I call them Euro style because none of our stalls here are like those I've seen in Europe.
[Funny] xHamster blocks all porn in North Carolina.
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
GasBandit
Staff member
MAINTAIN EYE CONTACT
FINISH LIKE A BOSS
I can't even pee when my wife is in the bathroom trying to get ready. There is no way I'd be able to perform under that pressure.
The gendered bathrooms was actually created to address sex inequality in workplaces. As women entered the workforce in he early 1900's they found they often had only one restroom for the work area, and most would refuse to use it. They pushed for the government to act, and that's why even in workplaces with 99% men there are still an equal number of women's facilities and stalls.
Going to a unisex bathroom would probably upset some transgender advocates as well. Bathrooms are one area of society where we still have and accept segregation. Once all the differences are gone - and they are falling faster than many realize - then there won't be any real difference. Men and women, cis or trans, wouldn't be distinguished except through secondary sexual characteristics, and some would mute them, emphasize them, or simulate them whether regardless of their gender or gender identity.
Right now the fact that they want to use the segregated facility belies the acceptance of and knowledge that men and women are distinctly different and deserving of separate spaces and treatment. Presenting as the gender opposite your biological sex only has meaning while society has cues and differences that are widely adhered to.
Take that away and being transgender loses significant meaning - at least it will for some.
There are transgender people who do not want to change to a unisex society, and will fight such changes as much as social conservatives.
Going to a unisex bathroom would probably upset some transgender advocates as well. Bathrooms are one area of society where we still have and accept segregation. Once all the differences are gone - and they are falling faster than many realize - then there won't be any real difference. Men and women, cis or trans, wouldn't be distinguished except through secondary sexual characteristics, and some would mute them, emphasize them, or simulate them whether regardless of their gender or gender identity.
Right now the fact that they want to use the segregated facility belies the acceptance of and knowledge that men and women are distinctly different and deserving of separate spaces and treatment. Presenting as the gender opposite your biological sex only has meaning while society has cues and differences that are widely adhered to.
Take that away and being transgender loses significant meaning - at least it will for some.
There are transgender people who do not want to change to a unisex society, and will fight such changes as much as social conservatives.
GasBandit
Staff member
You have a point there, and it does go along nicely with the final sentence of my previous missive - for some, any compromise that doesn't involve social conservatives validating the gender identification of the transgendered will not be an acceptable compromise.
Thing is, that's just not going to fly. You can tell a good compromise - it's when all parties leave the table equally displeased.
Why should there be a compromise? Ones side is "being transgender is a sin, so you shouldn't have the right to live how you want." Just because there are two points doesn't mean both sides have merit.
GasBandit
Staff member
Because being an absolutist just means that when the pendulum swings the other way, your opposition will feel all the more righteous in cramming you back in your box where "you belong." I mean, unless you just plan to enforce your will forever, no matter what, regardless of the cost, at gunpoint if necessary.
But I bet your uniforms will look really snappy.[DOUBLEPOST=1463529739,1463529203][/DOUBLEPOST]Let me put it another way...
Without a 3/5ths compromise, the United States would not have come to exist. And that compromise was later "corrected."
GasBandit
Staff member
You're missing the point. The point was the people you would classify as "good" or "right" back then were forced to compromise for the sake of the Union. If they took the Rorschach approach, as you are keen to do so, the United States would have been over before it even started, the CSA would have risen in the 18th century instead of the 19th century when it was much weaker comparatively speaking, and slavery would probably have persisted as an institution much longer than it did - assuming, of course, that some European power didn't come and reconquer the colonies after they fractured. When you're working for change, sometimes you have to take whatever progress you can get, and then continue to work. If you flip the proverbial table when you don't get everything you want instantly, often all you're doing is damaging your own cause in the long term. Cultural change is like anal sex. You gotta go maddeningly slow and use way more lube than seems should be required. Because if you just ram what you want in there with a casual disregard, things will not work out for the best, to put it lightly.
The fact of the matter is there are still way more people on the other side of the issue than you think, and recently we're starting to get a taste of what happens in politics when people start feeling like their views are not being respected by their government. It only goes downhill from there. It doesn't matter how wrong you think they are.[DOUBLEPOST=1463531239,1463531195][/DOUBLEPOST]
Oh look at you being all succinct and shit.
I'm trying to sneak onto my phone during a middle school concert.
Where's the "People who don't want others to see other others naked"?
GasBandit
Staff member
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
Ain't no bureaucrat like a Texas bureaucrat.
We're all aware by now of Chick-fil-A's issues with homosexuality. And now that NYC mayor DeBlasio all but calling for New Yorkers to boycott, Anthony Bourdain has responded:
I'll just say when you've already got Fuku and Shake Shack in town, Chick-fil-A should be irrelevant.Anthony Bourdain said:
The gay people I know spend their money at Chik-fil-A more than anyone else.
I will never understand why anyone goes to that place. Food is overpriced for what you get and it's not even that good.
People kept telling me how wonderful the sauce was.
Then I got to try some. It's like someone mixed french dressing and Miracle Whip.
You want good fast food sauce, you get some of Long John Silver's Baja Sauce or Arby's Horsey Sauce, that stuff is tasty.
--Patrick
I agree, except for their fries. I only had them once, so maybe it was a fluke, but I was surprised how good they tasted.
Their waffle fries are the best thing they make. I am not a fan of their sandwiches.
The chicken sandwiches (not biscuits) are pretty fantastic, I've been very fond of them since arriving states-side. The fries are good as well, better than any other fast food place around here (save Arby's).
Isn't it Chick-fil-A's policy not to support any political cause, but that their owners take a certain personal stance? I mean, yes, I realize that Chick-fil-A's money is what pays for the owners to do what they want, but they are technically different.
Anyway, I feel like Anthony Bourdain is probably right on this one. Not that I've ever eaten at a Chick-fil-A, which I don't think has any Canadian branches.
Anyway, I feel like Anthony Bourdain is probably right on this one. Not that I've ever eaten at a Chick-fil-A, which I don't think has any Canadian branches.
Wouldn't be as good as Mary Browns anyway.
There at least used to be one (maybe still there) in the Calgary airport near the check in gates by the USA departures. But outside security, so never bothered. I'd rather get THROUGH security and then figure things out for food since then your two big delays (bag drop & security) are done and you can't really be late for your flight.
So might be there. At least it was once.
Oh man have you been to Seoul Fried Chicken? It's on 79 Ave and 104 St. You've got to try it: delicious.
That may be what they say, but their actual practice of it is iffy. A small amount of profits were going to anti-gay marriage lobbyists years back. I remember that this caused whoever runs the Muppets to sever a marketing deal with the restaurant chain.
I'm curious if/when some group will ask them their bathroom policy in relation to transgender people. My local one has single-person bathrooms, so this wouldn't affect it, but for all I know larger locations also have larger bathrooms.
I only get Chik-fil-A if the buses have completely fucked up my ability to get into work on time, because it's right next to the bus station. Though I suppose I could just walk two blocks and get Chipotle, but the lines there are always longer.