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.
In the OP, there was a picture. Several people here have posted pictures of beautiful women who were transgender to make their point. I don't seem to get it. Nobody on Earth would know that these women used to be men. So unless they just want attention, if they truly did just want to live their lives as women, then if they shut up, that's exactly how their lives would be. Or is that not the norm? (if it's not, then those pushing those pictures have been woefully dishonest)
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: network dude
What woman?
originally posted by: network dude
. . . if they truly did just want to live their lives as women, then if they shut up, that's exactly how their lives would be.
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
originally posted by: yuppa
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: SonsOfTheMeek
Umm not if he dont have the paperwork backing it up he cant.
Unless he gets a doctoor to say he IS a woman in a mans body he cannot be in there.
Nope. You're uninformed. There's nothing in these laws that says you're required to show paperwork. In fact, to ask for any constitutes harassment and opens you up for a lawsuit.
Youre missing a point. IS the man dressed as a female? You never specified this.
Sure, why not? We'll say he dressed as a woman to go into a public women's shower room in this hypothetical situation. What is your point?
originally posted by: network dude
I don't seem to get it. Nobody on Earth would know that these women used to be men. So unless they just want attention, if they truly did just want to live their lives as women, then if they shut up, that's exactly how their lives would be. Or is that not the norm? (if it's not, then those pushing those pictures have been woefully dishonest)
originally posted by: yuppa
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
originally posted by: yuppa
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: SonsOfTheMeek
Umm not if he dont have the paperwork backing it up he cant.
Unless he gets a doctoor to say he IS a woman in a mans body he cannot be in there.
Nope. You're uninformed. There's nothing in these laws that says you're required to show paperwork. In fact, to ask for any constitutes harassment and opens you up for a lawsuit.
Youre missing a point. IS the man dressed as a female? You never specified this.
Sure, why not? We'll say he dressed as a woman to go into a public women's shower room in this hypothetical situation. What is your point?
Because if he does not act female and look female he will have a situation and be arrested. Its not legal for him to go into a female shower room for the purpose of ogling the women.
ALso I dont know of ANY TRANSGENDER Who will go into a bathroom they dont look like they belong in. So your original fear is unfounded. Going into a restroom full of guys for a very feminine trangender is like tossing a bone to a dog and really dangerous.
originally posted by: network dude
I see this law as making sure that Two beered up guys who have no morals, don't decide to go to a jr. high female locker room and claim they identify as a female, so their presence is allowed. (in the south, we call that common sense)
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
originally posted by: yuppa
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
originally posted by: yuppa
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: SonsOfTheMeek
Umm not if he dont have the paperwork backing it up he cant.
Unless he gets a doctoor to say he IS a woman in a mans body he cannot be in there.
Nope. You're uninformed. There's nothing in these laws that says you're required to show paperwork. In fact, to ask for any constitutes harassment and opens you up for a lawsuit.
Youre missing a point. IS the man dressed as a female? You never specified this.
Sure, why not? We'll say he dressed as a woman to go into a public women's shower room in this hypothetical situation. What is your point?
Because if he does not act female and look female he will have a situation and be arrested. Its not legal for him to go into a female shower room for the purpose of ogling the women.
ALso I dont know of ANY TRANSGENDER Who will go into a bathroom they dont look like they belong in. So your original fear is unfounded. Going into a restroom full of guys for a very feminine trangender is like tossing a bone to a dog and really dangerous.
Once again, he doesn't have to do anything except claim his gender identity to be female. You're really struggling to understand that part, aren't you? He doesn't have to act female, he doesn't have to look female. After all, who are you to judge what characteristics about him are female and what aren't?
He doesn't even have to claim that he isn't sexually aroused because he can claim himself to be female AND lesbian. Just accept that the SJW's have really opened up a can of worms on this that can't be put back in.
Perverts can now legally do what they want because transgenders couldn't compromise with what shower and locker rooms to use according to their plumbing. Congratulations.
Youre flat wrong.
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel secure in your position or you can actually read these laws and see how they are being interpreted around the US and open your eyes.
originally posted by: Freija
originally posted by: SonsOfTheMeek
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel secure in your position or you can actually read these laws and see how they are being interpreted around the US and open your eyes.
You are aware that 17 states and 250 some cities already protect the rights of a person to use whatever facilities that are the most appropriate for them?
This has not caused an increase in all these theoretical problems the propaganda you've fallen victim to would have you believe.
originally posted by: network dude
I have been thinking about how to articulate this, and I hope it comes out right. I appreciate your candor and willingness to help. In all the examples you visually gave, you showed very cute/pretty girl looking pictures. So that is the image we are supposed to have in our mind when discussing this.
If that's the case, I can't comprehend why any of them would want to go to the men's room. They look like women, regardless of any laws, they should go to the woman's room. And nobody would question that.
I see this law as making sure that Two beered up guys who have no morals, don't decide to go to a jr. high female locker room and claim they identify as a female, so their presence is allowed. (in the south, we call that common sense)
So I'm left with confusion over who in their right mind though that this needed to be addressed in any governmental facet. Unless the small group wants some sort of federal recognition or something.
Amid consideration in state legislatures of “papers to pee” bathroom bills aimed against transgender students, the Republican National Committee has approved a resolution endorsing the legislation.
The resolution, approved under the chairmanship of Reince Priebus, condemns as “governmental overreach” the Obama administration’s interpretation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 to prohibit discrimination against transgender students.
“The Republican National Committee calls on the Department of Education to rescind its interpretation of Title IX that wrongly includes facility use issues by transgender students,” the resolution says. The “whereas” portion of the resolution defines gender as “the physical condition of being male or female,” saying gender is identified at birth and can be confirmed with a DNA test — which is contrary to the experience of transgender people. The resolution also specifies Congress never included the term “gender identity” under Title IX and identifies courts that have ruled the gender provisions under the law don’t apply to transgender students.
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: SonsOfTheMeek
That story is iffy. The cops were not called. Think about that for a minute.