I think supervision exists in locker rooms, but is not necessarily always effective. And plausible that supervision could be harassment and/or trouble itself. Or describe to me how you think supervision in a locker room would work to always be effective in getting around the mean attitudes of certain people, much less the perversions of others.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A legal violation of student's dignity and privacy
- Thread starter SkylarHunter
- Start date
I think supervision exists in locker rooms, but is not necessarily always effective. And plausible that supervision could be harassment and/or trouble itself. Or describe to me how you think supervision in a locker room would work to always be effective in getting around the mean attitudes of certain people, much less the perversions of others.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
No. You're right. The supervisor could be on the harassment, so it's not effective at all times, but in cases like this one: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/m...n-swimming-pool-locker-says-transgender-law-a
It probably could have been avoided with someone adult on site.
---
Sorry, taking that story back. Did some diggin into it, and the facts are not accurate in the story. The website that has this article are anti-transgender group, which made me doubt the truth of it. And lo' and behold. It's true that there were complaints filed, but the background to the story was that Colleen didn't intentionally expose himself at all. He was there with cisgender friends in an off-limit area for underage, and the minors walked off and looked into the sauna where Colleen was.
So forget that story.
Last edited:
All laws that are broken often, and frequently not getting caught.
How would you break the law that Obama is putting forth and not get caught?
A good example of abuse. But is it proper to call it abuse? For the man could clearly self identify as female and to conclude otherwise without his personal consideration would be discriminatory (if not hateful).
In my reading, supervision was present but not ever watchful. The ever watchful supervision is the type that I think would quickly/easily lead to trouble.
Sapiens
Polymathematician
The only "freedom" that you are losing is the freedom to swing your fist where someone else has previously placed their face. I see that as a legitimate use of governmental authority ... if you don't like it, hold your water until you get home.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
True. There's no easy or perfect solution either way.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Please explain the connection between "Unisex bathrooms do not exist in most schools, so that means complete overhaul." and "I think Obama is doing everything now to make sure the Dems can't get re-elected. This is gonna be a coal fired furnace for Trump to stoke with impunity. School districts aren't even going to put the issue on their card until the next President gets in with the hope that they don't even have to ask for the money.
That's all that's gonna happen, Dems choke themselves out of the election.".As far as I can see, you have made a very sudden change of subject. I am still trying to understand what is wrong with a complete overhaul being required to create unisex bathrooms in most schools.
I'm kinda done with the thread, I made my points as far as I am interested and moving on to greener pastures.
I can agree to disagree, life moves on.
Sapiens
Polymathematician
The "overhaul" is not that big a deal, and will have the added benefit of reducing the isolation from supervision of the bathrooms ("smokin' in the boy's room" even made it into song, most of the fights I got into in school were in the bathroom or under the bleachers). You replace the stalls with drywall stick construction, you make the urinals into stalls and later change them to toilets, you remove the hall doors (and maybe the wall that the hall door is in. All facilities (except for the urinals) become coed.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
And this is what I grew up with in Sweden. We had unisex bathrooms in all schools I went to from kindergarten to college.
The only problem we had was that the rooms got vandalized. Drawings and carvings on the walls, broken toilets, and such. But that's no different to the shared stalls here in the US now anyway. Same difference, as they say.
That attitudes established for I dunno, hundreds of years, is being abruptly confronted and forced to deal with something that doesn't seem entirely well thought through. The idea that this won't lead to any problems along the way, during the transition, and will be great for everyone before (or around right now) during (when seemingly all officials are on board) and after (when dust settles and we are back to our usual discriminatory behaviors).
None of this means it is inherently wrong to seek an overhaul, but just to realize that it would greatly impact a whole bunch of people's beliefs on the way things have always been. Part of that is discriminatory stuff that is hard to justify, even if it is knowingly well ingrained. But another part of that is seemingly ignoring the idea that kids can be cruel, that in some instances it is seemingly okay grounds for being popular if you are cruel (in the right way) and that this can all be downplayed during the transition given the ultimate destination. Instead, all those who have issues during the transition and are uncomfortable, tough luck is what I get at times. While all those who might face typical discrimination of the well ingrained type will be propped up as "see what we have to deal with! Look at how much of victims we are!" I honestly think that would be placed higher as cause of concern going forward than the typical cruel discrimination that kids display because the latter would likely be shunned by parents of those kids, thus not seen as 'ingrained.' More like troubled kid that didn't know any better.
So parents, as noted in OP are being asked to be comfortable with something that at least appears like it could be troublesome going forward.
I honestly don't think for guys/boys this will be a big deal. For women/girls, I think at times it will be a very big deal. I think in the long run it could be a big deal for guys because guys are used to being gross in a restroom, or we (possibly) tolerate it more in a restroom. After the dust has settled, I'm thinking guys are going to be a whole lot different in restrooms than they are now, which is a good thing (I think). But how long it takes us to get there, and have guys not being so pig-headed is anyone's guess. I'd love the idea of it happening in days or a few weeks. I could see it possibly taking another 1000 years for it to play out until we've finally got rid of the pig-headed qualities in human society.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
It doesn't happen like that, so you have nothing to be concerned about. If they have a "gender of the month," they do not have gender dysphoria, they will not have any support or clearance for a transition, there will be no going back and forth from one restroom to the other.
Actually, if a female does transition to male, he does use the men's restroom and lockerroom. Men who transition to women do use the women's restroom and lockerroom. And what dignity and privacy is being violated? It's not like a transsexual is going in to take a peek and be a perv about it. And, we've already had, to an extend, this discussion with homosexuals. But more and more people are realizing it's just not an issue.
No it's not. Federal law prohibits discrimination against sex, and what North Carolina has done is discriminate against sex. The Justice Department and federal appeals court has also ruled the law does discriminate against sex.
And you shouldn't be deciding what rights we may be blessed with or denied. No one should. We should just have them, equally, for all people. If something is a non-issue, and made into an issue only by those who want to turn into an issue, no one should be deciding if a group should be bestowed with rights or denied them because they should just have them.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
I'm kinda done with the thread, I made my points as far as I am interested and moving on to greener pastures.
I accept your surrender.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
In other words, it will be better than what we have and we will have to deal with other issues when they appear.
More like tired of arguments with lack of development to the final conclusion, but whatever keeps you happy.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
More like tired of arguments with lack of development to the final conclusion, but whatever keeps you happy.
My post was a request for explanation. Not an argument.
This isn't a law that's being made and I'm tired of the fear-mongering over it. It's pretty ridiculous and transphobic.
What happened was that the Justice Department and the Department of Education issued a letter to public schools not to discriminate against trans students, or they're at risk of losing federal funding. There is no law being made, unlike with that ridiculous, unconstitutional transphobic and homophobic North Carolina law, which struck down anti-discrimination ordinances for LGBT people and prevented new anti-discrimination ordinances from being passed! Where's the fear-mongering over that? It's horrible when the Justice Department, which is supposed to protect our civil rights and the Department of Education, which oversees public schools and has a stake in providing a safe environment for students, just issue a letter clarifying the federal government's stance on this issue?! Get your facts and your priorities straight, people! Otherwise you're saying it's okay to force laws through based on hatred and bigotry and strip protections from groups, but it's horrible when the government tells taxpayer-funded schools not to discriminate? Um, trans people pay taxes, too. We have a right to equal access to public facilities.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/12/politics/transgender-bathrooms-obama-administration/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathroom_bill
What happened was that the Justice Department and the Department of Education issued a letter to public schools not to discriminate against trans students, or they're at risk of losing federal funding. There is no law being made, unlike with that ridiculous, unconstitutional transphobic and homophobic North Carolina law, which struck down anti-discrimination ordinances for LGBT people and prevented new anti-discrimination ordinances from being passed! Where's the fear-mongering over that? It's horrible when the Justice Department, which is supposed to protect our civil rights and the Department of Education, which oversees public schools and has a stake in providing a safe environment for students, just issue a letter clarifying the federal government's stance on this issue?! Get your facts and your priorities straight, people! Otherwise you're saying it's okay to force laws through based on hatred and bigotry and strip protections from groups, but it's horrible when the government tells taxpayer-funded schools not to discriminate? Um, trans people pay taxes, too. We have a right to equal access to public facilities.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/12/politics/transgender-bathrooms-obama-administration/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathroom_bill
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
No ****. A minority group being run over by the tyranny of the masses and partisan politic bull**** is just fine and dandy to some, but how dare anyone point out that it is in violation of the law. Heaven forbid the government be used to fix a wrong, and telling a lesser part of itself it has to bestow rights to a group that causes no harm because they are violating the laws that are legally bestowed upon it.
And not too mention it's also making school about political agendas rather than learning. We are a culture built upon diversity, we believe everyone is equal under the law, we like to say we value individuality, it's about time we start acting like it.
Brian Schuh
Well-Known Member
I read a book called "Testosterone." In it was a story of a "man" who went to a hospital and came out a woman, shocking the world in the 1950's. Then she married her black butler, shocking the world with her biracial marriage. Then shocked the world again when she got pregnant. Come to find out she had a rare enzyme disorder causing her genitalia to look like a man's.
This isn't just about transgenders, but hermaphodites, tum tums (another kind of person with unspecified gender from birth) and even others.
Most babies born with unspecified gender get "fixed" before they can decide for themselves, sometimes it is obvious a mistake was made.
This minority has the same equal rights as the vast majority, and their feelings are equally important as your daughter's.
This isn't just about transgenders, but hermaphodites, tum tums (another kind of person with unspecified gender from birth) and even others.
Most babies born with unspecified gender get "fixed" before they can decide for themselves, sometimes it is obvious a mistake was made.
This minority has the same equal rights as the vast majority, and their feelings are equally important as your daughter's.
How did you come to the conclusion that it was unconstitutional?
Are you just saying to make arguments sound credible. Why don't you start all over and prove to all of us how it was unconstitutional then we can continue on your subsequent points.