HB2, North Carolina mandate to hate homosexuals.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
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.

I tried to equate this to the Health care act. there was a very small percentage of people who couldn't get covered under the way thing were. People with no insurance and pre-existing conditions. I agree, that sucks and isn't fair. But rather than find a solution for that small group, they changed the entire system, making rates double for all of the participants. That also isn't fair, and to a much larger demographic.

This current situation has a solution, and I believe it can be dealt with, without making the other larger percentage of the population have to make changes in their lifestyles to accommodate this small group. I realize that is not a liberal ideal, but more of a conservative ideal. But with dialog, compromise, and education, anything is possible. Going about it the way it happened was wrong, the solution was wrong, and in my opinion, the understanding of the solution is very wrong. If everyone stepped back, and went about this like a group of adults, there wouldn't need to be any news coverage and Bruce Springsteen could sing his wonderful music and keep his political thoughts to himself.

originally posted by: Pinke

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

how exactly do you know I am not?

I think you may have hyperbolized just a tiny bit with that post. Wheelie people?
( I feel dirty for grinning at that)

ETA: but when we bought our house for a business, and retrofitted it for commercial use, we did have to redo the bathroom on the ground floor to make it handicapped accessible. (by law)

a reply to: kaylaluv

In that same argument, then, what of the child with BIID who is continuously failed in PE class for not participating? Or that is always late to class but isn't given the same type of accomodation.

What about school desks? There are kids who are overweight and cannot comfortably use a desk. So they get a "different" desk, that causes them to be poked fun at by their peers. In fact, i'd say this happens way more often that a transgendered child going into the bathroom.

Do we create special classifications for every iteration of human available? Or do we just try to hit the middle of the target as best we can and leave individuals to deal with their invididuality?

There is no way to justify this bill - - - other then FEAR.

FEAR based on personal belief, and created lies.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan


Do we create special classifications for every iteration of human available? Or do we just try to hit the middle of the target as best we can and leave individuals to deal with their invididuality?

I'm not sure there has to be a special classification for everyone. Everyone deserves to be treated fairly and with some degree of dignity and respect.

a reply to: kaylaluv

well...the debate is that we currently have 2 restrooms. Charlotte decided to address that, and the state government said "not so fast".

In response, people took to the internet and started accusing each other of being intolerant.

If its not a "special classification" that is being talked about, what are we talking about here?

Yes, all people deserve dignity/respect. So reference my prior point about the fat kid in the school desk. Or the BIID sufferer who isn't given disability status.

a reply to: Freija

SO hostile and you do realize that the issue is furthered muddled by people who claim differing gender identity? Look at Caitlyn Jenner! Your explaination is not the the only one out there. And for your information there are many men who identify as woman and yet still are attracted to woman. I have a close friend who is in that category. Are you trying to say that he and other like him don't count? Kudos for your support for trans-gender kids, but do not cherry-pick to try and prove your argument. There are more variations to this issue than you seem to want to admit and not all of them support your argument. Personally I could care less about this bathroom issue, but I do think that ALL angles need to be explored no matter how distasteful the results maybe.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Pinke

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

ETA: but when we bought our house for a business, and retrofitted it for commercial use, we did have to redo the bathroom on the ground floor to make it handicapped accessible. (by law)

Not if you're a church. They're exempt from having to accommodate the disabled.

Yep, they fought for that exemption in court.

originally posted by: Power_Semi
There is no point in saying anything more to any of you, you are prize idiots.

Good day to you, sir! It is kind of funny you discount the brain/mind in all of this. Where do you think your sense of gender comes from? Your big toe?



Ugh! I just woke up to this, have work to do but will reply to other individuals as time allows. BFFT, I recognize your desire to have an intelligent, philosophical type discussion about this and the position you are trying to take to foster this discussion but you're coming pretty close to the line with your parallels and similes but they're starting to get under my skin a bit as being obtusely apple and orangish. I will see if I can counter and redirect as soon as my brain starts firing on all cylinders.

a reply to: Freija

If it helps, just always remember: you and I have the same goal here. And neither of us intends anything ill or hurtful.

I can believe that. If you can, we'll be ok.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: kaylaluv

well...the debate is that we currently have 2 restrooms. Charlotte decided to address that, and the state government said "not so fast".

In response, people took to the internet and started accusing each other of being intolerant.

If its not a "special classification" that is being talked about, what are we talking about here?

You know why the governor did what he did. He was simply pandering to his conservative base. A conservative base that feels like it is quickly losing the power it once had.

People, regardless of whatever classification applies to them, deserve to use the restroom of the gender they identify with.

Yes, all people deserve dignity/respect. So reference my prior point about the fat kid in the school desk. Or the BIID sufferer who isn't given disability status.

So, give the fat kid a desk that works for him, and nip the bullying in the bud when you see it happening. Same as any fat kid or nerdy kid or gay kid that gets bullied. I don't see the issue here.

How is a BIID person not disabled? Whether its psychological or neurological or physical, isn't it still a disability if it prohibits him/her from fully participating? If a kid has an anxiety disorder and has some kind of phobia of gyms and sweating, the school deals with the kid's doctor to work something out, like excusing him from P.E. I don't see a problem here.

a reply to: kaylaluv

While you may be right on the motivations of the governor, it was the legislative body that did this. And your motives are likely correct to be applied to them as well.

RE: "it seems obvious" on the BIID issue...here is a case:

www.barcroft.tv...

Oddly enough, she lives in North Carolina.

originally posted by: network dude

. . . there was a very small percentage of people who couldn't get covered under the way thing were. People with no insurance and pre-existing conditions. But rather than find a solution for that small group, they changed the entire system, making rates double for all of the participants.

You would need to factually prove to me that this is the "what and why".

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: kaylaluv

While you may be right on the motivations of the governor, it was the legislative body that did this.

Under the cover of darkness.

So to speak.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: network dude

. . . there was a very small percentage of people who couldn't get covered under the way thing were. People with no insurance and pre-existing conditions. But rather than find a solution for that small group, they changed the entire system, making rates double for all of the participants.

You would need to factually prove to me that this is the "what and why".

not on topic at all (my fault) but I thought that part wasn't up for debate. the ACA was made for some reason, wasn't that it?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: network dude

. . . there was a very small percentage of people who couldn't get covered under the way thing were. People with no insurance and pre-existing conditions. But rather than find a solution for that small group, they changed the entire system, making rates double for all of the participants.

You would need to factually prove to me that this is the "what and why".

not on topic at all (my fault) but I thought that part wasn't up for debate. the ACA was made for some reason, wasn't that it?

As said. Off topic. We'll leave it at that.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
[
You know why the governor did what he did. He was simply pandering to his conservative base. A conservative base that feels like it is quickly losing the power it once had.

This was totally a Fundie power trip.

And it will backfire.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

RE: "it seems obvious" on the BIID issue...here is a case:

www.barcroft.tv...

Oddly enough, she lives in North Carolina.

I really don't get your point here. Are you saying this woman doesn't deserve to be on disability because she blinded herself? Is she or is she not disabled? Wasn't she disabled even before she blinded herself? She had a legitimate diagnosed disorder that made it difficult for her to live a normal life. They could have tried to give her all kinds of psych meds to relieve the disorder that would have all kinds of side effects, which would have also made it difficult for her to live a normal life. And how does this compare to a transgender person who just wants to go to the restroom?

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

RE: "it seems obvious" on the BIID issue...here is a case:

www.barcroft.tv...

Oddly enough, she lives in North Carolina.

I really don't get your point here. Are you saying this woman doesn't deserve to be on disability because she blinded herself? Is she or is she not disabled?

Didn't Pinke say: "Fit the need of the patent"?