Jump to content


* - - - - 1 votes

What do you think about Target Transgender Bathroom Policy


#91 Syntax Error   Art School Dropout CAGiversary!   10957 Posts   Joined 6.9 Years Ago  

Syntax Error

Posted 11 June 2016 - 02:54 PM

It's not so much having the ID to vote, but it's more of using the fact that you HAVE TO GET an ID as a barrier to vote. Poor people generally have to work all day and they live by their paycheck. That definitely does not give them the time to go to the DMV, which in many states is a challenge in of itself.

That and also difficulties in accessing the supporting information: birth certificates, proof of residency, Social Security cards, etc.  It's enough of a headache to get a replacement birth certificate when you're middle class.



#92 Syntax Error   Art School Dropout CAGiversary!   10957 Posts   Joined 6.9 Years Ago  

Syntax Error

Posted 11 June 2016 - 02:57 PM

And appearance makes sense? So you you would leave it all up to something that is purely subjective? By that reasoning if I put some lipstick on I should be able to go into a ladies room all I want because to me I am acceptable [...] Or I can just say "I found out I am a woman like 15 minutes ago, I can go in the ladies room"

Is this something you (as an assumed biological male) are planning on doing?  No?  Neither is anyone else, really.



#93 TheN8torious   Shhh...I'm Invisible CAGiversary!   16939 Posts   Joined 12.7 Years Ago  

TheN8torious

Posted 11 June 2016 - 06:08 PM

And appearance makes sense? So you you would leave it all up to something that is purely subjective? By that reasoning if I put some lipstick on I should be able to go into a ladies room all I want because to me I am acceptable, then I can sue the store for denying me entrance because from their view point I am not passable as a woman. Or I can just say "I found out I am a woman like 15 minutes ago, I can go in the ladies room" and what law is there to say otherwise? Do we need to have gender police around the country now to be called when a business decides a person doesnt look enough like the opposite sex to use the restroom?

 

And why is just now suddenly not ok to just have men in mens rooms and women in womens restrooms? It seems to have worked so far for the past 100 years.

 

And why does no one consider the people who are made uncomfortable by them being there? If a trans persons feelings matter so much then why dont the feelings of people who arent trans? Again, it goes back to the minority getting what they want because they yell the loudest, that isnt exactly a way you should decide on a law or rule. Giving a small group what they want purely for the sake of not wanting negative press is not a good way to make decisions, on any subject matter. Rules whether they be in a county, a state, or the whole country should be made with the good of the whole in mind.

I like how you take my reasonable, rational suggestion and turn it into something ridiculous because it fits a preconceived idea that you have. Show me where i suggest a man just throw on some lipstick and claim he's a woman. That's not remotely close to what I'm talking about. But I guess that's the problem if you believe ANY transgender woman is "a man in lipstick".

 

As for the "gender police", I don't see how that situation is any different than trying to enforce HB2 now. Since my appearance idea and people not being able to tell seemed silly to you, are we going to check birth certificates and ask people to pull their pants down before we let them use the bathroom? Is that more realistic? Sure, you'll catch obvious cases, but you would have caught those anyway. The difference is, you're now making it illegal for actual transgender people to use the bathroom that makes sense.

 

Again, Shawn Stinson...was born a female. If he went into the women's restroom as HB2 demands, are you honestly trying to suggest there wouldn't be an absolute shitstorm of people feeling uncomfortable and wondering why there's "a man in the ladies room"? So, for him to not create mass hysteria and have the police called, he has to break the law and use the men's room. That's how much sense HB2 makes...

 

So, what is the alternative then? If people like Stinson (which to me is the actual transgender demographic...people who believe in their hearts that they were born the wrong gender and have taken steps to transition. It's not Uncle Larry putting on a dress to be funny) can't use the men's room. And it makes everyone uncomfortable if he goes into the women's room. Where do transgender people go? Oh, right...as far away from society as possible since they're just a bunch of sick, perverted freaks.

 

That's the endgame of the HB2 argument. And it's insulting to act like the rest of the world isn't smart enough to figure it out. It is willful discrimination against a group out of fear that a few people might take advantage. Hell, if that's the way we function now, shouldn't all of Wall Street be ostracized too?



#94 slowdive21   CAG Elder CAGiversary!   12572 Posts   Joined 12.7 Years Ago  

slowdive21

Posted 12 June 2016 - 12:50 AM

I'm left handed and I demand all establishments have revolving doors. It doesn't matter the cost or what it will do the the building structurally. It doesn't matter that only 10% of the world population is left handed. The world should adjust to me!

 

Sounds ridiculous doesn't it? Now imagine the people demanding the change are less than 1% of the population.

 

 

---

 

Insert a meme reply or "false equivalence")  here because someone on the fringe disagrees with common sense.



#95 RedvsBlue  

RedvsBlue

Posted 12 June 2016 - 02:04 AM

I'm left handed and I demand all establishments have revolving doors. It doesn't matter the cost or what it will do the the building structurally. It doesn't matter that only 10% of the world population is left handed. The world should adjust to me!

Sounds ridiculous doesn't it? Now imagine the people demanding the change are less than 1% of the population.


---

Insert a meme reply or "false equivalence") here because someone on the fringe disagrees with common sense.

Well, for one, there's no nexus between being left handed and revolving doors.

For two, no one is asking businesses to spend any money on bathrooms just to allow transgender people to continue using the bathroom in which they feel most comfortable. You know, like they've already been doing without incident for the previous however many years there's been transgender people and public bathrooms.

#96 slowdive21   CAG Elder CAGiversary!   12572 Posts   Joined 12.7 Years Ago  

slowdive21

Posted 12 June 2016 - 03:00 AM

Well, for one, there's no nexus between being left handed and revolving doors.

For two, no one is asking businesses to spend any money on bathrooms just to allow transgender people to continue using the bathroom in which they feel most comfortable. You know, like they've already been doing without incident for the previous however many years there's been transgender people and public bathrooms.

1) Revolving doors can use either hand or both hands where regular doors usually require the right hand. The reason I said revolving doors is because it is a universal door ie the same as a universal communal bathroom with no gender requirements.

 

2) Yes, in Chicago people are complaining because single stall bathrooms with signs that state "family" or "unisex" are being removed because they do not have the boy boy/girl  girl logo on the sign. That is like a guy with a cane complaining about the disabled sign not being inclusive because it does not show every variation of disabilities. It costs everyone money and time.

 

Remember this thread is about Target policy, not HB2. Some of you are clouding the issue by making it about NC.



#97 RedvsBlue  

RedvsBlue

Posted 12 June 2016 - 12:43 PM

1) Revolving doors can use either hand or both hands where regular doors usually require the right hand. The reason I said revolving doors is because it is a universal door ie the same as a universal communal bathroom with no gender requirements.

2) Yes, in Chicago people are complaining because single stall bathrooms with signs that state "family" or "unisex" are being removed because they do not have the boy boy/girl girl logo on the sign. That is like a guy with a cane complaining about the disabled sign not being inclusive because it does not show every variation of disabilities. It costs everyone money and time.

Remember this thread is about Target policy, not HB2. Some of you are clouding the issue by making it about NC.

You're talking in circles but ok, sure let's talk about Target. A company that decided, independently, to make a statement saying their customers were free to use whichever bathroom they were more comfortable in. They weren't forced to do anything by any groups and they didn't spend any money doing this. Well, aside from the salary of an employee to write up the press release.

So, tell me, how were they forced to spend any money on "revolving doors"? They weren't. You're talking about a separate issue here involving Chicago, not Target's voluntary statement regarding their own bathrooms, so do you want to stay on topic regarding the Target bathrooms or talk about complaints in Chicago?

#98 slowdive21   CAG Elder CAGiversary!   12572 Posts   Joined 12.7 Years Ago  

slowdive21

Posted 12 June 2016 - 02:21 PM

You're talking in circles but ok, sure let's talk about Target. A company that decided, independently, to make a statement saying their customers were free to use whichever bathroom they were more comfortable in. They weren't forced to do anything by any groups and they didn't spend any money doing this. Well, aside from the salary of an employee to write up the press release.

So, tell me, how were they forced to spend any money on "revolving doors"? They weren't. You're talking about a separate issue here involving Chicago, not Target's voluntary statement regarding their own bathrooms, so do you want to stay on topic regarding the Target bathrooms or talk about complaints in Chicago?

I'm not talking in circles. I think most people are against HB2. I was addressing the general issue, acknowledging that it is separate from the initial reason for the thread, and explaining the cost/actions needed to bend to the will of people that are noting more than statistical outlier. I'm sorry you couldn't follow what I was saying.

 

In terms of the target policy: Their policy creates discrimination by only allowing self-identifying transgender people to use a different restroom. If they were really for equality anyone could use any bathroom they would like to without moral or legal repercussions. If they are going to call the cops on a genetic male using a women's restroom, then they are hypocrites.



#99 Mrclark2  

Mrclark2

Posted 10 November 2016 - 01:19 AM

You can pull the stem off an apple and paint it orange but it's still an apple.

I'm not against transgenders. I'm against people who are not the majority try and force everyone else to please them and make concessions for them as if they deserve special treatment. This is how problems start, very small. Give someone an inch they take it a mile. Then others want to be treated special and unique above all others. Then one day you have a major lawsuit because a normal guy goes in the ladies room and sues for being thrown out saying "I feel like a woman, prove I don't. I just started my journey". Then you have to make rules like transgenders can go in other bathrooms if they are dressed as that gender, or have had surgery, a note from a psychiatrist.

Everyone says they need to be made comfortable, but what about the people made uncomfortable?

#100 detectiveconan16   Delicious! CAGiversary!   7124 Posts   Joined 12.2 Years Ago  

detectiveconan16

Posted 10 November 2016 - 02:56 AM

They want to use a bathroom with a privacy stall. Is that so hard to understand?