BREAKING: NCAA says state of North Carolina will again be considered for championship hosting....

[Deleted member 2897]

Seems like that logic wouldn't preclude this statement: Well, someone who's willing to force sex with a woman against her will is already willing to break the law, so what's a rape statute going to do to stop them.

Do you think it should be legal for someone with male anatomy to go into the shower room with your daughter? Like, legal, on the books, "you sir with the male parts, can go in that room naked with naked women if you feel like it."

It's Satan worship, which is the worship of yourself. You can do whatever you want, and everyone else has to get out of the way. We could be talking about any number of things, it just happens to be bathrooms in this case...but it's all part of the same narcissistic world we live in.

 

[vamosjackets]

Im on the other side, and I dont necessarily disagree with you.

I appreciate you saying that. That statement is full of hope.

 

[vamosjackets]

It's Satan worship, which is the worship of yourself. You can do whatever you want, and everyone else has to get out of the way. We could be talking about any number of things, it just happens to be bathrooms in this case...but it's all part of the same narcissistic world we live in.

It's also responding to brokenness with "Being broken is great!" It's hopelessness masked as compassion.

... Instead of "We are all broken, but that doesn't have to be the final word. Healing and victory is possible."

And, if I'm allowed, then I must go on: There was only one who was not broken, and he broke himself to repair us.

"Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love never fails."

Love is infinitely better than being a slave to desire.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

You don't have to do any of that to claim you're a woman for those on that side of the issue. If someone was willing to literally mutilate their genitalia, then my issue with it would be moot. Someone with a "johnson" shouldn't be able to go into the shower room with my daughter. The point is it should be based on something objective/scientific rather than feelings. Birth certificate is objective at least, but I wouldn't be opposed to say it's based on anatomy rather than birth certificate. But, that's not what the other side is arguing. They want it to be totally subjective and based on the individual's choice rather than societal norms (aka scientific, biological, anatomical norms).
And, if that's the rationale they want for bathrooms, what is the justification for making it different for sports?

Isn't the policy you seem to be advocating in your last statement doing just what that statement condemns? Let's take .001% of the population's irrational thoughts and feelings and make a law that adversely affects everyone based on that irrationality.

When you know people who have been raped in bathrooms (and you have daughters) the policy is important.

Do you really not think it makes a lot of economic sense for a guy who is really good at a sport, but not quite good enough to make it to the professional ranks to go into the women's ranks?

Also, take it the other way (and this has already happened in wrestling), a girl wants to compete in boys competition. She's allowed to take testosterone, while it is illegal for the males. Sound fair to you? It's time to do what you suggested and stop making policy based on irrationality and worse-case scenarios.

I still think you are overreacting and assuming the worst. You might as well assume a gang of bull dikes are gonna rape your daughters. How are you gonna stop that from happening? I have a daughter, too, just so you know.

 

[vamosjackets]

I still think you are overreacting and assuming the worst. You might as well assume a gang of bull dikes are gonna rape your daughters. How are you gonna stop that from happening? I have a daughter, too, just so you know.

I might start by not allowing the "bull dikes" to come on in the house and go on up to her room while she's naked.

 

[deeeznutz]

Seems like that logic wouldn't preclude this statement: Well, someone who's willing to force sex with a woman against her will is already willing to break the law, so what's a rape statute going to do to stop them.

Do you think it should be legal for someone with male anatomy to go into the shower room with your daughter? Like, legal, on the books, "you sir with the male parts, can go in that room naked with naked women if you feel like it."

That's a false equivalency, you're talking about banning A to prevent B...more similar to banning alcohol to prevent drunk driving. As for the second part, someone acting like a perv in a bathroom is still going to have rules to prevent that. When my daughters are of age to be in a communal shower room, I don't think seeing a ***** is going to cause any kind of harm. It may not be something I'm happy with but that's no different than a whole lot of other things in this world.

 

[vamosjackets]

That's a false equivalency, you're talking about banning A to prevent B...more similar to banning alcohol to prevent drunk driving. As for the second part, someone acting like a perv in a bathroom is still going to have rules to prevent that. When my daughters are of age to be in a communal shower room, I don't think seeing a ***** is going to cause any kind of harm. It may not be something I'm happy with but that's no different than a whole lot of other things in this world.

I respectfully disagree.
First, I want to ban A because A is wrong in itself. Second, I want to ban A because A makes B much easier, and B is such a great evil that it must enter into consideration of A.
Also, I don't think it's quite a false equivalency. I will concede that it's perhaps not the best comparison. A better comparison might be, there shouldn't be a law for illegally entering someone's house because entering someone's house doesn't hurt anyone. And, if entering someone's house leads to stealing or other crimes, well it's obvious that if the perpetrator is going to steal, then he obviously would've broken the "illegal entry" law anyway. So, there should be no such thing as illegal entry, because it doesn't prevent other crimes.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I might start by not allowing the "bull dikes" to come on in the house and go on up to her room while she's naked.

I thought you were referring to school locker rooms.

 

[takethepoints]

Just a few things more.

It is perfectly possible - indeed, it isn't that uncommon - to be phenotypical female or male and genetically male or female. This is why we have sexual reassignment surgery for children, again fairly common. A birth certificate in such situations is by no means "scientific"; it is simply a statement by the doctors at the time of their guess about the child. Further, there is nothing "unscientific" about mental states, especially when it comes to gender issues. You ask people, they tell you, then you check on behavioral history. It's akin to any mental state that predicts behavior, including heterosexuality. Finally, this isn't a "gender disorder"; the conditions involved in transgender persons are more complicated then we like to think, but they are not indicative of any kind of mental disorder, unless the person involved has been persecuted into one. That happens.

All of this entire brouhaha is the result of an overreach by the North Carolina legislature and is largely ideological in nature. If they had left Charlotte's original ordinance alone, then this would have been a tempest in a teapot. The only result has been $1B or so of lost business to NC and a return of the championship games to Tobacco Road in future. What a waste of public resources!

 

[SlawDog]

If you have a 'Johnson' you go to the facilities that say 'men'. If you have a 'coochie' you go to the facilities that say 'women'.
Some will say that some men, who identify as women, may not feel comfortable going to the 'mens' facility. I say too bad! Why are these people's feelings more important than the feelings of 'coochie' holders that don't want to share a facility with those equipped with a 'johnson'?
To many this will sound simplistic however, this simplistic take has worked since the beginning of time.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Just a few things more.

It is perfectly possible - indeed, it isn't that uncommon - to be phenotypical female or male and genetically male or female. This is why we have sexual reassignment surgery for children, again fairly common. A birth certificate in such situations is by no means "scientific"; it is simply a statement by the doctors at the time of their guess about the child. Further, there is nothing "unscientific" about mental states, especially when it comes to gender issues. You ask people, they tell you, then you check on behavioral history. It's akin to any mental state that predicts behavior, including heterosexuality. Finally, this isn't a "gender disorder"; the conditions involved in transgender persons are more complicated then we like to think, but they are not indicative of any kind of mental disorder, unless the person involved has been persecuted into one. That happens.

All of this entire brouhaha is the result of an overreach by the North Carolina legislature and is largely ideological in nature. If they had left Charlotte's original ordinance alone, then this would have been a tempest in a teapot. The only result has been $1B or so of lost business to NC and a return of the championship games to Tobacco Road in future. What a waste of public resources!

No, the City of Charlotte started this by writing a law that required everyone in the city to allow anybody of any gender to go into any bathroom. The city of Charlotte is trying to battle San Francisco to become the single most Looney Tunes city in the entire country. Someone had to put a stop to it.

 

[Skeptic]

Well, this business of politics v. sports and sports v. politics and games in China and world without Hamlet end amen, as a long-time resident of the once-great Old North State, might I point out that HB2, the bill in question, institutionalized and codified formal and legal discrimination, not merely against gays, lesbians and transexuals, but religious beliefs as well -- not to mention potentially race -- and for a party supposedly dedicated to less is more and getting guvmint out of our lives, took that control of all those issues from city and county governments and put it in the all-powerful, central government legislature. (Shoot, we made South Carolina look enlightened.) The NCAA's only sin in this matter was waiting too long and now, even restoring eligibility, giving those forces another three years of discriminatory practices. So a bit of illumination is required.)

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Well, this business of politics v. sports and sports v. politics and games in China and world without Hamlet end amen, as a long-time resident of the once-great Old North State, might I point out that HB2, the bill in question, institutionalized and codified formal and legal discrimination, not merely against gays, lesbians and transexuals, but religious beliefs as well -- not to mention potentially race -- and for a party supposedly dedicated to less is more and getting guvmint out of our lives, took that control of all those issues from city and county governments and put it in the all-powerful, central government legislature. (Shoot, we made South Carolina look enlightened.) The NCAA's only sin in this matter was waiting too long and now, even restoring eligibility, giving those forces another three years of discriminatory practices. So a bit of illumination is required.)

Yea, 2 wrongs don't make a right. (But three lefts do. Just wanted to point that out.) The City of Charlotte started it all. That doesn't excuse the North Carolina State Legislature hitting a tack with a sledge hammer. But sometimes you shouldn't poke a bear. It probably won't only poke you back.

By the way, I'm in South Carolina. We've publicly said we don't want any bathroom laws and we're getting along fine down here all by ourselves just trying to be nice and respectful of each other. But if a City Government decides to do what Charlotte did, I'm sure we'll stand up and push back.

 

[Skeptic]

Yea, 2 wrongs don't make a right. (But three lefts do. Just wanted to point that out.) The City of Charlotte started it all. That doesn't excuse the North Carolina State Legislature hitting a tack with a sledge hammer. But sometimes you shouldn't poke a bear. It probably won't only poke you back.

By the way, I'm in South Carolina. We've publicly said we don't want any bathroom laws and we're getting along fine down here all by ourselves just trying to be nice and respectful of each other. But if a City Government decides to do what Charlotte did, I'm sure we'll stand up and push back.

Well, it needs to be pointed out to those who weren't fairly close to the situation -- I mean voters who put these knuckledraggers into office -- that the "bathroom bill" was not a bathroom bill at all. It was meant to legalize discrimination in hiring and employment practices, and used the "bathroom danger" -- that, just as with SC, never existed in NC -- as cover. It worked. That's all anybody talked about, and not the discriminatory hiring and service polices, many based on religion, that ensued. And come on, bwelbo, lighten up. I was just picking at my friends in SC. I have son down there and on occasion I enjoy visiting the 19th Century.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Well, it needs to be pointed out to those who weren't fairly close to the situation -- I mean voters who put these knuckledraggers into office -- that the "bathroom bill" was not a bathroom bill at all. It was meant to legalize discrimination in hiring and employment practices, and used the "bathroom danger" -- that, just as with SC, never existed in NC -- as cover. It worked. That's all anybody talked about, and not the discriminatory hiring and service polices, many based on religion, that ensued. And come on, bwelbo, lighten up. I was just picking at my friends in SC. I have son down there and on occasion I enjoy visiting the 19th Century.

HA! No problem. If you ever need a place to stay, you are welcome to stay here. I mean, my floors are dirt and you'll share a room with a horse, but at least you wouldn't have to walk all the way here as I can pick you up in my buggy.

 

[vamosjackets]

Just a few things more.

It is perfectly possible - indeed, it isn't that uncommon - to be phenotypical female or male and genetically male or female. This is why we have sexual reassignment surgery for children, again fairly common. A birth certificate in such situations is by no means "scientific"; it is simply a statement by the doctors at the time of their guess about the child. Further, there is nothing "unscientific" about mental states, especially when it comes to gender issues. You ask people, they tell you, then you check on behavioral history. It's akin to any mental state that predicts behavior, including heterosexuality. Finally, this isn't a "gender disorder"; the conditions involved in transgender persons are more complicated then we like to think, but they are not indicative of any kind of mental disorder, unless the person involved has been persecuted into one. That happens.

All of this entire brouhaha is the result of an overreach by the North Carolina legislature and is largely ideological in nature. If they had left Charlotte's original ordinance alone, then this would have been a tempest in a teapot. The only result has been $1B or so of lost business to NC and a return of the championship games to Tobacco Road in future. What a waste of public resources!

There is a lot I'd like to respond to here, but it's probably too much. I do think I see a way forward from my side and the side you're expressing.
Would you be good with bodily function, changing, and bathing facilities being based on anatomy (not birth certificate)?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Finally, this isn't a "gender disorder"; the conditions involved in transgender persons are more complicated then we like to think, but they are not indicative of any kind of mental disorder.

Actually, it is a disorder, and labelled as such by the medical community...until just a couple years ago when they were lobbied hard by the LGBTQetc crowd. They (and many people these days) don't like/can't stand thinking that there is anything wrong with them whatsoever. Like they are defective. They're not, its just a medical term. Lots of people have anxiety disorders, alcohol disorders, ADHD, eating disorders, depression. Its how you're born. It doesn't mean you are a defective human being. The point is in this case these people legitimately 100% think they are the opposite gender. The reason it is a disorder is that like how anorexics erroneously think they are fat these folks are not actually the other gender. And that's why there is this huge struggle about bathrooms and locker rooms. Many people are taking the position that you are whatever gender you say you are. That is scientifically and biologically false. Its like a triangle saying it wants to be a square. "Okay, you're a square." ITS NOT TRUE. We are literally killing our transgender children - over half of them attempt suicide. Because they are living a lie and being told to live a lie. They need to understand the nature of the disorder, educate others, and be open about it. Deep inside is this identity crisis that's going to decay in them forever if we keep playing this make believe game.

 

[takethepoints]

Actually, it is a disorder, and labelled as such by the medical community...until just a couple years ago when they were lobbied hard by the LGBTQetc crowd. They (and many people these days) don't like/can't stand thinking that there is anything wrong with them whatsoever. Like they are defective. They're not, its just a medical term. Lots of people have anxiety disorders, alcohol disorders, ADHD, eating disorders, depression. Its how you're born. It doesn't mean you are a defective human being. The point is in this case these people legitimately 100% think they are the opposite gender. The reason it is a disorder is that like how anorexics erroneously think they are fat these folks are not actually the other gender. And that's why there is this huge struggle about bathrooms and locker rooms. Many people are taking the position that you are whatever gender you say you are. That is scientifically and biologically false. Its like a triangle saying it wants to be a square. "Okay, you're a square." ITS NOT TRUE. We are literally killing our transgender children - over half of them attempt suicide. Because they are living a lie and being told to live a lie. They need to understand the nature of the disorder, educate others, and be open about it. Deep inside is this identity crisis that's going to decay in them forever if we keep playing this make believe game.

Well … there's a reason that medical terms change and it usually, as in this case, has bupkas to do with political pressure and a lot to do with research results. Like I said before, the factors that lead to a transgender identity are pretty complicated and there are (probably) multiple paths to the realization. I personally know two such people, one who had full sexual reassignment surgery and one who did not. Neither of them have any "identity crisis" at all.

Iow, I think your major premise is simply wrong. There's nothing "make believe" about their identity. The only crisis about their sexuality transgender people face is caused by those who - like some people we know - are bound and determined to not face the facts about their gender. It is true that many transgender kids are driven to attempting suicide. However, that's not because they are transgendered but because they are driven to it by people who will not accept their identity and who, in some instances, pass silly laws to try to enforce their prejudices. Because that's what they are, you know.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Well … there's a reason that medical terms change and it usually, as in this case, has bupkas to do with political pressure and a lot to do with research results. Like I said before, the factors that lead to a transgender identity are pretty complicated and there are (probably) multiple paths to the realization. I personally know two such people, one who had full sexual reassignment surgery and one who did not. Neither of them have any "identity crisis" at all.

Iow, I think your major premise is simply wrong. There's nothing "make believe" about their identity. The only crisis about their sexuality transgender people face is caused by those who - like some people we know - are bound and determined to not face the facts about their gender. It is true that many transgender kids are driven to attempting suicide. However, that's not because they are transgendered but because they are driven to it by people who will not accept their identity and who, in some instances, pass silly laws to try to enforce their prejudices. Because that's what they are, you know.

Well let me rephrase what I said, because I don't think I said it well. I don't think that what THEY think is make believe. I am 100% convinced that they are absolutely genuine that they feel they are the other gender. What is make believe is that you can't just say you are a certain gender and then voila you are. I'm also not saying if you were born a male and feel female and you grow your hair long and dress like a female that you are playing make believe. The medical community actually even recommends that's how you work through this - you assume the gender that you feel. What is make believe is doing all of the above and then actually stating that you indeed are the other gender. That is scientifically and biologically false. For example, Bruce Jenner (now Caitlyn or however you spell it) is 100% definitively not a female and should not be in female dressing rooms, bathrooms, or locker rooms. (My opinion.) That doesn't mean Caitlyn shouldn't dress like a woman, be treated respectfully, and understood. But Bruce/Caitlyn's true and real identity is a transgender person. Born a male, identifies with female. Its that simple. Throughout our history we haven't needed laws because everyone just lived their own lives and away we went. But when you start having folks wanting to codify into laws scientific impossibilities and an endorsement of certain behaviors (I want to be careful here, I am referring to a behavior of Jenner going into a female area, not the identifying or dressing behavior), that's where you're going to get pushback.

There are numerous studies, and here is one of a 30 year period from Sweden, that shows more support for the danger of this type of approach:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885
To me, its just more proof of how harmful all this is on the inside for transgender people. Until they truly embrace how they were born and who they are, I can't imagine these statistics changing. They need to understand what they are, embrace it, be proud of it and defend it and educate others about it. In the studies I've read, those that are most open and honest about it have much better health outcomes.

 

[ncjacket79]

I don't want to get into this whole argument, but just want to point out that someone willing to rape someone in a bathroom is going to go in whether there is a law about it or not. They're already willing to break the law, what's a bathroom statute gonna do to stop them.
BTW I have 2 daughters. Constantly worrying about extreme cases gets you nowhere.

Exactly. I have 2 daughters as well and recognize someone who wants to rape a woman doesn't care what the law says about which bathroom they are supposed to be in.