Target, Bathrooms, & a PC culture

[NM11046]

"What about sex offenders? Those that have already been charged with possessing child porn, sexual assault, etc...How do we keep THEM from abusing this policy?"[/size]

How do we monitor or keep them from doing so now?[/size]

We don't.

Exactly.

I guess I am now confused which side you are taking on this deal. Currently, standard convention helps prevent men from entering the ladies room. These guys know today that people will look at them funny and probably say something if they attempt to use the women's room. With this new Target policy, there is not even that deterrent to help keep them out. I realize that may cause a little discomfort for some trans people but I really do believe that would serve society as whole better.

My point is that we can't assume that sex offenders are the opposite sex, or same sex. We can not monitor the risky "bathroom goers" at all right now anyway. By allowing transgendered to use the bathroom aligned to who they are today we are not increasing risk, as we have no clue what risk is now and we don't monitor and can't regulate it. Today men can go into mens rooms and prey on men. Women can go into womens' rooms and prey on women. Nothing changes if a transwoman goes into a ladies room. She may or may not be a good person or a sexual deviant just like everyone in every stall next to her.

 

[Red Dead Redemption]

I have a brilliant solution.

We should make all trans people wear a yellow badge or patch to discreetly and respectfully inform others of their gender identity since it may not be intuitively obvious. If their junk is male, then their yellow patch should say, "Dude". If their junk is female, then their yellow patch can be bedazzled or have a unicorn on it.

Easy-peasy

 

[JJ Husker]

"What about sex offenders? Those that have already been charged with possessing child porn, sexual assault, etc...How do we keep THEM from abusing this policy?"[/size]

How do we monitor or keep them from doing so now?[/size]

We don't.

Exactly.

I guess I am now confused which side you are taking on this deal. Currently, standard convention helps prevent men from entering the ladies room. These guys know today that people will look at them funny and probably say something if they attempt to use the women's room. With this new Target policy, there is not even that deterrent to help keep them out. I realize that may cause a little discomfort for some trans people but I really do believe that would serve society as whole better.

My point is that we can't assume that sex offenders are the opposite sex, or same sex. We can not monitor the risky "bathroom goers" at all right now anyway. By allowing transgendered to use the bathroom aligned to who they are today we are not increasing risk, as we have no clue what risk is now and we don't monitor and can't regulate it. Today men can go into mens rooms and prey on men. Women can go into womens' rooms and prey on women. Nothing changes if a transwoman goes into a ladies room. She may or may not be a good person or a sexual deviant just like everyone in every stall next to her.

You're right, in that we really can't monitor much now and the bad people could be guys or girls. But at least one thing I think we know; Most of these types of crimes are committed by non-trans males. Yeah, nothing really changes as far as exposing possible new victims in the men's room but, allowing men to use the women's room does expose more potential victims IMO. I guess we just disagree if that trade off is worth making a relative small number of trans people feel a bit more comfortable using public restrooms.
Why does everyone constantly assume that the people who oppose this think that trans people are the problem. They're not. I'm not for suppressing their desire to use the facility that makes them most comfortable but I am for keeping it "out of place" for a man to enter the ladies room. Not because they might be trans but because most of these sexual assault and predatory problems are caused by non-trans males.

Anyway, I'm done because I have already stated that a dozen times. I just find it somewhat incredible that a few others don't see that we are opening Pandora's box.

 

[knapplc]

Why does everyone constantly assume that the people who oppose this think that trans people are the problem. They're not. I'm not for suppressing their desire to use the facility that makes them most comfortable but I am for keeping it "out of place" for a man to enter the ladies room. Not because they might be trans but because most of these sexual assault and predatory problems are caused by non-trans males.

I don't know why this keeps happening, but in the last two/three pages of this thread, you keep saying you're not worried about the trans people you're worried about the predators, and people keep responding to you like you're saying something about the trans people.

You're not the only one seeing this. It's weird.

 

[Landlord]

You're right, in that we really can't monitor much now and the bad people could be guys or girls. But at least one thing I think we know; Most of these types of crimes are committed by non-trans males. Yeah, nothing really changes as far as exposing possible new victims in the men's room but, allowing men to use the women's room does expose more potential victims IMO. I guess we just disagree if that trade off is worth making a relative small number of trans people feel a bit more comfortable using public restrooms.

Why does everyone constantly assume that the people who oppose this think that trans people are the problem. They're not. I'm not for suppressing their desire to use the facility that makes them most comfortable but I am for keeping it "out of place" for a man to enter the ladies room. Not because they might be trans but because most of these sexual assault and predatory problems are caused by non-trans males.

Anyway, I'm done because I have already stated that a dozen times. I just find it somewhat incredible that a few others don't see that we are opening Pandora's box.

RE: your first paragraph, this is kneejerk sensationalist politics/legislature at it's finest. There haven't really been studies and good research on this stuff, so why so many people are jumping to these wild solutions is just wild. However, I also don't think Target's policy is quite as loose and free as you make it out to sound.

RE: your second, it's not really an assumption, but it's a reaction to the fearmongering that IS going on. The people fighting this stuff on top, the ones with the power, are doing it by painting trans people as this phobic, dangerous, unnatural threat. Your perspective is much more reasonable and refreshing, but it's also not, I don't think, the same one being used by a lot of people with the louder voices.

 

[knapplc]

You guys do realize that within the first six months of a "use whatever bathroom you want" policy some jackball is going to take advantage of it to peep on women in the ladies room and they'll use the excuse "I felt like a woman today," right?

I'm not saying this is for or against this policy, but it' going to happen. That idiot exists.

 

[Scratchtown]

Why does everyone constantly assume that the people who oppose this think that trans people are the problem. They're not. I'm not for suppressing their desire to use the facility that makes them most comfortable but I am for keeping it "out of place" for a man to enter the ladies room. Not because they might be trans but because most of these sexual assault and predatory problems are caused by non-trans males.

I don't know why this keeps happening, but in the last two/three pages of this thread, you keep saying you're not worried about the trans people you're worried about the predators, and people keep responding to you like you're saying something about the trans people.
You're not the only one seeing this. It's weird.

That's what happens when emotions get brought into discussion. NM is obviously somewhat passionate about it. Keeps missing the point.

 

[Scratchtown]

You guys do realize that within the first six months of a "use whatever bathroom you want" policy some jackball is going to take advantage of it to peep on women in the ladies room and they'll use the excuse "I felt like a woman today," right?

I'm not saying this is for or against this policy, but it' going to happen. That idiot exists.

Thank you.

 

[NM11046]

Why does everyone constantly assume that the people who oppose this think that trans people are the problem. They're not. I'm not for suppressing their desire to use the facility that makes them most comfortable but I am for keeping it "out of place" for a man to enter the ladies room. Not because they might be trans but because most of these sexual assault and predatory problems are caused by non-trans males.

I don't know why this keeps happening, but in the last two/three pages of this thread, you keep saying you're not worried about the trans people you're worried about the predators, and people keep responding to you like you're saying something about the trans people.
You're not the only one seeing this. It's weird.

That's what happens when emotions get brought into discussion. NM is obviously somewhat passionate about it. Keeps missing the point.

I don't think anyone is missing the point. Our points just differ, and that doesn't make either one less valid.

Nobody has debated with you on the fact that a man should not be allowed into a ladies room. Nobody has debated with you that if there was some way to do it we should limit access to any sexual predator to either the mens or the ladies rooms.

I respect your concerns that this rule will allow bad people to potentially use this as a way to access bathrooms. I just don't agree. I simply tried to make the point in a variety of examples that gender or gender identity is not tied to sexual predatory risk, and that there is no evidence that allowing someone into a bathroom to relieve themselves increases safety risks for anyone. Regardless of gender or gender identity.

 

[JJ Husker]

Why does everyone constantly assume that the people who oppose this think that trans people are the problem. They're not. I'm not for suppressing their desire to use the facility that makes them most comfortable but I am for keeping it "out of place" for a man to enter the ladies room. Not because they might be trans but because most of these sexual assault and predatory problems are caused by non-trans males.

I don't know why this keeps happening, but in the last two/three pages of this thread, you keep saying you're not worried about the trans people you're worried about the predators, and people keep responding to you like you're saying something about the trans people.

You're not the only one seeing this. It's weird.

You guys do realize that within the first six months of a "use whatever bathroom you want" policy some jackball is going to take advantage of it to peep on women in the ladies room and they'll use the excuse "I felt like a woman today," right?

I'm not saying this is for or against this policy, but it' going to happen. That idiot exists.

Thanks knapp. I was beginning to wonder if it was just me.

 

[JJ Husker]

You're right, in that we really can't monitor much now and the bad people could be guys or girls. But at least one thing I think we know; Most of these types of crimes are committed by non-trans males. Yeah, nothing really changes as far as exposing possible new victims in the men's room but, allowing men to use the women's room does expose more potential victims IMO. I guess we just disagree if that trade off is worth making a relative small number of trans people feel a bit more comfortable using public restrooms.

Why does everyone constantly assume that the people who oppose this think that trans people are the problem. They're not. I'm not for suppressing their desire to use the facility that makes them most comfortable but I am for keeping it "out of place" for a man to enter the ladies room. Not because they might be trans but because most of these sexual assault and predatory problems are caused by non-trans males.

Anyway, I'm done because I have already stated that a dozen times. I just find it somewhat incredible that a few others don't see that we are opening Pandora's box.

RE: your first paragraph, this is kneejerk sensationalist politics/legislature at it's finest. There haven't really been studies and good research on this stuff, so why so many people are jumping to these wild solutions is just wild. However, I also don't think Target's policy is quite as loose and free as you make it out to sound.

RE: your second, it's not really an assumption, but it's a reaction to the fearmongering that IS going on. The people fighting this stuff on top, the ones with the power, are doing it by painting trans people as this phobic, dangerous, unnatural threat. Your perspective is much more reasonable and refreshing, but it's also not, I don't think, the same one being used by a lot of people with the louder voices.

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree. It seems painfully obvious to me that there is an element in our society that will use the men are welcome in the women's rooms to abuse the policy change. It doesn't really take evidence to know this WILL happen. "Hey I may look like a man but I 'm one of these trans people you made this policy for, so quit harassing me." I can hear the excuse already. Maybe the reason there is no evidence (yet) of this is because men are out of place and not welcome in the ladies room. Their policy may not seem loose and free to you but there is absolutely no way to control it at all if men are allowed to enter women's restrooms. However, I do agree that it is not likely to cause problems to skyrocket but, IMO, even one instance that could have been prevented is one too many.

I appreciate that you think my perspective is reasonable. I think your and NM's are also. I understand that there are many, not necessarily in this discussion on HB, that are not reasonable and that do have an agenda against trans people. I won't comment further on Red Dead's trolling of the topic- other than he's just being his typical douche self. And of course there are jackwagons like those in North Carolina contributing more to the problem than the solution.

 

[Landlord]

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree. It seems painfully obvious to me that there is an element in our society that will use the men are welcome in the women's rooms to abuse the policy change. It doesn't really take evidence to know this WILL happen. "Hey I may look like a man but I 'm one of these trans people you made this policy for, so quit harassing me." I can hear the excuse already. Maybe the reason there is no evidence (yet) of this is because men are out of place and not welcome in the ladies room. Their policy may not seem loose and free to you but there is absolutely no way to control it at all if men are allowed to enter women's restrooms. However, I do agree that it is not likely to cause problems to skyrocket but, IMO, even one instance that could have been prevented is one too many.

I guess that I don't understand the draw.

Like what will these people actually do? If they assault or rape someone, those are still crimes that there is no protection from. If they're looking to sneak a peek, well they'd have to set up a camera or peek underneath or over the top of a stall or something, which are still crimes. The only sort of thing that a person could do in the opposite gender's bathroom and 'get away with' easier than before without being arrested is just....stand there, which would be weird and uncomfortable, but hardly threatening. Maybe there's an argument that it puts them in an easier initial position from which to commit a serious crime, but there's not really been anything stopping predators from entering bathrooms before.

 

[Red Dead Redemption]

I guess that I don't understand the draw.

Like what will these people actually do? If they assault or rape someone, those are still crimes that there is no protection from. If they're looking to sneak a peek, well they'd have to set up a camera or peek underneath or over the top of a stall or something, which are still crimes. The only sort of thing that a person could do in the opposite gender's bathroom and 'get away with' easier than before without being arrested is just....stand there, which would be weird and uncomfortable, but hardly threatening. Maybe there's an argument that it puts them in an easier initial position from which to commit a serious crime, but there's not really been anything stopping predators from entering bathrooms before.

No, nothing stopped them before, except having to worry about being deterred from committing the crime before he is able to carry it out.

If a male predator/voyeur wanted to hang out in the bathroom and wait for his victim, or follow his victim in, he no longer needs to worry about getting "caught" in the wrong bathroom before he has the opportunity to commit his crime.

Same with people who plant spy cameras around the toilet. If it is a male doing this in a female bathroom, he previously would have to worry about getting "caught" in the wrong bathroom when he goes in to plant his device. Now he can go in unimpeded whenever he wants and take his time to plant his camera at the most opportunistic spot.

Once the crime is committed, whatever it is, there is no difference. The chances of the person getting caught and prosecuted are the same regardless of the bathroom gender policy. But casing the "other" bathroom, or waiting for or planning the perfect opportunity, is easier to do when access to that bathroom is unobstructed.

But like you mentioned earlier, how much would the incidents of crime actually increase? We face risks all the time. Is it worth sacrificing simple liberties and dignity to have to prove our gender before entering or exiting? Or is it worth the harassment and indignities trans people have had to endure. It's pandoras box, but it had to opened at some point. There have been and will be other issues with dilemmas similar to this.

 

[knapplc]

Like what will these people actually do? If they assault or rape someone, those are still crimes that there is no protection from. If they're looking to sneak a peek, well they'd have to set up a camera or peek underneath or over the top of a stall or something, which are still crimes. The only sort of thing that a person could do in the opposite gender's bathroom and 'get away with' easier than before without being arrested is just....stand there, which would be weird and uncomfortable, but hardly threatening. Maybe there's an argument that it puts them in an easier initial position from which to commit a serious crime, but there's not really been anything stopping predators from entering bathrooms before.

I think the argument is that this creates an unnecessary risk. You send your 8-year-old daughter into the potty while you stay outside with your 3-year-old. Some perv is in there on the pretext that "all people have access to all bathrooms" or "you can choose which bathroom you use based on which gender you feel like today" and they do something bad to your daughter. It's a terrifying scenario for any parent.

Also, women do not want to use the same bathroom as men. Not one woman I've asked about this is OK with guys in their bathroom. Yeah, that's anecdotal, but it's 100% so far.

Again, just presenting arguments and "facts," not advocating for which way this should go. I still haven't made up my mind.

 

[funhusker]

Like what will these people actually do? If they assault or rape someone, those are still crimes that there is no protection from. If they're looking to sneak a peek, well they'd have to set up a camera or peek underneath or over the top of a stall or something, which are still crimes. The only sort of thing that a person could do in the opposite gender's bathroom and 'get away with' easier than before without being arrested is just....stand there, which would be weird and uncomfortable, but hardly threatening. Maybe there's an argument that it puts them in an easier initial position from which to commit a serious crime, but there's not really been anything stopping predators from entering bathrooms before.

I think the argument is that this creates an unnecessary risk. You send your 8-year-old daughter into the potty while you stay outside with your 3-year-old. Some perv is in there on the pretext that "all people have access to all bathrooms" or "you can choose which bathroom you use based on which gender you feel like today" and they do something bad to your daughter. It's a terrifying scenario for any parent.

Also, women do not want to use the same bathroom as men. Not one woman I've asked about this is OK with guys in their bathroom. Yeah, that's anecdotal, but it's 100% so far.

Again, just presenting arguments and "facts," not advocating for which way this should go. I still haven't made up my mind.

I have a fear of being a victim in a car accident caused by a person driving too negligently. I know there are laws against drunk driving, wreckless driving, speeding, not properly working tail lights, not using a seat belt, texting while driving, etc....

But what we really need is a law that car manufactures can only make cars that top out at 25 mph.

We have laws against everything people are scared of in the bathroom. Will someone take advantage of the law policy (edit)? Maybe. Same as someone is going to top out their Corvette on the interstate because "they can". Hopefully that person is reported before something bad happens.

Target is responding (I don't think they even needed to) to a topic raised by unneccesary legislation by far right lawmakers. This whole thing is stupid and it originates in North Carolina and other states that have manufactured fear among constituents. What gets me is when people to the right make fun of Target for "worrying about bathrooms" when it is their own elected officials that felt the need to worry in the first place. The best example I've seen is the meme of "Today at Target..." with a picture of a man holding hands with a presumed TG at the urinal. When in fact, that picture is exactly what Target doesn't want to happen. If anything, a courthouse in NC will have a bearded man, with a vagina, washing hands next to an 8-year-old girl in the womens room.

This whole thing is (or at least was) a non-issue and it is frustrating to hear people say Target is pushing some sort of Liberal agenda; when Target is cleary, albiet unneccesarily, pushing back against an ingnorant and pointless Conservative agenda.