ThunderJam Posted January 28, 2008 Report Posted January 28, 2008 I've been super inactive lately, but thought Id log on real fast to toss this up. Where I live, montgomery county maryland, the county council has passed a bill to reduce any transgender discrimnation. Google "montgomery county transgender restrooms." They will actually allow biological males who identify themselves as females to use public women's restrooms, locker rooms, pool showers, etc. This includes in schools. Can you say pedophile heaven? Check it out, and post what you think. Btw it supposedly goes into effect Feb 20 if this group, whos homepage is www.notmyshower.com (LOL) doesn't get i think 25,000 signatures which would force a county wide vote on the bill.
SeVeR Posted January 28, 2008 Report Posted January 28, 2008 I don't see the pedophile argument, as male pedophiles can still use the male locker rooms without any problem. I do disagree with this bill if it allows male cross-dressers into female locker rooms. If all it takes is to put on a dress, then it's not hard to see how the new law would be abused. In the case of a male who has had gender-re!@#$%^&*ignment surgery, they obviously think of themselves of female, so i see no problem.
»D1st0rt Posted January 31, 2008 Report Posted January 31, 2008 lol mojo county they should be adding lanes to the beltway, not worrying about what dudes can go into the ladies' room
Aileron Posted February 1, 2008 Report Posted February 1, 2008 I saw mention about a similar thing out west, only it was a proposal at some sort of public school...I think it was an elementary school's restroom. I think I saw it on O'Reilly one time, which is a highly credible source. (Its highly credible because I'd bet there is a line of several million people waiting to point out any and all inaccuracies O'Reilly says, and since they didn't make a big protest out of it, I'd guess the proposal itself has actually attempted.) My gut tells me that there are far more Men who would try to cheat their way into a woman's locker room than there are men with trans gender issues. Also, this bill would also either allow minors to do this or be the predecessor of such a bill, so that goes double for the number of teenage-boys who would attempt that. And as for women with trans gender issues, they cannot use the facilities anyway due to biological construction, and will feel discriminated regardless. I'm sure there is a legal definition for male and female. The facilities should be regulated to that legal definition. A trans gender should go to the facility for which their legal definition qualifies as. I understand the problem. When these people go into a restroom, they identify their biological gender to anyone around them. Those people then may judge the person. If the person can't stand to be judged, than he or she is simply weak, and needs to toughen up. If they are ashamed they should re-evaluate their desires. I don't mean to sound cruel, but seeking sexual re!@#$%^&*ignment surgery without being prepared to deal with public embarr!@#$%^&*ment is like trying to take a five day hike in the desert without bringing any water. If they can't take the heat of going to the bathroom in front of strangers who couldn't care less of whom their leak-taking-partners are, how are they going to handle it when the bartender asks for their drivers license, or when an employer asks for a birth certificate?
Bak Posted February 5, 2008 Report Posted February 5, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Utpam0IGYac
ThunderJam Posted February 7, 2008 Author Report Posted February 7, 2008 Apparently a similar thing was proposed in.. I think it was minesota, and the minesota supreme court ruled that bathroom classifications are intended to mean biological sex. Havn't heard anything new bout this yet... As to how to solve it... with bathrooms i think it would be plausible to make a separate one-man bathroom for transgender individuals next to the normal multi-person male/femalse bathrooms. If a handicap individual restroom exists, i guess make it legal for them to use that? Obviously in places where restrooms are only single-person it really isn't an issue. The hassle is changing rooms, showers, lockers, etc... i tend to agree with the minesota case that you gotta restrict this biologically. I mean who is more important, the one transgender person, or the dozen people in the same changing facility that are made uncomfortable by that individuals presence.
SeVeR Posted February 8, 2008 Report Posted February 8, 2008 Thanks for the youtube link. I understand a little more about transgender people now. Still i agree with TJ, gender should be defined biologically. Only after someone has had "the snip" can you be sure they're serious. With kids like the one in the video, you can never be sure they're serious until they're older.
Recommended Posts