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.

 

NFL warns Texas that its proposed ‘bathroom bill’ may jeopardize chances to host Super Bowls

page: 7
12
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2017 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The point is that under the new bathroom policies, a man, dressed as a man, can go into the women's bathroom. He may be transgender. And that can give men who want to do other things cover whereas before, such things would be questioned.

And previously, those who were transgender and sincerely transgender did what the rest of us did. No one knew and no one really gave it a thought.

But now we have laws and ordinances that we must not question someone if he says he is "feeling feminine" today. So he can go wherever he likes. This is because there is no clear definition of what actually makes on transgender. In some circles, simply saying you identify as the other gender, without any other outward sign of transition, is enough.


So why are't conservatives targeting that particular aspect of it? Instead, they are just making women who have lived as women for ages use the men's room and men forced into the women's room.

If you are being honest here, I would assume your version of a bathroom law would address men pretending to be trans. Am I correct?

So why are you supporting these laws that only hurt people and protect nobody? In fact, since transmen will be forced to use the women's room, it will be normal to see men in there and then cisgender men can get away with it even easier than before.

I'm not doubting your reasons but your reasons don't line up with your support for many of these bathroom bills.




posted on Feb, 10 2017 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Abysha

No the NFL just attached their name to it.


Nope. If the NFL said nothing and accepted discriminatory policy, they would then be attached to it since it affects their own fans/users/etc.

Think of it like this. If Target decided to stop carrying a product that was found it was made by slave labor, are they attaching their name to that product or are they distancing themselves.

It's obvious to me. They are distancing themselves from something that is harmful.


How many NFL fans/users/etc do you think this actually affects? Do you NFL, bro?



How many black people would be affected if an Irish sports bar banned all African Americans? Not many. But does that make it okay? Do you even redneck, princess?



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 05:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Fungo

For the life of me I can't understand why the NFL would even get involved. Is this a hill they want to die on?

Some people have 'ethics', no matter their employment.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 07:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu


There comes a time when society has to stop and say "Stop, this is stupid. Find a different bathroom or soldier on. You do not have a right to impose your delusions on other people."


This is the problem. Some have zero respect for the transgender population. This is why it is so easy for them to brush off their safety issues. They think trans people are just deluded "freaks" who don't really deserve any consideration. I won't use the word "transphobic" because I know how easily triggered some people get with words and all.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 07:25 AM
link   
This liberal cuckery is pure insanity.



edit on 11-2-2017 by Kromlech because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 07:31 AM
link   
These bathroom laws are not about any sort of special privilege.

They remove the modicum of respect that we should all have for a persons individual choice.

It's a place to go to when you have to eliminate some body waste. It is not a cultural center, it is not a day care, it is not a church.

If a woman who dresses as a man or a man who dresses as a woman feels more comfortable using a restroom that they identify with, they should use that.

To have "women" suddenly using a men's restroom, or a "man" using a woman's restroom would cause more issues than anything else.

Face it, men dressed as women and women dressed as men have been around for millennia. And everyone got along pretty well.

Lets not muck this up with silly laws.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 07:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freija

19 states and over 250 municipalities already have anti-discrimination laws protecting the rights of transgender individuals to use the public accommodations consistent with their gender identity. It isn't a problem.



Isn't it ironic that these anti-discrimination laws previously passed in primarily blue states generated no fanfare. Nobody screamed "We're all gonna get raped in the bathrooms!". Some of these laws have been in existence for years. No huge increase in bathroom or locker room rapes/attacks/molestations. These laws mostly protected trans people whose employers tried to discriminate against them by forcing them to use the wrong restroom or get fired, and they protected trans students at public schools. So there WAS a need for the anti-discrimination laws. It wasn't just activism for the sake of activism. It gave trans employees and trans students a legal recourse.

When these anti-discrimination laws were introduced into red states is when all hell broke loose. Methinks the conservatives aren't really scared of getting raped in the bathroom - they just think that trans people are deluded freaks who shouldn't get to use the restroom they want. The conservatives want to be able to tell a trans person "you don't get to be here - ha ha" and legally get away with it. The anti-discrimination law stops that, and it pisses them off.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   

edit on 11-2-2017 by neo96 because: Never Mind



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

The Williams Institute estimates there are 127,000 transgender people in the state of Texas.

Anybody short-sighted enough to think the NFL's statement is about trans people using the bathroom at football games really doesn't have a clue.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Freija




The Williams Institute estimates there are 127,000 transgender people in the state of Texas.


Some of us do have clue what that word means.



verb (used with object), estimated, estimating. 1. to form an approximate judgment or opinion regarding the worth, amount, size, weight, etc., of; calculate approximately:


www.dictionary.com...

So in Williams Institutes OPINION there might be that many.

Which doesn't mean anything since it's an OPINION.

Heres the definition of that.



noun 1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.



www.dictionary.com...

So who doesn't have a clue?



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

If this is your discussion style, ignoring the topic and going into attack mode over something completely irrelevant, then I see no further reason to engage with you. Your type of post exemplifies behaviors less than complimentary to this board and you always seem so argumentative and angry whatever the subject. Would you like a cookie, bruv?



None of this matters but...

The Williams Institute of UCLA's School of Law, has a mission statement:


The Williams Institute is dedicated to conducting rigorous, independent research on sexual orientation and gender identity law and public policy. A think tank at UCLA Law, the Williams Institute produces high-quality research with real-world relevance and disseminates it to judges, legislators, policymakers, media and the public.

Experts at the Williams Institute have authored dozens of public policy studies and law review articles, filed amicus briefs in key court cases, provided expert testimony at legislative hearings, been widely cited in the national media, and trained thousands of lawyers, judges and members of the public.


Since you are the one that brought up numbers in the edited post you removed and then made a big deal over the word "estimate", do you have any research or published statistics that counter the number I posted? Don't bother looking because it isn't relevant and save the predictable response attacking my source because none of this has anything to do at all with this thread.

There's been some good discussion in this thread and different angles and perspectives shared but unfortunately as most transgender topics do, it has ended up in the toilet and down someone's pants.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Freija

Words are subjective. Facts are subjective. Quantitative labeling is subjective.


On ATS, everything is now subjective. We've taken up the "alternative website" mantle and applied it liberally to information in all forms. It's a big game of I-know-you-are-but-what-is-Clinton and I'm-gonna-argue-this-one-tidbid-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-what-you-said-but-it-will-annoy-and-distract-you-till-you-leave.

#alternativeatsfacts



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:06 PM
link   
Unisex bathrooms with individual stalls.

Problem solved. Next?

How often are stadiums remodeled these days? Geese...this is such a tempest in a teapot.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
Unisex bathrooms with individual stalls.

Problem solved. Next?

How often are stadiums remodeled these days? Geese...this is such a tempest in a teapot.


Even Trump knows that's a bad idea. He said it would be too much of a burden on business owners and I agree. He said we should keep things the way they are (i.e. all women use the women's room and all men use the men's room, regardless of what was assigned at birth).



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull

How often are stadiums remodeled these days? Geese...this is such a tempest in a teapot.


I'm sorry but if you think the NFL's statement is about bathrooms in stadiums, then I must say I think this one went over your head?



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Freija

Or I was specific to the topic?

Football stadiums. Bathrooms. ???



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:17 PM
link   
The confused are confusing things that should not be confused, again.

Identity is not reality.

This bathroom thing is being way overblown by a very vocal minority.
Most people don't care what bathroom you use as long as you act appropiately and don't make a big deal out of it.

Will male fake trans creeps creep in the womens bathroom?
You know they will.
And they will record it.
And post it.

Be careful of what you ask for.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull

Football stadiums. Bathrooms. ???


The topic is neither football nor bathrooms. It is about a major organization making a political statement about opposing discriminatory legislation.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Freija

Gender specific bathrooms are not discriminatory.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Freija

...and?

They're not allowed to?

Personally, they're out of bounds. However, they do have a right to state an opinion. There's no law against that.

Folks in favor of this sort of thing obviously have little or nothing important going on in their lives if this is a big issue for them...

Unisex bathrooms, separate stalls, where does the argument go then? It has no where to go.

As for it being cost prohibitive, if an NFL franchise/stadium owner can not afford this, then perhaps they ought to think about selling the franchise...



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join