• 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

Hersheypark Announces Commitment to Allowing Men Who Identify as Women to Use Women’s Restrooms

HERSHEY, Pa. — A Pennsylvania amusement park that is a popular attraction for families with children has announced that its internal policies allow visitors and employees to use the restroom that correlates with their “gender identity.” Hersheypark officials released a statement on Friday outlining that its restroom accommodations have already been in place and will continue.

“We recognize that the more perspectives we have within our company, the more welcoming we are to all those who visit and seek employment here,” said Public Relations Manager Kathy Burrows. “In fact, our company has four core values, one of which is ‘respectful

http://www.lucianne.com/thread/?artnum=874336


sx71M8L.jpg

Wow, if I was Hershey, I'd be careful. I've been there many times. Nice place, but doesn't compare to 6 Flags or Kings Dominion. People that go to Hershey have other choices nearby. With choice comes the ability to boycott. Target can handle a $10Billion loss - for the time being. If people rallied and decided to boycott Hershey, the park wouldn't last. The company would. But the park would go under.

Interesting article about the "benevolent" Hershey Park that cares so much about welcoming everyone, the company with core values, including respect:

http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2011/08/hershey_home_of_chocoalte_kiss.html

Hershey: Home of chocolate Kisses and corporate greed

Behind those chocolate Kisses and amusement rides, The Hershey Co. is hiding a secret ingredient, an exploited workforce of 400 18- and 19-year-old students from across the globe who are packaging chocolates. With unemployment at 7.8 percent in Pennsylvania and even higher nationwide, this is stickier than melted chocolate on a hot summer day.

In America on their summer breaks, these student workers are part of a guest-worker-cultural exchange program, bringing them only one impression of what America is becoming: a home for corporate greed to thrive.

Hershey’s Kisses are as American as apple pie; and Hersheypark promotes the core American family values that so many Pennsylvanians believe in.

All of which makes it difficult to stomach that Hershey, which we all thought of as a good 'ol hometown company, has become like so many other corporations in our country that are driving wages down to keep their profit margins high.

Last year, Hershey CEO David West brought home $7.5 million. The company as a whole is doing quite well. In just the second quarter of this year, Hershey posted $130 million in profits, a 7.5 percent increase over last year.

While workers employed directly by Hershey’s are making $18 an hour for their efforts to create America’s favorite chocolate, the company has outsourced work through an outside company to package its candies. That company, Exel, is only paying foreign student workers from $7.85 to $8.35 per hour for hard, manual labor. This is part of an ongoing problem of subcontracting.

Many companies making big profit margins, contract work to outside vendors and operations such as this just to avoid paying decent wages for work and to avoid responsibility for workers who, at the end of the day, make their companies successful.

Through the J-1 guest-worker program, students working at the chocolate packing factory paid a fee from $3,000 to $6,000 to participate in the program. Their parents scraped together this money, just like many of us do for our kids, to try to give them a learning opportunity that they thought would help their children develop career-building and language experiences.

Imagine how these parents feel now, having sent their sons and daughters to a foreign country only to learn they have been deceived and treated poorly. Through the so-called “program,” students are forced to live four to a room in a seedy motel at a cost of $400 per week.

After the company deducts these expenses from students’ paychecks, the promised wages of $8.35 an hour have been reduced, in some cases, to $42 per week. That’s not even enough to pay for one day’s admission to Hersheypark.

Instead of an opportunity they and their parents thought would help them advance in their careers, these students fear deportation and the withdrawal of rights to ever return to the United States for standing up to this modern-day indentured servitude.

These young heroes should be an inspiration to all of us for their bravery and desire to stop exploitation of workers and provide jobs to those who need them in America. They dared to stand up to end the exploitation of cheap immigrant labor for the sake of higher profit margins and the abuse of workers.

With 600 Pennsylvania workers recently laid off from good, family-sustaining jobs at Hershey, this system of exploitation of temporary visa holders is bad for U.S. workers and bad for the nation’s economy. I feel privileged to stand with these student workers, who are not only fighting for their own justice, but also fighting against the injustice perpetrated by a corporate system skilled at avoiding responsibility to the hard-working people keeping them in business.

The Hershey Co.’s latest offer to provide one week of paid vacation to the students does not go far enough. Each student needs to be reimbursed the program fee they paid.

The Hershey Co. and other big corporations involved in this disgraceful behavior should be held accountable to the workers they exploit through the J-1 visa program and to all the hard-working Americans and those looking for jobs who are hurting because big corporations are choosing to make their profits through a race to the bottom for workers’ wages.
 
Already happening. The girl that got stabbed in Target. Life saved by a fellow patron. Patron sued by Target. Target told that little girl victim to STFU.

Supe, you're off your game today. I'm disappointed - you let the lower IQ get the better of you today. He baited you with his annoying questioning (he never answers questions) into a position you weren't stating.

You simply asked him to agree that something needs to be done to prevent the continuing harm to children
. Now you and I and the rest of the world with a 20+ IQ realize that could mean any of a thousand measures from simply keeping things the way they are (man enters woman's shower, women scream, police come sirens blaring) to using Internet of Things technology to automatically trigger alarms when anything with a beard enters a Female Shower room (utilize cognitive capabilities to analyze unstructured data like video feeds to detect anomalies) to having unisex bathrooms to retrofitting female restrooms with airplane-like secure stalls (much like the ones the pilots sit in) to individuals carrying mace. Whatever works. Any of countless measures could be taken to prevent harm to the children (and women).

You let ding-a-ling have you believe the only way to do this is by asking people to deliberately try to determine the gender of other occupants. Which, BTW is actually really normal and what's been happening forever. As I've said 29 times now in this thread, in the near past, if you were male and walked into a women's restroom, the females would scream and you'd find yourself having a discussion with the police.

Ewwww, that's so creepy...those women deliberately determined the gender of that man! ::horror!::

In fact, I've had this discussion with my wife this weekend. "If we are out - shopping, at dinner, whatever - and you're in the dressing room or restroom and a guy wearing workboots, jeans, a T-shirt and a 5'o'clock shadow enters, leave immediately and find me."

Ooooh, creepy...she might have to identify him as a man​

tumblr_inline_ne5hcg5VLD1sj1lrd.jpg

see, Tim, I was getting Trog to agree that something must be done for the children and minors that onefor so valiantly represents now. Even though I've had this discussion with my own daughter and my girlfriend's daughter, onefor represents them (even though her opinion does not parallel theirs). Both agree that trannies should be allowed to piss wherever they want -- a point that we've all agreed on here -- but that making it a law for people who were born a male or born a female to pee only in the restroom that reflects their birth sex is ensuring the safety of children. Libs want to glamorize the ****** "rape culture" and say "something must be done!!" to stop this. Then, they turn around and say that all bathrooms should be open to anyone to use, regardless of sex.

it's a pee-drenched slippery slope either way.

I guess my bewilderment is that if we have this many sexual attacks as there are now, with the societal norm of men using the men's room and women using the women's room, why would the left be so willing to throw open the door to women's rooms when it's already been proven that sexual predators (who outnumber trannies) would then have a free ticket to allow themselves to submit to their perverted sickness? Yeah, maybe the sex crimes do not rise. Maybe they do.

Shouldn't it be up to us to err on the side of caution for the sake of our children and future generations? Enforce the law as it is now while we figure out what is a "safe space" for trannies so as to not allow ourselves to become even further entrenched in the rape culture that is already prevalent.
 
Trog, One (or anyone else for that matter) still hasn't explained to me how this new federally mandated "policy" doesn't conflict with the very reason we created women's bathrooms in the first place.

By definition, women's bathroom's are exclusionary and were created that way on purpose, correct? They are sexist, correct? I mean, this applies to locker rooms, changing stations (at waterparks for instance), showers at the YMCA (publicly funded with some taxpayer money).

We create all these "women's areas" for their benefit.

How does allowing any man that just wants to "claim" he identifies as a women help keep the purpose/goal of women's areas in tact? How can you reconcile this dichotomy? And is the benefit of 250,000 to 400,000 transgender women (men who want to use women's areas) worth the sacrifice of making women's room not really women's room anymore?

The problem when looking at this issue as some sort of "right" is to ignore the fact women's rooms are themselves already segregated and restricted on purpose. A women's room is anything but "equal" or "fair" to start with.

I still don't understand the logic of the decree or who it really benefits.
 
Last edited:
By allowing ALL men to go into ALL women's facilities you let in 100% of all predators with absolutely zero barrier to entry (when prior there were barriers to entry) <---- why you all keep failing to acknowledge this is beyond the pale.

We understand that some preds will slip through today's (or is that now yesterday's?) cracks.

The barrier to entry of which you speak is the symbol of a woman on an unlocked door and the societal norm that it's for women. IT'S. STILL. THERE.

Who are these men that are commonly found using the women's room now? None of the women I know are encountering them.

Just because you have thought up an apocalyptic vision of public restrooms doesn't mean it exists. People have realized this isn't a big deal and continues to do so (see Hershey Park).
 
Just fyi, I have never once stated that I represent anyone. I don't know where you guys are getting that. In fact I've repeatedly said the country is divided on this, although scientific polls (not "i know a bunch of people who feel this way") do show that a majority of younger people do not care about this.
 
see, Tim, I was getting Trog to agree that something must be done for the children and minors...

Shouldn't it be up to us to err on the side of caution for the sake of our children and future generations?

To be more precise, and I believe OFTB brought this up, you are asking something be done for FEMALE children and minors.

I'm not saying you don't care about boys being victimized, but there was no outcry about public restroom safety before any of this and I wouldn't be surprised if the larger problem is victimization of boys.

Regardless, the "Yea, but that stuff always happened. We just don't want things to get worse" doesn't seem like a very genuine "Something must be done!" argument, IMO.
 
Just fyi, I have never once stated that I represent anyone. I don't know where you guys are getting that. In fact I've repeatedly said the country is divided on this, although scientific polls (not "i know a bunch of people who feel this way") do show that a majority of younger people do not care about this.
"scientific polls" is a bit of an oxymoron.
 
Your analogy isn't accurate in the least.

Banks don't have UNLOCKED DOORS with "Men's $" and "Women's $" leading into vaults where people are free to help themselves.

You ignore the fact that heretofore, bathroom markings "Men" and "Women" meant "Men" and "Women." The bank access doors are plainly marked "Employees Only."

You want customers to acknowledge and follow that directive but have no issue with the limitation "Men" or "Women" being unenforceable.
 
The barrier to entry of which you speak is the symbol of a woman on an unlocked door and the societal norm that it's for women. IT'S. STILL. THERE.

No. That. Is. Not. The. Barrier. I. Speak. Of.

Pay attention. This time. Please. I beg you.

Five years ago, if a man wearing jeans and workboots and a scruffy beard walked into a women's shower in the locker room at Gold's Gym, every woman in the locker room would have screamed and yelled and police would have been called.

Five years ago, if a man wearing jeans and workboots and a scruffy beard walked into a women's shower in the locker room at Gold's Gym, every woman in the locker room would have screamed and yelled and police would have been called.

Five years ago, if a man wearing jeans and workboots and a scruffy beard walked into a women's shower in the locker room at Gold's Gym, every woman in the locker room would have screamed and yelled and police would have been called.

Five years ago, if a man wearing jeans and workboots and a scruffy beard walked into a women's shower in the locker room at Gold's Gym, every woman in the locker room would have screamed and yelled and police would have been called.

Five years ago, if a man wearing jeans and workboots and a scruffy beard walked into a women's shower in the locker room at Gold's Gym, every woman in the locker room would have screamed and yelled and police would have been called.

Make sense?

Now, case in point, the perv who undressed twice in front of the girls swim team in Washington. No one said anything. Someone casually said something to the front desk. Police were never called.

The barrier to entry was the women themselves who knew a man shouldn't be in there and would scream bloody hell to get him scared enough to run away and to get employees to come rushing to their aid and/or to call the police. People were the barrier. Norms were the barrier. Behavior was the barrier. Not a stupid sign.

Now, because transgender - people have been told it's bad to hurt someone's feelings. You can't question a man being in there. No one says anything when they witness the man stroll in. Five years ago, they would have.

Is this REALLY that hard for you to comprehend?
 
Just fyi, I have never once stated that I represent anyone. I don't know where you guys are getting that. In fact I've repeatedly said the country is divided on this, although scientific polls (not "i know a bunch of people who feel this way") do show that a majority of younger people do not care about this.

...but the majority of Americans disagree with it.
 
To be more precise, and I believe OFTB brought this up, you are asking something be done for FEMALE children and minors.

I'm not saying you don't care about boys being victimized, but there was no outcry about public restroom safety before any of this and I wouldn't be surprised if the larger problem is victimization of boys.

Regardless, the "Yea, but that stuff always happened. We just don't want things to get worse" doesn't seem like a very genuine "Something must be done!" argument, IMO.

You just don't read do you?

We've admitted there was a problem with boys prior. Always has been. Always will be.

The problem we are trying to avoid is INCREASING he number of these assaults. Not much you can do about men in a men's room, or women in a women's room. But there is no denying that if you allow men free access to women's restrooms and locker rooms MORE assaults and more predator incidents like surreptitious filming will (errrr...is) happen. That's EVIDENT.

We are saying - don't make the problem worse.

Again, it's not that hard.
 
Just fyi, I have never once stated that I represent anyone. I don't know where you guys are getting that. In fact I've repeatedly said the country is divided on this, although scientific polls (not "i know a bunch of people who feel this way") do show that a majority of younger people do not care about this.
and if there's one thing young people know, it's being mature enough to make a decision that would effect them and their kids and grandkids...

well, if you can get them off Instagram, snapchat, imgur, Twitter and a host of other mind-numbing bullshit apps.
 
and if there's one thing young people know, it's being mature enough to make a decision that would effect them and their kids and grandkids...

well, if you can get them off Instagram, snapchat, imgur, Twitter and a host of other mind-numbing bullshit apps.

Don't forget Tumbler. Solid go-to for porn.

Or so I was told.
 
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/...ngerous-and-underreported-part-of-obamas-tran

The most dangerous, and underreported, part of Obama’s transgender edict

For all the justifiable press coverage of Barack Obama's federal guidance on transgender students in the public schools, its most dangerous provision has largely gone unnoticed – and it has nothing to do with bathrooms.

The most outrageous provision of his transgender bathroom order does not even involve locker rooms, where teenagers of the opposite sex will change and shower next to one another.

The most offensive part of the new policy is that, under the Obama administration's federal guidance:

School districts must allow biological males and females to spend the night together in the same hotel room on field trips;

Colleges must let men who say they are transgender be roommates with one or more women; and

School officials cannot even tell those young women or their parents in advance that their new roommate is a man, without risking a federal lawsuit.

The eight-page letter clearly states that, as far as the Justice Department and the Dept. of Education are concerned, a student becomes a member of the opposite sex the moment he feels like it. The instant he tells school officials about his decision, they must immediately treat him accordingly.

That's it. The student doesn't have to meet any other conditions to change his sex – in fact, school districts are prohibited from setting any. “Under [the Obama administration's unilateral rewriting of] Title IX, there is no medical diagnosis or treatment requirement that students must meet as a prerequisite to being treated consistent with their gender identity,” the letter says.

That clarifies – mandates, really – that a student doesn't have to have surgery, take hormone treatments, or present himself in any way as a member of the opposite sex. He can continue looking and acting as a male but say he identifies as a female. After all, that's sort of what “gender non-conforming” is all about.

Just as there is no minimum threshold required to qualify as transgender, there is no maximum limit to the number of times a student can change genders.

So, any individual who says he is a member of the opposite sex must be allowed to spend the night in the same room as members of the opposite biological sex for his “social integration” and “comfort.”

Suppose a teenage boy discovers he is “transgender” just in time to spend the night in his girlfriend's hotel room? Or the hotel room of a girl who is decidedly not his girlfriend? He must be allowed to do so without a chaperone, unless there's an adult in every room. Don't forget, under civil rights law, there can be no disparate treatment. If transgender students are chaperoned but “other” girls aren't, that's profiling and could trigger a federal civil rights lawsuit from the social justice warriors in the Obama administration or its like-minded successors.

Some people would argue that not telling a gifted 16-year-old college freshman that her new roommate is a bearded 51-year-old with male pattern baldness and a taste for young ladies violates her privacy.

But according to the booklet, even the potential roommate cannot ask about a transgender person's biology, because “asking personal questions about a person’s body” is a form of harassment.

Thus, under the Obama administration's policies, a man can declare himself a female and be assigned as the year-long roommate of a nubile, possibly underage, co-ed. If the college tells the young lady her roommate is a biological male without his express consent, it could be sued.

Yep, no problems with this legislation at all.

A wise man on this thread said the Government is telling us what is acceptable. Evidence.
 
So you're telling me that I could send my daughter off to college and the college would have the right to place her with a male dorm roommate? Without even being obligated to let me know in advance?

I can't even imagine a world where such a thing is in the realm of possibilities. Have we completely lost our ******* minds?
 
So you're telling me that I could send my daughter off to college and the college would have the right to place her with a male dorm roommate? Without even being obligated to let me know in advance?

I can't even imagine a world where such a thing is in the realm of possibilities. Have we completely lost our ******* minds?

Apparently the youth of America are just fine with this.
 
Apparently the youth of America are just fine with this.

They are not actually fine with it. They have just been bullied into silence. They have been programmed in PC culture their whole lives to the point that comedians like Chris Rock has quit playing college shows because they won't laugh at anything. They don't think they are allowed to laugh.

There are some that winningly go along with it even though they personally disagree. This is because they have been convinced that the need for this is so great that they must just get used to it.

It's the same way Obamacare was passed. The vast majority were actually happy with their own coverage. Maybe they'd complain about some copays but for the most part, they were happy. That's why they kept lying about If you like your Dr, you can keep your Dr. They knew most people did not want any change for themselves. The scam was in convincing them they their neighbor was dying without healthcare and needed this change.

The same thing happens here. They first put out the notion that this is a HUGE issue that demands immediate change. Next they try to convince people it is no big deal. They won't even notice anything.

Then you read the fine print and you drop your daughter off at college and find out her roommate is a guy. And when you complain, the school will explain that by law it is your daughter who will be disciplined if she complains.
 
So you're telling me that I could send my daughter off to college and the college would have the right to place her with a male dorm roommate? Without even being obligated to let me know in advance?

I can't even imagine a world where such a thing is in the realm of possibilities. Have we completely lost our ******* minds?

Hater.
 
https://www.ralstonreports.com/blog/child-i-love

When Maddy Ralston came into this world almost 21 years ago, it was love at first sight.

I cradled her in my arms, my adopted miracle, and couldn’t stop crying. She was the most beautiful thing I had ever seen.

As she grew up, Maddy eschewed the traditional girly girl stuff. “If you get me a doll for Christmas, I’ll cut its head off,” she once admonished me.

She refused to wear the skirts in the school uniform catalogue, preferring the khaki pants. She became a full-fledged tomboy before high school. She was a stunning, blonde-blue-eyed kid, but she didn’t care. She would rather go sit for hours and fish at Sunset Park than go to the mall with other girls. She told me she wanted to be a boy.

It’s just a phase, I figured. So many women told me stories of their tomboy days.

We went shopping for clothes, and she would never go into the girls’ section. Always the boys. It wasn’t even a question.

I didn’t really care. She was my little girl, and I adored her.

The father-daughter bond was growing ever-stronger. We did everything together. I rarely missed a game, be it soccer or basketball or volleyball or flag football. We went to Europe three times, reveling in each other’s company. I loved making occasional allusions to her in my writing, calling her “The Teen.”

When she got to high school, she was bullied during her freshman year. High school girls are the worst. They whispered she was a lesbian, and I figured they were right.

I didn’t care. She was my Maddy. That’s all that mattered.

She had a boyfriend for a little while. But that didn’t last long. It didn’t feel right to her, I could tell.

Then she had a girlfriend. It lasted for awhile, but she wasn’t happy. Something wasn’t right.

Maddy never really talked about what the truth was until junior year. But somehow she had known since she was five, when she eschewed dolls and dresses.

I don’t think I even listened very well when Maddy told me a few years ago she was really a male inside, that she was transgender. Sure, you are, I thought. It’s just a phase, I was certain.

After all, the kid has been through a lot. Her mother had died. She had to switch schools. She had no idea who she was.

But the truth was I had no idea. Or I was in denial.

Slowly but surely, I have come to not just accept it but to embrace it. I have learned a lot about transgender issues through my job. I have read a bit.

But I don’t want to talk about bathrooms or locker rooms. I don’t want to debate the public policy issues in North Carolina or whether the president was right to sue. There will be plenty of time for that.

My first instinct, as ever, has been to protect my child, to make sure Maddy is safe and happy. That’s all most parents ever want for their children.

Life is difficult as it is. But with so much ignorance out there breeding so much fear, so much visceral recoiling from the concept of transgenderism, I fear this will make Maddy’s life that much harder.

So many people I know and respect spout off about the issue, on social media, even in person, because they don’t know about Maddy. They don’t know the reality. They don’t know, so I cut them slack.

They will come around. Only the hateful ones won’t.

Maddy already has experienced some of it on campus. She has been called “an abomination of God,” been told her mother killed herself because she was ashamed of her, that she is “going to burn in hell.”

It must be unimaginably excruciating to hear such things. I feel boiling rage when she tells me.

I admit I sometimes still have a hard time with it all. I look around the house, see the pictures of me with my little girl and my eyes fill with tears. But those memories are forever, and Maddy told me not to take them down, that she cherishes those, too.

Last year, Maddy began talking about transitioning, about having surgery. And about six months ago, Maddy began taking testosterone to begin the process of becoming who she really is.

This week, Maddy went to court, bravely told a judge why she wanted to be a male and wanted her birth certificate changed, too. After the hearing, when it was finally real, when he called me, I don’t think I have ever heard my kid sound so happy. And he wanted the story told.

When I get home later this week, I will see someone officially named Jake Ralston for the first time. And one thing I know for certain: It will be love at first sight.
 
You just don't read do you?

We've admitted there was a problem with boys prior. Always has been.

We are saying - don't make the problem worse.

LOL! This is what I wrote, damn near word for word. Either you aren't reading or you have completely lost it.
 
https://www.ralstonreports.com/blog/child-i-love

When Maddy Ralston came into this world almost 21 years ago, it was love at first sight.

I cradled her in my arms, my adopted miracle, and couldn’t stop crying. She was the most beautiful thing I had ever seen.

As she grew up, Maddy eschewed the traditional girly girl stuff. “If you get me a doll for Christmas, I’ll cut its head off,” she once admonished me.

She refused to wear the skirts in the school uniform catalogue, preferring the khaki pants. She became a full-fledged tomboy before high school. She was a stunning, blonde-blue-eyed kid, but she didn’t care. She would rather go sit for hours and fish at Sunset Park than go to the mall with other girls. She told me she wanted to be a boy.

It’s just a phase, I figured. So many women told me stories of their tomboy days.

We went shopping for clothes, and she would never go into the girls’ section. Always the boys. It wasn’t even a question.

I didn’t really care. She was my little girl, and I adored her.

The father-daughter bond was growing ever-stronger. We did everything together. I rarely missed a game, be it soccer or basketball or volleyball or flag football. We went to Europe three times, reveling in each other’s company. I loved making occasional allusions to her in my writing, calling her “The Teen.”

When she got to high school, she was bullied during her freshman year. High school girls are the worst. They whispered she was a lesbian, and I figured they were right.

I didn’t care. She was my Maddy. That’s all that mattered.

She had a boyfriend for a little while. But that didn’t last long. It didn’t feel right to her, I could tell.

Then she had a girlfriend. It lasted for awhile, but she wasn’t happy. Something wasn’t right.

Maddy never really talked about what the truth was until junior year. But somehow she had known since she was five, when she eschewed dolls and dresses.

I don’t think I even listened very well when Maddy told me a few years ago she was really a male inside, that she was transgender. Sure, you are, I thought. It’s just a phase, I was certain.

After all, the kid has been through a lot. Her mother had died. She had to switch schools. She had no idea who she was.

But the truth was I had no idea. Or I was in denial.

Slowly but surely, I have come to not just accept it but to embrace it. I have learned a lot about transgender issues through my job. I have read a bit.

But I don’t want to talk about bathrooms or locker rooms. I don’t want to debate the public policy issues in North Carolina or whether the president was right to sue. There will be plenty of time for that.

My first instinct, as ever, has been to protect my child, to make sure Maddy is safe and happy. That’s all most parents ever want for their children.

Life is difficult as it is. But with so much ignorance out there breeding so much fear, so much visceral recoiling from the concept of transgenderism, I fear this will make Maddy’s life that much harder.

So many people I know and respect spout off about the issue, on social media, even in person, because they don’t know about Maddy. They don’t know the reality. They don’t know, so I cut them slack.

They will come around. Only the hateful ones won’t.

Maddy already has experienced some of it on campus. She has been called “an abomination of God,” been told her mother killed herself because she was ashamed of her, that she is “going to burn in hell.”

It must be unimaginably excruciating to hear such things. I feel boiling rage when she tells me.

I admit I sometimes still have a hard time with it all. I look around the house, see the pictures of me with my little girl and my eyes fill with tears. But those memories are forever, and Maddy told me not to take them down, that she cherishes those, too.

Last year, Maddy began talking about transitioning, about having surgery. And about six months ago, Maddy began taking testosterone to begin the process of becoming who she really is.

This week, Maddy went to court, bravely told a judge why she wanted to be a male and wanted her birth certificate changed, too. After the hearing, when it was finally real, when he called me, I don’t think I have ever heard my kid sound so happy. And he wanted the story told.

When I get home later this week, I will see someone officially named Jake Ralston for the first time. And one thing I know for certain: It will be love at first sight.

thanks for the anecdote. we'll add it with the others.
 
LOL! This is what I wrote, damn near word for word. Either you aren't reading or you have completely lost it.

really? seems that you just answer concerns with questions.
 
You sure about that? The two presidential candidates don't. That seems like political suicide.

Again, you're as dense as concrete. This has just been recently posted - before....

ReAD iT SLowlY

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...-transgender-bathrooms-twirls-down-the-drain/

Public support for the progressives’ goal of mandatory mixed-sex rest rooms is down by 20 points since mid-April as more Americans face the once-ludicrous prospect of being forced to share facilities with people of the opposite sex, according to a new Reuters poll.

The poll showed that support for mixed-sex bathrooms dropped 8 points from 46 percent on April 13 to 38 percent on April 19.

Surely you will come back to this with a meaningless question.

LOL! This is what I wrote, damn near word for word. Either you aren't reading or you have completely lost it.

You wrote what Trog? You wrote "You just don't read?" You wrote that I (TSF) have admitted that there is a problem and always will be with boys in men's rooms? You wrote that we shouldn't make the problem worse by now bringing that threat into women's restrooms, locker rooms, and showers?

We all eagerly await your senseless questions in response to our posts.
 
Last edited:
Top