Slippery something in those showers, anyway.Since you're already complaining about ad hominem, I'm pretty sure "Today it's bathrooms, tomorrow it's showers" falls under the "slippery slope" category of fallacies, Mr. Debate Rules.
Slippery something in those showers, anyway.Since you're already complaining about ad hominem, I'm pretty sure "Today it's bathrooms, tomorrow it's showers" falls under the "slippery slope" category of fallacies, Mr. Debate Rules.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...banning-trans-student-from-girls-locker-room/if you're extrapolating bathrooms to showers, you're a huge fucking idiot, sorry!
Since you're correcting people on logic, please note that "slippery slope" is an argument, with both valid and fallacious uses. By saying that a slippery slope argument is necessarily a slipper slope fallacy, you are either begging the question or using a false equivalence (take your pick?).Since you're already complaining about ad hominem, I'm pretty sure "Today it's bathrooms, tomorrow it's showers" falls under the "slippery slope" category of fallacies, Mr. Debate Rules.
But this isn't even about money. It's about being treated equally. I'm cis so I don't think about it much but I'd imagine if I actually was trans, my gender identity would be on my mind a lot more, and having the government tell you "I don't care that you completely feel like a man/woman. You're wrong" would be a big slap in the face."Fuck you, gimme yours." That's the democrat way.
Of all the movies over the last 20 years, I would never have pegged Starship Troopers as being the culturally sensitive oneif you're extrapolating bathrooms to showers, you're a huge fucking idiot, sorry!
I love the little square on... Rico's? butt.Of all the movies over the last 20 years, I would never have pegged Starship Troopers as being the culturally sensitive one
Actually, for it to be a slippery slope, there has to be no connection. Furthermore, there has been an observable trend/pattern in the social justice cause that shows that the goal of the struggle IS the continuation of the struggle itself.Since you're already complaining about ad hominem, I'm pretty sure "Today it's bathrooms, tomorrow it's showers" falls under the "slippery slope" category of fallacies, Mr. Debate Rules.
Sometimes a slap in the face is warranted. Why do the rights of the Trans community - again, a fraction of a fraction minority - trump the rights of the Cis?But this isn't even about money. It's about being treated equally. I'm cis so I don't think about it much but I'd imagine if I actually was trans, my gender identity would be on my mind a lot more, and having the government tell you "I don't care that you completely feel like a man/woman. You're wrong" would be a big slap in the face.
I guess I'd rather err on the side of treating people with respect.
Trans people want the existing cis right to use the bathroom that matches one's gender identity extended to them.Sometimes a slap in the face is warranted. Why do the rights of the Trans community - again, a fraction of a fraction minority - trump the rights of the Cis?
Excerpt from “You Wouldn’t Want One of ‘Em Dancing With Your Wife”: Racialized Bodies on the Job in World War II by Eileen Boris
Concepts of purity that distinguished white women from African Americans lay behind discriminatory acts. 81 White workers based moral judgments on physical appearance; as one woman admitted, “I always thought colored people were not clean and smelled bad and weren’t as good as white people.” Manuals for managers attempted to counter notions fanned by racist southern politicians “that Negroes have a peculiar body odor; that it is unpleasant to remain in close proximity to them” and “that there is an extraordinarily high incidence of social disease among Negroes.” Syphilis rates were high among whites as well as blacks in areas of “low economic status.” Still some employers acted as if high black rates of syphilis were “a well-known scientific fact.” A hospital in Oakland, California, for example, refused to hire “experienced Negro girls” as dieticians because “Negroes couldn’t pass Wassermann tests.” A New York State handbook reminded managers that “the possibility of acquiring a venereal disease by contact with a toilet is exceeding remote.” Such manuals also pointed out that black women and men not only cleaned public and private toilets but care for children, prepare food, and “handle much of the linen and make up the beds of many white Americans.” A domestic’s touch could be ignored in ways that bodily closeness at the job apparently could not; private service work reinforced racialized gender hierarchies in ways that public intimacy undermined them. 82
Despite the attempt by some managers to alleviate fears, “the cleanliness taboo” generated resistance to using the same toilet, shower, and locker room facilities, especially on the part of white women. 83Sometimes these resisters merely threatened to leave work to see if they could push management to remove black women, but “had no intention of really going through with their threat because they knew it might jeopardize their own jobs,” as happened at a Buffalo, New York aircraft factory. 84 Other times they shut down production. Fifteen hundred United Automobile Union members walked out in the spring of 1944 when Chevrolet Motors refused “to rehire seven woman workers who had balked at working alongside four Negro women,” who presumably would use the same toilets. When more than half the labor force of the U.S. Rubber Company in Detroit struck a few months before, they demanded that black women machinists “be transferred” or the company provide separate toilets for them. In contrast, lack of racial friction at Pullman’s railroad operations may have derived from company adherence to segregated toilets and related facilities. 85 [End Page 94]
The hearing before the WLB over the December 1943 strike at the Baltimore Western Electric plant illuminates the racialized gendered subtext behind contests over employment discrimination. Toilet integration was central to this job action. Though only 200 out of 6,000 eligible employees participated in the strike vote, the presence of picket lines dropped attendance to about 30 percent of the workforce, with almost all black workers crossing the lines. The U.S. army took over this plant deemed vital to the war effort. 86
Part of the disbelief for me is how good she looks on Supergirl, but again, modern medicine and science, etcHoly shit, Ally Mcbeal's nearly 20 years old?
That's it, it's official, I'm elderly now.
But those aren't equivalent things. It's not talking about "desegregating" the genders of bathrooms, it's talking about putting one who is demonstrably, physically NOT into the other because they feel it suits them better. It would be more akin to saying that a "negro" should be allowed to use a whites-only bathroom because they feel they are white, but leave the segregationist system intact.Trans people want the existing cis right to use the bathroom that matches one's gender identity extended to them.
To me, this is akin to arguing that consensual white-black miscegenation should've remained illegal because those wishing to marry across racial lines were a very small minority, and their right to marry shouldn't trump the racially pure's rights to a society without mixed marriages.
Or, for extra fun, that bathrooms should've remained segregated because a black woman's right to use a desegregated toilet shouldn't trump a white woman's right to a non-negro-smelling bathroom (bless sci-hub):
You're right, the situation is worse, because trans people don't even get their own bathroomsBut those aren't equivalent things. It's not talking about "desegregating" the genders of bathrooms, it's talking about putting one who is demonstrably, physically NOT into the other because they feel it suits them better. It would be more akin to saying that a "negro" should be allowed to use a whites-only bathroom because they feel they are white, but leave the segregationist system intact.
Which is a different, asinine argument.
Sure they do. And furthermore, unisex bathrooms are even a thing in some places.You're right, the situation is even worse, because trans people don't even get their own bathrooms
Then the situation is equivalent. [GROUP1] people want to use [GROUP2]-male and [GROUP2]-female bathrooms instead of their own separate but equal (taking you at face value here) facilities.Sure they do.
I think you misunderstand. I said "sure they do," not because there are separate trans bathrooms, but because bathrooms are already available for both genders - including the genders trans people actually are.Then the situation is equivalent.
I said thatLike was said earlier, we only segregate by gender because we are raised to do so.
I forget who said it, but there's a famous quote that says "Nobody actually changes their minds, the people who believe old ideas die, and new generations grow up already believing the new ideas to be the norm."My mom got mad because my daughter said he told her about periods for fucks sake. Because "dads shouldn't be talking about that kind of thing with their daughters." The fuck are you smoking woman?!
Ah.I think you misunderstand. I said "sure they do," not because there are separate trans bathrooms, but because bathrooms are already available for both genders - including the genders trans people actually are.
Every single public restroom I stopped in in every airport on my recent trip had a baby changing station in the men's room, too. Two in Texas and one in Colorado.(Didn't mean to partially quote you, I was going off of your post as it was when I clicked Reply.)
Unisex bathrooms are far from universal, and thus an unreliable solution. The vast majority of bathroom sets I've encountered in my travel through the U.S. have been male/female (though I've been pleased by how many male GA bathrooms have baby-changing stations).
Well, and one wildly-flung "fucking idiot" accusation and some other veiled implications, but otherwise, yeah.Yeah, I'm quite glad at how civil this is all being. You're a good sport about having your opinion compared and contrasted to segregation-era ones.
"average halforumite insults everyone 10 times a day" factoid actualy (sic) just statistical error. average halforumite insults everyone 0 times a day. Insults Charl, who lives in cave & posts over 10,000 each day, is an outlier adn should not have been counted.Well, and one wildly-flung "fucking idiot" accusation and some other veiled implications, but otherwise, yeah.
If you had to guess, you’d probably say that people who watch a lot of pornography are less likely to be religious. And you’d be right — to a point. But according to this study, which looked at the connection between porn viewing and later religiosity, there actually appeared to be a more complicated relationship between porn and religious sentiments. More specifically, people who watched no porn were likely to be religious, and religious levels declined with more frequent porn use up to “once a week.” But as viewing got more frequent — up to “once a day or more” — religiosity actually went back up. This just might be the best use of our “Holy correlation, Batman!” blog post category to date!
What about people who are beaten or even killed just for wanting to empty their bladder? I was told a story of a student who was not only severely beaten within an inch of their life, but also urinated on by their attackers.I have a hard time really shedding a tear for people who are upset that they can't pee where they want
As callous as it sounds, I need to ask for citations on this one.What about people who are beaten or even killed just for wanting to empty their bladder? I was told a story of a student who was not only severely beaten within an inch of their life, but also urinated on by their attackers.
I don't have a citation for it, unfortunately. It was a story my sister relayed to me through a friend of hers. Her friend is a transgender professor at a university who also runs a support group. And they had to drive a badly beaten student to the hospital.As callous as it sounds, I need to ask for citations on this one.
As for the other side of the coin...
Man Strips In Women’s locker room, Says New Transgender Rules Make It Legal
Sexual predator jailed after claiming to be ‘transgender’ to assault women in shelter
California Man Dressed as Woman Busted for Videoing in Women’s Bathroom
These are not transgender people, these are predators who would abuse the loophole that is created when you let anyone decide what bathroom they get to use with only themselves as judge.
*sigh* And I'm out if you're going to use images like that to mock the issue that my transgender friends are terrified over.As callous as it sounds, I need to ask for citations on this one.
As for the other side of the coin...
Man Strips In Women’s locker room, Says New Transgender Rules Make It Legal
Sexual predator jailed after claiming to be ‘transgender’ to assault women in shelter
California Man Dressed as Woman Busted for Videoing in Women’s Bathroom
These are not transgender people, these are predators who would abuse the loophole that is created when you let anyone decide what bathroom they get to use with only themselves as judge.[DOUBLEPOST=1460506366,1460505832][/DOUBLEPOST]
"I'm a trans-ginger. I looked it up. It means I can use the girls' shitter."
The thing is, that episode wraps everything up nicely in 22 minutes and everybody's happy.Well, those seem to be outliers. Certainly not as prevalent as say, deaths from firearms.
And holy shit Gas, you completely missed the point of that South Park episode.
The difference is now, like that guy in Seattle, they have legal protection to do so. I shouldn't have to point out how much that changes things.And really, those predators would have found a way to do their thing regardless. That's a separate issue from letting transgenders use a washroom.
I'm not trying to mock the issue, and I'm not trying to belittle your point. But do you understand where I'm coming from when, in a discussion of this nature, I'm to debate a story you heard from your sister who heard it from her friend? How am I even supposed to address that?I don't have a citation for it, unfortunately. It was a story my sister relayed to me through a friend of hers. Her friend is a transgender professor at a university who also runs a support group. And they had to drive a badly beaten student to the hospital.
*sigh* And I'm out if you're going to use images like that to mock the issue that my transgender friends are terrified over.
I don't know. I don't know why I bothered posting in here. I'm not a good debater and I'm not equipped to deal with it. Just forget I said anything.I'm not trying to mock the issue, and I'm not trying to belittle your point. But do you understand where I'm coming from when, in a discussion of this nature, I'm to debate a story you heard from your sister who heard it from her friend? How am I even supposed to address that?