Would you sue a transgender person for using the bathroom?

[Revoltingest]

Virgina Republican Bob Marshall has proposed a new bill HB 1612 that is much like the N.Carolina bill HB 2. The proposed Virginian bill would make it illegal for any person to use a bathroom that does not correlate to the gender listed on their birth certificate. But the bill also specifically allows you to sue any individual who does so.

I find this typical of Republicans, delicate little flower who want to sue over the potential of having their delicate little feelings hurt by the mere encounter with anyone that is in anyway different. I find it difficult to express just how disgusting I think this is.

https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?171+ful+HB1612

They can already be sued for using the bathroom....right or wrong....for any reason.
There are no restrictions upon filing suit.
Proving damages would be difficult though.

I don't even monitor who uses my bathrooms unless another tenant complains it's being monopolized for too long.

 

[Curious George]

They can already be sued for using the bathroom....right or wrong....for any reason.
There are no restrictions upon filing suit.
Proving damages would be difficult though.

Methinks he was pointing out that the law is creating a legal cause of action. I suppose one could sue under some other cause of action but it would most likely be dismissed.

 

[fantome profane]

They can already be sued for using the bathroom....right or wrong....for any reason.
There are no restrictions upon filing suit.
Proving damages would be difficult though.

I don't even monitor who uses my bathrooms unless another tenant complains it's being monopolized for too long.

That is a good point, and I was wondering when someone would make it.

So if this was always the case why specifically add it to the bill? I think obviously it was done for to score political points.

But I am also worried that if this bill passes (it has not yet) this particular clause could end up doing two things. It could encourage people to sue over this silliness and it could influence the outcome of a civil case (and not in a good way).

 

[Scott C.]

People are taught to be ashamed of their bodies and their sexuality. Nude beaches and colonies are a perfect example of how human beings can coexist without little to no form of perversion. Sure, there's always going to be a bad apple. Anyhows, these folks unlearned their biases to be able perceive each other normally in their birthday suits.

What you're claiming is just what you've been taught. Again, is there really a logic or rationale behind it other than traditional thinking?

My faith teaches that the human body is beautiful and to be celebrated. It's part of our doctrine that we will have a physical body for eternity. No body shaming in my religion. We even believe that God has a physical body. I'm probably on fairly safe ground to say that Mormons celebrate the human body more than most faiths. The idea that God wants us to be clothed comes from the Bible, which I believe. That has nothing to do with body shaming.

 

[suncowiam]

My faith teaches that the human body is beautiful and to be celebrated. It's part of our doctrine that we will have a physical body for eternity. No body shaming in my religion. We even believe that God has a physical body. I'm probably on fairly safe ground to say that Mormons celebrate the human body more than most faiths. The idea that God wants us to be clothed comes from the Bible, which I believe. That has nothing to do with body shaming.

Let me rephrase it. Men and woman coexist just fine at nude beaches and colonies, more so concerning the seasoned nudists.

 

[psychoslice]

No I wouldn't sue, these people have enough problems already.

 

[psychoslice]

Only the beautiful, passable ones should be welcome. The ugly, 300 pound trans "women" can stay the hell out.

Does that include the 300 pound heterosexual woman ?.

 

[Revoltingest]

Methinks he was pointing out that the law is creating a legal cause of action. I suppose one could sue under some other cause of action but it would most likely be dismissed.

Depends upon the judge.
All that's needed is a dispute of fact.
Actual loss would be determined in court.
This is why frivolous suits are so dangerous.

 

[Revoltingest]

That is a good point, and I was wondering when someone would make it.

So if this was always the case why specifically add it to the bill? I think obviously it was done for to score political points.

But I am also worried that if this bill passes (it has not yet) this particular clause could end up doing two things. It could encourage people to sue over this silliness and it could influence the outcome of a civil case (and not in a good way).

That seems a reasonable assessment.
I'll add that since birth certs are never required for bathroom usage,
suits would be rare...a kind of bizarro world inverse lottery...with
terrible consequences when it happens.

 

[Willamena]

Virgina Republican Bob Marshall has proposed a new bill HB 1612 that is much like the N.Carolina bill HB 2. The proposed Virginian bill would make it illegal for any person to use a bathroom that does not correlate to the gender listed on their birth certificate. But the bill also specifically allows you to sue any individual who does so.

I find this typical of Republicans, delicate little flower who want to sue over the potential of having their delicate little feelings hurt by the mere encounter with anyone that is in anyway different. I find it difficult to express just how disgusting I think this is.

https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?171+ful+HB1612

What is the basis for the suit? *baffled*

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sex is chromosomes, you don't get to pick that.

It's not that simple. An XY woman may, hypothetically and possibly never learn of her chromosomes. Sometimes men are born, visually as men, and they themselves identify as men, though they have an extra X chromosome. We have sex-chromosomes, but the freshman biology of XY=male/XX=female doesn't reflect how complicated the subject actually is.

The discomfort with blacks was based I suppose on thinking one race was superior, or cleaner, or more decent than the other.

Oh well. Tough titties. Who care's about such sentiments? We said damn such feelings decades ago, and it's time we do it again.

Not picking on the Muslim religion but more readily presented. Would a devote Muslim male accept a female into a public restroom with him. This issue could be applied to many different upbringings, religious beliefs, or hostility.

Oddly, truly remarkably, Muslim nations tend to be more accepting and tolerant of transgender people than America. Iran, for example, performs more sex-change operations (for not exactly the right reasons) than every other nation save for Thailand. Today it averts the "gay issue" for them, but even traditionally such people had roles in society and they weren't really demonized the way we are today.

 

[columbus]

Do you believe our individual discomforts should override the rights of another?

Isn't that what this is all about? People's individual discomforts are the whole point. Trans people want to use the restroom that they prefer, it isn't like they are being prevented from using one at all. Other people feel unsafe with a "man" in the bathroom with them. The whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. If everyone just minded their own business there wouldn't be a problem at all.
Tom

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Obviously, I wouldn't sue, but if sued, I'd counter sue and shamelessly pull absolutely every last card I can (including playing being a "medically frail" patient to my advantage) to roast some people.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Isn't that what this is all about? People's individual discomforts are the whole point. Trans people want to use the restroom that they prefer, it isn't like they are being prevented from using one at all. Other people feel unsafe with a "man" in the bathroom with them. The whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. If everyone just minded their own business there wouldn't be a problem at all.
Tom

Because people do pretty much always mind their own business, there usually isn't a problem, not until some Christian gets upset and thinks without punishing the sinners and putting them in their place that the entire world is going to crumble and end and fall into massive orgies, widespread atheism, and Christians being butchered like they used to butcher witches. (I wish that was over exaggerated, but for some of the more Conservative-inclined, it isn't)

 

[Neo Deist]

If a "woman turned man" came into the bathroom while I was taking a leak and glanced over to "compare" ...he/she would probably revert back and ask for my number.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If someone had sex reassignment surgery, I don't have a problem with them using the restroom that matches their current gender.

Not all of us want it and not all of us can even afford it if we did want it. Everyone just needs to mind their own business, case closed. My genitals are really none of your business.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If a "woman turned man" came into the bathroom while I was taking a leak and glanced over to "compare" ...he/she would probably revert back and ask for my number.

Or not. And it's he, not "he/she". By the way, this post makes you sound gay or bi. That's cool if you are, but you make it sound creepy.

 

[Neo Deist]

Or not. And it's he, not "he/she".

Lighten up cupcake. At least I did not say "it."

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Lighten up cupcake. At least I did not say "it."

Get a clue.

 

[Neo Deist]

Get a clue.

The irony of that statement when talking about transgenders...