We'll show you!

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

A perspective with examples

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uzwMJAFWLtQ&feature=youtu.be

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[White Horseradish]

A perspective with examples

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uzwMJAFWLtQ&feature=youtu.be

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

That is roughly the equivalent of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98K_-PXPefo

Emotional appeal with exact same logic - punish many for misdeeds of a few.

[makattak]

That is roughly the equivalent of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98K_-PXPefo

Emotional appeal with exact same logic - punish many for misdeeds of a few.

Punish the "many"? 

The so-called transgender are 0.3% of the population.

What's your guess for the percentage of the population that are sexual predators? (That's the ENTIRE  population, not the number within the miniscule 0.3%)

[White Horseradish]

Punish the "many"? 

The so-called transgender are 0.3% of the population.

What's your guess for the percentage of the population that are sexual predators? (That's the ENTIRE  population, not the number within the miniscule 0.3%)

Why would I look at the percentage of the population? Only a tiny minority of them do anything related to what we are talking about. C&SD's video couldn't even come up with enough actual predators and had to lump in people who have not committed any crime (unless you count being a teenager a crime).

I don't know that we're looking at more than 10 people who are actual problems in this specific scenario. The number of people punished is certainly far greater. And the punished don't even necessarily fall into the TG category - see my earlier post about the lesbian pulled off the can with her pants down and tossed in jail.

The scope of the problem is tiny. The cure is worse than the disease.

[Sideways_8]

Punish the "many"? 

The so-called transgender are 0.3% of the population.

What's your guess for the percentage of the population that are sexual predators? (That's the ENTIRE  population, not the number within the miniscule 0.3%)

So, punish 0.3% of the population for? Oh wait, this goes back to why a social conservative will never get elected. Because, they, like the liberals can't keep their noses out of people's business. You can't legislate more freedom. You can only take away. All the arguments remind me of gun control based on what someone might do. If that's the case, hand in your guns now because you might go shoot some people. Odds aren't in your favor per history.

[White Horseradish]

All the arguments remind me of gun control based on what someone might do. If that's the case, hand in your guns now because you might go shoot some people. Odds aren't in your favor per history.

This bathroom thing is a sort of a "penis-free zone" that works just like a gun-free zone. Nobody checks, and the criminals ignore it.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/23/a-rape-survivor-speaks-out-about-transgender-bathrooms/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[makattak]

Why would I look at the percentage of the population? Only a tiny minority of them do anything related to what we are talking about. C&SD's video couldn't even come up with enough actual predators and had to lump in people who have not committed any crime (unless you count being a teenager a crime).

I don't know that we're looking at more than 10 people who are actual problems in this specific scenario. The number of people punished is certainly far greater. And the punished don't even necessarily fall into the TG category - see my earlier post about the lesbian pulled off the can with her pants down and tossed in jail.

The scope of the problem is tiny. The cure is worse than the disease.

Bravo. You studiously missed the point.

As you will note in my post, I SPECIFICALLY didn't claim the transgenders were sexual predators, which is why I pointed to the whole population.

The issue is not "OMG TEH GAYZOERS/TRANNY'S ARE ALL A BUNCH OF PREDATORS!!!", the issue is that actual predators will use this law to provide more opportunities for predation.

This is because the predators:

...are not only not right in the head, but will take great & unreasonable risks to satisfy their illicit sexual desires.

This stupid fight will make getting access to women and children easier. As noted, many of the predators aren't worried about "getting away with it"¹. That isn't the issue. This makes it easier for them to do it. Yes, they can enter bathrooms now, but the likelihood they will be caught just entering is high enough that it decreases the expected reward.

Decrease the risk of getting caught just for entering and you've now changed the calculation by said predators, as the predators that have already taken advantage of this stupidity have shown.



1:as in:

For me to see this as a problem, I would want to see more than one instance of someone doing something nefarious (that means things other than just being there and doing normal things done in such places) and getting away with it based on claiming to be trans. Some guy going peeping and getting in trouble doesn't qualify.

[Ron]

The scope of the problem is tiny. The cure is worse than the disease.

Very ironic statement.

Upending societies whole way of organizing bathrooms and locker rooms to accommodate folks who are mentally unbalanced or genuinely confused about what sex they are fits your above statement to a T. 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Taylor buehler, Norwood smith burned, Jason pomares


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Perd Hapley]

The problem is so tiny

That is roughly the equivalent of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98K_-PXPefo

Emotional appeal with exact same logic - punish many for misdeeds of a few.

Because segregating bathrooms by sex in exactly the same way we've been doing it for generations is "punishment."

[Ron]

And this is why conservatives lose elections. Because they worry more about being socially conservative than fiscally conservative. Please, call me when a candidate is fiscally conservative and not socially. Otherwise, the "conservative" candidates will lose because they try to legislate morality. I want a small government that stays out of my life fiscally and morally.

You might want to wake up from your delusional state.

You are getting neither SoCon or FisCon, all that has been offered up is Democrat light almost since I've been voting.

The so called "fiscal conservative social liberal" is a unicorn. They always end up being statists. the presuppositions that lead them to reject traditional morality nearly always cause them to buckle on fiscal issues.

Social liberals aren't about freedom but about replacing traditional morality with their moral system. The social liberal moral system demands government interference in everything and that costs money, tax money. It is also very authoritarian and they will not hesitate to use government force to impose their morality.

[Perd Hapley]

No, you cannot legislate morality. Unfortunately, we're headed rapidly toward a situation in which our moral views on the transgendered and the sexually confused are dictated by Washington, in much the same way it already dictates our policies on race.

I would like to live in a world where people don't feel like they need to write laws about the obvious things, like, "No boys in the girls' locker room," or "Just because you cut off your bits and take hormones, you are still not a girl, and not allowed in the girls' room." Unfortunately, we've tried to live in a world where morality - no, biological reality -  is optional. They turn things upside down, and then get upset when people want it set right.

Hooray. Progress.

[zxcvbob]

"Just because you cut off your bits and take hormones, you are still not a girl, and not allowed in the girls' room."

If you've cut off your "bits" and are taking female hormones, you probably *should* be using the girls' room.  But I don't know why we need a law about it one way or the other.

[Ron]

If you've cut off your "bits" and are taking female hormones, you probably *should* be using the girls' room.  But I don't know why we need a law about it one way or the other.

To make the heretics submit.

Like roo said earlier, rub the socons face in the reality that the progressives are in control and that all must bend the knee to their authority.

You have no right to control who you associate with, not even when you go into a room to drop a deuce.

[MechAg94]

If you've cut off your "bits" and are taking female hormones, you probably *should* be using the girls' room.  But I don't know why we need a law about it one way or the other.

1.  If people would just use a stall in the restroom they are dressing for, 95% of the time, no one would care.

2.  I agree we can't legislate morality.  Would someone please explain that to the activists who keep trying to use the laws and courts to destroy society's norms and standards?  Most of the laws conservatives are proposing/passing are just a reaction to these people constantly pushing the limits.  Most these bathroom laws are not even restrictive or onerous, but the activists act like it is a new civil rights batte.

[Perd Hapley]

But I don't know why we need a law about it one way or the other.

I guess it has something to do with the crybullies, or Obergefells, or whatever they're called, that throw tantrums every time some school wants to keep the status quo that's been working out for everybody for the past umpteen decades. In that past, such antics might have been safely ignored. Now, we have to use the patron/client sort of arrangement with local government, just to keep things civil.

[KD5NRH]

Even men's rooms, except at a few old sports stadiums where there was a long trough to pee in, there were stalls and dividers to maintain at least a little privacy.  You're not going to see anything unless you're looking for it.

Carlsbad Caverns.  The men's room in the cave.  As one walks in, the immediate view is pretty much straight down the line of urinals without dividers.  It's dark outside and bright inside, so women sometimes miss the essentially backlit signs.

The entry view would be about two feet to the right of where the camera is in this shot.  Looks like the photographer stepped in and then left to get out of the doorway.


At least twice during the 3 days we spent there, (most of that time in the cave) I looked over while taking a leak to greet some shocked looking woman who had suddenly realized she was in the wrong room.

"Good morning.  My eyes are up here."

[grampster]

I'm waiting for some folks to start getting some courage to tell the nitwits to bite the bag.  I liked that VP from Ohio State last week.  When a bunch of SJW crybabies tried to take control of the office of the President of the University making all sorts of dumb ass demands, a VP came out and said the President isn't interested in what you have to say and get the hell out of here before I call the cops and have you arrested. PS:  We'll also expel you.  They were horrified that someone in authority would challenge their BS and not knuckle under.  PPS:  They all left.

Edited to add:  Someone told me that wasn't OSU but another smaller Ohio college.  Don't know for sure.

[White Horseradish]

Because segregating bathrooms by sex in exactly the same way we've been doing it for generations is "punishment."

No.

Punishment is legally requiring someone who looks like this to use the mens facilities.



These people have a very real chance of being killed if they are outed as being trans. Happens all the time. That seems like a punishment to me.

Their other option is to break the law. In which case, they get what that lesbian from my previous post got -  a beating from the cops and some jail.  Which she got not even being TG.

Maybe getting beaten and locked up is something you do for fun, but for most people that meets the definition of punishment.

[KD5NRH]

Punishment is legally requiring someone who looks like this to use the mens facilities.

In cases like that, unless he/she/it is standing by the sinks and peeing over the stall doors or ogling the other users with a visible erection, how is anybody going to know what equipment is under the skirt?

Pretty sure no one would raise a stink about what certainly appears to be a woman using the women's room in a normal manner, but when you get one with five o'clock shadow wanting to hang out in the women's room or shower with the schoolgirls, that's where people are getting concerned.

[makattak]

These people have a very real chance of being killed if they are outed as being trans. Happens all the time. That seems like a punishment to me.

That is roughly the equivalent of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98K_-PXPefo

Emotional appeal with exact same logic

A "very real chance"? "Happens all the time?" What's the percentage on that? How many have been murdered in this country, in the past 30 years after being outed?

[MechAg94]

makattak beat me to it. 

[Boomhauer]

A "very real chance"? "Happens all the time?" What's the percentage on that? How many have been murdered in this country, in the past 30 years after being outed?

Seems to me the SJWs would be screaming about tranny murders instead of bathrooms if this were the case.

[Perd Hapley]

No.

Punishment is legally requiring someone who looks like this to use the mens facilities.



These people have a very real chance of being killed if they are outed as being trans. Happens all the time. That seems like a punishment to me.

Their other option is to break the law. In which case, they get what that lesbian from my previous post got -  a beating from the cops and some jail.  Which she got not even being TG.

Maybe getting beaten and locked up is something you do for fun, but for most people that meets the definition of punishment.

So the individual in the photo is a man, who has or did have man parts, and chooses to look like a woman, apparently. I presume he was identifiably one sex or the other at birth, as I think that's what we're talking about. If he were told to use the men's restroom, that would be a punishment? A punishment, as in something that's optional, but intentionally done to someone, to make them pay for wrong-doing? The problem with that is, not all consequences are punishments. Especially not when the consequences are really just being told to use the appropriate restroom.

And then you'd have us a believe that, when a woman (or a pseudo-woman) is found to be using a men's room stall, they are going to be beaten up by police or security, or something? Why would you expect that to happen?