High school locker rooms and transgender

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(09-10-2015, 12:38 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: And yes I know that my choice of words can be called into question sometimes.   I'm not oblivious to that, but in the same point you all should realize by now that I have no problem throwing out controversial language.   Not sure why you all are still surprised.

I don't think anyone is surprised by your choice of words or controversial language.  However you act all shocked and surprised when called out on it.  Choice of words don't bother me nor does controversial language, personally I think you like to go for shock value because it's the interwebz.  Some call it trolling, I call it a waste of time.

[Rotobeast]

(09-10-2015, 12:35 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I have had loads of positive expierences with people from these places.    

But none of this changes how I think our national immigration policy should be implemented.  

What's sad is these guys jump on the word savages instead of the meat of my statement and miss the point.    

I dont want open borders, I want to limit access to our country to only the best.    It's bad enough we have sift through the illegals now.

Well, I'm glad to hear you have and I apologize for assuming you hadn't.
I think many are in agreement with your opinions on immigration, but the abrasive language puts people off and makes them want to blow it up.
I realize that much of what you post is from your phone and auto-complete gets the best of us all, but not everyone takes that into consideration and realizes that may make you come off a little different than you may have intended.
Regardless, I give you credit for standing behind it anyway.
You do come back to defend your position, time and time again.
I think that is why you get a lot of attention, you respond frequently and adamantly.

*side note: I posted in this thread today, before I seen the big blow-up in the other thread.

Also.... Happy Birthday !
 

[StLucieBengal]

(09-10-2015, 02:29 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Well, I'm glad to hear you have and I apologize for assuming you hadn't.
I think many are in agreement with your opinions on immigration, but the abrasive language puts people off and makes them want to blow it up.
I realize that much of what you post is from your phone and auto-complete gets the best of us all, but not everyone takes that into consideration and realizes that may make you come off a little different than you may have intended.
Regardless, I give you credit for standing behind it anyway.
You do come back to defend your position, time and time again.
I think that is why you get a lot of attention, you respond frequently and adamantly.

*side note: I posted in this thread today, before I seen the big blow-up in the other thread.

Also.... Happy Birthday !
 

Ty

[*bfine32*]

According to the Feds. A unisex bathroom for transgenders is not good enough:

http://news.yahoo.com/us-agencies-back-transgender-teenager-restroom-dispute-193359766.html

Quote:The government's filing says a Gloucester County School Board policy that requires 16-year-old junior Gavin Grimm to use either the girls' restrooms or a unisex bathroom constitutes unlawful bias under Title IX, the 1972 law that prohibits sex discrimination in education.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2015, 12:08 PM)bfine32 Wrote: According to the Feds. A unisex bathroom for transgenders is not good enough:

http://news.yahoo.com/us-agencies-back-transgender-teenager-restroom-dispute-193359766.html

Unisex is perfect because they can pretend to be whatever sex they want to be .... Maybe rename it fantasy land.

[Rotobeast]

(10-30-2015, 12:08 PM)bfine32 Wrote: According to the Feds. A unisex bathroom for transgenders is not good enough:

http://news.yahoo.com/us-agencies-back-transgender-teenager-restroom-dispute-193359766.html

So, I guess gender-fluid peoples just go in and decide which one to use each day ?
Heck....let's just revert to communal outhouses.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2015, 01:58 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: So, I guess gender-fluid peoples just go in and decide which one to use each day ?
Heck....let's just revert to communal outhouses.

Gender fluid lol.    What a joke.  

This whole thing has to be a sham.   Lol

They won't be happy until children are all changing with one another and exploring each other's bodies .... It will be so natural ... Maybe they can get boys, girls, and unisex to lather each other up.

[*bfine32*]

(10-30-2015, 01:58 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: So, I guess gender-fluid peoples just go in and decide which one to use each day ?
Heck....let's just revert to communal outhouses.

I suppose if a young boy is uncomfortable using the bathroom in front of someone with other body parts he must use the unisex facility. I assume the feds would be behind that.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2015, 02:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I suppose if a young boy is uncomfortable using the bathroom in front of someone with other body parts he must use the unisex facility. I assume the feds would be behind that.

The only thing the Feds are behind is making as many people uncomfortable as possible.

[*bfine32*]

I've seen many of my liberal friends state that a unisex facility is the answer. Waiting to get their view on this ruling.

[GMDino]

(10-30-2015, 03:26 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The only thing the Feds are behind is making as many people uncomfortable as possible.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2015, 08:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I've seen many of my liberal friends state that a unisex facility is the answer. Waiting to get their view on this ruling.

I am convinced today's liberals are not happy unless they pressure you to accept and be surrounded by their chosen lifestyles. It's not about personal freedom for liberals anymore it's about bending everyone's will....

[BmorePat87]

oh, hey, the transphobia is back.

Wait, I mean, it's a legitimate point of view that I have to respect despite the hatred aimed at people different from the poster. I don't want anyone to start crying to mods because I "attacked them" after I called them out for being transphobic.

[*bfine32*]

(10-31-2015, 01:36 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: oh, hey, the transphobia is back.

Wait, I mean, it's a legitimate point of view that I have to respect despite the hatred aimed at people different from the poster. I don't want anyone to start crying to mods because I "attacked them" after I called them out for being transphobic.

Any thoughts on the Feds ruling?

[BmorePat87]

(10-31-2015, 01:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Any thoughts on the Feds ruling?

Sex and gender are two different things. Based on what little I saw, they seem to be lumping in gender with the protection title IX offers.

I also don't think the bathroom counts as a school program or activity. Considering the fact there's no federal protection for bathrooms based on gender, I think they're reaching here. A state law may require it, but there's no federal law I know of that does

[Belsnickel]

(10-31-2015, 05:00 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Sex and gender are two different things. Based on what little I saw, they seem to be lumping in gender with the protection title IX offers.

I also don't think the bathroom counts as a school program or activity. Considering the fact there's no federal protection for bathrooms based on gender, I think they're reaching here. A state law may require it, but there's no federal law I know of that does

From what it looks like to me, they are stating that it would be sex discrimination because someone identifying as their gender being a woman but their sex being a male, if forced to use the male or unisex restroom, could be considered because of their sex. Since we are discussing someone whose gender and sex do not match the discrimination could be considered due to either one. So I can see their position's legitimacy in the law.

[*bfine32*]

(10-31-2015, 06:14 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: From what it looks like to me, they are stating that it would be sex discrimination because someone identifying as their gender being a woman but their sex being a male, if forced to use the male or unisex restroom, could be considered because of their sex. Since we are discussing someone whose gender and sex do not match the discrimination could be considered due to either one. So I can see their position's legitimacy in the law.

If given all this, wouldn't a unisex facility be a reasonable accommodation?

[Belsnickel]

(10-31-2015, 06:52 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If given all this, wouldn't a unisex facility be a reasonable accommodation?

In the sprit of the law? I believe so. But the letter they filed seems to be more concerned with the letter of the law. By the letter of the law it would still be discriminatory to have them use a unisex facility.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-31-2015, 08:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: In the sprit of the law? I believe so. But the letter they filed seems to be more concerned with the letter of the law. By the letter of the law it would still be discriminatory to have them use a unisex facility.

So they are advocating for communal restrooms and locker rooms then?

[Belsnickel]

(10-31-2015, 08:56 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So they are advocating for communal restrooms and locker rooms then?

No. They are stating that someone identifying as a particular gender, according to Title IX, has the right to use the bathroom/ locker room for that gender.