Since the assorted fetishists are having such big problems adjusting to real life, we can build them their own asylums like the other insane people have, and each cell will have its own toilet, same as San Quentin does; problem solved, plus they're away from children, a huge benefit for the rest of society.
Well, it's certain there aren't many of them who are going to 'blend', that's for sure ... https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/01/19/rachel-levine-transgender-biden-hhs-pick/
There are women with mustaches. Yes, even cis women. I don't get this obsession with genital inspection that you folks have.
Genitalia is only one element. Bone structure, reproductive organs, cervical screening, mammograms, periods, ejaculation, DNA, chromosomes, facial hair, Adams apple, muscle strength, testosterone, estrogen, progesterone, and the ability to crash cars and make sandwiches are also of interest. You will find the difference in these are split into two types, humans call one type male and the other type female. They're quite distinct and unfortunately you cannot physically transform from one to the other. Mentally some do, but physically, it's a no. So the problem is not physical, it's mental, that's what needs treated for the patients wellbeing.
So gender is now a spectrum . . . like trans people have been telling us for years now? You are presenting two different stories here and you need to decide on which one you want to stick with.
Men probably don’t really care who is in their locker rooms, but prepubescent girls, teen girls, and adult women should have the right to change clothes and shower in the presence of other females only, not in the presence of males. Liberals who argue otherwise are making a mockery of their own alleged respect for women and women’s rights. *smh*
Hey now, we both know that never happened! . . . He was too busy assaulting the cousin that he married
First off I noted the changing room situation not the restroom. In a restroom situation, no one, male or female should be showing genitals. So in the end, the restroom situation has no bearing on what genitals they have. I also acknowledge that the phrase was supposed to be "...should not be showing...". Let me know if that wasn't a typo.
Anyone assaulting anyone anywhere is a concern of mine. Cis or trans, gay or straight, it don't matter. People lying about how the group as a whole are the problem is also a concern. Since that is not the position of most LBGT people and supporters, I have no clue what narrative you are referring to here. Plenty of support of gay people without the need to transition. Transitioning has nothing to do with not being gay any longer, not to mention that many who do transition "become gay" based on the labeling structures.
Then you might as well get rid of showers. If you give kids too much privacy in locker rooms, then you will have kids taking advantage of that privacy to harass others. Instead of having boys flashing their junk in the girls locker room you could have boys cornering girls in a private shower.
No messier than the narrative that priests are there to help people and save their souls. That is not the message of the LBGT community. Can you source this supposed message? Or are you just interpreting something else with your own bias? Sexual normalcy according to who? If it's not feeling normal to them to begin with, then sex per their birth body is not really a loss. For you, yes it may be, and there are those for whom transitioning does not need bottom surgery to alleviate GD. For them, sex in the body they have is normal. Again, where are you getting this from? This is starting to sound rather conspiracy theory. A person born male who is just gay, identifies as the man gender. Gay men don't think they are of another gender. I am beginning to wonder if you have any real clue on the difference between the two conditions. The vast majority of liberals don't have an issue with two males kissing. What lifetime of regret? More people who transition are happy that they did. And of those who de-transition, they are twice as likely to commit suicide as those that don't. I'm not claiming that there are not those who do regret such, but don't misrepresent the numbers. Here's the reality, and this position makes me unpopular with both sides. Those locker rooms are not public facilities. They are private, as in privately owned. The owner gets to decide how they are used. This makes me unpopular with the right because that means the owner can say that people are to use the changing room of their gender. This makes me unpopular with the left because it means that the owner can say that people are to use the changing room of their sex. But no one is owed a changing room that fits what they think is right. No one has the right to the services of that location. You don't like what the owner has put out, then don't go. Go find a facility that fits your desires.
Or boys cornering boys in a private shower, or girls cornering girls in a private shower, or even girls cornering boys in a private shower.
I just don't know if that works, logistically, in all scenarios. Large airport bathrooms will have roughly 12 stalls and 20 urinals per area... and I've seen most of it occupied during flight connections. Where would you build 32 bathrooms to replace that, it would take a lot more space and money and just wouldn't always be practical. That said, I'm on the trans side for this issue. People should always be expected to mind their own business in the bathroom, and if everybody does that, there's no issue and people can use the bathroom they want.
Of course they were. Trans people just didn't materialize after the gay marriage won support. Trans have been around for nearly as long as humanity. If that's what you mean by men. But even if not, you can bet there has always been perverts trying to sneak a peak. Ever since there were separate bathrooms. Again, this is nothing new. It just became political after gay marriage was granted.