Furtopia | Family Friendly Furry Forum and IRC Chat!
not-so-furry discussion => news forum => Topic started by: Old Rabbit on May 14, 2016, 11:51:39 am
-
It appears the Obama administration has pushed the issue, and now
several states are saying NO!! At least the governers are.
Apparently there has been questions from schools and other public
entities on what to do or how to proceed. So the president made it
clear.
This obviously will cause quite a lot of consternation among those who are
against the idea. I hope it doesn't do more harm than good.
If I had a daugter in school I would tell her to do her business in
the stall. Including undressing or dressing. And if someone with a
male body exposed them selves purposely, report it and tell me as
well. Just as you would if it happened anywhere else.
Locker rooms propose a different problem since there may not be any
private space for those who want or need it. Even among those of the
same physical gender might want a private space for personal reasons.
Over the years I have been in new construction, and all womens public
bathrooms have stalls. As long as they are in good condition there should
be no problem. If they aren't they should be repaired immediately
.
There are very few transgeder people anyway. They havea bad enough time
without politicians adding laws against them.
-
As I said before in the Transgender thread, this is an attempt at the President/Federal Gov't going too far. As is written in the Constitution, the powers not granted to the Federal Gov't should be relegated to the State. The States should determine their own transgender bathroom policies. Not the Federal Gov't. >:( In fact, I don't see this whole transgender bathroom issue being a major issue right now when there's bigger and better issues that need taking care of in the U.S. (and/or world) during a Presidential election year. I care more about issues like unemployment, Social Security, Dealing with ISIS, and a whole bunch of other issues that have a much higher priority than what bathroom a person wants to use. >:(
-
Here's a blog post on the issue by a gender nonconforming person called "Glorify." If you're actually interested in this, then you may want to look at their personal experience on the matter. This is not the whole post, but here's a salient excerpt:
I use the bathroom as quickly as possible. I don’t know what the supporters of bathroom bills think trans and gender non-conforming people are doing in there, but I can assure you it’s not exciting. In fact, I can testify that most of the time we get out as soon as humanly possible. Then I wash my hands, carefully avoiding the mirror-reflected gazes of the woman next to me. I say nothing, unless something is said to me. And then I leave.
I am lucky in that the worst that has ever happened to me in a women’s room is that I’ve been embarrassed. Friends of mine have not been so lucky. One was pulled out by force by a man who believed she was going to harm his wife. He had thought she was a man. Other friends have come out to find a someone standing with a police officer who then demands to see their ID. And I’ve certainly thought about how to best defend myself if someone gets violent. Everyone I know who is gender non-conforming has had those thoughts.
That’s why I try to avoid public bathrooms as much as possible. Believe me, if there is any way to get around it, I will. I suspect this is true of most trans, genderqueer, and gender non-conforming folks. For all the fears around us wanting to use the bathroom, the reality is that we’re far more afraid to use it than you know. I’ve learned not to drink water before I have to fly in order to avoid airport restrooms. I change my clothes before I get to my gym. I’ve walked back to my house rather than use a restaurant bathroom.
For the whole post you can click here: https://emilycheath.com/2016/04/27/on-restrooms-gender-and-fear/
But yes, please, let's forget about the personal safety of transgender folks, because the personal safety of those weirdos just isn't our concern. How this could possibly have anything to do with states' rights is beyond me. The federal government has been consistently empowered to deal with discrimination against marginalized communities. The same argument was made about black people with regard to the civil rights act, and it didn't hold any water then, so why would it magically become an important legal principal now?
-
So tell me Kobuk, how is the following much different from what you are saying?
As I said before in the Segregation thread, this is an attempt at the President/Federal Gov't going too far. As is written in the Constitution, the powers not granted to the Federal Gov't should be relegated to the State. The States should determine their own bathroom policies for coloreds. Not the Federal Gov't. >:( In fact, I don't see this whole bathroom issue of segregating whites from coloreds as being a major issue right now when there's bigger and better issues that need taking care of in the U.S. (and/or world) during a Presidential election year. I care more about ... and a whole bunch of other issues that have a much higher priority than what bathroom a person has to use. >:(
I highly doubt Obama would have issued any such thing if it wasn't for states pushing for discriminatory bathroom policies.
-
It''s a federal law not to discriminate. States do not have the right to over ride that law. Personally I think it would be harder on a female bodied individual going into a mens room. Women are not turned on by seeing exposed genitalia. Men are.
-
This is already starting a minor cultural revolt. I know of a large number of people who say they plan to homeschool at the start of the next school year. With this, I expect the feds to make a big push against homeschooling to try to force the social agenda. Check out what pre WWII Germany did to its and the Czechoslovakian education systems. Not that bad yet, but we're moving that way.
Obama didn't say third facilities for everyone to use, he is saying anyone, anywhere, no compromise. Imagine if a Republican President were to issue something along those lines, like anyone with a concealed or open carry license can carry anywhere, even if the property owner(s) want it a gun free zone.
10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The feds need to bug off big time. We need to return to the Constitution. If California wants trans in any facilities, while Alabama makes being trans or queer illegal (but not punished too severely, 8th Amendment violations are where the feds should step in.), let them! Don't like the law? Move to another state. Just about everyone will be happier because they will be surrounded by like minded people, and conflicts will go down. Fire and water can't mix.
-
Seriously, what is up in America, your the only country that has major debates, arguments, battles, etc, about bathrooms.
There are people under the LGB who are still abused, especially with this freedom of relgion - http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/mississippi-aclu/481869/
There are people unemployed without work or reason to feel alive - http://en.mercopress.com/2016/05/16/urban-unemployment-in-latin-america-to-increase-7-this-year-says-eclac
There are the homeless, that are still without a home, a feel of identity or access to half the things that the people who claim to have nothing have
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dwayne-paro/veterans-homelessin-ameri_b_9748278.html
http://newamericamedia.org/2016/04/old-and-homeless-aging-hard-and-fast-in-spokanes-street-life.php
http://www.vice.com/read/why-so-many-asylum-seekers-end-up-homeless
I'm sorry this isn't as important, for anyone who wish to say otherwise go to every abused blackman, unemployed person underpressure of losing everything, every homeless person on the street, every asylum seeker escaping from Syria, and tell them that their issues are nothing compared to your rights to take a dump in a bathroom of your choosing....*facepalms*
-
Thank you Natura, you are a breath of fresh air on this issue :orraccoon: As an american i feel like issues in general are prioritized horribly. Not to mention all the stuff revolving around this bathroom thing smells quite a bit of social engineering between the state funded travel bans, celebs canceling tours and what not...all over a toilet. Homeless veterans, unemployment and the national debt? Who cares, we're arguing about public restrooms! *Shakes head in disapproval*
-
Women are not turned on by seeing exposed genitalia. Men are.
Wow. Talk about stereotyping right there. :P
This is already starting a minor cultural revolt.
And I have to wonder what's next in the future. :P What next? Crossdresser's Rights? Seems to me Americans, or a certain percentage of them in the last year or two, seem to care more about sexual issues and rights than anything else around them. Gay rights, Gay marriage, Transgender bathroom rights. What's next? Is that all Americans care about? I would certainly hope not. I read about and hear about these issues from time to time and I get concerned about them just as much as the next person. But I really don't think transgender bathrooms are a high priority right now. I don't give a crap (No pun intended.) what bathroom people use. >:(
America must look like the laughingstock of the world right now. People in other countries must be scratching their heads and doing double takes thinking "What the hell is wrong with America?"
Natura Wolf is right. There's bigger and more important issues that deserve attention and take a higher priority than where a person goes to the bathroom:
Homelessness
Unemployment
Immigration
Syria
.......and so much more. But it seems like some Americans only care about their own self centered selfish needs on where to go to the bathroom, and all other issues they don't give a crap about. >:(
-
To answer your what's next, polygamy and bestiality. Polygamy is already popping up here and there, but the bestiality is further in the future. Not sure when, but marriage with children will appear eventually too. The people in power are simply using divide and conquer.
Natura, fully agree. Lets take care of the existential threats before we start wishing we could kill each other. Example: North Korea could take out the US with one nuclear weapon if they use it as an EMP or with a cyber attack. Solution? Rebuild and separate our grid, shore up our cyber defenses, store back ups of equipment, and put in an offline, back up grid. But no one wants to talk about that for some reason.
-
To answer your what's next, polygamy and bestiality. Polygamy is already popping up here and there, but the bestiality is further in the future. Not sure when, but marriage with children will appear eventually too. The people in power are simply using divide and conquer.
Be a cold day in hell before bestiality is ever approved. And I'll make damn sure it never happens. :goldpissed: Anyway, this is an issue best left to the adult forum. Not here.
Natura, fully agree. Lets take care of the existential threats before we start wishing we could kill each other. Example: North Korea could take out the US with one nuclear weapon if they use it as an EMP or with a cyber attack. Solution? Rebuild and separate our grid, shore up our cyber defenses, store back ups of equipment, and put in an offline, back up grid. But no one wants to talk about that for some reason.
Not to derail this thread any further, but........do you know how laughable that is? :D North Korea beat the U.S.? I don't think so.
-
If you told someone a few decades ago that homosexuality would be brought into the spotlight and given protections, they would have agreed with you, a cold day in hell. I mentioned "it" only because it was relevant to the discussion, I do not plan to mention it again unless if necessary.
I said take out, not beat. No one can beat us, we'd nuke their country until it glows. There was a joint exercise between the US and Israel simulating cyber warfare. In the end of the simulation, America was about to invade Israel because it appeared that Israel was launching large cyber attacks against transportation, even though it was simulated Iran doing it. According to retired US Army General Wesley Clark, who participated in the simulation, "The United States realized how difficult if not impossible it is to ascertain the source of attack" We quite probably wouldn't know who attacked us.
On the EMP, we would go back to the 1800s technologically. Anything with a computer chip would be dead... forever. It is theorized that cars could die too.
Both of those destroy our electrical grid. It would take years, even decades to rebuild. Until then, you would have disease, mass death, starvation, fighting, the end of America. Tens or even over a hundred million dead.
Could North Korea defeat us? No, no one can. But they can sure destroy us.
-
I am going to "lay my cards on the table" so to speak and give my full opinions on transgender bathroom access plus a few other issues. My opinions are what they are. If you don't like them, then too bad. I don't feel I have to explain why I feel the way I do nor defend my actions to anybody.
Transgender Access:
a) TBA in schools for grades 1-9: No
b) TBA in schools for grades 10-12: Undecided. Leave it up to the school district/States to decide the issue.
c) TBA in colleges/universities: Undecided. Leave it up to individual campuses and/or States to decide.
d) TBA at public places like restaurants, ball parks, retail stores, etc.: Leave it up to individual businesses and/or States to decide.
e) Transgender locker/dressing rooms in schools for grades 1-12: No
f) Transgender locker/dressing rooms at colleges/universities: Same as Letter C.
g) Transgender locker/dressing rooms at retail stores or other public places: Same as Letter D.
There were at least 1-2 other items I wanted to mention, but I can't remember them. I'll add them in later.
-
P.S. - The only way transgendered or "all access" bathrooms could work that I can see is by making them the following. But granted, not every school, retail store, or other place may be able to do this based on sizing and construction issues.
a) No urinals.
b) No stalls with wall sections that don't reach to the ceiling and/or floor. Have the stall "completely enclosed" so to speak.
c) Have "panic buttons" in each stall and near the sink area.
d) Have the restrooms monitored with security cameras. The cameras wouldn't be watching the stalls since they're completely enclosed, but rather watching the open areas near/around the sinks or other spots.
-
easy solution to the transgender bathroom issue...
-no gender oriented bathrooms
-make no holes/gaps in the doors/walls (it's only a few more square feet of plywood...)
-add better locks
-add a mirror in each one
-public sinks (dont really need privacy when washing your hands)
P.S. - The only way transgendered or "all access" bathrooms could work that I can see is by making them the following. But granted, not every school, retail store, or other place may be able to do this based on sizing and construction issues.
a) No urinals.
b) No stalls with wall sections that don't reach to the ceiling and/or floor. Have the stall "completely enclosed" so to speak.
c) Have "panic buttons" in each stall and near the sink area.
d) Have the restrooms monitored with security cameras. The cameras wouldn't be watching the stalls since they're completely enclosed, but rather watching the open areas near/around the sinks or other spots.
could have more public/city bathrooms then (many people go into stores/restaurants just to use the bathroom, so this would take traffic away from them, and the city will likely be able to find room for new structures some where (iv seen many empty areas of land that no one builds on since it's city property)
also why even have locker rooms (in schools it's usually for their Physical education thing, but why not teach them about staying healthy instead of forcing them to do it and hate it)
locker rooms should be left there for sports teams (and usually they dont really care about seeing each other)
To answer your what's next, polygamy and bestiality. Polygamy is already popping up here and there, but the bestiality is further in the future. Not sure when, but marriage with children will appear eventually too. The people in power are simply using divide and conquer.
Be a cold day in hell before bestiality is ever approved. And I'll make damn sure it never happens. :goldpissed: Anyway, this is an issue best left to the adult forum. Not here.
polygamy isnt really a bad thing... so what if someone has multiple partners, not harming anyone... yes it may seem kinda strange and i'd like to stay away from that (since things can easily get confusing/stressful if 2 of the other partners dislike each other)
as for bestiality in almost all cases it's a bad thing and animals are abused but i do know there are people who actually consider their animal as a partner/family/as another person, and treat them as well as they would treat someone else. as long as the animal isn't taken advantage of, harmed, forced, raised/trained for that type of behavior ect. i dont really have an issue with it. marriage with an animal doesn't really make any sense though (until reading an animal's mind comes out keep the marriage thing away) though with the way people are, allowing people to be with their animal legally will cause more harm than good due to most people just taking advantage of animals (sadly at the expense of the good people)
now as for marrying a child now that is an actual issue. children's minds aren't at their fully maturity till they are around 20 i think (though i'd say they are advanced enough for consent/marriage around the age of 14-17 (depending on the individual)) doing anything with someone under that age would be taking advantage of someone who may not even be able to understand what is going on, and should not be allowed.
though as for the reason why argue about this stuff it that it should be an easy solution.. (though most people just dont like the idea of spending a little extra money to alter bathrooms)
-
Wow, it's been a while since I've posted here. Hi there. I have a transgender fiance. Maybe I could give some input.
First off, OR, there's a difference between sex and gender. Sex is biological. "Inner gender" isn't how it works.
2. The only people who are going to rape women and children were going to do that regardless of a sign on the bathroom. If anybody can direct me to a single time in history a transgendered person has ever been accused of harassment/rape/kidnapping in a bathroom, please link it to me. No? That's strange. It's almost as if it's never happened before.
3. No transgendered person who hasn't transitioned is going to change in front of other people of the gender that they identify with for obvious reasons. There are already stalls in most locker rooms and trans people are generally perfectly happy to use them for the sake of not making other people uncomfortable.
5. You've already shared a bathroom with a transgendered person. You didn't know and you lived.
What next? Crossdresser's Rights?
Kobuk, I seem to recall you making a thread a couple of years ago about being interested in cross-dressing but only if you could wear a zentai under the clothing for anonymity. How did that go?
-
Honestly, these discussions about transgender people, and omg crossdresser rights, as if crossdressing and transgender is something that cisgender and gender conforming people need to defend themselves against. Full of vicious stereotypes against gender minorities. Talking about transwomen exposing themselves in a bathroom? What? If they "expose" themselves they're outing themselves as trans and putting themselves in danger. If you think that that's even slightly likely to happen then you have no idea what you are talking about. Add better locks? What are you so afraid of?
Talking about the pushback against the right wing attacks against transpeople as a messed up priority. It's the conservatives who have raised this issue. It's the republican national convention that has declared war on transgender people. Transpeople are just trying to live their lives, but their attempts to defend themselves are the bad priority, not the attacks against them. Ridiculous. Frankly, I'm tired of being on this forum. I feel like it's not a welcoming place, and I can't waste my time on people who are more interested in spewing hate speech that finding out what's really going on. I'm out.
So much for the fandom being open and welcoming!
-
Kobuk, I seem to recall you making a thread a couple of years ago about being interested in cross-dressing but only if you could wear a zentai under the clothing for anonymity. How did that go?
My interest is for Halloween and/or conventions like anime for example.
Animegao. Sometimes known as kigurumi. But the odds of doing this are almost impossible. The masks are hard to get and damn expensive. :P
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animegao_kigurumi
http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lu27yhBOdP1qic8pr.jpg
-
My interest is for Halloween and/or conventions like anime for example.
Animegao. Sometimes known as kigurumi. But the odds of doing this are almost impossible. The masks are hard to get and damn expensive. :P
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animegao_kigurumi
http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lu27yhBOdP1qic8pr.jpg
Right, and you have the privilege to make that decision. You get to take off the costume afterwards.
-
Add better locks? What are you so afraid of?
if you are referring to my post i meant better locks for the sake of not having to repair stalls all the time because some idiot kicked in the door for the lols (iv seen many broken stalls because some people just like breaking things)
iv got no worries about trans people, just i'd like to have stronger locks to feel more protected from anyone
-
easy solution to the transgender bathroom issue...
-no gender oriented bathrooms
-make no holes/gaps in the doors/walls (it's only a few more square feet of plywood...)
-add better locks
-add a mirror in each one
-public sinks (dont really need privacy when washing your hands)
And they'd only really need to do that sort of thing with new constructions. That's the way building codes generally work anyway. And over time, the non-gender oriented bathrooms will get more and more common. I suspect that if and when we go this route, eventually people will wonder why we ever segregated the bathrooms to begin with.
For those saying "there are other more important issues", the thing is, this should have very easy solutions. The ones that are turning it into a big deal are the ones that are actively trying to make things harder for trans and non-gender binary individuals. Really, it's dumb to actively move to keep someone down and then complain when they fight to get up.
-
There are people under the LGB who are still abused, especially with this freedom of relgion
It's no different for trans people. They face just as much, and sometimes more, abuse and discrimination then LGB individuals. I don't think think I've ever heard of someone being against LGB people while being completely okay with trans people.
-
We in the US seem to have a phobia over bathroom use. It may be due
to religion or because the country had a wilderness beginning.
Men might go weeks without seeing a woman, and since some were
roughnecks it may have been necessary to seperate the genders to
give some protection for women trying to do their business, and
since women often wish to adjust their makeup they installed
mirrors and vanities.
Today though perhaps public toliets should be an open area instead of a closed room.
With well built stalls that have solid floor to ceiling walls. So people could feel safe/comfortable
using them. No matter what their gender happened to be. The sinks and mirrors
could be in the open area. The sinks could be in a long counter with seperations
to give each sink user a bit of privacy.
This would be economical and gender friendly for all.
-
There are people under the LGB who are still abused, especially with this freedom of relgion
It's no different for trans people. They face just as much, and sometimes more, abuse and discrimination then LGB individuals. I don't think think I've ever heard of someone being against LGB people while being completely okay with trans people.
Your missing the point, The point is we are still addressing the issue of things like freedom of religious views, bigotry, heck even feminism and equality between men and women is still an issue. How can you solve Transgender issues when the bigger issues of feminism, discrimination and unequality is still very strong in the world. I don't think going to any woman and saying that gender is an illusion is going to make them feel better when there are women being paid less because they are women. The point is, there are bigger issues, and until they are address you can't address this one.
2. The only people who are going to rape women and children were going to do that regardless of a sign on the bathroom. If anybody can direct me to a single time in history a transgendered person has ever been accused of harassment/rape/kidnapping in a bathroom, please link it to me. No? That's strange. It's almost as if it's never happened before.
5. You've already shared a bathroom with a transgendered person. You didn't know and you lived.
2. Eddie Izzard already made this joke - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_kvXeMv-2k <--Gotta love Izzard, also he does mention some weird transvestite, point is their are weird transvestites, hes an executive transvestite XD
5. I'm sure I have, and I'm sure it's not an issue, infact it's almost like these conversations don't need to happen because as you have said, you are not going to notice....*facepalms*
-
For those saying "there are other more important issues", the thing is, this should have very easy solutions. The ones that are turning it into a big deal are the ones that are actively trying to make things harder for trans and non-gender binary individuals. Really, it's dumb to actively move to keep someone down and then complain when they fight to get up.
I argue that you are equally just as bad as the people making a big deal, because I would argue you are the opposite extreme to the other argument. As far as I see it, Shim is right, you probably don't even notice what toilet a transgender person is using. In the eyes of the law non-gender doesn't exist, feminism exists, discrimination exists, bigitry, inequality, but non-gender does not. Gender is as much real as the french language, which as you may know, has a process of naming something as male or female, even objects. What this feels more like is trollers one one side that don't know better and then an over sensitive group on the other which know this but still respond to them.
-
I argue that you are equally just as bad as the people making a big deal, because I would argue you are the opposite extreme to the other argument.
And exactly what is my argument? I get a strong feeling that you are not really understanding what I'm saying.
-
Jesus why have I not heard about this?
-
I argue that you are equally just as bad as the people making a big deal, because I would argue you are the opposite extreme to the other argument.
And exactly what is my argument? I get a strong feeling that you are not really understanding what I'm saying.
Perhaps not, I have to admit I can't say I understand you clearly, but from conversations about requesting all toilets to be completely seperated from each other, and our past conversations, I get an idea, even if it is possibly the worng idea
-
Perhaps not, I have to admit I can't say I understand you clearly, but from conversations about requesting all toilets to be completely seperated from each other, and our past conversations, I get an idea, even if it is possibly the worng idea
I think that would be nice if they did things that way. But I'm not demanding that they do, or even necessarily expecting it. But I do expecting people to be tolerant of trans people using public restrooms.
BTW, when I used the phrase "non-gender binary", I mean anyone that falls outside the standard notions of male and female. Androgynous, gender-fluid, etc. Perhaps it's not the best term, but I'm just trying to be all inclusive.
-
But I do expecting people to be tolerant of trans people using public restrooms.
Ok
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdC0AlnEE68 <-- This is my argument more or less, specifically here https://youtu.be/mdC0AlnEE68?t=2m30s but i would recommend watching the whole thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3qCJHAaiKg <--- this is another argument that is kinda worth mentioning to, again here is specific https://youtu.be/P3qCJHAaiKg?t=3m19s
-
But I do expecting people to be tolerant of trans people using public restrooms.
What you "ask for" and what you "get" are two entirely different things. ;) You can't "expect" people to do/say what you want all the time.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdC0AlnEE68 <-- This is my argument more or less, specifically here https://youtu.be/mdC0AlnEE68?t=2m30s but i would recommend watching the whole thing.
Yeah, positive social change is often slow. So what. That doesn't mean that we should just ignore it when people actively fight against positive social change.
-
I completely disagree,
sometimes ignorance is bliss. Donald Trump has shown this as an example, his popularity is through people listening, more and more who are outraged by his appauling comments that more and more are listening and drawing attention to him...that is a huge mistake
-
I completely disagree,
sometimes ignorance is bliss. Donald Trump has shown this as an example, his popularity is through people listening, more and more who are outraged by his appauling comments that more and more are listening and drawing attention to him...that is a huge mistake
Hey you don't have to bring Donald into this dude.
-
Hey you don't have to bring Donald into this dude.
I feel its a good example for what I am talking about, and an example that is easier to put forwards to others
Point is, stuff like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCIYsXhR1D0
Shouldn't be taken seriously, by taking it seriously it gives them attention and therefore more power and a louder voice because people are carrying that voice. I found this to be funny, hillerious considering anything 'Father Ted' fans I direct you to this episode which came to my mind when this woman talks about target becoming a dangerous place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beN7FftWNCM
I just found it so funny, and I shouldn't really be linking this because it kinda contradicts when i say not to draw attention, but for the sake of showing how little seriousness we should give these things, yes, a show form 1995 ridicules this behaviour already.
Point is don't give them time, attention, this is when being ignorant isn't a bad thing, otherwise it's like giving attention to a naughty child, your feeding into the behaviour
-
Point is, stuff like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCIYsXhR1D0
Shouldn't be taken seriously, by taking it seriously it gives them attention and therefore more power and a louder voice because people are carrying that voice.
I agree to a point. If it's just a fringe with limited to no effect and one that is mostly not taken seriously then there is no reason to bring them attention. But when you have things like states making laws that are actively against positive social change, you can't just ignore it and expect it to go away.
Martin Luther King Jr's "I Have a Dream" speech: https://youtu.be/H0yP4aLyq1g
Would you honestly say that positive social change would have occurred just as quickly without things like this?
(Note: I find the part from 1:30 to 3:10 particularly relevant to my point here.)
Also, I'd like to point out that in another current thread you are advocating for disabilities to be better represented in furry art. Well, why not just ignore the problem and it'll go away on it's own? Yeah, clearly you don't believe that.
-
I agree to a point. If it's just a fringe with limited to no effect and one that is mostly not taken seriously then there is no reason to bring them attention. But when you have things like states making laws that are actively against positive social change, you can't just ignore it and expect it to go away.
Martin Luther King Jr's "I Have a Dream" speech: https://youtu.be/H0yP4aLyq1g
Would you honestly say that positive social change would have occurred just as quickly without things like this?
(Note: I find the part from 1:30 to 3:10 particularly relevant to my point here.)
Also, I'd like to point out that in another current thread you are advocating for disabilities to be better represented in furry art. Well, why not just ignore the problem and it'll go away on it's own? Yeah, clearly you don't believe that.
Ok, i think your missing my point.
Firstly, my Disability thread comments that there is little arts, stories, etc, of furries with mental or physical disability. I bring this up because as the furry fandom is meant to be a community known for it's welcoming and acceptance I find this information to be counter intuitive. I understand that part of the furry fandom is about escapism, but if the majority is about escapism then you begin to erode the ideals of diverse acceptance, simply because you are denying who you are. I am a firm believer that nothing should stop a person from achieving what they want to achieve if they have the will, want and the determination to see it through. but when there is no art to communicate this, then you are not fully giving a diverse acceptance.
There is a theatre company in Scotland called Solar Bear, and they work with accessibility theatre for those who are hard of hearing, or are completely deaf. They do amazing work and have discovered so much about communication with people who are deaf, and because of this they can now make art and theatre about this, but what they also know from doing this, is that they are able to inspire people who are deaf to join the performing arts, and that is the major point there. What they say is, if there is no one to inspire someone that someone of their status, to prove that it can be done, e.g. be a deaf actor in scotland, or a black scientist in oman, etc. Then it's unlikely they will pursue it.
My point on yours is this, yourself, Shim and other members have repeatedly pointed out that no one notices when someone of transgender quality uses a bathroom, Kobuk and others have also pointed out that it is almost impossible to enforce this act without impeding on everyone personal space. So collectively the point is that they cannot enforce this change because it is not possible to enforce this change whether be it a bill or not. So I argue on that score there isn't anything to complain about, and in doing so you are giving more and more attention to something that at sounds unachievable. The woman talking about having twelve children and how the stores are meant to protect them is stupid, I should know I am a retail service person, never will I jump infront of a customer with a sword and shield and protect the customers against whatever, it's a service, prodominantly under capitalist thinking, which is, to make a profit. These things shouldn't stop people, and as it's suggested that they cannot, then continue your normal lives and let them complain, because firstly, there isn't much they can do, and America (and the UK) have laws that still exist that are never used because they die out from never being used, and secondly by just going through your lives you make a better argument of being better 'citizens' than the people kicking and screaming. The point is you don't actually have a problem by the sounds of it, someone is trying to make a problem, you don't need to take the bait
Connecting this with the Disability, firstly it was an observation, which I argue to a be a problem, but may not be. I would however argue with the amount of furries and people that I have spoken to that depression and thoughts of suicide is pretty high, as well as feelings of isolation. I would argue based on my point above, that part of this is because we are feeding too much into escapism that we are not truly that diverse. I mean when you think about it, furries are diverse in LGBT, gender-fluidity, fetishism, race, community, etc. Not much on people with disability though either mental, social or physical, and as such there isn't that much support for these people. Perhaps that is why on this board there is talk of isolation, because there isn't art or a true communication that shows you can be who ever you want to be and still do the things you want to you. If escapism is the key point then that is a problem because in constantly escaping you are severing yourself from your IRL person, and therefore you are becoming more isolated in feeling not the same person. This is a problem I argue that does need addressing because people are impacted by this constantly, and perhaps this further attributes to why furrys is more about sex than anything else, and yes I have seem many art forms but the sexual art form seems to be the main concept of being a furry. In your issue, people don't need to be effected, it's a bathroom which are isolated areas, so no one is going to suspect anything unless you give them reason to. Do you think standing declaring you are transgender and have the right to use the bathroom you choose will allow you better access? Not really, it's probably going to make you a target, because you put attention on yourself.
In regards to the martin Luther King speech i'm sorry I don't see the connection, I found that to be a little naive. African American citizens were oppressed without the same rights as a white heterosexual man (point extends to women, LGBT, Disability, etc). But yeah, they were oppressed, few to no one was standing for people who just had different skin colour. This is not a conscious decision for having different skin colour, yet the religion and politics given dictates blacks to be the spawn of Satan. Disabled people were considered weak and left to die, etc. From the moment of birth they were condemned. Point is, transgender people were not. Firstly, at some point a conscious decision has to be made to forcefully change your body to fit with your spirit inside. But here is the other thing, you can do that. Scientists and Doctors have put allot of time, resources and effort to enable people to change genders completely. I'm sorry but black people didn't have that form of dedication, you do. So I would argue you are not that unsupported if there are systems in place to enable transgender to be achievable. I find this to be naive because it sounds like you are forcing ALL identity problems in life to be exactly the same, and therefore you are attempting to undermine me with the conversation about disability. It's not like you were supporting my view point on the matter of disability, arguably you were suggesting that escapism is the reason so thats that. Understandably different passions and ideals but them don't throw them all into this conversation of trying to 'win' by throwing other conversations that are not connected into this mix.
-
Oh my god, I think I must have struck a nerve or something. Wall of text. x_x
First of all, you don't have to go off on this disability thing. In no way was I saying it's wrong to want to see better representation. I actually agree that it'd be nice to see that. My point of bringing it up was only to point out that you also have no problem bringing something to attention at least on some level when you think there may be a problem. That's all. It was simply meant to show that our views are not as diametrically opposed as you make it out to be, which is also the reason I bring up MLK.
My point is not to "win" the argument. If you think that, it's no wonder you keep interpreting what I say as some kind of extreme view. It's simply not.
Here is a bit of a lesson on the argumentative style that I'm using: It's meant to find areas where we agree, so we can use that to pinpoint exactly where the disagreement is.
That's why I brought up MLK because I'm pretty sure you'd agree with me on that issue.
That's also why I brought up your disability thread because it's also an area where we agree.
Now, as for the bigger thing,
In regards to the martin Luther King speech i'm sorry I don't see the connection, I found that to be a little naive. African American citizens were oppressed without the same rights as a white heterosexual man (point extends to women, LGBT, Disability, etc). But yeah, they were oppressed, few to no one was standing for people who just had different skin colour. This is not a conscious decision for having different skin colour, yet the religion and politics given dictates blacks to be the spawn of Satan. Disabled people were considered weak and left to die, etc. From the moment of birth they were condemned. Point is, transgender people were not. Firstly, at some point a conscious decision has to be made to forcefully change your body to fit with your spirit inside. But here is the other thing, you can do that. Scientists and Doctors have put allot of time, resources and effort to enable people to change genders completely. I'm sorry but black people didn't have that form of dedication, you do. So I would argue you are not that unsupported if there are systems in place to enable transgender to be achievable.
This just shows how horribly misinformed you are about transgender issues. The "choice" you speak of is only a choice to live as your true self. If they never made that choice, they'd still have gender dysphoria. That part is NOT a choice, and it significantly reduces quality of life. So you suggesting that they could just choose to continue denying it is the same as telling homosexual people to just live as heterosexuals. Sure, they technically could do that, but they'll never be truly happy with themselves.
-
This just shows how horribly misinformed you are about transgender issues. The "choice" you speak of is only a choice to live as your true self. If they never made that choice, they'd still have gender dysphoria. That part is NOT a choice, and it significantly reduces quality of life. So you suggesting that they could just choose to continue denying it is the same as telling homosexual people to just live as heterosexuals. Sure, they technically could do that, but they'll never be truly happy with themselves.
Dude that does not make any sense >:(. I believe that they have a choice to stay the way they are, or change genders. But I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly.
-
If you were born in a body whose sex matches your internal gender identity, it might be difficult to understand how painful it is when the two do not match up. How you're trapped as something you don't want to be, with everyone identifying you as the wrong gender and making assumptions about you because of that.
While technically yes it is a choice to change gender or not, by not changing gender they are stuck in a body that their mind does not fit in and condemned to a life of sadness.
Would you tell a gay man to just deal with it and marry a woman, and live his entire life trying to force himself to be with women when it goes against his nature? No? Then why would you tell a transman to stay in a womans body?
If you would tell a gay person to pretend to be straight for their whole lives though, then I have nothing more to say to you on this matter.
-
If you were born in a body whose sex matches your internal gender identity, it might be difficult to understand how painful it is when the two do not match up. How you're trapped as something you don't want to be, with everyone identifying you as the wrong gender and making assumptions about you because of that.
While technically yes it is a choice to change gender or not, by not changing gender they are stuck in a body that their mind does not fit in and condemned to a life of sadness.
Would you tell a gay man to just deal with it and marry a woman, and live his entire life trying to force himself to be with women when it goes against his nature? No? Then why would you tell a transman to stay in a womans body?
If you would tell a gay person to pretend to be straight for their whole lives though, then I have nothing more to say to you on this matter.
That kinda gave me more info on what trans people feel, but I still can't see why they would think they are the opposite gender. And no dude I wouldn't tell a gay person to be straight.
-
It isn't something they actively choose to do. They don't wake up one day and say "hey, I think I'll decide to be trans today", in the same way that people don't wake up and take a decision on their sexuality. It is just how they are.
-
It isn't something they actively choose to do. They don't wake up one day and say "hey, I think I'll decide to be trans today", in the same way that people don't wake up and take a decision on their sexuality. It is just how they are.
Not trying to be offensive or anything, but that just sounds like a disorder.
-
Oh my god, I think I must have struck a nerve or something. Wall of text. x_x
First of all, you don't have to go off on this disability thing. In no way was I saying it's wrong to want to see better representation. I actually agree that it'd be nice to see that. My point of bringing it up was only to point out that you also have no problem bringing something to attention at least on some level when you think there may be a problem. That's all. It was simply meant to show that our views are not as diametrically opposed as you make it out to be, which is also the reason I bring up MLK.
My point is not to "win" the argument. If you think that, it's no wonder you keep interpreting what I say as some kind of extreme view. It's simply not.
Here is a bit of a lesson on the argumentative style that I'm using: It's meant to find areas where we agree, so we can use that to pinpoint exactly where the disagreement is.
That's why I brought up MLK because I'm pretty sure you'd agree with me on that issue.
That's also why I brought up your disability thread because it's also an area where we agree.
Now, as for the bigger thing,
This just shows how horribly misinformed you are about transgender issues. The "choice" you speak of is only a choice to live as your true self. If they never made that choice, they'd still have gender dysphoria. That part is NOT a choice, and it significantly reduces quality of life. So you suggesting that they could just choose to continue denying it is the same as telling homosexual people to just live as heterosexuals. Sure, they technically could do that, but they'll never be truly happy with themselves.
Yeah, takes a while for me to formulate things, hense wall of texts.
Ok, I am going to make a point here about the word choice. Choice in its entirity is having more than one option or course of action, or decision making. Without choice there is no such thing as freedom, or liberal, etc.
Going back to the speech of for equality of afro-american. There is no choice on what colour of your skin is, it is immediate and in those times lead to a likelyhood of an outdated preconception to perceive this person as inferior, or uneducated or spawn of satan, etc. Take your pick but they do not have a choice in the matter. Same for physical disabilities and a good few mental disabilities. This however is not the case for sexuality or transgender.
Now to make this clear, I AM NOT stating that they can choose how they feel, how they identify themselves, if you are gay you are gay, if you identify yourself as a man in a womans body, same. But like it or not you DO have a choice as to when to reveal this information, and more importantly to whom. Argue as much as you want people who are black cannot do that, same for disabilities. This is easily exampled in allot of LGB behaviour in living how they want to live while withholding some information to certain people about their lives. There is choice, that comes with consequence.
Same applies to transgender, whether you want to accept this or not, you will be seen as a child equal of all children in a typical family, you will be loved, brought up, cherished, taught, etc. Like any other white child, as you age you gain information in the discovery of your identity as you age and become more aware of your internal and external self (as well as the world around you). Upon which you will discover what makes you laugh, makes you cry, what sexually appeals to you more, what you feel more comforted by, what makes you feel loved, happy, etc. All adding to your Identity, this Identity however is solely yours and for the most part it is a choice in when you share this and to who. you may choose never to share it and potentially face a feeling of isolation, depression and other negative feelings, you may choose to immediately share it and share openly because you want to be seen as an open person, and outcomes can lead to either becoming closer or further form your family, community, etc. It may also allow yourself to feel more or less safer or a greater/lesser relief depending on circumstance. You can also choose to change yourself completely and set a goal to move and change everything about your, again consequences happen depending on person and many other sources, but you get the idea. Some people are so comfortable with who they are that they find it easy to open to people, or do so naturally that people don't need to be told who they are, because they signify it so effectively.
The biggest fact however, is that a choice to change yourself is given to you by science and medical research, that choice is there because people put effort into it. Without this learning your choice would be limited, infact there may be no choice and would definitely be in oppression. But the fact that people have put research in this and there are steps into changing gender means that choice to gender is available, and that is a bloody good thing is it not, to have choice to change and become what you identify yourself as.
Its rather silly how the word choice is given bad press because there is this immediate connection to outdated voices that talk of choosing how we feel, or think. We cannot, we can control, but we cannot change who we are, instead we can discover more about who we are as the world is full of potential and possibility, and above all, choice. In an offhand related matter, this is also why I get annoyed at religious people that talk to people about their grades, their career plans, love plans, etc and say there is no choice. There is always choice, without choice you have no control.
On a lighter matter, choice can also be a pain in the butt. I would like to be thin and toned but I also love chocolate, and thus harsh choices need to be made that I wish I did not need to do. :'(
-
Ok, I am going to make a point here about the word choice. ....
Simple yes or no question for you:
Is it okay to discriminate against someone if they could choose to live with greatly diminished happiness to avoid the discrimination?
The biggest fact however, is that a choice to change yourself is given to you by science and medical research, that choice is there because people put effort into it. Without this learning your choice would be limited, infact there may be no choice and would definitely be in oppression. But the fact that people have put research in this and there are steps into changing gender means that choice to gender is available, and that is a bloody good thing is it not, to have choice to change and become what you identify yourself as.
Yeah... it sounds like you really don't know much about the history of that. There are a lot more complexities behind it.
For example, cis women are allowed a huge range of how and how much they express their femininity, but until fairly recently, transwomen didn't have that same freedom of expression. If they wanted help from the medical community they would have to pretend to be hyper-feminine. Otherwise they'd be denied treatment.
-
Ok, I am going to make a point here about the word choice. ....
Simple yes or no question for you:
Is it okay to discriminate against someone if they could choose to live with greatly diminished happiness to avoid the discrimination?
I think you need to rephrase this question, it doesn't make sense to me. I read this as do is it ok to discriminate someone who chooses to be unhappy.
The biggest fact however, is that a choice to change yourself is given to you by science and medical research, that choice is there because people put effort into it. Without this learning your choice would be limited, infact there may be no choice and would definitely be in oppression. But the fact that people have put research in this and there are steps into changing gender means that choice to gender is available, and that is a bloody good thing is it not, to have choice to change and become what you identify yourself as.
Yeah... it sounds like you really don't know much about the history of that. There are a lot more complexities behind it.
For example, cis women are allowed a huge range of how and how much they express their femininity, but until fairly recently, transwomen didn't have that same freedom of expression. If they wanted help from the medical community they would have to pretend to be hyper-feminine. Otherwise they'd be denied treatment.
You may not like me for saying this but sounds legitimate. I can't imagine that the biology of changing genders is easy, and it shouldn't just go to anyone without a reason, so how do you prove it?
I finding it hard to agree with you in that you are looking for common ground when by the sounds of it you've just knocked pretty much all of my previous statement, you spoke about the miscommunication of the word choice, and you have responded nothing about it, as though you recognised nothing and seem to be disregarding allot of what I said.
-
I think you need to rephrase this question, it doesn't make sense to me. I read this as do is it ok to discriminate someone who chooses to be unhappy.
Lets say there are two people: person A and person B.
Person A has a trait that does not hurt anyone. Person A's not able to hide the trait and the trait is easily noticed by others.
I'm pretty sure we both agree that discriminating against person A over this trait would be wrong.
Person B also has a trait that does not hurt anyone. But person B is able to hide the trait. However, hiding the trait causes person B a great deal of anguish.
My question is, would it be wrong to discriminate against person B over this trait?
You may not like me for saying this but sounds legitimate. I can't imagine that the biology of changing genders is easy, and it shouldn't just go to anyone without a reason, so how do you prove it?
Do you realize that there is a spectrum of gender identity? In fact, calling it a spectrum still doesn't describe it's complexities. Here is someone's attempt to explain it which I think does a decent job of at least highlighting how varied it is. (http://www.impactprogram.org/youth-blog/gender-identity-map/#sthash.OwiDbtGV.dpbs)
-
I think you need to rephrase this question, it doesn't make sense to me. I read this as do is it ok to discriminate someone who chooses to be unhappy.
Lets say there are two people: person A and person B.
Person A has a trait that does not hurt anyone. Person A's not able to hide the trait and the trait is easily noticed by others.
I'm pretty sure we both agree that discriminating against person A over this trait would be wrong.
Person B also has a trait that does not hurt anyone. But person B is able to hide the trait. However, hiding the trait causes person B a great deal of anguish.
My question is, would it be wrong to discriminate against person B over this trait?
You may not like me for saying this but sounds legitimate. I can't imagine that the biology of changing genders is easy, and it shouldn't just go to anyone without a reason, so how do you prove it?
Do you realize that there is a spectrum of gender identity? In fact, calling it a spectrum still doesn't describe it's complexities. Here is someone's attempt to explain it which I think does a decent job of at least highlighting how varied it is. (http://www.impactprogram.org/youth-blog/gender-identity-map/#sthash.OwiDbtGV.dpbs)
I think at this case I think its just agree to disagree. The question you ask appears to over look my statement about choice, and the question oddly reflects the American politics which is just side vs side. if you read my argument, I mentioned multiple options, you give me only two, in the typical black and white sense.
I'm sure there is a spectrum, but its still universally and culturally seen to lean either towards masculinity or femininity.
anyways, enjoy your evening
-
I think at this case I think its just agree to disagree. The question you ask appears to over look my statement about choice, and the question oddly reflects the American politics which is just side vs side. if you read my argument, I mentioned multiple options, you give me only two, in the typical black and white sense.
I'm not overlooking your statement about choice. I'm trying to figure out why you think it's such an important distinction.
Yes, transgender people can choose to repress that part of themselves and pretend to not be transgender. But doing so leads to them having a greatly reduced quality of life to the point that transgender suicides are among the highest in any demographic.
Why is the distinction of them having this choice relevant?
-
Ideally i don't think the government should HAVE to get involved at all, and that everyone would just get the hell along and respect a fellow man and get on with their lives. But no, there's hate, and there's violence, and nobody is happy because the only thing that makes THEM happy is seeing their enemies burn.
I suffer from depression, now i'm waiting until they pass the law that forces me into a separate collage cause i might shoot up the place. Give me a call when the world isn't as horrible as everyone says it is.
-
Give me a call when the world isn't as horrible as everyone says it is.
Personally, I don't think the world is as horrible as so many people say it is. There are horrible parts, yes. But there are also a lot of positive things as well.
Heck, a lot of places in the world are much worse for such things. Like, good chance you'd be killed if suspected of being LGBT. Of course, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to make things better, just that it helps to keep things in prospective.