Transgenders and bathrooms....

[EMom]

If there are only two bathroom stalls, then priority goes to anyone who NEEDS to use the stall to pee, poop or is on their period, IMHO. If I fell into that category and I had only a few minutes to do my business AND get changed and on the dance floor, only to find the stalls occupied by girls changing clothes in private, I would not be happy. That's why they all change in the big, mirrored room. They don't like it, but it's the courteous thing to do.

 

[Mrs. Ciz]

Really? Really! You think that's what Maistre Gracey meant??!!!

Whether or not he mean it to go that far, it does apply.
That's one of the problems with the whole tolerant of intolerance argument. If you want to make the argument that people calling for tolerance must extend that to intolerant people and their actions, you can't pick and choose which intolerant people it extends to.
Of course another big problem with it is the whole argument is usually only used by someone wanting to discriminate against another group.
It's not the clever point to call out hypocrisy people who use it think it is. It's a distortion of what tolerance and intolerance really mean and how those words are many to be applied.

First I want to say that in NO WAY do I believe a transgender is going to attack someone in a public bathroom. I do not buy into that fear mongering at all. What does concern me is the comfort and privacy of ALL individuals, not just transgender people.

I will try to explain the way I took it, and it has nothing to do with David Duke. This whole issue has to do with making transgender people feel comfortable when using a bathroom or locker room. Some judges, courts and schools believe that Title IX pertains to actual biological gender, not the gender one identifies with. Other judges, courts and schools believe Title IX does apply to gender identity. The legal world is currently split on this. In my state, the district court ruled IX does not apply to gender identity. The appellate court said it does apply. There are currently many other cases pending in other states.

The whole issue started in my state (Virginia) because a transgender (female to male) named Glen was uncomfortable using the girls facilities and wanted to use the boys facilities. Boys and parents were uncomfortable with Glen in the boys facilities so alternate unisex facilities were provided for Glen. Glen didn't like that either, so he took the school to court and eventually won. Uncomfortable boys now need to use the single separate unisex facility if they want privacy. The biological boys being uncomfortable is not unique to this case. Biological boys in San Diego were uncomfortable in the same situation. Biological girls were uncomfortable in Illinois and New York.

Some folks have said the biological boys and biological girls should be more accepting... it's the adults that have the problem...these kids just need to get over it and not be body conscious or uncomfortable. Easier said than done. Teens are by nature body conscious anyway. In schools, the transgender kids are not anonymous; pretty much everyone knows what plumbing they have. It is not crazy to think that bio girls would be uncomfortable with a transgender male to female in their open locker room when they are changing. Or that bio boys would be uncomfortable with a transgender female to male walking in when the bio boys are using the urinal.

If this whole thing is about a transgender person being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of his or her choice than it HAS to also be about all kids (including bio kids) being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of their bio sex. The rights of all kids have to be protected, not just the transgender's rights. The way things currently are it seems that the transgender's right to feel comfortable supersedes the bio kids' right to be comfortable. I cannot agree with this. But hey, I also disagree with whole schools being peanut free when peanut allergy kids attend. I think that takes away the rest of the students' right to enjoy peanut butter. I support having a peanut free table in the lunchroom and hand washing /desk washing protocols to protect the peanut allergy child. The peanut allergy child in protected, other kids' rights to have peanut butter are intact. I don't feel the Title IX current bathroom/ locker room policy protects the rights of all.

In New York, 18 bio girls on a recreational club swim team were uncomfortable changing (swimsuits, so they have to get totally naked) and showering in the girls locker room after it was open to and used by a transgender person. When they expressed concern, they were told that if they want privacy they needed to use the single unisex family bathroom. So now all 18 girls are trying to change and shower in a small family bathroom with 1 shower head. I really don't think this is a solution to the problem! Retrofitting everything everywhere is not practical either. It will cost millions of dollars and years to do it all. There has to be a way to protect the right of comfort and privacy for ALL people. My insistence on this does not mean I support David Duke and his horrible ideas!

Here are links to support the examples I've given.

Virginia: http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/152056.P.pdf

New York: http://time.com/4324687/even-in-liberal-communities-transgender-bathroom-laws-worry-parents/

Illinois (yes, I realize this is a conservative publication) http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/21/w...t-transgender-student-a-in-their-locker-room/

San Diego http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/feb/09/transgender-restrooms-locker-rooms-high-school/

 

[mjkacmom]

First I want to say that in NO WAY do I believe a transgender is going to attack someone in a public bathroom. I do not buy into that fear mongering at all. What does concern me is the comfort and privacy of ALL individuals, not just transgender people.

I will try to explain the way I took it, and it has nothing to do with David Duke. This whole issue has to do with making transgender people feel comfortable when using a bathroom or locker room. Some judges, courts and schools believe that Title IX pertains to actual biological gender, not the gender one identifies with. Other judges, courts and schools believe Title IX does apply to gender identity. The legal world is currently split on this. In my state, the district court ruled IX does not apply to gender identity. The appellate court said it does apply. There are currently many other cases pending in other states.

The whole issue started in my state (Virginia) because a transgender (female to male) named Glen was uncomfortable using the girls facilities and wanted to use the boys facilities. Boys and parents were uncomfortable with Glen in the boys facilities so alternate unisex facilities were provided for Glen. Glen didn't like that either, so he took the school to court and eventually won. Uncomfortable boys now need to use the single separate unisex facility if they want privacy. The biological boys being uncomfortable is not unique to this case. Biological boys in San Diego were uncomfortable in the same situation. Biological girls were uncomfortable in Illinois and New York.

Some folks have said the biological boys and biological girls should be more accepting... it's the adults that have the problem...these kids just need to get over it and not be body conscious or uncomfortable. Easier said than done. Teens are by nature body conscious anyway. In schools, the transgender kids are not anonymous; pretty much everyone knows what plumbing they have. It is not crazy to think that bio girls would be uncomfortable with a transgender male to female in their open locker room when they are changing. Or that bio boys would be uncomfortable with a transgender female to male walking in when the bio boys are using the urinal.

If this whole thing is about a transgender person being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of his or her choice than it HAS to also be about all kids (including bio kids) being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of their bio sex. The rights of all kids have to be protected, not just the transgender's rights. The way things currently are it seems that the transgender's right to feel comfortable supersedes the bio kids' right to be comfortable. I cannot agree with this. But hey, I also disagree with whole schools being peanut free when peanut allergy kids attend. I think that takes away the rest of the students' right to enjoy peanut butter. I support having a peanut free table in the lunchroom and hand washing /desk washing protocols to protect the peanut allergy child. The peanut allergy child in protected, other kids' rights to have peanut butter are intact. I don't feel the Title IX current bathroom/ locker room policy protects the rights of all.

In New York, 18 bio girls on a recreational club swim team were uncomfortable changing (swimsuits, so they have to get totally naked) and showering in the girls locker room after it was open to and used by a transgender person. When they expressed concern, they were told that if they want privacy they needed to use the single unisex family bathroom. So now all 18 girls are trying to change and shower in a small family bathroom with 1 shower head. I really don't think this is a solution to the problem! Retrofitting everything everywhere is not practical either. It will cost millions of dollars and years to do it all. There has to be a way to protect the right of comfort and privacy for ALL people. My insistence on this does not mean I support David Duke and his horrible ideas!

Here are links to support the examples I've given.

Virginia: http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/152056.P.pdf

New York: http://time.com/4324687/even-in-liberal-communities-transgender-bathroom-laws-worry-parents/

Illinois (yes, I realize this is a conservative publication) http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/21/w...t-transgender-student-a-in-their-locker-room/

San Diego http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/feb/09/transgender-restrooms-locker-rooms-high-school/

We had a trans female to male at our school, he used the boys locker room and bathroom. At least here, it was a total non- issue. What about openly gay students? Would these boys so offended by a trans male be okay with an openly gay boy getting dressed nest to them? Because that does happen every day.

 

[sunshinehighway]

First I want to say that in NO WAY do I believe a transgender is going to attack someone in a public bathroom. I do not buy into that fear mongering at all. What does concern me is the comfort and privacy of ALL individuals, not just transgender people.

I will try to explain the way I took it, and it has nothing to do with David Duke. This whole issue has to do with making transgender people feel comfortable when using a bathroom or locker room. Some judges, courts and schools believe that Title IX pertains to actual biological gender, not the gender one identifies with. Other judges, courts and schools believe Title IX does apply to gender identity. The legal world is currently split on this. In my state, the district court ruled IX does not apply to gender identity. The appellate court said it does apply. There are currently many other cases pending in other states.

The whole issue started in my state (Virginia) because a transgender (female to male) named Glen was uncomfortable using the girls facilities and wanted to use the boys facilities. Boys and parents were uncomfortable with Glen in the boys facilities so alternate unisex facilities were provided for Glen. Glen didn't like that either, so he took the school to court and eventually won. Uncomfortable boys now need to use the single separate unisex facility if they want privacy. The biological boys being uncomfortable is not unique to this case. Biological boys in San Diego were uncomfortable in the same situation. Biological girls were uncomfortable in Illinois and New York.

Some folks have said the biological boys and biological girls should be more accepting... it's the adults that have the problem...these kids just need to get over it and not be body conscious or uncomfortable. Easier said than done. Teens are by nature body conscious anyway. In schools, the transgender kids are not anonymous; pretty much everyone knows what plumbing they have. It is not crazy to think that bio girls would be uncomfortable with a transgender male to female in their open locker room when they are changing. Or that bio boys would be uncomfortable with a transgender female to male walking in when the bio boys are using the urinal.

If this whole thing is about a transgender person being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of his or her choice than it HAS to also be about all kids (including bio kids) being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of their bio sex. The rights of all kids have to be protected, not just the transgender's rights. The way things currently are it seems that the transgender's right to feel comfortable supersedes the bio kids' right to be comfortable. I cannot agree with this. But hey, I also disagree with whole schools being peanut free when peanut allergy kids attend. I think that takes away the rest of the students' right to enjoy peanut butter. I support having a peanut free table in the lunchroom and hand washing /desk washing protocols to protect the peanut allergy child. The peanut allergy child in protected, other kids' rights to have peanut butter are intact. I don't feel the Title IX current bathroom/ locker room policy protects the rights of all.

In New York, 18 bio girls on a recreational club swim team were uncomfortable changing (swimsuits, so they have to get totally naked) and showering in the girls locker room after it was open to and used by a transgender person. When they expressed concern, they were told that if they want privacy they needed to use the single unisex family bathroom. So now all 18 girls are trying to change and shower in a small family bathroom with 1 shower head. I really don't think this is a solution to the problem! Retrofitting everything everywhere is not practical either. It will cost millions of dollars and years to do it all. There has to be a way to protect the right of comfort and privacy for ALL people. My insistence on this does not mean I support David Duke and his horrible ideas!

Here are links to support the examples I've given.

Virginia: http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/152056.P.pdf

New York: http://time.com/4324687/even-in-liberal-communities-transgender-bathroom-laws-worry-parents/

Illinois (yes, I realize this is a conservative publication) http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/21/w...t-transgender-student-a-in-their-locker-room/

San Diego http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/feb/09/transgender-restrooms-locker-rooms-high-school/

I was talking about the previous poster's thoughts that one can't disagree with someone's intolerance without being considered intolerant themselves. I don't think the David Duke reference was meant to apply specifically to this issue but that general idea stated by a previous poster.
Nobody was trying to say you either support transgender rights or you support David Duke. I certainly wasn't saying that, nor do I think that.

 

[damskipi13]

First I want to say that in NO WAY do I believe a transgender is going to attack someone in a public bathroom. I do not buy into that fear mongering at all. What does concern me is the comfort and privacy of ALL individuals, not just transgender people.

I will try to explain the way I took it, and it has nothing to do with David Duke. This whole issue has to do with making transgender people feel comfortable when using a bathroom or locker room. Some judges, courts and schools believe that Title IX pertains to actual biological gender, not the gender one identifies with. Other judges, courts and schools believe Title IX does apply to gender identity. The legal world is currently split on this. In my state, the district court ruled IX does not apply to gender identity. The appellate court said it does apply. There are currently many other cases pending in other states.

The whole issue started in my state (Virginia) because a transgender (female to male) named Glen was uncomfortable using the girls facilities and wanted to use the boys facilities. Boys and parents were uncomfortable with Glen in the boys facilities so alternate unisex facilities were provided for Glen. Glen didn't like that either, so he took the school to court and eventually won. Uncomfortable boys now need to use the single separate unisex facility if they want privacy. The biological boys being uncomfortable is not unique to this case. Biological boys in San Diego were uncomfortable in the same situation. Biological girls were uncomfortable in Illinois and New York.

Some folks have said the biological boys and biological girls should be more accepting... it's the adults that have the problem...these kids just need to get over it and not be body conscious or uncomfortable. Easier said than done. Teens are by nature body conscious anyway. In schools, the transgender kids are not anonymous; pretty much everyone knows what plumbing they have. It is not crazy to think that bio girls would be uncomfortable with a transgender male to female in their open locker room when they are changing. Or that bio boys would be uncomfortable with a transgender female to male walking in when the bio boys are using the urinal.

If this whole thing is about a transgender person being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of his or her choice than it HAS to also be about all kids (including bio kids) being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of their bio sex. The rights of all kids have to be protected, not just the transgender's rights. The way things currently are it seems that the transgender's right to feel comfortable supersedes the bio kids' right to be comfortable. I cannot agree with this. But hey, I also disagree with whole schools being peanut free when peanut allergy kids attend. I think that takes away the rest of the students' right to enjoy peanut butter. I support having a peanut free table in the lunchroom and hand washing /desk washing protocols to protect the peanut allergy child. The peanut allergy child in protected, other kids' rights to have peanut butter are intact. I don't feel the Title IX current bathroom/ locker room policy protects the rights of all.

In New York, 18 bio girls on a recreational club swim team were uncomfortable changing (swimsuits, so they have to get totally naked) and showering in the girls locker room after it was open to and used by a transgender person. When they expressed concern, they were told that if they want privacy they needed to use the single unisex family bathroom. So now all 18 girls are trying to change and shower in a small family bathroom with 1 shower head. I really don't think this is a solution to the problem! Retrofitting everything everywhere is not practical either. It will cost millions of dollars and years to do it all. There has to be a way to protect the right of comfort and privacy for ALL people. My insistence on this does not mean I support David Duke and his horrible ideas!

Here are links to support the examples I've given.

Virginia: http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/152056.P.pdf

New York: http://time.com/4324687/even-in-liberal-communities-transgender-bathroom-laws-worry-parents/

Illinois (yes, I realize this is a conservative publication) http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/21/w...t-transgender-student-a-in-their-locker-room/

San Diego http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/feb/09/transgender-restrooms-locker-rooms-high-school/

Mrs. Ciz, thanks. I think that is a very rational argument. I just had two quick things I wanted to clarify.

1) IMO, this issue is not really about transgendered individuals' comfort, it is about their safety. I realize for some people it's about comfort, and they are entitled to that opinion. To me, being comfortable is not a good enough reason to alter society. But transgendered persons get harassed and sometimes attacked when using the bathroom. That, to me, is a safety issue and worthy of addressing. The Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law found in their study that 68% of transgendered respondents experienced verbal harassment and 9% experienced physical assault when using public restrooms. To me, those numbers are much to high to ignore. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...d-Restrooms-and-Minority-Stress-June-2013.pdf

2) The other thing I wanted to clarify was "Some folks have said the biological boys and biological girls should be more accepting... it's the adults that have the problem...these kids just need to get over it and not be body conscious or uncomfortable." I hope you are referring to stuff you have seen outside this thread. What people in this thread have said is that the kids we know already are more accepting than some adults, not that they should be more accepting. We aren't trying to tell people what to believe, we are saying the kids we know already believe the transgender/bathroom issue is a non-issue. As for kids needing to not be body conscious or uncomfortable comment, I would never try to force someone to not be body conscious. It'd be a wonderful world if we could all get over being body conscious, but as someone who changed in private in high school, I know you can't just tell someone to "get over it." Heck, I still feel uncomfortable changing at the gym as an adult, even when nobody is looking and even though I'm in pretty good shape. I don't think we can ever force people to not be body conscious, but I do think facilities and procedures can be modified so students who want privacy can be accommodated. An earlier poster talked about how a school brought in plywood to create very cheap changing areas - that seems like a good start. I also think that when people are talking about kids changing in a classroom together for sports/dance/theater, well if one classroom is empty then probably others are too so why not designate a few other classrooms for the kids that are uncomfortable? I think there are plenty of solutions available, but people aren't exploring them. This thread has kind of gotten off topic with the whole body consciousness issue though, since that is an issue that exists with or without bringing transgenderism into it, so I'll stop talking about it unless somebody specifically asks me about it. I think we should bring the thread back to the original topic - transgendered persons and bathrooms.

 

[Mrs. Ciz]

Mrs. Ciz, thanks. I think that is a very rational argument. I just had two quick things I wanted to clarify.

1) IMO, this issue is not really about transgendered individuals' comfort, it is about their safety. I realize for some people it's about comfort, and they are entitled to that opinion. To me, being comfortable is not a good enough reason to alter society. But transgendered persons get harassed and sometimes attacked when using the bathroom. That, to me, is a safety issue and worthy of addressing. The Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law found in their study that 68% of transgendered respondents experienced verbal harassment and 9% experienced physical assault when using public restrooms. To me, those numbers are much to high to ignore. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...d-Restrooms-and-Minority-Stress-June-2013.pdf

2) The other thing I wanted to clarify was "Some folks have said the biological boys and biological girls should be more accepting... it's the adults that have the problem...these kids just need to get over it and not be body conscious or uncomfortable." I hope you are referring to stuff you have seen outside this thread. What people in this thread have said is that the kids we know already are more accepting than some adults, not that they should be more accepting. We aren't trying to tell people what to believe, we are saying the kids we know already believe the transgender/bathroom issue is a non-issue. As for kids needing to not be body conscious or uncomfortable comment, I would never try to force someone to not be body conscious. It'd be a wonderful world if we could all get over being body conscious, but as someone who changed in private in high school, I know you can't just tell someone to "get over it." Heck, I still feel uncomfortable changing at the gym as an adult, even when nobody is looking and even though I'm in pretty good shape. I don't think we can ever force people to not be body conscious, but I do think facilities and procedures can be modified so students who want privacy can be accommodated. An earlier poster talked about how a school brought in plywood to create very cheap changing areas - that seems like a good start. I also think that when people are talking about kids changing in a classroom together for sports/dance/theater, well if one classroom is empty then probably others are too so why not designate a few other classrooms for the kids that are uncomfortable? I think there are plenty of solutions available, but people aren't exploring them. This thread has kind of gotten off topic with the whole body consciousness issue though, since that is an issue that exists with or without bringing transgenderism into it, so I'll stop talking about it unless somebody specifically asks me about it. I think we should bring the thread back to the original topic - transgendered persons and bathrooms.

Thank you for your response.

1) I realize it was about transgender safety in the beginning. I agree their safety is important. But in the Virginia case, safety was ensured when Glen was given an alternate unisex space to use. He was uncomfortable with that, so at that point it was no longer about safety. It was about what made Glen comfortable.

2) I also realize people on this thread were talking about people they actually know when they said young people didn't have a problem with it or the parents were the problem. I wanted to point out that just because people here know some kids that are comfortable with it, that does not mean all kids accept it. There are many others that are not comfortable with it. We need to consider their feelings too.

 

[Hrhpd]

First I want to say that in NO WAY do I believe a transgender is going to attack someone in a public bathroom. I do not buy into that fear mongering at all. What does concern me is the comfort and privacy of ALL individuals, not just transgender people.

I will try to explain the way I took it, and it has nothing to do with David Duke. This whole issue has to do with making transgender people feel comfortable when using a bathroom or locker room. Some judges, courts and schools believe that Title IX pertains to actual biological gender, not the gender one identifies with. Other judges, courts and schools believe Title IX does apply to gender identity. The legal world is currently split on this. In my state, the district court ruled IX does not apply to gender identity. The appellate court said it does apply. There are currently many other cases pending in other states.

The whole issue started in my state (Virginia) because a transgender (female to male) named Glen was uncomfortable using the girls facilities and wanted to use the boys facilities. Boys and parents were uncomfortable with Glen in the boys facilities so alternate unisex facilities were provided for Glen. Glen didn't like that either, so he took the school to court and eventually won. Uncomfortable boys now need to use the single separate unisex facility if they want privacy. The biological boys being uncomfortable is not unique to this case. Biological boys in San Diego were uncomfortable in the same situation. Biological girls were uncomfortable in Illinois and New York.

Some folks have said the biological boys and biological girls should be more accepting... it's the adults that have the problem...these kids just need to get over it and not be body conscious or uncomfortable. Easier said than done. Teens are by nature body conscious anyway. In schools, the transgender kids are not anonymous; pretty much everyone knows what plumbing they have. It is not crazy to think that bio girls would be uncomfortable with a transgender male to female in their open locker room when they are changing. Or that bio boys would be uncomfortable with a transgender female to male walking in when the bio boys are using the urinal.

If this whole thing is about a transgender person being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of his or her choice than it HAS to also be about all kids (including bio kids) being comfortable using the locker room or bathroom of their bio sex. The rights of all kids have to be protected, not just the transgender's rights. The way things currently are it seems that the transgender's right to feel comfortable supersedes the bio kids' right to be comfortable. I cannot agree with this. But hey, I also disagree with whole schools being peanut free when peanut allergy kids attend. I think that takes away the rest of the students' right to enjoy peanut butter. I support having a peanut free table in the lunchroom and hand washing /desk washing protocols to protect the peanut allergy child. The peanut allergy child in protected, other kids' rights to have peanut butter are intact. I don't feel the Title IX current bathroom/ locker room policy protects the rights of all.

In New York, 18 bio girls on a recreational club swim team were uncomfortable changing (swimsuits, so they have to get totally naked) and showering in the girls locker room after it was open to and used by a transgender person. When they expressed concern, they were told that if they want privacy they needed to use the single unisex family bathroom. So now all 18 girls are trying to change and shower in a small family bathroom with 1 shower head. I really don't think this is a solution to the problem! Retrofitting everything everywhere is not practical either. It will cost millions of dollars and years to do it all. There has to be a way to protect the right of comfort and privacy for ALL people. My insistence on this does not mean I support David Duke and his horrible ideas!

Here are links to support the examples I've given.

Virginia: http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/152056.P.pdf

New York: http://time.com/4324687/even-in-liberal-communities-transgender-bathroom-laws-worry-parents/

Illinois (yes, I realize this is a conservative publication) http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/21/w...t-transgender-student-a-in-their-locker-room/

San Diego http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/feb/09/transgender-restrooms-locker-rooms-high-school/

I don't see a problem here. There are private areas provided for anyone to use if they are uncomfortable. My children's old school district was cited by the Feds as being an example to the nation on how to be gender friendly. There are girls, boys and gender neutral bathrooms. It is up to the individual to use whichever one they are comfortable with.

It is no different than a mom wanting to take her 12 year old son into the ladies room but the son is not comfortable so they use the family restroom. It is all about individual choices.

Having children that have been on swim teams for the past 20 years, I don't believe an entire swim team especially a club team, but even a rec team, had a problem with self-consciousness. They had a problem with the person being transgender. After being with males and females with thin suits on that are at least 2 - 3 sizes too small day in and day out, self consciousness is one of the first things to go on a swim team.

But they were provided a private place to change and it was their choice to use it. I don't see an issue here.

 

[bcla]

I guess my point is that this whole thing is ridiculous. Law or no law, it isn't enforceable and only shows just how ignorant some of us alleged "rednecks" can be. In case you haven't guessed. I live in North Carolina. No I'm not trans-gender or gay. What I am is ashamed to tell people that I live in NC. If they tried they couldn't come up with a more nasty, useless law. Throwing away thousands of dollars to defend the worst legislation to ever be purposely enacted. Please don't judge all NC residents as being backward, uneducated bigots, some of us still have working brain cells.

Even the supporters of this law acknowledge that there are no enforcement/penalty provisions.

However, the entire law covers a lot more, as was mentioned earlier. That effectively includes a ban on local government enacting civil protections based on LBGT status, minimum wage higher than the state's, etc. The guts of this law aren't about the use of bathrooms.

 

[Mrs. Ciz]

I don't see a problem here. There are private areas provided for anyone to use if they are uncomfortable. My children's old school district was cited by the Feds as being an example to the nation on how to be gender friendly. There are girls, boys and gender neutral bathrooms. It is up to the individual to use whichever one they are comfortable with.

It is no different than a mom wanting to take her 12 year old son into the ladies room but the son is not comfortable so they use the family restroom. It is all about individual choices.

Having children that have been on swim teams for the past 20 years, I don't believe an entire swim team especially a club team, but even a rec team, had a problem with self-consciousness. They had a problem with the person being transgender. After being with males and females with thin suits on that are at least 2 - 3 sizes too small day in and day out, self consciousness is one of the first things to go on a swim team.

But they were provided a private place to change and it was their choice to use it. I don't see an issue here.

Yep...girls didn't want to change in front of a person that they knew or thought to be a biological male. It made them uncomfortable. But when 18 girls all have to use the one tiny private space in order to feel comfortable while the transgender gets the locker room it becomes an untenable solution to me. I realize you feel otherwise. However, I respect your right to your opinion even though I don't agree with it.

 

[bcla]

I didn't have time to read this whole thread so it may have been said already. If so, sorry! The question that comes up is how is this enforced? If a transgender person (say male to female) enters a bathroom they are very likely to be dressed and present themselves as female. How is enforced? And why would a person that considers themselves to be female become a threat to other women anymore then a non-transgender person is a threat? Do we have to make everyone drop their pants to inspect their actual physical sex? What if you have some women, and I have seen many, that due to hormonal imbalance are very masculine looking... are they relegated to the men's room? A person that is gay or lesbian are still going to be using the respective rooms of their actual sex. They don't deny being one gender or the other, but, that their preference is male, if a male or female if they are female. Doesn't that make them more of a risk in the designated restroom of their birth sex?

Couldn't a male that wants to enter a ladies room, only need to look female to go there and how would that be known? How do we know it isn't happening all the time? Surely, they are not going to hang a sign around their neck saying... "Hey, I'm a man that wants to see all you ladies naked". Apparently born with x-ray vision to see through the metal toilet stalls.

I guess my point is that this whole thing is ridiculous. Law or no law, it isn't enforceable and only shows just how ignorant some of us alleged "rednecks" can be. In case you haven't guessed. I live in North Carolina. No I'm not trans-gender or gay. What I am is ashamed to tell people that I live in NC. If they tried they couldn't come up with a more nasty, useless law. Throwing away thousands of dollars to defend the worst legislation to ever be purposely enacted. Please don't judge all NC residents as being backward, uneducated bigots, some of us still have working brain cells.

It's been mentioned that the NC law has no enforcement or penalty provisions. The bulk of the law has also been discussed.

However, the federal education guidelines have been mentioned separately. The risk there is loss of federal education funding for noncompliance.

 

[Goofy_Disney_Dad]

 

[manning]

solving problems that do not exist, only in america

There is a problem and it is the government.

 

[mnrose]

There is a problem and it is the government.

Yup. The government which passed the law in North Carolina is clearly a problem. Glad we can agree on that. If the "government" in North Carolina hadn't passed this law, guess what? Life would have gone on nicely as it had for a long time. Instead, the "government" decided an unnecessary law was "important" and voila, opened a whole can of worms.

 

[Mrs. Ciz]

Yup. The government which passed the law in North Carolina is clearly a problem. Glad we can agree on that. If the "government" in North Carolina hadn't passed this law, guess what? Life would have gone on nicely as it had for a long time. Instead, the "government" decided an unnecessary law was "important" and voila, opened a whole can of worms.

There is a problem and it is the government.

And here I was thinking FEDERAL government!

 

[Uncle Remus]

And here I was thinking FEDERAL government!

Yeah, we just don't need civil rights, do we?

 

[mnrose]

Yeah, we just don't need civil rights, do we?

Of course not. How silly. The only civil rights I need are the ones that protect me. Other people? Well, those we clearly don't need.

 

[mnrose]

And here I was thinking FEDERAL government!

Well, see, the "federal" government didn't have any rules about this until certain state governments decided to play where they shouldn't and deprive some people of their civil rights. If state governments would stop making silly, out-dated rules, a lot of federal government action would be unnecessary.

 

[Goofy_Disney_Dad]

Of course not. How silly. The only civil rights I need are the ones that protect me. Other people? Well, those we clearly don't need.

That darn Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court decision started this landslide I tell ya!

 

[DisneyOma]

I'm thrilled your daughter's dance company has found a way to change without having to strip completely. It doesn't work for my DD's group. It just doesn't.

Pop up changing rooms. Find them online.

Very common. And would the new locker room rules apply to when the team travels to dance competitions at schools and hotels? For those, we typically are assigned a set of classrooms to change in if it is a school, so obviously there are no privacy stalls. Just a room. If it's a hotel, we get one big room. No privacy at all.

Lots of schools have locker/changing rooms that are just big open rooms with no stalls. Believe it or not. And there is no money to change that.

See above.

Yep...girls didn't want to change in front of a person that they knew or thought to be a biological male. It made them uncomfortable. But when 18 girls all have to use the one tiny private space in order to feel comfortable while the transgender gets the locker room it becomes an untenable solution to me. I realize you feel otherwise. However, I respect your right to your opinion even though I don't agree with it.

They "knew or thought" - that's on them.

The solution - pop up changing room. Walmart sells them for $20

 

[Mrs. Ciz]

Of course not. How silly. The only civil rights I need are the ones that protect me. Other people? Well, those we clearly don't need.

I personally like the ones that protect ALL people.