Lance Berkman campaigns against allowing boys into girls' bathrooms

Where is this place? I'd like to...uh...cross it off my list of places to frequent.

 

Welp, if it is a big enough problem that the status quo system, then changes need to made. Grandfather in small existing buisnesses or force them to establish a third restroom and see if the ordinance passes.

The current system has worked well for a long time.

 

Other states has passed similar ordinances and their current system work. Not a big problem or a big deal. Why incur an unnecessary cost burden? We want smart efficient government, not one that create regulation that increases both public and private costs for something that other states already found is unnecessary.

 

Sadly, that's the best Republican policy statement I've seen on this issue

 

And the 20 year old stripper, 30 year old hooker and 50 year old schizophrenic junkie panhandler, who could all be cisgendered women. What are the odds of one of them showing up compared to a trans man?

 

It speaks volumes to how terrified some people are of their own sexuality.

 

So, what is the case for letting men use the women's facilities again?

 

I grew up in the 80s. I know bull**** moral panic when I hear it. Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to listen to Judas Priest backwards and play Dungeons and Dragons with all my friends who are just normal dudes but once in a while wear dresses so they can watch little girls pee because the Devil.

 

That's hilarious. Dungeons and Dragons, people giving kids LSD stickers (smurfs?), razorblades in Halloween candy...what am I forgetting?

 

What are the cases against transsexuals using the restroom of their identified gender?

I've yet to hear a legit argument for restricting it, just a bunch of stuff based on feels. A bunch of men thinking they are protecting women, even had a woman in here said she didn't mind it at all but still as usual had a bunch of men speaking up for their feels.

 

Easy, it's not the restroom or other facility for their sex. Neither mental illness nor genital mutilation can make a male a female when it comes to humans....it's just biology. If they were born a different species, maybe something could be done, but alas, they are human. I know a bunch of anti-science types are probably upset by that, but there's really nothing that can be done to help them.

Being a male in a dress doesn't make one a female.

Okay, you're turn, what is the case for males using female facilities?

 

Ugh, *your

 

Actually you are wrong, unless you have science to back that up then don't just throw it out there. You are throwing yourself into a complex debate that you don't comprehend, not even in the slightest. Please link us anti-science folks your discovery and tells us more about what you understand about gender. If not, leave that argument at the door and don't throw it out casually.

My case is that they identify with female. In fact, some of them LOOK like female if they have committed to the change at an earlier age. It's actually fine in a few states and nothing has happened. The world hasn't exploded. There hasn't been a SINGLE case of any "Male" exploiting the restroom to perv on women. There is not a single valid argument against this except restricting the rights of others.

So, with that said. You are on record for this person

Using the women's restroom then?

Just want to make sure you are consistent.

 

It's a bit looney toons that this time it's the usually anti-regulation conservative types that want more rules on who goes potty where. Why do they want to take away my freedoms?

This is not a bathroom ordinance.

 

Bathrooms are the red herring of the ordinance.

 

This may jar your memory. And more recently...

Off the top of my head, AIDS in general, gays are trying to "recruit" your kids, the "Save the Children From Bad Words in Music" campaign of Tipper Gore and the PMRC, and through the 90s the overblown stranger-danger, "pedophiles are everywhere trying to abduct our kids" paranoia of which this new transphobia is an offshoot.

When any politician tries to turn a chain letter into a law they deserve nothing but ridicule.

 

Why have the creators of this ordinance allowed this issue to be the hill that the whole thing dies on?

In this scenario, everyone loses.

 

I don't know if they've 'allowed' it. I think the opposition to the ordinance has more money, talent, time, and organization. They've managed to frame the conversation around this stupid bathroom thing because they can get guys like Lance Berkman to come stump for them.

 

Fair enough, but as far I've seen -- All the other content in the ordinance isn't even debatable. It's all protections and actions that would make any opposition look absolutely absurd to speak out against.

However, the bathroom issue is extremely polarizing at best. Isn't part of politics knowing which battles or worth fighting and when to concede? This entire thing was bungled horribly, IMO. HERO's drafters needed not look any further than Dallas and San Antonio to see how this ordinance could've been passed successfully.

They went for too much too soon. It's a shame that you have to use that type of thinking with human rights, but they should've been smarter.

 

Yes, they've rather botched it. I think the mayor underestimated the determination of the opposition. This was supposed to be an ordinance for the city council to decide. But, the opposition got the preachers out, got petitions and forced it onto the ballot instead. Now, something that was crafted for policy and policy-makers now has to be marketed to the general public. The strategy would have been different if they went in with the assumption they'd have to win at the ballot box. Now that they are where they are, I don't think they can easily move the conversation off the childish concerns over bathrooms.