Stopping Edu. Funds for Disabled Students over Bathroom Laws

[MightyQuinn]

We also have freedom of speech, but it doesn't give you the right to shout, 'fire' in a crowded theater (unless there actually is a fire).

Shouting fire or not is fairly obvious.

Pray, do tell, how you'd determine whether someone "looks like the sex they belong to" or not? Cup size? Anything? It's very subjective, so you can't possibly build an argument based on that.

Back when they were casting for Pirates of the Caribbean IV, Disney was looking for athletic women with no breast enhancement. My dream job was to be the inspector.

Now if I were a transvestite or transsexual, I would make sure that I did my best to look like a female. Who wants to be ugly? I'd watch a LOT of Ru Paul's Drag Race, buy my clothes from specialty stores and do my best impression of Brenda Vaccaro when speaking. Some of the most beautiful men I've ever seen were at a female impersonator show in New Orleans.

[Quokkastan]

Shouting fire or not is fairly obvious.

Pray, do tell, how you'd determine whether someone "looks like the sex they belong to" or not? Cup size? Anything? It's very subjective, so you can't possibly build an argument based on that.

Back when they were casting for Pirates of the Caribbean IV, Disney was looking for athletic women with no breast enhancement. My dream job was to be the inspector.

... next time you feel like sharing. Don't.

Now if I were a transvestite or transsexual, I would make sure that I did my best to look like a female. Who wants to be ugly? I'd watch a LOT of Ru Paul's Drag Race, buy my clothes from specialty stores and do my best impression of Brenda Vaccaro when speaking. Some of the most beautiful men I've ever seen were at a female impersonator show in New Orleans.

Not everyone is physically capable of being attractive. But even if they were, legislating that the must be is one of the most blatant violations of personal liberty imaginable.

[Noraika]

Shouting fire or not is fairly obvious.

Pray, do tell, how you'd determine whether someone "looks like the sex they belong to" or not? Cup size? Anything? It's very subjective, so you can't possibly build an argument based on that.

Back when they were casting for Pirates of the Caribbean IV, Disney was looking for athletic women with no breast enhancement. My dream job was to be the inspector.

Now if I were a transvestite or transsexual, I would make sure that I did my best to look like a female. Who wants to be ugly? I'd watch a LOT of Ru Paul's Drag Race, buy my clothes from specialty stores and do my best impression of Brenda Vaccaro when speaking. Some of the most beautiful men I've ever seen were at a female impersonator show in New Orleans.

Wow...way to not reinforce gender norms. Anyways, are you implying that transgender individuals do not attempt to present themselves as the gender they identify with, or don't look 'womanly' or 'manly' enough for you? Just what is you experience with, and perception of, transgender individuals?

Back when they were casting for Pirates of the Caribbean IV, Disney was looking for athletic women with no breast enhancement. My dream job was to be the inspector.

... next time you feel like sharing. Don't.

Seconded...

[Des-Bal]

This is a thing the government does, it's why the drinking age is the same in all states. I don't care that much about it.

[Des-Bal]

Shouting fire or not is fairly obvious.

Pray, do tell, how you'd determine whether someone "looks like the sex they belong to" or not? Cup size? Anything? It's very subjective, so you can't possibly build an argument based on that.

1.Yes you can. See, the nature of having a men's room and a woman's room and having those policies enforced is that we have already conceded it is visually possible to identify which sex a person belongs to. You can argue that it would be difficult to "catch" everybody breaking the rules or that periodically a person who is not transgender would be ejected from a bathroom but you can't argue there's no metrics at all.
2.Presuming that transgender people should be allowed to use the bathroom of their stated gender then consider the case of Alan.
Alan acknowledged her status yesterday, Alan has not practiced "passing", uses her birth name, and prefers wearing traditionally male clothing. Alan still feels more comfortable in the women's room. Does Alan have a right to be there?

[Noraika]

Shouting fire or not is fairly obvious.

Pray, do tell, how you'd determine whether someone "looks like the sex they belong to" or not? Cup size? Anything? It's very subjective, so you can't possibly build an argument based on that.

1.Yes you can. See, the nature of having a men's room and a woman's room and having those policies enforced is that we have already conceded it is visually possible to identify which sex a person belongs to. You can argue that it would be difficult to "catch" everybody breaking the rules or that periodically a person who is not transgender would be ejected from a bathroom but you can't argue there's no metrics at all.
2.Presuming that transgender people should be allowed to use the bathroom of their stated gender then consider the case of Alan.
Alan acknowledged her status yesterday, Alan has not practiced "passing", uses her birth name, and prefers wearing traditionally male clothing. Alan still feels more comfortable in the women's room. Does Alan have a right to be there?

Given that she's a woman, and women should be permitted to use the women's facilities, yes.

[MightyQuinn]

Back when they were casting for Pirates of the Caribbean IV, Disney was looking for athletic women with no breast enhancement. My dream job was to be the inspector.

... next time you feel like sharing. Don't.

Now if I were a transvestite or transsexual, I would make sure that I did my best to look like a female. Who wants to be ugly? I'd watch a LOT of Ru Paul's Drag Race, buy my clothes from specialty stores and do my best impression of Brenda Vaccaro when speaking. Some of the most beautiful men I've ever seen were at a female impersonator show in New Orleans.

Not everyone is physically capable of being attractive. But even if they were, legislating that the must be is one of the most blatant violations of personal liberty imaginable.

If you don't want to be attractive, what's the point? If you don't care to "look the part" you're always going to be inviting unwanted attention.

Also, your discomfort at my sharing makes you seem awfully intolerant.

[Gurori]

Wait... They're actually considering cutting funding to helping disabled children in their education over the shitter?

What... The fuck...

[Galloism]

Wait... They're actually considering cutting funding to helping disabled children in their education over the shitter?

What... The fuck...

The state is required to follow TItle IX anti-discrimination clauses in order to receive federal aid.

When they refuse to follow those guidelines, they lose the privilege of the aid.

[Noraika]

Wait... They're actually considering cutting funding to helping disabled children in their education over the shitter?

What... The fuck...

You obviously haven't read the thread. Yes, adherence to anti-discrimination measures at the federal level is a prerequisite to receiving federal funds, so as the current law HB 2 violates both Title XI of the ED regulations, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, et cetera, North Carolina has made itself knowingly ineligible to receive federal funds under the contract which they agreed to when they applied for federal funds.

[Aphryss]

Wait... They're actually considering cutting funding to helping disabled children in their education over the shitter?

What... The fuck...

Sort of yes, but also not really; that's based on the OP blithely misrepresenting events.

What's happening is that North Carolina has been accepting Federal money for education, some of which goes to disabled students. One of the conditions of that money is that North Carolina not discriminate on the basis of sex, and the courts have ruled that in this case sex includes gender identity. North Carolina recently passed HB2, which mandates discrimination on the basis of gender identity, including in North Carolina's schools. This has put the money North Carolina receives from the Federal government in jeopardy; the Federal government has announced its intention to sue North Carolina's state government for violations of the Civil Rights Act.

[Des-Bal]

Given that she's a woman, and women should be permitted to use the women's facilities, yes.

Okay, we agree that if transgender people should be allowed to into the bathrooms of their preferred sex then that should be the case no matter what they look. So any arguments predicated on people being unable to tell is gone.

To continue the hypothetical, Bob walks into the bathroom at the same time Alan does. Bob is a dead ringer for Alan, they look almost exactly the same. Bob is not transgender, he just thinks the women's room is nicer. Cindy sees Alan and Bob and demands they both leave? What should happen?

[Linux and the X]

If you don't want to be attractive, what's the point?

Holy fucking shit what even?

[Noraika]

Given that she's a woman, and women should be permitted to use the women's facilities, yes.

Okay, we agree that if transgender people should be allowed to into the bathrooms of their preferred sex then that should be the case no matter what they look. So any arguments predicated on people being unable to tell is gone.

To continue the hypothetical, Bob walks into the bathroom at the same time Alan does. Bob is a dead ringer for Alan, they look almost exactly the same. Bob is not transgender, he just thinks the women's room is nicer. Cindy sees Alan and Bob and demands they both leave? What should happen?

Given that what is considered is an individuals gender identity, the individual who has a female gender identity, under federal regulations, has an expressed right and legal protection to use that facility, and the individual who does not does not. Its not any different, in that case, from a woman who looks like a man using the women's room, and there have been plenty of women who look like that, and instances where that has caused a ruckus. The difference is you're comparing two unlike things. Physical appearance is not a necessary qualifier, and using it as a factor has caused even some women to face harassment and discrimination whilst using the restroom for not looking 'feminine enough', or 'looking like a boy'. It doesn't change the fact that they're women, and thus are using the appropriate facilities.

When you're trying to make a point it's usually not considered good forum to use drawn out hypothetical. In other words, what's your point?

[Wallenburg]

Wait... They're actually considering cutting funding to helping disabled children in their education over the shitter?

What... The fuck...

I know, right? The state legislators are batshit insane!

[Jolet]

Given that she's a woman, and women should be permitted to use the women's facilities, yes.

Okay, we agree that if transgender people should be allowed to into the bathrooms of their preferred sex then that should be the case no matter what they look. So any arguments predicated on people being unable to tell is gone.

To continue the hypothetical, Bob walks into the bathroom at the same time Alan does. Bob is a dead ringer for Alan, they look almost exactly the same. Bob is not transgender, he just thinks the women's room is nicer. Cindy sees Alan and Bob and demands they both leave? What should happen?

Excellent question. I concurr- how are we able to moderate who is and isn't transexual, if we don't judge them by their appearance? Doesn't that open the door to potential assault? Because frankly, anybody can say that they're transexual and then walk into a restroom. I mean, if it's that easy... I dunno. I currently only agree with the NC law in an idealistic sense, as the law itself is completely unenforcable. However, the summary of my opinion remains- if your sex (not gender, as the two are apparently different) is male or female, it'd be a good idea to stick to those restrooms. Otherwise, the chance for abuse, and subsequent villanisation of transgender individuals (who are a minority of a minority, mind you) as pedophiles and perverts, which I don't think anybody wants. Perhaps that's an overly negative view on the subject, but I am a pessimist and I see that result as likely. And before anybody starts yelling "bigot", I have worked and continue to work with transexuals as part of my job, and they are all very nice people. Different, yes, but still very nice. I just don't see this as a good step in the correct direction.

[Wallenburg]

Okay, we agree that if transgender people should be allowed to into the bathrooms of their preferred sex then that should be the case no matter what they look. So any arguments predicated on people being unable to tell is gone.

To continue the hypothetical, Bob walks into the bathroom at the same time Alan does. Bob is a dead ringer for Alan, they look almost exactly the same. Bob is not transgender, he just thinks the women's room is nicer. Cindy sees Alan and Bob and demands they both leave? What should happen?

Excellent question. I concurr- how are we able to moderate who is and isn't transexual, if we don't judge them by their appearance? Doesn't that open the door to potential assault? Because frankly, anybody can say that they're transexual and then walk into a restroom. I mean, if it's that easy... I dunno. I currently only agree with the NC law in an idealistic sense, as the law itself is completely unenforcable. However, the summary of my opinion remains- if your sex (not gender, as the two are apparently different) is male or female, it'd be a good idea to stick to those restrooms. Otherwise, the chance for abuse, and subsequent villanisation of transgender individuals (who are a minority of a minority, mind you) as pedophiles and perverts, which I don't think anybody wants. Perhaps that's an overly negative view on the subject, but I am a pessimist and I see that result as likely. And before anybody starts yelling "bigot", I have worked and continue to work with transexuals as part of my job, and they are all very nice people. Different, yes, but still very nice. I just don't see this as a good step in the correct direction.

With the passage of the new laws, anyone can say they are transgender and are being forced to enter a bathroom not corresponding to their gender. This law does nothing to solve that very fictional problem.

[MightyQuinn]

Wait... They're actually considering cutting funding to helping disabled children in their education over the shitter?

What... The fuck...

Yes, the Obama Administration is considering cutting funding to disadvantaged and disabled children if public school and university have restrooms that are for people who actually happen to be women or men.

Title IX is the excuse that they are using. Title IX prohibits discrimination based on sex, but it has no language recognizing transgender-transsexual persons and it predates any judicial ruling that recognizes the mental perception of sexual identity.

[Gurori]

Its probably for the best that transexuals go to the restroom for their gender despite their sex. It'll save society a LOT of discrimination, but that's just my opinion.

[MightyQuinn]

Heard on the news today, the majority of North Carolina residents seem to believe that if you don't like their laws, then just stay away and leave them alone, and shove the Federal dollars up Washington D.C.'s backside.

[Noraika]

Excellent question. I concurr- how are we able to moderate who is and isn't transexual, if we don't judge them by their appearance? Doesn't that open the door to potential assault? Because frankly, anybody can say that they're transexual and then walk into a restroom. I mean, if it's that easy... I dunno. I currently only agree with the NC law in an idealistic sense, as the law itself is completely unenforcable. However, the summary of my opinion remains- if your sex (not gender, as the two are apparently different) is male or female, it'd be a good idea to stick to those restrooms. Otherwise, the chance for abuse, and subsequent villanisation of transgender individuals (who are a minority of a minority, mind you) as pedophiles and perverts, which I don't think anybody wants. Perhaps that's an overly negative view on the subject, but I am a pessimist and I see that result as likely. And before anybody starts yelling "bigot", I have worked and continue to work with transexuals as part of my job, and they are all very nice people. Different, yes, but still very nice. I just don't see this as a good step in the correct direction.

With the passage of the new laws, anyone can say they are transgender and are being forced to enter a bathroom not corresponding to their gender. This law does nothing to solve that very fictional problem.

Not to mention the use of the law, in general, ignores the very real issue of violence and harassment of transgender individuals, and the reinforcement of stigma this law feeds by supporting the idea that allowing transgender individuals and allowing them access to the facilities and accommodations of their gender identity is compromising to bathroom safety, despite the experiences of numerous states, local authorities, and countries which have protected this ability for transgender people, in some cases for over a decade, saying and showing otherwise.

[MightyQuinn]

Its probably for the best that transexuals go to the restroom for their gender despite their sex. It'll save society a LOT of discrimination, but that's just my opinion.

Too easy and makes too much sense for radical social experimenters.

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

Wait... They're actually considering cutting funding to helping disabled children in their education over the shitter?

What... The fuck...

Yes, the Obama Administration is considering cutting funding to disadvantaged and disabled children if public school and university have restrooms that are for people who actually happen to be women or men.

Title IX is the excuse that they are using. Title IX prohibits discrimination based on sex, but it has no language recognizing transgender-transsexual persons and it predates any judicial ruling that recognizes the mental perception of sexual identity.

The 2nd Amendment has no language recognizing machine guns, and it predates assault rifles by over a century. Even still, people apply it. Times change, and while I shan't make a complete defense of either side at the moment, I will state that the reason the ability to draft amendments, as well as the power of Judicial Review held by the Supreme Court, exists is specifically because older rulings and documents can be used for later proceedings, and the guidelines are not entirely rigid. Society is a fluid thing, constantly shifting and changing, and so it should be no surprise that people will point to a precedent to support their own arguments.

[Galloism]

Given that she's a woman, and women should be permitted to use the women's facilities, yes.

Okay, we agree that if transgender people should be allowed to into the bathrooms of their preferred sex then that should be the case no matter what they look. So any arguments predicated on people being unable to tell is gone.

To continue the hypothetical, Bob walks into the bathroom at the same time Alan does. Bob is a dead ringer for Alan, they look almost exactly the same. Bob is not transgender, he just thinks the women's room is nicer. Cindy sees Alan and Bob and demands they both leave? What should happen?

Obviously, the solution is to do away with segregation.

... but that would be too easy.

[Wallenburg]

Heard on the news today, the majority of North Carolina residents seem to believe that if you don't like their laws, then just stay away and leave them alone, and shove the Federal dollars up Washington D.C.'s backside.

The Republic of Billystan has laws stating that any man caught wearing a t-shirt is to be summarily executed. The majority of Billystanis seem to believe that if you don't like their laws, then just stay away and leave them alone.