The Disgusting Hypocrisy of the Anti-Trans Bathroom Movement

The Disgusting Hypocrisy of the Anti-Trans Bathroom Movement April 15, 2016

toilet doors for boys and girls. Male and female pictograms

So listen– I’ve been thinking about this whole movement to make peeing while trans illegal, and I have a few thoughts.

The basic premise is this: Individuals who are transgender need to use the public restroom that corresponds to their actual gender (not their sex, which is different). They need to do this for their own safety, as if they were to enter the bathroom that corresponded to their sex instead of their gender, it would freak people out and cause an unnecessary disturbance. Furthermore, going into the wrong bathroom would subject our trans brothers and sisters to potential harassment and even violence.

Yet, certain forces on the right are working tirelessly to make it illegal for trans individuals to use the restroom that corresponds with their gender– mainly using the argument that women and children would be at risk of harm from men masquerading as trans women for nefarious purposes. Thus, instead of addressing the issue of male violence, they want a blanket law that prohibits all transgender people from using the correct restroom.

While there are perhaps a dozen angles from which one could discuss this issue, the thing that really irks me the most is the gross hypocrisy of those behind these bathroom bills. Let me explain.

The same folks who argue that we need a law forcing transgender people to use the bathroom that corresponds to their sex instead of their gender, is the same group of people who are fighting for their gun rights when they’re not busy regulating where people pee.

And when they shift from gun rights to anti-bathroom bills, they completely dump their logic and principles.

It goes something like this:

“Someone might pretend to be a transgender person so they can enter the bathroom to assault our wives and children! We cannot put too high a price on the safety of our families. We must pass a law that stops all of them from gaining access to the bathroom!”

However, when the issue becomes gun rights and not bathroom rights, this group switches sides dramatically.

When we say, “Listen, we cannot put too high a price on the safety of our families. Our children are being killed every day by gun violence, and we could really benefit from some common sense gun regulations to reduce the bloodshed” the anti-bathroom folks no longer believe what they’re selling. Instead of, “We must protect our children from this danger” they reply with:

“You must be a special kind of stupid. Criminals don’t obey laws, so more laws won’t work. Do you really think that gun restrictions will actually stop someone who is determined to get access to a gun and use it the wrong way? Hahaha. You’re such a libtard. You should just go back and run with the other sheeple.”

For real. This is actually how dramatically they switch sides when it goes from protecting their rights compared to someone else’s rights.

Regulating bathroom rights? Great solution!

Regulating gun rights? Nah, laws never work. Besides, most gun owners are no threat to anyone.

I think what their side is missing is the fact that our transgender brothers and sisters are not a threat to us, and instead of protecting people, these anti-bathroom laws serve to put a population of society at greater risk of harm– and I’m not talking about your wife and kids.

If the anti-bathroom folks actually did believe that we must protect our children (they don’t believe that, btw) they wouldn’t be on a mission to regulate a nonexistent problem while ignoring the growing pile of dead children we seem to amass on a weekly basis from gun violence.

Our transgender friends aren’t going to just snap while washing their hands and assault you. They’re not trying to sneak a peek or cop a feel. They’re just trying to freakin’ pee.

Let’s be clear: This has nothing to do with protecting our children. If these folks actually cared about the safety of our children, they’d be focused on what’s killing them on a daily basis– and newsflash: it’s not our transgender friends.

If folks want to be transphobic, ignorance can be their prerogative. But let’s not pretend for even one second that they get the moral high ground of putting the safety of our children first– because on any other day of the week, they value their own rights over the lives of children.

 Follow follow the guy who doesn’t notice transgender folks in the restroom, because he doesn’t even make eye contact with people in public restrooms:

"MHO I believe one's thoughts predict one's actions and trajectory in life. Love Justice and ..."

No, The Gospel Isn’t “Good News” ..."
"Wasn't Jesus, the entity you worship, a socialist? Seems to me he was."

5 Serious Questions I Have For ..."
"Well, dude he's not in favor of abortion, want me to vote for an abortionist? ..."

5 Serious Questions I Have For ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Meredith Indermaur

    As a resident of NC, I’ve been trying to say this on Franklin Graham’s page for a couple weeks now, but not as articulately as you have done here. Thank you for your sanctified common sense and your courage.

  • otrotierra

    Thank you for this, Dr. Corey! Indeed—U.S. religious fundamentalists, who despise Big Government, want to make Big Government even Bigger by policing other people’s bowel movements.

  • Timothy Weston

    Right now, I am calling this “Anti-LGBT Limbo” after hearing how low some of these legislatures are stooping to regulate behavior.

  • David Antonini

    You mean like the blanket law that says I can’t drive at 140 mph on the interstate, just because others won’t do so safetly? Many laws actually target the actions of a few, because policing hearts and intent are m6ch more difficult. I don’t disagree with your point that predatory behaviour should be targeted because that is the issue, but your citicism of the law fits a lot of others also.

  • missjay

    I honestly wonder if the people so upset over a trans woman using the woman’s restroom understand the difference between a transvestite -a man in a dress – and a trans woman who takes estrogen, gets breast implants, etc.

  • Allie Burton

    I think you might be overgeneralizing a bit here. Not everyone who is uncomfortable with laws that allow trans people is super pro-gun rights, but I agree that there’s a lot of overlap and definitely some hypocrisy. I’d be curious about your position on people who are pro-gun control and also in favor of, as you put it “anti-bathroom bills”.

  • Oceanalienprincess

    Well said.

  • Blerg

    My mother-in-law, who never met a black or gay person she didn’t fear, was talking about this the other day, after watching a fearmongering segment on Fox “News” about these laws. As you might imagine, the Fox report indicated women and children are in enormous danger from transgenders. So I dropped a little truth bomb, that more republican congressmen have been arrested for bathroom sexual misconduct than transgenders. She looked like I was speaking another language. Then she said that the real problem is men who will dress as women so they can attack young girls in the bathroom. I again pointed out this doesn’t actually happen, and she replied triumphantly “It might!”

    I wish I knew how to argue with hate and fear-filled folks.

  • That is exactly the point of the article.

    So, why does the same group of people who insist that we can’t regulate guns because of the abuses of “a few” also argue that we should regulate bathroom usage? That’s what the article is about.

  • If you want to take my urinal, come get it!

  • ian

    This article seems to lack the standard of logic I am used to from your blog. Sure, there’s immense hypocrisy from the pro-gun camp, but just because they’re wrong in one argument doesn’t make them wrong in every other one, and it certainly doesn’t mean that everyone who questions the sense of the trans-bathroom movement is pro-guns (that being a uniquely american phenomenon).

    The argument for trans people to be able to use the bathroom corresponding to their gender is completely unworkable unless there’s an objective way of determining someone’s gender (which would be antithetical to the trans movement). Otherwise all we’re ruling is “use whichever bathroom you feel comfortable using”, in which case we might as well ban gender segregated bathrooms and only have unisex ones. That should be where the debate is centred, is there a need for gender segregated bathrooms? I think a good argument can be made that they’re not necessary, in which case do away with them and solve the problem. If there’s a reason for them to remain, then there has to be a feasible way of enforcing the segregation.

  • Gizzy N

    Here’s an argument you can run by your mom…

    Ok mom, so let me sum up your position – you want to have a law that says people who look like men, but were born women, are to use the women’s bathroom. And people who look like women, but were born men, to use the men’s bathroom, right? And you want this law because some perverted or pedo man might dress up as a woman and go into the women’s bathroom and assault a woman or child. Do I have all of this right?

    Ok… great. So we pass the law. And now people who look like men, but were born women, are going into the women’s bathroom like they’re supposed to, because of the law.

    Except mom, by passing this law, you’ve now made it even EASIER for perverts and pedos to go into the women’s bathroom.

    When she says she doesn’t understand/you don’t know what you’re talking about, explain…

    BEFORE the law, a perv/pedo would have to go through great effort to make themselves look like a woman before they could reasonably expect to go into a woman’s bathroom and perv around unnoticed. Few, if any, ever made the effort because it is HARD for a man to look like a woman. But sure, they might have.

    But now? They don’t have to do anything. They can walk into the women’s bathroom with their beard and mustache and beer gut and perv around to their heart’s content. Why? Because all they have to do NOW is say, “but I’m trans… I was born a woman!” AND HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PROVE OTHERWISE?!?!?!?!?!

    It’s not like we have to pass a DNA test to go through the door… or let someone examine our girly bits to make sure they’re the ones we’re born with. All these MEN have to do now is CLAIM to have been born a woman, and we have no way to challenge that or make them prove it. Because we’ve passed a law YOU supported that sends thousands of male-looking people into the women’s bathroom all because they were born with an “innie.”

    You are literally CREATING the very outcome you fear, and allowing sick and perverted men a golden ticket to access the women’s bathroom ANY TIME THEY WANT.

    Then you drop your mic and walk away ;)

  • HazumuOsaragi

    Then she said that the real problem is men who will dress as women so they can attack young girls in the bathroom. I again pointed out this doesn’t actually happen, and she replied triumphantly “It might!”

    I wish I knew how to argue with hate and fear-filled folks.

    Easy-peasy. Present them with these facts:

    •The first city to allow transgenders to use the restroom that matches their gender identity/presentation was Minneapolis in 1975.
    •The first state was Minnesota, in 1993.
    •There are currently 17 states (edit: 18) that protect transgenders using the facilities that match their gender identity.
    •Half of them have had said protections since at least 2006.

    THEREFORE: There must be thousands of incidents in at least the last 10 years where perverts intent on molesting YourDaughter™®© used these protections to gain unfettered access to the Women’s Sanctuary and Harem™®©.

    And with thousands of incidents, it’s no trouble at all to GØØGLE hundreds of them.

    Tell the person you tell this you’ll wait for their results…

  • JD

    Ben, thank you for this. My view is go to the restroom of the gender that you present yourself as. If you are a transgender woman and present yourself in public as a woman, then go to the women’s room. If you are a transgender male and present yourself in public as a male, then go to the men’s room. If you are transgender, but still living as your biological gender, then go to the restroom with which you present yourself.

    For all those that scream about how transgender individuals should go to the restroom of the sex they were born as, it just makes zero sense whatsoever. If one is living full-time as a woman, has fully transitioned, and is on HRT, then do you honestly want them in the men’s room? Use common sense. Go to the restroom of the gender that you present yourself as. These laws are nothing more than part of the culture war nonsense and “payback” by the religious right because they keep losing. But, as they keep losing these battles, they double down and look even less like Jesus.

  • They do not, for the most part. In discussions, I’ve clarified this distinction three times in the last two weeks alone.

    The key, overwhelming issue in all this is *incuriosity.* Not just ignorance and hate, because ignorance can be fixed by learning new information – and hate can be mitigated by exposure and experience. However, the willful determination not to expand one’s knowledge. . . the glazed eye look when peer reviewed studies and scientific information is brought into this conversation. . . I don’t know how to combat that.

    I think my transgender friends must have the thickest skins of anyone I know. After all, they have to deal with the same tired and clichéd misconceptions almost every single day, whereas most of us only encounter the same inane untruths (untruths that could be cleared up by a thirty second google search) when the issue is topical because of current events.

  • people who hate and fear live in a bubble of kind of mental illness that can be exacerbated by watching soul murdering media like Fox News. IMHO when one is influenced by a negative information source and one’s opinions and identity are heavily invested & molded with daily indoctrination for years and years it is possible for one to become addicted to the fight or flight chemicals (adrenaline and cortisol) w/ hits so powerful that can induce one to do violence against others one is directed to believe is a personal threat.

  • tyler

    If one is living full-time as a woman, has fully transitioned, and is
    on HRT, then do you honestly want them in the men’s room?

    i’m pretty sure their answer would be yes. judging from the rhetoric i’ve heard, i can only assume that their ideal situation involves the aforementioned trans woman entering the men’s room and then being violently assaulted and possibly murdered

    when you’ve presented all the statistics and anecdotes and they’re still convinced that any of this is a good idea, the only conclusion there is to draw is that they want trans people dead

  • CroneEver

    Great post. I also have been pointing out to people that there isn’t a woman in this country who hasn’t walked into and used the men’s room when there was too long a line for the women’s room. Does this mean that we’re all now going to get arrested at the next concert or sports event? Not only that, unanimously unisex toilets are used by any gender/age/etc every day in our homes. As far as I can tell, no one has ever done pants checks on guests. People go in, shut the door, and if necessary, lock the door and use the toilet. No problem.

  • Backamae

    Awesome response! And I agree!

  • RollieB

    Didn’t all of us grow up with unisex bathrooms in our residence? … I fail to see a problem requiring a new law.

  • LadyMustang

    I have made this exact same argument multiple times. I was talking online with one woman who insisted that people should use the bathroom that matched their genitalia. So I posted a picture of a transman and said let me be clear – you want this man in the bathroom with you – and then I posted a picture of a transwoman and said – but you don’t want this woman in the bathroom with you. She replied: “Read.” So I explained that the man in the first picture had a vagina and under the new law would be required to use the ladies room while the woman in the second picture had a penis and would need to use the men’s room. It finally got through to her what I had been talking about. So many people think transwoman is “man in a dress” and don’t understand what happens when you take hormones and have surgery. You are so absolutely right. They are creating the very situation they claim to want to prevent.

  • Josie Olsen

    Hehehe I posted about this on twitter weeks ago

    It is incredible the ways and places the right wants to see regulation.

  • What I find disgustingly hypocritical is that the same progressive Liberals who support their candidates unbelievable position that an unborn child has no constitutional rights whatsoever now tell us we should be ashamed to try and stop men using the women’s restroom in order to protect our born children.

  • Don Lowery

    So…let me get this straight…if I was in a production of “Rocky Horror” playing Frankfurter or any other female part (because I’m a great performer/singer/look good in drag…NOT)…I have to hold it during “The Time Warp” or other numbers where I’m not on stage because I actually have time to use the restroom AND molest some woman or child AND get back on stage to do “Sweet Transvestite”? Guess that makes me not only a great scientist here on earth and on Transexual, Transylvania…since I am able to break the laws of physics to do all of this in the time allotted. By George..I’ve got it! Dr. Corey…thank you so much for showing me the way. ;)

  • John Heinis

    Benjamin Corey has hit the nail squarely on the head! This is the most Compelling Argument to be used when Confronting the Followers of Franklin Graham.

  • Bones

    Yes, my right to shoot you overrides your right to go to the toilet………

  • Protect them from what, exactly? Can you please cite the straight-man-posing-as-woman-to-assault-girls-in-the-restroom incidents that have prompted this supposedly protective legislation?

  • Bones

    That’s right. They want to regulate people’s behaviour and bodies….

  • Lisa Rosestars

    This is not about transgender protection anymore. This is about bullying women into accepting the risk of strange men who may or may not be who they pretend to be coming into the ladies bathrooms and locker rooms, if this was only about protecting transgenders they would accept a compromise and agree to go into the restrooms and changing rooms that are single stalled and unisex which is a good idea not only for them but for other issues as well, but no they demand the right to come into the multi stalled ladies rooms and locker rooms ,and how may I ask will they be asked to prove they are truly transgender and deserve to be in there and are not a predator or peeping tom up to no good? Well ? Apparently you claim they should not have to all they have to do is claim to feel like a woman. And in fact according to the current law in Washington they do not even have to do that. Have you really thought this through? It is not the truly transgender who are the danger it is men who will abuse this law. And if you do not think they will then you have not been reading the news because it is already happening. And what about female victims of sexual violence? Do you not see how traumatizing it would be to have men who look like men come into a bathroom or locker room when she is in there ? And you really expect people to trust men not to try to abuse this law in any way ? I hope you will take responsibility when they do abuse this law because I will hold you and all of those like you morally responsible .

  • LeoMdE

    Prove to me that you’re a woman. Go on, prove it. I don’t think you look feminine enough. You might be a man dressed as a woman. Therefore, you need to show me proof.

    And THAT, lady, is how stupid it is to try to tell transgender people that they have to prove anything. Are you going to drop your trousers because someone else demands it?

  • Being a geek, I can’t help but think of how un-enforceable this law is at fantasy and sci fi conventions. Having been to a few anime conventions… um… I broke one of my cosplay props in the ladies room while dressed up as a male character! Fell right out of my holster onto the floor… That’s not even getting into the sincerely-convincing sexy-females that are actually skinny young guys with high-end gear. Also, what the heck is Totoro? So many people in so many odd and amazing costumes and no… you can’t tell even if you are looking at them instead of just there to do your business. It’s just the idea of having people playing gender-police outside the bathrooms at one of these things (where people go to use the mirrors to correct wardrobe malfunctions and makeup even more than they go to use the can) provides me with a hilarious mental image.

    Also pretty sure now that Otakon will NEVER move to North Carolina.

  • Deflection into a completely-other issue (which, if I’m not mistaken, has been addressed on this blog before… searching is your friend). This is common, isn’t it? A “progressive” boogyman brings up some issue and someone shouts “abortion!”

    Distraction-tactic. Annoying. Don’t anyone fall for it.

  • Brandon Roberts

    i think trans people should have the right to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with. but if that’s too big a deal than i think a fair compromise would be having seperate bathrooms for trans individuals or coed bathrooms.

  • kaydenpat

    I’m hoping that these so-called bathroom bills will be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. They are unnecessary and unfairly target a minority group.

  • kaydenpat

    Women being assaulted by fake transgender women is not a real issue. It’s s bogeyman created by bigots to justify their hatred of trans people. As a straight woman, you and your ilk are not protecting me by supporting so-called bathroom laws.

  • kaydenpat

    I have yet to hear about incidents where men dress up as women to assault women or children in women’s bathrooms. Such incidents don’t exist and are therefore not a problem.

  • kaydenpat

    Yep, common sense would lead to your conclusions. Just goes to show what is actually motivating those who support these bathroom bills.

  • kaydenpat

    Thanks for that information. It needs to be tweeted out so that the truth is spread as far and wide as the lies which are used to justify these laws.

  • I can tell you that North Carolina isn’t alone. Lawmakers in seven states are looking to do something similar: Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, Mississippi, Tennessee and Wisconsin. The state’s job is to protect its citizens. These states have found the current trend dangerous.

  • Apparently North Carolina isn’t alone in wanting to protect our children. Lawmakers in seven states are looking to do something similar: Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, Mississippi, Tennessee and Wisconsin. Besides killing our children in the womb progressives want to have sex with them anyway they can.

  • Apparently besides North Carolina lawmakers in seven states don’t agree: Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, Mississippi, Tennessee and Wisconsin are concerned about incidents that you say don’t exist.

  • Paul Atreides

    Just a quick reminder that trans men aren’t likely to assault anyone either, so be careful about using this argument or you could be spreading the wrong message. Thanks!

  • Paul Atreides

    um what.

    Bob, listen. I’m a trans man. I usually pass as male (though I’m probably what you’d call androgynous, in a kind of schlubby way; not all of us can be David Bowie).

    99.9% of the time, I use the mens’ room, even though I haven’t had any surgeries. I go in a stall, pee, do my business, and leave. The other .1% of the time, I go in the ladies’- because I’m actively having my period or the mens’ room is just a urinal and I still need to sit down.

    I have never harassed anyone. I have never been sexually harassed. I certainly have never tried to have sex with a child because. ew. why would you do that. that’s fucked up, man.

    I’ve lived in pretty big cities with a large lgbtqia+ population for ages and I have never heard of anyone else going to bathrooms to abuse children either. Straight, gay, cis, or trans.

    The worst I have ever seen or heard in a bathroom is, well… I work in a public library. Occasionally you get homeless men who go to the bathroom to jerk off. I cannot really blame them; if you’re homeless, you don’t really have a safe place to do your business. Also, occasionally you get people who shit all over the seat… and the floor… and the walls… yeah, that’s worse than almost anything sexual people could do in a bathroom, IMO.

    People certainly aren’t going out of the way to bugger kids in restrooms. Most child molestors are opportunists. They are not going to molest kids when it’s hard when there are much easier ways to get access to victims. Such as being a Good Christian Man/Woman and teaching Sunday School, or just “growing” some of their own.

    God, now I feel skeevy now. TLDR: Grow up. No one is going to hurt you or your kids in the restroom, you just want an excuse to keep the icky queers out.

  • Blerg

    That is a great explanation. My husband calls her issues “a sickness”; I think you’ve described it perfectly. I try using her Christian faith (God will protect you), but nothing works.

  • Paul Atreides

    …Because they’re playing political Calvinball.

    They need a way to let their constituents know that they’re In Support of Traditional Families and Lifestyles, but most of the things they could actually do to prove it are political suicide. In this day and age, unless you’re living south of the Mason-Dixon line, anti-gay discrimination bills are not actually popular. But no one cares about trans people except other trans people. This is changing, but it’s still the truth. We’re still way too easy to demonize.

    There are no incidents of trans women harassing teenage girls in bathrooms, to my knowledge- to say nothing of kids. But most people already believe we’re the bad guys. It’s an easy, cynical, pandering vote-grab and that’s all there really is to say on the matter.

  • missjay

    ” Do you not see how traumatizing it would be to have men who look like men come into a bathroom or locker room when she is in there” – that is exactly what this law wants to happen!!!! – it wants to make trans men(who were born women and might still have female genitals) use the women’s locker room/bathroom even though they take testosterone & have full beards and have had a mastectomy so they no longer have breasts & instead have chest hair like men.

    You obviously have zero concept of what a trans person is. A trans woman is not a man in a dress, that is a transvestite. A trans woman is not a man who says “I feel like a woman” and that is that. A trans woman lives & presents as a woman. She takes estrogen and other hormones, she gets a boob job – and you want her to go into a men’s locker room and get attacked because she might not have had bottom surgery yet.

  • (((J_Enigma32)))

    You have no right to another person’s body. Otherwise, if we’re the same donor type, why can’t the government to beat down your door and arrest you for murder because I died when you didn’t give me your kidney?

    I have no idea how stopping men from using women’s restrooms would protect “born children” — a redundant phrase, given all children are born. Gay men use the boy’s restroom all the time, gay women use the girl’s restroom all the time, and you know what? It’s not a problem.

    It’s almost like people are actually capable of controlling sexual urges while they’re in public or something. God damn what a notion. Right-wingers need to learn that the world doesn’t work like porn, since they clearly have trouble with that distinction.

  • (((J_Enigma32)))

    Why? It was never really enforced before.

    Consider the following: There’s no cop around to enforce the law, so why do you stop at red lights and stop signs? Out of courtesy, and because you’ll get in trouble if you don’t. Sure, a few people don’t do that, but the bulk of people will follow the rules as written. That’s the same thing at work here.

    That said, I agree: all bathrooms should be unisex and we should get rid of the distinction.

  • Larry TheKeyboardist Blake

    This further reaffirms my theory that the dolts behind these bills always need to find a new group of people to be offended by when it becomes unpopular to attack the previous group(s) they’ve gone after before. Now that they’ve lost the war over marriage equality, they’ve decided to shift their focus to obsessing over what might be between someone’s legs.

    And the whole idea that these people want a “smaller government”? Yeah, that notion can officially be put to rest now.

  • IMHO there is a huge difference between devotion and obsession/addiction. the bottom line is: who is in control?

  • No one is killing your children in the womb unless you have a womb, a child / proto child (depending upon your philosophy on the matter) in it and go through the trouble of making arrangements for that kind of thing. This is irrelevant to bathroom-usage unless you plan on dropping a tragic toilet-baby. I am going to assume given your masculine monkier that you do not have a womb unless you happen to be one of the people targeted by this law who is doing devil’s advocate trolling for farts and giggles.

    I will say what I said on my facebook page: This is a dumb law and I’m afraid that it may affect me if it happened in my state. I am not trans. I only cross-dress at anime conventions and not very convincingly and only because I like a certain character a lot. I do, however, sometimes duck into the “wrong bathroom” in an emergency because I have kidney and bladder problems. And no, I do not want to go through the extraordinary trouble of getting some kind of doctor’s permission-slip (like a schoolchild going on a trip) to take a pee in the smelly bathroom I don’t even want to venture into most of the time. I do this with single-stall, or… if I have to… take a little peek into the mutlistalled men’s room to make sure no one’s there. Also, what of the honest-mistake? One of my most embarrasing moments in grade school was walking into the boy’s room when i wasn’t paying attention. Are cops going to arrest people for that now?

    Also, I once had a church-friend who always went to the bathroom with her son. This was because some little cousin of hers WAS almost molested in a bathroom, by a straight-non-trans man who happened to be a pervert. So, this person I once knew used to be kind of paranoid about letting her very young son using the public men’s room like a big boy without checking things out first. A woman helping her little boy to a men’s room stall because she wants to protect him! Gasp! What a criminal! Not sure she’s the best example because she was kind of a freak, but.. yeah, that happens.

    I don’t expect people set in their ways (like my facebook relatives) to change their mind about LBGT people. It took me a while – reading and listening to stories and participating in online forums for anime and gaming geeks and religious-issues discussions like here and meeting a few. You can go ahead and see them all as freaks and perverts if you like – but please, much like Helen Lovejoy of The Simpsons wants you to “Think of the children!” Please, “Think of the children who are out shopping with their opposite sex parent!” and “Think of the people with health issues!”

  • Heck, I’m wondering of the Americans with Disabilities groups could challenge this on the grounds of people with issues of the kidney, bladder or bowels that sometimes need an emergency outlet if their gendered bathroom is occupied / locked / otherwise unavailable.

  • This has already been the law in a number of states and they have somehow managed not to devolve into deranged peep shows.

  • Let’s see… unborn… constitutional… protect… rights… BINGO! If you’d only said “what the Bible clearly labels as sin,” I’d have had bingo going two ways.

  • Can you cis people stop with that “sex and gender are not the same thing” crap?

    Defending the mythical sex binary – even tacitly – doesn’t help anyone.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    Did you really read my post about a compromise in which trans people can go into a single stalled unisex bathroom or changing room? I also feel concern and must ask about the safety of the person you mention who was born female but has been given male hormones so has a bead and chest hair, but still has female genitals how safe is that person getting undressed among men in a men’s changing room ? The person still has female parts and can still be in danger. And yet this person would also not feel comfortable in the ladies changing room either. Do you not agree that that safest most comfortable choice really is a private single stalled restroom or changing room? And why has my other reply still in which I give examples of this transgender law being abused by men , still has not been approved and posted while it seems everyone else’s are ? Is this a case of censorship?

  • scott stone

    Wow! We are becoming a mad, crazy world aren’t we. Glad to see once again the level of passion and outrage over another LGBT issue on the PC channel. Maybe some day you folks will have as passionate discussion about poverty, but I doubt it. This is about progressive ideology, not theology. Now I’m sure one of you will be able to twist your PC credentials and explain how this would be something Jesus would fight for, because there aren’t enough serious issues to try and tackle.

  • Actually this comment thread is Apple and mobile friendly as well, not just PC.

  • You go ahead and use the unisex restroom.

  • You’ve repeated this at least twice now. It doesn’t have the impact you were hoping for.

    Other states have idiots in elected office as well. States like Missouri and Mississippi who have the most poverty and lowest literacy rates in the nation. Color me shocked.

  • scott stone

    Didn’t know that. I just assumed (which usually gets me into trouble) that since it was posted on the Progressive Christian channel, that was the target audience. My main point is that LGBT issues dominate this channel. I’m fine with the discussion, I just find it a bit odd how prevalent the discussion around sexual identity is. Immaterial how I or anyone else feels about the subject, as Christians, if our identity is in anything other than Christ, we’ve taken a wrong turn. Thanks for the clarification.

  • Beverly Cosgrove

    The best answer is to have a small, single occupancy bathroom somewhere just for bigots to use. The rest of us can go ahead and use the regular bathrooms just as always.

  • scott stone

    Wow. That’s rather hostile. Pretty sure I didn’t derail anyone. Have a great day!

  • scott stone

    Hate and fear-filled folks? Check out the lovely response I received, probably from someone on your side of the spectrum. There’s enough hate on both sides of the aisle.

  • Beverly Cosgrove

    (1) By pasting this same comment over and over, you turned it into a spam comment, so you are in danger of being banned as a spammer. You should compose your comments individually. (2) The reason these laws are so similar is that the lawyer for Kim Davis and a right wing group are writing the laws and sending them to sympathetic legislators in every state with a Republican majority. Criminal laws are normally initiated by request of state organization of police chiefs, or by district prosecuting attorneys, or the state attorney general. NONE of these laws are originating there. They all originate purely from bias and deliberate ignorance of what transgender people are.

  • Beverly Cosgrove

    A perfect summary Gizzy. You can also point out that every time a trans man is ejected from a women’s room for obeying the law (but appearing as a man) they will file a civil suit for battery and false arrest and cost the city or state hundreds of thousands of dollars, money she will have to pay in taxes, but the trans man and his lawyer will end up rich.

  • Ah, but their (mostly unspoken) reasons for both bathroom laws and pro-gun law are internally consistent. The goal is to protect their families from “undesirable outsiders”. So, they follow the usual conservative recipe for fostering a “moral” community: first, create legislation which is designed to incarcerate, impoverish, and kill “undesirables”. If a few “undesirables” manage to slip through the legal cracks and stick around, they have the comfort of knowing they can get rid of them via hot lead injection. Smith & Wesson are the ultimate and final purveyors of “moral” community.

    Any votes for the GOP that can be harvested from the miasma of fear and hatred they’ve whipped up in the process goes back into maintaining the control over government they need to foster a “moral” community.

    They may or may not say any of this aloud in mixed company, but there you have it, in a plain wrapper with no extra fixings.

  • Nick

    “Can you cis people stop with that “sex and gender are not the same thing” crap?”

    It’s all I know. Care to explain why it is crap?

  • Blerg

    That’s a disgusting thing to say.

  • Blerg

    I’m sure there is, and I’m sorry your feelings got hurt by an Internet comment. It’s weird that anyone expects any level of civility anymore on the Internet, or anywhere else for that matter. In a country where Donald Trump can be a leading candidate for president, I guess all we can expect is hate and fear.

  • scott stone

    My feelings weren’t hurt. I don’t give a damn what some little troll says to me on the internet. My point was that each side thinks it’s the others fault. Conservatives think liberals are crazy and liberals think conservatives are evil. As I said, there’s enough hate on both sides. People in glass houses…

  • Korou

    Bravo, and hear, hear! An excellent article on an insane issue.

    Wouldn’t the whole problem – as well as quite a lot of smaller problems – be solved if we just had unisex bathrooms? I’ve been in some places that have them. There doesn’t seem to be any risk of…anything. All that happens is there’s a small room – that is, the toilet cubicle – you go into for a few minutes to relieve yourself. Where’s the danger or damage or harm? You might be in one cubicle, a woman in the cubicle to your left, a man in the cubicle to your right; you won’t see each other undressed any more than you would outside the toilets!
    …is my thought.

  • You came here to start sh!t, and you got it. Don’t snivel at me.

  • Shut up you clown. Nobody asked you a damned thing.

  • This is part of a larger narrative that frames sex as binary, and gender as detached from it. The fact is that this is entirely false.

    Just for starters,

    1. Blank Slate Theory is garbage, and we don’t need people reinforcing it. The dysphoria that trans people experience – according to all available research – appears to be based on some sort of neurological sex mapping phenonemon that’s not well understood yet.*** While the psychological manifestation of this among people in the west at least is a “gender identity” mismatch, the foundations are neurological and based in sex – irrespective of how it manifests psychologically (which is intertwined with social context). Gender doesn’t have anything more to do with the causes of [sex] dysphoria, which are not culturally bound than what clothes someone wears does.

    2. The binary sex model is garbage, and we don’t need people defending it, even tacitly. It’s outmoded trash. Decoupling gender without arguing against that biological binary is a tacit defense of it.

    3. Trans people are not simply choosing a different means of gender expression regardless of our sex, and that’s what this trash implies. Our sex is the *reason* we are trans.

    *** here’s some of that research. I’ve had to produce it enough times for people that can’t be bothered that I’ve taken the time to even format it.

    Here is an excerpt of a lecture by Dr. Robert Sapolsky an American neuroendocrinologist, professor of biology, neuroscience, and neurosurgery at Stanford University, researcher and author

    The research he is referring to is indicated below with leading asterisks (**)

    Peer-Reviewed Papers on Neurological gendered differences in the transsexual brain

    Male-to-female transsexuals show sex-atypical hypothalamus activation when smelling odorous steroids. by Berglund et al Cerebral Cortex 2008 18(8):1900-1908;

    …the data implicate that transsexuality may be associated with sex-atypical physiological responses in specific hypothalamic circuits, possibly as a consequence of a variant neuronal differentiation.

    **Male–to–female transsexuals have female neuron numbers in a limbic nucleus. Kruiver et al J Clin Endocrinol Metab (2000) 85:2034–2041

    The present findings of somatostatin neuronal sex differences in the BSTc and its sex reversal in the transsexual brain clearly support the paradigm that in transsexuals sexual differentiation of the brain and genitals may go into opposite directions and point to a neurobiological basis of gender identity disorder.

    Sexual differentiation of the human brain: relevance for gender identity, transsexualism and sexual orientation. Swaab Gynecol Endocrinol (2004) 19:301–312.

    Solid evidence for the importance of postnatal social factors is lacking. In the human brain, structural diferences have been described that seem to be related to gender identity and sexual orientation.

    **A sex difference in the human brain and its relation to transsexuality. by Zhou et al Nature (1995) 378:68–70.

    Our study is the first to show a female brain structure in genetically male transsexuals and supports the hypothesis that gender identity develops as a result of an interaction between the developing brain and sex hormones

    A sex difference in the hypothalamic uncinate nucleus: relationship to gender identity. by Garcia-Falgueras et al Brain. 2008 Dec;131(Pt 12):3132-46.

    We propose that the sex reversal of the INAH3 in transsexual people is at least partly a marker of an early atypical sexual differentiation of the brain and that the changes in INAH3 and the BSTc may belong to a complex network that may structurally and functionally be related to gender identity.

    White matter microstructure in female to male transsexuals before cross-sex hormonal treatment. A diffusion tensor imaging study. Rametti et al, J Psychiatr Res. 2010 Jun 8.

    Our results show that the white matter microstructure pattern in untreated FtM transsexuals is closer to the pattern of subjects who share their gender identity (males) than those who share their biological sex (females). Our results provide evidence for an inherent difference in the brain structure of FtM transsexuals.

    Regional cerebral blood flow changes in female to male gender identity disorder. Tanaka et al, Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2010 Apr 1;64(2):157-61.

    GID subjects had a significant decrease in rCBF in the left anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and a significant increase in the right insula compared to control subjects.

    The ACC and insula are regions that have been noted as being related to human sexual behavior and consciousness. From these findings, useful insights into the biological basis of GID were suggested.

    Sexual Hormones and the Brain: An Essential Alliance for Sexual Identity and Sexual Orientation. Garcia-Falgueras A, Swaab DF Endocr Dev. 2010;17:22-35

    The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation.

  • *comes here to trash talk about trans people*

    *whines and cries when they get the response they expected*

    *calls others trolls with no sense of irony*

  • You two can go have your group cry session in private.

  • Marja Erwin

    I doubt it. Given the accessibility barriers everywhere, and the *violence* against disabled people, the system is obviously on the side of discrimination against disabled people.

    I know there are sometimes token efforts at accessibility. For example, the local bus system had signs saying they were accessible, last I was able to use them, but they only have a phone number to report accessibility problems, and phones aren’t accessible, and relay services require registration, which isn’t accessible either.

    But that just shows that they’re token efforts.

  • …There’s one political cliché so popular, so omnipresent, so densely far-reaching, that it is without doubt the greatest cliché of our time. It is the One Cliché to rule them all: “political correctness” and its variants. What’s striking about the repetitive droning complaints about “PC” (from both conservatives and liberals) is that the expression itself, and the concept it invokes, is as sloppily unexamined as it is pedestrian.

    The phrase “politically correct” can be used in two distinct ways: either with its original literal meaning, or with the mocking sarcasm that’s common these days. I’ll get to the former in a moment, but I’ll begin with the latter. As it’s commonly used, “PC” is a deliberately imprecise expression (just try finding or writing a terse, precise definition) because its objective isn’t to communicate a substantive idea, but simply to sneer and snivel about the linguistic and cultural burdens of treating all people with the respect and sensitivity with which they wish to be treated. Thus, the Herculean effort required to call me “Asian American” rather than “chìnk” is seen as a concession to “the PC police”, an unsettling infringement on the free-wheeling conversation of, I suppose, “non-chìnks”. Having to refer to black folks as “African Americans” rather than various historically-prevalent epithets surely strikes some red-blooded blue-balled white-men as a form of cultural oppression. Having to refer to “women” rather than “bìtches” lays a violent buzzkill on the bar-room banter of men preoccupied with beating on their chests and off other body parts.

    Obviously these examples fall on the simplistic side of things, but I think they illustrate the shaky philosophical foundation of today’s usage. Underlying every complaint of “PC” is the absurd notion that members of dominant mainstream society have been victimized by an arbitrarily hypersensitive prohibition against linguistic and cultural constructions that are considered historical manifestations of bigotry. It’s no coincidence that “PC”-snivelers are for the most part white men who are essentially saying, “Who the hell do these marginalized groups think they are to tell me how I should or shouldn’t portray them? I’m not going to say ‘mentally challenged’ when it’s my right to say ‘retărd’, goshdarnit there’s only so much abuse I’ll take!”

    In this context, the conceit that “political correctness” constitutes a violation of free speech is particularly zany; as though society’s marginalized groups wield oppressive power over the dominant mainstream. Actually, as far as I’m concerned you’re free to call me “chìnk” and I’m free to call you “moronic racist loser” (and more if necessary, but I’ll leave that aside for now in the interest of false civility). Free speech is the straw man of choice for intellectual bums of all stripes too fragile and vacuous for critical engagement. Calling someone who says or does bigoted things “a bigot” isn’t censorious, it’s descriptively accurate, like calling a bad movie “a bad movie”, even if the bigot didn’t intend to come off as bigoted and the movie didn’t intend to come off as bad.

    As for the original literal meaning of “PC”, the phrase is believed to have emerged from China (seriously, I’m not making this up) during the reign of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist thought. Revolutionary leaders unironically applauded words and actions as “politically correct” when these were seen to advance the revolutionary cause (ya think something was lost in translation?). Personally, I suspect that the Chinese phrase predates Maoism and hearkens back to imperial China when complying with the demands of the throne and advancing the interests of the empire, at any level of society, would be “politically correct”; as opposed to, say, writing dissident literature, which would be “politically incorrect” to the point of getting you exiled or executed. In both the Maoist and imperial contexts, the key point to observe is that “PC” denotes alignment with state power. On a semantic and philosophical level, this makes a good deal more sense than the vague pejorative sarcasm of today’s “PC”-snivelers.

    Interestingly enough, according to this non-sarcastic, relatively unconsidered, more meaningfully precise definition of the term, the USA is a politically correct nation indeed; but not in the way that most Americans are led to believe. Some examples: Magnetic yellow ribbons are PC. Denouncing Islamism in the name of 9/11 is PC. Reciting the pledge of allegiance is PC. Not talking about radical politics at work or in polite company is PC. Gay-bashing is PC. Standing and placing your hand on your heart during the national anthem is PC. Smiling and applauding when the president enters the room is PC. On the other side of the equation: Marching for civil rights is not PC. Protesting a US war is not PC. Questioning US-Israeli neo-colonial policy in the Middle East is not PC. Calling the US government a white male supremacist corporatist kleptocracy is not PC. Agitating for structural change in our society’s distribution of wealth and power is not PC. Refusing to shake a corrupt president’s hand is not PC.

    Frankly, I can think of far more extreme examples of politically incorrect acts and statements, but it’s a testament to the real coercive power of the police state — not some imaginary “PC police” — that I hesitate to publish these thoughts even hypothetically, even with ample theoretical padding. Given this reality, perhaps we might reconsider exactly whose free speech is being violated by whom. As far as I know, “the PC police” haven’t thrown any insensitive white men into Gitmo or launched CointelPro operations against white bloggers who publish blackface. For some reason, people of color who oppose US imperialism haven’t had that same good fortune.

    Simply put, the great “PC” cliché, as commonly deployed in mainstream discourse, is cultural propaganda designed to befuddle and misdirect while defending the current power structure. All politics deal with power relations, and in the debate over America’s alleged climate of “political correctness”, there’s a stark asymmetry of power between the defiant megaphone-wielders who complain of being constrained by humorless hypersensitivity from below, and the under-represented people of color, women, LGBT, handicapped, poor, and otherwise marginalized or dispossessed people who have no choice but to absorb the linguistic, cultural, and physical barbs of the ruling class. The former feel psycho-emotionally oppressed by their inability to crack puerile ethnic jokes without criticism; the latter simply are oppressed.

    – Kai Chang, The Greatest Cliche: The Unexamined Propaganda of Political Correctness.

  • Jesse Helms led an effort to create a blanket exclusion for any trans related protections under the ADA back in the early 1980s, with help from all American elected officials, Republican and Democrat alike.

    That exclusion still exists today.

  • scott stone

    No trash talk here. Mommy or daddy issues?

  • Work them out on your own. I’m not your shrink, manchild.

  • ArmedForces✪

    Damn! ~ that was good.

  • He’s very quotable.

  • P J Evans

    Please cite incident that support the need for this bill. Because I’ve never heard of any.

  • P J Evans

    Answer the question you’re being asked, please, instead of giving us the same BS statement again.

  • P J Evans

    I haven’t – but I have used a women’s restroom when there was a man in it. (I don’t know why he was in it.)

  • P J Evans

    IMO, trans women are women, and trans men are men. These bills are intended to ‘other’ people and create fear and encourage discrimination against a minority.

  • Bones

    That’s the standard response from conservative Christians when civil rights are mentioned.

    “But there’s more important issues I don’t care about…….”

    I take it you don’t think Jesus thinks about Trans people.

  • I’ve seen single bathrooms at various places that contain a toilet and a urinal. Include at least two of these in every establishment. Never understood the point of gendered single bathrooms, anyway.

  • Do you even read this blog on a regular or semi-regular basis? Or any of the other Progressive Christianity blogs? Ben and others talk about the injustice of poverty ALL THE TIME!

  • scott stone

    You are too stupid to engage. I never said Jesus doesn’t think about Trans people. I’ve had engagements with you before and it’s never been productive. Lots of deflection on your part.

  • Ok. I’ll let it there…

  • I don’t believe this issue is exclusive to “Right wingers” at all. That’s why seven states are moving forward. It’s bigger than left-right issues.

  • I went to the movies today. I didn’t see any already-existing unisex bathrooms there. Nope. Just men’s and women’s. Now that I come to think of it, I wasn’t paying much attention at the time (you know, since I cared about peeing and getting a sink to wash my hands), put now that I think about it, there were some males in the bathroom with me. A couple of mothers came in with gaggles of kids – and I don’t think they were all little girls. Oh, noes! Perverts! Nope… just people getting in their bathroom-time while the previews and commercials were running.

  • I don’t believe for one moment any law will prevent a parent from checking out the restroom for their child. People with health issues are now placed in this position because the LBGT faction is pressing the issue. I can’t see how any of my comments indicate that I see the LBGT as freaks and perverts. I use the abortion example to show the contrast between people who think killing their unborn baby is on par with this issue.

  • Bones

    Actually it’s you who’s deflecting.

    There’s obviously more important things than the rights of a minority whom you despise.

  • Phil, if I remember correctly, you don’t know what the bible clearly labels as sin – so your double bingo isn’t going to happen.

  • With the number of comments I have received I would say the impact was pretty good. To say that our government is full of idiots I completely agree starting with the idiot who currently in the oval office.

  • Laws originate in many different ways. States accept and pass legislation based on many criteria. From your reasoning we should automatically disregard any legal action started by the ACLU – which would not be a bad idea now that you mention it.

  • Listen: I honestly am just baffled by this stuff. I mean, I don’t see why anyone should CARE. I have no idea if I’ve ever shared a ladies’ room with anyone who was a woman who owned or ever owned a wang. I don’t want to know because again, I don’t care. As far as I’m concerned, when people gotta go, people gotta go. I’m uncomfortable with the idea of the the state regulating peoples’ basic, necessary bodily functions. You squat. You wash your hands, you go. Hopefully someone cleans the damn thing every once in a while. (Shudders at fast food work memories… ugggh…). This is such a simple, basic thing and people are losing their heads over it. It’s so baffling that I’m actually commenting on the issue.

  • Perhaps. Perhaps not.

  • scott stone

    God you are such a douche.

  • scott stone

    Just curious. What did I deflect?

  • Bones

    We should be talking about poverty and not silly trans…Wah…Wah…..

    Of course you have a presidential candidate who is talking about poverty.

    You sure as hell won’t be voting for him.

  • Bones

    You’re an idiot.

  • Bones

    You were big on rights in the guns thread.

    I take it you now want to inspect people before they go to the toilet.

    Maybe you guys need an amendment on that.

  • Bones

    Are transexuals sinning?

  • Martha Anne Underwood

    Well a right winger letter writter on shows the idiocy of transphobic people in a rant against Springsteen cancelling his concert because of NC recent discrimination bill. It made me want to throw up. I agree totally with Benjamin Corey here. These transphobes need to get over it.

  • America… Bible… guns… freedom… God… limited government… BINGO!

  • scott stone

    Actually my candidate talks about poverty all the time.

  • scott stone

    You need to help reduce CO2 emissions. Stop breathing.

  • scott stone

    Once again, what did I deflect?

  • Nick

    Thanks for the research. Just glanced at your work and most of it is going over my head. It will take me a while to get a better understanding. BBC world ran a story today (midnight eastern standard) that seemed to be stating similar research.

  • Meg Whaley

    PC? Politically correct? I prefer to replace that antiquated term with “treating people with basic respect and human decency”. Anyone complaining about being respectful or decent (PC), is really whinging because they have grown used to the rude assholian unfiltered speech that they have always used, and it is an inconvenience to be expected to suddenly treat people with decency and respect.

    Didn’t Jesus Christ teach something about respect and decency?

  • scott stone

    I was referring to Progressive Christian (PC)

  • scott stone

    My apologies

  • scott stone

    How about PayPal discontinuing business in NC, where approx. 450 lose their jobs but the continue to do business in Thailand where homosexuality is actually a crime. Fucking hypocrites!!

  • Beverly Cosgrove

    Forcing transgender women to use a “special” rest room is discrimination. Period. Trying to justify it by claiming a percentage of them will harm women is illegal, and is profiling, and is based on no real evidence. It is wrong in every possible way. Transgender women ARE NOT MEN. They are not. If you want to make it illegal for men to go into women’s restrooms, go ahead, but you will have to recognize transgender women as women, not men. If you don’t, the law will die as soon as it gets to the Federal level. “The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach… a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity.” The fundamental rights found in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause “extend to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs, but the identification and protection of these fundamental rights has not been reduced to any formula.” (SCOTUS, Obergefell v. Hodges)

  • mcgyver99

    What about the Locker rooms and showers?
    How many ladies reading this are okay with changing clothes next to another person in the locker room who has full male genitalia?
    How about you and your daughter in the same shower while they soap and lather up those dangly bits?

    They’re making the fight about bathrooms because they can’t win the fight about locker rooms and showers…

    Can I hear your answers ladies???

  • mcgyver99

    Yes He does…and He would tell them the same thing He said to the tax collectors, adulterers, drunkards , ect…”Go and sin no more”

  • mcgyver99

    What about the Locker rooms and showers?
    How many ladies reading this are okay with changing clothes next to another person in the locker room who has full male genitalia?
    How about you and your daughter in the same shower while they soap and lather up those dangly bits?

    They’re making the fight about bathrooms because they can’t win the fight about locker rooms and showers…

    Can I hear your answers ladies???

  • Amadi

    I don’t know what men do in locker rooms. I know women, in the locker rooms I’ve been in (at gyms, spas, resorts and country clubs) don’t walk around nude. They don’t show their genitals (or even their breasts) to others. They stay turned toward their lockers, they keep towels around them as they dress and undress, and often take undergarments with them to the shower stall so that they can be covered when they come out.

    A trans woman would be all the more likely to do that because of the danger posed by people who would decide her very existence is some kind of threat. I can’t imagine a trans woman using an open, no stall shower arrangement in any locker room, for her own safety. (Yes, regardless of her own genitals, a trans woman is at extreme risk in men’s rooms and locker rooms.)

    In a closed stall situation, much as in basic restrooms, I’m not thinking about the bodies of other people, I’m thinking about doing whatever I’m doing and going about my life. The only people who seem deeply concerned about what trans women do in restrooms and locker rooms are cisgender men who assume trans women must be up to something wrong because they (as cis men) would be if given access to women’s spaces, and cis women who’ve been told — despite having absolutely no evidence — that trans women are predators out to harm them. The full weight of history tells us that women, cis and trans alike, don’t need to fear one another, but cis men.

  • Amadi

    NB; Not all trans people take hormones or have surgery. Not all have a binary presentation. That doesn’t change their gender, or mean they have less need or right to enter a restroom that fits their needs to use a toilet.

  • Bones

    He obviously didn’t read that bit.

  • Bones

    Yes I know you would like to see me dead.

    How pleasant you types are.

  • Bones

    What are they doing that’s sin?

  • Bones

    Dude, Paypal still accepts business from North Carolina.

    They just won’t be opening an office there.

    Just like they won’t be opening an office in Thailand or Saudi Arabia and they’ll still be continuing business with them.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    I have tried to explain that to them but they keep calling me names like bigot. I actually care about transgenders. But I think you need to draw the line somewhere to protect women. It is not transgenders I do not trust it is men who will abuse this law. It already happened in Virginia, Washington, and in Canada. I have been reading the news.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    Fine let transgenders in the bathroom as long as they can get a legal definition of such to separate them from other men. Then they can show paperwork or have it on their driver’s license, otherwise any man can claim to be transgender,and women will be unsafe, because men up to no good will abuse this law. It has already happened . At the University of Toronto they made the bathrooms unisex and men started filming women in the shower, at the Potomac Mills mall in Virginia a man dressed like a women was arrested after he started peeping at women in the bathrooms stalls in a woman’s bathroom. My idea of a special restroom is not meant as a punishment but meant to keep transgenders safe while keeping women safe too. I personally prefer single stalled restrooms for privacy and would love a single stalled private changing room and shower. I would use those facilities myself with no problem. It is not a punishment it is special treatment.

  • Sarah

    Growing up female, in a time of group showers and zero cubicles in locker rooms, male genitalia and the attached human were often present, usually in the form of boys who were too young or otherwise unable to navigate the locker room on their own. For safety, their mother or caretaker would bring them to the more tolerant ladies room. Since then, I believe cubicles and privacy are now the norm. In my opinion, the ‘male’ and ‘female’ signs have been a guideline that is regularly ignored for legitimate reasons including a parent bringing a young child to the “wrong” room for safety.

  • Bones

    How do you know you haven’t already?

  • scott stone

    So they’ll accept their money but they’ll make noise about North Carolina. If this is such a huge issue for PayPal they should stand by their principals and not accept transaction services from the countries that have made homosexuality illegal. Like I said, they are hypocrites.

  • scott stone

    PC, in my post, refers to Progressive Christian.

  • Paul Julian Gould

    And, basically, condensed to its simplest form, the abuse of the term “PC” by the followers of a certain Presidential candidate, and other like-minded fools is “It’s my right to act like as much an asshole as possible, and by Gawd, I’m gonna exercise it whether or not you like it.”

    Because one can doesn’t always translate to may or ought, but our society, while historically pretty crude, seems to have assumed they’ve been given permission to pull out all the stops and wear the willful ignorance loudly and proudly.

  • Adrian

    Thai culture actually has more than just a binary gender (male/female). Many trans people actually travel to Thailand to have their surgeries performed, since the cost is so much less than in the US. You can buy airfare, the surgery, and recover at a resort, for less than the cost of the surgery alone in the US. I’m not really sure Thailand was a good example for you to use here.

    Also, as others have pointed out, PayPal isn’t discontinuing business in NC; it’s choosing not to open/expand an office in NC. PayPal has to be able to recruit and hire employees, and is at least as free to care about social policy as businesses like Hobby Lobby are to care about religion.

  • Adrian

    It’s also the difference between a place that has failed to make progress, versus a place that is actively regressing. One hasn’t gotten better, while the other is actually getting worse.

  • scott stone

    Ok, instead of referencing Thailand I’ll use Singapore. My point is the selective moral outrage by PayPal is hypocritical. That really isn’t disputable.

  • scott stone

    I’m so glad the liberals are the tolerant ones, excepting of alternative points of view. Not!!

  • Finally a question. Legitimacy is the bigger issue. Not just legitimacy from men but from God. You could say the law granting same sex couples the right to marry gives them legitimacy from men. Does God? That depends on God. He has spoken on this subject but most on this site don’t want to believe what He said which is why they are on this site in the first place. To sin you have to believe it is possible to commit a sin which most on this site do not (and I’ll just put you in that category). But if you do believe in sin you have determine if your conduct is sin.

    Is the declaration that one is a transsexual a sin? I don’t think so.

  • Bills are put forward by legislators and if they have enough support they are voted on. They are debated and the language vetted and then put up for a vote. I have not researched any of the background of these state bills yet and I won’t until it becomes an issue in my state.

  • Malachite

    Uh, Lisa , I live less than 20 miles from Potomac Mills Mall. I read the paper every day, watch TV news and listen to radio news on multiple stations several times a day, and I’ve never heard of any such incident as you describe. Since the majority of local news outlets would be all over anything that salacious, the logical conclusion is that *it never happened*.

  • scott stone

    I was speaking of you regarding the mommy or daddy issues.

  • Attacking Benjamin L. Corey for not caring enough about poor people and valuing other issues enough has to be the absolute worst objection you could possibly think up.

    This is honestly the exact equivalent of going to Donald Trump and saying that he doesn’t talk about his business projects enough, or going to Adam Sandler and say that he doesn’t make enough dirty jokes, or going to Bernie Sanders and say that he doesn’t talk about banking reform enough.


  • Something that gets me is how inherently ‘anti-male’ and ‘misandrist’ your side is, if you actually took this stuff as a coherent doctrine and really applied it through.

    Cis-gendered straight men are such evil, despicable, sick, twisted, hateful, and nasty horn-dogs by their very nature– from birth on filled with such testosterone-powered evil– that even the slightest possibility of them having an excuse to rape must be taken as a certainty. Even if these cases of abusers pretending to be transgender don’t actually happen. Even if so many trans gender individuals, so many non-binary people from place to place get harmed. It doesn’t matter. Such is the evil of man.

    This is the same logic that was behind preventing women from going out openly to shop in the first place, preventing women from being in mixed-gender offices, and so on. Men are just so horrible that women must be protected from them at all costs. Even the slightest chance of getting away with it turns once decent guys into predator wolves on the hunt and turns once strong women into helpless objects yelping for assistance like weak prey rabbits.

    This is actually applying the logic and reasoning of your side through, of course, and not just using jargon and stereotypes as ‘reasoning’.

  • Adrian

    My point about lack of progress versus regressing still stands, no matter which nation you point to.

  • scott stone

    Ok. I’m trying to understand what your response has to do with the point I was making. That being the selective moral outrage by PayPal and others.

  • Oh, so your solution involves forcing a group that’s violently discriminated against to apply for, and then carry, special papers identifying them as such? Should it be in the form of a yellow star pinned to their lapel, perhaps? Or a pink triangle?

    You’ve already been asked to provide documented examples of trans folk harassing or assaulting people in bathrooms or change rooms. I notice you have still failed to do so.

  • Bones

    They won’t be having their employees subject to homophobic laws.

    That’s obviously difficult for you to understand.

  • Bones

    You mean like when you wish people who disagree with you to stop breathing…..

  • Bones

    That’s ok.

    Scott wishes I was dead…..

    But yeah poor you.

  • scott stone

    There you go, wasting others oxygen again.

  • Snowy

    Backing up Amadi here. I don’t know what guys must be up to in their locker rooms, but most women tend to be pretty private in all the locker rooms I’ve ever been in. We don’t just walk around sans clothing, laughing it up, having full conversations. We’ll wear our bathing suits in open showers and use towels, take our underwear with us, ect. And like Amadi said, any trans woman is going to do the same.

    And by the way, I was good friends with a trans woman before I moved and we used the same bathroom and locker room on a regular basis. Not a big deal.

  • Questioning

    Careful there Bob…. the Bible, as I suspect someone like you interprets it, takes a pretty dim view of calling someone an idiot, or are you choosing to ignore that particular area?

  • Adrian

    Because it’s not selective moral outrage. It’s being more outraged by backsliding than by not making progress.

    Can you understand how a business owner would be more upset by his business going from being profitable to unprofitable, as opposed to his business breaking even, but never progressing to the point of profit?

  • scott stone

    That’s a ridiculous analogy. If the PayPal CEO is so passionate about the issue, man up. It’s like DiCaprio lecturing us on global warming yet fly private everywhere. His carbon footprint is massive yet he freaking lectures people. Hypocrites all of them.

  • God says He gives us the leaders we deserve. In our current condition we are getting what we deserve and yes their mental capacity is very low as in idiot level. We have to respect their positions – since God gave it to them – but not their persons; that they have to earn…

  • TracyLauren

    A real M2F person is not able to look at them self in a mirror, let alone be seen naked in public. If you have a person who is walking around in full male genitalia, call the cops. a real Transgender would not do that.

  • P J Evans

    [citation needed]

  • P J Evans

    So you believe that PP should no longer do business in any location you don’t approve of, regardless of their corporate policies?

    Nice to know you’re a bigot.

  • P J Evans

    Dude, you’re wasting a lot of oxygen defending transphobia and homophobia.

  • P J Evans

    How many people ever look at other people’s stuff? I don’t remember any interest when I was in high school or college and sharing locker rooms with hundreds of people.
    I doubt that trans women are interested in ogling other women, etiher.

  • P J Evans

    ‘I have been reading the news’

    Then you should be able to provide sources for the stories you’ve been reading. They’re certainly not making it to the news in my area.

  • P J Evans

    It’s easier to get people to understand that than the very weedy version you prefer.

  • P J Evans

    Then you’re going to have to require everyone to have those papers, and be able to produce them at all times.

    Do you really want that kind of police state?

  • P J Evans

    There certainly haven’t been problems in California rest rooms, even though trans people do get beaten up for being themselves.

  • scott stone

    What the hell are you talking about? PayPal pulled an expansion in NC that would have created 450 jobs. They pulled the project because of ant-LGBT issues. All I did was comment that they are being hypocrites because the will do business in countries that actually outlaw homosexuality. How is it that I’m the bigot?

  • scott stone

    Where in any of my posts did I defend anything? This all started because I commented that the topics on the Progressive Christian channel on Patheos are dominated by LGBT issues. My comment was that I thought was a bit odd.

  • While very much expressing my agreement, I do want to note the large number of cases of cis and trans men victimized by other cis men as well in bathroom, locker room, etc settings too.

    Victimization is something that unfortunately is common among different gender identities, different ethnic groups, and so many people– it would be pretty f*cking nice if we had a REAL set of legislative measures in various states to help folks out.

    Fixing things such as the huge backlog of rape kits, the short statues of limitations for many abuse cases letting predators go free, and the like absolutely need to be pushed for over and over again.

  • TracyLauren

    What do you want? Web sources? The only members of the transgender community talking right now are the F2M’s because, although awkward, they are in little fear of getting the shit kicked out of them in the womens bathroom.

    I am saying be realistic and logical, and think for 1 second from the other side of the fence. A person wants to legitimately switch from one gender to another. They were born, and raised as one, and now they feel a genuine NEED to be what they feel. How do they proceed?

    They study the gender, every move, every accent, every gesture. They practice for endless hours if front of a mirror (clothed) until they think they can pass. They are their worst critic.

    They record their voice, and replay over and over until they get the inflections right.

    Now, this person needs to pee. Somehow this person is suddenly going to walk naked in front of strangers? Can anyone with a brain actually think this is true? and even if someone thinks it, the fact that there is not a single occurrence of it happening should also come into your thinking. If you read an article about it, try to find the same story from a different site. I have been watching, EVERY one of them is a hoax to push an agenda.

  • If someone is smoking a pack a day but says that he’s gradually quitting, and appears to be doing so, by going to a pack every two days… compared to someone that doesn’t just smoke a pack a day but openly brags that he’s about to start a heroin habit, personally showing you a needle that he just about, wouldn’t it blindly obvious that you’d treat those two people differently?

    (Personally, I don’t even support boycotting generally– I favor engagement. But I’m not going to make up B.S. arguments in support of a narrative.)

  • “It [sic] already happened…” Citations please.

  • Malachite

    This is increasingly common in Europe. On my trip to London 2 years ago, many times the restroom in a public place consisted of an alcove with a group of doors leading to toilet cubicles with floor-to-ceiling walls. These were used by everyone; several times a man entered a cubicle I had just left. Everyone used the same set of sinks. No fuss, no hysteria, just people minding their own business. I’ve wished ever since that system would catch on here.

  • Malachite

    No, what needs to be done is for people to educate themselves and stop believing specious nonsense about trans boogeymen.

  • leslie green

    You are nuts. You’re never going to get the vast majority of women to accept this sh*t….forget it.

  • (((J_Enigma32)))

    And? I’m curious why you think it matters. Right-wingers exist in all of the states, and they control multiple ones.

    This is matter of hate and nothing more. And it’s utterly transparent, at that. After sixty years of the same fucking rhetoric, with the previous population swapped for the current object of conservative America’s two-minute hate, you people must think the rest of the country is stupid as shit to not see through it.

  • If you’re ideologically blind and devoted to not understanding something, then you won’t.

    As have been posted already before, the narrative runs like this:
    >”There are no bisexuals, only a certain type of homosexuals seeking attention.
    >There are no transgender people, only a certain type of homosexuals seeking attention.
    >Homosexuals are arrogant sex-crazed perverts that can’t even begin to lead anything like normal lives because they are petulant children that act out against God and God’s society, craving affirmations that they shouldn’t get because they ought to just wake up and stop their sinful choices.”

    It’s a narrative based completely on dogma with no relationship whatsoever to objective factual reality, as shown by scientific research on animals and people, but that doesn’t matter. The narrative is the narrative. The narrative is not to be questioned.

  • Bones

    Not particularly.

    He obviously has issues wanting to kill people.

  • Bones

    It’s sad when your only come back is to wish ill of people.

    Are you on medication?

    Because that’s not a normal response even from someone who’s supposed to be a Christian.

  • Bones

    What does God say about transsexuals?

  • Beverly Cosgrove

    “men using the women’s restroom” – again, the central lie, the core nullification of the existence of transgender women. Transgender women are women, not men. They are so emphatically women that they suffer an enormous disturbance in their normal lives, literally rip up a decade of happiness in many cases, to make the painful and dangerous transition to their proper physical sex to match their gender. You know nothing, and with your preprogrammed bias, you know less than nothing, about this subject. And the leaders who crafted this law are using YOUR ignorance to their benefit, crassly and cynically knowing they can count on you to remain dutifully ignorant because you love your own bias, and would not in a moment replace it with actual knowledge. Am I right? I expect you will say no. But do not forget that some random transgender woman told you this on a comment thread in 2016. The day will dawn on you, if you live long enough, to see. Perhaps you will have a child who is transgender, or someone else who is dear to you, and you will be forced to choose between your cherished belief and the reality which now stands in front of you. At that moment, you will know.

  • Matthew


  • Questioning

    Ok, then you should be thanking God he gave us Barrack Obama. He is a decent man, a family man, an intelligent, well spoken, likable man, who has faced a nearly impossible job of governing, while fending off attack after attack upon his person, his character, and his position. (e.g. he’s a Muslim, he was not born in the U.S., he’s running for a 3rd term, he’s going to take our guns away, blah, blah, blah, ad nauseum, not to mention all the veiled, “he’s black” insults.) Despite all this, he has presided over the rescuing of our economy, provided healthcare to millions who could not afford it, done a decent job of protecting our country from attack, without further embroiling us in useless, wasteful conflict. He inherited a mess when he took over. If you are insistent upon conflating the word idiot with the White House, look up George W. Bush.

  • Bones

    You deserved Bush and you got him.

    It’s a shame he screwed the rest of the world.
    I doubt we deserved that.

  • Julie

    The problem with this theory is that the new law actually makes it easier for men who look like men to go into a women’s restroom. They don’t have to dress like women anymore. Now they can walk in and say they are transgender female to male and they just happen to look really masculine. so I don’t see how this law in anyway prevents straight men from causing havoc in the ladies room – although I doubt very many have such intentions – it seems to me it would make it easier.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    Well I did read the articles online after your post I went to look again I just noticed the date it is from November of last year 2015. It is from last year. I had thought it was more recently. Still there are more recent situations that have happened also . For clarity I will post a link to the article I mentioned. The man’s name is Richard Rodriguez .

  • Lisa Rosestars

    I do not need to provide such information because I never accused the trans folks of causing any problems. I accuse men who will pretend to be trans of causing problems. They are what I feel afraid of. I asked for identification because the current laws make it too easy for just anyone to claim to be transgender and walk into a ladies room. The right to come into the ladies room must be earned not just demanded or it protects nobody and endangers everyone.

  • You think it’s hate? Most people don’t enough about LGBT to hate. This is about legitimacy nothing else.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    The man in Virginia at the mall was from November 2015 his name is Richard Rodriguez here is a link

    The situation from the University of Toronto is from late last year also here is a link :

    And more recently a situation in Seattle Washington at the Evan’s pool a man twice came into the women’s changing area and began to undress but did not identify himself as a transgender that is from February of this year

    here is a link:

  • I don’t have a cherished belief about bathrooms. I am reacting to what is going to happen when men use women’s facilities. I know many LGBT people and they all have the same problem. They are not any happier. I wish you the best in any event.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    No I do not want a police state but don’t we all have to carry paperwork around with us? How many times have you been required to show your driver’s license or social security card or other forms of id ? What is one more? And as a legal transgender they could then qualify for the extra protections and help they want and need in so many different ways . Not only protection from job discrimination but qualifying for insurance help to pay for hormone therapy or gender surgery.

  • Don’t confuse liking the President with his effectiveness. None of his programs work, none of the various government are working well including the VA and the IRS. But the deal with Iran is so dangerous that he will likely not be gone by the time it blows up in the world’s face. No need to conflate on this site.

  • Why don’t you go first and tell us what the Koran says about this matter?

  • Bones


  • Lisa Rosestars

    I have posted some links already but the one I really wanted to post more about was at the University of Toronto around October of last year ( 2015) when they tried and failed to make their bathrooms unisex and stupid young men started filming women in the showers with their cell phones.I could have told them that would happen. Here is another link:

  • Bones

    How do you ‘earn’ that right.

    Prove that you don’t have any tackle?

  • RustySkywater

    “Then they can show paperwork or have it on their driver’s license”

    Ah, a “Papers, please” policy. Certainly no historical examples of that going terribly wrong…

  • Because you don’t believe in the bible as you have said before so what it says is not relevant to you. You have mentioned the Koran. I understand Muslims kill transsexuals on sight?

  • (((J_Enigma32)))

    If it’s legitimacy, why’s it sound like the same exact bullshit that’s been said about every minority group ever since the end of the Civil War? This is the same exact rhetoric. The same exact rhetoric!

  • Beverly Cosgrove

    OK, reading comprehension problem. The ACLU originates a wide variety of actions, and none of them are the same, or for the same reason. These anti-trans laws are the same because they come from one place and are for one purpose.

  • Beverly Cosgrove

    I said nothing about bathrooms in my comment. The “cherished belief” is that transgender women are “men” in some way. You echo that in every message you write, and you entirely rely on it. Giving up that belief would deprecate something that you hold dear, some assumption of life. You really cannot allow yourself to look at it critically, I claim. This is the logic flaw being exploited by political manipulators by creating a scary image for you to look at.

  • First, LGBT are not a yet a minority group requiring protection. Neither are Mormons with multiple wives. Groups want that for legitimacy. Perhaps they will be recognized as a minority – perhaps not. I think the states are approaching this as a public safety issue not a sexual preference issue.

  • I don’t consider my transgender friends any different one way or the other. Politicians are not manipulating this issue because there is no money to be made from it.

  • P J Evans

    You made the claim, and you should be able to provide evidence to back it up.
    None of the trans women I’ve met have been afraid of mirrors. They present as women, I accept them as women, and there aren’t problems. I don’t know how they feel about being naked in public, because I’ve never been any place where people are naked in public. That’s quite unusual in the U.S. – as you should know.

    If there’s an agenda here, it’s yours, pushing transphobia and bigotry.

  • Questioning

    “None of his programs work, none of the various government are working well including the VA and the IRS. But the deal with Iran is so dangerous that he will likely not be gone by the time it blows up in the world’s face. ”

    This is admittedly off topic but I am going to respond.

    This is pure vitriol and opinion, and not even good opinion. It seems you might be in the camp of thinking everything that is wrong with the US, right now, is Obama’s fault somehow. That’s fine, that is your prerogative, and again your opinion. Based on what, no one knows. But, if you have any interest in fairness, truth, and justice, you must apply the same benchmark to any sitting president. Let’s stray from opinion here to fact. 3000 or so citizens of the earth were killed in the 09/11 attacks. American soldiers suffered almost 37000 casualties in Iraq. It is now estimated that around 500,000 Iraqi civilians, including woman and children, have died as a result of the Iraq war. A war, begun by George Bush, that was a huge mistake and accomplished nothing positive. It did leave a void in the middle east landscape that ISIS has been more than happy to fill. All these things happened on the Bush watch. With respect to the VA, if he did not create the problem, he certainly exacerbated it by creating a huge influx off physically and mentally maimed American soldiers… maimed during his “Mission Accomplished” triumph. Anyone who is half awake knows that the IRS has been a broken quagmire for years, but I guess you think President Obama was supposed to magically fix all these things, given no respect and a Congress that mainly just wanted to cover their ears and shout “la la la la la” anytime he spoke. I guess your solution for Iran was more war instead of negotiation? Frankly, I find the blindness, the willful ignorance of some people, just astonishing.

  • chose the VA because the President campaigned on fixing it and he did not. When it came up again this year he said he would fix it. He has done nothing about it. The President has used the IRS to punish his “emenies” in this case the 501C entities who are Republican.

    The war was begun by the destruction of the towers. Everyone voted for that war including Hillary Clinton. President Obama decided not to get a Status of Forces Agreement – against all advice – and ISIS sprung from that decision. ISIS persists because the President does not have the stomach for war. He won’t even allow an effective bombing campaign against ISIS. The Presidents more notable additional foreign policy failures are Libya, Syria and Russia.

    The President lost his credibility when forced Obamacare down the throats of the Republicans and did not have the political skills to repair the damage. Good Presidents work with their Congress to acheive what can be achieved.

    The willful ignorance you mention is shared by 65% of the people who note our country is on the wrong track. Don’t confuse people who like the President with those who expect him to do something.

  • TracyLauren

    Nice try. I am not pushing transphobia or bigotry. I am M2F personally, so my words are coming from experience, not conjecture.

    I also should have been more clear in the original statement. “A real M2F person is not able to look at them self in a mirror” should have been “A real M2F person is not able to look at them self NAKED in a mirror.” I was tired when I wrote it. I hope this clears it up. There is a lot of mirror time fully clothed, or as naked as possible without showing obvious traits of the wrong gender.

    It is important thing that people cant seem to get their heads round. a TG does not view them self as their original gender. they will do everything in their power to hide those traits from themselves, let alone strangers. This is why I stated that if a person is literally showing full male genitalia in a women’s’ locker room, call the cops. this is NOT a real TG.

  • TracyLauren

    I just re-read my statement from earlier. can you tell me where in my words did I show a transphobic or bigotry agenda?

  • Do you have any evidence — any, at all — of cis men pretending to be trans women in order to harass and assault cis women and kids in ladies’ rooms?

    Meanwhile, over 50% of trans folk have experienced some form of sexual violence in their lives. The measure you propose would invite harassment and assault, not prevent it.

    ETA: you also seem to be under the impression that passing as a woman is something that a born-male person can do easily and casually — that all they have to do is throw on a dress and makeup. This is false.

  • Jeff Preuss

    “This all started because I commented that the topics on the Progressive
    Christian channel on Patheos are dominated by LGBT issues. My comment
    was that I thought was a bit odd.”

    I don’t personally find it odd. Trans rights and gay rights are being challenged and questioned in the public sector, usually hand-in-hand with calling it defending (Christian) religious freedom. Progressive Christians, in general, find this large religious/political effort to not be reflective of the Christianity they know and believe, so they write to offer a different Christian perspective.

    Whichever side of these issues “started it” doesn’t really matter – it’s a fairly prominent topic in the political and religious landscape of the US these days, so progressive Christians voicing their opinions on it shouldn’t be that surprising.

  • scott stone

    I understand your point, I just tend to disagree. I’m still interested in a dialogue around the subject of identity. Whether you are a progressive Christian or conservative Christian (just a note, I hate modifiers. The title Christian should be good enough. Often modifiers take precedence over the noun they are modifying. It becomes about Progressivism or conservatism instead of Christianity) our identity in something other than Christ is problematic. The concept of identity based upon sexuality seems to be peculiar to say the least.

  • Questioning

    “chose the VA because the President campaigned on fixing it and he did not. When it came up again this year he said he would fix it. He has done nothing about it. ”

    President Obama, like any President, like any politician for that matter, is not going to be successful at accomplishing every goal he or she establishes. Events always overtake us. Having said that, I took the liberty of researching some information about the VA. Most of what I read was positive, even glowing. These were real life situations from actual patients. Is it perfect, course not. Is there room for improvement, always. I am not sure what your definition of “fixing it” is, of course if your getting all your information from biased conservative websites then you are getting exactly what you deserve.

    “The President has used the IRS to punish his “emenies” in this case the 501C entities who are Republican.”

    Citations please… This sounds suspiciously like some Faux News spin.

    The war was begun by the destruction of the towers. Everyone voted for that war including Hillary Clinton.”

    No it was not. The war was begun when George Bush, acting on faulty, suspect intelligence, fanned the flames of a war thirsty populace wanting revenge, and targeted Iraq. Does not matter who voted for it, it was sponsored, supported, and pushed by George Bush and his administration. Everyone else trusted him and fell in line like little lost sheep. Not even all the military supported it, but they followed orders.

    “President Obama decided not to get a Status of Forces Agreement – against all advice – and ISIS sprung from that decision. ISIS persists because the President does not have the stomach for war. He won’t even allow an effective bombing campaign against ISIS. The Presidents more notable additional foreign policy failures are Libya, Syria and Russia.”

    You act as if ISIS sprung up because of something we did not do. That’s naïve. They would have sprung up, indeed had already sprung up, and would have struck in any direction they perceived as possible. President Obama does not have the stomach for foolish, wasteful, and unwinnable war. He went into Pakistan and cut off the head of Al Queda in his bed. We remove their leaders and their troops at every opportunity, and guess what, no Americans have to die in the process. These ideologies cannot be defeated from the outside. The Russians could not do it in Afghanistan and neither can we. Chop off their heads and two will grow back. The only thing that will stop this is for it to die from the inside. Until then the best we can do is to protect ourselves, our Allies, continue to remove the leadership, and hope the Muslim world can heal itself. Apparently you prefer all out war in the Middle East. How has that worked for us so far?

    The President lost his credibility when forced Obamacare down the throats of the Republicans and did not have the political skills to repair the damage. Good Presidents work with their Congress to acheive what can be achieved.”

    It was apparent, early on, the Republicans in Congress had no interest in working with the President at all. I guess they were mad because he won. Their credibility was lost long before the President had a chance to do anything. I am not saying mistakes weren’t made on both sides, frankly I do not have that information, and I am very dubious as to where you are getting your sweeping rhetoric. Again, I suspect it is from less than credible sources, but then you have not offered anything in the way of substantiating your claims. Finally, lost in all this, is who the Congress and the President work for. The President did what he felt he had to do for the American people which is exactly what he should have done.

    “The willful ignorance you mention is shared by 65% of the people who note our country is on the wrong track. Don’t confuse people who like the President with those who expect him to do something.”

    65% huh… and what pray tell, do those 65% perceive as the right track? Depends on who you talk too. I suspect a significant majority of those people would not even agree with you on what the “right track” is exactly. In other words, your 65% statistic, on the whole, is pretty meaningless. Finally, I did not say 65% of Americans are willfully ignorant, you made that leap all on your own.

  • We have shower cubicles these days, not wide-open shared showers. I’m also not the kind of woman who ogles other women as they are changing their clothes–IF they even do that in the open area. Most of us change in private. As a woman who does theater, I understand changing clothes in an open setting. You are focused on yourself and changing very quickly. You’re not looking around at everyone else and worrying about whether they have a penis or not.

    Maybe guys do this differently so they assume that’s what women do? Do guys all sit there romping around naked and staring at each others genitals?

  • It doesn’t say anywhere that these were transgendered people doing this filming. The argument for these bathrooms is that transgender women will be accosting others in the women’s bathroom. This article doesn’t have anything to do with that at all.

  • Trans women look like women. If a man walks into a ladies room looking like a man, you call security.

  • Not everyone considers nudity that big a deal, dude. Up until the mid-twentieth century, Japan didn’t bother to segregate its bathhouses by sex. Scandinavian saunas are still very often mixed-sex.

    My first time art modelling was with a male co-model. And when I invited a friend who happens to be trans over for a swim in my apartment’s pool, I knew I was changing next to someone with “dangly bits”. I cared not a whit. Nor would I have cared if I had a kid along with me.

    Does that answer your question?

  • Jeff Preuss

    I’ll say, as a gay man, being gay is only part of my identity, and is usually something other people use to lump me into whatever category they like…including that of non-Christian, though I patently am one. And I agree we should all just be Christians, but (again from the perspective of someone who is gay) there is so much bad blood and fear that wells up in some upon hearing the word Christian, modifiers sometimes seem necessary for conversation to even be possible.

    It’s sure to seemingly create yet a further divide in our somewhat-fractured faith, yet it also feels like a natural development borne of scores of barbs of “not real Christians.”

    I try to view it as tags to imply differing schools of thought, rather than one being “true” and the other not true. And, on Patheos, it does reflect some ideological differences, but as I understand it, the different channels help to stave off some of the aggravated conflict that used to exist when there was simply a Christian channel.

    To bring it back to identity…my identity is Jeff, and there are many facets to it. No one category perfectly sums me up. :)

  • gimpi1

    Bills are also put forward for political reasons, to appeal to a specific group of supporters, for example. That appears to be what’s happening here – it’s a “solution” in search of a problem because the problem doesn’t exist.

  • Since you thought your question was such a clever “gotcha” that you felt the need to paste it twice, I’ll re-post my own answer:

    Not everyone considers nudity that big a deal, dude. Up until the mid-twentieth century, Japan didn’t bother to segregate its bathhouses by sex. Scandinavian saunas are still very often mixed-sex.

    My first time art modelling was with a male co-model. And when I invited a friend who happens to be trans over for a swim in my apartment’s pool, I knew I was changing next to someone with “dangly bits”. I cared not a whit. Nor would I have cared if I had a kid along with me.

    Seriously, just because you’ve got issues doesn’t mean everyone else does.

  • scott stone

    Thanks much for the reply. Can’t add anything to what you wrote. You’ve expressed your point beautifully.

  • Citation needed.

  • gimpi1

    Well, I’m a woman, and I don’t find the idea especially traumatic. In fact, a few years ago I took an arthritis water-exercise class (I have rheumatoid arthritis) and the hospital it was held at had a mixed locker room with private, curtained changing areas. This was most likely because the vast majority of people in the class were women, so a separate area for the occasional man made no sense. Anyway, it was really no big deal. Certainly not traumatic.

    I also see no reason why this makes it more likely that straight male predators would dress as women and enter the ladies’ room. That could happen now. This law changes nothing.

  • gimpi1

    The thing is, straight male peeping toms have done the kind of thing you’re talking about for a long time. Trans-people have nothing to do with it, and laws accommodating them don’t make peeping more likely or easier. The two things just aren’t related.

  • gimpi1

    A “papers please” policy for using the restroom is both intrusive and expensive. Frankly, it would be cheaper to reconfigure our current rest rooms to large banks of single-person facilities than to hire 24-7 security guards.

  • gimpi1

    As I mentioned earlier, at the hospital where I took a water-exercise class for people with rheumatoid arthritis, there was only one locker room, with curtained booths for changing. Most people showered before coming to the class, and showered off in their swim-suits, then undressed and dried off in curtained booths. I assume this was because the class was mostly all women, and it didn’t make sense to set aside a space for the very few men. However, when they showed up, it was really no problem.

    Now, this system had some privacy, but I’m really not afraid of “dangly bits.” My husband has a set. I’ve also hot-tubbed with friends, some of whom are so-endowed. It really wasn’t a big deal. Unless someone acts in an aggressive way, I don’t really have a problem.

  • gimpi1

    Do they have an office in Thailand? If not, I don’t see the hypocrisy.

  • gimpi1

    But there’s a difference in a web-based company doing transactions for all comers, but not choosing to build a new facility that had public policies they find immoral. The two actions are not the same at all.

  • gimpi1

    That’s my experience as well, Amandi. I’m not sure where this idea of women’s locker rooms being some sort of strip show came about, but it’s just not true, in my experience.

  • The VA scandal started in Phoenix where 40 vets died waiting for care. The VA falsified waiting list times as well. This was exposed in 2014. The problems have not been solved according to NBC News.

    Per the NY Times the Senate “bipartisan investigation shows gross mismanagement at the highest levels of the I.R.S. “the committee found evidence that the administration’s political agenda guided the I.R.S.’s actions with respect to their treatment of conservative groups.”

    After America was attacked on our soil killing over 3000 people in the most grotesque way, America acted to punish those involved and a majority of Senators like Obama and Clinton supported the action. it very much matters who supported it as it shows democrats and republicans were united in the effort.

    ISIS did spring up because of something the President did not do – leave 5-10,000 troops behind to prevent the very thing that happened. His reasoning was faulty and his failure to get a Status of Forces agreement signed will be his big blunder in the history of this war. ISIS swooped in and took everything we left behind. What was left:

    2,300 Humvee armored vehicles @ $70,000 per copy. Total: $161 million

    40 M1A1 Abram tanks @ $4.3 million per copy. Total: $172 million

    52 M198 Howitzer mobile gun systems @ $527,337 per copy. Total: $27.4 million

    74,000 Army machine guns @ $4,000 per copy. Total: $296 million

    As to the wrong track, that is from Real Clear Politics:

    26.4Right Direction 67.5Wrong Track from March of this year. Average of eight polls: NBC, CBS, Rasmussen, etc.

  • Lynn

    Fox and friends are very good at brainwashing.

  • P J Evans

    Still not buying it. You may not be able to do that – but that doesn’t mean others can’t.

  • Lynn

    I know a woman who bore many children, (I think seven.) that had the facial and body features of a large man. With laws like this she would not be allowed in either bathroom without a birth certificate.
    Definitely against all of these laws.

  • Lynn

    You are confusing the president with the do nothing bigoted congress.

  • Lynn

    What ALEC writes we will submit. Must follow Koch brothers.

  • Lynn

    God bless you.

  • Lynn

    Are you willing to have your taxes raised to make all the renovations required to expand buildings to have enough room to have enough single stalled bathrooms with all the extra plumbing needed for the private sector or just for the public sector buildings?

  • Lynn

    You want to pay for the bathroom monitors needed at every bathroom or the extra janitors that will be needed while we look for proof in order to go and end up going on the floor in front of the bathroom instead. Talk about long lines.

  • How would you know the Congress is bigoted? They are elected officials responsible to their constituents. Hardly bigoted. The President lost control of the Congress in 2010 and the Senate in 2014 precisely because the people don’t like his policies not because he is black.

  • Lynn

    I do not usually get through the long replies but yours are interesting. Thanks.

  • Lynn

    Sad but true.

  • Lynn

    Does not bother me.

  • Lynn

    Now this is a real thing to address and correct through legislation.
    Are rape kits free to the victims now or are the victims still being charged for them?
    Harsher penalties or punishment for violating restraining orders would be nice too.

  • Lynn

    In the women’s locker room I frequent many women run around naked and no one pays attention or makes a big deal of it. I know of only one transgender woman who comes.

  • Lynn

    Mine also. It has changed sometimes there are only a limited number of cubicles or only shower but not dressing cubicles and the little ones go with the adult they came with which nowadays can be mom or dad.

  • TracyLauren

    It seems a lot of people cant seem to ‘buy’ it either. thats why all the bigotry and transphobia now. Believe what you want.

  • Lynn

    Policies that the republicans had said they wanted in the past that President Obama asked them to pass now they rejected that is because he is black.
    The latest example is the supreme court nominee.

  • Bones


    I pointed out that your fallacious argument could be used in support of the Koran.

    Just because something is old doesn’t mean it’s divinely inspired.

    That’s lazy reasoning.

  • Christopher LaHaise
    Nepal, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Germany, New Zealand, Australia. Perhaps not 100% embracing, but a hell of a lot further ahead than the USA. :)

  • David Evans

    There are many people who have bought a gun and later regretted it.

  • Your comments here are a very poor reflection on Fuller. I’m saddened.

  • Malachite

    Yeah, I remember that case. *He wasn’t trans.* The laws already in place didn’t stop that guy & others like him, neither will the anti-trans laws. They just demonize innocent people.

  • Bones

    How does that dude get anywhere near a seminary?

    Hopefully he won’t be unleashed onto people.

  • Malachite

    As you yourself showed, non-trans men are already abusing the status quo. Anti-trans laws will do nothing to change that.

    There is, far, far, more to being trans than “feeling like a woman.” See the research cited above. Your wilfull ignorance and baseless hysteria are making you look really bad here.

  • leslie green

    Well Lynn, you are a minority and I suggest that you should push for a neutral gender mandate. You and others will not win this …. regardless of what the law may say…. Women will have it their way and for the great and vast majority, we want and will maintain our privacy. Gender refers to genetics and say what you may the facts of science still remain… you are male or female period. I don’t give a flying “F” what you all say…. truth is truth. These trannies need to understand that the great majority of women will not tolerate this bull sh*t progressive agenda and it’s a useless and idiotic cause that isn’t going to fly. I don’t need to defend modesty, or self-respect or decency to you … if you agree with this… you need to see a psychiatrist and if you would allow your daughter to be exposed to this , then Child Welfare should be contacted for child abuse. I do believe however and would support gender neutral facilities where they can have their own special place. I do not agree with transgender dressing or locker rooms however. Modesty and Decency do not include transgenders in the restrooms … sorry to the trannies but,, no… not gonna’ happen…. they should fight for their own spaces…with that I agree.

  • Questioning

    “The VA scandal started in Phoenix where 40 vets died waiting for care. The VA falsified waiting list times as well. This was exposed in 2014. The problems have not been solved according to NBC News.”

    The VA has seen a huge influx of new patients due to population aging and the results of the wars we are fighting. Put simply, the VA needs staff and facilities, but that takes government money. Something people like you tend to poo poo at every turn. The text below was taken from the Department of Veterans Affairs own website….

    Last week, the House Appropriations Subcommittee marked up the 2016 Veterans Affairs funding bill, and slashed more than $1.4 billion from the president’s requested budget for America’s Veterans. Today, VA Secretary Bob McDonald appeared before the Senate Appropriations Committee to discuss that budget proposal.

    While some may argue this is not a drastic move, every cut and rescission of funds has real-world implications for Veterans across the country. Here are three ways these proposed congressional cuts will adversely affect the quality of care and services provided to Veterans next year if they are not reversed:

    Medical Care

    The Veterans Health Administration has expanded access to care, completing more than 46 million appointments between May 1, 2014, and Feb. 28, 2015. That’s an increase of 2 million more completed appointments than during the same time period in 2013-2014. VA has also begun to turn the corner on wait times – 97 percent of appointments are completed within 30 days, including 12 million same-day appointments.

    The 2016 House proposal reduces VA medical care by $690 million. What does this mean? As a result of the overall cut to medical services, an estimated 70,000 fewer Veterans will receive the VA care they need.

    “After America was attacked on our soil killing over 3000 people in the most grotesque way, America acted to punish those involved and a majority of Senators like Obama and Clinton supported the action. it very much matters who supported it as it shows democrats and republicans were united in the effort.”

    Of course they supported it, with the President beating the war drum, saying that Iraq had WMD’s, all the while ignoring warnings from within our own intelligence community that the information was dubious. This was conveniently hidden from the American public. There was no confirmed link established between Iraq and the attacks, so I am not sure who your “those involved” is referring to. I would think before committing American lives and American resources, one would want to be as sure as possible about what/why the action is being undertaken. Not the Bush administration…. And no ISIS did not spring up because we left some hardware and no troops in Iraq. They simply moved in that direction first. Here is the thing you are missing… there would have been no hardware to leave, no need for troops to remain in Iraq, no void for ISIS to step into, had the war never occurred in the first place.

    Let’s recap… you called President Obama an idiot. That was a mistake. I think you know it, because ever since then you have been trying to extricate yourself from a hole you dug and fell into. Additionally you have been unable to provide a single fact substantiating that claim. With respect to the Iraq war, the costs in human lives, in American dollars and resources, and it’s results, are quantifiable fact. History will judge President Obama in due time. I only voted for him once and I do not regret that vote. Using your benchmark, if President Obama is an idiot, then George W. Bush is several orders of magnitude, a bigger idiot.

    Oh and your 65% number still means little, since the 65% will never agree on what the “right track” is.

  • You’ve all shared a restroom or locker room with trans people. If you haven’t notices, it’s probably because you don’t go around these facilities checking people’s genitals like conservatives are so intent on.

  • You are wrong on the VA. The scandal continues because the President does not know how to repair it or who to put in charge of it to do so. You can read the most current status assessment from Senator McCain that appeared in our paper two weeks ago. Spending time on Liberal websites is truly a waste of your time.

    Dennis Wagner, The Republic | 10:23 a.m. MST March 29, 2016 Arizona Sen. John McCain unveiled a new action plan for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs at a Monday town hall in Phoenix, declaring that after nearly two years of reform efforts “our veterans still have not gotten the care they need and deserve.”

    President Obama has been in office for over 7 years now. He has managed the “slowest recovery in history” despite spending $7 trillion dollars of money we don’t have. His singular domestic achievement, Obamacare, is in trouble: Not enough people signing up to sustain it; 12 state exchanges already failed; the largest insurer about to depart because of the money they are losing; can’t keep your doctor, can’t keep your plan; sky high deductibles and prices have gone up not down the promised $2500 per family. I would say this qualifies Obama as an idiot and worse because he knowingly lied to the American people and was caught in that lie.

  • Questioning

    Read what I wrote again… I was on the United States Governments own Department of Veteran Affairs website, not a “liberal” website. Never heard of Dennis Wagner, maybe you should take your own advice.

    As far as Obamacare, you need to present qualified, unbiased citation for all your rhetoric. I do know this… I kept my doctor and my plan, plus I know multiple people who are now being treated for health conditions, where they could not even afford health insurance before. The law is far from perfect and will need change, but it is an improvement, especially for those who had no hope of acquiring insurance before, i.e. the least of the least. You know who they are right? As far as Obama “knowingly lying” to the American people, that is just your opinion and worth about as much as most opinions are, but heck I’ll play along. You say Obama knowingly lied or mislead the American people. I would counter by saying George W. Bush did the same. Tell me, which was the bigger lie. Saying it a way you will better understand, what was the fruit of each lie? Throwing your rhetoric back over the fence, I would say this qualifies Bush as an idiot and worse because he knowingly lied to the American people and has been caught in that lie.

  • Try to be serious. Dennis Wagner is the name of the reporter for the Arizona Republic who posted Senator McCain’s remarks. Why would you even assume the VA website has unbiased information? Get a grip. The VA is under scrutiny. Their website is hardly the place to research their current problems.

    On no. It is documented that our President lied about the ability to keep your doctor, your plan. That was proven about six months ago.

    “For all of these reasons, PolitiFact has named “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,” the Lie of the Year for 2013. Readers in a separate online poll overwhelmingly agreed with the choice. (PolitiFact first announced its selection on CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper.) Honestly this is all over the web by many, many sources.

    Obama Care was sold to the American people as something it was not and you know it or should. It was only about providing free healthcare for some and never about the rest of the system. But it appears to be just about crushed under it’s own weight. Now the taxpayer will have to bail it out. So much for his signature achievement.

    George Bush is not the president and has not been for 7 years. Obama is the current President. Obama will be judged by history and not by comparison to Bush.

  • agnosticsdonthatemuch

    ” I think my main problem is the message we’re sending to transgender people, that it’s ok to be transgender instead of just accepting the sex they were born with. And that’s why I’m against it.”
    You are just plain wrong!
    That is the typical answer from a religious person who doesn’t believe god makes mistakes. god has made numerous biological mistakes in nature.
    These laws are meant to tell gays and lgbt that you are not part of god’d creation. But, here is the clincher, god made them so they are part of nature. god made 10% of all mammals homosexual! That is a scientific fact backed by research. When scientist’s don’t know the answer, they develop tests to see what the truth really is. Now, you said they should just accept that they are just in denial. Why, because god doesn’t make mistakes. That is not true because science answered the belief.

  • RollieB

    Just in: The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, upheld the department’s interpretation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 to include protections in the law’s ban on sex discrimination that allow transgender people to use a restroom in accordance with their gender identity.

    We should try and remember: religion sets our beliefs, the law sets behavior. Render unto Caesar… Eventually they meet in the middle and Love Wins. Love casts out fear.

  • Questioning

    Brush up on your reading comprehension. I never said the USDVA had unbiased information, you said I was reading “liberal” websites for information, and it was nothing of the sort. Even so, there was little about what I copied that hints of bias. You contend the President has done nothing about the VA, obviously he has tried but apparently Congress does not approve of his methods. So who is at fault. Both most likely…. As far as your lie of the year, in 2009 it was Sarah Palin and her death panels, in a subsequent year it was the Republican view that the healthcare law was a “takeover” of healthcare in the US. So shall we add the sponsors of these whoppers to your list of idiots? Providing free healthcare to those who cannot afford it, is a bad thing in your estimation? Does not seem to be a very Christian view. Finally, history has already judged the Bush presidency. It was a disaster. No need to compare it to anyone or anything. George Bush is fortunate that the “lie of the year” was not a thing while he was President.

  • Ah! So you agree with me. Took a while.

  • Questioning

    Uh no…. not hardly. Your reading comprehension has let you down again.

  • Claims of widespread transition regret are based on misreadings of a small number of studies. (Debunking here, here, and here.) Not surprisingly, as medical care and community support for trans folk improves, the suicide rate drops.

    Please take the time to talk to some trans folk, and to read their personal accounts, instead of continuing to speak from ignorance.

  • I notice that you reply to Lynn as though she was a lone voice, rather than one of many similar replies.

    As I noted in previous comments, the practice of segregating toilets and bathing facilities is not a universal one found in every era or every culture. And “modesty” is a learned behaviour, not an innate quality (if I had it, I’d never have been able to do art modelling).

    You know what else turns out not to be a universal law? Biological sex being a simple-to-determine thing. If you actually bothered to do even a cursory amount of internet research on human sexual dimorphism, you’d find it’s actually quite complex — to take but one example, look up the various different ways that XXY chromosomes can manifest.

    Oh, also? Statistically speaking, you’ve already shared a bathroom or changeroom with a transwoman at least once in your life. You just didn’t know it.

  • You said that you were against “the message we’re sending to transgender people, that it’s ok to be transgender instead of just accepting the sex they were born with,” and justified this by saying, “there are many people who have made the transition and have later regretted it.” If you weren’t making a reference to the myth of mass transition regret, then what did you mean?

  • Adrian

    You have two kids. One is a teen, and the other is a toddler. The toddler is having trouble being potty trained. The teen has been potty trained for over a decade, but just began shitting himself again. Can you understand the distinction now? Should you handle the toddler and the teen the same, since they’re both doing the same thing? Is one the failure to make progress, while the other is actually regression?

  • Mike

    “the law sets behavior”?

    Are you kidding?

  • Adrian

    We could just revert to universal bathrooms. It’s not like male and female poop is different. Same with pee. And toilets already have stalls anyway. Most people either live in, or were raised in, co-ed houses, and I don’t think I’ve ever met anyone who has separate male and female bathrooms in their houses or apartments.

    And, to be perfectly honest, we’d probably have fewer problems if we were more accustomed to seeing naked people of both sexes as a matter of course.

  • Hilary

    Fine with me. I’d rather shower and change with a transgender woman then a right wing fundagelical Christian.

  • Comrade Carrot-Blog Vegetarian

    “Someone might pretend to be a transgender person so they can enter the bathroom to assault our wives and children!”

    Why is assault a worry? Aren’t our wives and children packing heat?

    That’s how you stop a bad guy with a gun in your bathroom, is it not?

    It’s those idealistic, utopian liberals who believe more laws and regulation will incline a determined assaulter to freeze in place at the magic barrier marked by the stick-figure with a dress.

  • Bones

    While you’re “forming your opinion”, people will go about living their lives the best they can.

    Ultimately it’s none of your business.

  • Bones

    Most abortions are natural…..

    And the doctrine of Original Sin shows that it was better for humanity if they weren’t even born.

  • Bones

    It’s people’s lives.

    It’s none of your business.

    Get over it.

  • Bones

    I did……

  • Bones

    Talk about the pot calling the kettle black….

    You’re one of those who likes sticking their nose into people’s lives.

    You should get out more….and find a mate…instead of sticking your nose into other people’s lives.

    I mean it’s no surprise that a person who doesn’t like gays or liberals wouldn’t like transexuals.

  • Bones

    There are people who got married and regretted it….

  • Spoken like a true heterosexual fundamentalist. You wish everyone who was “sexually other” would just stop being that way and accept their biological sex. Oh, would it be that simple. Wouldn’t that make everything nice and neat? Read John Shore’s book, “Unfair.” It has page after page of wrenching letters from LGBTQ Christians who were shunned by family and church when they came “out.” Many became suicidal. Most prayed fervently for God to remove these desires. Some married heterosexually to please family or in a desperate attempt to “become” “normal,” with disastrous results. Most tried harmful, pseudo-psychological programs like Exodus to force behavioral modification. They weren’t healed because they weren’t sick! The fact is, humans aren’t strictly binary sexually, never have been, never will. Human sexuality is a very complex issue. It’s a bit like being left handed in the 1950’s, when the common sense treatment was to attempt to force behavior modification, because, well, being left handed was abnormal. Just learn to accept the way people were made and not a vision of what you wished they were.

  • Bones

    Your opinion means nothing as it is ill informed and ignorant, and probably no different to the Taliban.

  • You state there is no “gay gene” then turn around and that “doesn’t mean there aren’t defects in our genetic make up.” You’re contradicting yourself here.

  • Can’t imagine peeing next to Ted Cruz, yuck!

  • Bones

    What does science say about transexualism?

    It’s all in the brain and neurology…..Nothing to do with the old conservative hang ups with mums and dads which is how it is taught in conservative churhces.

    Here is an excerpt of a lecture by Dr. Robert Sapolsky an American neuroendocrinologist, professor of biology, neuroscience, and neurosurgery at Stanford University, researcher and author

    Gender Orientation: IS Conditions Within The TS Brain

  • I think one of the more disturbing elements in the anti-trans movement is characteristic of the evangelical movement’s attitude toward LGBTQ people in general. That is, the propensity to rely on falsehood to support supposed “truth.” Whether or not you believe being Gay or Trans is a “sin” does not matter as far as arguing your case goes. Using lies to prop up your beliefs does matter. Evangelicals have consistently maintained that the Gay “agenda and lifestyle” is destroying America, wrecking our families, teaches our kids to be Gay or Trans, none of which has ever been substantiated. This is why SCOTUS ruled in favor of Gay marriage…conservatives could not prove their case. How often have we seen reports in the news about Trans people assaulting our “wives and children?” How often do we see cases of rape or murder or child abuse done by cis men? Quite frequently, I’m afraid. This is totally a scare tactic, and Christians should be ashamed of themselves when they use it.

  • That’s right, man. We need more bathroom shootouts to counter all the bathroom assaults. This is exactly what is happening in states that already allow transgender people to use their chosen restroom. Widespread assaults and bathroom-oriented gunfights like every day. It’s like the Wild West in public restrooms in California.

  • Paul actually seems pretty upset at people who go around checking on people’s genitalia for conservative legalism: Gal. 2:3-5

    Not that the American Christian Right has ever cared much about the Bible, but still.

  • Ron McPherson

    Yes. I think it was maybe my cousin’s friend whose hairdresser’s veterinarian heard something on this from her brother’s girlfriend who has a nephew whose teacher’s husband saw something like this on some news channel, or read about it in some newspaper, or heard about it on the radio, or read it on either Twitter or Facebook maybe, or somebody maybe told him about it, or something like that…

  • I wear a flak jacket to restrooms in Minnesota.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    I actually do not picture monitors asking for proof.I think that legal proof of transgender status could be shown by a transgender person only if people get upset by their presence in the bathroom and complain, then management can request it. That is all.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    Exactly it is the non transgenders who are causing this problem but these transgender laws as they are currently written will make it easier for perverted peeping toms to go into the ladies bathroom, and the unisex bathroom idea like the one temporarily implemented at the University of Toronto will be a nightmare. I really think only total capitulation to what you think and want will make me look good on such a biased site as this one and if caring about women’s safety while also wanting transgenders to be safe as well makes me look bad so be it.

  • Lisa Rosestars

    I agree with you it may cost more but I think it is the best solution. Large businesses like Wal Mart and Kroger already have family restrooms and smaller stores already have single stalled bathrooms so for them the issue is not a problem. Not sure how it will be paid for but I know large businesses can afford it.

  • Ron McPherson

    Always good to be prepared.

  • Here’s what you don’t seem to be considering: there’s already widespread pressure upon trans folk to “accept the sex they were born with”. It’s only very recently that we’ve begun to consider that for the majority of trans people, that method doesn’t work — it only ends up causing gender dysphoria, depression, and often suicide.

    If you checked out the links I posted earlier, you’ll note that approximately 95% of trans people who transitioned ended up happier. If this method works better for the vast majority, and stops them from doing stuff like killing themselves, why on earth would you propose rejecting it?

  • They need to do this for their own safety, as if they were to enter the bathroom that corresponded to their sex instead of their gender, it would freak people out and cause an unnecessary disturbance.

    The thing is, appearance and biology don’t match up perfectly, thanks to society constantly changing its mind about what people ought to look like. So even if all we’re dealing with is a group of people who are cis, there’s still going to be so much variation in their appearances that, almost inevitably, someone is going to look like they’re in the wrong bathroom.

    And the fun thing about these laws and the culture of anxiety that promotes them is that even people who are cis have been running up against them, sometimes with violent results. A woman with short hair was bodily torn from the women’s room and slammed upon the ground by a security officer who was positive that no one with short hair could possibly be anything but a man.

    In the end, the only way to ensure that no one that concerned about who pees where can be satisfied is by forcing everyone to look alike.

    So how long until the party of small government tries to pass a law mandating hair length and clothing color restrictions?

  • Ironically, either way, whether made legal or illegal, it becomes impossible to determine who belongs in the bathroom and who’s trespassing there, because external appearance isn’t the end-all be-all of sex or gender.

  • “They can have my urinal when they pry it from my cold, dead hands!”

  • The more likely outcome is that a person who is trans will never stay out and about very long, because of the fear of being assaulted in a public restroom. Less trans visibility is a win for the conservative.

  • Why?

  • You should check out the podcast “How to be a Girl.” It’s a great example of a transgender child who knew they were the other sex around 3 years old.

  • This is what abortion politics is for. This is what it was designed to do. This is its function and its purpose. It is — above all — a weapon for reasserting a claim to the moral high ground, and for putting the moral upstarts of the Civil Rights movement back in their proper place as moral subordinates who should have no say in determining right and wrong unless they first consult the rightful arbiters of such things, i.e., us.

    Those people, you see, are depraved baby-killers. But how does that change the utter failure of –?


    But how do you justify defending brutality, inequality, segregation, oppressi–?

    They kill babies.

    This is what abortion politics is for – Fred Clark, Slacktivist

  • News to me. I must be imagining our significantly higher rates of hate crime victimization, including rape and murder.

  • Well, since you’re so concerned about this, we’ll just go ahead and ban transgender people from using the women’s room. Then people like Aydian Dowling will be forced to give up their perversion and use the women’s restroom like they should, and women won’t have to worry about strange men in the bathroom!

  • Alas, we’ve still had more Republican senators arrested for bathroom misconduct than people who are trans, or pretending to be trans.

  • What will stop fake trans people from getting this same documentation?

  • Given that the North Carolina law has a rider that prevents lesser municipalities from having a minimum wage above the state minimum, I keep wondering if the point of the law is that the offensive part gets stripped out and everyone forgets the rider…

  • Er, many very good ideas come from problematic sources. Declaring that sex and gender are not synonymous in no way, tacitly or otherwise, affirms a sexual binary, regardless of the other beliefs of the origin of that idea.

    Putting it another way: before Freud, we didn’t have a lot in the way of support for psychiatry focusing on unconscious thoughts and framing, or the idea that childhood trauma could continue influencing a person years down the road.

    Stating that the mind has many layers and the conscious one isn’t the end-all of psychology doesn’t mean, however, that all mental illnesses actually come down to how we were potty trained or that we have unresolved sexual desire for our parents.

  • You’re right! I’m very concerned about who could be looking at my child’s dangly bits. That’s why I need you to unzip, lift your skirt, and prove to me that you’re not a pervert in disguise. After you’re finished, you’ll have to repeat the process with your child. The last thing we need is more perversion afflicting our children!!!

  • Problem: Trans people don’t all transition to the same degree, and a number of cis people are commonly confused for a different sex.

  • Being trans and having moderate to severe gender dysphoria are not synonymous. Many trans people are, to varying degrees, comfortable with their bodies. Others, as I pointed out previously, don’t or can’t transition in such a manner.

    For example, whether I want dangly bits or not, the surgery is way, way too expensive for me. Am I not trans because I’m not rich? Am I supposed to just never ever go outside for extended lengths of time because I’m not wealthy enough to get surgery? Huge problems with this logic.

  • This stall ain’t big enough fer the two of us!

  • Ron McPherson


  • TracyLauren

    Its actually the point I am making. Are you planning to wander NAKED through a womens change area? Having and showing are not the same thing.

    I am not saying the only post op are trans. I am just saying that someone walking NAKED and displaying full dangle is a problem. real trans people would not do that. if it happens, this is NOT a trans person.

  • Adrian

    Well, then you’re an exception, not the rule (regarding having his and hers bathrooms in your home). And I’ve been in places where the urinals have stalls.

  • A real trans person could indeed do that (although many obviously won’t). Being trans does not equate to having body shame, full stop — and some people who happen to be trans are also blase, exhibitionist, perverse, or otherwise do not care who sees what they’ve got.

    Trust me, not only I party with them on a regular basis, I do so because they’re my people. I’m trans, and I’ll confess to having gone streaking last weekend (among consenting adults) to celebrate the end of the hottest day in April in our state’s history.

    If a cis person would do it, a trans person would do it.

    You’re trying to invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy, and there’s a reason it’s a fallacy.

  • TracyLauren

    So I took a few minutes to answer because you pissed me off.

    First off acts of “exhibitionism” and “perversion” are still, and always have been illegal in public, let alone public bathrooms. Those words do not belong in a conversation about public bathrooms, and human decency in general society. At this point, nobody wants you in any bathroom.

    I am going to make 2 observations:

    1) you are not Trans. Taking you for just your actual words, you are at best gender fluid. Gender fluidity really is a change of topic to a binary mens/womens washroom topic. We are not talking about you guys yet, so wait your turn.

    2) you are not Trans. You are a troll. You are deliberately adding a conflict into what was an actual conversation in order to push the far extreme of one side or another. I refuse to be drawn into this conversation any further.

  • Another possibility is that it could be something which occurs between the combining of chromosomes and birth. A number of hypotheses focus on the influence of hormones on prenatal development.

  • This worries me also.

  • Questioning

    Outlaw urinals and only outlaws will have urinals…

  • Brian Kellogg

    Nice. Was preparing something similar, but you summed it up very well already.

  • My previous post was placed in the moderator queue for vulgarity, so apparently you’re not the only one fuming. Let’s try this again:

    How a person gets their rocks off has nothing to do with their sex or gender, and plays no deciding factor whatsoever in whether a person is genderfluid. You call me a troll, but you’re the one pushing a dialogue which erases and silences trans people by attempting to define who is and isn’t actually trans based upon whether they feel ashamed of themselves for existing. I hope you’ll understand that this irritates me. A lot.

    Speaking as someone who studied clinical psychology as a major (but decided not to pursue it as a career), there is nothing — nothing — which requires that a person experience significant gender dysphoria in order to be classified as transgender. A person can celebrate the body they have, even if they don’t believe it accurately portrays the person they are inside. Sophie Labelle, author of Assigned Male, has spent years now speaking on this very issue. I commonly use her PSAs as part of my advocacy for body acceptance for people not in a position to transition, due to factors such as conservative family members or poverty. She commonly posts things like this, or this, or this. Is Sophie Labelle “genderfluid” because she believes a transwoman is a woman regardless of what’s between her legs and encourages transwomen to see themselves the same way?

    Seriously, where the hell do you get off telling transpeople that they aren’t legitimate unless they feel a certain way about themselves? How the hell am I trolling for pushing back against the presumption that, unless I harbor feelings of repulsion and disgust for myself, I don’t qualify as trans? Don’t you think I get enough of those feelings from other people without being required to feel them for myself, too?

  • No, children get upset when they see their parents getting riled up about something. If you explain things to a child in a matter-of-fact way, they won’t be upset or confused.

    One couple had a transwoman babysitter for their child, and said, “[Babysitter] was born a boy, but she always felt like a girl. So now a doctor is helping her become a girl.” Kid accepted this easily.

  • TracyLauren

    I label you a troll, because you use “exhibitionism” and “perverse” in a conversation about public bathrooms.
    This is PRECISELY the reason people are afraid. if it is your intent to help an issue, then stick to the topic at hand, and help people understand that #justwanttopee is not in the same conversation as exhibitionism and perverse.

    “How a person gets their rocks off” is also off topic for this conversation, and again speaks to my topic. If you view the bathroom as a way to “Get your rocks off” you deserve to be arrested. nobody wants you in a public washroom of any gender.

  • Gehenna

    Exactly. When a kid isn’t indoctrinated to really hate something like that, then they probably don’t have a negative reaction.

    “Mommy, why does my brother dress like a girl?”
    “Because she’s felt like a girl trapped in a boy’s body her entire life,”
    “Ok, can I have a cookie?”

  • Gehenna

    As a cis male, if a trans male was in the shower or locker room, I really wouldn’t care.

  • Red flag on the playing field: you changed the subject matter in a previous post and are now appending my statements to the previous subject. Since you’re unfairly trying to malign me, let’s revisit the context, shall we?
    You said:

    Its actually the point I am making. Are you planning to wander NAKED through a womens change area? Having and showing are not the same thing. … I am just saying that someone walking NAKED and displaying full dangle is a problem. real trans people would not do that. if it happens, this is NOT a trans person.

    And this is specifically to which I was replying when I said:

    A real trans person could indeed do that (although many obviously won’t). Being trans does not equate to having body shame, full stop — and some people who happen to be trans are also blase, exhibitionist, perverse, or otherwise *do not care* who sees what they’ve got.

    In the context of the changing area, nudity sometimes happens, and not everyone is shy about it. Hell, I was the kid who always went around the corner because I was shy and a lot of the other kids weren’t. Who am I to say each and every one of the kids who flaunted their bits was cis? Who are you to say absolutely none of them could have been trans?
    If a person is strutting around the bathroom, that’s something else, but: it’s still something a trans person could do, however unlikely, because trans people are not miraculously immune to any and all forms of sexual misconduct. There are no records of it ever happening and I don’t anticipate seeing many in my lifetime, but if life has taught me anything, it’s not to expect perfection from anybody.

    Also, for constantly trying to turn “a person could do this” into “you do this” and thus try to attack me? May your favorite pen get lost between the desk and wall just as you’re filling out a check for cat food with a noisy Siamese yowling hungrily in the background.

  • Heh, for all the disparaging comments I’m weathering in another thread regarding hypothetical conduct in a bathroom, the last time I showered with others, there were three of us of mixed gender in a single cramped stall, and you know what happened?

    We helped each other bend backwards to dunk our heads beneath the shower spray, because the water temperature was so erratic that none of us wanted to get fully under it (lest we get blasted with volcanic emission or arctic runoff, or both somehow). Three nude people in a small shower and chief concern remained “get clean with a minimum of fuss.” This was in a location where debauchery was kind of a theme, too, and public nudity was allowed after sundown.

    It’s almost like we had different priorities entirely… like using the room for its intended purpose.

  • Your video link points only to YouTube. However, this is just as well because I, like many others, prefer to process information via text. (Also, video links without transcripts or subtitles are inconsiderate to deaf users.)

    “Courage” is a Roman Catholic organization whose idea of “supporting” LGBT folk is to assume that same-sex attraction is something for which people must do “penance”, and that the best way for them to live is through self-enforced celibacy. This is, to use layman’s terms, deeply fucked up.

    Like your assertion that trans people should just “learn to accept their birth sex”, you don’t seem to realize that these are not new ideas. For decades, these ideas were promoted to LGBT people as the only “solutions”. These ideas are being increasingly abandoned for the simple reason that for the vast majority, they not only don’t work but are actively harmful, causing depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts.

    It’s still an ongoing process, but thankfully, most psychologists and psychiatrists no longer share your notions about sexuality and gender identity. And as a result, the rate of depression amongst LGBT people is decreasing.

  • Jeff Preuss

    “If you view the bathroom as a way to “Get your rocks off” you deserve to be arrested.”

    Outside perspective? NOTHING Sam has said indicated that Sam views the bathroom that way, and it was readily apparent Sam was countering the notion that’s the sole reason trans people wish to be in a bathroom, which is the very twisted idea those supporting the bathroom law are pushing. In fact, the narrative Sam was putting forth squarely posits that transpeople should be viewed as fully human, neither complete devils nor angels, and cannot simply be unilaterally pigeonholed with a statement about what a “real trans” would do.

    It’s a parallel conversation to what plays out often on this blog, with some declaring themselves the arbiter of who is and is not a “true Christian.” Hence, Sam’s mention of the No True Scotsman fallacy. In a debate, it tends to undermine your position.

  • agnosticsdonthatemuch

    How do you know there isn’t a gay gene? That’s exactly your problem. Just because you say something is true/not true doesn’t make it true. Where is your research? Please don’t tell me it’s your 2,000 year old book? Biblical scholars don’t even accept its validity.
    It definitely has little meaning today. Find love and joy in life in the here and now. You sound like a nice person. Or, Jesus said many wonderful things. I know great, intelligent and loving people who find the relevant passages by Jesus and follow Jesus’s teachings.

  • *shrug* Nobody’s making you. But sooner or later, your kids are going to have to make up their minds for themselves. If you don’t want to give them the tools to deal with this stuff without getting upset and confused, that’s on you.

  • Dennis Ray Wall

    If someone just 20 years ago had said, for starters, that we’d someday elect an anti-American president who would intentionally flood our borders with millions of illegal immigrants and Islamist “refugees,” that we’d soon celebrate as “heroic” a former Olympic champion for mutilating his body and pretending to be a woman, that we’d have five extremist lawyers on the Supreme Court unconstitutionally force the radical redefinition of marriage to mollify people with same-sex fetishes – you might call that person crazy.

    Well, crazy is the new normal. America has lost its mind. We’ve snapped. Anyone with eyes to see, ears to hear and a brain to think knows it.

    But why? How did it happen? What exactly caused America’s moral GPS to send our nation headlong into oncoming traffic?

    The answer is obvious! Barack Hussein Obama is a “Community Organizer! Joe Biden has drank the Kool-Aid & is therefore a part of that Community! And let me remind you that Jim Jones was also a “Community Organizer”!
    James Warren “Jim” Jones (May 13, 1931 – November 18, 1978) was an American cult leader & community organizer. Jones was the founder and leader of the Peoples Temple, infamous due to the mass murder-suicide in November 1978 of 918 of its members in Jonestown, Guyana.
    They “drank the Kool-Aid” that was laced with cyanide! Many of America’s citizenry has drank Obama’s “Kool-Aid” laced with lies, deceit & moral insanity! The only sane hope & change for America is The God of The Bible!
    14 If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
    2 Chronicles 7:14 NIV

  • And how would a kid “not be ready” for a simple statement like the one I used as an example? It’s not like anyone’s recommending trying to explain hormone replacement therapy to a five-year-old.

  • Christopher LaHaise

    As a bisexual man, married to a bisexual woman, I really, really want to see the person who says ‘there’s no bisexuals’. Really, I do. So I can laugh in his face.

  • Bones

    Oh for the good ol days when women, gays and blacks were in their place.

    What we’re seeing is liberation.

    Btw MLK was a community organizer.

    So was Jesus……..

    Me thinks you’ve been on too much kool-aid.

    Maybe one day God will heal your land when your type stop screwing other countries.

  • Bones

    My opinion is informed by science….

    Yours is informed by ignorance and bigotry.

  • Off topic
    Ssshhh, Eva I should not have mentioned that name on that channel. dumb, dumb, dumb. Hence my edit.

  • :-)))

  • Nathan Aldana

    summarized in a sentence: “I miss the days when I could threaten everyone who didnt agree with me with implied violence and get the sort of “respect” that comes from good ol fashioned fear”

    Granted, it is kind of fun watching people like you freak out like little scared children while pretending to be manly and brave, and by that I mean screaming invective at everyone.

  • Nathan Aldana

    I wonder what safety theyre after anyhow.

    If someone who was born a girl but identifies as a man comes into my bathroom to pee well..who cares? everyone has to pee.

  • SamHamilton

    But wouldn’t it be so much easier to mock the women who don’t want people with penises in their bathrooms and changing areas if we assume that everyone who opposes the former doesn’t want additional gun control? It would be a lot easier to dismiss their concerns that way…wouldn’t it?!

  • SamHamilton

    We need a mature discussion about this issue and Mr. Corey’s contribution doesn’t help. What irks him the most about this debate is the supposed hypocrisy? Really?

    What bothers me the most isn’t some hypocrisy, but the probability that, left to their own devices, I’m willing to bet that local institutions, whether it’s schools, public buildings, businesses, libraries, city governments, etc. would come to find acceptable solutions when it comes to bathrooms, changing areas, sports teams, etc. for the minute number of people who truly suffer from gender dysphoria. But as with far too many things in our society, it’s become an issue of asserting “rights” (since when is there a right to a bathroom of one’s choosing?!) rather than talking about the right thing to do in individual situations.

    So instead of the city of Charlotte being allowed to set rules for establishments in the city, the state government comes and says “you can’t do that!” And instead of a local school in Illinois being allowed to make accommodations for a student with gender dysphoria, we get the federal government coming in and saying “no, what you’ve done is not good enough, we know what’s best for your school!” These matters can mostly be settled by people at the local level with the best knowledge of the needs of their local community, but of course, this is America and we can’t have that. We have to crank things up to 11 and make a national issue of this.

    Mr. Corey is right in one regard; it’s not about safety for some people on either side. It’s about a larger culture war and forcing their worldview down the throats of people in communities hundreds of miles away in situations they know nothing about. To me, this is what irks me the most.

  • SamHamilton

    Our transgender friends aren’t going to just snap while washing their hands and assault you. They’re not trying to sneak a peek or cop a feel. They’re just trying to freakin’ pee.

    Let’s be clear: This has nothing to do with protecting our children. If these folks actually cared about the safety of our children, they’d be focused on what’s killing them on a daily basis– and newsflash: it’s not our transgender friends.

    These paragraphs don’t make any sense. By Mr. Corey’s own admission in previous paragraphs he’s noted the complaint of those opposed to allowing people with gender dysphoria into the bathroom of their choice – that they’re supposedly afraid of men claiming to be transgender but who aren’t entering areas reserved for women. They’re not worried about people with gender dysphoria, but people pretending to be so. They’re not worried about transgendered people “snapping” but non-transgendered men sneaking into areas reserved for women. At least pay attention to what the other side is saying (even if you don’t give them the benefit of the doubt that what they’re saying is the truth about what they believe).

  • SamHamilton

    How would you know if the person was trans male? What about a locker room of non-trans men?

  • SamHamilton

    How many people are up for federally mandated unisex changing areas? If not, why not? If so, why?

    From reading some comments here it sounds like it’s a mere hang-up that American women don’t like disrobing in front of strange men that they need to get over.

  • I find it fascinating that you don’t mention the blatantly obvious true reason for this whole debate, except in passing: to protect trans people from violence against THEM! The incredible rates of assault on people who don’t match the predetermined definitions of reality espoused by many here is why they’re scared to go into restrooms that conflict with their gender identities. Why should they be forced to enter bathrooms where they themselves are likely to be harmed?

  • I’m not sure I understand your post. A trans woman looks like a woman. Forcing her to go into the men’s room is what would put her in harm’s way. Not the other way around.

  • How is that a problem?

  • So you are saying because a baby has no concept yet of gender that they are not trans? None of use knew we were boys or girls that early. So really, to ourselves, we’re all non-gendered until we come to even understand what that means.

  • I probably didn’t explain myself well, Enesvy–that is my point (what you said)–that trans people face far more violence than the feigned helplessness argument being put forth by conservatives. I felt like the author missed or didn’t fully present this aspect of the weakness of the argument of people who oppose allowing trans persons to use the restrooms of their gender identity.
    I really appreciate your gracious tone! If I thought I had meant the opposite, I probably would have struggled to be as kind as you in my response.

  • One4Life

    Gun laws and transgender/bathroom ordinances & laws, responses, ideas, and our societal response are not connected. Despite an attempt here of sorts, you have failed to make a connection.
    On transgender individuals – not all transgenders who started out as men are sexually attracted to men – many remain sexually attracted to women. So a transgender woman (who was originally a man) may still have all the equipment, all the upper body strength of a man, and the sexual appetite of a heterosexual man — all this in a dress or capri pants. And who determines if they are actually trans or just having some cross-dressing erotic fun? There is no deterministic way – one must simply take their word for it. I can see the problem.

  • It’s an unfortunately common sentiment. I’ve gotten it from straight people and from gay people alike.

  • Even with that clarification, the threat is blown absurdly out of proportion. There are no recorded incidents of a person pretending to be transgender to enter a bathroom and yet a lot of people want to pass laws to address this threat, while there are thousands upon thousands of incidents every year from other causes which are deemed an acceptable risk.

  • Not everyone gets surgery or hormones (at least at the time you see them), so not everyone is going to “pass.” That might make it fairly obvious.when you’re dealing with a trans person. After surgery or hormones, then it can be harder to tell.

  • It means that when that person walks into the ladies room and they look like a man, so you call security, you’ve probably just gotten a woman with short hair beaten up. Or you got the transwoman who doesn’t look like a woman beaten up. Because security these days tend to slam first and ask questions later.

  • (My previous reply is still in the pending queue, it seems. So here’s a rewrite.)

    What I find offensive is dogma which hurts and oppresses people. And I don’t consider, “Oh, but it’s a deeply and sincerely-held belief!” to be an excuse. Some people deeply and sincerely believe that whites are a superior race — should they be immune to mockery and criticism?

    It doesn’t matter if there’s some small number of people who claim to have been genuinely helped by this “Courage” outfit — what they’re selling has proven, time and time again, to be harmful to most.

    The evidence is against you, and all the pearl-clutching in the world won’t change that. Have fun in the dustbin of history, because that’s where you’ve consigned yourself. The rest of us will move on to a happier world without your lot.

  • SamHamilton

    Here’s an example: http://www dot king5 dot com/news/man-womens-locker-room-cites-gender-rule/65533111

    But you’re right, these incidents are few and far between. I think the fear that there’s going to be lots of people doing this is overblown.

  • SamHamilton

    A trans woman doesn’t always look like a woman.

  • Even this one doesn’t necessarily appear to be malicious, the only questionable part about it being that the person apparently made no effort to demonstrate being transgender, making them a possible example of my point that being trans and appearing to be trans don’t go hand in hand.

    The fact that they apparently didn’t identify as transgender makes me wonder if it’s someone protesting the rule by deliberately using the wrong changing room, though. I wouldn’t put it past someone to try making a point by intentionally causing a scene.

  • Nathan Aldana

    The thing is though, its overblown on purpose.

    The entire point of overblowing it is to make the “crying game scenario” all anyone thinks about when they think of transgender people, for the purposes of riling up conservative voters.

  • Actually, when a born-male person begins to take estrogen, one of the side effects is that they lose bone density and muscle definition. So they’re actually less strong.

    Of course, by your logic, we should ban lesbians from ladies’ bathrooms. Or is it only lesbians who work out a lot? Please explain what your standards would be, and how you’d go about applying them.

    Of course, all of this is beside the point: there have yet to be any documented cases of trans women sexually harassing women in ladies’ rooms (and bear in mind that trans women have been using ladies’ bathrooms for decades already). The cis men who try to sneak into bathrooms tend to dress and present as men.

    teal deer: you have no case.

  • Maybe not purposefully, at least on the lower end of the political power spectrum. Authoritarians are prone to viewing this world as inherently dangerous, spinning out of control, and likely to end within their lifetimes. It helps reinforce their boundary placements and makes them all the more hostile toward people who fall outside them.

  • Jeff Preuss

    “The fact that they apparently didn’t identify as transgender makes me
    wonder if it’s someone protesting the rule by deliberately using the
    wrong changing room, though. I wouldn’t put it past someone to try
    making a point by intentionally causing a scene.”

    When that was first reported, that was my gut reaction to the story. It didn’t ‘pass the smell test,’ as it were. To me, it seemed like someone was trying to make a point, though clarity on the exact nature of the point was and is lacking.

  • Yeah, will have to keep an eye on that story and see if anything develops further.

  • Gehenna

    The only ways I’d know, a) if I’m actually looking (which I don’t care enough to because if I’m in a dressing room, I’m getting dressed, if I’m in a shower, I’m taking a shower), b) if I know them and they’ve told me.

    I’ve been in an open shower with other guys (bootcamp) didn’t really bother me then. I do prefer a private shower honestly, but I think most people do.

  • There are plenty of lay Catholics who think that the bishops are flat-out wrong about damn near everything regarding sex or sexuality. Some of them are doing their best to change the institution from within. Others pretty much ignore what the bishops say about gay and trans people, in much the same way as the pronouncements against birth control are ignored.

    Eventually, though, the Church is going to be faced with a choice: change or die. Either one will be slow, I’m sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s not inevitable.

  • What’s this got to do with using the bathroom? Do we prevent Gay men from using the men’s restroom because they are attracted to men, lesbians can’t use the woman’s restroom because they’re attracted to women, what about Bi’s, they shouldn’t use either! What is it about sex and restrooms for Evangelicals? Why do they connect the two? I sure as heck don’t think about sex while using the John. Some people are just uncomfortable with anyone or thing that seems different. I am not quite sure what Evangelicals want to do about this “problem.” Trans people just want to do their business like everyone else with the least amount of drama.

  • Or we could simply have a Republican stand at all public restroom entrances and have anyone entering drop their trousers or lift their skirt before entering so they can be told which restroom to use! ;)

    It would be cheaper than building new gender-neutral restrooms as judging by how obsessed with sex Republicans seem to be, they’d probably line up for the jobs and work for free, just to get their jollies!

  • No good; more Republicans have been arrested in bathrooms than all the incidents involving trans people in bathrooms put together.

  • One4Life

    Gay men often have sex in bathrooms. There are pick up spots in specific locations. But since both are men it would be hard to force oneself on someone, particularly someone buff and attractive. It is a consensual deal. It’s simply a fact of biology that men are stronger than most women. This is one reason men raping women happens. And pervy men going after women in a bathroom is not beyond the realm of possibilities. In fact, I am sure it has happened. If I had a daughter I would not be comfortable with her sharing a bathroom or shower room at the gym with a man who identifies as female yet remains with all his equipment. Heck I wouldn’t be comfortable with any of my female relatives being put in such a situation.

  • One4Life

    Men tend to attack sexually much more often than women. So no, lesbians are not a problem. Gay men are not a problem – they would have to attack and overcome another man, some fit guy they’re attracted to, which becomes problematic. Men sexually assaulting women is the most common, if everything I’ve ever heard is correct. Besides, I think this is a big non-issue. I have never heard of anyone stopping a truly trans individual identifying as a woman. I’ve never heard of a case, much less it being some huge problem we must solve. Preventing men wearing a wig and some lipstick from showering with women is not a bad thing. That’s the only people who would ever be stopped from entering the ladies.

  • Well then, I’ll pose you the same question I asked someone else upthread, and for which I never got an answer: can you present any documented cases of cis men pretending to be trans women in order to get into women’s bathrooms?

  • Hi there! I’ve shared a change room with a friend who’s a trans woman, before she got bottom surgery. It was exactly like sharing a change room with a cis woman. Really, the only reason I knew that there was someone with a penis and testicles in the next cubicle was because we know each other well.

    Someone who presents as female well enough to feel confident walking into a ladies’ change room will be someone who’s been taking estrogen for a while. As I already mentioned, some side effects of that are loss of bone density and muscle definition. Another side effect is loss of erectile capability. So your worries about cis women being sexually assaulted by trans women are unfounded.

  • Sam, what you’re espousing ends up just not being practical. Yes, states do have the right, to a certain extent, to govern themselves. But at some point, as a unified country, rules need to be evenly applied. Gay marriage is a good example. Each state was deciding differently about the issue ranging from not legal to civil union to full equality. It was creating a nightmare of legal issues. And it affected a large group of people, their families, health insurance, etc.

    The state’s rights issue dates back at least to the civil war if not further. Most recently it has been used primarily to “deny rights” and not to protect rights. To prevent interracial marriage, to allow Fundamentalist Universities to deny Blacks equal rights. As a country based on democratic principals our government tries to protect everyones’s rights equally, an equal footing.

    It wasn’t too long ago that states could decide for themselves if blacks could use the same bathrooms as whites, or drinking fountains or ride in the same coach class as whites. The backlash against big government stepping in was the same as we have here today.

    I’m sorry that you are more concerned about state’s rights than other’s safety. You are entitled to that opinion, but it doesn’t reflect well on your character.

  • I still don’t see the logic. How will creating a law prohibiting transgender folk from using their preferred gender restroom keep determined rapists from entering restrooms to attack women or children. You are creating hypothetical issues, then creating laws based on it. The crime is rape, not peeing! You have failed to see the connection, the hypocrisy that Ben is talking about. On the one hand, conservatives rankle at more gun laws, “we have enough, the ones on the books are sufficient…” Yet concerning violence to “our womenfolk and ‘chilluns we can’t be too careful. Let’s make laws against them pesky queer folk, tho cain’t say I ever seen one attack anyone, cause who knows, a pervert might dress up like one all sneaky-like and attack them.”

    Laws are proposed against, say, assault rifles. Is it because some people think they are evil? No, it’s simply a tool. But it is used, quite frequently to harm others. There is, in other words, statistics to back up a desire to protect others from the misuse of these dangerous weapons. Here we have facts. The laws in NC and other states are not based on facts but ignorance, fearmongering and prejudice, pure and simple.

  • Danke!

  • Trust me. We women know those who mean us harm and those who just need to pee.

  • I’d say 99% of them do.

  • Hopefully your criteria is a bit more precise than “looks like a man,” which is what you said earlier.

  • … Only because you’re not counting the majority who don’t, because you never recognize them as such, blithely assuming they’re men because they look like what society considers men. Do you honestly think nigh-every transwoman has had the luxury to transition?

  • You don’t have to transition to dress and present as a woman. The majority of trans people want to live and present as their true gender. From my understanding (and I could be wrong) a trans woman wants to present as a woman. If she is choosing for whatever reason to present as a man, she would most likely have no problem using the men’s room and would most likely choose to do so to avoid controversy. However, honestly, if a man walked into the women’s bathroom, used the toilet, washed their hands and left, I’d definitely double-take but in this day and age, I wouldn’t think much about it. They could be a drag king for all I know.

  • Most accounts consider dressing to be a form of transition as well, but that’s still a problem. Sure, I have a lot of skirts and dresses in my wardrobe, but what if I’m just wearing shorts and a t-shirt?

    We need to get away from relying on visual cues to inform us of a person’s gender. It didn’t work even when the default assumption was that everyone was cis — I was commonly misgendered throughout my teens and early adulthood before I transitioned because my hair is “wrong for my gender.” Even worse if I was wearing one of my pink shirts (back then, I had one I could get away with wearing even in the transphobic area I grew up in, since the text on it was snarky), which amused me at the time because I had family portraits of when it wasn’t unusual for men to wear pink and women to wear blue (and both of them wore dresses for pictures!)

  • Thanks, Sam! Great points.

  • Lynn

    So women who look like men but were born women and use the womens bathroom and men who look like women and use the mens bathroom will be questioned and have to drop their pants or bring their birth cirtificates when complained about.
    Remindes me of driving while black or flying while aribic looking.

  • Lynn

    Who then is to use the family restroom?

  • Lynn

    What would you do with people who are born hermaphodite from birth? What bathroom do they use?

  • Lynn

    I still have a lot of ignorance on this subject but I am trying to learn.

  • Lynn

    Star bellied sneetches anyone?

  • Lynn

    Let’s have republican and democratic restrooms and the others can use the family room.

  • Lynn

    So let’s segregate the republicans into outside republican only restrooms.

  • Hmm, it still wouldn’t be safe to let children use the same restroom as Republican males.

  • Lynn

    Ok, no children allowed.

  • leslie green

    That is a complex situation but, this is usually known early on, so these children choose the gender they most associate with and are raised as such. I am speaking about the tranny that decides that they want to be something they never have been. .. not the hermaphrodites per say who usually choose very young…. different situation entirely… I would not have a problem with them nor would I know about it.

  • iamwinstonsmith

    Actually, allowing a man to pose as a transgender in order to have access to a woman’s bathroom is more comparable to allowing convicted criminals to purchase guns legally without a background check.

    The original author’s argument is completely upside down.

  • iamwinstonsmith

    No recorded incidents? Is your Google broken?

    There are plenty of recorded incidents and these were *before* the movement to encourage men-dressed-as-women to use the same bathrooms as little girls.

    You people are incredibly naive and overly trusting of the human race.

  • Jeff Preuss

    They’ve got no stars upon thars!

  • > Actually, allowing a man to pose as a transgender in order to have access to a woman’s bathroom

    How would any law stop that? It would just become a matter of whether they have to pose as a transgender man or transgender woman to access a woman’s bathroom. The laws just make it impossible for trans people to pee safely, while not deterring potential perverts in the least.

  • > A woman with short hair was bodily torn from the women’s room and
    slammed upon the ground by a security officer who was positive that no
    one with short hair could possibly be anything but a man.

    Do you have a link for this? It would definitely come in useful.

  • > How often have we seen reports in the news about Trans people assaulting our “wives and children?”

    There was one case here recently; the plot twist being that the culprit was a transgender man, not a woman, accused of (and confessed guilty to) multiple rape charges against a 13 year old girl who didn’t know he was trans. The court deemed him innocent saying that he didn’t have a penis and thus was a woman and women were not legally capable of rape. So they’re just going to lock him up in a women’s prison for a few months for the child abuse, vs up to 20 years if he’d been a cis man. Conservatives are outraged about that for all the wrong reasons, and don’t yet seem to realise the irony that it’s precisely men like that whom they insist should use the female bathrooms because genitals.

  • Gay guy here. There is almost certainly no gay gene, though that doesn’t mean homosexuality isn’t genetic. Sexual orientation is likely influenced by multiple genetic markers across a variety of genes, not one, as well as other non-genetic biological factors.

  • Trans man here. While on principle I agree with you, humans are complex enough that generalisations are practically impossible. There’s always an exception to the rule, and I don’t consider it completely out of the scope of possibility that a ‘real’ trans woman somewhere might indeed streak naked through a women’s change area. Like cis people, some trans people are mentally ill; some trans people are drunk; some trans people are perverts; some trans people are trolls; some trans people enjoy causing trouble; some might be all five, all of which are factors that might make a ‘real’ trans woman decide to do just that, and it wouldn’t make her less trans for it.

  • er, I live in Singapore. I’m gay, trans, working hard to change the local laws, and need to use PayPal for many things including get paid for freelance jobs. Please don’t give them ideas.

  • unless it’s in North Carolina, whereupon he might be a trans man who is legally obliged to be there.

  • “Tranny”, like “Nigger”, is deprecated. “Hermaphrodite”‘s not real good either, try “Intersex” please.

    Or continue to use all three if you wish. Names are not that important, and at least we get warning of bigotry on the part of those who use them. Otherwise we might mistake such people for decent human beings.

    Those who know no better – well, in my experience, usually do, but to defame even the rare exception by implying bigotry on their part would be unjust. So, over to you.

  • Experts in 12 states — including law enforcement officials, government employees, and advocates for victims of sexual assault — have debunked the right-wing myth that sexual predators will exploit transgender non-discrimination laws to sneak into women’s restrooms, calling the myth baseless and “beyond specious”

    Or perhaps you claim, like Senator Cruz, that Trans people are “disgusting perverts, criminals, pedophiles, child molesters” – like his buddy, Josh Dugar, who campaigned against equal rights for Trans people while molesting his sister?

    Well if so, let’s see your evidence. Bearing in mind that three Trans women have been lynched in Houston since January, a rate of slayings equivalent of 10,000 in the general population.

  • “Hmm, it’s… Tuesday. I think today, just for giggles, I’ll undergo a massive amount of social ostracization, hormone replacement which sickeningly alters bone mass, painful and expensive surgeries, and top it off with a trip to the mall so I can buy a new wardrobe and leer at people in the bathroom.”

  • Except the person allegedly merely posing as a transgender person is only hypothetically out to cause trouble, while the convicted criminal has already caused trouble in the past and there is reason to suspect they’ll do so again in the future.

  • Apparently it is, because when I google it, I get a number of sites like this and not so many with reports of assaults in bathrooms that mention transgender people in any capacity.

  • Ironic that you condemn the author for giving opinions instead of facts, and then what immediately follows is a bog standard, long discredited talking point.

  • Interesting point. I don’t know the particulars in this case, but the person could have just as easily been a sexual predator who was a cis-female who engaged in inappropriate sexual behaviour with a child. I think this particular case has been discussed elsewhere in this blog thread. It also shows that destructive or abusive sexual behaviour is to be found in all types of people, straight or otherwise. It is just not practical, effective or fair to legislate against hypothetical possibilities. Most laws of this type deal with behaviour and outcomes of actions. Anything else would be like the sci-fi movie Minority Report.

  • Did the Human Genome Project find a LGBTQQ gene? NO!

    The Human Genome Project also didn’t find a gene responsible for countless things we know are not chosen behavior. That’s because there is no one gene responsible for various phenotypic traits. We call these polygenes. There are also many phenotypes which only emerge when many genes align in a particular way, such as a predisposition to various types of cancer. There is no binary on/off gene for a lot of things we know happen incidentally, rather than by design.

    In addition, it’s possible that it’s not specifically genetic, but still influenced by genetics, such as the predisposition to cancer mentioned above. It could also be caused by factors taking place before birth. There are quite a lot of ways things can happen besides being a “chosen lifestyle.”

    And just to put the nail in this coffin, when you tell me it’s a chosen lifestyle, you’re calling me a liar. You’re telling me that my knowledge of myself is flawed, yet somehow, you, a random heterosexual on the Internet who I doubt will fail to admit has never had emotional or sexual interest in members of the same sex, know me better than I know myself.

    I call BS on that. I’ve had emotional interest in the same sex since early childhood, before I even learned what sex was, and sexual interest followed in adolescence. Frankly, I once needed someone to tell me that it wasn’t a choice — because I thought everyone was inherently bisexual and people simply chose to be straight or gay. It was that natural to me, having grown up that way.

    Has Mrs. Bill DiBlasio abandoned her lesbian lifestyle and now IDs solely as hetero? YES!

    Okay, wow. First off: “Mrs. Bill DiBlasio”? You mean Chirlane McCray? Don’t know if you’ve noticed, but nowadays we tend to assume that women have an identity outside of being their husband’s wife.


    She also dodged the questions about bisexuality — saying she hates “labels” — which she’s been doing since the couple first publicly discussed the story in December.

    Asked if she’s still attracted to women, McCray said, “I’m married, I’m monogamous, but I’m not dead, and Bill isn’t either.”

    Does that sound like someone who identifies exclusively as heterosexual? You’re confusing doing with being. Whether she’s a bisexual woman or simply someone who found the one reason to make an exception for a person to whom they connect with, she has obviously found room in her life for at least one man as well as women. A person’s sexuality is not simply the person they’re currently with.

    Do you use the men’s room because you were born male? YES!

    Nope. I don’t use public restrooms at all unless they’re single occupancy, and then I don’t care which one I use.

    (I have a level 20 bladder with the Iron Skin feat and maxed CON, honed by many hours of harsh training in hostile conditions, such as 3 hour long movies and airport layovers.)

  • Polygenes concern PHYSICAL traits, NOT emotional responses.

    You think emotions are generated out of the ether? The brain and endocrine system play huge roles in the emotions a person experiences, and altering their form or function can have huge impact on a person’s emotional state. Pheromones play a large role in sexual desire, and how could it possibly be more plain that a change to a person’s vomeronasal organ might explain a great deal about homosexuality? (This being only one possibility. The brain is a complex organ and its functions are still not incredibly well understood.)

    The crux of the LGBTQQ movement is that people who ID as LGBTQQ do so because they are “born that way”. The Human Genome Project PROVED that is NOT the case.

    As I have thoroughly explained, this is not the case. Perhaps you don’t understand genetics or mammalian physiology well enough to understand why you have been refuted, but repeating your argument does not prove it.

    Furthermore, I’m not even of the opinion that it matters how homosexuality is caused. If skin color were consciously chosen, would racism become acceptable because African Americans could choose to be white?
    Where I did I call you a liar? Where? Show me EXACTLY where I called you a liar?

    Do me a favor: go back and read what I wrote immediately after this. It helps explain a preposition when you read the subject immediately following it.

    You call me liar when I tell you something about myself and you claim it’s not the case. If I tell you that my feelings and desires are innate, and you claim they’re a lifestyle choice, then one of us is lying. Since I have no reason to blithely consign myself to a life of frequent prejudice and occasional discrimination, I’d say the liar becomes the one repeating a tired and easily refuted talking point.

    Do yourself a favor and look up “monogamous” in the dictionary.
    Monogamous: the practice or condition of having only one sexual partner at a time.

    Yes, and? How is this even relevant? Are you under the assumption that a lesbian isn’t monogamous, or that monogamous people don’t experience attraction to others? (Neither of these is the case.)

    By her own words (although I am rapidly coming to suspect that you aren’t capable of parsing them), she still has desire for other women.

    Nope, YOU are. Are you a murderer if you THINK about killing someone or are you a murderer when you KILL someone?

    Improper terminology. If you’re seriously thinking about killing someone (as in giving deliberate premeditation to the deed, not having a passing fancy), then you are murderous. “Murderer” refers to the state of having committed murder, and even then it’s a legal term (is a person who performs an execution on behalf of the state a murderer? Technically not, because murder refers to unlawful killing).

    By your logic, a person who is not presently having sex is asexual.

    Which is WAY-MORE than I ever wanted to know about a complete stranger! “Thank you” for sharing.

    It’s called humor; apparently you’re unfamiliar with the concept. Fortunately, you can rest assured that the joke wasn’t intended for you.

  • leslie green

    There is not a good reason not to call an Hemaphrodite b

  • Well, I’m convinced. Stellar demonstration of your intellectual prowess there — just not completely sure how you figured coming across as a drooling imbecile incapable of formulating a well-reasoned argument was likely to prove that you’d actually taken time and put effort into your position, rather than grabbing the nearest talking point at hand to justify your bigotry.

    Oh, the bigotry, by your logic, is also nothing more than a conscious choice. Though why someone would choose to be contemptuous and unpleasant is, sadly, another thing I fail to grasp.

    I bow to your obvious moral superiority.

  • Jeff Preuss

    “There is not a good reason not to call an Hemaphrodite b”

    Try this:
    “The word intersex has come into preferred usage for humans, since the word hermaphrodite is considered to be misleading and stigmatizing,[3][4] as well as “scientifically specious and clinically problematic”.[5]”

  • You can choose to be intimate with a man or a woman — or not. NOTHING in your make-up FORCES you to be intimate with a man or a woman because you “can’t help” but “feel” attracted to a man or a woman.

    I get you quite well, but you do realize you’re contradicting your earlier argument that it’s not rooted in biology? Whether or not I choose to be intimate, the fact remains that I’m wired to experience sexual desire for members of the same sex. It’s a thing that happens whether I acknowledge it or not. There is no choice involved in that aspect — no more than there’s a choice not to feel pain, whether you let yourself show it or not.

    And while I’m sure you’d be more comfortable if I chose to ignore my body’s callings, I don’t live my life for you.

    Mrs. DiBlasio may still feel attracted to other women, but she CHOOSES not to act it.

    Which doesn’t make her heterosexual. Sexuality is how you’re wired to react to others, not whether you act upon that wiring.

    And I have another newsflash! Your ancestors – your grandparents, your great-grandparents, so on – thought non-heterosexuality was not only a CHOICE, it was an abomination, a crime against Nature.

    My ancestors also thought whites marrying blacks was an abomination, and ironically, I wouldn’t be here today if they hadn’t broken that taboo. My ancestors made a lot of bad decisions. Heck, the jury’s still out on whether that particular decision wasn’t an even worse one (rumor has it the blood got mixed when someone raped a slave).

    Remind me why I should think my ancestors were some sort of moral paragons?
    As for nature, nature doesn’t seem to mind homosexuality one bit, seeing as how so many animals engage in it, how it seems to be fulfilling some sort of subtle purpose (homosexuality occurs most often in family units that have a lot of offspring), and how some species exclusively utilize it in lieu of heterosexual mating.

    The wild wacky part about nature is that a trait typically doesn’t get passed on unless it’s either neutral or beneficial to the offspring. People like to imagine that widespread homosexuality would be the death of a species, but as the whiptail shows above, it wouldn’t propagate so widely unless it was compensated for in some fashion — such as asexual reproduction.

    So the fun part is that even if alllll my ancestors had been gay, chances are I’d still be here anyway, just a very different version of me. Probably one with scales or gills.

    Let’s not poke too deeply into the quantum foam, though. Just in case I turn out to be Cthulhu in some universe.

    That’s right, junior — you owe your very existence to a bunch of bigots!

    And what would life be like if they hadn’t had me? Hm… oh, right, I literally wouldn’t be capable of missing myself, because I wouldn’t exist. That renders it kind of a meaningless thought experiment. If I was never born, then I’d be in no position to feel bad about it, and the thought honestly doesn’t bother me a bit. I’d have missed out on some good stuff, but I also wouldn’t have gone through a hell of a lot of unpleasant things.
    Fun fact: yesterday was the three year anniversary of the day one of those bigoted parents you were praising tried to murder me.

    Now go ahead and try making me feel like I should feel grateful that they discovered the rare art of intercourse, that act which is so endangered that the world’s population only increased by 380% in the last 100 years. At a mere 7.1 billion humans, I can almost see why you’d be so concerned that some of them have a different vocation in mind than breeding.

    (What’s that, science? You’re experimenting with a way for same-sex couples to reproduce? You’ve also successfully produced genetically related offspring from two female rats? Oh science, you so crazy!)

  • May you find what makes you whole, man of clay.

  • Bones

    They also believed slavery was a natural condition for blacks. And gay people were sent to mental homes to be lobotomised and receive electric shock treatment to be made straight.

    That’s a great game you’re playing.

    I hope you are never let near people with mental health issues.

    Btw suicide victims and their families were disowned by the church for being self-murderers.

    Thankfully we’ve moved on from such ignorance.

    Well most of us have.

  • Bones

    You obviously have serious issues.

    The one hating is you.

    So much so you had to seek out a blog to express your hatred.

  • “But what if a cis man poses as a trans woman to get into ladies’ bathrooms?”

    I’ve already asked a couple of times, above, for examples of that happening. The answer I got was resounding silence.

    But also… picture this scenario in your head. A cis man puts on a dress and makeup and goes into a public place… whereupon he risks the kind of mockery, harassment, and outright violence that trans women face. Not only does this seem highly unlikely, but it’s the exact opposite of what sexual predators do in real life — sexual predators do their best to be either unobtrusive, or in positions of authority.

    Meanwhile, in the real world, the people who are in danger while using a restroom are trans folk.

  • Bones

    This doesn’t seem to be an issue over here.

    Why is it suddenly an issue in the US?

  • Ron McPherson

    So I’m a hetero male but never ‘chose’ to be. I’m not attracted to those of the same sex, are you? If not, then how could it be a ‘choice’ for those who are attracted to the same sex, but not a choice for those who are attracted exclusively to the opposite sex? You discount the testimony of AnonySam in being ‘wired’ the way he is (which means you’re asserting he made some sort of conscious decision to be attracted to the same sex), but what about us straights who never made a conscious decision to be attracted to the opposite sex?

  • Jeff Preuss

    Honestly, I think with the legalization of gay marriage, there is this realization from some conservative perspectives, that they have “lost the battle” on gay rights. It’s no longer broadly culturally acceptable to demonize gay people. Hence, the bogeyman shifting to trans people.

    It’s a group that is smaller in number, and less widely understood, so it’s easy to make it the next “other.”

  • Phil Griffin

    Gun rights are constitutional, bathroom rights? not so much… Do I have the “right” to use the bathroom of my choice? No.

  • Or people who “look trans,” as recent incidents demonstrate…

  • We have never, ever gotten over the authoritarianism propagated by slavery apologists in religious garb.

  • It seems to me that when cultural conservatives weigh in against trans presence in the bathroom, they are usually talking about simple cross-dressing. The image they invoke is consistently that of someone who has not really changed genders in any meaningful sense. Just another case of the right wing refusing even to address the issue at hand.

  • Bones

    Instead of sulking about getting your arse kicked or what gay people are doing, go do something useful with your life.

  • Jeff Preuss

    It’s interesting what someone terms “hissy fits/meltdowns.”

  • One4Life

    After reviewing the law in North Carolina it really goes too far. In Houston, the voters rescinded special provisions for trans individuals – leaving it to businesses etc to use their judgement over whether it was a predator cross dressing or someone who truly identifies/or is a female. No one is going to stop a dolled up decked out woman and ask for a genital check. In North Carolina, they didn’t simply rescind the laws/ordinances in the cities, they went a step further and said you MUST use the bathroom that correspond with your birth genitals. Okay – now that I know this – this is a step too far. For one thing, and it’s huge, there are 1 in a thousand who are born hermaphrodites – with both genitals. Right there – FAIL>

  • One4Life

    Here is one case of transgender policies creating problems – I found a lot more if you want me to post them?

  • JD

    First, “tranny” is a slur. We can have this discussion without using offensive language. Second, most transgendered people weren’t “raised as such” because most transgendered people grew up in crippling fear of society and their families rejection. Transgendered people don’t just wake up one day and choose to be “something the never have been”. Most, if not all, can trace back these issues back to early childhood.

  • JD

    Saw good news today. Looks like NC legislators are introducing a bill to repeal this ridiculous anti-transgender bathroom law.

  • I asked specifically: “can you present any documented cases of cis men pretending to be trans women in order to get into women’s bathrooms?”

    The case you’ve linked to does not fit that criterion. It’s a unisex bathroom, and the problems were with cis men who presented as men. That case was already raised upthread, and other people pointed out that it didn’t fit.

    If you can find something that ACTUALLY fits the criterion, go right ahead and post it.

  • You keep bringing up this notion that cisgender male predators are going to dress like women. Since you don’t seem to have bothered reading the rest of the thread, I’ll paste this here:

    Picture this scenario in your head. A cis man puts on a dress and makeup and goes into a public place… whereupon he risks the kind of mockery, harassment, and outright violence that trans women face. Not only does this seem highly unlikely, but it’s the exact opposite of what sexual predators do in real life — sexual predators do their best to be either unobtrusive, or in positions of authority.

    Meanwhile, in the real world, the people who are in danger while using a restroom are trans folk.

  • JD

    I made this exact point the other day talking with some friends at church. This just smells like the “religious right” lashing back at the LGBTQ community because they’ve been losing these culture war battles for a while now. The problem with Christians fighting the “culture war” is that once we start fighting it, we guarantee we will lose it. Instead, let’s just focus on living and loving as Jesus. That’s what will draw others to Him. Legislation certainly won’t.

  • SamHamilton

    I never made an argument based on “states’ rights.” I actually don’t think the state of North Carolina should have overruled the city of Charlotte with its legislation prohibiting the city from allow people with gender dysphoria from using the bathroom of their gender. These aren’t decisions that should be made on a state by state basis, but on a case by case basis. This has become another huge culture war issue when it didn’t have to be, and blame goes to both sides (see this Alan Jacobs blog post for some good thoughts on it: )

    Please go back and read my comment more carefully before making comments about my character. I can’t stand the snark and smugness.

    Just because some rules need to be uniformly applied, doesn’t mean that all rules need to be. Arguing that because some jurisdictions engaged in wide-spread racial discrimination and segregation means that today there has be one federal standard regarding school locker rooms isn’t logical.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Yup. And, what so many term as “standing against sin” is enacted in the real world by attempting to paint some “other” as a threat because of said “sin.” This way, they get to make someone a bogeyman and not feel at all bad about making other human beings completely miserable.

    As April Kelsey said over on :

    “I find it interesting that denying certain services to LGBT folks is
    somehow a matter of conscience, but making people feel like second-class
    citizens is not.”

  • One4Life

    You have to admit – the problems in the article above stem from the entire transgender accommodation movement. That’s what we’re talking about right? Here’s another couple I found showing problems stemming from the movement to allow every person to define their gender at will (and who is the authority that can say they’re lying about their gender?):

  • Wonder

    not to mention the cleaning costs. with everyone being made to wait in extra long lines and all, accidents will happen.

  • Elizabeth

    I 100% agree with you on public bathrooms and have shared your perfect thought about how people want laws for one things but not another.
    Reading more though I do wonder about high school and locker rooms. Some kids truly are searching for their identity and need to supported not shamed (we know the suicide statistics) but then there are kids who rebel and push the limit and could use this in a bad manner. What do we do about that?

  • No, there’s no proof whatsoever that that’s where the problems stem. Unisex bathrooms have been around for a long time, or haven’t you noticed?

    As for your next couple of links: one is from notorious liars “LifeSiteNews”. Since I do not wish to give them any site views, the only way I’ll go there is via DoNotLink, which is down at the moment. If you can find a more reliable source for the same story, I’ll have a look.

    The second example is a guy deliberately trying to stir up hostility against trans folk.

    Still waiting for anything that ACTUALLY fits the criteria I laid out.

  • SamHamilton

    I agree with you that some of those who oppose allowing trans people to use the bathroom of their “new” gender are simply uneducated about the issue and have no interest in educating themselves. However, part of the problem or confusion is coming from the trans and “gender-fluid” advocates themselves. There is a small group of people who truly suffer from gender dysphoria for whom certain accommodations should be made. But when you step back from this small group of people, you find a wider group who seem more like they’re trying on gender roles for fun or to be different or avant garde…e.g. the people who convinced Facebook its users needs 50-plus different genders to choose from.

    When it comes to public policy, I think it’s important to separate these two groups. If someone has a diagnosable condition that’s one thing; it’s another to be forced to make all sorts of accommodations for someone who simply wants to gender bend.

  • SamHamilton

    Again, I don’t think people are worried about transgender people assaulting people in bathrooms, but non-transgender people pretending to be transgender doing it. That being said, I think those fears are overblown, but we at least need to characterize those fears correctly. It’s not a fear of truly transgender people.

  • Lynn

    I was asking about people who are born with both genitalia I thought that was the correct term. sorry.

  • SamHamilton

    Beware…you will be accused of bigotry because you haven’t learned the correct labels. If no harm was intended, you still must grovel for mercy before the smug keepers of the nomenclature in order be declare “bigotry free.” Keep in mind, however, the labels change quickly, so keep up!

    By the way…apparently the term bi-sexual is no longer cool, because it implies there are only two. Who knew…

  • And again, this pretty much doesn’t happen. The threat is dramatically overblown. Twelve states have had permissions for people to use the bathroom of their identity since as far back as 1993, and there are still few to nil reports of people pretending to be trans in order to access these rooms. For one thing, they’ve never needed to do that — there’s a number of ways men can access the women’s bathroom already, including just walking in with no explanation whatsoever.

  • One4Life

    What evs. You crack me up. I am afraid if we can’t look at what each other posts the conversation is pointless – see ya!

  • Jeff Preuss

    I think it’s pretty clear from the tone of your posts that no harm or offense was intended, Lynn. :)

  • One4Life

    Here it is again. I think it meets all of your numerous narrow restrictions for a specific problem with rules accommodating transgender individuals. You have many criteria in your news filter – not sure what the point is, other than perhaps disallowing every example in a lawyerly exclusion word game. This article is about a person claiming to be trans gaining access to women in a homeless shelter in order to rape them. Now, the shelter, obviously not wanting to discriminate, placed this individual with women, whom he then attacked. Also, this article, linked on life site news in my previous post is from the Toronto Sun – so I have met that stipulation as well – its not on life site news. I don’t recall any stipulations that the article be from the U.S. but perhaps that is an unpublished criteria you have –

  • JD

    Also odd that Christian bakers never seem to refuse service to the obese, or that these people calling for a boycott of Target never seem to call for boycotts because of the working conditions of the 3rd world labor used to make the products they buy.

    For some reason, the LGBTQ community is always the target.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Some of those offering their intent to boycott Target have offered they will drive cross-town to Wal-Mart, which allegedly already has their own transgender non-discrimination policy.

    “For some reason, the LGBTQ community is always the target.” Because racism is no longer cool.

  • And in shades of 1984 logic, racism was never cool. A majority of Christians opposed racism in all its stripes and colors. A majority of Christians opposed Jim Crow. A majority of Christians opposed slavery and fought for abolition.

    The fact that the largest protestant denomination in the United States was expressly formed to justify Christians owning slaves and held on its discrimination until the later half of the 20th century is totally irrelevant because reasons.

  • RollieB

    So your real fear is gay people?

  • Jeff Preuss

    We have always been at war with East Asia.

  • SamHamilton

    Thanks Eva. I don’t have a problem sharing a bathroom or changing area with someone who was born a woman and now lives as a man. But I understand how women might feel differently about sharing these spaces with a person born a man now living as a woman. I’m not about to get in the face of American woman and shout “bigot!!” because they have trepidations about this.

  • JD

    That’s what’s so hilarious about this whole issue. Wal-Mart has the same policy, and it’s my understanding that nothing actually changed at Target. They were simply stating what their existing policy was. It’s like the bedding/toy labeling faux outrage that ignored the fact that Target was actually just changing the policy to something similar to what other large retailers, such as Wal-Mart, had.

    But, we love our outrage.

  • SamHamilton


  • I feel like this is a bigger argument against changing areas than who might be in them.

  • Even better, twelve states have had express permission for trans people to use the bathroom of their preference since as far back as 1993, and yet it’s only the world’s biggest issue as of the last few months.

  • Jeff Preuss

    And Target was making this statement in reaction to the spate of bathroom laws going effect, trying to assure their customers they’ll still be welcome to pee where they’ve been able to. Yet, I see arguments this was started by “LGBT bullies” more times than I can count, when it sure seems it was the other way around.

    And AFA does what they excel at — denying the imago dei of people they don’t like by painting them as predators.

  • Congratulations — you actually managed to find a case. And yes, that does fit my criteria.

    Now… I can’t help but notice that it’s two years old. You’d think with all the conservatives combing the internet for cases (and creating them themselves, as with that changeroom guy you linked), they’d have found more than one.

    Here’s another question for you: considering how common violence against trans people is, what measures would you propose to keep everyone safe?

  • Also reminds me of how so many companies objected to the ACA mandating contraception coverage, when they already provided contraception coverage before the law passed. Hell, Hobby Lobby owns stocks in contraception companies … including one which makes a chemical which actually is used to induce abortions.

  • Larry TheKeyboardist Blake

    If someone sexually assaults someone else, what they’ve done that is wrong is commit sexual assault. Such a thing does not determine one’s sexual orientation or gender identity, it only determines that they are sex offenders.

  • One4Life

    So you think the right is pressing the transgender angle. Really.

  • Lynn, your gracious and kind apology is of course accepted. Hopefully with the same graciousness and kindness you have shown. It’s because of the rare exceptions like you who are not bigots that I have to be very careful not to “bear false witness”, and please accept my own apology for any unintended implication that you were anything other than mildly mistaken on an obscure topic.

    If I may give a swift lesson in biology here?

    There are no cases known of humans being born with two fully functional, complete and normal sets of genitalia.

    There are a very, very few cases of people being born with both ovarian and tesiticular tissue present, and these few would rightly be called “hermaphroditic” in a technical sense. In one case on record, auto-fertilisation happened as the result of a botched medical procedures. The child could not be carried to term, as the female reproductive tract wasn’t complete.

    Similarly, there are a larger number of cases of people being born with genitalia superficially of the appearance of one sex, which then naturally changes to have the superficial appearance of the other sex. Technically, these people would be classed as dichogamous (ie sex-changing) pseudo-hermaphrodites.

    But for 99.9-something percent of Intersex people, neither description applies. To use these terms outside a medical or biological journal, and as technical terms with specific meanings, is not only factually incorrect, but is almost always used by those doing violence to Trans, Gay or Intersex people.

    Intersex people are born with bodies neither wholly male nor wholly female. That is often not apparent – if a woman who has given birth to 3 kids has 46,XY “male” chromosomes, neither she nor anyone else has any reason to suspect that. But it happens.

    Many Intersex syndromes require subtle lab tests, sometimes batteries of them, to detect. So while it’s technically true that 1 in 60 people are Intersex, a more useful figure is “one in a few hundred”, where the situation’s obvious.

  • Her kind reply clarified that even for the hard-of-thinking like me.

  • One4Life

    That’s good. Until intersex becomes a slur. Then back to the language police to offer another new term.

  • 17 states. OK, 16 states and Washington DC.

  • Who knew it was such a burden using the words considered respectful to the people they address.

  • Ah, my source is just the twelve where someone was willing to address how many transgender-related bathroom incidents had taken place.

  • One4Life

    So it’s too old. I knew it would be disallowed for some reason. I just picked the wrong one when I noted it was not in the US. Like I said I think transgender accommodation is a big nonissue and no laws need to be passed about it. Just let businesses and people work it out as they have been until now. I’ve not heard of any major transgender problem with bathrooms, being harassed or barred from restrooms in the past. So creating laws about a nonexistent problem provoked a backlash against the ridiculous and unnecessary ordinances as in Houston. Creating bad law provides cover for those who would abuse the system. I can provide more examples of men taking advantage of rules to benefit transgenders if you like – but they’re sure to be rejected for one reason or another.

  • Jeff Preuss

    The right is pushing the bathroom angle.

  • Being fair.. we have bigger fish to fry.

    Since the large-scale and successful anti-HERO efforts led by numerous churches in Houston to label Trans people as “disgusting perverts” (to use Senator Cruz’s words), 3 Trans women have been lynched this year in that city.

    The last one had her skull caved in by a crowbar by one of the mob. A bystander who attempted to intervene was shot dead, the bodies left where they fell.

    So it’s helpful to have a sense of perspective about these things.

  • See

    These bathroom bills may be a form of backlash to the Supreme Court’s legalization of gay marriage last summer, and to the growing visibility of transgender people in the media,
    says Cathryn Oakley, senior legislative counsel for Human Rights
    Campaign. Yet the speed at which they’ve emerged across the country,
    often with similar or identical language, raises the possibility that
    these bills are part of a coordinated effort. “It would be surprising if
    legislators across the country all had the same idea at the same time,”
    Oakley says.

    Back in December 2014, ADF sent a letter to school districts across the country with a recommended policy
    that would require transgender kids to use private bathrooms or the
    multistall bathrooms corresponding with their birth sex. In the
    following months, it also proposed model legislation
    to state assemblies, calling for similar restrictions. In many cases,
    lawmakers appear to have mirrored or even copied the group’s draft while
    crafting their own bills.

    The AFA has admitted that these efforts are a direct result of the Obergefel case, and a response to them.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Language evolves, meanings change, and try as you might, YOU do not get to control what terms members of a group to which you do not belong find offensive to them.

    If you can’t find a way to communicate with people in a group to which you don’t belong (even if you don’t agree with their position) without referring to them by a term they’ve repeatedly pointed out is demeaning and derogatory, it doesn’t mean you’re getting caught by the language police – it means you’re being a dick, and your lack of respect for them as human beings undercuts any legitimate point you might have.

    This applies to all sides of an issue. I don’t dare pretend that those on the left don’t do the same thing. We should all be above that.

  • The fact that the case is two years old isn’t a condition which disqualifies it, it’s an observation that in two years, there don’t appear to have been many repeat incidents. If it were a prolific problem, then one would think there’d be more evidence of this.

    I’ve not heard of any major transgender problem with bathrooms, being harassed or barred from restrooms in the past.

  • There are always bigger fish to fry. That doesn’t mean small fish should be ignored.

  • One4Life

    Who said its a burden? You just have to use the right term, credentialed and approved by the right people.

  • One4Life

    I find dick highly offensive. Please use “of a phallic nature.”

  • Jeff Preuss

    Which just reinforces my theory that, having essentially lost the culture war on being able to paint gay people as dangerous deviants, some people have moved on to a smaller, less understood group to make their targets.

    There’s always gotta be an other.

  • Exactly. All it takes is the word “sorry” and an effort to use the term they appreciate more.

    And yet I get the feeling you’re being sarcastic, and you actually see it as a contemptible practice.

  • One4Life

    Please use the term “comedy of an abrasive nature” rather than sarcastic or smart ass as some have offensively used in the past.

  • And you know what? I can do this, even though it’s obvious that you’re purposefully trying to stir up trouble (you do know that’s a sin, right?). I can absolutely refer to you and use terminology you prefer more, and it’s no skin off my teeth to do so.

    But you appear to perceive anything which asks you to take others into consideration as an unworthy intrusion, something not normally worth consideration. Coming from someone ostensibly adhering to a religion where practioners are exhorted to behave respectfully even to aggressors or those who attempt to abuse their hospitality (give your coat to one who demands your cape, walk two miles instead of one, feed and give water to your enemy), this is… questionable at best.

    But of course it’s never about that. It’s about privilege and power and resentment.

    And it is antichrist, child of clay.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Whatever. It was a hypothetical ‘you.’ If you don’t want that term to apply to you, don’t be one.

  • I actually didn’t say I was disallowing your example. And I don’t care that it’s not in the U.S., because I don’t live in the U.S. myself. I said “Congratulations — you managed to find something that actually does fit my criteria.”

    I do find it interesting that the people who are screaming about “men in women’s bathrooms” as though it’s a widespread problem have found precisely one actual incident, and none before or since.

    …Now, if you truly think that transgender accommodation is a big non-issue, then why on earth have you been arguing as though you’re against it?

  • Jeff Preuss

    Yup. It’s a relatively minor quibble over terms when trans people are painted as threats and given giant targets on their backs, like in the case of the likely-to-be-elected Denton Country Sheriff in Texas who has said, “If my little girl is in a public women’s restroom and a man, regardless of how he may identify, goes into the bathroom, he will then identify as a John Doe until he wakes up in whatever hospital he may be taken to.” That a soon-to-be-elected public official makes threats like this is unconscionable, and we should fight to dispel the idea that trans=threat. Just no.

  • “I’ve not heard of any major transgender problem with bathrooms, being harassed or barred from restrooms in the past.”

    Then you haven’t been looking.

    About 70% of trans folk have reported being denied entrance, assaulted or harassed while trying to use a restroom. Study here.

    22-38% of trans people have been harassed by police, with upwards of 15% experiencing physical abuse and 7% being sexually assaulted by law enforcement. Study here.

    And I guess you just didn’t bother to read the link I posted earlier, which has multiple personal accounts. Here it is again. One of the women interviewed reports being beaten so badly she needed a tube in her throat.

  • Andy

    “Gun rights” are inferred from the Second Amendment, but that’s actually not a completely sound interpretation. The Second Amendment says that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed for the purposes of a well-regulated militia. It doesn’t say that you can own any type of arm, or that you can brandish it about for any reason. Also, a militia is hardly a 21st-century thing.

    If you’re going to infer from the Second Amendment what I just said, I see no reason why you can’t infer from the Declaration of Independence that peeing in a public restroom, causing no harm, is an entitlement of unalienable rights. There is common law precedent to support this. Further, one could argue that a trans person being forced to use a bathroom that doesn’t correspond to their presented gender is more likely to deprive people of the pursuit of happiness by inducing panic (“There’s a man in the women’s room!”) and therefore should be avoided. It wouldn’t surprise me if there is a legal precedent for this, too.

    We have as much right to pee in peace as we have to own guns.

  • Andy

    Really, it’s a multi-faceted thing. Besides the great responses already given, there’s also:

    – Some people feel the need to oppress others in order to assert their dominance in some way
    – Some people have been raised to believe that the world is an “us vs. them” place, that tolerance of others’ differences is to be condemned instead of celebrated
    – Some people are just ignorant, intolerant, and comfortable in their little world of homogeneity and bigotry

    The people supporting this crap, by and large, are not going to change. I am once again reminded of the following quote (though you might substitute a word in order for it to apply here):

    “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
    — Max Planck

  • Andy

    Those thoughts don’t enter into their head at all.

  • Andy

    Dr. Dee Tee, is that you? Because you used to yawn bigger.

  • Andy

    I interpret that as “when someone says something I don’t agree with and doesn’t completely Flanderize it.”

  • Andy

    Hardly. Most trans people that opt to present as another sex (yes, there are some that don’t) undergo a significant ordeal in order to do so. I suspect most of them have a doctor that would confirm that they are in fact trans. Cross-dressing pervs would not.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Okely Dokely.

  • Andy

    It’s also not far from a slippery slope to those infamous yellow badges…

  • SamHamilton

    Exactly. It’s 90% moral posturing, virtue signaling, and marketing by these large corporations. They’ll open up stores/plants and employ people in all sorts of repressive places because it makes them money, but if they can take a costless stand they’ll trumpet the fact as loud as they can. It’s like the fossil fuels divestment movement.

  • Phil Griffin

    “for the purposes of” is not in the second amendment language. I believe you are adding your interpretation. Obviously, the SCOTUS has ruled that our right to bear arms is not just for the purposes of a militia. As for peeing, you can infer what you like from the Declaration of Independence, but I doubt peeing was being considered at the time. I suppose we all have an unalienable right to pee, but not the right to pee anywhere we please, even if it would give me great happiness to do so.

  • One4Life

    I like you avatar Mr. Brown.

  • One4Life

    I read the Thinkprogress article. No law is going to prevent people from staring, frowning, or making comments about others. All people have experienced some form of this treatment for one reason or another. Nothing will ever stop it. Not attending school because of harassment? Well, I personally did play sick a lot through some difficult years– this happens and nothing can prevent it. Love from family or friends is the best antidote to the inherent meanness of the world. Nothing can make people be respectful. I’ve seen the video from McDonalds ages ago. It made me cry a bit, just being honest. I knew a girl in grade school who was similarly treated simply for being incredibly awkward and socially inept. I witnessed horrific things perpetrated against her. I came to her defense and tried to right some of the wrongs I saw perpetrated on her, although to my shame I once joined in during 6th grade lunch. I always felt incredibly sorry for that. I returned stolen items to her. I came to her defense. All of this happened in a peaceful suburban neighborhood and school. Literally torture. Could anything prevent this? Nothing beyond a parents strong intervention could have changed it. I too felt ostracized but I could blend much better than my friend, while at the same time feeling outside the circle so to speak. I believe transgender individuals wil always feel a bit out of place and people are always going to give them slights and attitude. We cannot create a magical universe where this is not the case. No matter what restroom policies or ordinances flow from the utopian minds and pens of individuals. I do believe there are negative impacts from trying to set social policy based on .04% of the population – and in the end it does nothing to better the lives of those it obstensibly is intended to help.

  • Sam, sorry for being a bit judgemental. You may not be arguing from “states rights” but your premise is the same. There is still a need for some kind of uniformity for the safety of transgender folk and you’d rather not have a larger governing body (the state) step in but allow each city decide whether transgender individuals need protection. I understand your hesitation about “big government” and it’s Bureaucratic snarl, and I agree, this shouldn’t be a big “culture war” issue. By “case by case” I suspect you mean every city should be free to decide how to best protect all individuals safety and privacy, as this effects them financially, etc.. Perhaps, what needs to happen is a general concept of civil rights that specify transgender folks, some general guidelines, then, allow cities to decide how to go about it.

  • Refuse service to the obese! LOL. Even my wife got a chuckle out of that one! I’ll have to remember that one! Thanks.

  • Lynn

    When the constitution was written there was no designation on any outhouse. We all went in the same place. On my farm we had a three hole outhouse with no dividers.

  • Lynn

    As for me and my house we will shop at Target.

  • Lynn

    I am just trying to use the above descriptions in a way to prove a bathroom bill as being unjust and unreasonable and unconstitutional and unenforceable and ridiculous and anyone putting up such a bill should be voted out of office as a constituent hater. Anyone who wants to word this better is welcome too. Sound bites welcome.

  • Lynn

    Since I was 4 years old I knew I was heterosexual I had no desire or curiosity to explore a homosexual side I was born that way not by choice. I knew when someone walked behind me and I was attracted by pheromones I had not seen him yet. I also had a friend who was bysexual and was comfortable with her feelings and sexuality and my best friend was a gay man. He wanted to be attracted to women but never was. It is not by choice. My life experiences contradict your statement.

  • Lynn

    replace gene with genes.

  • Phil Griffin

    Home use is entirely different. I doubt there were many “three hole outhouses” for public use of both sexes at the same time.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Unfortunately, this manufactured outrage is generating the typical response that will make things more confrontational. I’ve seen many people post on FB that they angrily confront employees at Target over this policy (because the store-level employees have any control over it), and one woman even suggested “If/when an LGBT enters a ladies room, call out and notify the occupants
    of the ladies room of his presence and that you will stand guard until
    he leaves and then give them the all clear.”

    Yet, we still “love” trans people, right? So, let’s loudly point out when we think a possible trans woman is “really” a man (or, I guess, also lesbians, bisexuals, and gay men?) and monitor them until they’re done peeing? Sure, this guarding will never escalate, right?

  • Too late.

    Total number of ciswomen assaulted or confronted by security/police for the crime of having short hair in a public restroom: 3

  • Jeff Preuss

    So…the real danger to ciswomen in the restroom is security guards?

  • Two words: protection racket.

  • JD

    Yes, it’s horribly sad to see. I saw a man running for sheriff here in Texas proclaim that he would beat any transgender person unconscious if they were in the restroom w/ his daughter or wife. Just vile and disgusting stuff coming from some, and it’s even worse when they spew their venom while proclaiming to be followers of Christ.

    I was heartened by one of our church elders’ wife posting on FB last night that we, as Christians, need to stop with the hate and vitriol. It’s driving people from the Lord. So many of these people will say that LGBTQ persons “need Jesus” (don’t we all though?), yet they do everything in their power to drive them away from Christ. It has disgusted me to see so many Christians react so much like the world.

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s the danger of elevating doctrine over love. To this day people fall prey to the very thing that Jesus rebuked. The zealots of his day thought that the mark of godliness was the degree to which one adhered to religious laws while railing against the ‘sin’ of others. Two thousand years later people are still doing it. What’s worse is that they’re invoking the name of Christ as justification for doing it. The irony is almost beyond belief. I’m convinced that most of it is due to fear, ignorance, and blindness to the Lords greatest commandment.

  • Jeff Preuss

    I bought a nice blanket there last night. :)

  • Lynn

    I do not believe there were any “Public Restrooms”
    Any restroom at that time would have been an outhouse.

  • Actually I was talking about Gene, the Gay guy that lives down the street. ;) Gene the Gay guy wears green jeans. Say that ten times fast!

  • Jeff Preuss

    They’ll know we are Christians… by our love?

  • RollieB

    “I don’t believe in bisexuality…” Your are affirming ignorance of the human condition.

  • RollieB
  • RollieB

    merci beaucoup

  • *Tilt* You believe most people when they say they’re genuinely attracted to the same sex, and I’m sure you believe most people who say they’re genuinely attracted to the opposite sex, but you don’t believe people who say they’re both?

  • I appreciate that you’ll reflect on new evidence, but this is related to one of my earlier arguments and so piques a pet peeve — what it comes down to is that in order to believe a particular position, it requires denying a person’s lived experience.

    Basically, if I say I experience desire for both men and women and you say that you don’t believe I can be bisexual, then in order for your position to “function,” you have to be calling me a liar. In order for your position to be true, then mine must be false, and I must either be lying about experiencing desire, or have been misled into believing that I do, or am not intellectually competent to accurately report my body’s reactions. It’s not really something that can fall under agreeing to disagree.

  • So then I must be a liar, not know myself, or not be competent to describe myself (and conversely, you see yourself as a better person to assess my desire or lack thereof than me).

    Unless you see an alternative explanation?

  • Gretchen Lindquist

    This topic came up in an informal discussion at the office yesterday. The person opposed to our locality’s “bathroom ordinance” stated that her opposition was not to transgender people but to predators pretending to be transgender and potentially attacking her 9 year old daughter in the ladies’ room. I have to admit I struggled for an effective response, so I would appreciate any suggestions for what I should have said.

  • I personally am bisexual (or pansexual if that applies), so it is actual lived experience that I’m commenting upon, and it’s been the case for as long as I’ve known — to the point that I still have a couple knickknacks from childhood crushes that I’ve never quite managed to throw away. It’s so natural to me that a friend once stopped a discussion we were having to point out that my rhetoric implied sexuality was a choice — I had said that I had a hard time understanding being gay or straight, because either one seemed like it was cutting one’s potential for finding a compatible life partner in ~half. I had a hard time really working through my internalized assumption that all people were secretly bisexual.

    On equating disagreement with hatred: That is a point. Mea culpa. With some people it seems evident that there is indeed disgust and contempt despite protestations to the contrary (implicit in the rhetoric they choose to use when describing or interacting with LGBT people [“I don’t have anything against fags or dykes!”]), but it’s probably fair to say that with a lot of others, it’s a case of unexamined consequences — if they haven’t lived it, they don’t understand what it means to condemn it.

  • Jeff Preuss

    In addition to what CKimber says, I’ve been saying to people that assaults, peeping, and recording someone in the restroom are all already illegal, and perverted creeps already do those things now. What about legally blocking transwomen from using the ladies’ room is going to actually stop perverted creeps from any of the above?

    When faced with that question, how can attempts to prevent transpeople from peeing where they are comfortable honestly be categorized as anything other than an attempt to limit and inconvenience transgender human beings? I personally believe the AFA and FRC are stirring up this fear and overblowing the danger with the ultimate goal of oppressing transpeople. And, with the catch phrase of “protecting our women and children,” it’s working.

    Plus, if we enforced using the bathroom of everyone’s birth sex, a FTM transgender might present as bearded and muscular and have to use the ladies’ room. I doubt that would appease anyone’s fears.

  • JD

    Saw this today from Nathan Hamm on FB. Amen!

    “LGBTQ persons are our friends, family,
    neighbors, & fellow Christians.

    We’re called to share not only public
    bathrooms, but also our tables,
    our homes, & our lives.”

  • Are you saying that you have to be gay / transsexual to understand / sympathize with the consequences of homophobia / transphobia?

    To a person for whom the concepts will always be hypothetical, they can never fully understand it. Worse, a person ignorant of something often misjudges how ignorant they are, and assumes that they can understand it better than most. This is actually something which has been observed by psychologists: the more ignorant or less competent a person is, the more likely they are to assume that they aren’t ignorant or lack competence, because they don’t understand the skills or concepts needed to accurately gauge their own abilities.

    I suspect this is part of why there are a number of people confidently stating that they know homosexuality is a choice, and it’s as simple as just making a different choice, or at worse, only as difficult as breaking an addiction.

    And what about a person who is part of the LGBT+ community and has chosen to lead a chaste life because he / she is against homosexuality?
    What about women who say that women shouldn’t be allowed to vote, have jobs outside the home, or be allowed to refuse sex to her husband? “Everything went wrong when we started fighting to be like men,” they say. “We need to embrace traditional gender roles, our femininity, and leave politics, the workplace, and wars to men where they belong.”

    Of course, that’s only a very, very small number of women who say this, and likewise, LGBT+ people who insist LGBT people need fewer rights and freedoms are a minority. They can certainly speak for themselves and I will (reluctantly, I admit) accept that what they’re saying holds true for them, but the problems start when one person attempts to prescribe particular thoughts and behavior to others. What’s true for one person doesn’t often make good policy for every person in the same category, and (this I concede) some people can’t accurately self-analyze for any number of reasons, distorting advice they would give others.

    For example, if a person didn’t believe in bisexuality, but had noted they had attraction to the same sex, they might inaccurately self-describe as “struggling with homosexuality,” and upon finding a partner of the opposite sex and being happy with them, might conclude that “were cured of homosexuality,” continuing attractions be damned. The problem is that they were never gay in the first place and so finding another person of the opposite sex could actually be a viable and fulfilling option for them, whereas a person who was genuinely gay would likely not find fulfillment in such a partner. Also, they assume that having a partner is the same as no longer being gay, because they conflate having a sexual partner as being the whole of one’s sexuality. This leads them to have inaccurately assessed their own situation, and would lead them to give immensely unhelpful advice to a gay person.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Love this.

  • I’m just going to point out that this conversation started because you were pretty sure that bisexual people didn’t really exist.

    Now you’re saying that you understand bisexual people to, at least, a significant degree.

    I just had to convince you that my life experiences are authentic, but you’re pretty sure you can empathize with my life. You’re not going to ask about my life or anything, but you’ll still resent the implication that you don’t know what it’s like to have lived it.

    What was it I just said about how the more ignorant people are, the more they are prone to inaccurately assessing their level of competence and understanding?

    Wait until you step on the other side of the mirror, child of clay.

  • Ron McPherson

    I know. It’s really weird. Like a criminal has no qualms about molesting innocents but wouldn’t dare walk into the wrong public restrooms until appropriate legislation is passed.

  • Jeff Preuss

    Also, I’m just a bit extra sensitive to the topic because this is driven by the American Family Association and Family Research Council, which have regularly made false claims (Hi, Fischer and Dobson!) about the dangers that gay people (like me) pose to children, and I refuse to allow another group of people to be scapegoated out of hyperbolic fearmongering.

  • Ron McPherson

    I grew up equating homosexuality with perverts, promiscuity, pedophilia, etc. I wasn’t openly antagonistic with anyone but was subtly indoctrinated (dare I say brainwashed) to this mindset. The quickest way to escape this sick mode of thinking is to actually get to know those who are gay, become educated on the topic, cease viewing intimate relationships purely from a sexual viewpoint, and most of all focus on Jesus’ greatest commandment. I just honestly believe that God ultimately rescued me from this type of toxic view.

  • Rudy R

    A birth certificate identifies the name, gender, date of birth, place of birth, and parentage. In addition to gender, a name and parentage can be changed. Are you also against changing names and adoptions?

  • Rudy R

    Since you don’t have issue with people legally changing their name and parantage that was originally assigned them at birth, why the issue with legally changing gender? Isn’t changing a name or parents because you want it that way? Your argument that birth certificates don’t matter isn’t based in reality.

  • R. Lee Johnson

    Porta-Johns for Everyone

  • Ron McPherson

    So you write, “I would assess this debate as truly about something bigger… progressive groups who are seeking in every way to breakdown family structure,” (geez, talk about straw man) and prophesy judgment against the author by writing, “BUT WHEN suicide rates and murders per capita sky rocket within the next decade, I want you to remember this: You are responsible.” You finish up by insinuating that the author’s “entire purpose is for (his) greed, fame, and the flattery that comes with it.” Considering the sacrifices the author has made to follow Jesus and what it has cost him, such an accusation is unfortunate. And ironically you somehow also assert that “If you deem my statements here as hateful, I can assure you there is no shred of evidence that this is even presumable.” Uh…ok….

  • Ron McPherson

    “Please, enlighten me to what is deemed as hateful”

    I did. If you can’t see that telling another that they will be responsible for suicides and murder over the next decade, with literally zero evidence to back that up, well…if you don’t understand that to be hateful then I guess we’re at an impasse on that one.

    “It’s not judgment to say that the player choosing to score goals in his own net lets the team down.”

    I literally have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Sorry

    “If you refuse to see what is self-evident: hate-filled speech, intolerance, and riots along with growing amount of violence attributable to racism, terrorism (in the name of God), and the falling education level of society in line with the more progressivist policies (common core as an example, or asking an average college student who won the Civil War or the ACTUAL REASONS behind the civil war) being pushed, then you’re just not being honest.”

    So who is to blame for all the violence before these ‘progressivist policies’ (it’s hard to address this because you offered no specifics)? What’s ironic is that many ‘progressivists’ are for increased gun restrictions and somehow it seems they’re the ones blamed for more violence lol. By the way, I’m not quite sure what you mean by “ACTUAL REASONS behind the civil war”. I am familiar that some like to whitewash the slavery issue in favor of state’s rights being the real reason. But yeah, it was slavery. Not sure if this is what you’re referring to. At any rate, peace.

  • Once they seceded, they sure weren’t about to start any other businesses, though, to judge by the fact that they made freeing slaves a felony crime.

  • Ron McPherson

    Hmm, you’d think the FBI would lock up all those progressives for being responsible for all the country’s violence. Especially given the fact you say you provided evidence (which of course means your accusations aren’t hateful now). Dang bro, does this mean you’re now responsible for the violence as well because you’re not sharing this with the authorities?

    “We live in a world where minorities believe they deserve exactly what they ask for.”

    So I suppose this means only us white males have worked for what we’ve gotten. Everybody else just wants a handout I guess.

    “Slavery is said to have been “highly profitable” for the cotton industry. It is probably better said that it was the “only decently profitable” way for the South to produce cotton…So, you have to give the North some blame for the rampancy of slavery in the 1800’s. Once they took that away, the states seceded as that was the dominate industry and slavery was the “only decently profitable” way to produce cotton.”

    Yep, the war was about slavery alright, because eliminating it would cut into the south’s profits. Appreciate the clarification. Ultimately, the war was about slavery no matter how you slice it.

  • IMHO a thought groove gets placed in people’s brains and it goes hand-in-hand with behavior and habits and dances to the same tune over and over again. perhaps it’s the only dance they know and the only tune they know and over time they’ve gotten really good at it so they feel they own it but actually it owns them. I think when one encounters such one must make the decision on whether to carefully, prayerfully and gently back away from the argument lest one joggle the person out of their routine, thereby causing them to become imbalanced thus causing a concussion which they blame on you or one becomes Discerning for the ‘ripeness’ of a person’s willingness to learn to appreciate what you have to offer them if you indeed have anything to offer them.
    Restless Farewell by Bob Dylan
    Oh, ev’ry thought that’s strung a knot in my mind
    I might go insane if it couldn’t be sprung/But it’s not to stand naked under unknowin’ eyes/It’s for myself and my friends my stories are sung/But the time ain’t tall/Yet on time you depend and no word is possesed/By no special friend/And though the line is cut/It ain’t quite the end/I’ll just bid farewell till we meet again

  • Ron McPherson

    Great points.

  • Robert O. Robbins

    I walk the Middle Path and thus I find that often I do not agree with neither liberal nor conservative Christians on many issues; but this issue of transgender individuals being able to use the bathroom of their choice is a whole different type of issue. Ben, while I understand your disgust over the gun issue and agree with you that something must be done about the proliferation of gun ownership in this country, I do at least partially find myself agreeing with the conservatives on the absurdity of allowing people claiming to be transgender to use the bathrooms of their choice. This is not because I believe such persons are dangerous, they are simply wanting to use the restroom as would any normal person. It is because so-called “normal” people are less than “holy” and some, a few, in our yet to be civilized society would take advantage of such legalized permissions to enter the “wrong” gender restroom and abscond with personal privacy and comfort, let alone possibly their safety.
    However, I believe there is a simpler solution. I wrote my personal state representative last week asking him to promote a law which would require public buildings and businesses which provide public restrooms to have a unisex third restroom which would contain a single stall and could be locked as another choice for those who felt the need not to use the restroom designed for the gender of their birth. This simpler solution would thus provide the necessary facilities in a reasonable fashion while avoiding the potentially violent situations being staged in allowing the cross-gender use of restrooms like you are supporting.
    If you are looking for a loving solution to this issue, that is what I am proposing.

  • Aria Johnson

    Ron, I am transgender and I am so happy to hear that your experiences didn’t jive with your learned assumptions! We are people too, and a lot of us are… just this way. Its terrible that I cannot use the restroom because people brand me a pervert due to their own ignorance.

    I wanted to thank you for your story and thank you for taking the time to admit what had been happening. You stood up for us and that makes you truly a man of God :)

  • Ron McPherson

    Thank you so much for your kind words. God bless!


  • Rob_Drury

    “Considering the sacrifices the author has made to follow Jesus…”

    The views expressed in this piece certainly do not reflect those of Jesus.

  • Rob_Drury

    First, in the context of this discussion, the terms “sex” and “gender” are synonymous. Men have a penis; women have a vagina. Intersex individuals may represent a different dilemma, but this isn’t topic for the “pro-trans” community; they just want to believe that one is whatever gender one “feels” like at a given moment.

    That aside, Corey is completely backward in this analogy of gun control. The reasoning of safety in these two debates is identical. The view of gun rights advocates isn’t one of feelings; they go straight toward the inevitable breach of safety resulting from each of these problems. We don’t oppose gun control because we believe that our rights to own and shoot outweigh the safety of children; we oppose it because we understand and acknowledge that the data clearly shows that gun laws endanger that safety. We realize that designating a free-for-all bathroom policy, then declaring a “no pedophilia zone” doesn’t work any better than no-gun zones have.

  • Ron McPherson

    And yet others believe they do. Folks disagree. That’s ok. Love God, love others. That’s the one thing hopefully all Christ followers agree on. Peace

  • Rob_Drury

    It’s pretty much irrelevant what anyone believes. God is who He is. As soon as my personal beliefs enter the conversation, I’ll be sure to label them as such.

  • Ron McPherson

    Of course “God is who He is.” But you made a subjective statement about the author which cannot be proven or disproven. So yes, it is most definitely your “personal beliefs.”

  • Bones

    Apparently God agrees with Him.

    There’s a surprise.

  • Rob_Drury

    So, our understanding is limited to personal beliefs here? Hmmm; interesting. Where is there any authority?

    No; I made no subjective statement. It was a purely objective statement based on the clear will of God. If you’re looking for revelation to be “proven,” it may be a while.

  • Rob_Drury

    No; I agree with God. It would be pretty stupid not to.

  • Jeff Preuss

    “Purely objective.”

    That’s hilarious.

  • Ron McPherson

    Of course it was subjective. Two plus two equals four is a demonstrable fact. Your assertion about the author is not. If you can’t see that, then I have no idea why you posted considering you provided no evidence to even support your assertion. Would you consider it to be factual if someone said that your statements are not reflective of Jesus? Pretty sure you would consider that to be subjective lol.

  • Bones

    Yeah so do I.

    Except my God doesn’t have a fetish for gay sex .

  • Rob_Drury

    I don’t know who “your god” is, but it’s a bit difficult for me to take your assertions about him seriously given your level of cynicism and sarcasm in describing him.

    BTW, my God doesn’t have a fetish for gay sex either. He despises it and says that all who do it are abominations. Again, His words, not mine.

  • Rob_Drury

    Okay; ya got me! I’m just passing along God’s subjective opinion; limited to his “feelings” on the subject.

    Better now?


  • Jeff Preuss

    You’re passing along your opinion, and declaring it to be God’s. It isn’t worth further debate with you on it. Stubborn brick walls make for extremely boring conversationalists. Have a great day.

  • Rob_Drury

    Well, I guess that’s YOUR opinion.

  • Bones

    Yes, I know you don’t know my God. My God is based on Jesus.

    Yours isn’t.

    Your god is an idol based on bigotry and divisiveness.

  • Bones

    Lol…I wonder if he’s giving His opinion or just relating what God thinks.,.

  • Do you think God’s love is extended to one such as him? I think obviously yes and I’m glad he comes here to post this crap. his bullying means we get the benefit knowing firsthand what Antichrist is doing in people’s hearts and Minds. SAD! =*(
    This is a real valuable education IMHO and we couldn’t get it anywhere else but here together online. This person is a real mess! Now I know how to pray for him. *~{|:D

  • JD

    How people argue that guns make things safer when America has one of the highest gun violence rates and gun ownership rates in the world is beyond me.

  • Rob_Drury

    If you’re a gun control advocate, I’m sure there’s quite a bit that’s beyond you. If you’re wanting to quantify things to evaluate their validity, as you sadly attempted in your statement, try checking out the stats regarding gun-related crime and the strictness of gun laws and you’ll see that they invariably correlate very strongly. Guns don’t kill; gun control laws do!

  • JD

    The fact that you start your response off with an insult speaks volumes about your willingness to have a rational discussion about this. No, I’m not a gun control advocate. I’m a voluntaryist. But it is impossible to ignore the fact that America is flooded with guns and gun violence. We are flooded in both at levels unseen in other Western nations. Bumper sticker cliches like “Guns don’t kill; gun control laws do!” don’t promote constructive dialogue, and it goes against the defense often used of “gun don’t kill, people do”. Gun control laws don’t kill. The myth of redemptive violence, hate, anger, brokenness…those are what is leading to this. Do I believe guns kill? No. Do I believe that guns make the carnage much worse? Absolutely. I don’t believe banning them is the solution, but I do believe the church should have a discussion not on our “rights” to own guns, but on whether or not we should own guns.

    But, important conversations can’t be had when people immediately come to the table with insults and antagonism. So, this will be my last post to you. I hope you engage others from a more respectful position in the future, as that is the only way we will have constructive dialogue. Peace to you, brother.

  • Rob_Drury

    Effectively, I don’t see the difference. They’re both perverts.

  • Rob_Drury

    I gauge “factual reality” by the Word of God, which very directly and clearly supports each of the “dogmatic narrative” statements above.

  • Rob_Drury

    There is no need to overcomplicate this. There is no contradiction between love and God’s will. You are lying to someone when you tell them you love them, and continue to allow them to wallow in their sin. No need to condemn; but don’t condone their lifestyle either. Love of others starts with: love God, hate sin.

    It’s kind of hard to illustrate this in a forum where there is so much moral contradiction, but I’ve known many gays and transgenders. I’ve always gotten along with them just fine. They know my feelings and completely respect me for them. They expect me to respect them as human beings, and I do; they don’t expect me to speak or act favorably or supportively regarding their lifestyles, and I don’t.

    Love God, love others, hate sin. I’m not a hypocrite; I understand that this issue is simply one variety of the sin from which we all suffer. That doesn’t change the fact that it IS sin.

  • Ron McPherson

    I think the tension lies in the fact that many Christians who are gay believe this subject must be taken in context with careful exegesis. I think telling someone a thousand times that they’re living in sin may not be the best approach, because they believe otherwise. For a great many, it has not proven to be helpful especially when they see us straights taking all sorts of liberties with other passages of scripture, but being rigidly inflexible on this topic. It just doesn’t lend itself to credibility. That’s why I believe Jesus greatest commandments supersedes all barriers

  • Meg Whaley

    Really? Do you watch their “kinky” sex in order to come to that conclusion? Or are you merely labelling someone because you are uncomfortable with the notion of showing human decency and compassion to someone who is different from you? I guess you missed the sermon about Jesus Christ and loving your neighbor, and WHO your neighbor actually is.

  • Rob_Drury

    My statements were nothing but decent. As far as love and compassion, I have enough of both not to lie to them by affirming their disgusting and self-destructive behavior. If there is anything I can do to help them, I am most certainly eager to do so, but allowing them to live their lie is not helping.

  • As if you’re the best judge by which to determine whether your statements are decent!

  • Meg Whaley

    Dude, Jesus already died on the cross. Get down and let other people choose to accept Him, or not. You are not helping people. Your are contributing to their mental health issues and likely pushing them towards death by suicide… Making you an accessory to THAT sin.

    Instead, pray for them. Share love with them. Jesus never said love your neighbor, but not the one who you don’t like. You are to love everyone. And if your love and compassion come with conditions, you need to reevaluate your understanding of what grace really is.

  • Rob_Drury

    Well, I suppose it would be difficult to be objective if we weren’t discussing a topic which is so obvious to thinking individuals, but this one’s pretty cut-and-dry. Also, motives are a big issue here, and mine are squeaky clean.

  • Rob_Drury

    No judgment nor conditional love or acceptance here. No tiptoeing around the truth either.

  • Meg Whaley

    To quote a movie: You can’t handle the truth.

    But really, I don’t have any more fucks to give about this conversation. You’re still going to hurt people in a misguided attempt to practice a religion that worships a God that doesn’t actually love all of His creations. And I am going to continue worshipping Love.

  • If I have perfectly reasonable motivation to call you an ass, does that somehow equate to you not actually being called an ass and experiencing all that being called an ass entails?

    Ah, right. Objectivity is limited to the judgmental type.

  • Bones

    You’re an idiot.

    The last thing they would need to be is around you.

    You’re the type that kills people.

  • Bones

    Your motives are you hate people who are different to you.

    Like you want a medal for that…..

  • Rob_Drury

    So, if your views aren’t Christian, why are they relevant here (or anywhere else for that matter)?

  • Meg Whaley

    1 John 4:8

    He who is not loving did not know God, because God is love.

  • Rob_Drury

    “Just because something is old doesn’t mean it’s divinely inspired. That’s lazy reasoning.”

    That’s true; however, being divinely inspired does mean it’s divinely inspired. Glad I could clear that up for you.

  • Bones

    Yeah like the Bible says about itself….it’s called circular logic….it is because it says it is.

  • Rob_Drury

    Well, I understand what you’re saying. If it were applicable to my statements, it would be a good point. However (and I suspect you have know idea of what I’m saying), I’m speaking from empirical experience, not “belief.”

  • Bones

    The empirical experience of what is ‘divinely inspired’….

    That’s fascinating….maybe you could detail this ’empirical experience’.

  • Rob_Drury

    Why bother? Pearls to pigs.

  • Mmm. That’s the best part about theology which claims the benefit of empirical evidence: rather than survive peer review, it declares itself exempt from peer review by dint of the fact that in not surviving it, it would only prove itself correct.

  • Rob_Drury

    Peer review?

    Sorry; the only “peers” in this discussion are true Christians; those who have received direct revelation from the Holy Spirit and are in active two-way conversation with God on a regular basis. There’s no “theology” or religion involved; only reality that often transcends the natural. If you wish to write that off as “convenient” for my argument, that’s fine. There will be a day when you too will know the truth (Phillipians 2:5).

  • *Nods* So when you say empirical evidence, what you mean is that it’s purely a matter of faith. Which isn’t empirical evidence at all.

  • Rob_Drury

    Not even close, as I suspect you define the term “faith.” Of course, the way God defines it, they are one and the same.

    Frankly, if you read my statement thoroughly, my description refers to absolutely no unsubstantiated belief. It is all absolute direct observation and active participation. You either have extremely poor reading comprehension, or you simply don’t believe me. Either way, it makes little sense for me to waste any more time on this conversation. Good night.

  • Empirical evidence is evidence which has been gathered through observation by means of the senses, so there should be no reason a non-Christian would fail to accept it if it is truly valid. It goes without saying that such evidence should also be gathered by a means which is repeatable, so that the results can be tested by others. Simply stating “I have determined this is in accordance with my beliefs” is not sufficient, and is the pitfall into which many would-be scientists fall when they strive to prove a Biblical conclusion, starting first with their conclusions and searching for data which affirms them.

  • Bones

    So no ’empirical experience’ then….

    Stop making up shit.

  • Rob_Drury

    What purpose would I have for making anything up?

    Sorry your God is so small.

  • Rob_Drury

    “I have determined this is in accordance with my beliefs”

    I agree; that would be terribly insufficient. So, when exactly did I state anything even remotely close to this?

  • You haven’t stated much at all, although a review of your posts reveals that you edited the previous, which I recommend you not to do if it substantially adds or alters the content of your post. Those of us (like myself) who follow these threads through e-mail subscriptions are only party to the first iteration of each post, and not subsequent edits. It makes following this contemptuously deceptive verbal fencing even harder.
    First of all, what you have described contradicts contemporary usage of the words “religion” and “theology.” You stated that neither is involved, and then went on to state definitively the existence of holiness, revelation, and supernatural entities based on a process which is only evident to certain individuals who have engaged a transcendent world on specific grounds which, you then state, have nothing to do with faith — although somehow those of us who attempt to replicate your experimental process will not be able to do so without first doing something which will look remarkably like embracing faith, I suspect.

    In these situations, my argument is simple: don’t dress up your beliefs with the drapings of science when doing so requires deliberate misuse of universally understood terminology.

    You have also failed, as we say, to stick the flounce. If you prefer to withdraw from the thread (though you are apparently reluctant to do so without having the last word), I will bid you hopes that you find harmony err you transcend the clouded mirror, child of clay. What comes beyond is quite different than you’re picturing.

  • Bones

    Why do you post complete crap?

    Your God is so small, he can be kept in a box.

  • Rob_Drury

    A small god is one who fits neatly into our preconceived ideas; who can’t or won’t do anything that we have difficulty envisioning, or whose actions fall outside our ideas of logic or fairness.

    My God is infinite. He can do anything except contradict himself; and if something appears to be a contradiction, it’s our lack of understanding, not His reneging on His Word. He is all-knowing and all-loving, even when He says or does things that violate our understanding or concept of what is right or loving. For example, I love that He is willing that none should perish, and that there is nothing we can do for which we cannot be forgiven; yet, most will go to hell because they refuse to accept His forgiveness through Christ. If it were up to me, I’d probably say, “what the heck; they aren’t really all that bad. Let ’em in;” but God is love, and He’ll love those who deny His Holy Spirit as He banishes them for all eternity. His justice and perfection demand it.

  • Just-a-me
  • About the same as you feel every time one of your group rapes and murders someone, which happens far, far, far more often, mind you.

  • Just-a-me

    So the fact that asinine rationalizing put this wolf in a hen house means nothing to you, huh? Truly despicable. Unlike the unfortunate women who wind up dating such men or passing them on the street, I never once advocated for locking them in a room together. These molestations are on your hands.

  • Yes, yes. The important part is to assign blame upon entire classes of people and everyone around them. If even one person breaks the law, everyone should be punished as harshly as possibly. This is truly the Christian answer: lots of punishment, lots of disgust and contempt and hatred and violence.

  • Just-a-me

    “The important part is to assign blame upon entire classes of people and everyone around them.”
    No no, the important thing to understand is that these women were only victims of harassment from this man because you and people like Corey want to feel good. You created a risk.

    “If even one person breaks the law, everyone should be punished as harshly as possibly.”
    No, no, but if someone supports locking a man in a room full of women then they bear some responsibility when stuff like this happen.

    “lots of disgust and contempt and hatred and violence.”
    You brought it on yourself.

  • ” No no, the important thing to understand is that these women were only victims of harassment from this man because you and people like Corey want to feel good. ”

    Actually I’m fighting for my own rights, thanks. I’m trans. These matters concern me on a personal level.

    “No, no, but if someone supports locking a man in a room full of women then they bear some responsibility when stuff like this happen.”

    You, of course, bear no responsibility whatsoever for what members of your group do — they’re mentally ill lone wolves who lashed out unexpectedly in ways no one ever could have seen coming (even though this happens on such a regular basis in such repetitive ways that one would think we’d notice a pattern developing).

    “You brought it on yourself.”

    Of course. Jesus would want us to hate each other and act to worsen each other’s lives.

    May you find harmony, child of clay.

  • Just-a-me

    “These matters concern me on a personal level.”
    And they concern women inmates as well.

    “bear no responsibility whatsoever for what members of your group do”
    Happenstance interactions in public places is much different than determined interaction by forcing co-habitation.

    “they’re mentally ill lone wolves who lashed out unexpectedly in ways no one ever could have seen coming”
    Every conservative saw this type of abuse coming.

    “Jesus would want us to hate each other and act to worsen each other’s lives.”
    It is hate when you carelessly lock men up with women for the sake of feeling good. You’ve chosen your personal comfort over their molestation, plain and simple.

  • Bones

    Ergo conservative scours internet looking for something to get offended about and decides every single trans is a rapist in disguise.

    Jesus says the measure you use to judge others is the measure you will be judged by….therefore when a priest rapes children, all Christians are rapists…..

  • Bones

    “Every conservative saw this type of abuse coming.”

    Obviously not because the UK is ruled by a conservative government.

    A shame you didn’t see the thousands of actual rapes of children by clergy.

    Maybe you were too busy looking at people in the toilets.

    “It is hate when you carelessly lock men up with women for the sake of feeling good. You’ve chosen your personal comfort over their molestation, plain and simple.”

    The person in question was still an actively sexual male with a history of violence and sex attacks.

    No person in their right mind would think they should be transferred to a female prison, no matter what they identified as.

  • Bones

    Btw I realise it must be difficult to understand you are now completely irrelevant tom the modern world after losing the war against gay people and you now have to manufacture another group to cast as boogie men even if they represent 0.000001% of society.

    But that’s how societies evolve.

    I wonder who it will be after transpeople…..

  • Just-a-me

    “The person in question was still an actively sexual male”
    How do you disprove that this isn’t just a sexually active lesbian female?
    And how on earth are you going to police this when it comes to bathrooms?

  • Bones

    “How do you disprove that this isn’t just a sexually active lesbian female?”

    Because he still has a cock….

    Derpy you are aware that trans people have been using the bathrooms of their choice for decades.

    Why all of a sudden the outrage?

    Because you can’t take it out on gays anymore.

    So you need to find some other group to demonise.

  • Just-a-me

    “Because he still has a cock….”
    What does this have anything to do with being male or female?

  • Ron McPherson

    It’s like when homophobes claim all gay people must therefore be pedophiles whenever a child is molested by an adult of the same sex. It’s just patently ignorant.

  • Ron McPherson

    “I wonder who it will be after transpeople…..”

    I’m going to go with pretty much anybody that Jesus would have hung around with.