Target, Bathrooms, & a PC culture

[NM11046]

JJ, just want to say I appreciate your thoughts and posture in this thread. You've definitely got a more conservative slant than I do, but it isn't lacking compassion or a willingness to learn and look outside the box, which we all could benefit to do better with.

 

The "a bit off" element you're referring to with TG people is called gender dysphoria, which is an actual diagnosis of the unease/dissatisfaction that people have with their gender or sex at birth. It can come from a TON of different factors at play, but it's a struggle that those people have in common.

 

 

 

Now not to necessarily switch sides on this, but here's the two things that I don't quite understand or can't get entirely on board with logically when it comes to transgenderism.

 

First, gender dysphoria is essentially a lack of compatibility between one's sex and the gender they feel they identify with. The way I see this there are exactly two reconciling treatments for this: 1. Change your mind to match your body 2. Change your body to match your mind. Why, in 2016, is mutilating sex organs and pumping full of non-native hormones the only celebrated, loving, and 'good' solution, while the suggestion of going through therapy and counseling to get the mental state to match up with the biological state considered to be such a bigoted, barbaric idea? I think both could have merit in different scenarios, but especially when you get to the realization that biology ISN'T a social construct, it isn't relative, and it isn't unreliable. Our brains, however, are full of all kinds of detrimental, self-harming, inefficient neural pathways.

 

The other thing I don't really get is this. People who end up transitioning genders often do so out of a lifelong struggle from childhood of feeling pressured to fit into a narrow gender binary. So, the lesson being that the gender binary is bad, right? Isn't the solution to getting rid of this human-made construct to break down the binary, and isn't transitioning to the other gender only reinforcing the binary? If I have a son who likes to play dress up, likes playing with Barbies, is very affectionate and tender, and what some would call effeminate, isn't the best thing to do to simply go, "Cool. This is my sweet, affectionate boy who likes what he likes and is who he is."?

Maybe I'm naive, but I don't think transitioning is the only "celebrated" option. I think as a general rule people want others to be happy and content. If that's assisted by counseling because one wants to get more comfortable in their own body - great! If it is assisted by allowing one to evolve into the physical embodiment of what they feel - great! It really doesn't impact anybody but that person and potentially their family.

 

Now on the binary comment, I don't think that's bad either - it is what it is. But it is NEVER going to change because the majority of people are fortunate to feel like they look, and content to be labeled as such, and it's for some reason an important thing for culture to be able to bucket people into categories. It would be great if we could just be who we are without classification.

 

On your example - YES! He is your child and regardless of what he plays with he likes what he likes and is who he is. Now if he came to you down the road and said, "Mom/Dad, I have been tender and loved Barbies for my entire life, and I've been struggling because although I was physically born a male, I really feel female and I'd like to live as such" - cool. If he grows up to be an effeminate male that feels male - cool. Either way he is still your tender loving child.

 

To add a wrench into this entire binary conversation, there is a population of folks that doesn't feel one or the other distinctly, or feels both depending on the day and situation (gender fluidity) so they buck the binary system ...

[NM11046]

And, JJ, I want to ditto Landlords comments, "... I appreciate your thoughts and posture in this thread. You've definitely got a more conservative slant than I do, but it isn't lacking compassion or a willingness to learn and look outside the box, which we all could benefit to do better with."

[TonyStalloni]

 

 

Solid response JJ, even though we may disagree on the "mental health" of TG people.

 

Your reponse kind of matches the way "I" interpret the President's policy. We are grown ups. We can tell if a person "belongs" in a restroom. If they pee, wash hands, and get out; have a great day. A person should be able to choose which restroom makes them more comfortable in regards to that. However, if a 16 year old boy claims to be a girl so he can position a video camera in the girl showers, well we got some laws against that and the Administration acknowledges that.

 

I'm sad because the President had to come out with a policy that should be common sense that is already being practiced.

The reason I keep hearing that TG and TS need to use bathrooms of the gender they aren't is so they are more comfortable. Are they uncomfortable because of a modesty issue or because they fear being assaulted? If it is the former then you have protected the modesty of .2% of the population while making uncomfortable probably half or more of the total female population. If it is the later then "well we got some laws against that". I don't know how long it has been since you were in high school or been around high school boys but if you think some will not push the envelope to find a way to successfully spend time in the girls locker room and bathrooms and come away with pics/video, then your head is a long way up your keester.

 

How is the law making half or more of the female population uncomfortable? Does this law mean every man will suddenly start using the women's restroom? I imagine this will be a very rare occurrence. As for actual transgendered women, I don't think that many women would be bothered by it.

 

To the last bolded, that already happens. In fact, trying to take video of girls locker rooms/bathrooms would probably be harder when attempting it in such an obvious way.

 

I am not saying that every man would start using women's bathrooms. There is a small % of men who would delight in making a woman uncomfortable by following her into a bathroom. And even of that small % very few of those would even be molesters. Can you honestly say you would be comfy if a 6'2 200 lb man followed you into the public bathroom and while not saying anything didn't go into a stall to use the facility? Not saying he was peeping or even near your stall. He might be checking for spinach in his teeth or combing his hair. Would you open the stall door and nonchalantly walk to the sink and wash if he was between you and the exit door? If you say you wouldn't give it another thought you are unlike the 12-15 women I have asked a similar question to over the last few weeks. Given that all the respondents were here in conservative central Nebraska and I would guess at least half of women nationwide do/would not feel comfortable with a man in the same bathroom. Who is standing up for those women? Why do they have to "get over themselves and their insecurities"?

 

After all that I'm saying I don't see why we as a nation need to cross this bridge for .2% of the population. If the feds are that serious about this then let them fund the cost of either private single stall/either sex bathrooms or make TG/TS only bathrooms. I'm also NOT saying I think TG individuals are now or would be a major problem with being offensive.

[Atbone95]

 

 

Solid response JJ, even though we may disagree on the "mental health" of TG people.

 

Your reponse kind of matches the way "I" interpret the President's policy. We are grown ups. We can tell if a person "belongs" in a restroom. If they pee, wash hands, and get out; have a great day. A person should be able to choose which restroom makes them more comfortable in regards to that. However, if a 16 year old boy claims to be a girl so he can position a video camera in the girl showers, well we got some laws against that and the Administration acknowledges that.

 

I'm sad because the President had to come out with a policy that should be common sense that is already being practiced.

Ehhhh, I think you're going a complete 180 if you're trying to draw any parallels between your statement and JJ's.

 

[begin my own opinion]

Why should a person be able to choose which restroom makes them more comfortable if, in reality, their choice could make 51+% of everyone else uncomfortable? I get TG, I'll even slightly buy that they can't control being the way they are (reluctantly). At the end of the day, why in the hell are we catering to a population that is .2% of the United States? Why can't we stick to the status quo and tell the .2% (most of whom, like JJ said, probably aren't given a fuss the way it stands now) that unfortunately that is how it is?

 

Don't bring back the "we have laws for that kind of behavior" either, please. I know you're jumping in, but that was had a while ago. Yes, we have laws for that. Never before have we literally facilitated the opportunity for crimes like that to happen.

 

 

American Indians and Native Alaskans made up 0.7% of the US population as of the 2010 Census. I suppose we should stick with the status quo and tell that 0.7% of folks that the way they're being treated is just unfortunately how it is.

 

Did you really just compare TG's and their ability to use a bathroom of their choice to a set of people who had their land pillaged and stolen, their women raped, and their children sent off to boarding schools to make them "white"?

 

If you want to make an actual argument, I'm still here.

[JJ Husker]

And, JJ, I want to ditto Landlords comments, "... I appreciate your thoughts and posture in this thread. You've definitely got a more conservative slant than I do, but it isn't lacking compassion or a willingness to learn and look outside the box, which we all could benefit to do better with."[/size]

Ahhh shucks, stop it, you guys had me at "more conservative". ;-)

 

Seriously though, it is nice to see a discussion like this that doesn't devolve into personal attacks and a burning dumpster.

[Landlord]

Did you really just compare TG's and their ability to use a bathroom of their choice to a set of people who had their land pillaged and stolen, their women raped, and their children sent off to boarding schools to make them "white"?

 

If you want to make an actual argument, I'm still here.

 

 

 

He highlighted the common dangerous perspective of, "Let's just ignore the very small minority and make them step in line" that is prevalent in both scenarios.

[Atbone95]

 

Did you really just compare TG's and their ability to use a bathroom of their choice to a set of people who had their land pillaged and stolen, their women raped, and their children sent off to boarding schools to make them "white"?

 

If you want to make an actual argument, I'm still here.

 

 

 

He highlighted the common dangerous perspective of, "Let's just ignore the very small minority and make them step in line" that is prevalent in both scenarios.

 

I agree it's dangerous in general.

 

Those two scenarios are about as far from alike as they get.

 

Native Americans, dangerous. TG and their bathroom selection, not dangerous.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

 

 

Did you really just compare TG's and their ability to use a bathroom of their choice to a set of people who had their land pillaged and stolen, their women raped, and their children sent off to boarding schools to make them "white"?

 

If you want to make an actual argument, I'm still here.

 

 

 

He highlighted the common dangerous perspective of, "Let's just ignore the very small minority and make them step in line" that is prevalent in both scenarios.

 

I agree it's dangerous in general.

 

Those two scenarios are about as far from alike as they get.

 

Native Americans, dangerous. TG and their bathroom selection, not dangerous.

 

 

Except they're not, especially when the argument against the bill is "they're such a small minority anyways. Why must the vast majority of people be subjugated to their "issues?"

 

I don't know how to feel about the bill and I'm not sure where I stand on the issue. It's definitely not something that's going to directly affect me: I'm a 24 year old male and don't have a young daughter or son. Both my parents are conservative and were raised conservative, but I think I'm more receptive to people's differences, probably because of my educational upbringing: BA in Psychology from UNL, MS in Industrial and Organizational Psychology from UNO. I think an understanding of the brain has led me to believe that gender dysphoria is hardly a choice; not as biological as race or eye color, or any physical characteristic, definitely not purely volitional. That perspective means I shouldn't treat transgender people differently because of their real psychological "disorder". Their thoughts are not a crime.

 

At the same time, I understand the real concern on parts of women and parents, especially those in conservative parts of the country about the unintended consequences of the bill. I'm not sure if perverted males and females are not intentionally using the other restroom to assault females and males because the sign on the restroom reads "Women/Men". But, and I think it's important to get into the minds of these individuals, this law gives them a way of "justifying their behaviors," despite their unjustifiable actions. And it's at that point where justification doesn't matter. I know that's not explained well, but it's basically a rehash of the argument that can be found and articulated better on other pages.

 

Essentially there's not going to be a solution that'll work for everyone. It's a zero-sum situation and it's unfortunate. Good people are going to be harmed regardless of what happens.

[teachercd]

This thread is getting better and worse...

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

Solid response JJ, even though we may disagree on the "mental health" of TG people.

 

Your reponse kind of matches the way "I" interpret the President's policy. We are grown ups. We can tell if a person "belongs" in a restroom. If they pee, wash hands, and get out; have a great day. A person should be able to choose which restroom makes them more comfortable in regards to that. However, if a 16 year old boy claims to be a girl so he can position a video camera in the girl showers, well we got some laws against that and the Administration acknowledges that.

 

I'm sad because the President had to come out with a policy that should be common sense that is already being practiced.

The reason I keep hearing that TG and TS need to use bathrooms of the gender they aren't is so they are more comfortable. Are they uncomfortable because of a modesty issue or because they fear being assaulted? If it is the former then you have protected the modesty of .2% of the population while making uncomfortable probably half or more of the total female population. If it is the later then "well we got some laws against that". I don't know how long it has been since you were in high school or been around high school boys but if you think some will not push the envelope to find a way to successfully spend time in the girls locker room and bathrooms and come away with pics/video, then your head is a long way up your keester.

 

How is the law making half or more of the female population uncomfortable? Does this law mean every man will suddenly start using the women's restroom? I imagine this will be a very rare occurrence. As for actual transgendered women, I don't think that many women would be bothered by it.

 

To the last bolded, that already happens. In fact, trying to take video of girls locker rooms/bathrooms would probably be harder when attempting it in such an obvious way.

 

I am not saying that every man would start using women's bathrooms. There is a small % of men who would delight in making a woman uncomfortable by following her into a bathroom. And even of that small % very few of those would even be molesters. Can you honestly say you would be comfy if a 6'2 200 lb man followed you into the public bathroom and while not saying anything didn't go into a stall to use the facility? Not saying he was peeping or even near your stall. He might be checking for spinach in his teeth or combing his hair. Would you open the stall door and nonchalantly walk to the sink and wash if he was between you and the exit door? If you say you wouldn't give it another thought you are unlike the 12-15 women I have asked a similar question to over the last few weeks. Given that all the respondents were here in conservative central Nebraska and I would guess at least half of women nationwide do/would not feel comfortable with a man in the same bathroom. Who is standing up for those women? Why do they have to "get over themselves and their insecurities"?

 

After all that I'm saying I don't see why we as a nation need to cross this bridge for .2% of the population. If the feds are that serious about this then let them fund the cost of either private single stall/either sex bathrooms or make TG/TS only bathrooms. I'm also NOT saying I think TG individuals are now or would be a major problem with being offensive.

 

 

 

I would feel uncomfortable, but not more uncomfortable than I already feel just by being in a public restroom. I don't care if it's a man woman or child in there with me, I don't like public restrooms. I've had little kids peeking under the stall to look at me while I was peeing before. Damn kids.

 

I think what would make women far more uncomfortable than the possibility of some kind of assault happening is the chance that a man might hear them making "bathroom noises."

[teachercd]

 

 

 

 

Solid response JJ, even though we may disagree on the "mental health" of TG people.

 

Your reponse kind of matches the way "I" interpret the President's policy. We are grown ups. We can tell if a person "belongs" in a restroom. If they pee, wash hands, and get out; have a great day. A person should be able to choose which restroom makes them more comfortable in regards to that. However, if a 16 year old boy claims to be a girl so he can position a video camera in the girl showers, well we got some laws against that and the Administration acknowledges that.

 

I'm sad because the President had to come out with a policy that should be common sense that is already being practiced.

 

The reason I keep hearing that TG and TS need to use bathrooms of the gender they aren't is so they are more comfortable. Are they uncomfortable because of a modesty issue or because they fear being assaulted? If it is the former then you have protected the modesty of .2% of the population while making uncomfortable probably half or more of the total female population. If it is the later then "well we got some laws against that". I don't know how long it has been since you were in high school or been around high school boys but if you think some will not push the envelope to find a way to successfully spend time in the girls locker room and bathrooms and come away with pics/video, then your head is a long way up your keester.

How is the law making half or more of the female population uncomfortable? Does this law mean every man will suddenly start using the women's restroom? I imagine this will be a very rare occurrence. As for actual transgendered women, I don't think that many women would be bothered by it.

 

To the last bolded, that already happens. In fact, trying to take video of girls locker rooms/bathrooms would probably be harder when attempting it in such an obvious way.

I am not saying that every man would start using women's bathrooms. There is a small % of men who would delight in making a woman uncomfortable by following her into a bathroom. And even of that small % very few of those would even be molesters. Can you honestly say you would be comfy if a 6'2 200 lb man followed you into the public bathroom and while not saying anything didn't go into a stall to use the facility? Not saying he was peeping or even near your stall. He might be checking for spinach in his teeth or combing his hair. Would you open the stall door and nonchalantly walk to the sink and wash if he was between you and the exit door? If you say you wouldn't give it another thought you are unlike the 12-15 women I have asked a similar question to over the last few weeks. Given that all the respondents were here in conservative central Nebraska and I would guess at least half of women nationwide do/would not feel comfortable with a man in the same bathroom. Who is standing up for those women? Why do they have to "get over themselves and their insecurities"?

 

After all that I'm saying I don't see why we as a nation need to cross this bridge for .2% of the population. If the feds are that serious about this then let them fund the cost of either private single stall/either sex bathrooms or make TG/TS only bathrooms. I'm also NOT saying I think TG individuals are now or would be a major problem with being offensive.

 

I would feel uncomfortable, but not more uncomfortable than I already feel just by being in a public restroom. I don't care if it's a man woman or child in there with me, I don't like public restrooms. I've had little kids peeking under the stall to look at me while I was peeing before. Damn kids.

 

I think what would make women far more uncomfortable than the possibility of some kind of assault happening is the chance that a man might hear them making "bathroom noises."

Why do you think those kids peeked?

[JJ Husker]

 

.... is the chance that a man might hear them making "bathroom noises."

Pfffft fantasy. Everyone knows girls don't fart. Physical imposssibility.

[NM11046]

"Good people are going to be harmed regardless of what happens." Why would this be your take away It'sNotAFakeID?

 

I go back to when laws were enacted to desegregate schools ... it was beyond controversial, mostly because parents at that time felt it would put their children at risk, because (gasp) white and black kids would be in the same classroom, going to the same dances, showering in the same place after gym class. How were good people harmed with that initiative? The only harm came when white people (parents and others) harmed innocent children who were just trying to go to school in order to make a point.

 

Bad people will always find a way to "justify" their behaviors. Talk about playing to the minority ... the defense many have given here is that we must think ahead to the handful of people who MAY (or may not) take advantage of this new rule to do bad things. I think it speaks volumes about our culture that instead of doing what's right and then dealing with the issues that MAY (or may not) come up we fight doing what's right because maybe, just maybe there will be a problem.

 

The real underlying problem here (in my opinion) is the lack of comfort people have with someone who is different. Do we now look at the fact that black, asian, spanish, etc and white kids all join hands at the school concert as alarming? No. Would our grandparents, probably. So I find some comfort in that each generation seems to be exposed to more and seems to be much more accepting of people in general. But the whole debate surrounding this being an issue of safety is bunk. It's us. We are afraid. Not of safety but of change and of things we don't know.

 

Now if in a year there is a surge in bathroom assaults and harm is being done to people by transgender folks or by people who use that as an excuse then perhaps my perspective could be changed because it would be fact based. But (to close out my diatribe), I wonder did we see an increase in crimes when blacks were allowed to use the same bathrooms as whites? Because sadly, the feeling at that time was allowing them to do so would expose women and children to savages and put them at risk. Sound familiar?

[teachercd]

 

.... is the chance that a man might hear them making "bathroom noises."

Pfffft fantasy. Everyone knows girls don't fart. Physical imposssibility.

I just got sick

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

 

Solid response JJ, even though we may disagree on the "mental health" of TG people.

 

Your reponse kind of matches the way "I" interpret the President's policy. We are grown ups. We can tell if a person "belongs" in a restroom. If they pee, wash hands, and get out; have a great day. A person should be able to choose which restroom makes them more comfortable in regards to that. However, if a 16 year old boy claims to be a girl so he can position a video camera in the girl showers, well we got some laws against that and the Administration acknowledges that.

 

I'm sad because the President had to come out with a policy that should be common sense that is already being practiced.

The reason I keep hearing that TG and TS need to use bathrooms of the gender they aren't is so they are more comfortable. Are they uncomfortable because of a modesty issue or because they fear being assaulted? If it is the former then you have protected the modesty of .2% of the population while making uncomfortable probably half or more of the total female population. If it is the later then "well we got some laws against that". I don't know how long it has been since you were in high school or been around high school boys but if you think some will not push the envelope to find a way to successfully spend time in the girls locker room and bathrooms and come away with pics/video, then your head is a long way up your keester.

How is the law making half or more of the female population uncomfortable? Does this law mean every man will suddenly start using the women's restroom? I imagine this will be a very rare occurrence. As for actual transgendered women, I don't think that many women would be bothered by it.

 

To the last bolded, that already happens. In fact, trying to take video of girls locker rooms/bathrooms would probably be harder when attempting it in such an obvious way.

I am not saying that every man would start using women's bathrooms. There is a small % of men who would delight in making a woman uncomfortable by following her into a bathroom. And even of that small % very few of those would even be molesters. Can you honestly say you would be comfy if a 6'2 200 lb man followed you into the public bathroom and while not saying anything didn't go into a stall to use the facility? Not saying he was peeping or even near your stall. He might be checking for spinach in his teeth or combing his hair. Would you open the stall door and nonchalantly walk to the sink and wash if he was between you and the exit door? If you say you wouldn't give it another thought you are unlike the 12-15 women I have asked a similar question to over the last few weeks. Given that all the respondents were here in conservative central Nebraska and I would guess at least half of women nationwide do/would not feel comfortable with a man in the same bathroom. Who is standing up for those women? Why do they have to "get over themselves and their insecurities"?

 

After all that I'm saying I don't see why we as a nation need to cross this bridge for .2% of the population. If the feds are that serious about this then let them fund the cost of either private single stall/either sex bathrooms or make TG/TS only bathrooms. I'm also NOT saying I think TG individuals are now or would be a major problem with being offensive.

 

I would feel uncomfortable, but not more uncomfortable than I already feel just by being in a public restroom. I don't care if it's a man woman or child in there with me, I don't like public restrooms. I've had little kids peeking under the stall to look at me while I was peeing before. Damn kids.

 

I think what would make women far more uncomfortable than the possibility of some kind of assault happening is the chance that a man might hear them making "bathroom noises."

Why do you think those kids peeked?

 

 

Because kids are kids, damn kids. Most little kids watch their parents (or at least their moms) go to the bathroom, and apparently some of them want to watch everyone go to the bathroom.