Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders Signs Law Prohibiting Transgender Restrooms in Schools

Doesn’t have to be all at once. Do you not have “disability toilets” over there? They are usually unisex.

Single bathrooms would have saved this little girl

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/pe...ght-year-old-girl/RS4B76E5IFDYRRLVKQS33NMETY/

https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/crime/jailed-raping-woman-waihola-public-toilet

https://thewest.com.au/news/crime/girl-5-raped-in-mens-public-toilets-ng-s-1630503

I have found three examples of rape in a public toilet and not one of them was someone who was trans. There are a huge number reported from India where inside toilets are rare and even public toilets are few and far between but none are lgbtq.

 

Thanks for this info. I'm unsure of the point you are trying to prove. is it that women still can be raped by biological men if they are in a women's only restroom? I don't think I ever claimed that could not happen. But why present more opportunity for this sort of thing?
Also, I know its non PC to have any kind of "metrics" on this sort of thing. We are just suppose to accept the word "trans" and consider them that gender even if they look like this?



For the record, I'm not anti-trans and if they are actually making an effort to live their life as the other gender then i'm all for them using that bathroom, because if they are doing it right then how would you even know they are a biological male?
I have met many trans people (have a relative in theatre) and with many of them you can't even tell but now its just getting crazy man.
Now they are trying to have beards and what not and call it NB but sitll want to use any bathroom they want. The line should be drawn somewhere.

Quick side story. I used to work in a bagel shop and had super early hours, 4am to 11am and this man used to come in very early in the morning (when nobody else was there) , about 6'3, in good shape, very manly looking EXCEPT he had on high heels, thigh highs, fake stuffed boobs in his denim jacket AND chest hair poppoing out of his shirt and through the top of his thigh highs.
He would talk sports and pretend that he wasn't dressed like that. We never disrespected him or anything but my boss would always high tail it to the back room because he was older and this stuff is just too much for some older folks.
THAT is an example IMO of a "trans" person that should not be allowed in a women's bathroom.
Before you rip on me. I understand its non PC to be like "nope, sorry, not feminine enough", I get that but there has to be a LINE.
I'm more flexible than most republicans so before you try and rip me, read what I wrote please.

 

This is where they get to use the unisex toilet. Simple. Because rape is reasonably rare in public toilets I am actually more concerned with the cleanliness.

But globally 2.4 billion people lack access to toilets and America is concerned that the “wrong” genders may be using them?

 

You know what? that isn't a half bad idea! I mean it could just have that stuff that shower windows have so you can see but its very blurry (you would still see if sometone is getting assaulted"
I dunno @Bowerbird
You might just be onto something that is better than a 3rd bathroom and my security guard bathroom idea.
I'm not even being sarcastic. I think that would really help to stop bathroom rape.

 

Iowa bans pediatric sex-change treatments


GOV SIGNS

'The bill, SF538, says that a healthcare professional in the state of Iowa “shall not knowingly engage in or cause any” treatments “for the purpose of attempting to alter the appearance of, or affirm the minor’s perception of, the minor’s gender or sex, if that appearance or perception is inconsistent with the minor’s sex [at birth].”'

'Further, the bill restricts the practice of removing any healthy or non-diseased body part or tissue as well as bans the administration of hormone-blockers to delay puberty.'

'[That’s good, but it likely will only be a temporary disincentive. The real disincentive will come when detransitioners haul doctors and clinics into court for malpractice and start winning large judgments, which will come when such cases demonstrate a complete lack of reliable science behind “gender affirming” treatments and surgeries, especially on minors. Insurers are very shortly going to refuse to indemnify such treatments, which will bring the practice to a screeching halt. ]'

BRING THE MALPRACTICE LAWSUITS!

 

I think the Tokyo “see through” toilets that you can either dim or leave clear might also be a “fix”. Even if you cannot see in it would take a very either deranged or brave person to do anything illicit inside a see through toilet.

I am also betting they would stay cleaner



imagine if this approach were to be used in areas with high levels of homelessness. One of the factors that keep people homeless is lack of access to basic hygiene

 

blind people know where the signs should be... why we have standards... and the Braille is obviously, so they can read it

 

I think that the only way they should be able to use the bathroom of the sex they identify with is if they are on a current hormone therapy program or have had surgery, otherwise they should be accompanied with either a unisex or single occupancy bathroom.

The issue is that many on the right want to force transwomen that no longer have male parts and look more like a woman than most women do to use the men’s room. You will find that is a fairly common belief with the right in my experience while only a very small fringe group of leftists believe a man should just be able to say he is a woman and that’s it.

 

Your company either had a poor architect that didn’t apply the law correctly or they were skirting accessibility law by have a certain percentage of their bathrooms handicap accessible even though they were not actually accessible.

Also note: handicap doesn’t mean wheelchair and most commercial bathroom signs have braille on them automatically

 

Really? How do they know where the door leading to the bathroom is?

 

they feel the wall

why do you need a sign, cold just ask someone? same reason they need a sign, they just want to know before they enter

 

The bathroom I'm talking about is wheel chair accommodated. Plus there was no way to get to it from the first floor. Nor was the company legally obliged to provide a way for the wheelchair bound person to access the second floor since work for such a person could be provided on the first floor, where another bathroom was located. The inspector was being a dickhead.

 

Are they going to need signs along the walls leading them to the wall where the bathroom is?

 

Wow, a surly lying bitch becomes governor and the bigotry just flows. How unsurprising.

 

do you need that?

they often have guide dogs or canes, as their eyes

legally blind is a spectrum as well, not all blind people are 100% blind

but they may be way too blind to read that sign

 

Yeh, they have to be wheel chair accessible to be classified as handicap accessible for compliance with the ADA guidelines. They are supposed to have ease of access to them so technically should be disqualifying if they are located on a floor without an elevator.

It really shouldn’t be up to an inspector however, that is something that is handled during the architectural review process long before inspectors become involved.

They do some crazy **** to meet ada guidelines which can be outright absurd and failure to comply can result in a major lawsuit.

 

If they are visually impaired they might be able to see but not be able to read well — visual and/or tactile lettering is also required to have a non-glare finish and a high contrast between text and background — all to aid in accessibility.

Why does this upset you?

 

Look the bathroom I'm talking about was a newly built one as part of a modification project for new jobs. The bathroom was already completed when the final inspection took place. The inspector insisted on it being handicapped accessible. The company, having deep pockets, decided to just comply with the inspector (rather than fight him) and shut down the new job until the already completely new bathroom could be retrofitted to accommodate a wheelchair that had no way of getting there since they was no elevator.

 

Look

 

Upset me? Good grief.

Look

 

yep, sounds like their corp or those they hired tried to cut corners and got caught

 

I don’t see anyone else whining about signage made to help disabled people.

It’s ironic that your post tells me to look when you posted lol

 

Point #1: Do you understand the concept of an "aside," or the meaning of the word "incidental?"

Point #2: My aside had not even been directed toward you, but toward Adfundum, which is why I asked your permission/pardon, in making my deviation from our debate; but your wording was so perfectly like the example I had given Adfundum, of the sorts of things I, not infrequently, have heard people say, that I didn't want to miss the chance, to point it out to him.

Point #3: It had been Adfundum, who had thought pronoun use would become more confusing, once the word "they," for example can replace "she," for a single person, whom we know to be (or who appears for all intents & purposes to be) female. My point, I will reiterate-- since it is not clear you understood, and since you are making this a point of contention between us, though it really has nothing to do with our argument (I refer you, once more, to the words incidental aside)-- had been that it is the way the speaker uses his given verbiage, more so than the way the words, themselves, can be used, which is the primary factor, influencing the clarity of any statement. IOW, even w/out this new change in pronouns, people can use pronouns carelessly, to make things more ambiguous than they need be; conversely, those who consider the perspective of their audience, will always have options to make their references clearer and more readily grasped, if they are willing to put in a little bit of effort.

And yes, I was able to figure out your meaning; that does not mean that you hadn't expressed it, in a confusing way. Luckily, this was in writing, not speech, so I could take the time to examine and consider it.

Since this is all apart from our main discussion, I will let this reply stand on its own (hopefully without encouraging any prolongation of the subject).

 

Protecting actual girls is not bigotry.

Bigot must be the new term overused by the left. Anything they don't like, you're a bigot. It's the new racist.

 

School superintendent: male coaches don't want naked girls in locker room, but they should



'Assistant Superintendent of the Glendale California Unified School District Kelly King explained in a video call that male coaches feel uncomfortable being in a locker room with trans-identified males walking around naked.'

SHE WOMAN-SPLAINS WHY THOSE FEELINGS ARE INVALID

'She actively conceals permanent records from parents so they will not know their child has altered his/her gender identity. "For a handful of kids, their permanent record is in my office... We've kind of gone out on a limb, and we know that's controversial to some people."'

'Kelly King works with Gender Spectrum to produce Gender Support Plans. “If the parent’s not affirming, the parent may not be involved in this document. This may be a private conversation between that trusted adult at the school and the student about how we keep you safe at home.”'

'Kelly King makes $263,000 a year from a school system that serves ≈25,000 students. By high school, only 43% of Glendale students are proficient in math and only 65% in reading. Kelly King is rewarded for mediocrity and sexualizing children without parental knowledge.'

IN MAINE

'"a social worker gave the teen the chest-flattening garment and encouraged her to keep it a secret from her parents." The school defended the social worker who called CPA on the mom when she started homeschooling.'


Mom vs Teacher.

Chest binding is physically dangerous. 'Kids have broken their own ribs, had trouble breathing, and one “happy” transitioning girl actually had her nipples fall off'.

Good for Sarah!