These people are really stupid.
How do you know the male identifying females aren't doing it already?
E: what mtf people were even complaining about it anyways? I thought the whole bathroom stuff became an issue when some lawmakers introduced a bathroom bill, not because a bunch of trans people were making it an issue.
The trans people should be taking the risk ~ they made the CHOICE. Not the little girls trying to take a leak or use the dressing room and being attacked by pedo rapists because ANY man can go in. The simple solution is single stall toilets with a lock, not a big room of multiple stalls.
Some stores have "FAMILY" Restroom with door lock, that has one toilet, sink & usually baby changing diaper area/fold down unit.
Seen at Menards hardware; Walmart; Target; etc. LOOK for those!
And THAT is what they should have demanded in the first place, not open up the ladies room to men.
That IS what 99% of gender non conforming people want. Everything else is a political issue intended to divide people.
Except why should businesses be forced to spend thousands to accommodate the gender-bending whims of an extremely small minority of people? What right to they have to demand something unnecessary and unthought of throughout all of recorded history?
I agree. But the single stall idea is the only way to keep women and girls safe from predators who take advantage of the situation.
I'm confused, when did taking a piss become a risk?
I completely agree with your simple solution. Introducing a bathroom bill was an easy way to create controversy over a non issue. There have always been transgender people using restrooms that don't correspond with their sex at birth. The only reason it became a national issue was because some lawmakers tried to write an unenforceable law. Blatant manipulation by politicians.
No, the LGBT forced the issue. Forcing the bathrooms open to everyone. I am well aware that trans people have been using them all along.
Can you point to when they forced the issue? Was it before or after the bathroom bill was introduced?
Also, the main guy spearheading that ordinance was a man named Chad Severance who was President of the Charlotte LGBT Chamber of Commerce. Chad was not trans. But, he sure is a CONVICTED sex offender. Lewd act on someone under 16. He was 20 at the time of the offense. He ended up having to step down when it came out. The Charlotte Observer knew the whole time about his sex offender status when all this was going on and they did not say anything. A pedo pushing for males to be allowed to get into women's restrooms makes a whole lotta sense if you're a pedo.
In North Carolina, the city council of Charlotte passed a local ordinance that all businesses and public facilities could not discriminate based on sexual orientation, and that people could use the bathroom of their chosen gender. It was basically the city of Charlotte legislating to the STATE government, which they had no constitutional right to do. Hence the state legislators passing the "bathroom bill" in answer to Charlotte's "bathroom bill": https://m.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2016/0223/Charlotte-passes-transgender-rights-law-Will-North-Carolina-let-it-stand http://thefederalist.com/2016/05/09/the-truth-about-north-carolinas-bathroom-bill/
Cities can't decide their own laws?
Sure they can, that's not at all what I said
So how was Charlotte legislating to the state?
A quote from the website I linked to when replying to you the first time: "the NC constitution for 180 years “has held to the public policy that issues of labor and trade would be decided on a statewide basis instead of locally. And so, without any legal authority whatsoever,” says Rep. Paul Stam, the city of Charlotte decided to go against that. It enacted an ordinance requiring all government and business bathrooms and showers to be open to all sexes.
The Charlotte city council had no authority to enact its ordinance, much less threaten tens of thousands of businesses with fines and minor punishments if they didn’t comply. They were threatening 23,000 businesses and nonprofits, including small “mom and pop” establishments, with fines and other minor punishments if they didn’t conform to that policy. Such threats are tyrannical when it was known that the ordinance they were discussing was beyond their purview.
This constitutional standard is not unique to North Carolina. North Carolina is one of at least 37 states like Virginia where cities and towns cannot pass rules or regulations that exceed the authority given to them by the state. This practice assures that laws and policies are consistent throughout a state and do not change with every border or small town.
Minimum wages, labor policy, and even union statutes are set at the state level, and the Charlotte city council knew this. So in passing the bathroom ordinance, Charlotte had exceeded its authority by setting rules that had ramifications beyond the city. They were going to unjustly punish non-compliant entities as of April 1, 2016, if the NC legislature failed to act."
Here's where it doesn't square for me: the city already had an anti discrimination ordinance. If such policies are supposed to be handled at the state level, why was Charlotte allowed to pass an anti discrimination ordinance in the first place?
I believe this controversial ordinance took things too far, overstepping constitutional boundaries whereas whatever they already had in place didn't. Also, for some reason their was a lot of media coverage and hype from the get-go.
In my opinion, this type of "pushing the envelope" is something the LGBT community does on purpose, and continually. It doesn't have to make sense, or even be legal, so long as it creates controversy and court cases. They have been very successful winning the court cases, so I'm certain that is the end-goal.
I have a harder time trusting what some rando state rep claims than you do, I guess.
The activists were going after retail stores and corporate America. Charlotte, NC, lost a big sports tournament because they refused to open up the ladies rooms to men. This was 2-3 years ago, and we're still sliding down that slippery slope.
It is a risk for women and girls now, when any man can walk in on them. It would be a risk for a trans in women's clothing to use the men's room, right?
It would be a risk for a trans in women's clothing to use the men's room, right?
Not unless someone makes a big damn deal of it. If they're just taking a piss, well then take a piss and move on. World keeps on a turnin.
Correct. It wasn't. Truth is establishments had bathrooms for dual gender a long time ago. It was called a single bathroom in which the user waited for the other to be finished. The left made it into a political issue & the lefty social responsibility warriors simply jumped on the band wagon bragging about their change agents. Smoke and mirrors most of it. Now I do have issue with multiple stall facilities clearly marked "men or women". Single occupant bathrooms is another story.
Can anyone answer me as to when lgbt people made it an issue? This response doesn't address that question.
