It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

HB2, North Carolina mandate to hate homosexuals.

page: 11
42
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



But that is really just semantics


I never really know how to respond when people bring up semantics. In this case I meant what I said as exactly how it was said in that in regards to my gender identity that is more of a matter of self awareness as opposed to self perception. As I pointed out earlier there is already scientific neurological evidence to show that Transgender people have brains more in line with the "gender" they identify with.

So would this not be a matter of self awareness in that I am aware my brain is geared differently than how my body appears? Aware with no brain scan to show me just my own feelings and intuition?




posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: RainbowPhoenix

yet there is also ample evidence that a person who undergoes "the switch", without concurrent counseling, has feelings of detachment and confusion. So it may not be that its a man trapped in a womans body (to borrow a phrase), but more a person who has a pathological basis to the dysphoric condition.

I may have missed your links, but am interested in reading them if you wouldn't mind throwing them up again. At the end of it all, the hope is that we yield a better understanding of human consciousness in general.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Conversely, im not sure what people are gaining from challenging it to begin with. NetworkDude makes a fair point: transgendered folks have been around for awhile, and seemed to not have a lot of issue using the restroom until lately. Is it more about standing up and screaming "ACCEPT ME!!!"? If so, done. I accepted them before they even asked. The rest of the country...that's another topic altogether.


For the 100th time, no one did anything to encourage any need for this law.
No one demanded any "special treatment". No one demanded that the rest of the population "accept them".
No one demanded anything of anyone, other than the same rights everyone else already has!

I just don't understand what part of this people are not getting.

This law was not created because transgender people were militantly demanding special facilities to cater for them. This law was created by Republican, Christian fanatics in an attempt to stop people from going about their daily business in freedom, to remove the rights LGBT people already had in cities like Charlotte.

It doesn't affect you or anyone else if someone using the cubicle next to you used to identify as female. It makes no difference to any woman if the female using the cubicle next to them used to identify as male. None of this makes any difference at all, no one was demanding that anything be changed in this respect.

Men who once identified as female will now want to use the male facilities, women who once identified as male will now want to use the women's rest room - in 99% of cases no one would even know. Nothing was being demanded by anyone and the state was not prompted into creating any new law, they chose to enact this law because they saw it as an opportunity to roll back all LGBT equality across the state, laws already created by various jurisdictions to protect the rights of LGBT were arbitrarily revoked by the state after they created a storm of sudden scaremongering over something that didn't need to be changed.

Instead, thanks to this law, people who look male will now be FORCED into using the women's rest rooms, and people who appear to be female will now be FORCED to use the men's.

Even if you ignore all the ignorance in this, you have to see the stupidity of it, surely?

edit on 18-4-2016 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013

Ya know what I don't understand: what part of "i just want to explore some ideas" that people don't get.

Now, continue on with your exasperation.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

It wouldn't be that hard to make both your bathrooms unisex, about a 30 dollar sign?



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

To be honest I have a short attention span and another poster as well as myself have posted separate articles outlining the findings that I have shared. So I am not going to repost but you are certainly capable of going back to page 10 I believe. No offense you do seem to be one of the more intellectual folks that are open and willing to learn more about the phenomena in general. I'm just bored talking it to death and am going back to lurking, at least on this subject. I have spoken my peace and if is from a personal experience perspective so to stay for too much longer and be subject to some of the more hateful poster's may cause me to...




posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Rocker2013

Ya know what I don't understand: what part of "i just want to explore some ideas" that people don't get.

Now, continue on with your exasperation.


By all means explore those ideas, I'm not attacking you, I just can't understand the failure in logic here or the belief that something happened when it didn't.

My response was to you claiming that something was demanded by certain people, and that this law is in response to that. I pointed out that nothing was demanded of anyone other than equal treatment.


edit on 18-4-2016 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

WHich brings me back to my point: what to do when other DSM diagnosis determine that they want acceptance as well? I don't really have a big issue with it, like i said. But that isn't the public at large.



Can you give a specific hypothetical example of what you're talking about?

And I don't know what you mean exactly by "acceptance". If you mean they would like to not be beat up or killed or put in jail for going to the restroom, then yeah, I guess they want acceptance. If you mean they want people to give them high fives for being transgender and be their best friend, then no, I don't think that's what they want or need.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Might need a new thread to keep going in this direction? Not sure, it's maybe going off topic, but it's interesting. If you wanted to discuss it and let me know where the thread is I'd wander over.

Brief answer though. There is a book called 'What is Madness' by Darien Leader. It's pretty awesome, and I kind of feel that's the question you're asking here.

The idea that we might fall in a deconstructionist mess in the future ... Am trying to word this in a way that isn't dismissive, but is that a real concern? Deconstructionism appears to exist primarily in slippery slope arguments in reference to future dystopias. That extreme rarely happens. Won't say never, but it's beyond rare. Very few people surveyed support the type of logic it would require to sustain such a world.

As a more focused answer ... The question presupposes a few things. For starters there is the assumption that if it is a diagnosis made by a psychiatrist then the treatment should be something other than a transition or there are clearly better treatment options available. This may not be the case.

Then there is the question what type of gender are we discussing. Are we discussing sex (ability to reproduce 'naturally' etc ...) or gender (culturally interpreted performance of gender)? What is it that drives trans* people? Can you entirely separate the physical from the mental? If people are really losing their minds over appearances, is it the people's problem or societies?

Will stop there, because I think where am going with it is ... it needs to be investigated and discussed, and that doesn't happen with people being worried about deconstructionist slippery slopes or invalidating people's experiences. That discussion is also unique.

There isn't going to be equivalent discussions about sociopathy or schizophrenic conditions because they each have very different properties and outcomes. Its also why we study these things in the first place, to learn about their properties and establish how we can know these properties.

So it's possible that the question itself is perhaps flawed in the number of presuppositions it brings?



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013

For the 100th time, no one did anything to encourage any need for this law.
No one demanded any "special treatment". No one demanded that the rest of the population "accept them".
No one demanded anything of anyone, other than the same rights everyone else already has!

I just don't understand what part of this people are not getting.

This law was not created because transgender people were militantly demanding special facilities to cater for them. This law was created by Republican, Christian fanatics in an attempt to stop people from going about their daily business in freedom, to remove the rights LGBT people already had in cities like Charlotte.



no, no, and hell no. First and foremost, Charlotte NC passed a law:


The Charlotte City Council passed an addition to its non-discrimination ordinance Monday night adding marital status, familial status, sexual orientation, and gender identity and gender expression to the list of protected characteristics under its non-discrimination law. But another piece of the ordinance removing a distinction that prohibits members of the opposite sex from using restrooms, shower rooms, bathhouses and similar facilities meant for the other gender may serve to invalidate the change under the state’s indecent exposure law. The council’s edict applies to places of public accommodation, such as bars, restaurants and stores and also applies to taxis.

link to source

Why was this added to the ordinance? Was there a big problem with transgender people mulling about mumbling about not being able to relive themselves before this was passed?

Now, because of this ordinance, AND ONLY BECAUSE of this ordinance, HB2 was enacted.

You really need to be a better liar.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
Now, because of this ordinance, AND ONLY BECAUSE of this ordinance, HB2 was enacted.

You really need to be a better liar.


Don't forget to include that big part about LGBT people now losing all their rights across the state through the passing of HB2.

Funny how you keep on claiming that HB2 is all about those pesky transgender people demanding special things, and that this is not at all about removing the rights of all LGBT people across the state, while totally ignoring the actual law stating exactly that for everyone else to see clearly.

And you can call me a liar all you like, I'm not the one in this thread manufacturing an entirely different law to the one actually passed.

Everyone else can read the law, you seem incapable.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: network dude
Now, because of this ordinance, AND ONLY BECAUSE of this ordinance, HB2 was enacted.

You really need to be a better liar.


Don't forget to include that big part about LGBT people now losing all their rights across the state through the passing of HB2.

Funny how you keep on claiming that HB2 is all about those pesky transgender people demanding special things, and that this is not at all about removing the rights of all LGBT people across the state, while totally ignoring the actual law stating exactly that for everyone else to see clearly.

And you can call me a liar all you like, I'm not the one in this thread manufacturing an entirely different law to the one actually passed.

Everyone else can read the law, you seem incapable.


Please list any rights the LGBT people lost with HB2.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

no, no, and hell no. First and foremost, Charlotte NC passed a law


Why should Charlotte not make laws that fit their demographic?

As previously stated - - - - this is like California making a state law that prevents San Francisco and West Hollywood from doing what is right for their specific demographic needs.

McCrory used bullying tactics to disallow one specific area doing the right thing for its demographic.

Why? Because he's a clueless Fundie - - who chooses belief and lies over science.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: network dude
Now, because of this ordinance, AND ONLY BECAUSE of this ordinance, HB2 was enacted.

You really need to be a better liar.


Don't forget to include that big part about LGBT people now losing all their rights across the state through the passing of HB2.

Funny how you keep on claiming that HB2 is all about those pesky transgender people demanding special things, and that this is not at all about removing the rights of all LGBT people across the state, while totally ignoring the actual law stating exactly that for everyone else to see clearly.

And you can call me a liar all you like, I'm not the one in this thread manufacturing an entirely different law to the one actually passed.

Everyone else can read the law, you seem incapable.


Please list any rights the LGBT people lost with HB2.


How about a law that forces you to use the women's restroom?

How about a law that forces you to dress as a woman and use only those areas designated for females?

What? You will get put in jail if you try to use the men's room? Because . . . .



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

WHich brings me back to my point: what to do when other DSM diagnosis determine that they want acceptance as well? I don't really have a big issue with it, like i said. But that isn't the public at large.



Can you give a specific hypothetical example of what you're talking about?

And I don't know what you mean exactly by "acceptance". If you mean they would like to not be beat up or killed or put in jail for going to the restroom, then yeah, I guess they want acceptance. If you mean they want people to give them high fives for being transgender and be their best friend, then no, I don't think that's what they want or need.



I think you are asking a good question. Because, as far as bathrooms are concerned, I thought we already had that worked out in reality. The debate here really seems to be one more of philosophy, not reality. Because in reality, no one is going to stop someone from walking into the restroom they appear ready to use. If you have a beard and lumberjack attire, its never been (and likley never will be) something folks want to tolerate.

In the real world: i don't think that if Kaitlyn Jenner weren't famous, she would ever experience any issues walking into a womens restroom. Is someone going to walk up and say, "excuse me....but you seem a bit homely to be a woman. And your feet are big. Are you sure you should be going in there?"

And I can bet that there would be a fist fight the first time someone pulled that on another mans wife.

So, what exactly is being discussed here beyond mere philosophy?

I can't nail down what "acceptance" means. I guess we will know when we don't have all this silly bickering.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

In the real world: i don't think that if Kaitlyn Jenner weren't famous, she would ever experience any issues walking into a womens restroom. Is someone going to walk up and say, "excuse me....but you seem a bit homely to be a woman. And your feet are big. Are you sure you should be going in there?"


Actually, I have seen a butch lesbians confronted in a women's restrooms.

That was years ago, before I even heard of transgender.



Op-ed: I'm a Lesbian Targeted by the Bathroom Police

A few years back, I went out to a sports bar with a close friend. Eventually she and I made our way to the women’s room. There was a line inside. A bartender came out of the stall, and when she saw me, she shoved me into the wall and yelled in my face. I explained to her (not in a very nice way) that I was a woman and left. It was embarrassing. Plus I hate confrontations. And ever since it happened I’ve depended on an elaborate scheme to prevent it from happening again: If I have to pee, I wait until I get home. If only I were the only one in this situation. There are thousands, if not millions, of people who are easily mistaken for the opposite sex — like Cortney Bogorad, a cisgender (nontrans) woman who is suing the Fishbone restaurant chain after she was manhandled and thrown out after using one of its restrooms (employees did not believe she is a woman even though she showed them ID). Add to that around 700,000 transgender people in the United States who often cannot use public restrooms of their choosing. www.advocate.com...



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You're right, the public restroom part of the law is just a metaphorical middle finger to the efforts of this country to be more inclusive with the LGBT community. The fact is, unless someone personally knows that a specific person is transgender and decides to turn them in under this law, no one is going to know for sure if someone is transgender or not. I've seen some hard-core women weight lifters who I really thought were men in dresses, and I've seen some pretty small-built guys with soft skin and long eyelashes.

Even though I hate the law for what it stands for (psychological marginalization of the transgender population), I'm not so concerned with the public restroom part. What concerns me more is if a transgender teen is forced to use the restroom or locker room of the gender they do not identify with at a public school. In a smaller environment, these kids are not so anonymous. Everyone knows who the transgender ones are. They can't just slip in cuz they pass for the gender they identify with. It's hard enough to be a teen as it is, not to mention being a gay teen, or even harder, a transgender teen.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

In the real world: i don't think that if Kaitlyn Jenner weren't famous, she would ever experience any issues walking into a womens restroom. Is someone going to walk up and say, "excuse me....but you seem a bit homely to be a woman. And your feet are big. Are you sure you should be going in there?"


Actually, I have seen a butch lesbians confronted in a women's restrooms.

That was years ago, before I even heard of transgender.



Op-ed: I'm a Lesbian Targeted by the Bathroom Police

A few years back, I went out to a sports bar with a close friend. Eventually she and I made our way to the women’s room. There was a line inside. A bartender came out of the stall, and when she saw me, she shoved me into the wall and yelled in my face. I explained to her (not in a very nice way) that I was a woman and left. It was embarrassing. Plus I hate confrontations. And ever since it happened I’ve depended on an elaborate scheme to prevent it from happening again: If I have to pee, I wait until I get home. If only I were the only one in this situation. There are thousands, if not millions, of people who are easily mistaken for the opposite sex — like Cortney Bogorad, a cisgender (nontrans) woman who is suing the Fishbone restaurant chain after she was manhandled and thrown out after using one of its restrooms (employees did not believe she is a woman even though she showed them ID). Add to that around 700,000 transgender people in the United States who often cannot use public restrooms of their choosing. www.advocate.com...





What if instead of it being a very butch lesbian, it was just a man trying to get a peak at some girls using the restroom? Would that be acceptable to you? If not, why?

I just can't imagine this happens often enough to need a law about it. Even in this article, the woman in question came up with a viable solution, pee at home. (even though I'd wager she didn't have this happen to her on every bathroom experience)

I'm not against LGBT people at all. I just hate seeing everyone obsess over such a tiny, tiny percentage of the population. Times are changing, people are changing, but not at the same pace. When you want to force your ideals on others, they inevitably will likely do the same back, and you get what we have here........a failure to communicate.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Mandating toilet usage.... yeah America you truly are ludicrous.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
What if instead of it being a very butch lesbian, it was just a man trying to get a peak at some girls using the restroom? Would that be acceptable to you? If not, why?

Anyone being sexual in a public toilet is being creepy. Don't care who they are.


I just can't imagine this happens often enough to need a law about it. Even in this article, the woman in question came up with a viable solution, pee at home. (even though I'd wager she didn't have this happen to her on every bathroom experience)

Please, tell me about your vast experience as a butch looking woman.

But no I actually completely agree with this. It's the same with people who use wheel chairs. They can crawl, I don't see what the problem is. It's a viable solution. Damn wheelie people.



When you want to force your ideals on others, they inevitably will likely do the same back, and you get what we have here........a failure to communicate.

What about when I want to pee?

Guess I better hold it till I log off.
edit on 18-4-2016 by Pinke because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
42
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join