PDA

View Full Version : Which bathroom should I use?



UTEopia
05-14-2016, 02:41 PM
The US Justice Department has told public schools and colleges that they must protect transgender students from discrimination and that they cannot prevent transgender students from using the bathroom of the gender they identify with as opposed to the gender indicated on their birth certificate as mandated by recently enacted laws in North Carolina and elsewhere.

See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-transgender-bathrooms_us_57353d73e4b060aa7819eea4?ir=Queer+Voi ces&section=us_queer-voices&utm_hp_ref=queer-voices

I must admit that I am not sure exactly how I feel about any of this. I don't remember ever hearing of an issue related to a transgender person doing anything inappropriate while in a public restroom. I guess I believe that there is greater risk of bullying, etc towards the transgender person than there is inappropriate behavior by a transgender person, but I don't know.

If Bruce is now Caitlin and presents as a woman, which bathroom is the appropriate one to use when at the airport? I'm guessing Caitlin would feel most comfortable in the women's bathroom. If Caitlin walks into a public bathroom and my wife or adult daughters are in there, am I concerned? I don't think so. What if my ten year old granddaughter is in there by herself? I don't think I really have anything to be concerned about, but if I am honest with myself, I am. I don't know any transgender people. Maybe if I did, I would not have these concerns. I have friends who are gay and I am fine with gay marriage.

Is the legislation in NC really responding to a legitimate issue?
Is it fear mongering?
Is it simple hate?

LA Ute
05-14-2016, 02:51 PM
I don't think the fear is of transgender people generally, but of unintended consequences involving others people. The interviews on this video are pretty compelling, in my opinion:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg-MAMvkplE&amp=&feature=youtu.be&app=desktop

UTEopia
05-14-2016, 03:04 PM
I don't think the fear is of transgender people generally, but of unintended consequences involving others. This video is pretty compelling, in my opinion:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tg-MAMvkplE&feature=youtu.be

"It's men in shorts." -- Rick Majerus

Like I said, I'm conflicted on this issue. I believe there are legitimate concerns on both sides. I'm not sure that requiring a transgender person to use the bathroom of the gender identified on the birth certificate protects against the unintended victims concerns expressed in the video. If a predator wants to gain access to a women's public locker room or bathroom all he need do is present as a female.

Diehard Ute
05-14-2016, 03:43 PM
Like I said, I'm conflicted on this issue. I believe there are legitimate concerns on both sides. I'm not sure that requiring a transgender person to use the bathroom of the gender identified on the birth certificate protects against the unintended victims concerns expressed in the video. If a predator wants to gain access to a women's public locker room or bathroom all he need do is present as a female.

The first interview in the video showed exactly why this whole debate is a bit ludicrous.

We know who the predators of the world are. And oddly enough we as a society ignore them.

See scandals in scouting, churches, sports etc etc etc.

I'd venture we've had far more children molested by men in positions of trust, presenting as a bland heterosexual male, than we ever have had with a transgender person

Rocker Ute
05-14-2016, 03:45 PM
Protection of children is a red herring a bit. Pedophiles are of all walks of life, including congressmen, coaches, judges, doctors and anyone else. And if you are targeting children there are easier places than a public bathroom. If you are concerned about your child go in there with them or take them in with you. Or if neither of those work make sure there are others going in and out.

There is a solution though and it isn't for just transgender and you are seeing it more frequently and that is having private bathrooms.

I personally love these when my daughter's needed to go (when they still needed help). There are a variety of reason to have these and make them handicap accessible. The downside is you have to wait if it is in use.

Of course there are also costs associated too.

If you are concerned, if there is someone who is in the bathroom that makes you uncomfortable just go back out until they leave. It is a time honored tradition kind of like not using the urinal right next to another guy that has worked since running water.

And with 3 out of 100,000 people identifying as transgender I'm pretty sure most people won't run into this issue, and if they do won't know that they are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Diehard Ute
05-14-2016, 03:51 PM
Protection of children is a red herring a bit. Pedophiles are of all walks of life, including congressmen, coaches, judges, doctors and anyone else. And if you are targeting children there are easier places than a public bathroom. If you are concerned about your child go in there with them or take them in with you. Or if neither of those work make sure there are others going in and out.

There is a solution though and it isn't for just transgender and you are seeing it more frequently and that is having private bathrooms.

I personally love these when my daughter's needed to go (when they still needed help). There are a variety of reason to have these and make them handicap accessible. The downside is you have to wait if it is in use.

Of course there are also costs associated too.

If you are concerned, if there is someone who is in the bathroom that makes you uncomfortable just go back out until they leave. It is a time honored tradition kind of like not using the urinal right next to another guy that has worked since running water.

And with 3 out of 100,000 people identifying as transgender I'm pretty sure most people won't run into this issue, and if they do won't know that they are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly.

The vast majority of transgender people who live their life fully, or even part time, as who they identify as want NO attention for it.

I think perhaps many people don't know a truly transgender person and thus imagine a drag queen as being representative of what a transgender person is.

People who are transgender, or even those who enjoy cross dressing or other similar things are usually quite fearful of being exposed. Some for actual physical safety concerns, many for the stigma and judgement they're likely to face.

LA Ute
05-14-2016, 04:25 PM
I agree that this is a ludicrous debate. Granting the legal right to use a rest room to transgender people is a solution in search of a problem. I sure they've been using them for a long time without even being noticed. I Iike Rocker's idea of private or unisex bathrooms.

The videos are about triggering. For women who've been abused and still suffer from the aftereffects, having a biological male in a restroom is a triggering event.

You guys didn't mention locker rooms. With a letter going out to all public schools in the USA from the federal Department of Justice, threatening legal action if the schools don't grant access (an extraordinary move, you've got to admit), the schools are in a tough spot. My wife's been a board member of a very large charter high school in L.A., and she's wondering how the school will approach this. When some knucklehead teenage boy walls into a girls' locker room after swim practice (this has already happened elsewhere), and claims he is transgender, how do we respond to the parents' and girls' complaints that their privacy has been violated? Do we make the boy submit to psychological testing to prove his transgender status? Will there be an appeal of that decision?

It's all amazingly stupid IMO.

EDIT: I like this writer's take on the subject:

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/american-society/law/federal-bathroom-war-transgender/

If we're going to do something like this, fine, but let's make it a decision that results from the political/judicial process, not from a Justice Department letter to all the public schools.

sancho
05-14-2016, 06:15 PM
We know who the predators of the world are.

I don't know what you mean or what you are proposing.

Are there statistics on those who are arrested for molestation, statutory, etc? I would expect all types of people would be represented. I have no idea if any groups would be overrepresented. I only personally know two people who have been arrested for these things. Both are gay, neither is transgender. Extremely limited sample size.

Diehard Ute
05-14-2016, 06:58 PM
I don't know what you mean or what you are proposing.

Are there statistics on those who are arrested for molestation, statutory, etc? I would expect all types of people would be represented. I have no idea if any groups would be overrepresented. I only personally know two people who have been arrested for these things. Both are gay, neither is transgender. Extremely limited sample size.

Yes. All of that stuff is tracked, it takes work to compile it, but there are definite profiles of all types of crimes.

We even know that actual rapists who are caught commit several rapes on average before they're caught (same for most who drive drunk)

NorthwestUteFan
05-16-2016, 04:10 PM
A close friend has a trans son who just turned 18.

He just wants to be able to walk into a stall in the men's bathroom and do his business, without showing his birth certificate or having some creepy legislator worry about what he has (or doesn't have) in his pants.

Two Utes
05-16-2016, 04:35 PM
A close friend has a trans son who just turned 18.

He just wants to be able to walk into a stall in the men's bathroom and do his business, without showing his birth certificate or having some creepy legislator worry about what he has (or doesn't have) in his pants.


So you need to genuinely help me understand this.

Before this all became an issue, anyone with a penis would go to the men's bathroom and anyone with a vagina would go to the girls bathroom (I realize we are setting aside the very few folks who have both, I juts don't want this to go on a tangent).

There were some folks who felt uncomfortable with this approach and want to be in a different bathroom because mentally they feel more like the opposite sex

Now, we are saying these folks shouldn't have to ever feel uncomfortable and should be able to go into the bathroom where mentally they feel best even if that makes others in the bathroom uncomfortable.

So we are basically shifting the uncomfortableness?

But probably if you are uncomfortable with the new approach, you must be a backwards ass idiot who is going to be brow beaten into submissiveness by social media?

Rocker Ute
05-16-2016, 05:45 PM
The real question is who is going to enforce these laws or non-laws or whatever and how are they going to do it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LA Ute
05-16-2016, 06:09 PM
The real question is who is going to enforce these laws or non-laws or whatever and how are they going to do it?

Ding-ding-ding-ding. It's questionable (understatement alert) whether the DOJ even has the authority to mandate this kind of action. All they can do is threaten to sue, based on a theory (not settled law). It actually looks like a trap. Many school districts will go predictably go nuts over this (many already have), politicians will jump on board, any enforcement lawsuit will get tons of news media coverage and will provide tons of wonderful sound bites by crazy people. Candidates everywhere will be asked their position on the issue. It will be this year's version of the "War on Women," except it will be the "War on the Transgendered." Republicans will, of course, be the big meanies in the trumped-up "war.".

NorthwestUteFan
05-16-2016, 08:42 PM
Here is part of the problem. Most of you would freak out if this guy followed your daughter into the Womens bathroom, wouldn't you? (this is not my friends' son). Would you ask him to see his birth certificate and check in his pants before allowing him into the restroom? Of course you wouldn't do that, you would simply go on your first impression of his face and general build.

1838

My friends' son has been living as a boy officially for 4 years, and has always dressed more like a boy. He did the binding thing for a long time but just had the top half surgery done within the past year. I have always known him as a boy and called him by his male name (officially had that changed a few years ago). Besides being sort of short for a man, he doesn't really look any differ than his cis male peers.

All he wants to do is go into a bathroom, do his business, and not have anybody make a big deal about anything. trans people have been using the bathroom of their choice since before running water, and in fact Brigham Youngs oldest son is thought tohave been a trans female (and was photographed in dresses). it is merely the fact that there is broad political support for lgbt+ issues in the community that this is even an issue now, and political groups are crying 'Wolf!' with sweeping legislation that causes exponentially more problems than it solves.

My advice to the world is to quit worrying about the genitalia of the person in the shitter next to you.

And besides, a trans person is statistically FAR less likely to be a pedophile or ephebophile than any straight person you would pass on the street.

LA Ute
05-17-2016, 12:07 AM
Here is part of the problem. Most of you would freak out if this guy followed your daughter into the Womens bathroom, wouldn't you? (this is not my friends' son). Would you ask him to see his birth certificate and check in his pants before allowing him into the restroom? Of course you wouldn't do that, you would simply go on your first impression of his face and general build.

1838

My friends' son has been living as a boy officially for 4 years, and has always dressed more like a boy. He did the binding thing for a long time but just had the top half surgery done within the past year. I have always known him as a boy and called him by his male name (officially had that changed a few years ago). Besides being sort of short for a man, he doesn't really look any differ than his cis male peers.

All he wants to do is go into a bathroom, do his business, and not have anybody make a big deal about anything. trans people have been using the bathroom of their choice since before running water, and in fact Brigham Youngs oldest son is thought tohave been a trans female (and was photographed in dresses). it is merely the fact that there is broad political support for lgbt+ issues in the community that this is even an issue now, and political groups are crying 'Wolf!' with sweeping legislation that causes exponentially more problems than it solves.

My advice to the world is to quit worrying about the genitalia of the person in the shitter next to you.

And besides, a trans person is statistically FAR less likely to be a pedophile or ephebophile than any straight person you would pass on the street.

I don't think most people are worried about trans people. They're worried about others taking advantage of the loophole the DOJ letter creates.

Rocker Ute
05-17-2016, 08:13 AM
Here is part of the problem. Most of you would freak out if this guy followed your daughter into the Womens bathroom, wouldn't you? (this is not my friends' son). Would you ask him to see his birth certificate and check in his pants before allowing him into the restroom? Of course you wouldn't do that, you would simply go on your first impression of his face and general build.

1838

My friends' son has been living as a boy officially for 4 years, and has always dressed more like a boy. He did the binding thing for a long time but just had the top half surgery done within the past year. I have always known him as a boy and called him by his male name (officially had that changed a few years ago). Besides being sort of short for a man, he doesn't really look any differ than his cis male peers.

All he wants to do is go into a bathroom, do his business, and not have anybody make a big deal about anything. trans people have been using the bathroom of their choice since before running water, and in fact Brigham Youngs oldest son is thought tohave been a trans female (and was photographed in dresses). it is merely the fact that there is broad political support for lgbt+ issues in the community that this is even an issue now, and political groups are crying 'Wolf!' with sweeping legislation that causes exponentially more problems than it solves.

My advice to the world is to quit worrying about the genitalia of the person in the shitter next to you.

And besides, a trans person is statistically FAR less likely to be a pedophile or ephebophile than any straight person you would pass on the street.

Brigham Young's son would dress up as an opera singer for skits. He was married and had 10 children. Even if he was a legit cross dresser that is also different from actual gender dysphoria. But who cares other than people advancing their own political agenda?

I'm unable to find any stats that show transgender people are less likely to be pedophiles. Given the relative low sample size though and also trends among all population I would guess they are likely on par with everyone else, but I'm interested to see where you are getting that stat if it exists.

LA is right that people are more worried about the 'loophole' it creates. Like I said, who is going to monitor this and as far as the loophole goes, is a teenaged boy really going to take on a trans label just to get a peek at girls in a locker room at school? I find it unlikely.

Much ado about nothing.

If your friends transgender son is that well established is he really having trouble in bathrooms from other people?

All of this talk reminds me of my Jr High policy of going to the bathroom at home. There were always some jerk kids hanging out giving everyone trouble or kicking you in the butt while you tried to take a leak. They were equal opportunity punks.

There was also a kid who hit puberty early, shaving in 7th grade and hairy as a monkey. He had the most hairy legs and it appeared to go straight up his shorts to his neck. Kids nicknamed him dingleberry.

In short, I don't think anyone felt comfortable in the bathroom or locker room.

sancho
05-17-2016, 08:29 AM
If your friends transgender son is that well established is he really having trouble in bathrooms from other people?


I had a conversation with a transgender friend yesterday. She is 4 years into the conversion process, and she still looks and sounds like a man. I imagine some people would be uncomfortable with her entering the women's locker room.

The photo Northwest posted is a good example, but there are also good examples in the other direction - transgender people who look much more like their biological gender than their psychological sex. So either way, people will be uncomfortable. If I were transgender, I would try to figure out which option would make the fewest people uncomfortable.

sancho
05-17-2016, 08:38 AM
Brigham Young's son would dress up as an opera singer for skits. He was married and had 10 children. Even if he was a legit cross dresser that is also different from actual gender dysphoria. But who cares other than people advancing their own political agenda?


Funny. I remember a period during the early gay rights era when headlines regularly would pop up with speculation that so-and-so beloved historical figure was gay. It was usually an immense stretch based on something the guy said or wore once or how he liked his tea. Maybe we can enter a new era where we do it every time we find a photo of a famous guy as a baby in his christening gown.

NorthwestUteFan
05-17-2016, 08:53 AM
It really isn't a problem. The laws in North Carolina and other places are creating a problem where none should exist. They actively passed a law that will exclude 0.003% of the population from shitting where they are comfortable, where the law could remain silent and nobody would be affected. I see the Obama administration's presidential order as a reaction to laws like this.

Students at a school in Seattle solved the problem themselves. They proposed to the that they could take a small Women's bathroom and convert it into an 'everybody' bathroom. Essentially they took a 3-stall restroom and converted it into a 2-stall restroom with bigger walls/doors for more privacy.

Frankly the biggest reason I would be nervous about using an 'everybody' bathroom is the risk of stinking up the joint or echoing a loud fart off the walls.

My friends' son came out to his friends several years ago and has been largely supported by friends and by school admin. The world is greatly evolved since I was in high school. There is little social cost for lgbt kids to come out, and therefore most kids have an acquaintance who is at least questioning his/her sexuality. When kids come out now, most of their friends will say, "Oh cool. {Hug} Did you finish your math homework?" I guess the anti-bullying campaigns over the last few decades have been effective.

My one close friend who came out in HS kept his secret for 5+ years, and then was subsequently shunned by everybody.

mUUser
05-17-2016, 09:33 AM
Here is part of the problem. Most of you would freak out if this guy followed your daughter into the Womens bathroom, wouldn't you? (this is not my friends' son). Would you ask him to see his birth certificate and check in his pants before allowing him into the restroom? Of course you wouldn't do that, you would simply go on your first impression of his face and general build.......

1838



I guess I'm not following. Yes, I'd be concerned if this guy followed my daughter/wife into the restroom, and would likely take a peek to see what was going on. And if him and two of his buddies followed them in, I'd rush my @ss in like my hair was on fire. You wouldn't? I apologize, but I'm not following your point......

Look, a few years ago I was concerned about gay marriage and the impact it would have on adoptions......really, our social structure in general. Today, I can't believe everyone isn't comfortable with legalizing gay marriage, especially those conservatives that want the government to take a smaller role in their lives. Do we really trust the government to determine which tax paying, law abiding citizens of sound mind should and should not have the same basic rights of all other tax paying, law abiding citizens of sound mind?

Anyway, the issue here has a "public safety" component that gay marriage simply doesn't have.

It's going to take a learning curve for most to get comfortable with this thing. Exercise some patience.

Also, I too would be interested in the studies that show a trans person is far less likely to be a sexual predator than a straight person. I actually believe you, but, you state it with such confidence that there must be a multitude of studies that demonstrate it.

sancho
05-17-2016, 09:42 AM
I guess I'm not following. Yes, I'd be concerned if this guy followed my daughter/wife into the restroom, and would likely take a peek to see what was going on. And if him and two of his buddies followed them in, I'd rush my @ss in like my hair was on fire. You wouldn't? I apologize, but I'm not following your point......


He's saying that the guy in the photo would be required to use the women's restroom by the NC law because that guy was born a gal. The NC law forces people to use the wrong restroom in this way.

Applejack
05-17-2016, 09:48 AM
This "issue" won't have the impact of gay marriage. Gay marriage impacted people's lives: look at the thousands of couples who now can marry each other (and divorce each other!). It was a movement that mattered.

This bathroom issue is just a cultural war fought by two political parties in an election year. You have the NC bathroom law (stupid) against the DOJ letter (stupid). In the end, we'll get the status quo. If you already look like a man (like the man in NWUF's post) you use the men's room-no one cares. If you look like a woman (like Sancho's friend) you continue to use the women's room. Either way, it works its way out without the government getting involved in our bathroom selection.

Dwight Schr-Ute
05-17-2016, 09:54 AM
It really isn't a problem. The laws in North Carolina and other places are creating a problem where none should exist. They actively passed a law that will exclude 0.003% of the population from shitting where they are comfortable, where the law could remain silent and nobody would be affected. I see the Obama administration's presidential order as a reaction to laws like this.



Right. I keep wanting to respond to LA's comment about a solution looking for a problem. That simply isn't the case. The most recent activity is a response to laws being passed that changed which bathroom a person to legally use. The irony about North Carolina's HB2 is that it st put more men in the women's room than it solved. These videos about women being emotionally triggered by bathrooms that are easier for sexual deviants to access, while ignoring the idea that it would now require a someone similar to the photo NWUF's shared to use the woman's restroom. Where are the videos addressing that? Talk about a solution looking for a problem.

mUUser
05-17-2016, 09:55 AM
He was born a girl? That's an amazing transformation.

I was thinking it was a guy in the early stages of transforming into a girl and was completely confused. I can see some of the surgery scars now. Thanks.......

Yes, he belongs in the boys restroom, and Caitlyn Jenner belongs in the girls restroom. Seems reasonable to draw a line somewhere, but I don't have a friggin' clue where that line should be drawn.

LA Ute
05-17-2016, 11:24 AM
Funny. I remember a period during the early gay rights era when headlines regularly would pop up with speculation that so-and-so beloved historical figure was gay. It was usually an immense stretch based on something the guy said or wore once or how he liked his tea. Maybe we can enter a new era where we do it every time we find a photo of a famous guy as a baby in his christening gown.

I'm hearing that both Lincoln and Jefferson were probably transgender. Washington's an open question -- not enough data. You can also find some hints in the New Testament that the Apostle Paul was too.

Rocker Ute
05-17-2016, 03:14 PM
I'm hearing that both Lincoln and Jefferson were probably transgender. Washington's an open question -- not enough data. You can also find some hints in the New Testament that the Apostle Paul was too.


Yeah, doesn't it feel like Paul was overcompensating for something with his views on women, if you know what I mean?

UTEopia
05-18-2016, 08:40 AM
With Texas now entering the fray, will this issue become as divisive and hateful as gay marriage?

LA Ute
05-18-2016, 08:59 AM
With Texas now entering the fray, will this issue become as divisive and hateful as gay marriage?

I have given up making political predictions after the way this year has gone. But I won't be surprised if we hear an awful lot about this between now and November.

UTEopia
05-18-2016, 12:22 PM
I have given up making political predictions after the way this year has gone. But I won't be surprised if we hear an awful lot about this between now and November.


I think the NC law and those like it were motivated almost totally by political efforts to energize the religious right so that they stay in the election this year. I think it had very little to do with protecting anyone while using the bathroom or the locker room. I don't think the law that they enacted does that anyway, but they have been successful in raising a hot topic button. I also do not believe that the Justice Department's reaction addresses the issue.

LA Ute
05-18-2016, 01:25 PM
I think the NC law and those like it were motivated almost totally by political efforts to energize the religious right so that they stay in the election this year. I think it had very little to do with protecting anyone while using the bathroom or the locker room. I don't think the law that they enacted does that anyway, but they have been successful in raising a hot topic button. I also do not believe that the Justice Department's reaction addresses the issue.

The Justice Department letter elevated the issue to every public school district in the nation. I think that was intentional. Every candidate, everywhere, will now be asked about it. Republicans, mainly, and some Democrats, will be baited into saying really stupid things (which is not very hard to do, as history has shown). Those stupid statements will generate additional news, and the candidates' opponents will then respond, and all candidates will then be asked about the matter in debates. And so on and so on and so on.

Diehard Ute
05-18-2016, 01:48 PM
The Justice Department letter elevated the issue to every public school district in the nation. I think that was intentional. Every candidate, everywhere, will now be asked about it. Republicans, mainly, and some Democrats, will be baited into saying really stupid things (which is not very hard to do, as history has shown). Those stupid statements will generate additional news, and the candidates' opponents will then respond, and all candidates will then be asked about the matter in debates. And so on and so on and so on.

And black helicopters will hover over bathrooms everywhere.

LA Ute
05-18-2016, 01:51 PM
And black helicopters will hover over bathrooms everywhere.

That would be too obvious. They'll use drones.

Rocker Ute
05-18-2016, 03:18 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BTDM9-ktgY
That would be too obvious. They'll use drones.

Dwight Schr-Ute
05-18-2016, 05:17 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BTDM9-ktgY

https://youtu.be/w0KtU45cXn0

NorthwestUteFan
05-18-2016, 06:57 PM
This is funny, as although it doesn't really work with Brigham Young's explanation of the God/Mary Amalgamation (Hubba Hubba).
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160519/27c9011159f91641b9bd7f20e3a3a1f0.jpg

NorthwestUteFan
05-18-2016, 07:17 PM
As bad as HB2 in NC is, the bathroom problem is only part of the issue.

It also changed the way a person can pursue a discrimination case for discriminatiin based on race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, or biological sex. Ad I understand it the bill would have effectively removed a State remedy for discrimination, practically forcing people to file a federal suit for any of these claims against an employer (e.g. the State no longer is concerned if an employer discriminates against an employee in the state.

It also forbade cities and counties from setting minimum wage, etc.

It was a mess all around.

U-Ute
05-20-2016, 03:38 PM
1841

Rocker Ute
05-20-2016, 03:39 PM
1841

HA HA HA HA. Twitter was made for Conan O'Brien and Conan O'Brien was made for twitter.

LA Ute
05-24-2016, 11:17 PM
Damon Linker:

Liberals' latest lazy cultural crusade
(http://theweek.com/articles/625892/liberals-latest-lazy-cultural-crusade)
(Damon's a liberal.)

UTEopia
05-25-2016, 12:03 PM
Damon Linker:

Liberals' latest lazy cultural crusade
(http://theweek.com/articles/625892/liberals-latest-lazy-cultural-crusade)
(Damon's a liberal.)

This guy is correct. The Obama administration was baited by political moves of the right calculated to get the religious right voters to the voting booth to vote against Democrats and Obama took the bait.

LA Ute
05-25-2016, 12:15 PM
This guy is correct. The Obama administration was baited by political moves of the right calculated to get the religious right voters to the voting booth to vote against Democrats and Obama took the bait.

I think it was the other way around. Remember the War on Women in 2012? That began with HHS requiring religious organizations to include abortifacients in their insurance plans. (The Little Sisters of the Poor Case came out of that and was just before the SCOTUS.) But Republican idiots got lured into making stupid statements, like that guy running for the Senate in Missouri. All in all, that ploy resulted in a net win for the White House. This 2016 letter from the DOJ about bathrooms is producing the same idiotic, over-the-top responses.

Diehard Ute
05-25-2016, 02:19 PM
I think it was the other way around. Remember the War on Women in 2012? That began with HHS requiring religious organizations to include abortifacients in their insurance plans. (The Little Sisters of the Poor Case came out of that and was just before the SCOTUS.) But Republican idiots got lured into making stupid statements, like that guy running for the Senate in Missouri. All in all, that ploy resulted in a net win for the White House. This 2016 letter from the DOJ about bathrooms is producing the same idiotic, over-the-top responses.

You mean like Utah's? I love that Utah's AG says this is classic federal overreach. The week after saying Utah has every right to tell a movie theater they can't serve beer while showing Deadpool.

The hypocrisy of Utah's elected officials is awesome. (Complain about the Feds telling Utah what to do, then in the same session pass laws telling SLC what they have to do. Comedy gold)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LA Ute
05-25-2016, 03:27 PM
You mean like Utah's? I love that Utah's AG says this is classic federal overreach. The week after saying Utah has every right to tell a movie theater they can't serve beer while showing Deadpool.

The hypocrisy of Utah's elected officials is awesome. (Complain about the Feds telling Utah what to do, then in the same session pass laws telling SLC what they have to do. Comedy gold)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, it was a stupid overreach that someone in the White House thinks is a clever move.

Diehard Ute
05-25-2016, 03:30 PM
Well, it was a stupid overreach that someone in the White House thinks is a clever move.

Completely missed the point


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LA Ute
05-25-2016, 03:41 PM
Completely missed the point


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was agreeing with anyone who says it's a federal overreach. I agreed with the rest of your post.

Diehard Ute
05-25-2016, 03:49 PM
I was agreeing with anyone who says it's a federal overreach. I agreed with the rest of your post.

So, what's your solution?

Obviously the fine folks in NC started the landslide, how does one stop it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LA Ute
05-25-2016, 04:05 PM
So, what's your solution?

Obviously the fine folks in NC started the landslide, how does one stop it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I will not defend the NC law. I will note that it was a reaction to a city ordinance in NC that did what the DOJ order wants to do nationally. A mass letter from the DOJ, with no Congressional action, that would make sweeping changes in a matter of personal privacy affecting millions of Americans (basically, almost every one of us) is a stupid way to make policy.

Let me ask you: A solution to what? Please describe the problem that needs to be solved, that the DOJ letter seeks to solve.

Diehard Ute
05-25-2016, 04:10 PM
I will not defend the NC law. I will note that it was a reaction to a city ordinance in NC that did what the DOJ order wants to do nationally. A mass letter from the DOJ, with no Congressional action, that would make sweeping changes in a matter of personal privacy affecting millions of Americans (basically, almost every one of us) is a stupid way to make policy.

Let me ask you: A solution to what? Please describe the problem that needs to be solved, that the DOJ letter seeks to solve.

Consistency. What's wrong with having such things consistent in our country?

And of course there's the real issue behind all of this. None of us should pretend for one second any of these politicians give a rats ass about any of us.

What they care about is power. And their ability to say they're the ruler of whatever plot of land we've been stupid enough to elect them to administer.

Maybe if their egos didn't demand they do things in the first place we'd still be operating on common sense on this issue.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

USS Utah
05-25-2016, 04:11 PM
I haven't posted about this before because I haven't really been following it. What little I have seen -- because some folks insist on leaping aboard the latest cause celebre and posting about it endlessly on social media -- has made both sides look incredibly silly, or stupid, or worse.

Apparently this topic has been lurking under the surface for a while now, if this July 28, 2015 piece in Time Magazine in any indication:

http://time.com/3974186/transgender-bathroom-debate/

Two Utes
05-25-2016, 04:12 PM
Consistency. What's wrong with not having such things consistent in our country?

And of course there's the real issue behind all of this. None of us should pretend for one second any of these politicians give a rats ass about any of us.

What they care about is power. And their ability to say they're the ruler of whatever plot of land we've been stupid enough to elect them to administer.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


We are all closet libertarians. Most of us are just too dumb to realize it and that's why politicians piss us off so much.

LA Ute
05-26-2016, 10:06 AM
Here's a piece in that right-wing transphobic rag, the New Yorker, by a Harvard Law School professor (who, I'm guessing, must have tenure already):

The Transgender Bathroom Debate and the Looming Title IX Crisis (http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/public-bathroom-regulations-could-create-a-title-ix-crisis)


She points out a bit of an inconsistency in the White House's approach to Title IX issues:


Quite apart from a possible legal right, it is reasonable to think that the appropriate bathrooms for transgender people to use are ones fitting their gender identities. But the parents’ rhetoric of federal overreach on Title IX is not off base. It is of course unexceptional for the federal government to enforce federal law. But, unlike the Education Department’s many regulations, the Dear Colleague letter is not law, because it wasn’t enacted through legal procedures, involving public input, that federal agencies must follow when making law. The Education Department’s rule that schools must provide prompt and equitable grievance procedures to hear complaints of Title IX sex discrimination results from that required process and is legally binding. But the agency chose not to have such a process for its missive on transgender students.

This is a familiar but controversial O.C.R. strategy. Its last Dear Colleague letter about Title IX, in 2011, said that sexual violence is a form of sexual harassment and is therefore sex discrimination. It detailed how colleges and universities must discipline perpetrators and prevent such incidents. It too came with a threat to cut off federal funds, and O.C.R. proceeded to investigate hundreds of schools for noncompliance. (O.C.R. found Harvard Law School, where I teach, in violation of certain terms of the Dear Colleague letter. I have been critical (https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/14/rethink-harvard-sexual-harassment-policy/HFDDiZN7nU2UwuUuWMnqbM/story.html) of the federal pressure on schools to adopt policies and procedures that deny fairness to accused students in the name of Title IX compliance.) Several lawsuits claiming that O.C.R. unlawfully promulgated and enforced the contents of its Dear Colleague letter on sexual violence are currently pending in the federal courts.

Whether or not the federal government acted unlawfully, it has now set in motion a potential Title IX collision course between its directives on sexual violence and on bathrooms. Schools attempting to comply with the federal bathroom policy have at least two possible ways of doing so: allow students to use sex-segregated bathrooms and locker rooms based on their gender identity, or move away from sex segregation (http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/whos-afraid-of-same-sex-bathrooms) of such facilities. The latter, gender-inclusive arrangement, which was in place in my college dormitory more than twenty years ago, is not uncommon on campuses, and a social movement to desegregate at least some portion of bathrooms is growing. Some colleges have made every bathroom on campus open to any gender, and this solution could well become a practical choice at K-12 public schools.

But there is also a growing sense that some females will not feel safe sharing bathrooms, shower rooms, or locker rooms with males. And if a female student claimed that a bathroom or locker room that her school had her share with male students caused her to feel sexually vulnerable and created a hostile environment, the complaint would be difficult to dismiss, particularly since the federal government has interpreted Title IX broadly and said that schools must try to prevent a hostile environment. This is not wholly hypothetical. Brandeis University found a male student responsible for sexual misconduct for looking at his boyfriend’s genitals while both were using a communal school shower. The disciplined student then sued the school for denying him basic fairness in its disciplinary process, and a federal court recently refused to dismiss the suit.

Applejack
05-26-2016, 12:07 PM
This is why politics is so stoopid:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/05/26/utah-dad-says-he-was-sucker-punched-at-walmart-for-taking-5-year-old-daughter-into-mens-bathroom/?tid=sm_tw

LA Ute
05-28-2016, 06:30 PM
Conservative Christian preacher's wife says to lay off Target:

http://www.faithit.com/jaci-lambert-straight-conservative-preachers-wife-target-transgender-bathrooms/?utm_content=buffer88dc4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Rocker Ute
05-28-2016, 07:45 PM
Thanks LA, that article made me want to claw my eyes out. Not because of her opinion, but because of her writing style. It may have caused me to lose my faith. Yeesh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LA Ute
05-29-2016, 02:33 PM
Thanks LA, that article made me want to claw my eyes out. Not because of her opinion, but because of her writing style. It may have caused me to lose my faith. Yeesh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hater.

Rocker Ute
05-29-2016, 09:39 PM
Hater.

Taters gonna tate.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160530/42a9832bbfc6e67c7e775bedab9b681a.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LA Ute
06-03-2016, 04:49 PM
This NPR story kind of fits here:

How Utah's Compromise Could Serve As A Model For Other States (http://www.npr.org/2016/06/01/480247305/how-the-utah-compromise-could-serve-as-a-model-law-for-other-states?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=religion)

Sullyute
06-03-2016, 06:52 PM
This NPR story kind of fits here:

How Utah's Compromise Could Serve As A Model For Other States (http://www.npr.org/2016/06/01/480247305/how-the-utah-compromise-could-serve-as-a-model-law-for-other-states?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=religion)

That was a really good interview and made Utah look very progressive and accepting compared to most of the stuff that comes from the Utah legislature.

LA Ute
06-03-2016, 06:57 PM
That was a really good interview and made Utah look very progressive and accepting compared to most of the stuff that comes from the Utah legislature.

This seems to be one of the rare times that bunch gets a very sensitive issue right.

NorthwestUteFan
06-03-2016, 07:46 PM
The culture might still think it should be illegal to trans-pee in the cis-pool, but the legislature somehow found a good balance here.

Rocker Ute
06-04-2016, 08:22 AM
The culture might still think it should be illegal to trans-pee in the cis-pool, but the legislature somehow found a good balance here.

For good or bad that 'somehow' is because the LDS church brought that to the table. That was a result of previous policies supported by the LDS church in Salt Lake City and THAT was a result of church leaders and LGBT leaders sitting down together monthly in private over the past few years.

Funny how it works when people sit down together and start talking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NorthwestUteFan
06-04-2016, 02:24 PM
Baby steps. But the situation in Utah is certainly better than in NC, Mississippi,Texas, etc.

The church leadership can fix the cultural problem by standing up in General Conference and telling members to love and accept their lgbt children and to stop kicking them out of the house because of it. That will make an immediate cultural improvement.

As it stands now my friend's trans son is required to be excommunicated according to the Church Handbook of Instructions because he had gender reassignment surgery. My Bishop refuses to even talk about doing anything like that, because he sees that requirement as unnecessarily hateful and destructive.

LA Ute
06-04-2016, 04:08 PM
As it stands now my friend's trans son is required to be excommunicated according to the Church Handbook of Instructions because he had gender reassignment surgery. My Bishop refuses to even talk about doing anything like that, because he sees that requirement as unnecessarily hateful and destructive.

Not quite. IIRC the Handbook says a disciplinary council must be held in such a case. The outcome is up to the council.

Rocker Ute
06-04-2016, 04:43 PM
My Bishop refuses to even talk about doing anything like that, because he sees that requirement as unnecessarily hateful and destructive.

If a bishop is operating a disciplinary council in the context of hate and destruction he's already screwed it up. Bizarre thing for a bishop to say if he gets the process.

Now if he said, "I don't think a disciplinary council is going to help this person..." Then yeah. Also LA is right, the outcome (such as excommunication) isn't pre-determined.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk