Switch Theme:

Rumblings of Moving the Superbowl from Houston after equal rights measure overturned  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

Of course, the idea of sexually segregated changing rooms is a social construct.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Nottinghamshire

 Spinner wrote:
I'm kinda curious as to why sharing a restroom with someone automatically seems to indicate that you'll see their genitals. How are they supposedly laid out? There's stalls, right? Like, with doors? People don't just walk in and drop their pants in front of everyone, right?

...have I been doing it wrong this entire time?
I spent my childhood going to swimming classes and races, and school ages 5-18 doing gym, and I could probably count the amount of genital encounters on one hand.
Most of those would be when parents let their little babies run around naked, which is another matter entirely, and only really bugs me in case they pee on things.
Nobody is going to pretend to be something they aren't to see some towel wrapped wobbly bits of either variety. The entire concept is farcical.

I can see this being used as a stick to beat the LGBT community, and it deeply saddens me.


[ Mordian 183rd ] - an ongoing Imperial Guard story with crayon drawings!
[ "I can't believe it's not Dakka!" ] - a buttery painting and crafting blog
 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

A lot of people do object to shared changing rooms. It is currently a social norm to have separate changing rooms.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in nz
Heroic Senior Officer




New Zealand

 Peregrine wrote:
 Swastakowey wrote:
After watching interviews and documentaries on criminals etc it's clear people who publicly flash or stalk and so on usually do it for the thrill that cannot be sated through mere images. Without trying to sound like one of them... this makes sense to me. If all they wanted was to see boobs then yes they could look on the net. Kind of like thrill seekers but perverted in a way.


And if someone is in a locker room flashing people, regardless of their sex/gender relative to what sign is on the door, you can do something about that. So what you really mean is that someone could be in there discreetly looking at people they find sexually appealing, while trying not to get noticed and get kicked out. And I fail to see how this is a reasonable objection. After all, gay people exist and are allowed to share locker rooms with their preferred gender.


I was just contesting the fact that nobody would do such a thing given the consequences.

Nowhere did I object.

I do however think restrooms and so on should be segregated by sex. Especially when teens are involved. Unisex bathrooms with stalls would have been great for my mates and I with our Gfs back in the day. They would need to be monitored unless parents are comfortable giving their teens more chances for happy fun time.

Changing rooms however have groups of people and aren't as much of a problem.
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus





 Frazzled wrote:
 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The superbowl SHOULD move from the bigoted city.
Your Daughters are not gonna get attacked by a guy in the shower. Get over yourself. This is about equality, not creeps.
.


How many homosexual mayors were elected in the hole you call a state again? Hating an entire region? How enlightened you are.


You gotta admit Fraz, Texas is taking over Florida's spot in the headlines lately.

3000
4000 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Swastakowey wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
 Swastakowey wrote:
After watching interviews and documentaries on criminals etc it's clear people who publicly flash or stalk and so on usually do it for the thrill that cannot be sated through mere images. Without trying to sound like one of them... this makes sense to me. If all they wanted was to see boobs then yes they could look on the net. Kind of like thrill seekers but perverted in a way.


And if someone is in a locker room flashing people, regardless of their sex/gender relative to what sign is on the door, you can do something about that. So what you really mean is that someone could be in there discreetly looking at people they find sexually appealing, while trying not to get noticed and get kicked out. And I fail to see how this is a reasonable objection. After all, gay people exist and are allowed to share locker rooms with their preferred gender.


I was just contesting the fact that nobody would do such a thing given the consequences.

Nowhere did I object.

I do however think restrooms and so on should be segregated by sex. Especially when teens are involved. Unisex bathrooms with stalls would have been great for my mates and I with our Gfs back in the day. They would need to be monitored unless parents are comfortable giving their teens more chances for happy fun time.

Changing rooms however have groups of people and aren't as much of a problem.


If you think simply not having the same changing rooms is providing any sort of non-trivial barrier to teenagers fething each other you don't remember being a teenager very well. Not to mention we have sex segregated bathrooms already and people feth in the those anyway.
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Peregrine wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
I think you missed theo whole point of the objection. Women objecting to being around men in a locker room situation.


No, I get the point. It's just a ridiculous point.


Says a guy.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Chongara wrote:
If you think simply not having the same changing rooms is providing any sort of non-trivial barrier to teenagers fething each other you don't remember being a teenager very well. Not to mention we have sex segregated bathrooms already and people feth in the those anyway.


And really, a public bathroom is pretty close to the bottom of the list of places where I'd want to have sex with someone. It might be private, but it's also disgusting.

(Then there's the question of why it's so important to prevent teenagers from having sex in the first place.)

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Of course, the idea of sexually segregated changing rooms is a social construct.


Everything outside of pure math is a social construct.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in nz
Heroic Senior Officer




New Zealand

 Chongara wrote:
 Swastakowey wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
 Swastakowey wrote:
After watching interviews and documentaries on criminals etc it's clear people who publicly flash or stalk and so on usually do it for the thrill that cannot be sated through mere images. Without trying to sound like one of them... this makes sense to me. If all they wanted was to see boobs then yes they could look on the net. Kind of like thrill seekers but perverted in a way.


And if someone is in a locker room flashing people, regardless of their sex/gender relative to what sign is on the door, you can do something about that. So what you really mean is that someone could be in there discreetly looking at people they find sexually appealing, while trying not to get noticed and get kicked out. And I fail to see how this is a reasonable objection. After all, gay people exist and are allowed to share locker rooms with their preferred gender.


I was just contesting the fact that nobody would do such a thing given the consequences.

Nowhere did I object.

I do however think restrooms and so on should be segregated by sex. Especially when teens are involved. Unisex bathrooms with stalls would have been great for my mates and I with our Gfs back in the day. They would need to be monitored unless parents are comfortable giving their teens more chances for happy fun time.

Changing rooms however have groups of people and aren't as much of a problem.


If you think simply not having the same changing rooms is providing any sort of non-trivial barrier to teenagers fething each other you don't remember being a teenager very well. Not to mention we have sex segregated bathrooms already and people feth in the those anyway.


Most schools have cameras today (I was a teenager merely 3 years ago), If I went into the same bathroom as the other sex it would have been noticed, outside of school well it entirely depends on the location.

As I said, changing rooms are obviously a different matter since everyone is in a group. But I think there is some legitimate concern especially in schools for sex segregated toilets etc.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Sheffield, City of University and Northern-ness

So, just as a quick question; Would you be cool with this person using a girls locker room then? Because they're biologically female.
Spoiler:



Ooh! or how about this person?

Spoiler:

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/05 20:53:03


   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
 Spinner wrote:
I'm kinda curious as to why sharing a restroom with someone automatically seems to indicate that you'll see their genitals. How are they supposedly laid out? There's stalls, right? Like, with doors? People don't just walk in and drop their pants in front of everyone, right?

...have I been doing it wrong this entire time?
I spent my childhood going to swimming classes and races, and school ages 5-18 doing gym, and I could probably count the amount of genital encounters on one hand.
Most of those would be when parents let their little babies run around naked, which is another matter entirely, and only really bugs me in case they pee on things.
Nobody is going to pretend to be something they aren't to see some towel wrapped wobbly bits of either variety. The entire concept is farcical.

I can see this being used as a stick to beat the LGBT community, and it deeply saddens me.


I don't see it impacting the LGB community at all, except insuring the rights of the L and half the B portion are respected.
Why make private businesses and organizations legally liable unless you want to sue them for something?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
A lot of people do object to shared changing rooms. It is currently a social norm to have separate changing rooms.


Separate rooms and showers. That could be ameliorated over time with changing physical facilities, but why make it a legal liability? Where is the respect for women here?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 WrentheFaceless wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The superbowl SHOULD move from the bigoted city.
Your Daughters are not gonna get attacked by a guy in the shower. Get over yourself. This is about equality, not creeps.
.


How many homosexual mayors were elected in the hole you call a state again? Hating an entire region? How enlightened you are.


You gotta admit Fraz, Texas is taking over Florida's spot in the headlines lately.


Again, when NYC elects a lesbian mayor they can talk. until then they can get off their high horse.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/05 20:53:18


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Swastakowey wrote:
But I think there is some legitimate concern especially in schools for sex segregated toilets etc.


But, again, the premise of this argument is that schools/governments/whatever have an obligation to prevent teenagers from having sex. And not just an obligation, but one that is significant enough that it takes priority over respecting the chosen gender identity of transgender people. Why is this? Why, assuming that everyone involved consents to the sex, do we have any obligation to stop them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Frazzled wrote:
Separate rooms and showers. That could be ameliorated over time with changing physical facilities, but why make it a legal liability? Where is the respect for women here?


You know, it's interesting that you ask this but don't think to ask where the respect for men is. Why is it assumed that mixed-gender bathrooms/locker rooms/whatever are disrespectful to women but not to men?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/05 20:54:43


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Frazzled wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
Of course, the idea of sexually segregated changing rooms is a social construct.


Everything outside of pure math is a social construct.


Well no. I'll starve to death if I don't eat. I require food and water that's a real thing that isn't math. You can describe some of it in mathematical terms. On the gender front that men on average are taller than women on average isn't a social construct it's an observable trend. Poop, smelling bad and being something people generally want to avoid is not a social construct but a pretty universal survival adaptation. Babies being cute also not a social construct.

Lots of things are social constructs however certainly not every aspect of daily existence. We take for granted that fire is hot and burns you not because we've decided as a collective that fire is and hurt burns you but because if you catch on fire it burns you and it's hot.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/11/05 20:57:14


 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

You'll starve to death because you're burning more energy than taking in. thats math.

"Everything's math! Even the mathematical perfection of canines! Even Malfred's fascination with other people's socks!"
-Frazzled, dad of a future Math PhD.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/05 20:58:21


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Frazzled wrote:
You'll starve to death because you're burning more energy than taking in. thats math.

"Everything's math! Even the mathematical perfection of canines! Even Malfred's fascination with other people's socks!"
-Frazzled, dad of a future Math PhD.


It's something that described with math it's... oh why even bother.

Something Something, something weiner dog joke. That about sum it up?
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Sheffield, City of University and Northern-ness

Chongara wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
You'll starve to death because you're burning more energy than taking in. thats math.

"Everything's math! Even the mathematical perfection of canines! Even Malfred's fascination with other people's socks!"
-Frazzled, dad of a future Math PhD.


It's something that described with math it's... oh why even bother.

Something Something, something weiner dog joke. That about sum it up?
Dont forget, he needs to refer to someone as 'boyo' and make a comment about how his son would find something trivial. (Though it appears that that's already happened)

Frazzled wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
Of course, the idea of sexually segregated changing rooms is a social construct.


Everything outside of pure math is a social construct.


Jesus Christ, you've actually turned into Peter Wiggin.

   
Made in gb
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





South Wales

He doesn't have an insanely uneducated fear of ebola yet.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Sheffield, City of University and Northern-ness

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, when NYC elects a lesbian mayor they can talk. until then they can get off their high horse.
You realise that this argument is basically the equivalent of 'we're not racist, we have a black friend' right? If you replace 'black' with 'gay' and 'friend' with 'mayor', and 'racist' with 'acting like donkey-caves'.

   
Made in us
[DCM]
.







So that's that then.
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: