PayPal bails on North Carolina

[homersapien 11,373]

Why would a sexual predator pick a woman's bathroom for a sexual assault in the first place? I fail to see how letting transgenders use the bathroom of their choice is going to result in more sexual attacks.

You cannot be serious. Good Lord, don't be so committed to open-mindedness that your brain falls out.

Why do predators place hidden cameras in women's dressing rooms, restrooms and locker rooms? Why don't peeping toms just hang out across the street and watch women walk to the mailbox? Because restrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms and such are where women are semi-naked to naked. The peeping tom isn't watching his target watch TV or cook dinner, he's looking in her bedroom while she's getting dressed.

You are granting them legal cover. That you fail to see this astounds me. Of course we have laws against assault. But anyone knows that you don't do things to make it easier for them to gain access to targets.

How does this grant anyone legal cover? If someone dresses up like a woman and goes into a restroom and starts peering over the stalls - or something similar - claiming to be a transgender has no relevance. Heck, if she really is a transgender, she has no legal excuse to spy on other women, much less lay a hand on them.

This "legal defense" claim is bogus. Simply allowing transgender people to use the bathroom they choose has been going on for decades - if not centuries - also. You'd think if there was a problem it would have come up.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

How does this grant anyone legal cover?

Because right now, you can prevent it in many cases. Person who looks like a dude in women's clothes wants to go to the women's showers, you tell him to get the hell out. But now you have to stop and wonder, "if I tell him he can't go in there, am I setting myself up for a lawsuit if he claims he's transgender?" The predators know this and will use it to their advantage. You're granting them legal cover to be in private areas they have no business in.

If someone dresses up like a woman and goes into a restroom and starts peering over the stalls - or something similar - claiming to be a transgender has no relevance. Heck, if she really is a transgender, she has no legal excuse to spy on other women, much less lay a hand on them.

You don't have to peer over stalls. You keep wanting to restrict the discussion to what might happen in a restroom with closed stalls. And while that should still be an area women can feel are off limits to men, there are many other facilities to consider where it isn't so obvious as standing on a toilet to peek over the stall.

You're intelligent, homer. Don't talk to me like you're not or you think I'm not. Be intellectually honest about what's going on here.

This "legal defense" claim is bogus. Simply allowing transgender people to use the bathroom they choose has been going on for decades - if not centuries - also. You'd think if there was a problem it would have come up.

There is a difference in something happening where no one knows it and codifying it to make it a civil right to claim "feelings" and take your male body into female private spaces.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

College Kids Can't Explain Why a Short White Man isn't a Tall Asian Woman

I honestly think sometimes the entire Western world is collectively losing it's damn mind.

[cooltigger21 0]

College Kids Can't Explain Why a Short White Man isn't a Tall Asian Woman

I honestly think sometimes the entire Western world is collectively losing it's damn mind.

Not surprised considering the state of our education system and pop culture.

[homersapien 11,373]

Why would a sexual predator pick a woman's bathroom for a sexual assault in the first place? I fail to see how letting transgenders use the bathroom of their choice is going to result in more sexual attacks.

You cannot be serious. Good Lord, don't be so committed to open-mindedness that your brain falls out....

Show me one piece of data that shows sexual assaults going up in cities with similar laws as the one proposed in Charlotte.

Like I said, I don't approve of the Charlotte law either as I am not convinced it solved an actual problem. But the reaction with the "counter" law was way overboard and (obviously) counterproductive. The reactionaries should have just set back and let things evolve - or not - in Charlotte. Passing a state "counter" law was stupid pandering which backfired on them.

As far as my intelligence, I am smart enough not to let myself get lathered up over a problem that doesn't exist.

I never thought I'd say it, but Trump was correct (at least in his initial statement, who knows what he's said since).

[Guest NC1406]

I think I agree with homer on this one (yeah it scares me ). My states legislature should not have overridden a local act. If you disagree with the local rules avoid their bathrooms and move on. I know I rarely go to Charlotte anymore but they have the right to govern themselves.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

Why would a sexual predator pick a woman's bathroom for a sexual assault in the first place? I fail to see how letting transgenders use the bathroom of their choice is going to result in more sexual attacks.

You cannot be serious. Good Lord, don't be so committed to open-mindedness that your brain falls out....

Show me one piece of data that shows sexual assaults going up in cities with similar laws as the one proposed in Charlotte.

The thing I have been pointing out that never seems to be acknowledged is that there is hardly enough of a data set to be making claims about it not being a danger. That is the positive claim being made by the "whatever you feel" side. But this is still a relatively new thing that is only now beginning to gain widespread attention and acceptance. Victims of sexual assault are raising concerns about it. I think theirs are voices worth listening to rather than blithely dismissing as fear mongering or bigotry.

But what we do know is that sexual predators look for places where their preferred targets gather. We know that they look for loopholes and ways to gain access to private areas. We understand this so much we restrict where certain kinds of predators can even live or be allowed to hang out (for instance, child sexual predators can't live within a certain distance of a school, can't work in professions with lots of children there, can't be within a certain distance of playgrounds, etc). Basic logic would dictate that if you give them more of an opening and a plausible legal cover to be in areas they don't belong, they will start taking advantage of it.

Like I said, I don't approve of the Charlotte law either as I am not convinced it solved an actual problem. But the reaction with the "counter" law was way overboard and (obviously) counterproductive. The reactionaries should have just set back and let things evolve - or not - in Charlotte. Passing a state "counter" law was stupid pandering which backfired on them.

I don't agree with all the particulars of the NC state "counter" law either. But in general I get the desire not to throw open the gates and act like it's nothing, nor do I appreciate the intellectually lazy rebuttals of "bigot" over what I believe are legitimate concerns and issues.

As far as my intelligence, I am smart enough not to let myself get lathered up over a problem that doesn't exist.

A problem you think doesn't exist or won't become a problem and that you refuse to engage logically.

[aujeff11 6,243]

To answer your question TItan, yes, if you throw a blatant man in a woman's outfit out of the bathroom when your daughter is in the bathroom, somebody will call it a hate crime. It's unfortunate.

How far are you willing to go, knowing you'd have the same stigma of the racists and the radicals?

[TitanTiger 20,482]

To answer your question TItan, yes, if you throw a blatant man in a woman's outfit out of the bathroom when your daughter is in the bathroom, somebody will call it a hate crime. It's unfortunate.

How far are you willing to go, knowing you'd have the same stigma of the racists and the radicals?

If it's my wife or daughters, no ****s given. I won't go out of my way to bother some male body that wants to believe he's female and dress up like a woman. But I'm not going to compromise the safety of my family to appease anyone.

[homersapien 11,373]

Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Organizations Debunk 'Bathroom Predator Myth'

http://abcnews.go.com/US/sexual-assault-domestic-violence-organizations-debunk-bathroom-predator/story?id=38604019

[aujeff11 6,243]

To answer your question TItan, yes, if you throw a blatant man in a woman's outfit out of the bathroom when your daughter is in the bathroom, somebody will call it a hate crime. It's unfortunate.

How far are you willing to go, knowing you'd have the same stigma of the racists and the radicals?

If it's my wife or daughters, no ****s given. I won't go out of my way to bother some male body that wants to believe he's female and dress up like a woman. But I'm not going to compromise the safety of my family to appease anyone.

I'm probably just either going to go in the bathroom with them or find a single stall bathroom. I'm not ever going to risk my reputation by a news story that was conjured up by an agenda driven liberal journalist.

And if my "fears" of sexual attacks and peepers are unsubstantiated, so be it. I hate flying even though statistics say I'm relatively safe.

[Guest NC1406]

Being married to a spouse that has been attacked I tend to take extra precautions in all manners of our life. We stay home more than going out. We have pups that warn of unwanted issues and are trained to attack. In our opinion this gives my wife or I time to respond to inappropriate visitors (anyone not giving prior notice). My wife normally takes the REALLY good dog with her when she ventures out alone. When she runs in our remote area the pup is with her if I am not.

A city has the right to legislate as they see fit. Not sure I could be or would want to be more vigilant if this local law stood.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

http://yellowhammernews.com/politics-2/cross-dressing-man-arrested-peeping-alabama-woman-mall-bathroom/

[aujeff11 6,243]

http://yellowhammernews.com/politics-2/cross-dressing-man-arrested-peeping-alabama-woman-mall-bathroom/

Cant be true. Supposedly this type of behavior is only a myth that is being advanced by the bigot fearmongers.

[channonc 466]

http://yellowhammern...-mall-bathroom/

Cant be true. Supposedly this type of behavior is only a myth that is being advanced by the bigot fearmongers.

According to the article, he violated laws that were already in place.

Richard Rodriguez, 30, of Old Greenwich Drive in Fredericksburg, was charged with three counts of unlawful filming of a non-consenting person and three counts of peeping, Probus said. He is being held without bond at the Prince William-Manassas regional jail.

Again, what do the bathroom laws prevent? There are already laws in place to punish people for these types of things.

[aujeff11 6,243]

http://yellowhammern...-mall-bathroom/

Cant be true. Supposedly this type of behavior is only a myth that is being advanced by the bigot fearmongers.

According to the article, he violated laws that were already in place.

Richard Rodriguez, 30, of Old Greenwich Drive in Fredericksburg, was charged with three counts of unlawful filming of a non-consenting person and three counts of peeping, Probus said. He is being held without bond at the Prince William-Manassas regional jail.

Again, what do the bathroom laws prevent? There are already laws in place to punish people for these types of things.

Well no s***. Putting the man one stall over certainly made it easier to pull stunts like that though. How is that not getting through to you?

[channonc 466]

http://yellowhammern...-mall-bathroom/

Cant be true. Supposedly this type of behavior is only a myth that is being advanced by the bigot fearmongers.

According to the article, he violated laws that were already in place.

Richard Rodriguez, 30, of Old Greenwich Drive in Fredericksburg, was charged with three counts of unlawful filming of a non-consenting person and three counts of peeping, Probus said. He is being held without bond at the Prince William-Manassas regional jail.

Again, what do the bathroom laws prevent? There are already laws in place to punish people for these types of things.

Well no s***. Putting the man one stall over certainly made it easier to pull stunts like that though. How is that not getting through to you?

Really? How is it easier? Will NC be paying cops to sit at the door of a public restroom? Again, I think you are letting your emotion get in the way of practical reality.

[aujeff11 6,243]

http://yellowhammern...-mall-bathroom/

Cant be true. Supposedly this type of behavior is only a myth that is being advanced by the bigot fearmongers.

According to the article, he violated laws that were already in place.

Richard Rodriguez, 30, of Old Greenwich Drive in Fredericksburg, was charged with three counts of unlawful filming of a non-consenting person and three counts of peeping, Probus said. He is being held without bond at the Prince William-Manassas regional jail.

Again, what do the bathroom laws prevent? There are already laws in place to punish people for these types of things.

Well no s***. Putting the man one stall over certainly made it easier to pull stunts like that though. How is that not getting through to you?

Really? How is it easier? Will NC be paying cops to sit at the door of a public restroom? Again, I think you are letting your emotion get in the way of practical reality.

Not at all. I said stuff like this would happen and it's happening. If you want to talk about pratical reality, point the finger at yourself. How is it not easier than when the men and women were restricted to different bathrooms?

[TitanTiger 20,482]

I think when you try to slip into the women's room in disguise but, being a man and having a hard time really pulling off the woman thing, you're more likely to be confronted or reported. But when you try to shut people up and cast them as fearmongers and bigots for saying a dude dressed like a woman doesn't belong in the women's facilities, you are making it easier for them to get away with these things. Is the manager or owner of a place going to confront them and tell them they can't go in the women's room if there's a risk of a civil suit or getting fired for "discrimination?"

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

Illicit acts in public restrooms is nothing new. Remember Larry Craig? But I'm afraid that every instance now will be linked to the transgender population and the bathroom policies enacted by Target. I for one am tired of hearing this. Only 3% of American's identify as transgender. So chances of sharing a restroom with them are very slim. Don't agree with these laws? Then don't use public restrooms. Have young children to protect? Don't ever allow them to go to a public restroom alone.

[channonc 466]

Illicit acts in public restrooms is nothing new. Remember Larry Craig? But I'm afraid that every instance now will be linked to the transgender population and the bathroom policies enacted by Target. I for one am tired of hearing this. Only 3% of American's identify as transgender. So chances of sharing a restroom with them are very slim. Don't agree with these laws? Then don't use public restrooms. Have young children to protect? Don't ever allow them to go to a public restroom alone.

This! Very well said Elle.

[TitanTiger 20,482]

Illicit acts in public restrooms is nothing new. Remember Larry Craig? But I'm afraid that every instance now will be linked to the transgender population and the bathroom policies enacted by Target. I for one am tired of hearing this. Only 3% of American's identify as transgender. So chances of sharing a restroom with them are very slim. Don't agree with these laws? Then don't use public restrooms. Have young children to protect? Don't ever allow them to go to a public restroom alone.

1. This isn't just about bathrooms.

2. Try 0.3%

3. This is more about people posing as transgender that transgenders.

4. 0.3% of the population should not dictate policy for the rest. Especially when we're basing it entirely on self-proclaimed feelings rather than any sort of actual diagnosis by a professional. People, and especially women and girls who are a disproportionate number of sexual assault victims, have a right to an expectation of privacy and safety in areas such as locker rooms, showers and restrooms.

If you want to push for more unisex restrooms to be available, fine. At least people know what they're dealing with. But "I feel" is not sufficient to disregard private spaces for men and women.

[alexava 6,973]

Whew. i am glad it wasn't 3%. I hope 0.03% is actually high. What is it about other than bathrooms?

[TitanTiger 20,482]

Whew. i am glad it wasn't 3%. I hope 0.03% is actually high. What is it about other than bathrooms?

People like to focus on restrooms because they can talk about how people are in stalls and the only open area are the sinks. But locker room facilities, showers, saunas, and such are frequently not broken up into individual spaces. My 12 and 11 year old girls should be able to change out of a swimsuit at the YMCA without being subjected to the man in a wig with a penis changing in front of them, nor having to change in front of him. They certainly deserve to have some privacy away from men who will only claim transgenderism as a cover to get a free show...or the opportunity to try something worse.

[telling tiger 156]

If it is only about restrooms, locker rooms, etc, why did the state of North Carolina override a Charlotte non-discrimination ordinance and make it illegal in the state for a local area to provide for non-discrimination?