Whats stopping me from insisting I'm a FTM transgender person and I'm just trying to follow the law by using the bathroom that matches how I was born?
[Funny] xHamster blocks all porn in North Carolina.
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
GasBandit
Staff member
Your birth certificate, according to the NC law.
GasBandit
Staff member
So basically, it will boil down to if someone else thinks you belong where you are or not, and if a fuss is thrown, that part comes out when you produce your birth certificate before a judge. Otherwise, if you are Aydian or Andreja you simply chuckle to yourself because the cisnormies are none the wiser.
It's almost as if the law isn't intended to persecute them, isn't it?
Thats so delightfully naive. Do you feel the same about the "religious freedom" bills that allow people to discriminate against gay and lesbian people?
So basically, a trans person who cant afford the paperwork and hassle to legally change all of the documentation can't live the life how they please. Or what about someone who is in the middle of transitioning and might not fully "pass" yet? Should they just be forced to live like the gender they're doing a lot to not have to?
People have just been using the bathroom of their choice forever and there haven't been issues. This law is purely because the bigoted right lost gay marriage and now is using trans people as the new boogeyman. Unless you think the timing is a big coincidence.
No, they don't. Can you cite a single case in which someone successfully used a religious freedom bill (either the federal one or a state version) to allow discrimination? There have been a few attempts, but they've all been denied because the law does not work that way.
The various religious freedom bills aren't destroyed just because a few people attempted to use them in ways they aren't meant to be used and failed. While some of those advocating for them misunderstand how they work as much as those against them do, they do provide a useful standard to protect religious rights without overreaching.
GasBandit
Staff member
If they're transitioning, I dare say the "paperwork and hassle" of changing their documentation is a drop in their bucket compared to that of getting the gender reassignment surgery required to change the gender on the birth certificate.
Actually, there HAVE been issues, directly brought about by the government getting involved in the first place, which have been linked earlier in this thread. The North Carolina state law was a reaction to a city law specifically codifying "anyone can use any bathrom they say they feel they identify with." It didn't just come out of the blue by way of the governor of NC said "Ok, NOW is the time to oppress some trannies, muahaha!" And BOTH laws only pertained to government facilities. THEN the federal government got involved and handed down the legal opinion that anyone can use any bathroom they say they feel they identify with in both public AND privately owned properties.
As usual, this is yet another case of there not being a problem until governments got involved and made everything worse. If the Charlotte City Council had just kept its SJWeenis in its pants and not made a bathroom bill in the first place, there wouldn't have been an issue at all.
Not all trans people get the surgery.
You were right about the timing of it, I just find it hard to look at the government passing a law to prevent discrimination as a bad thing just because it brings out the bigotry in people.
I have a feeling the first person stopped by this law isn't going to be a trans woman, but a cisgender woman whose features or clothing don't conform to expectations of femininity.
GasBandit
Staff member
But that's what is required in most states to change the gender on your birth certificate. And it's an imperfect standard, yes. But there is literally no good place to draw a line and say "this, this right here is how you prove you're transgender."
It's a bad thing when it's a bad law that can be abused by bad people to unintended effect. You know what paves the road to hell.
Which is why I don't think you should have to prove it. Just use the bathroom you're comfortable with.
But the intended effect is to force people to use the bathroom they don't want to, aren't comfortable with, and are likely to take abuse for using. Its solving a problem that barely exists and replacing it with one thats depressingly common.
GasBandit
Staff member
The problem here is that this flies in the face of the entire reason bathrooms were segregated in the first place - because, by and large, arbitrary cultural programming though it may be, a large number of people are not comfortable going to the bathroom/changing in the locker room in the presence of the opposite gender. And since there is no way to reasonably require "proof" of transgenderism, it means that this happens, in accordance with and protected by law.
As I said, if the first law hadn't overstepped the government's role in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess. THAT law attempted to address an uncommon problem (by your own words, everybody was "just fine" before all the law shenanigans) by creating a new, easily more potentially numerous abuses. Remember, transgendered people number less than a tenth of a percent of the population.
Also, from a pragmatic standpoint, I somehow doubt this does anything to positively impact the so-often-used as a fallacious argumentum ad passiones example of bathroom violence against the transgendered. It's a well-intentioned blunder that's just made everything worse, and in the long run, probably won't be particularly effective. It'd have been much simpler and more effective to simply make all the public restrooms unisex, and really get started deprogramming the culture from thinking we need to hide from each other to pee. Some places in Europe don't have this problem because they don't stigmatize coed nudity.
So, in my opinion, the easiest solution is, instead of having a men's room and a women's room, have a regular (unisex) restroom and a "family" restroom for people with kids, with facilities appropriate for parents with small children (larger stalls, shorter toilets, changing tables, etc). That way, if you're an adult, you still can get the more faster, efficient room, and people who are paranoid about strangers oogling their kids still have their own place to go.
And you don't have to stomp anyone's toes by "letting men in the women's room" by way of refusing to have a physical definition of what constitutes either one - because this way it no longer is important in a practical sense. It also requires a lot less renovation than converting buildings built around a 2 bathroom paradigm to 3 bathrooms.
Last edited:
My point with posting the photo on the last page was that you don't have to have had gender reassignment surgery for a trans man to look like that. So under following NC law, he'd be going into the women's restroom.
I agree with Gas that it'd have made sense to just do things the simple way, but haha America.
I agree with Gas that it'd have made sense to just do things the simple way, but haha America.
My best friend is German. The spa she and her husband go to has a co-ed changing room (including families with children) and clothing is optional in the sauna. And somehow, the German men manage not to rape everyone in the room.
GasBandit
Staff member
Yep. The first American settlers were the guys who thought all pleasure was sin and that included any bared flesh other than hands and face, wound so tightly that nobody else in Europe wanted to put up with them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritans#New_England_Puritans
We still haven't shaken that off completely, to this day.
We still haven't shaken that off completely, to this day.
Yep. The country was founded on the idea that people should have the right to oppress people even MORE in the name of religion.
Caitlyn's rep has responded calling the rumors false.
Still, sex change regret is a real issue in the transgender community, and unfortunately the LGBT community attacks anyone who tries to go public regarding their de-transitioning or convince others that sex change surgery isn't the panacea so many claim. You can do a google search for "sex change regret" and find sites, articles, etc, and Caitlyn wouldn't be the first high profile person to be under this microscope.
GasBandit
Staff member
As I so often say - a lot of people care more about championing the cause than the actual happiness and well being of those they purport to champion. Consider also how women who decide to be stay at home moms are told they're "wasting their potential" or "setting women back 50 years."
Which is why very first step when someone experiences gender dysphoria MUST be counseling/therapy. Not to convince them to transition or not to transition, but to figure out what's going on.
I forget what it pertained to, but I was in the comments section for a Dumbing of Age comic, and two trans people were talking about how they couldn't keep track of all the acronyms and weird terms that those people who were supposedly on their side kept creating and enforcing with harshness.
I was 15 when I first met a trans person online, so this was back in 2000. She created a web site with photos of her going through her transition and more importantly a HUGE question/answer page that was very informative. She wanted people to understand what all this was and what it meant to her.
I've interacted with several trans people since then and none of them have had the disgusting attitude that I see from the pretend-ally community on Tumblr. It's very obvious they have zero regard for the safety or well-being of the trans people they pretend to support; it's all about themselves, because as is the SJW mantra, "we're not here to educate."
Fortunately Title IX isn't a law, it's just a funding mechanism. If you don't follow the federal rules, you don't get the federal dollars. So states are still free to decide, though of course they could still face discrimination lawsuits, and they will lose some funding, but this is a "carrot" situation rather than a "stick" situation.
We will have to wait and watch the lawsuits currently in process to see whether the executive branch's decision to expand title ix to orientation and gender identity is valid without new legislation. I feel it would be better for congress to write the laws explicitly rather than people expanding their meaning without oversight, but the supreme court has started to expand other similar laws in similar ways, so it may not matter.
Constantly expanding government, removing rights from states and local governmental units. Not a good plan in the long run, but it sure makes some people happy to see their views and beliefs forced on others via governmental decree.
We will have to wait and watch the lawsuits currently in process to see whether the executive branch's decision to expand title ix to orientation and gender identity is valid without new legislation. I feel it would be better for congress to write the laws explicitly rather than people expanding their meaning without oversight, but the supreme court has started to expand other similar laws in similar ways, so it may not matter.
Constantly expanding government, removing rights from states and local governmental units. Not a good plan in the long run, but it sure makes some people happy to see their views and beliefs forced on others via governmental decree.
Governmental decrees taking away rights, and forcing beliefs on others, is what got the Feds involved in the first place.
Which is why a lot of people prefer limited government, and allowing the people to govern and compromise themselves, rather than having the government come in and mandate a winner and a loser.
Others prefer to be told what they can and can't do, and so want rulers to decree and dictate.
We already know how that sort of system works out, and if we continue going down that path with the government controlling and taxing more of society then even those who are happy now to have their beliefs promoted will be unhappy as they find the natural course of this path turns against them as well.