NationStates

Diopolis wrote:The men's and women's bathrooms correspond to sex, not gender. That's why they're different because of the plumbing they're designed to handle, not they're color scheme. The sooner people get this in their heads, the sooner we can put this behind us.

Wallenburg wrote:Another red state hates equal rights. More at 11.

Diopolis wrote:The men's and women's bathrooms correspond to sex, not gender. That's why they're different because of the plumbing they're designed to handle, not they're color scheme. The sooner people get this in their heads, the sooner we can put this behind us.

Boineburg wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Here[pdf] is the text of the bill. Rather looks to me like the section added to Article 37 of Chapter 115C of the General Statutes and the new Chapter 81 of Article 143 do prohibit trans people from using bathrooms based on their gender identity.

Thanks for completely ignoring my open withdrawal of that claim and continuing to argue pointlessly against it.

Setgavarius wrote:

Diopolis wrote:The men's and women's bathrooms correspond to sex, not gender. That's why they're different because of the plumbing they're designed to handle, not they're color scheme. The sooner people get this in their heads, the sooner we can put this behind us.

Down with segregated bathrooms.

Khadgar wrote:

Mithridia wrote:I can see it now; Police waiting by bathroom doors to grab crotches in the name of the law, breaking another in the name of justice.

Wouldn't work. They'd have to check birth certificates.

Wallenburg wrote:Another red state hates equal rights. More at 11.

Philjia wrote:

Crockerland wrote:This is not an anti-LGBT bill. Anyone can change the sex on their birth certificate.
http://www.lambdalegal.org/know-your-rights/transgender/changing-birth-certificate-sex-designations

Some states have arbitrary bullshit laws demanding you live as your preferred gender publically for a certain time.

Mithridia wrote:

Khadgar wrote:
Wouldn't work. They'd have to check birth certificates.

"While I crave your junk, I'd like to see your birth certificate."

You have to bring paperwork to take a crap. I'd cry.

Ceres-Vesta wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
Why does every debate on this always come down to THEY JUST WANT TO RAPE US?

TRANSGENDER people don't want to rape anyone. Well, statistically, some of them probably do. But no more than any other group. The problem is that anyone could claim to be transgender, and say that they haven't had a sex-change operation yet. Then go and do whatever they want in the bathroom of the opposite sex. Filming, eavesdropping, anything (Can't really see actual, foll-on rape happening in a crowded public restroom though). A better law would be to keep people who claim to have not yet had a sex-change operation to the restroom of their biological gender upon birth, and allow all other members of the transgender community to use the restroom of their own gender.

Anyways, I do sort of hate how they say the bill is to "Protect women". I'd feel violated if someone had taken pictures of me naked too. It also implies that FTM people don't exist, or that only men are capable of sexual assault. Which is an implication that manages to insult everyone at once.

The Qeiiam Star Cluster wrote:Ah yes, "protecting our children".

Diopolis wrote:

Setgavarius wrote:Down with segregated bathrooms.

And that's a reasonable criticism to make. I would disagree, but there it is.
Screaming "transphobic!" Because it's not going your way is not. The fact of the matter is that bathrooms and locker rooms are segregated on the basis of sex and not gender and the state passed a law declaring that fact.

Ceres-Vesta wrote:

Wallenburg wrote:Another red state hates equal rights. More at 11.

I still remember when we got gay marriage legalized here. I refused to believe it until my friend handed me proof. Honestly, I would have believed that we had seceded before believing that we had legalized gay marriage.

Philjia wrote:
Some states have arbitrary bullshit laws demanding you live as your preferred gender publically for a certain time.

Before surgery? In that case, it's to ensure that the person in question really wants to go through with it. It's an important decision to make, after all. Plenty of people don't need that period (for obvious reasons), but some people really do. I personally had a friend who thought they were FTM transgender, but later realized they were gender neutral.

Lady Scylla wrote:
I disagree.

Val Halla wrote:

Diopolis wrote:And that's a reasonable criticism to make. I would disagree, but there it is.
Screaming "transphobic!" Because it's not going your way is not. The fact of the matter is that bathrooms and locker rooms are segregated on the basis of sex and not gender and the state passed a law declaring that fact.

Bathrooms based on sex are absolutely pointless. What logical purpose do they serve?

Val Halla wrote:

Diopolis wrote:And that's a reasonable criticism to make. I would disagree, but there it is.
Screaming "transphobic!" Because it's not going your way is not. The fact of the matter is that bathrooms and locker rooms are segregated on the basis of sex and not gender and the state passed a law declaring that fact.

Bathrooms based on sex are absolutely pointless. What logical purpose do they serve?

New Benian Republic wrote:

The Qeiiam Star Cluster wrote:Ah yes, "protecting our children".

The way they're seeing it as I think is this: Maybe little Sally doesn't want to see little Willys willy if they're little children in school showers.

Lady Scylla wrote:

Crockerland wrote:This is not an anti-LGBT bill. Anyone can change the sex on their birth certificate.
http://www.lambdalegal.org/know-your-rights/transgender/changing-birth-certificate-sex-designations

So I was correct then.

Furthermore;

North Carolina
Statute: N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 130A-118(b)(4), (e) (2005).

Text: (b) A new certificate of birth shall be made by the State Registrar when . . .

(4) A written request from an individual is received by the State Registrar to change the sex on that individual's birth record because of sex reassignment surgery, if the request is accompanied by a notarized statement from the physician who performed the sex reassignment surgery or from a physician licensed to practice medicine who has examined the individual and can certify that the person has undergone sex reassignment surgery.

Boineburg wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Here[pdf] is the text of the bill. Rather looks to me like the section added to Article 37 of Chapter 115C of the General Statutes and the new Chapter 81 of Article 143 do prohibit trans people from using bathrooms based on their gender identity.

Thanks for completely ignoring my open withdrawal of that claim and continuing to argue pointlessly against it.

Ifreann wrote:

Lady Scylla wrote:
So I was correct then.

Furthermore;

Obviously anyone can get sex reassignment surgery. Takes twenty minutes and most places will give you a complimentary head massage.

Crockerland wrote:

New Benian Republic wrote:The way they're seeing it as I think is this: Maybe little Sally doesn't want to see little Willys willy if they're little children in school showers.

Group showers in schools should be illegal anyways.

New Benian Republic wrote:

Val Halla wrote:Bathrooms based on sex are absolutely pointless. What logical purpose do they serve?

Not having children see other children's genetalia.

Val Halla wrote:

Diopolis wrote:And that's a reasonable criticism to make. I would disagree, but there it is.
Screaming "transphobic!" Because it's not going your way is not. The fact of the matter is that bathrooms and locker rooms are segregated on the basis of sex and not gender and the state passed a law declaring that fact.

Bathrooms based on sex are absolutely pointless. What logical purpose do they serve?

Des-Bal wrote:

Lady Scylla wrote:
I disagree.

That's great because the argument that without beginning transition early a transgender person is not likely to pass is one of the few convincing arguments that parents should ignore their personal feelings and not forbid their children from starting the process while they live at home and if possible suppressing puberty. Since that's not actually an issue I guess there's no counter to the my house my rules argument.

Crockerland wrote:

New Benian Republic wrote:The way they're seeing it as I think is this: Maybe little Sally doesn't want to see little Willys willy if they're little children in school showers.

Group showers in schools should be illegal anyways.