Furtopia | Family Friendly Furry Forum and IRC Chat!
not-so-furry discussion => news forum => Topic started by: Kobuk on April 21, 2016, 02:47:46 pm
-
For those who haven't been keeping up with the news in the last several days and weeks, North Carolina has passed a bill preventing Transgender people from using a restroom of the opposite sex. This bill has even gone so far as to "overrule" LGBT anti-discrimination measures made by local towns and cities in North Carolina. Many aniti-discrimination groups, large companies/corporations, celebrities, etc. are voicing outrage and anger against this bill and have boycotted various activities in North Carolina in protest.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/north-carolina-gender-bathrooms-bill/
What are your thoughts? Has this bill gone too far?
-
I think people getting upset over who uses what bathroom is completely absurd, maybe businesses (and people who care) should provide unisex bathrooms.
-
I'm undecided on the bathroom issue.
What I am against is the Governor/Legislature pushing through (rushing) this bill and overruling individual town/cities LGBT anti-discrimination measures. Obviously, it sounds like the Governor/Legislature doesn't care about discussing/debating the issue, but rather pushing "his/their" beliefs/rhetoric on other people and cities in North Carolina at the cost of individual freedoms. When they do this, they aren't acting in the best interests of the American public, but rather just acting as petty dictators instead to satisfy their own selfish needs or political agendas. >:(
-
I'm all in favour of doing away with gendered bathrooms altogether and having unisex rooms.
-
i am agender, so i totally support allowing people to use whichever bathroom they identify with; or just having all unisex bathrooms. and to the people who would get upset by that, come on, bathroom stalls were invented for a reason. but yes, i think that, if there are not universal unisex bathrooms, one should just be able to use whatever bathroom they feel comfortable with.
-
I think the most ridiculous thing about this whole deal here is all the travel bans and whatnot to NC resulting from this...like you really wanna hurt an entire state and possibly deprive all of it's citizens over a single bill? Plus you're really gonna try and tell people where they can and can't travel? You're hurting all for the actions of the few.
In regards to bathrooms, if all places just added a unisex bathroom i think that would be a simpler, way cleaner fix to the issue.
-
The issue of whether transgender people can use whatever bathroom, locker room, etc. they want is a bit tricky. Namely due to two things: Privacy and Security. I'm sure a real woman wouldn't want to be faced with a man or a transgendered person coming into the female bathroom and assaulting/raping her.
And there could be other reasons too like "protecting the children" and trying to teach them "right from wrong" so to speak.
And whether or not religion plays into this whole issue, I do not know. But I wouldn't count it out. After all, North Carolina is a bible-belt state. I'm sure some people are probably thinking that "it's a sin" to use the bathroom of the other gender.
-
The issue of whether transgender people can use whatever bathroom, locker room, etc. they want is a bit tricky. Namely due to two things: Privacy and Security. I'm sure a real woman wouldn't want to be faced with a man or a transgendered person coming into the female bathroom and assaulting/raping her.
And there could be other reasons too like "protecting the children" and trying to teach them "right from wrong" so to speak.
And whether or not religion plays into this whole issue, I do not know. But I wouldn't count it out. After all, North Carolina is a bible-belt state. I'm sure some people are probably thinking that "it's a sin" to use the bathroom of the other gender.
1. A transwoman is just as much a real woman as a biological woman.
2. Not all trans people are rapists.
3. You don't have to dress as or act like a woman to sneak into a room and assault someone.
4. Woman can assault women. Women can assault men.
Not to even start on the "teaching right from wrong" thing. Surely we should be teaching kids to accept other people whatever their gender and not discriminate?
-
The issue of whether transgender people can use whatever bathroom, locker room, etc. they want is a bit tricky. Namely due to two things: Privacy and Security. I'm sure a real woman wouldn't want to be faced with a man or a transgendered person coming into the female bathroom and assaulting/raping her.
And there could be other reasons too like "protecting the children" and trying to teach them "right from wrong" so to speak.
And whether or not religion plays into this whole issue, I do not know. But I wouldn't count it out. After all, North Carolina is a bible-belt state. I'm sure some people are probably thinking that "it's a sin" to use the bathroom of the other gender.
1. A transwoman is just as much a real woman as a biological woman.
2. Not all trans people are rapists.
3. You don't have to dress as or act like a woman to sneak into a room and assault someone.
4. Woman can assault women. Women can assault men.
Not to even start on the "teaching right from wrong" thing. Surely we should be teaching kids to accept other people whatever their gender and not discriminate?
Loc, I'm not even going to begin to try and understand why this whole bathroom issue has exploded to the point that it has in recent days and weeks. All I was trying to do was maybe list a few reasons why North Carolina politicians and/or others are going all bonkers about this whole issue. Whether they are right or wrong, I don't know. I don't care. I'll let the media, other politicians, LBGT groups, etc. figure it all out.
-
The issue has exploded because people misunderstand it in the same way you do: "Should TG (Transgender) people be allowed to use either bathroom?" They aren't using either bathroom, and never were. Why would you even think that? They're upset because they're being legally forced to use the wrong bathroom.
(https://40.media.tumblr.com/48cc7cac970892b3b3906b013e8f5a38/tumblr_o5kkgwkRdz1rpw0zao1_1280.jpg)
EDIT: Typo.
-
i am kinda on the side of not allowing trans gender into either bathroom.
the reason why is out of safety/privacy concerns. some guy/girl could easily claim to be trans just to be able to be around girls/guys. though of course it is still unfair but so are many laws but they are there for our safety (for ex it's kinda unfair that i cant just get a firearm(which i know proper safety/usage for) though the reason why is because we dont just want everyone to get a firearm)
though im pretty sure NC is doing this out of hatred for trans people.
though if bathrooms were completely sealed and complete (no holes in the stalls/sink+mirror? for each stall) then i'd be completely fine with it.
-
You don't need to claim to be trans to be around people of your preferred sex. There are clubs and bars for that. Not to mention everywhere else in the world.
And of all the places to try and molest someone, public bathrooms are the worst. They are either very populated (a bad place to try and rape someone) or you're likely to have to wait hours to get someone to come past (and if you're just faking being trans, that's a lot of work for potentially no benefit to you).
-
"Gone too far" is a silly way of putting it in my opinion. It never should have gotten started in the first place. The only thing behind this is fear and discrimination against transgender people. Fact is a transperson using the bathroom is just trying to use the bathroom. They're not using it as a cover for rape. That's just absurd! There is no threat to privacy or security. Bathrooms have stalls. If you don't want someone to watch you pee, go in there. It's no hardship on you, and it works the same way on transpeople as it does on cispeople. Do people think that being transgender gives you exray vision or something? Pretty sure it doesn't.
The police, by the way, have no idea how to even enforce this. Are they going to start asking people to hand over their birth certificates? Does a feminine-presenting cisgender man now have to carry around his birth certificate? What about transwomen who effectively pass as cisgender--are they now going to be pulled over and interrogated when trying to obey this ridiculous law?
-
With regards to the travel bans, no one is being forbidden to travel to North Carolina or Mississippi, as that's actually not possible to legislate given the structure of our government (federal republic). It's just that you can't use government funds or the funds of certain companies.
As for boycotting the state, it is the elected government that is doing this, so that's really not punishment of the minority. At the very least, a majority of people in North Carolina failed to vote for someone different, even if most of what happened was that people stayed home, so a boycott really isn't much of an injustice. Again, this goes to the way our government is structured.
-
People go into the bathroom to do their buisness not to look at
each other. If someone purposely exposes them self even in a
bathroom someone can file a complaint against them. If a man
wants to attack a young girl, he wouldn't likely do it in a public
place, where others could walk in on him. Besides if some
idiot wanted they could do it anyway.
Those who say not in the bathroom with my kids. Are they
ready to hire bathroom police? Are we going to check to see
if everyone can pass a gender test before entering? Put a security
camera in the bathroom? Now that would be strange, but I wouldn't
put it past some people, the way they act..
There are laws against exposing ones nudity to others on purpose
already. We don't need duplicate laws. Whats to keep a man or
woman from dressing like the oposite sex to peek now?
It's just due to people talking before thinking as usual.
Public bathrooms are just a money saving idea anyway. They
could just have muliple non gender bathrooms for single person
use. They could suggest some for each gender if they liked.
Some people might prefer to use a bothroom after others of
their own gender.
-
I'm all in favour of doing away with gendered bathrooms altogether and having unisex rooms.
I was speaking with a friend the other day who lived in Europe for a few years (Germany, I think?). He told me that ungendered public bathrooms were not uncommon in his area, so the idea has reasonable precedent.
The issue of whether transgender people can use whatever bathroom, locker room, etc. they want is a bit tricky. Namely due to two things: Privacy and Security. I'm sure a real woman wouldn't want to be faced with a man or a transgendered person coming into the female bathroom and assaulting/raping her.
And there could be other reasons too like "protecting the children" and trying to teach them "right from wrong" so to speak.
And whether or not religion plays into this whole issue, I do not know. But I wouldn't count it out. After all, North Carolina is a bible-belt state. I'm sure some people are probably thinking that "it's a sin" to use the bathroom of the other gender.
1. A transwoman is just as much a real woman as a biological woman.
2. Not all trans people are rapists.
3. You don't have to dress as or act like a woman to sneak into a room and assault someone.
4. Woman can assault women. Women can assault men.
Not to even start on the "teaching right from wrong" thing. Surely we should be teaching kids to accept other people whatever their gender and not discriminate?
Loc, I'm not even going to begin to try and understand why this whole bathroom issue has exploded to the point that it has in recent days and weeks. All I was trying to do was maybe list a few reasons why North Carolina politicians and/or others are going all bonkers about this whole issue. Whether they are right or wrong, I don't know. I don't care. I'll let the media, other politicians, LBGT groups, etc. figure it all out.
Having lived in North Carolina for most of my life, I can attest to a lack of concern for LGBT rights. While there are most definitely large factions in NC that actively promote anti-LGBT sentiments for "moral reasons", I think most people there just fail to the consider the LGBT community's perspectives. I believe this results from a lack of exposure to the community; for example, in 14 years I never encountered an openly LGBT individual, so I never really considered that people might be LGBT even though I am, in fact, gay. Now that I've moved to a college campus in the midwest, the difference is like night and day with respect to how alternative perspectives are considered and how openly present the LGBT community is. In summary, I think a lot of the controversy around this law stems from the fact that many citizens of North Carolina realize from a superficial standpoint that something is very wrong with the legislation, but very few people have personal incentives to concern themselves with it beyond passing conversation; thus, groups with more aggressive agendas only experience superficial political resistance.
Education will be key to solving issues like these. Many people subscribe to prejudiced ideas because that is the only thing they were exposed to growing up, and they never learned to see anything from other people's perspectives. Probably it will be people like all of us, who are willing to learn about others before judging them, that will end up setting the example in the future.
-
Personally I think it will take a long time to change those who feel it's a
moral issue. Tradition and culture are slow to change, and if people feel
their religion is against it you compound the problem.
Like gay issues it will take federal law to force the states to treat people
fairly. It's no different than racism. The public will have to learn to deal
with their fears, and ignorance.
Now during a political season the polititions are trying to gain votes from
a divided public. Even though a majority of the country favor the new
lifestyles. Be they gay or transgender issues.
I fear as with racism it will be a long road for all.
-
I would vote no, though I would approve unisex toilets, they work, in UK we call them disabled toilets (minor joke) but there isn't issues, just don't have urinals.
I would vote no however that if you are transgender it should be to a fixed point of you are either choosing to be female or male, not dance around them both. but then in honesty after taking a course on reading performance, which is basically philosophy in disguise, who knows. How would this draw up to other cultures, regions, laws, etc, or rather culture cause that what everything comes down to.
Question, is it really going to kill you if you are allocated a toilet space, your taking a number one or two, something both genders do, and isn't something really that requires to be remarked upon.
-
Question, is it really going to kill you if you are allocated a toilet space, your taking a number one or two, something both genders do, and isn't something really that requires to be remarked upon.
It might actually lead to being harmed, yes. Unless you are in an environment that is very accepting of trans and non-gender binary people, then being forced to use the wrong bathroom could result in the trans/non-gender binary person being harassed or worse.
On that note, people who purpose such bills as a security issue, I'm sorry but it's just not.
First of all, the vast majority of trans/non-gender binary people just need a place to go and are not there for causing any sort of problem. They are more likely to be the target of assault then the perpetrator. So these sorts of bills would lead to less security for a lot of trans people by force outting them.
Secondly, the idea that cis-men will pretend to be trans to access the woman's restroom is just a ill thought out scare tactic; these imaginary perpetrators are already intent on breaking the law by committing assault, so why the hell would some stupid bathroom law stop them from going in anyway? These sorts of bills do nothing to increase security for cis people.
So it simply doesn't work as a security measure, and it actually makes things worse.
By the way, I believe that bathrooms should be unisex but single more single stalled. It works great in nearly every household.
-
By the way, I believe that bathrooms should be unisex but single more single stalled. It works great in nearly every household.
if you are referring one person per a sealed room (like no stalls) the this would be amazing.
-
One thing that might kill this bill is: How do you enforce it? What are companies, restaurants, etc. going to do? Start having "potty police"? I've even heard some stories of police depts. from cities and towns that were unsure of what to do and how to enforce this law. They just gave up. :P
-
They just gave up. :P[/color]
Good.
-
If you are referring one person per a sealed room (like no stalls) the this would be amazing.
Yes. Those walls that don't even go all the way to the floor don't provide nearly enough privacy as far as I'm concerned. And urinals often don't even have dividers, and if they do, they usually pathetically small.
-
Question, is it really going to kill you if you are allocated a toilet space, your taking a number one or two, something both genders do, and isn't something really that requires to be remarked upon.
It might actually lead to being harmed, yes. Unless you are in an environment that is very accepting of trans and non-gender binary people, then being forced to use the wrong bathroom could result in the trans/non-gender binary person being harassed or worse.
On that note, people who purpose such bills as a security issue, I'm sorry but it's just not.
First of all, the vast majority of trans/non-gender binary people just need a place to go and are not there for causing any sort of problem. They are more likely to be the target of assault then the perpetrator. So these sorts of bills would lead to less security for a lot of trans people by force outting them.
Secondly, the idea that cis-men will pretend to be trans to access the woman's restroom is just a ill thought out scare tactic; these imaginary perpetrators are already intent on breaking the law by committing assault, so why the hell would some stupid bathroom law stop them from going in anyway? These sorts of bills do nothing to increase security for cis people.
So it simply doesn't work as a security measure, and it actually makes things worse.
By the way, I believe that bathrooms should be unisex but single more single stalled. It works great in nearly every household.
How can it lead to harm? In what way are they going to be harmed? Transgender is not a definable race like White, Asian, African, etc. The toilet for guys is literally to remove your waste, sometimes for women its to powder ones self, but yeah, it's a simplistic ritual that is unisversal, and also it's private. I mean what are they going to do have a willy inspection?
I'm sorry but I don't understand what harm is going to happen and how it is going to occur.
Furthermore there isn't anything wrong with cubicles, generally they are cheaper to build and more economical space wise.
The bill is flawed in it's own standing, how can you back something like that up? If 'concern' was made to the use of toilets then increase routine cleans, least then they'll be sanitary.
-
If you are referring one person per a sealed room (like no stalls) the this would be amazing.
Yes. Those walls that don't even go all the way to the floor don't provide nearly enough privacy as far as I'm concerned. And urinals often don't even have dividers, and if they do, they usually pathetically small.
...What?
-
Natura: If say, a trans-woman who presents as and dresses as a woman is forced to use the bathroom of her biological sex for whatever stupid reason, she is going to have to go into the gents. It would make her a target for ridicule and assault. That would cause them to risk coming to harm.
-
Natura: If say, a trans-woman who presents as and dresses as a woman is forced to use the bathroom of her biological sex for whatever stupid reason, she is going to have to go into the gents. It would make her a target for ridicule and assault. That would cause them to risk coming to harm.
My question to you then is how are they force considering they view themselves as a woman, and they have taken steps to utilise the semiotics to allow people around said person to read 'female'
-
Maybe they haven't started on hormones and still have some masculine characteristics. Those things do take time to work, it isn't an instant swap.
-
Maybe they haven't started on hormones and still have some masculine characteristics. Those things do take time to work, it isn't an instant swap.
then regardless what toilet you go into, people will see a class of signs suggesting both male and female, and ou can't change that line of thinking, nor blame someone for thinking that way, it's ingrained, arguably beyond the point of society.
-
Why the hell do we even have gendered bathrooms again?
Personally, I'd like to get rid of urinals as well. The shaming of men who have/want to sit down to pee is disgusting.
Also, Kobuk, stating things as if they're your opinion and then claiming you're just talking for other people when someone is disgusted by it, just makes you look like someone who feels out what they can get away with and backpedals to safety when called out. If you want to give what you think are other people's reasons or arguments for something, it's really better to state that's what your doing upfront. It makes you a whole lot less slimy.
-
Why the hell do we even have gendered bathrooms again?
Personally, I'd like to get rid of urinals as well. The shaming of men who have/want to sit down to pee is disgusting.
Also, Kobuk, stating things as if they're your opinion and then claiming you're just talking for other people when someone is disgusted by it, just makes you look like someone who feels out what they can get away with and backpedals to safety when called out. If you want to give what you think are other people's reasons or arguments for something, it's really better to state that's what your doing upfront. It makes you a whole lot less slimy.
firstly urinals don't shame anyone, at all. Its a choice not a force.
secondly kobuk isn't being slimy, he's stated his thoughts, opinion and doesn't have to be on a side, don't even need to be sides
-
How can it lead to harm? In what way are they going to be harmed?
As I said, unless you are in an environment that is very accepting of trans and non-gender binary people, then being forced to use the wrong bathroom could result in the trans/non-gender binary person being harassed or worse. How is that hard to understand? It can 'out' people that don't want to be out, it can send a message to them they their is something wrong with them (thus potentially physiological harm, particularly for kids that are trans), or just in general draw unwanted attention just because they need to use the bathroom. For example, a trans-man would probably blend in more in the men's restroom, and a trans-women would probably blend in more in the women's restroom.
-
How can it lead to harm? In what way are they going to be harmed?
As I said, unless you are in an environment that is very accepting of trans and non-gender binary people, then being forced to use the wrong bathroom could result in the trans/non-gender binary person being harassed or worse. How is that hard to understand? It can 'out' people that don't want to be out, it can send a message to them they their is something wrong with them (thus potentially physiological harm, particularly for kids that are trans), or just in general draw unwanted attention just because they need to use the bathroom. For example, a trans-man would probably blend in more in the men's restroom, and a trans-women would probably blend in more in the women's restroom.
Because the argument above is completely subjective without an example of how someone would be harrassed, and honestly in comparison the world still addressing, feminism inequality, northern and southern conflict still continuing within USA despite the slave war ending many many years ago, refugees of syria, and i'm sure many other issues, that i'll be frank, need addressing much more than 'I want to wear a dress when I take a crap without being judge'.
You are basically countering stupid bills with melodramatic statements of individual bathrooms everywhere without cubicals, and that gender specific toilets cause harm to the trans people, which are not a race. Lifestyle, god giving them the wrong body, mental handicap, disability handicap, gene issues, whatever you wan to believe, but they are not a race of people.
The arguments you suggest do not fix nor progress trans gender, and the arguments you give appear to be strictly emotively given without research or discussion, which Ironic considering gender is being considered a grey aspect rather than one or the other, but good and bad is final, it's a very christian thinking.
Point is this discussion is kind of pointless other than to seek oppinions of others, but if you do not like them nor accept them, then what do you want?
-
@ Natura Wolf:
What are you talking about? I am deeply confused by your response. For one thing, I DID provide examples. For another, why would it possible make any difference that it's "not a race". Race or not, it's still something people get targeted for discrimination over. Are you honestly denying that?
And what's this "good or bad is final" bit? Where did I ever say anything was strictly good or bad? You said "is it really going to kill you if you are allocated a toilet space". I was just pointing out that, yes, harm -can- come from it. Not that harm is guaranteed, but that harm is a possibility.
It honestly seems to me like you are responding to something completely different from what I've said here.
-
@ Natura Wolf:
What are you talking about? I am deeply confused by your response. For one thing, I DID provide examples. For another, why would it possible make any difference that it's "not a race". Race or not, it's still something people get targeted for discrimination over. Are you honestly denying that?
And what's this "good or bad is final" bit? Where did I ever say anything was strictly good or bad? You said "is it really going to kill you if you are allocated a toilet space". I was just pointing out that, yes, harm -can- come from it. Not that harm is guaranteed, but that harm is a possibility.
It honestly seems to me like you are responding to something completely different from what I've said here.
What examples?
Also many things can harm you, that doesn't mean it's likely to or that it would. I know that a few furries are happy to believe that the human societ is the worst thing in the world and are more likely to promote death to humans rather than equality. In this conversation for example it's a major assumption that something bad is going to happy to majority of transgender by, well people, cause humans are bad, and after having many conversations that result in people whining that most peoplle are evil and they should all die, etc, they are tiresome and unintelligent conversations as generally at this point they are shut off from any from of reason or perspective but their own.
Also Dalai Lama <3
Final point, perhaps neither of us are understanding each other, i'm only responding to what I am getting from the conversation with you
-
Also many things can harm you, that doesn't mean it's likely to or that it would.
This response is so dismissive it's insulting.
Anyways...
Before I can really address anything further with you, I think it's important to ask you: (and I'll try to put this as neutrally as I can. Please disregard anything else about the context of our conversation and just answer it as a stand alone question:)
True or false: There are places in the U.S. where it is not uncommon for people to be targeted for discrimination due to being transgender.
-
I'm all in favour of doing away with gendered bathrooms altogether and having unisex rooms.
Syr> Agreed.
-
I'm straight and see nothing wrong with it. I'm also not republican. I can think clearly on the subject.
-
Here's a new link/story I just saw. Another example of the Obama administration butting it's nose in where it doesn't belong. Let individual communities and States handle their own transgender bathroom issues, not the Federal Gov't. :goldpissed:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/us/politics/obama-administration-to-issue-decree-on-transgender-access-to-school-restrooms.html?_r=0
-
First of all, there is no "transgender bathroom issue." Everyone goes to the bathroom. Second of all, this is a constitutional issue. You can't make laws in this country specifically targetting groups of people, no matter how uncomfortable they make you. States and localities have no right to harass and intimidate people on the basis of their gender identity.