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.

 

The slippery slope of the restroom floor.

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Not at all. The bathrooms being segregated have always been about preventing this kind of stuff (in schools). And it has still been a problem.

Now you want to let the wolves into the hen house??????????????????????


originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: pl3bscheese

Mixing kids in restrooms is loaded with potential problems. Problems that have already existed before it. It will make them worse. WHAT CAN GO WRONG WILL GO WRONG.

Here's some other examples of the things that happen even when the kids / adults aren't supposed to be in the others rooms:

15-year-old girl caught having sex with 25 boys in a school restroom

Teens Face Rape Charges After Sex In School Bathroom

The parents of a 16-year-old Atlanta student said they want answers from school officials on how their son was raped by another student during the school day.

Student charged with raping another student in high school bathroom

Girl says she was raped in school bathroom

Police investigate ‘gang rape’ in TX middle school bathroom



Man on trial charged with rape in high school bathroom

Girl used as 'bait' raped in school bathroom
Special needs student, 14, ‘raped in Alabama school bathroom after teacher told her to act as bait in bid to catch sexual predator’

11-year-old Wicker elementary student says she was raped in school bathroom

A Rape Survivor Speaks Out About Transgender Bathrooms:
"There’s no way to make everyone happy about transgender bathrooms and locker rooms. So the priority ought to be finding a way to keep everyone safe. ...
Victimizers Use Any Opening They Can Find ...
There are countless deviant men in this world who will pretend to be transgender as a means of gaining access to the people they want to exploit."

Former Student Charged with Rape in School Restroom

13-year-old boy accused of assaulting girl in Pioneer Middle School restroom

Teen Charged For Raping Special Ed Student At Roosevelt High School

Bucks County Teen With Knife Tries to Sexually Assault Classmate in School Restroom

Any no more doubts that kids can and DO already get raped in school restrooms (pre-Obama's Edict)?

.
edit on 15-6-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: TerryDon79

Not at all. The bathrooms being segregated have always been about preventing this kind of stuff (in schools). And it has still be a problem.

Now you want to let the wolves into the hen house??????????????????????


Funny how there are successful unisex toilets throughout the world, yet people still think they encourage misbehaviour.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Are those single room units, or big open multi-stall units?

Where is your evidence to support your claims?

Are your examples from schools?

NEWS FLASH: We are talking about grade school restrooms here!
edit on 15-6-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

No one said they didn't. The ONLY PERSON who is saying that, IS YOU to try and get your point across.

Maybe we should ban elevators. People get raped in them. Cars too. Oh, parks, playgrounds, apartments, houses, roads, fields, offices, schools, businesses and EVERY conceivable place you can think of.

Rape has NOTHING to do with which bathroom someone uses and EVERYTHING to do with opportunity.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: TerryDon79

Are those single room units, or big open multi-stall units? Are your examples from schools?

Where is your evidence to support your claims?


Where's my evidence? You haven't proved that unisex bathrooms increase rape or sexual assault in anyway whatsoever.

Your argument is based purely out of fear. Nothing else.


(post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss removed for a manners violation)

posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Note my links above. The first one is about a girl letting 25 boys have sex with her in a rest room. Rape isn't the only reason to segregate boys and girls.

Terry, You said "Rape has ... EVERYTHING to do with opportunity". Well as kids what higher concentration of other kids in one place is there than school? At school, ANY school, INDOORS, what more opportunistic of a place is there to be around maximum other children AND for consensual sex OR sexual assault than the restrooms?

I advise you actually think about what you're going to say before you say it. I learned this as a child. Now you finally can too.
edit on 15-6-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Note my links above. The first one is about a girl letting 25 boys have sex with her in a rest room. Rape isn't the only reason to segregate boys and girls.
You know that happens anywhere they could do it. It's a non argument.


Terry, You said "Rape has ... EVERYTHING to do with opportunity". Well as kids what higher concentration of other kids in one place is there than school? At school, ANY school, INDOORS, what more opportunistic of a place is there for consensual sex OR sexual assault than the restrooms?
So? If someone wants to have consensual sex in a male, female, unisex or baby changing room, they'll do it. Doesn't matter what you, me or my dog thinks, it will still happen.


I advise you actually think about what you're going to say before you say it. I learned this as a child. Now you finally can too.
Trust me, I'm thinking before I'm typing. This argument just isn't an argument. For you to get what you want, there would have to be security on every single school toilet in the world. And guess what? It won't stop anything. They will still find a way.


(post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: TerryDon79

But when the norm is boys and girls walking in and out of either rooms (which following the slippery slope is the inevitable outcome) its like ringing the dinner bell to sex obsessed kids AND rapists.
Is there any fact to that or is that your personal fear? If it's your fear, then you're entitled to it, but it doesn't make it real.

BTW, did you know, in Finland, the male, female and kids take public saunas together, naked? Then shower, naked? I was a bit surprised by that when I first moved there, but quickly got used to it. It's not a big deal and you actually see nakedness, unlike a bathroom, which is behind closed doors.


POST REMOVED BY STAFF
Again, there's no evidence of what you're saying beyond your personal fear. Rape happens. Yes, it's sick, but bathrooms won't change it.
edit on Wed Jun 15 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

You would actually argue that here in the US segregating the kids rooms doesn't help minimize on campus sexual assaults??

IT DOES.

[I've brought tons of facts into this thread to support my arguments. You: NONE.]

Which means if you take away that safety net, its maximizes the opportunities not only for it to happen, but also for potential sexual deviants to act out and practice becoming sexual predators (borderline Entrapment).

It's like you're arguing that loss prevention technologies wouldn't deter or obfuscate shoplifters.
edit on 15-6-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: TerryDon79

You would actually argue that here in the US segregating the kids rooms doesn't help minimize on campus sexual assaults??

IT DOES.

Which means if you take away that safety net, its maximizes the opportunities not only for it to happen, but also for potential sexual deviants to act out and practice becoming sexual predators (borderline Entrapment).
Proof?


It's like you're arguing that loss prevention technologies wouldn't deter or obfuscate shoplifters.
2 COMPLETELY different things.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

You're obviously not thinking clearly. I already addressed this earlier. It's only with things as they are now in which situations such as those you bring up can arise with (not so) high rates. If you are to unisex all bathrooms, the risk of raping/groping/peeking in a restroom where any grown man with a conscience can walk in is just too high. You realize many school bathrooms have no doors which follow the same reasoning, right? The act of attempting to secure is ineffective, the act of literally opening up the doors works as a deterrent.

I don't know how you can't see this, you're only willing to put some of the pieces together and use how things currently are to show how changing the equation would make things worse. It's circular, not logical.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
It goes without saying.

It's called COMMON SENSE.

If you're going to dismiss it, where is your argument?

Of course school restrooms and retail stores are 2 different things... but its called an ANALOGY:
Shoplifters (usually kids) hunt things to steal. Loss prevention tech's obfuscate them (hence billions are spent on the tech's). Take all that stuff away and shoplifting would surely go off the chart, if it could be done without consequence. Kids getting caught is often part of the growing up process where they face consequences, learn from it and grow up (the whole shoplifting thing fades away as a phase and they become normal non-clepto adults later on).

You were the one that said its about "opportunity". Your policy ensures MAXIMUM opportunity. It's not something to be proven (although this policy is on track to do that, just give it time...), its just reality.

Sexual predators (or simple peeping tom's) look for "prey" to "hunt" (or peep on). Give them all a secluded place where there are guaranteed to be girls with their panties down... Do I really have to spell this out for you?

Likewise, normal kids may look for a good spot to have consensual sex. What better place could there be, assuming each one could walk in there at a set meeting time during class and nobody whom happened to notice (which ever one was going into the wrong room) would even bat an eye.

Another analogy is the Hen House. The existence of the expression explains its most important purpose: to protect them. It's their SAFE SPACE. If you were going to leave the door open every night for coons & coyotes to get in then why bother even building the hen house walls to begin with?

Sure a boy can physically walk into the girls room, if so bold. But until now they had to sneak in there to even get in. Once in, now a sore thumb to every girl happening to be in there.

It's about making the risks outweigh the gamble (like with loss prevention methods in stores). Your policy either puts cameras in all school restrooms, or takes them out of all retail stores (so to speak).

You cant possibly be this dense. You're pulling my chain all these posts, right? I swear this lot, you rival the even absurdly thick-skull'ed'ness as those crazy BP Oil Doomsday maniacs from some years ago; the 9/11 No Planers even.
.
edit on 15-6-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


Sexual predators (or simple peeping tom's) look for "prey" to "hunt" (or peep on). Give them all a secluded place where there are guaranteed to be girls with their panties down... Do I really have to spell this out for you?


You just have to be honest with yourself. That's not what a unisex bathroom is. It's not secluded. It's the opposite. It's inclusive.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: pl3bscheese

The core issue was about providing (a tiny minority of) kids a safe restroom space (not the merits of unisex restrooms).

We're talking about what, a few actual genuine transgender (gender dysphoric) students per school, vs. hundreds or more female students?

This policy strips away the safe restroom space potential for ALL female students.

Please quit trolling.
edit on 15-6-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
It goes without saying.

It's called COMMON SENSE.
Commin sense is interpretted by the individual and is not a universal constant.


If you're going to dismiss it, where is your argument?
I've already presented my argument. Unisex toilets.


The last bit a perfect analog: Shoplifters (usually kids) hunt things to steal. Loss prevention tech's obfuscate them (hence billions are spent on the tech's). Take all that stuff away and shoplifting would surely go off the chart, if it could be done without consequence. Kids getting caught is often part of the growing up process where they face consequences, learn from it and grow up (the whole shoplifting thing fades away as a phase and they become normal non-clepto adults later on).
Which has nothing to do with bathrooms and/or rape/sexual assault.


You were the one that said its about "opportunity". Your policy ensures MAXIMUM opportunity. It's not something to be proven (although this policy is on track to do that, just give it time...), its just reality.
It would actually give less opportunity as more people would be using the single bathroom instead of split between 2.


Sexual predators (or simple peeping tom's) look for "prey" to "hunt" (or peep on). Give them all a secluded place where there are guaranteed to be girls with their panties down... Do I really have to spell this out for you?
Are you really using the "panties down" argument? You do realise they're BEHIND A DOOR?


Likewise, normal kids may look for a good spot to have consensual sex. What better place could there be, assuming each one could walk in there during break and nobody noticing (which ever one was going into the wrong room) would even bat an eye.
Instead of the sneaking in they do already? It wouldn't stop them, maybe slow them down, but not stop.


Another analogy is the Hen House. The existence of the expression explains its most important purpose: to protect them. It's their SAFE SPACE. If you were going to leave the door open every night for coons & coyotes to get in then why bother even building the hen house walls to begin with?
Which, again, has nothing to do with bathrooms and/or rape/sexual assault.


Sure a boy can physically walk into the girls room, if so bold. But until now they had to sneak in there to even get in. Once in, now a sore thumb to every girl happening to be in there.
Says you. You have no evidence that this has happened in any of the unisex bathrooms world wide.


It's about making the risks outweigh the gamble (like with loss prevention methods in stores). Your policy either puts cameras in all school restrooms, or takes them out of all retail stores (so to speak).
No. That's you assuming my policy. Everything would be the same, but the bathrooms would be unisex. That's it.



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: pl3bscheese

The core issue was about providing (a tiny minority of) kids a safe restroom space (not the merits of unisex restrooms).

This policy strips away the safe restroom space potential for ALL female students.

Please quit trolling.


The bathroom has never and never will be about a "safe place". It has always been and always will be about a place to get rid of your bodies waste.
edit on 1562016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2016 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: pl3bscheese

We're talking about what, a few actual genuine transgender (gender dysphoric) students per school, vs. hundreds or more female students?


After this comment of yours, I'm done.

You said that this wasn't about transgender (page 2). Now you reinforced that it really is about transgender.

So, I'm done. I can't debate/converse with someone who can't decide what the issue is that they brought up.


(post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss removed for a manners violation)

new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join