Tyrannosaurus Rex-like butternut squash that will eat children, therefore I oppose genetically modified food". That kind of idiocy deserves to be treated with disdain and it deserves to be put down. You don't treat it like a legitimate argument. You show that it's bull**** and leave it at that.

That is what I have done with your arguments. You created an imaginary scenario and pretended it was likely, I pointed out that it was absurdly unlikely, so you even had to acknowledge that it was absurdly unlikely but then pursued the angle of "But it's still like totally possible, bro".

You have offered nothing in return. I offer gender neutral bathrooms (albeit I said separate, wrong word). You offer no solution of your own. You want to fight.

I refuse to compromise based on fairy tales.

You have input Mexican potatoes into a discussion about transgender equality.


And you have failed to see the reason for that, apparently.

I wanted to see a bill about bullying.

Just as relevant to this debate as Mexican potatoes.

I don't think you want to have a discussion.

I'd love to have a discussion. It can only happen when your arguments cease to be bull**** ones, though.
 
I'm glad you agree that it's pure idiocy to bring up unrelated nonsense and then pretends it has to be discussed as an either/or dilemma. I take it this will end your attempts to try to deflect toward anti-bullying laws, then?



Those were all very real possibilities the whole time. :shrug:


All of them? Wow.




said those who wanted to believe the fairy tale that it couldn't sink.



there was a time when it was true. :shrug:



Show that it's possible for five transgender boys who are interested in playing basketball to be of the same age and live in the same area.



Because I don't care about the hypothetical fairy tales. We'll stick to reality. Find a single "normal" school with five transgendered people in it, let alone five transgenders that play basketball. Just one. I'll wait. when you give up on that impossible search, you'll perhaps see why it's a fairy tale.



It's five girls playing five girls, first of all. One happens to be an XY girl, but how does that give the girl a major advantage? I used to date a girl who regularly kicked my ass in basketball. And I'm actually a fairly athletic guy. She was just better at basketball than I am. :shrug:



:lol: applying your arguments to me. bold move. When did I bring up anything about sensitivity? I've laughed at and ridiculed your attempts to claim sensitivity = herculean effort to prevent offense.

why are you simply resorting to outright lies at this point?



And I pointed out how that doesn't support your initial claim.


Stop lying. I've been quite clear in pointing out that your examples require little-to-no-effort. You're attempting to portray them as something they aren't. Man the **** up and admit that you made up some bull**** and are now pretending it's true.




What the **** are you babbling about?



And good for them.



I treated your "point" ith teh disdain it warranted.

Here's the thing, if I want to oppose something, and I make up some bull**** disaster scenario as a reaosn to oppose it, you'd be right to put that kind of idiocy down. Addressing it allows it to be treated as a valid exercise instead of pure intellectual dishonesty.

Example: let's say I oppose genetically modified foods. Let's say that my argument was little more than "You don't know if the genetic modification could create a Tyrannosaurus Rex-like butternut squash that will eat children, therefore I oppose genetically modified food". That kind of idiocy deserves to be treated with disdain and it deserves to be put down. You don't treat it like a legitimate argument. You show that it's bull**** and leave it at that.

That is what I have done with your arguments. You created an imaginary scenario and pretended it was likely, I pointed out that it was absurdly unlikely, so you even had to acknowledge that it was absurdly unlikely but then pursued the angle of "But it's still like totally possible, bro".



I refuse to compromise based on fairy tales.




And you have failed to see the reason for that, apparently.



Just as relevant to this debate as Mexican potatoes.



I'd love to have a discussion. It can only happen when your arguments cease to be bull**** ones, though.

Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't.

Doesn't have to be transgender males. Only claim to be.

When a bill is passed leaders must try an work out what may happened in the future and put into place mechanisms to keep the bill working as planned. If they don't you get the Patriot Act. And some would argue the 2nd amendment.

And for gender neutral bathrooms it has been endorsed by many high schools and universities across the country. It would be a bathroom period. No gender distinction. Single stall.
 
Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't.

Of course not. the fact that it can't happen is why it won't.

Doesn't have to be transgender males. Only claim to be.

why would someone do that? TO beat some girls at basketbal? Seems like a silly reason to have to live your life as a woman. Are you talking about the East German women's basketball team?

When a bill is passed leaders must try an work out what may happened in the future and put into place mechanisms to keep the bill working as planned.

what may happen, not "what probably will never happen".

GMO may lead to a T-rex-like butternut squash, so we should build our laws around that highly unlikely event, right?

If they don't you get the Patriot Act. And some would argue the 2nd amendment.

Oh, doubling up on the red herrings. Nice.

And for gender neutral bathrooms it has been endorsed by many high schools and universities across the country. It would be a bathroom period. No gender distinction. Single stall.

I'm not opposed to gender neutral bathrooms, but of course, this is the first time they've been mentioned in our discussion. I'm opposed to what you proposed earlier (a separate bathroom for transgenders).

Why a single stall, though?
 
Of course not. the fact that it can't happen is why it won't.



why would someone do that? TO beat some girls at basketbal? Seems like a silly reason to have to live your life as a woman. Are you talking about the East German women's basketball team?



what may happen, not "what probably will never happen".

GMO may lead to a T-rex-like butternut squash, so we should build our laws around that highly unlikely event, right?



Oh, doubling up on the red herrings. Nice.



I'm not opposed to gender neutral bathrooms, but of course, this is the first time they've been mentioned in our discussion. I'm opposed to what you proposed earlier (a separate bathroom for transgenders).

Why a single stall, though?

People will go to great lengths to win.

After all we are trying to rid ourselves of stereotypes, so the stigma of playing on a girls team should not be a problem should it.

So you are saying it will never happen. Strong prediction for the future. Since the day it was signed this idea came up. So we know the idea is out there.

So in team sports one transgender is ok. What about individual events? Tennis/track/swimming/gymnastics. Why have separate mens and womens team. How about one team. Everyone try out and the best make the team. Problem solved.

Believe me if Monsanto could make a buck off your GMO to T-Rex they would.

I did mention gender neutral bathrooms. Remember. My poor choice of separate.

Single stall? Is there a need to use two toilets outside of the flu?
 
Last edited:
People will go to great lengths to win.

So in other words, you don't have anything real, just thought-terminating cliches. got it. That's like the 14th distinct logical fallacy you've employed. Impressive.


After all we are trying to rid ourselves of stereotypes, so the stigma of playing on a girls team should not be a problem should it.

This sin;t about getting rid of stereotypes. Where'd you get that silly idea form?

So you are saying it will never happen.

I'm also saying T-rex-like butternut squashes won't come into existence. Not that bold of a prediction, if you ask me. It's like saying "the sun will rise tomorrow".

Strong prediction for the future.

It's it's a strong induction of logic based on reality and facts. Sort of like my prediction about the T-rex-like Butternut squash never existing. :shrug:


Since the day it was signed this idea came up.

From people desperately trying to opposing it by employing "fear tactics" and fallacy instead of logic and reason.

So we know the idea is out there.

The idea of T-Rex-like Butternut squash is out there now, too. Oh Noes!!!!1111!!!!


So in team sports one transgender is ok.

Doesn't bother me.

What about individual events?

see above.

Tennis/track/swimming/gymnastics.

See above.

Why have separate mens and womens team.

:prof they don't for things like wrestling and football. Women are free to join those teams.

How about one team. Everyone try out and the best make the team. Problem solved.

Why only have one team? Why not have multiple levels?

Believe me if Monsanto could make a buck off your GMO to T-Rex they would.

I'm not talking about intentionl development, I'm talking about the possibility of accidental development. It's hypothetically possible, like your arguments are only possible in the hypothetical, thus using your approach here, we should act as though it is likely instead of highly unlikely and oppose all GMO's. Save the world from t-rex squash, ban GMO's!!!!111!!
 
So in other words, you don't have anything real, just thought-terminating cliches. got it. That's like the 14th distinct logical fallacy you've employed. Impressive.




This sin;t about getting rid of stereotypes. Where'd you get that silly idea form?



I'm also saying T-rex-like butternut squashes won't come into existence. Not that bold of a prediction, if you ask me. It's like saying "the sun will rise tomorrow".



It's it's a strong induction of logic based on reality and facts. Sort of like my prediction about the T-rex-like Butternut squash never existing. :shrug:




From people desperately trying to opposing it by employing "fear tactics" and fallacy instead of logic and reason.



The idea of T-Rex-like Butternut squash is out there now, too. Oh Noes!!!!1111!!!!




Doesn't bother me.



see above.



See above.



:prof they don't for things like wrestling and football. Women are free to join those teams.



Why only have one team? Why not have multiple levels?



I'm not talking about intentionl development, I'm talking about the possibility of accidental development. It's hypothetically possible, like your arguments are only possible in the hypothetical, thus using your approach here, we should act as though it is likely instead of highly unlikely and oppose all GMO's. Save the world from t-rex squash, ban GMO's!!!!111!!

Even the IOC had foresight into transgender athletes. Maybe they could see a possible problem and wanted to end it before it started.

Your social dichotomy statement.

What about two transgender players on a team? Would that be acceptable?

Is there a physiological difference between men and women? On average, I it's possible to have a 6'6 female basketball player

A single team would have money.

Good for a school that allows girls to compete with the boys. There was a girls who was on a high school football team in a town I grew up in. It could also be there isn't enough interest to have a full team of girls to play football. So instead of not letting her play since there weren't enough girls to form a team they let her join the boys.

If a scientist could lay out the chemical equation to get to a T-Rex Monsanto and Spielberg are in. If they could show positive results in initial stages the scientist would get more funding to continue. But they have to get to the first stage. Every journey begins with one step.
 
Even the IOC had foresight into transgender athletes. Maybe they could see a possible problem and wanted to end it before it started.

I could see it happening with an olympic team. remember the East German women? We're not talking about a totalitarian government that might force men to pretend to be women, though.

Your social dichotomy statement.

Where is that?

What about two transgender players on a team? Would that be acceptable?

I don't care.

Is there a physiological difference between men and women? On average, I it's possible to have a 6'6 female basketball player

And it's possible to have a 5'3" transgendered woman. What's your point?

A single team would have money.

Don't they have the money for two teams now? Why would you limit it to one? Doesn't make any sense. :shrug:

Good for a school that allows girls to compete with the boys.

they all do.

There was a girls who was on a high school football team in a town I grew up in.

Yay!

It could also be there isn't enough interest to have a full team of girls to play football.

Possibly. I bet there's more interest in that than there is in pretending to be transgendered in order to play on a woman's basketball team, though.

So instead of not letting her play since there weren't enough girls to form a team they let her join the boys.

Of course. She shouldn't be prevented from playing simply because she's got a gash and jugs.

If a scientist could lay out the chemical equation to get to a T-Rex Monsanto and Spielberg are in.

Therefore we should ban GMO's altogether.
 
I could see it happening with an olympic team. remember the East German women? We're not talking about a totalitarian government that might force men to pretend to be women, though.



Where is that?



I don't care.



And it's possible to have a 5'3" transgendered woman. What's your point?



Don't they have the money for two teams now? Why would you limit it to one? Doesn't make any sense. :shrug:



they all do.



Yay!



Possibly. I bet there's more interest in that than there is in pretending to be transgendered in order to play on a woman's basketball team, though.



Of course. She shouldn't be prevented from playing simply because she's got a gash and jugs.



Therefore we should ban GMO's altogether.


Is there a general physiological difference?

Was it fair to let the East German team compete against the women?

A school could save money by having one team.
 
Depends on the individual.



Sure.



So you want to make it harder for everyone to play sports. got it.

Didn't say I was for it. Just said it would say money. In fact it is harder for everyone to play sports now. That's what happens when there are tryouts. Some make the team some don't. Not the case for every program.

I like the idea of open tryouts for all genders. Best athletes make the team no matter the gender. If a school had the resources add another team.
 
Didn't say I was for it. Just said it would say money. In fact it is harder for everyone to play sports now. That's what happens when there are tryouts. Some make the team some don't. Not the case for every program.

You argued in favor of a gender neutral program, but then arbitrarily limited it to one team instead of two.

I like the idea of open tryouts for all genders. Best athletes make the team no matter the gender. If a school had the resources add another team.

:prof If they have two teams now, then they have the resources for two teams.
 
You argued in favor of a gender neutral program, but then arbitrarily limited it to one team instead of two.



:prof If they have two teams now, then they have the resources for two teams.

Yes, exactly. You are correct. If they have two they should keep two. If they currently have one then they should keep one and have open tryouts.
 
And people wonder why more and more parents are sending their kids to private schools or homeschooling them.

Homeschools often have gender-neutral bathrooms.
 
Isn't that already the case?

Currently boys tryout for the boys team and girls tryout for the girls team. I would like to see open to all genders, with one, two or more teams.

But there have been cases where schools had to cut programs due to funding.
 
Currently boys tryout for the boys team and girls tryout for the girls team. I would like to see open to all genders, with one, two or more teams.

It appears we got a little lost in translation here. you said "If they currently have one then they should keep one and have open tryouts." and I said "Isn't that already the case?"

If the school only has one team right now, both genders can tryout, no?
 
Back
Top Bottom