• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Target Down 5 Billion Since Embracing Trans Bathroom Policy

I'm not Rod...the reality is this has been a non-issue for so long until politicians decided to stick their nose into it. Honestly the stink that people are making about this is probably driving these incidents more than anything else. There are already unisex fitting rooms in some stores, have been for years, I've been in them and it's never been an issue.The stalls are individual. I see guys sitting right outside of women's fitting rooms waiting for their wife to come out and show them clothes. If they wanted to take a peep nothing would stop them. We all have to be aware of our surroundings, especially if we're changing our clothes. Laws and policies will not change that.

Can you tell me where, prior to this Left wing agenda to drive an election year issue (that you've been baited into agreeing with), the following were previously allowed?
- High school boys being allowed to use the girls showers in HS locker rooms
- Adult men allowed to use the female showers at pools and gyms
- Adult men allowed to walk into public female restrooms to go to the bathroom (like at a shopping mall)

You keep saying it's always been this way; it's a non-issue. Where were these things above allowed prior? Unisex fitting rooms don't address those issues.

I've already decimated your "stalls providing privacy" theory (stalls do not provide privacy to you or anyone else when a man is in the next stall using cameras to film you). And we've already shown several stories of men pretending to be TG in order to gain access in order to film you.

Laws and policies absolutely will keep a much larger % of these pervs from initially gaining access in the first place.
 
Again Supe, men who give people the creeps can walk into any men's room after my son RIGHT NOW. If I can accept that risk why can't I accept what you're talking about?

Supervise your kids. Pay attention to your surroundings. Don't assume because someone doesn't look creepy, they aren't. Leave if someone makes you uncomfortable. But don't force someone who's living as a woman and has no intent to bother anyone to humiliate or even possibly endanger themselves. Don't punish harmless people just trying to go about their lives for the potential actions of a few freaks.

What??? Men who give you the creeps (I'd have used a different phrase) couldn't just walk into the ladies's room after your daughter. Why do you keep reverting it to your son or males?

NO ONE ARGUES THE POINT THAT MEN SHARED RESTROOMS WITH MEN, AND WOMEN SHARED RESTROOMS WITH WOMEN.

If I had a 14 year old daughter, and she and I are at the mall, and she wants to go try on bathing suits for our trip to Florida, I cannot be aware of her surroundings in the dressing room. I cannot go in the dressing room with her. Or do I have to state that I identify as a female in order to go into the dressing room to protect her from the man in work boots and jeans who just walked in with a gym bag, one T-shirt to try on, and generally caused me reason for concern?

God knows I can't yell "Honey, get your stuff on and get out of there now" from the hall. That man would sue me for defamation of character likely, and Target would support it - the same Target that is suing the man the hit the assailant who had stabbed a little girl in their store.
 
Again Supe, men who give people the creeps can walk into any men's room after my son RIGHT NOW. If I can accept that risk why can't I accept what you're talking about?

Supervise your kids. Pay attention to your surroundings. Don't assume because someone doesn't look creepy, they aren't. Leave if someone makes you uncomfortable. But don't force someone who's living as a woman and has no intent to bother anyone to humiliate or even possibly endanger themselves. Don't punish harmless people just trying to go about their lives for the potential actions of a few freaks.
like Tim said, you're continually referring to your son. That's not the issue. We're currently aware of what is going on. Tim's posted news stories of this type of ****.
what if your son gives you a granddaughter later in life? are you going to be ok with Hank The Tank or GCS walking into the dressing room right after her?
 
You do realize that female doctors already treat male patients, right? You don't need to pretend to be a chick for that.

Yes. I'm simply being a smart *** because your position on this just blows my mind.
I cannot believe this country has come to this.
I had just typed that although I disagree with you, I respect your opinion. Then deleted it.
I can't respect an opinion as crazy as this.

I do however, respect your right to that opinion.
 
but consider for a moment if this law is struck down and anyone can change anywhere. Do you want to see ark trying on clothes in the middle of an aisle? there's a level of decorum that we do not need to take down, and this is going to do just that.

What's the big deal about seeing someone in their underwear? Ever been to a swimming pool or beach? It's pretty much like seeing everyone in their underwear.

How puritanical are you?
 
Thing is, those exam rooms tend to be cold and a male doctor would understand shrinkage.

Elaine: It shrinks?

Jerry:Like a frightened turtle.

Great to watch those old re-runs. Those were the good ol days,,:hijack:
 
Last edited:
I got a plan. I'm going to buy stock in American Standard Terlet Company and wait for them to demand a stall for every possible genetic mutation there is...
 
What??? Men who give you the creeps (I'd have used a different phrase) couldn't just walk into the ladies's room after your daughter. Why do you keep reverting it to your son or males?

NO ONE ARGUES THE POINT THAT MEN SHARED RESTROOMS WITH MEN, AND WOMEN SHARED RESTROOMS WITH WOMEN.

If I had a 14 year old daughter, and she and I are at the mall, and she wants to go try on bathing suits for our trip to Florida, I cannot be aware of her surroundings in the dressing room. I cannot go in the dressing room with her. Or do I have to state that I identify as a female in order to go into the dressing room to protect her from the man in work boots and jeans who just walked in with a gym bag, one T-shirt to try on, and generally caused me reason for concern?

God knows I can't yell "Honey, get your stuff on and get out of there now" from the hall. That man would sue me for defamation of character likely, and Target would support it - the same Target that is suing the man the hit the assailant who had stabbed a little girl in their store.

Actually I don't think it's law anywhere. All NC did was pass a law keeping things the way they've always been. What the Feds are doing is threatening to withhold money from schools if they don't let people use the bathroom of their choosing.
 
Burgundy is right. The law wants to keep things the way they are and not progress into a leftist future.
 
What's the big deal about seeing someone in their underwear? Ever been to a swimming pool or beach? It's pretty much like seeing everyone in their underwear.

How puritanical are you?

Silly me. Please, by all means try on clothes in an aisle.
 
What's the big deal about seeing someone in their underwear? Ever been to a swimming pool or beach? It's pretty much like seeing everyone in their underwear.

How puritanical are you?

Silly me. Please, by all means try on clothes in an aisle.

You've not met Supe, ark, and DBS in person, have you?
 
While you push for gender specific swimming pools and beaches.

That's a stretch. No where is he suggesting that, or even alluding to it.

I suppose he's allowed to strip and change in an aisle.

The question is, now...what happens to all of the states' public indecency laws? Are these no longer enforceable? I'm sure the ACLU will seek to eradicate them because someone's feelings might be hurt, like Ark when he strips in public at Wal-Mart and DBS laughs at him.
 
Truth.

Pretty powerful write-up from a rape survivor. Her views. Of course, the heartless will discount her.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/23/a-rape-survivor-speaks-out-about-transgender-bathrooms/


Everywhere I read in the news, there’s talk of another school or gym or business that is boldly adopting “progressive” new locker room policies designed to create equal rights for people who identify as transgender. These policies allow transgender individuals to use the locker room consistent with the sex they identify as their own, regardless of anatomy.

While some have proposed a third option for transgender people (single-occupancy restrooms and showers), this option has been largely struck down, and employees are prohibited from suggesting it, as it is considered discriminatory and emotionally damaging to a group of people who are working so hard to fit in. The solution? Anyone can use whatever restroom he or she wants without being questioned.

Victimizers Use Any Opening They Can Find

I read these reports, and my heart starts to race. They can’t be serious. Let me be clear: I am not saying that transgender people are predators. Not by a long shot. What I am saying is that there are countless deviant men in this world who will pretend to be transgender as a means of gaining access to the people they want to exploit, namely women and children. It already happens. Just Google Jason Pomares, Norwood Smith Burnes, or Taylor Buehler, for starters.

While I feel a deep sense of empathy for what must be a very difficult situation for transgender people, at the beginning and end of the day, it is nothing short of negligent to instate policies that elevate the emotional comfort of a relative few over the physical safety of a large group of vulnerable people.

Don’t they know anything about predators? Don’t they know the numbers? That out of every 100 rapes, only two rapists will spend so much as single day in jail while the other 98 walk free and hang out in our midst? Don’t they know that predators are known to intentionally seek out places where many of their preferred targets gather in groups? That perpetrators are addicts so committed to their fantasies they’ll stop at nothing to achieve them?

Do they know that more than 99 percent of single-victim incidents are committed by males? That they are experts in rationalization who minimize their number of victims? Don’t they know that insurance companies highlight locker rooms as a high-risk area for abuse that should be carefully monitored and protected?

Don’t they know that one out of every four little girls will be sexually abused during childhood, and that’s without giving predators free access to them while they shower? Don’t they know that, for women who have experienced sexual trauma, finding the courage to use a locker room at all is a freaking badge of honor? That many of these women view life through a kaleidoscope of shame and suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, dissociation, poor body image, eating disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, difficulty with intimacy, and worse?

Why would people knowingly invite further exploitation by creating policies with no safeguards in place to protect them from injury? With zero screening options to ensure that biological males who enter locker rooms actually identify as female, how could a woman be sure the person staring at her wasn’t exploiting her? Why is it okay to make her wonder?
What About Women’s and Children’s Rights?


“Wake up!” I want to scream. “Can’t you see what’s going on? Do something about it!”

Despite the many reports of sexual abuse and assault that exist in our world, there’s an even larger number of victims who never tell about it. The reason? They’re afraid no one will believe them. Even worse, they’re terrified of a reality they already innately know to be true: even if people did know, they wouldn’t do anything to help. They’re not worth protecting. Even silence feels better than that.

There’s no way to make everyone happy in the situation of transgender locker room use. So the priority ought to be finding a way to keep everyone safe. I’d much rather risk hurting a smaller number of people’s feelings by asking transgender people to use a single-occupancy restroom that still offers safety than risk jeopardizing the safety of thousands of women and kids with a policy that gives would-be predators a free pass.

Is it ironic to no one that being “progressive” actually sets women’s lib back about a century? What of my right to do my darndest to insist that the first time my daughter sees the adult male form it will be because she’s chosen it, not because it’s forced upon her? What of our emotional and physical rights? Unless and until you’ve lined a bathroom door with a towel for protection, you can’t tell me the risk isn’t there.

Don’t Let Innocents Get Hurt Before You Rethink This

I still battle my powerlessness to do anything that feels substantial to affect change, but the good Lord didn’t bring me out of Egypt and set my feet upon a rock so I could stand idly by in the face of danger. So even if a little article or Facebook post doesn’t ultimately change the world, it’s better than silent resignation to negligence and harm. I feel a sense of urgency to invite people to consider the not-so-hidden dangers of these policies before more and more of them get cemented into place. Once that happens, the only way they’ll change is when innocent people get hurt.

Even if there aren’t hundreds of abusers rushing into locker rooms by the dozens, the question I keep asking myself is, “What if just one little girl gets hurt by this? Would that be enough to make people reconsider it?”
 
that's just anecdotal and plain silly, Tim.
 
That's a stretch. No where is he suggesting that, or even alluding to it.

He absolutely alluded to "level of decorum" in changing rooms. What he and you can't explain is why that level has been tested for decades at swimming pools and beaches without mass chaos breaking out.
 
Trog - you're a complete and utter idiot and I'm almost amazed you were able to make the stretch to gender-assigned swimming pools.
 
I asked my girlfriend's 16 year old daughter her feelings about this.

she said that she agrees that transgender people should be able to use whichever restroom they choose.
but she does not think that a law should be made about this, since sexual predators would exploit this and "no one should be following a little kid into a restroom"

keep in mind that striking down this law in NC would effect her more than me, Lying Tim, Burgundy or any other guy.
 
What I don't understand is, what the is the need for the new federal policy? Was there some kind of epidemic of transexuals soiling their panties in public because they weren't able to find a restroom?

I've never come across a man in a dress standing outside a ladies room with urine and feces running down his legs. Seems like they've been getting along just fine without this new policy, so who the **** saw the need for this divisive bullshit? If a young lady, or little girl should be expected to feel comfortable with a man in a dress, or even not in a dress, using the stall next to her, then why shouldn't we expect that same man in a dress to feel comfortable using a restroom with other men? What was so wrong with the way things were?
 
What I don't understand is, what the is the need for the new federal policy? Was there some kind of epidemic of transexuals soiling their panties in public because they weren't able to find a restroom?

I've never come across a man in a dress standing outside a ladies room with urine and feces running down his legs. Seems like they've been getting along just fine without this new policy, so who the **** saw the need for this divisive bullshit? If a young lady, or little girl should be expected to feel comfortable with a man in a dress, or even not in a dress, using the stall next to her, then why shouldn't we expect that same man in a dress to feel comfortable using a restroom with other men? What was so wrong with the way things were?

Yeah, whats wrong with the way things were?...like whites only drinking fountains and lunch counters. JK lol...just thought I'd play the liberal idiot part this time since no lib jumped on that.

Ignore if already posted.
Loretta Lynch compares trans bathroom issues to Jim Crow and the civil rights movement. Pathetic.

http://www.wral.com/lynch-nc-transgender-law-part-of-civil-rights-struggle/15694947/
 
Last edited:
Trog - you're a complete and utter idiot and I'm almost amazed you were able to make the stretch to gender-assigned swimming pools.

Like I said, you can't explain why the decorum of which you speak isn't needed at swimming pools. Many Islamic countries believe that it is.

What is idiocy is creating an unenforceable law that is intended to maintain a status quo. So what happens when someone in NC sees what they suspect is a man use the women's room?
 
The problem I have is Obama thinking he's GOD and can just make bullshit legislation and force the states to bend over and take it. We should be more concerned about THAT than we should be about who pisses next to whom.
 
What I don't understand is, what the is the need for the new federal policy? Was there some kind of epidemic of transexuals soiling their panties in public because they weren't able to find a restroom?

I've never come across a man in a dress standing outside a ladies room with urine and feces running down his legs. Seems like they've been getting along just fine without this new policy, so who the **** saw the need for this divisive bullshit? If a young lady, or little girl should be expected to feel comfortable with a man in a dress, or even not in a dress, using the stall next to her, then why shouldn't we expect that same man in a dress to feel comfortable using a restroom with other men? What was so wrong with the way things were?

Just the left's way. obama, despite his purported status as a "Constitutional expert" has evidently never laid eyes on the document or fails to comprehend its actual meaning. He believes that potus = potentate......and in his delusional world he believes he has the authority to issue imperial decrees that the rabble he rules over must obey. Even regarding morality and social issues. His narcissistic arrogance will not allow him to see otherwise and I firmly believe that he sits around and wonders why it is and how it could be that we all don't simply agree with him nor show him proper gratitude.

Like I said, you can't explain why the decorum of which you speak isn't needed at swimming pools. Many Islamic countries believe that it is.

What is idiocy is creating an unenforceable law that is intended to maintain a status quo. So what happens when someone in NC sees what they suspect is a man use the women's room?

What an individual CHOOSES to display in public is their CHOICE! What's wrong with "status quo"? It can be a negative but it's not always. As to your question.....I would hope that they would find a cop and report them.
 
As to your question....I would hope that they would find a cop and report them.

How urgently is a cop supposed to respond to that call? Especially after he humiliated both himself and the all-state softball player because some over-zealous confused granny panicked.
 
Top