Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

nkelsch wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
This isn't comparable to racial segregation, stop trying to make it so. Its not anywhere close to the same level.

Too bad the courts disagree with you and a majority of states have already resolved the issue by protecting the minority instead of marginalizing them. In this story, this particular state is behind the times... sounds like time for another supreme court decision for states which can't handle being part of civilized society to have a federal ruling to force them in line.

And nothing bad has happened and no one is upset about it... except bigots.

Because everyone knows that the Federal Government is always correct.

The teenage girls who have to share a bathroom with a guy with a penis are bigots? Interesting.

 Grey Templar wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
This isn't comparable to racial segregation, stop trying to make it so. Its not anywhere close to the same level.

Too bad the courts disagree with you and a majority of states have already resolved the issue by protecting the minority instead of marginalizing them. In this story, this particular state is behind the times... sounds like time for another supreme court decision for states which can't handle being part of civilized society to have a federal ruling to force them in line.

And nothing bad has happened and no one is upset about it... except bigots.

You just love to assume everyone who opposes you is a bigot. Just lets you shut down the argument. Likely because you are afraid you'll have to make some concessions.

Indeed, I'm the same. thats why, if I start to lose an argument I just throw a wiener dog at them.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:


As well there's an issue of what could be considered a form of segregation--"You say you're not a boy, but you're not a girl either so go shuffle off to this 'private' bathroom".

We already segregate by gender, creating a third gender shouldn't make some more equal than others. Declaring myself a potato shouldn't allow me to change in the kitchen in addition to either lockeroom.

That depends on if you look and act like a potato doesn't it?



/jk

 easysauce wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:


As well there's an issue of what could be considered a form of segregation--"You say you're not a boy, but you're not a girl either so go shuffle off to this 'private' bathroom".

We already segregate by gender, creating a third gender shouldn't make some more equal than others. Declaring myself a potato shouldn't allow me to change in the kitchen in addition to either lockeroom.

That depends on if you look and act like a potato doesn't it?



/jk

I'm halfway there lol

 Frazzled wrote:
wiener dog

I think there is a joke in there somewhere.

So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

It appears you have two options:
1. Deal with it.
2. Deal with it and be a bigot.

The choice is yours.

Or, say boys stay in the boys room and girls stay in the girls room. People that got a problem with that can deal with it.

If I'm a bigot for saying that I am ok with that.

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

You're just a neanderthal bigot!

 Lt. Coldfire wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

It appears you have two options:
1. Deal with it.
2. Deal with it and be a bigot.

The choice is yours.

I fail to see how exposing my child to opposite sex genitalia before I, as a parent, decide that it is appropriate makes me a bigot but, ok, if you feel that way.

I get to decide if my child participates in school sponsored sex-ed classes but somehow my right as a parent to limit exposure of the male anatomy in front of my child evaporates. I care not one iota how this child identifies; to me, as a parent, the child has male genitalia, full stop. I don't care if it has nothing to do with sex or sensuality or anything else someone can think up, the simple fact is that I don't want my daughter in the same room as an exposed penis, in the school no less.

 Lt. Coldfire wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

It appears you have two options:
1. Deal with it.
2. Deal with it and be a bigot.

The choice is yours.

Option 3. The girls go on strike and take no showers, thus turning the school into the hell of smelly girl armpits. Think it won't happen? Thats what they said about Mussolini.

 agnosto wrote:

 Lt. Coldfire wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

It appears you have two options:
1. Deal with it.
2. Deal with it and be a bigot.

The choice is yours.

I fail to see how exposing my child to opposite sex genitalia before I, as a parent, decide that it is appropriate makes me a bigot but, ok, if you feel that way.

I don't. You're totally crapping on my joke here, but I forgive you.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Lt. Coldfire wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

It appears you have two options:
1. Deal with it.
2. Deal with it and be a bigot.

The choice is yours.

Option 3. The girls go on strike and take no showers, thus turning the school into the hell of smelly girl armpits. Think it won't happen? Thats what they said about Mussolini.

lol. An army of unshave, unkempt females; foul humored from being in said condition is one hell that I care not to visit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lt. Coldfire wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Lt. Coldfire wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

It appears you have two options:
1. Deal with it.
2. Deal with it and be a bigot.

The choice is yours.

I fail to see how exposing my child to opposite sex genitalia before I, as a parent, decide that it is appropriate makes me a bigot but, ok, if you feel that way.

I don't. You're totally crapping on my joke here, but I forgive you.

Yeah, sorry, whole thing just struck me the wrong way.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Or, say boys stay in the boys room and girls stay in the girls room. People that got a problem with that can deal with it.

If I'm a bigot for saying that I am ok with that.

I think we're all okay with that. What's an issue is determining who is a boy, and who is a girl. An issue that is incredibly straight forward until you make the slightest bit of effort to look into it, and then it gets... complex. Particularly in a society that is increasingly aware of gender alignment being detached from physical manifestation.

How about we draw the line at the physical manifestation? That will cover 99.9999999999999% of situations.

lol. An army of unshave, unkempt females; foul humored from being in said condition is one hell that I care not to visit.

Indeed. Hellraiser has nothing on that. GC smells like a horse when she comes back from a competition. NO thanks

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

As I'm sure you know, being a man yourself, you might have less say on when you're daughter's are exposed than you might desire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
How about we draw the line at the physical manifestation? That will cover 99.9999999999999% of situations.

What about people that are legally one gender, with the physical manifestations of another? If their driver's license says female, but they still have a penis, do they have to use the men's room?

 Polonius wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

As I'm sure you know, being a man yourself, you might have less say on when you're daughter's are exposed than you might desire.

While that's true, at least it's going to happen on her terms. And, probably, not in the locker room with a total stranger.

 Polonius wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

As I'm sure you know, being a man yourself, you might have less say on when you're daughter's are exposed than you might desire.

Possibly, but ultimately I hope that it is her choice when she's ready and it's not school sponsored/endorsed/condoned/enforced when she's not.

Edit:
This is like the government and school saying, "We've decided it's high time your daughters saw an actual penis and we don't care if you disagree."

 agnosto wrote:
So, basically, as a parent of a daughter who doesn't want his little girl exposed to physical manifestations of male genitalia at X age, I have no say in what happens. The student with boy parts gets to saunter through the changing/bathroom with his/her boy parts swinging in the breeze in the presence of my underage daughter. Yay, progress is so great. :(

I dont know about you but I think I went through my entire time at school without exposing my junk when changing for sports/other things where you have to change. Or indeed seeing other people's Most English Parts. Even swimming

Working with (often vulnerable) men and women (I don't think I have seen any alternative gender identities), and having to see and interact with them, often in various states of undress, I understand the hang ups some people have about their personal space and how people of the same and other genders interact with it; it is natural to have reservations.

The point being that "physical sex" and gender identity can be extremely different in all sorts of ways; sexuality also rears its head.

Ultimately facilities should be gender appropriate; the gender that a person feels to be, and/or facilities should be appropriate to match the privicy requirements of the people who use them. One can mix genders and sexualities in facilities that offer appropriate privicy.

A coming together of all the genders and sexualities promotes understanding.

 agnosto wrote:

Possibly, but ultimately I hope that it is her choice when she's ready and it's not school sponsored/endorsed/condoned/enforced when she's not.

Edit:
This is like the government and school saying, "We've decided it's high time your daughters saw and actual penis and we don't care if you disagree."

I think that's the best argument to be made here. I'm really not certain this is a question of harm as much as it is one of control (I mean, how is anybody hurt by seeing genitals?), but I think you can make the argument that this does cross some sort of line. I'd buy it.

 Polonius wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
How about we draw the line at the physical manifestation? That will cover 99.9999999999999% of situations.

What about people that are legally one gender, with the physical manifestations of another? If their driver's license says female, but they still have a penis, do they have to use the men's room?

Well, I think that we probably shouldn't have that situation in the first place. You should only be legally a female once you have an actual vagina.

Of course I think gender reconstruction should only be for people who are unfortunate enough to be born with screwed up reproductive organs. Not for people who think they're the opposite gender, but have the blessing of a perfectly healthy and normal body. It would be better to get psychological counseling to accept that you are in fact a man/women and not a women/man. I also think plastic surgery should be reserved for people who have their bodies destroyed in accidents or are disfigured in some way.

If people are running through the restroom with their genitals hanging out you have bigger problems then what those genitals actually are.

 d-usa wrote:
If people are running through the restroom with their genitals hanging out you have bigger problems then what those genitals actually are.

I don't think rest rooms (where you piss or take a dump) are really the problem... but, how open most locker rooms tend to be:

And the story is about a restroom as she already dropped gym.

I know many places have the bathroom and locker room being the same thing.

nkelsch wrote:

And nothing bad has happened and no one is upset about it... except bigots.

You're throwing that word around far too much here.

I don't think it's unreasonable that high school students would be uncomfortable changing and showering with someone of a different biological gender. Doesn't make them bigots.

This is like the government and school saying, "We've decided it's high time your daughters saw and actual penis and we don't care if you disagree."

true that.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Well, I think that we probably shouldn't have that situation in the first place. You should only be legally a female once you have an actual vagina.

Of course I think gender reconstruction should only be for people who are unfortunate enough to be born with screwed up reproductive organs. Not for people who think they're the opposite gender, but have the blessing of a perfectly healthy and normal body. It would be better to get psychological counseling to accept that you are in fact a man/women and not a women/man. I also think plastic surgery should be reserved for people who have their bodies destroyed in accidents or are disfigured in some way.

I am extremely glad that you have no power over healthcare and represent a steadily declining section of society. Speaking as a healthcare professional. And a human being.

Edit: quotes

 d-usa wrote:
If people are running through the restroom with their genitals hanging out you have bigger problems then what those genitals actually are.

Locker room. Bathrooms are too small to run in. You'll hit the wall.