Bathroom Battles: All part of the war on breeders

The hypothesis offered here is that the Bathroom Battles concerning where transexuals should urinate and defecate are proxy fights for the larger war against the family unit.

like the legalize/normalize gay marriage movement, the transpotty movement creates a privileged class out of a small minority of the population. The majority must end traditional conduct in public (using sex-identified bathrooms) for the sake of 'not' torturing a small group of people who consciously decide to create chaos by attacking sexual norms in the first place.

The long-term goal is to destroy the family (a goal for every totalitarian movement) by destroying the definitions of fatherhood/motherhood man/woman, etc., and by sexualizing children as well as teens and adults.

a reply to: redempshno one is stopping you having more kids so get on with it and stop blaming others. You want to win this war have more kids, that'll show em

I dont 100% agree with what u believe the end goal is but you explained the absurdity of the situation with eloquence. Much respect

S&F

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: redempshno one is stopping you

That's just it; I am contending for the sake of this thread that forces are, indeed, attempting to lower the birth-rate and eliminate the family unit as a locus of power & decision-making in the west.

Until about 20 years ago, there was an assumption that society existed to help people start and nurture families. There were noise ordinances in residential neighborhoods, as well as curfews for children. Most of these laws are now off the books; likewise zoning ordinances that control how close liquor stores and "adult entertainment" can be built near schools have been repealed. Whether or not this is part of a conscious plan, many people are noticing that there is a definite trend which favors any 'alternate lifestyle' over traditional two-parent families

There is another thread on ATS (that someone else started) which contends that parenting is more difficult now than in the past, due to constraints on parents.

I have oodles of kids, by the way. I get harassed constantly by the authorities for it, too. That's what I'm saying here.

Did you know that homosexuals and transgender people have families? Did you hear about the transgender male who held off on sexual reassignment surgery until he could have a child with his female partner? Did you know that many homosexual couples have children with sperm donors and/or surrogates?

There are plenty of same sex parent households with kids, an SUV, a backyard, picket fence - the whole "family experience".

I'm going to continue to poop & pee wherever legally allowed, including unisex cans. Ain't stopping ME from getting laid, though I am admittedly done procreating (two is plenty, no need to go all Duggar, kthxbai) What's your problem, bud? Unisex makes the parts not work or something? How is that a turn-off preventing saluting for the mattress mambo? Do you realize how stupid the claim even is? "I can't get it up! BLAME SHARED TOILETS!"

a reply to: redempsh an American child will use up 20 times the resources as a child born in the 3rd world. Maybe it's about time people thought about these things before popping them out as if there is no consequence. That's of course if you want their to be a habitable world for your brood to enjoy

www.scientificamerican.com...

a reply to: redempsh

You know, you make some good points. I never really focused on the difference between a female or male toilet. Of course there's no denying a urinal when you see one, but I've been fortunate enough to see a female use one; most will never witness the true courage of women lol.

I think the issue is absurd. With everything else going on, this is truly petty and insignificant. Personally, if I gotta go, I'm going. Long line for men's room, no worries.. The ladies room is right next door usually. I've done to many times to count, and yes I get odd looks, but looks won't stop the call of nature so toughen up and grow up world.

Do I agree that this issue is in some part connected to larger conspiracy to ultimately destroy the family unit? I can think of less trivial issues that break families apart. It seems with most new couples these days, a mere inconvenience is enough to cause divorce or annulment.

This all starts at home with good parenting. If you want to instill values and ethics into your children, you will. If you want your children raised by TV, cellphones, social media they have no business being on, video games, wacko agenda pushing teachers, then some parents will do that too, unfortunately.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: redempsh an American child will use up 20 times the resources as a child born in the 3rd world. Maybe it's about time people thought about these things before popping them out as if there is no consequence. That's of course if you want their to be a habitable world for your brood to enjoy

What happened to the "nobody stopping you" line?

Now suddenly it's the opposite. On reading that I do in fact have children, there's something wrong.....

So basically I, and anyone like me is wrong no matter what we do. Easy to see how quickly people choose sides, when we're sort of forced into one stance or the other, from the get-go.

a reply to: redempsh

I don't get your argument about there being a war on families simply because the family is the easiest unit to exploit and tax. Families have to have homes which you exploit through mortgages, loans etc then the utilities and local government taxes so the state makes more out of families than people living singly in multi units. It also has more control over a family than an upwardly mobile single.

a reply to: kaylaluv

So.

What makes them any more exclusive than anyone else? Are we to marvel at the possibilities?? Who............ Freaking.......... CARES?!!

These folks would probably have a better go at things if they concentrated on living a life instead of shoving it down people's throats!

a reply to: Shiloh7

A family also supplies support in the midst of a crisis. A single person has no one but the government, to look to for help.

It's the same reason that government dislikes religion, and works to limit the work of local food pantries, etc. to help the poor. The government wants the poor dependent upon the state, not on a religious community.

In a city near me, it is illegal to feed the hungry without a permit. When our organization applied for a permit, we were offered government money to give out with the food. Of course, we'd need to apply for renewed assistance, and comply with all government rules....

I group I work with tried to help survivors of Katrina, but was elbowed out of the way by the Red Cross, who was given first access by the government. The way the RC was going to help, was by "providing low-interest loans." So, they're basically bankers, who have "first whack" at any victim/survivors or an emergency.

They even charged for the donuts.

So yeah, there are definitely forces in our society that to not want independent sources of power or authority. No family, no religious tradition, no idea of right and wrong beyond what the state tells you is right/wrong.

a reply to: redempsh

You're too funny! The world is only over-populated in the centers of convienance. No one really wants to lift a finger anymore if they absolutely don't have to.

If you ever get a chance to visit Nebraska or Wyoming for example, PLENTY OF ROOM.

Not to sound harsh or unsympathetic, but as far as your ratio concerning 3rd world verses America? Well, if there's not much going in, there probably isn't much coming out... If you catch my drift.

a reply to: redempsh

In the UK Cameron was supposed to be 'aiding' people to only have two children in their family by cutting child benefit etc. But PC got in the way when you have some non-working dink with 4 wives and umpteen kids - he's too busy to work looking after the babies he keeps on producing although he knew perfectly well where he would be supported before he chose to barge his way into our country.

A lot of gays etc don't have children despite the publicity Elton John got when he decided to have a family. Also many transgender folk can't have children anyway which is rather sad actually.

I do think there are more important things like corruption in our banking and financial systems and unwarranted wars and their repercussions than people getting their panties tied up in a wad over transgender issues etc, which is a personal tragedy for those involved and their families.

I suspect when it comes to putting liquor stores and adult entertainment places near schools, which I certainly don't thinks if a good idea either, its more about bribery/corruption than a conscious governmental action. W|e have pubs and stores with licenses to sell booze in the UK near schools but they are not allowed to sell to kids although the nature of our pubs has changed from pure drinking houses to restaurants with play facilities in their gardens etc.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Did you know that homosexuals and transgender people have families? Did you hear about the transgender male who held off on sexual reassignment surgery until he could have a child with his female partner? Did you know that many homosexual couples have children with sperm donors and/or surrogates?

There are plenty of same sex parent households with kids, an SUV, a backyard, picket fence - the whole "family experience".

There may be 'plenty' of them, but they are in the minority of homosexuals, or else their idea of 'family life' is different:,the number of new sexual partner per year rangers from 2.1 - 2.9, compared with heterosexuals averaging 4 - 6 partners total by age 45.

Not that this means that they should be held to some kind of "straight benchmark." But it does undercut your argument that they are "just plain folks" who "want the same things" as any other traditional family.

Their idea of the whole "family experience" is definitely not the norm.

a reply to: Shiloh7

yeah, 3/4 of Mexican immigrants to the US (legal or otherwise) receive government entitlements to which they are precluded from law from receiving. (The Obama administration violates US laws by cutting them a check, or issuing an EBT card).

If there is a war on families (this is why I put it in the skunkworks board), it is part of a larger effort to undermine western civilization as a whole. As you point out, it isn't immigrant families that are punished. Only the "root" citizens, as the French would say.

a reply to: redempsh

The hypothesis offered here is that the Bathroom Battles concerning where transexuals should urinate and defecate are proxy fights for the larger war against the family unit.

This has to be one of the most Victorian statements I have read in a long time.
I don't see a war being waged against the family unit, quite the opposite. Families have never held power or decision making-status like you say later, but they are highly taxable, like Shiloh said, and particularly through their mortgages.

a reply to: redempsh

You're confusing puritanical authoritarians losing their struggle to force individuals to conform to gender and sexual norms or face mistreatment with a "war on the traditional family."

It's obvious that not only are you completely clueless about biology, psychology, sociology and history but also political ideology.

Whose really closer to embracing totalitarianism here? Those who want individuals to have the freedom to live openly as their true selves or those who can't get their noses out of people's bedrooms and restroom stalls for fear that somebody else might be doing something they don't approve of?

This "war on the family" nonsense is nothing more than an attempt to prove harm where there is none to justify a deeply rooted desire to impose one's will on others.

a reply to: theantediluvian

It's good, old-fashioned, pearl-clutching stuff. What's not to love?
There'll be a trend for covering up table legs soon, you mark my words.

a reply to: EternalShadow

Soooooo. How can the LGBTQ community be fighting the family unit when they have family units of their own?

"These folks" are trying to live their lives, it's states like North Carolina that are hell-bent on stopping them!