Transgender vets now have a VA clinic

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 10:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: And those that do not look like the gender they identify would equally be more likely to cause an issue by going into the facility that fits their mind more so than their body.

You were simply disingenuous by only posting pictures of people that supported your stance; while knowing there are those that do not.

So it's not as cut and dry as you would want others to believe.

So, based on my post above your, who gets to decide who "looks" like the right sex to go in to a bathroom?

My guess is someone like, say, you?

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 10:27 PM)GMDino Wrote: So, based on my post above your, who gets to decide who "looks" like the right sex to go in to a bathroom?

My guess is someone like, say, you?

I think you got it backwards. I not the one advocating the "looks" issue (notice who was first to post images). I'm the one advocating the anatomy issue.

So did you mean to call out Matt and Pat and accidentally quoted me?

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 10:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think you got it backwards. I not the one advocating the "looks" issue (notice who was first to post images). I'm the one advocating the anatomy issue.

So did you mean to call out Matt and Pat and accidentally quoted me?

How can you tell the anatomy?  Continue...

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 10:32 PM)GMDino Wrote: How can you tell the anatomy?  Continue...

You will learn this in sex education.

So what about the looks issue? Do you agree that should be a big factor?

[Belsnickel]

(11-06-2015, 10:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: And those that do not look like the gender they identify would equally be more likely to cause an issue by going into the facility that fits their mind more so than their body.

You were simply disingenuous by only posting pictures of people that supported your stance; while knowing there are those that do not.

So it's not as cut and dry as you would want others to believe.

I didn't claim it was as cut and dry as you would like others to believe. But I am used to my point being misrepresented by you so much at this point that it is commonplace.

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 10:33 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You will learn this in sex education.

So what about the looks issue? Do you agree that should be a big factor?

Your being less than disingenuous to say its all about the parts...but not about the looks.  Because without the looks you have no idea what the parts are.

And as I shared about even WITH the looks you can't always tell.  Personally I don't care as I generally don't check out the men in the mens room to see if they look manly enough to be in there.

So when you want to be honest we'll continue.

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 10:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I didn't claim it was as cut and dry as you would like others to believe. But I am used to my point being misrepresented by you so much at this point that it is commonplace.

My apologies. That was Pat that stated just let them pee wherever they feel comfortable.

You actually posted your pictures to blur the lines.

[BmorePat87]

(11-06-2015, 08:39 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The planet fitness case is this exact scenario.   They have an open locker room.   Private shower areas but open locker room.  

If I recall correctly, a woman didn't like this trans woman in the gym locker room, but there were no actual issues and it was the company that decided to let her use the locker room, not a law. 


Not sure what you're suggesting happened 

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 10:41 PM)GMDino Wrote: Your being less than disingenuous to say its all about the parts...but not about the looks.  Because without the looks you have no idea what the parts are.

And as I shared about even WITH the looks you can't always tell.  Personally I don't care as I generally don't check out the men in the mens room to see if they look manly enough to be in there.

So when you want to be honest we'll continue.

I have zero idea what I am not being honest about. People with outies should use the little boys pee pee, people with inies should use the little girls pee pee.

If you don't check folks out then what is the problem with using the facilities that matches your body instead of your mind. I think it was the other Lucie thread where I stated this train of thought makes zero sense to me.

BTW would less that disingenuous be genuine?

[BmorePat87]

(11-06-2015, 08:42 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Where does "Michael" go when she/he is on his period?  There is nothing to help that in a men's room.

Im assuming he doesn't rely on bathroom coin operated dispensers. I don't know anyone who does. I also think the men's room has trash cans 

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 10:47 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Im assuming he doesn't rely on bathroom coin operated dispensers. I don't know anyone who does. I also think the men's room has trash cans 

You need to get out more.  You sure don't know a lot of varied folks.

[BmorePat87]

(11-06-2015, 10:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I have zero idea what I am not being honest about. People with outies should use the little boys pee pee, people with inies should use the little girls pee pee.

If you don't check folks out then what is the problem with using the facilities that matches your body instead of your mind. I think it was the other Lucie thread where I stated this train of thought makes zero sense to me.

BTW would less that disingenuous be genuine?

I think we'd all agree that posting a photo of someone in lingerie at home and suggesting you'd see that in public is disingenuous.

To address some of your concerns: I said they should use the bathroom they identify as. What do you think will cause a bigger problem, Michael using the men's room or Michael using the women's room? I have to imagine no man would assume he was born a women while many women would have a hard time believing he was and assume a man is coming into the lady's room

[Rotobeast]

(11-06-2015, 07:19 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Oh, hey, we're just going to spam multiple threads about one topic...








So those who opposed this anti-discrimination bill are ok with their daughters seeing this in their bathroom? Because according to "anatomy", he has to use the women's room.


Also, I'm still waiting on someone to post an incident of one of these laws leading to an attack. I don't think I have to explain how posting about a guy who got high in a store, took a life-size barbie's dress, and went into a bathroom in a town without one of these laws isn't an example... but I might have to.

Man or woman, they deserve to be punched in the face for taking pics in restrooms.
:angry:

[BmorePat87]

(11-06-2015, 10:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You need to get out more.  You sure don't know a lot of varied folks.

Are there any women here who can tell us how prevalent tampon dispensers are and how often they use them. My wife never does but bfine says I'm sheltered for not thinking most people do 


It's also sad that were even addressing this asinine argument from lucie

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 10:52 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I think we'd all agree that posting a photo of someone in lingerie at home and suggesting you'd see that in public is disingenuous.

Let me guess: You honestly don't know anyone that would wear clothes that resemble lingerie in public.

Do you want me to provide you with photos to prove it happens?

[BmorePat87]

(11-06-2015, 10:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Let me guess: You honestly don't know anyone that would wear clothes that resemble lingerie in public.

Do you want me to provide you with photos to prove it happens?

It does happen, but that doesn't make your post any less disingenuous, especially since I provided a photo of them in their street clothes.

I guess this is why a lot of us have a hard time taking you guys seriously on this topic. You're either trying to suggest it's wrong because they might dress inappropriately (because that's unique to trans people?) or you're saying that it'll cause attacks despite no cases of these laws ever causing that 


Why not base your points of contention on reality? 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-05-2015, 09:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: A trans person can be a rapist just as a cis person can. This was not, however, from what I saw, a case of someone claiming to be a woman simply to exploit the situation. I did not find much on it, though.

(11-05-2015, 09:21 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2014/02/16/christopher-jessica-hambrook-serial-rapist-sexually-assaulted-and-terrorized-women-after-being-placed-in-toronto-area-womens-shelters/

[url=http://www.torontosun.com/2014/02/15/a-sex-predators-sick-deception][/url]

I did.  And?

LOL as usual, you ask for evidence of a claim, evidence is supplied, now you have to find something wrong with the evidence in order to dismiss it?

It's not about a trans-person attacking others, I have never made that claim and I don't that is their intent, most likely they would be attacked. 

The whole argument to me is about: people claiming to be a trans-x to get access to places that they would not normally be allowed into and commit sexual offenses against other members of the opposite sex. And that is exactly what I posted evidence of.

[Belsnickel]

(11-06-2015, 11:06 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: LOL as usual, you ask for evidence of a claim, evidence is supplied, now you have to find something wrong with the evidence in order to dismiss it?

It's not about a trans-person attacking others, I have never made that claim and I don't that is their intent, most likely they would be attacked. 

The whole argument to me is about: people claiming to be a trans-x to get access to places that they would not normally be allowed into and commit sexual offenses against other members of the opposite sex. And that is exactly what I posted evidence of.

If you were to look at my next post on this you would see I did not dismiss it after further reading. It may be evidence of this occurring, but it would be the exception to prove the rule. Showing evidence of one person doing it does not prove that laws allowing for use of restrooms based on gender identity would increase the prevalence of this.

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 11:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: If you were to look at my next post on this you would see I did not dismiss it after further reading. It may be evidence of this occurring, but it would be the exception to prove the rule. Showing evidence of one person doing it does not prove that laws allowing for use of restrooms based on gender identity would increase the prevalence of this.

Are Transgenders "exceptions to the rule"?

The answer is yes or no.

Should we make laws to support these exceptions?

[*bfine32*]

(11-06-2015, 11:02 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It does happen, but that doesn't make your post any less disingenuous, especially since I provided a photo of them in their street clothes.

I guess this is why a lot of us have a hard time taking you guys seriously on this topic. You're either trying to suggest it's wrong because they might dress inappropriately (because that's unique to trans people?) or you're saying that it'll cause attacks despite no cases of these laws ever causing that 


Why not base your points of contention on reality? 

I guess you're losing me. You admit it happens then suggest I should "base my points of contention on reality".

Where did you get that I said people might dress inappropriately or mentioned attacks? But it is I that must "base my points of contention on reality".