Women's shelter sued for not taking in biological man

Honestly....if you want to recognize transgender in a legally valid way, gender fluidity should also be addressed.

A whole can of worms for sure

originally posted by: Unity_99
a reply to: rickymouse


Really? The women there can't lose that shelter.

Men need to ask the government for their own. ie transgenders etc. The reason they don't is the stats involved. There have been just over 4000 operations to swap sexes done since 2000. This issue is very small percentage and being shoved at majorities nonstop.

Your solution, close the shelter to the women and children! WOW! Give your head a shake. Needed shelter.

The solution then is to have people speak up and say that these organizations have the right to deny a transgender to be in with the woman. I have no problem with people being transgender, but when a person abuses the system, that is a different thing. I know a person who is changing his sex to a woman. He is actually a pretty decent person. When he completes it he is going to be a gay woman, still going out with women. Now, should the new she be allowed to go into a place full of woman and sleep? Question two, should a gay woman actually be allowed in there. The guy I know is a bigger guy, he could easily hold down a woman and rape them even after he is a woman.

If the line is blurred, ask yourself, why is this line there in the first place, a change occurred, should that change have occurred?

a reply to: face23785

Coyle couldn't even meet the state's definition of transgender. Also, this person is a registered Republican, they are not showing any pictures, there seems to be no actual attempt to transition, and the dumb ass was also being drunk and disruptive. I could be wrong, and this might really be a trans woman, but this sounds more like one of those jerks who just like to push things to be edgy.

I think legislators need to focus more on protecting establishments from trouble like this if they are being challenged by a random cis gender person who causes trouble. It seems to come up more than legitimately transphobic scenarios. There needs to be a line drawn to protect these places like requiring legal identification specifying your sex. That would protect people who genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and have transitioned (or are well on their way) but also protect shelters and other places from smarmy perverts who joke about being attack choppers on the internet.

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: face23785

Coyle couldn't even meet the state's definition of transgender. Also, this person is a registered Republican, they are not showing any pictures, there seems to be no actual attempt to transition, and the dumb ass was also being drunk and disruptive. I could be wrong, and this might really be a trans woman, but this sounds more like one of those jerks who just like to push things to be edgy.

I think legislators need to focus more on protecting establishments from trouble like this if they are being challenged by a random cis gender person who causes trouble. It seems to come up more than legitimately transphobic scenarios. There needs to be a line drawn to protect these places like requiring legal identification specifying your sex. That would protect people who genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and have transitioned (or are well on their way) but also protect shelters and other places from smarmy perverts who joke about being attack choppers on the internet.

While i agree with your assessment of this persons intent, i have to point out that the state defining what transgender is seems counter to what much of the movement supports.

The "gender fluid" concept is going to upend any attempt to provide any clarity to any of this stuff.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: face23785

Coyle couldn't even meet the state's definition of transgender. Also, this person is a registered Republican, they are not showing any pictures, there seems to be no actual attempt to transition, and the dumb ass was also being drunk and disruptive. I could be wrong, and this might really be a trans woman, but this sounds more like one of those jerks who just like to push things to be edgy.

I think legislators need to focus more on protecting establishments from trouble like this if they are being challenged by a random cis gender person who causes trouble. It seems to come up more than legitimately transphobic scenarios. There needs to be a line drawn to protect these places like requiring legal identification specifying your sex. That would protect people who genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and have transitioned (or are well on their way) but also protect shelters and other places from smarmy perverts who joke about being attack choppers on the internet.

While i agree with your assessment of this persons intent, i have to point out that the state defining what transgender is seems counter to what much of the movement supports.

What movement?

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: face23785

Coyle couldn't even meet the state's definition of transgender. Also, this person is a registered Republican, they are not showing any pictures, there seems to be no actual attempt to transition, and the dumb ass was also being drunk and disruptive. I could be wrong, and this might really be a trans woman, but this sounds more like one of those jerks who just like to push things to be edgy.

I think legislators need to focus more on protecting establishments from trouble like this if they are being challenged by a random cis gender person who causes trouble. It seems to come up more than legitimately transphobic scenarios. There needs to be a line drawn to protect these places like requiring legal identification specifying your sex. That would protect people who genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and have transitioned (or are well on their way) but also protect shelters and other places from smarmy perverts who joke about being attack choppers on the internet.

While i agree with your assessment of this persons intent, i have to point out that the state defining what transgender is seems counter to what much of the movement supports.

What movement?

Whatever "movement" is behind the changes in state law regarding the rights of transgendered people.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: face23785

Coyle couldn't even meet the state's definition of transgender. Also, this person is a registered Republican, they are not showing any pictures, there seems to be no actual attempt to transition, and the dumb ass was also being drunk and disruptive. I could be wrong, and this might really be a trans woman, but this sounds more like one of those jerks who just like to push things to be edgy.

I think legislators need to focus more on protecting establishments from trouble like this if they are being challenged by a random cis gender person who causes trouble. It seems to come up more than legitimately transphobic scenarios. There needs to be a line drawn to protect these places like requiring legal identification specifying your sex. That would protect people who genuinely suffer from gender dysphoria and have transitioned (or are well on their way) but also protect shelters and other places from smarmy perverts who joke about being attack choppers on the internet.

While i agree with your assessment of this persons intent, i have to point out that the state defining what transgender is seems counter to what much of the movement supports.

What movement?

Whatever "movement" is behind the changes in state law regarding the rights of transgendered people.

But the changes proposed by the proposition actually harms women. If it passes, trans women who have been living as women for most of their lives won't have basic rights to exist in public.

The only "movement" is the one trying to harm these women.

a reply to: Abysha

In that state, perhaps.

My larger point is that "gender fluid" is a wildcard that is going to make it almost impossible to protect the rights of folks.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Abysha

In that state, perhaps.

My larger point is that "gender fluid" is a wildcard that is going to make it almost impossible to protect the rights of folks.

But "gender fluid" isn't the issue. Gender fluid folk generally use facilities matching their sex assigned at birth. These aren't transsexuals; they are just gender queer. Which is totally fine and cool but it's not the same thing.

This whole conflation (caused by both liberals and conservatives) of all things related to gender being swept under the umbrella of "transgender" is why this conversation is nearly impossible to have with random people. Nobody is on the same page! You and I might be arguing for ten minutes before one of us realizes that a particular phrase or label doesn't mean the same thing to me as it does to you, etc.

If you completely separate gender dysphoria from the liberal noise, you'd see that most of us are on the same page. Most "movements" that carry word "gender" in their titles have nothing to do with what is usually being talked about.

a reply to: Unity_99

My thought is,on the planet you are born on,everyone should have at least basic shelter,and a basic food supply,to be augmented by working for more luxurious things if you want them. But yes,women and children are the most vulnerable. Transgender people: if the person strongly identifies as a woman,imo they should also be allowed into the shelter if they have been physically abused and have no where else to go. But if they are on the streets,due to violent behavior of their own volition at a previous shelter,they cannot blame the next shelter for not wanting them to be there,with previously traumatised people.