Target, Bathrooms, & a PC culture

[JJ Husker]

Did I excuse it?...

What I'm challenging is this idea that we *must* force transgender students to go against their identity because if we don't, non transgender sexual assaulters will voluntarily fake change their own identities to get away with sexual assault. Or not get away, rather, because that would still be illegal.

If we're talking about a criminal like that, they will continue to do criminal things like sneak in, peep, assault, rape, etc, as they are today. Because pretending to live as a gender you're not is not something anyone wants to do.

Zoogs-

You're not addressing the real issues. You are pretending the problem is forcing trans to use facilities they may feel uncomfortable in. This helps direct the issue away from the real problems of A) middle school and teenage boys abusing the ability to gain access to girls restrrooms and locker rooms (which we both know will happen) and B) sexual perverts and peepers abusing the now easier ability to gain access to women's facilities.

Yes, sexual assaults etc. are a crime now and they still would be. Non-issue. The problem is opportunity. Now people who are so inclined will not be out of place in the opposite sex restrooms. Officials hands will be somewhat tied as to dealing with any complaints that may arise before a serious problem occurs. Joe Pervert can simply claim he is transgender and claim harassment if his actions or motives are questioned in the least. Jimmy Schoolboy can claim he is transgender or that he just didn't fully understand the new rules. Not to mention that it will make the vast majority of women (based on those I've talked to that could be all women) uncomfortable and cause them to alter what is "comfortable" for them.

There are likely some people that are concerned about what actual trans people may do with this but I'm not one of them. I figure if a transgender male (male biologically but female by identity choice) is really concerned about which toilet facilities they use, there is a very high probability that they are also dressing and acting like a woman. So go ahead and use the ladies room. Same for the opposite situation. I can't see where anyone would harass them or raise a stink with the unwritten rules that have historically been in place. However, if a man, who looks, dresses and acts like a man wants to claim he is actually trans and wants to use the women's room, I don't think it's out of line for society to expect him to commit more to his chosen identity before an open invitation is issued for him to do whatever makes him comfortable. Basically, my position is leave it alone and it probably works out for the best with very low incidence of problems. Don't ban trans from certain restrooms and don't invite everyone to do as they please. Let it remain out of place for a man (with an outwardly manly appearance) or a woman (with an outwardly female appearance) to be in the wrong restroom. Really, how put out could they be if they won't even commit to the outward appearance identity. I would truly wonder about a man who says he feels more comfortable in the ladies room but we're also supposed to believe it is just too uncomfortable for him to act/look like a woman.

Could there still be a few problems or issues? Sure, there always will be, but the number would pale in comparison to what is currently being proposed. I sure wouldn't say a word to someone I thought to really be female but who looked and acted like a man. I really do not see the need to throw the baby out with the bath water, or maybe better...... throwing common sense out the window.

 

[JJ Husker]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

 

[Landlord]

I'm not following the logic on age being an issue. However, I will agree that it is a more dangerous and idiotic proposition in our schools than it is at a place like Target.

I don't think these two sentences honestly match up, and it seems like you're trying to catch me in some kind of inconsistency or "gotcha" moment. It makes sense to me why it's not the same thing, and it seems to make sense to you as well.

The only "gotcha" to it is in previous posts you were not concerned in the least about any possible additional dangers of the Target issue but, when schools were mentioned, you logically called it "overreaching and dangerous". I have merely said it was "more" of a problem in schools and showed that the exact same people would be free to use facilities in both locations. So, I guess I'll ask the question; Do you feel it is or isn't dangerous and I'll advised in Target stores as well as schools?
It really isn't meant as a "gotcha" so much as it is intended to figure out why you seem to be applying a dual standard to the same issue. We both know hormone laden teen boys will abuse it in schools. As far as "danger" of actual sexual assaults etc., I'm not sure there is any difference between the 2 locations. I do know my daughter sure was a lot more concerned about what it means for schools than she was about Target. Age being the issue is just a copout. BTW, her school would seem to have a way above average number of trans, gays, and generally "odd" kids and parents. This WILL affect her, if for no other reason, I am sure she will never use the facilities at her school because of it. Is that how we address things in this country now? Put out the 99% for the 1%. Doesn't seem right to me.

It seems that you are recognizing an inconsistency in your positions. So yeah, I'm a little curious if you'll squirm like those college students in the 2 videos or if you'll acknowledge that maybe it isn't the best of an idea anywhere.

What are you going on about? There is a double standard in my positions, yes. Because the entire public vs. specifically high school students demand different standards. You understand this, because you have said it is more of a problem in schools. I agree with you.

But then you say there's no difference between the two locations. Which one is it? Do I feel it is dangerous in Target? No. At least not any more dangerous than previously. Do I feel it is dangerous in high schools, knowing what high school boys are like, and understanding that pubescent brains are not fully developed and have a lot of really intense experiences floating through them that adults don't have, hence the "double standard"? Yes. At least more dangerous than at Target.

For the record I don't think it's dangerous to the extent of increases in rape and assault. I think it's dangerous to the extent of high school boys having just that much more loophole leeway to be perverts and demean women.

 

[funhusker]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

I blame the free market.

A group of people had a need: they felt uncomfortable in their own skin. Another group of people found a way to satisfy that need and make money: surgeons, counselors, and pharmaceutical companies.

...maybe

 

[NM11046]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

You're ridiculous.

 

[teachercd]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

You're ridiculous.

I think that is the point

 

[JJ Husker]

I'm not following the logic on age being an issue. However, I will agree that it is a more dangerous and idiotic proposition in our schools than it is at a place like Target.

I don't think these two sentences honestly match up, and it seems like you're trying to catch me in some kind of inconsistency or "gotcha" moment. It makes sense to me why it's not the same thing, and it seems to make sense to you as well.

The only "gotcha" to it is in previous posts you were not concerned in the least about any possible additional dangers of the Target issue but, when schools were mentioned, you logically called it "overreaching and dangerous". I have merely said it was "more" of a problem in schools and showed that the exact same people would be free to use facilities in both locations. So, I guess I'll ask the question; Do you feel it is or isn't dangerous and I'll advised in Target stores as well as schools?It really isn't meant as a "gotcha" so much as it is intended to figure out why you seem to be applying a dual standard to the same issue. We both know hormone laden teen boys will abuse it in schools. As far as "danger" of actual sexual assaults etc., I'm not sure there is any difference between the 2 locations. I do know my daughter sure was a lot more concerned about what it means for schools than she was about Target. Age being the issue is just a copout. BTW, her school would seem to have a way above average number of trans, gays, and generally "odd" kids and parents. This WILL affect her, if for no other reason, I am sure she will never use the facilities at her school because of it. Is that how we address things in this country now? Put out the 99% for the 1%. Doesn't seem right to me.

It seems that you are recognizing an inconsistency in your positions. So yeah, I'm a little curious if you'll squirm like those college students in the 2 videos or if you'll acknowledge that maybe it isn't the best of an idea anywhere.

What are you going on about? There is a double standard in my positions, yes. Because the entire public vs. specifically high school students demand different standards. You understand this, because you have said it is more of a problem in schools. I agree with you.

But then you say there's no difference between the two locations. Which one is it? Do I feel it is dangerous in Target? No. At least not any more dangerous than previously. Do I feel it is dangerous in high schools, knowing what high school boys are like, and understanding that pubescent brains are not fully developed and have a lot of really intense experiences floating through them that adults don't have, hence the "double standard"? Yes. At least more dangerous than at Target.

For the record I don't think it's dangerous to the extent of increases in rape and assault. I think it's dangerous to the extent of high school boys having just that much more loophole leeway to be perverts and demean women.

Fair enough, we just seem to disagree on the opportunity hazard present in both locations. We both know it will be a problem in schools and I think it will present increased risk also in the general public while you do not. Considering all persons can and do use the facilities in both locations, I simply feel my position is a little more consistent than yours is. No biggie.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Forcing this upon public schools is probably a bad idea, and I don't think Target should set a precedent for our schools.

Again, this is a zero-sum situation. A movement for one directly affects the other, and I don't know if there's room to compromise. In all honestly, I think the best, most equitable solution is a unisex bathroom.

 

[JJ Husker]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

You're ridiculous.

That very well might be (at least the litter box comment) but I very seriously would like it explained to me how gender identity issues are significantly different than species identity issues. Truly and seriously, I'm not trolling this subject. You've called one ridiculous and you think the other needs special accommodations made for it. I personally don't think a person with species confusion thinks they are ridiculous. It is a very real thing, I actually knew a girl my daughter attended elementary school with who thought and claimed and at times acted like she was a fox (no, not the hot babe type of fox). It was awkward for the other kids and caused her to be somewhat of an outcast, subjected to ridicule, etc. A very real situation. On the otherhand, I do not know personally one transgender or person with a gender identity issue.
So I really do want to know what is the difference between accommodating for this girls identity issues as opposed to someone with a gender identity issue?

If you think it is really that ridiculous, then simply don't reply.

Edit- I wanted to add that I really did feel sorry for this little girl. She was cute as a button. She was in the same class as my daughter 2 or 3 times over the course of K thru Grade 5, but she did attend the same school for all 6 years I believe. They had 3 to 4 classrooms for every age. So, I did see her often and heard many stories of some of her fox like actions. Like I said, my reaction was that I felt sorry for her. We lost track of her when she and my daughter went separate ways to different middle schools.

 

[JJ Husker]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

You're ridiculous.

I think that is the point

Sorry, but that is not the point. See my reply to NM. I truly don't get that there is much difference except that the species thing would seem to be even rarer than the gender thing, even though my personal experience is opposite of that.

 

[funhusker]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

You're ridiculous.

I think that is the point

Sorry, but that is not the point. See my reply to NM. I truly don't get that there is much difference except that the species thing would seem to be even rarer than the gender thing, even though my personal experience is opposite of that.

Have you ever thought a girl looked/acted "masculine" or ever thought a male looked/acted "feminine"?

I'll save you the response and "dangerously" assume that you have. These people have grown up being told that they are too "manly" or too "girly" when they are just being themselves. They think they are doing it right, but are told they are doing it wrong. They see another group of people acting just like them but being praised instead of criticized. They ask themselves "why" and come up with the answer that it is because the other group has the "correct" genitals and/or appearance. They want to be comfortable in their own own skin and be "accepted" by others and seen as a person who's appearance matches their personalities. Now, I don't mean to pretend that every single TG person out there fits this scenario, but I'm guessing I've covered a large segment.

To you point about the girl who thought she was a fox. Male and females humans are of the same species. Bringing in the "species" argument is like bringing up the "marry your toaster" point at a gay marriage debate. A male human can physically/mentally become female human physically/emotionally as far as hormones and body parts. If medicine ever allows a person to physically become a "fox" then I guess we will worry about it, but the brain transplant might make the argument obsolete. Since foxes (fox's, foxii, what is plural form of fox?) don't seem to be asking to be treated equally to humans, unlike other people

 

[teachercd]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

You're ridiculous.

I think that is the point

Sorry, but that is not the point. See my reply to NM. I truly don't get that there is much difference except that the species thing would seem to be even rarer than the gender thing, even though my personal experience is opposite of that.

Thank you for the apology! I appreciate that.

 

[funhusker]

I never want to be in a position where I tell people how they should live there lives, as long as they are being good citizens. That said, I think on a basic level this policy is meant to help a small, very small group of poeple.

If a 5'8" cute blonde female with perky breasts and short shorts walks into the womens room no one thinks twice, even though she may have a penis. However, her friend, who has a vagina, but is 6'1", deep voice, broadly built and slight facial hair is kept out of the same restroom because she "might" be a man is rediculous.

We are at a point where we just need to rely on common sense and hope our laws against peeping, assault, and other crimes are adequate. Didn't Einstein say something about human technology surpassing human understanding? Maybe he's right..

 

[NM11046]

Is anyone going to address the trans species issue? I know why it is being avoided but I want someone who supports this lunacy to explain to me how it is really any different. How many years before Target installs litter boxes in the facilities for their customer's identity comfort?

You're ridiculous.

That very well might be (at least the litter box comment) but I very seriously would like it explained to me how gender identity issues are significantly different than species identity issues. Truly and seriously, I'm not trolling this subject. You've called one ridiculous and you think the other needs special accommodations made for it. I personally don't think a person with species confusion thinks they are ridiculous. It is a very real thing, I actually knew a girl my daughter attended elementary school with who thought and claimed and at times acted like she was a fox (no, not the hot babe type of fox). It was awkward for the other kids and caused her to be somewhat of an outcast, subjected to ridicule, etc. A very real situation. On the otherhand, I do not know personally one transgender or person with a gender identity issue.
So I really do want to know what is the difference between accommodating for this girls identity issues as opposed to someone with a gender identity issue?

If you think it is really that ridiculous, then simply don't reply.

I can't speak to species identity issues, as it's not something that I've heard about or am familiar with, my reaction was to the dramatic way you commented (which I think was your goal). If I had to wager I'm fairly sure that would fall into a mental diagnosis and I can imagine that to be a difficult situation for all involved. As far as accommodating, I'm sure that they didn't send this child outside to go to the bathroom or etc, but just like when any handicapped person (mental or physical) is in a school every effort is made to insure that that child is respected, given the resources they need and the teachers' difficult job is to make sure they are treated fairly - tough with school children I'm sure. The difference is that transgenderism is not a handicap. Just like being gay is not a handicap or being tall is not a handicap, or being from Iowa is not (or is it?) a handicap.

I think if you read some of the articles by parents of children who are transgendered or watch documentaries or meet families who are involved you'd be surprised to hear how easily kids adapt to each other, and that the bigger problem with acceptance comes with the parents. Kids are not born biased or prejudiced or afraid of someone who is different. A 5 year old tells the other kid at the table he's a boy and that's that. (I'd be happy to recommend some reading/viewing material if you're interested.)

I am not debating your philosophy on bathroom risk and etc. I think several days ago we agreed to disagree on that. Also I think (very rationally) you said a week or so ago and you mention here that exposure to different sorts of people is often a factor in ones opinion on issues such as this. I moved from Nebraska to the east coast more than 20 years ago, and I don't know that back then I would have been so open minded, or that I'd be spending time defending the normalcy of something that doesn't directly impact me in any way. But now I know, live and work with all sorts -the founder of my company is a transgender woman who transitioned very late in life, and I live near another transgender woman. I'm sure that the opportunity to get to know people, and to realize they're no different than me (or you) has allowed me to make a quicker move toward acceptance.

I'm a firm believe that history repeats itself, and I see many parallels between race relations in the 60's and the gay rights struggles of the 90's. I also see similarities between transgender issues of today and both of those (as well as prejudice against jews in WW2 but that's another thread) ... and we should be learning from our past. People are people. Everybody deserves to be comfortable in their own skin - and should be respected and treated fairly. It's frustrating to me that we're not adapting more quickly to treating folks as they deserve to be treated.

When it comes down to it people have made a mountain out of a mole hill with this issue (5 pages of debate here!). It's simply not something that is going to be a noticed problem - as you made mention above, transgendered women will use the women's room without issue regardless of how far they've gone surgically in their transition and it will be fine. People may notice if they don't wash their hands but they won't notice if they used to be a man.

 

[teachercd]

I never want to be in a position where I tell people how they should live there lives, as long as they are being good citizens. That said, I think on a basic level this policy is meant to help a small, very small group of poeple.

If a 5'8" cute blonde female with perky breasts and short shorts walks into the womens room no one thinks twice, even though she may have a penis. However, her friend, who has a vagina, but is 6'1", deep voice, broadly built and slight facial hair is kept out of the same restroom because she "might" be a man is rediculous.

We are at a point where we just need to rely on common sense and hope our laws against peeping, assault, and other crimes are adequate. Didn't Einstein say something about human technology surpassing human understanding? Maybe he's right..

f#*k...Mo is about to LOSE IT ON YOU