• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

HB2 Strikes Again

How do you just "forget about the bathrooms" if you update anti-discrimination laws to include gender identity? Bathrooms would necessarily be subsumed as a portion of the anti-discrimination laws wouldn't they? At least in public bathrooms.
 
RE: Peeping tom- you can be a peeing tom from your own home or a hotel where you are legally there. It's the act you are doing and to whom.

It was uncomfortable for many southerners to sit at a lunch counter with blacks. It was more than uncomfortable for a southern white to use the same HS much less HS gym shower with a black person.

The last thing virtually all trans people want is to be an issue. They are nervous enough about their lives and vulnerabilities.
 
Last edited:
I have to admit that I side with a lot of men in opposing women in public bathrooms of movie theaters and especially sporting events. We get in and out in a hurry. They have lines at their bathrooms and spend a lot of time in the facility. We don't want to miss playing time. :)
 
TheReff said:
Amen Slider, sing it to the mountaintops!! Best part was it bit them in the butt first because they lost the NBA All-Star game last year. hahahahahaha Then they caused us to lose all these NCAA & ACC events, turning sports into something political, which it shouldn't be. All for something that was never a problem in the first place in Charlotte. Plus--go to the damn bathroom where you are supposed to--with the original tools God gave you and what is on your birth certificate. It reads M or F. There are no other categories when you come out of the chute.
Click to expand...

Well this is just objectively wrong. You really are a moron.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex
 
MysteryMen said:
You don't bear responsibility for somebody overreacting.
Click to expand...

Wakeforest22890 said:
Of course not, but this is perfectly consistent with his "Obama is to blame for Donald" nonsense as well.
Click to expand...

Uhhh, aren't you the law school warrior? And the 3L chimed in as well, of course. Either of you ever hear of proximate cause? In many situations you most definitely are liable for overreaction if you are the cause of that overreaction and the overreaction is reasonably foreseeable. If you drive on the wrong side of the road causing another driver to overreact and swerve across 2 lanes of traffic and hit someone else, you are the proximate cause and liable for that impact.

Putting aside legal responsibility, in politics understanding the reaction to certain policy before you enact it is especially important. Obama, obviously, failed miserably at that hence Trump. The CLT Council obviously also sucked balls in that department given the makeup of the legislature.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Uhhh, aren't you the law school warrior? And the 3L chimed in as well, of course. Either of you ever hear of proximate cause? In many situations you most definitely are liable for overreaction if you are the cause of that overreaction and the overreaction is reasonably foreseeable. If you drive on the wrong side of the road causing another driver to overreact and swerve across 2 lanes of traffic and hit someone else, you are the proximate cause and liable for that impact.

Putting aside legal responsibility, in politics understanding the reaction to certain policy before you enact it is especially important. Obama, obviously, failed miserably at that hence Trump. The CLT Council obviously also sucked balls in that department given the makeup of the legislature.
Click to expand...

Righto champ. Keep on keeping on.
 
I disagree that it was reasonably foreseeable that, in response to Charlotte passing a local ordinance about bathroom usage, the NC legislature would pass a law causing hundreds of corporations to condemn the state, the NBA to remove the all-star game, the NCAA to remove all future tournaments from the state, and cost the state tens of millions of dollars.

We probably have to agree to disagree on this one. To the extent that I would find it "reasonably" foreseeable, it would be that the NC GOP is almost wholly unreasonable and so there's nothing limiting the scope of proximate cause if you're a municipality trying to pass local laws as to what the legislature might do in response.
 
scooter84 said:
RJKarl said:
The Charlotte law did not erase laws for exposing yourself or being a peeping Tom which is what you are worrying about.[/QUOTE

Serious question - under your theory where trans people go the bathroom and locker room of their gender identity, if a man who identifies and presents as female but has not had the operation undresses in a female locker room, is that an illegal act "exposing yourself"? I don't know the answer in that world but I imagine it might be extremely uncomfortable and offensive to the other women changing there.

As for "peeping toms" - how do you call it "peeping" if the person is in there legally?

All of these issues are complicated and society is fairly new at dealing with them. I don't have the answers and don't believe that either the CLT ordinance nor HB2 were the right approach. But I do see both sides of the issue clearly. I believe that society would adjust naturally to dealing with this stuff, without codification of new laws - if people (i.e. politicians trying to push an agenda either way) would just let it happen. I believe society has been (to a large extent) dealing with the bathroom issue fine for a long time.

As I said before, I would be in favor of updating anti-discrimination laws to include gender identity and sexual preference and forgetting about the bathrooms.
Click to expand...

By your understanding, Peeping Tom can't peep on Dick and Harry. That makes no sense.
Click to expand...
 
PhDeac said:
scooter84 said:
By your understanding, Peeping Tom can't peep on Dick and Harry. That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand your point but I will try to address it anyway. The classic peeping tom is a guy peeping into a window at a girl. He is likely trespassing on her property and is definitely invading her privacy by peeping into an area (her home) where she has an expectation of privacy and where he is not allowed or invited. That classic scenario could also play out with a guy peeping at another guy or a girl peeping at another girl. Still illegal.

My point was that if a guy (ostensibly, but not really, trans) is legally present in a locker room, how can that be a peeping situation? Everyone is there legally (invited) and there is no expectation of privacy. Of course the scenario changes if someone is behind a curtain or something and someone else is peering into an area like that where there IS an expectation of privacy.

I will acknowledge that the prurient interest concerns around an ostensibly trans man (presumably not really trans) leering at women in a changing room kind of break down when you acknowledge that homosexual men or women have always been sharing locker rooms with people of the same sex - to whom they are sexually attracted. I am not sure what to do with that fact.
Click to expand...
 
A public restroom is for peeing and (god forbid) pooping if you really can't wait until you get home. And for checking your makeup or hair or that your teeth are reasonably clean. That's about it.

If you're leering, ogling, flashing, etc. then you're out of bounds regardless of if it's a men's or women's room or you're either or both or something in between.

Look, who should decide what is the proper room for anyone to use for peeing and such, the state, the city, or the person needing to pee? If you really buy into what passes as conservative thinking these days, it should be the latter. In which case you should embrace an ordinance like the CLT one.

The real problem is the acceptance of trans folks as legitimate/real. Reverend Baity (in the article I posted earlier) just doesn't think they really exist. And hence, need or should have no protections in law.
 
I really think conservatives use different facilities than I do. Theirs seem like peep shows waiting to happen.
 
PhDeac said:
I really think conservatives use different facilities than I do. Theirs seem like peep shows waiting to happen.
Click to expand...
After learning about Mike Pence's arrangement with his wife you should have a good idea about how scared conservatives are of penises, even their own.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk
 
scooter84 said:
I really think you are being purposely dense.
Click to expand...
I really think conservatives have an unhealthy fear of penises, which is supremely ironic since you all condone people carrying deadly weapons everywhere.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk
 
scooter84 said:
I really think you are being purposely dense.
Click to expand...

No. I think you all must experience facilities differently than I do. I've never seen anybody ogle anyone else in a bathroom and I've been in coed bathrooms.

I just don't understand what the issue is. Bathrooms are places where we pee and poop. There's no titillation involved.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
No. I think you all must experience facilities differently than I do. I've never seen anybody ogle anyone else in a bathroom and I've been in coed bathrooms.

I just don't understand what the issue is. Bathrooms are places where we pee and poop. There's no titillation involved.
Click to expand...

Have you missed, or just ignored, all my comments about changing rooms and locker rooms?
 
scooter84 said:
Have you missed, or just ignored, all my comments about changing rooms and locker rooms?
Click to expand...

No. Again, I don't understand the big deal. You change clothes and leave without invading someone's space. It's like you all view the human body as a big sex organ.
 
I've said this before, but I've worked at events where the break room for staff is a repurposed locker room with only one large bathroom. Men's room too, so there's even urinals in it. Nobody there (men and women) seem to have any issue with using the bathroom together (and a lot of these are olds too).
 
PhDeac said:
No. Again, I don't understand the big deal. You change clothes and leave without invading someone's space. It's like you all view the human body as a big sex organ.
Click to expand...

I give up. You don't think there is an issue so you can't see that others do. Of course it is no big deal to you, or me, or other normal people. We change clothes, we use the bathroom, we get out. Unfortunately, everyone is not like us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top