(23-02-2017 18:11 )munch1917 Wrote: If there is an issue with someone with 'male parts' entering a female bathroom, what about the situation with a post-op female?
One of the original cases that triggered this off was a state attempting to 'force' people to use the bathroom according to the sex of their birth, so a post-op female, must use a female bathroom, despite now having male genitalia. Apparently the same 'awkward' paradox!
As for using the disabled toilets as an alternative, frankly, that is no better than having people of colour use a different restroom to the whites, or sit at the back of the bus! It was precisely to avoid this kind of fucked up, neanderthal thinking and treat people as equal human beings that this ruling was brought in.
The stance of the Obama administration on this issue was a great step forward for the transgender community not just in the US, but it sent a message across the world, and was particularly significant for the young trans community that is was directed at, who are even more vulnerable.
In a stroke, that forward step has been taken away, and the trans youth of america must be made to feel less safe, somehow 'different, maybe 'wrong', and that is something that will affect them for the rest of their lives.
Another victory for prejudice, but hopefully just a temporary one.
I'll reply to Skully when I have had time to read it all.
Sex of the birth is not what we are talking about here, the article I posted was about
identity. You may or may not have had GRS you just have to identify yourself with a certain gender.
It's pretty clear I am talking about pre op, where they ARE physiological and genetically males, dispite what they themselevs feel. Post op they are females, full out no arguments and laws prohibiting transgender females entering a toilet (if there actually could be) would be wholey wrong. That said, transgender people can actually be lesbians, but the usual law of the land would apply to any unlawful issues arising from that the same has any woman.
The rest of your post was just rose tinted Obama glasses and ABC text book pcism that doesn't allow for the full complexity of the situation, nor the objections that some women have.
Males genitals to a lot of women (unless it's on whoever they have an interest in) are very threatening things. Woman aren't like men that want to look at mens bits and pieces all the time. Yes, they will be in cubicals, but woman will also know that such situations can be abuse. They will not want to freshen up, change cloths, have a piss with what they percieve as being a male (new years eve not allowing) in the same room as them. It's not just from the TG point of view, it's from both points of view, poeple like to dismiss the other side as irrelavant prejudice. There's a difference between being hateful prejudice and merely having difficulty in understanding; why would a male find Lisa snowden or Kelly Brook sexually unattractive for example?
You people also seem to think what toilet somebody uses will get rid of predjudice against TG. In the grand scheme of things that will be pretty much irrelavant, most of it will not come from there. It is not much more than an issue that can be pounced on, not unlike women who get the tits out here there and every where to feed their kids when there IS alternatives just to prove a point.
I'd like to bet right here, right now, that if any of you men that's feigning understanding and outrage at the prejudce that if some bloke came a chatting you up you would feel extremely uncomfortable, if you picked a woman up, took her home and found out she had meat and two veg, you would all flip your lids and kick her out the door in one. Some of the comments on the lady boy thread have been boarderline.
Real Ecstasy
Erotic Bliss
Hot & Wet
Live Sex Latinas
True Eros
Babestation
Search
Member List
Help
