Target Down 5 Billion Since Embracing Trans Bathroom Policy

[IndySteel]

If it's got a dick, use the men's room. If it's got a vagina, use the women's room. How it makes them "feel" doesn't matter in the slightest.

 

[oneforthebus]

15000000000000000000000000000% correct. absolutely correct.


this makes it LEGAL for anyone, regardless of sex, to enter either restroom without being questioned. You, onefor, can walk into the men's room wearing a pantsuit. a man can walk into the women's room wearing an NBA jersey and jorts. you CANNOT question this now. nor even consider that something is amiss until a crime occurs.

What crime? Why would someone choose to draw attention to themselves in that way if they were looking to commit a surreptitious crime like peeping or a surprise attack like a sexual assault?

 

[oneforthebus]

You have some solid ideas, del.

But interesting how I have seen anyone answer the question I posed - why is the President of the United freaking States giving orders about bathroom usage???

A better question might be why is it any business of any government's where or how I pee, as long as I'm not infringing on anyone else.

 

[deljzc]

A better question might be why is it any business of any government's where or how I pee, as long as I'm not infringing on anyone else.

Well that's just stupid.

For as long as we've had public bathrooms we have segregated men and women. Legally. And while I can't really think of the statute or law I would be breaking if I started just deciding to use women's bathrooms all the time, I would get in some kind of trouble. Or kicked out of the public place/business I was at.

So don't make this sound like it's new. It's not.

The truth is a women's bathroom was somewhat (maybe entirely) created as a "safe space" for women to do something much of our culture still considers very private and stigmatizes to some degree. It is a place they know they can go and be completely separate form men. Period.

That has now changed.

A women's room is no longer that. It is anything because there is no longer a strict definition required to enter.

I think it's a HUGE leap both in definition, cultural norms, the definition of "sex" and "privacy" and what defines privacy from the opposite sex and if that's even protected anymore (of if we even need to have it).

 

[oneforthebus]

Well that's just stupid.

For as long as we've had public bathrooms we have segregated men and women. Legally. And while I can't really think of the statute or law I would be breaking if I started just deciding to use women's bathrooms all the time, I would get in some kind of trouble. Or kicked out of the public place/business I was at.

So don't make this sound like it's new. It's not.

The truth is a women's bathroom was somewhat (maybe entirely) created as a "safe space" for women to do something much of our culture still considers very private and stigmatizes to some degree. It is a place they know they can go and be completely separate form men. Period.

That has now changed.

A women's room is no longer that. It is anything because there is no longer a strict definition required to enter.

I think it's a HUGE leap both in definition, cultural norms, the definition of "sex" and "privacy" and what defines privacy from the opposite sex and if that's even protected anymore (of if we even need to have it).

There never was a strict definition to enter. I promise you, you have gone to the bathroom next to transgendered people before, and so have I. You have gone to bathroom next to gay guys and I have gone to the bathroom next to lesbians. It didn't bother any of us a bit. Now suddenly we need a law protecting us from something that never harmed us in the first place.

 

[MTC]

Thanks a lot liberals. Now you're gonna have molesters and perve in bathrooms. Then what? People bring this **** upon themselves

 

[hamster]

Hey, would you ladies mind if I showered with you? I identify as a lesbian.

 

[Yinzerlyn]

From my daughter's HS principal today:

Derby High School


Derby High School
Reply|
Today 5:45 PM
You
Newsletters
Getting too much email from Derby High School? You can unsubscribe
Dear Parents,

Today at Derby High School, a local news outlet produced a story on the recent directive issued from the Federal government relating to transgender students and the use of public school restrooms. Prior to the news story, Derby Public Schools sought legal counsel on the issue. Based on this the district has directed Derby High School to comply with the guidance issued from the President, The United States Justice Department of Civil Rights and Department of Education.

 

[deljzc]

There never was a strict definition to enter. I promise you, you have gone to the bathroom next to transgendered people before, and so have I. You have gone to bathroom next to gay guys and I have gone to the bathroom next to lesbians. It didn't bother any of us a bit. Now suddenly we need a law protecting us from something that never harmed us in the first place.

Of course there was a definition.

And I already established this isn't about MEN'S bathrooms. I could care less.

You haven't really addressed anything I've said. It is clear in the history of segregated bathrooms we created women's bathrooms for THEIR BENEFIT. Call it "protecting", call it "safe space", call it "decorum", call it whatever you want. But the basic premise of the female bathroom was to give women a place AWAY FROM MEN.

This executive order now decides that this "space" we've established for woman over the last 100 years of our culture is not for them anymore.

Somehow that seems like a bit of a reach for a practice (men's and women's bathrooms) that is already a segregation and not equal we've accepted in society.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

You're equating a transgendered person using a public bathroom with a peeping tom...they are not the same thing.

I am not equating a transgender with a peeping tom. How many times do Supe and the rest of us have to say this. It is those who would abuse the laws favoring transgenders that we are concerned about. Please - stop misapplying labels. I've no issue with them. It's the law and the law opening doors for these predators.

And I've shown you and others - it's already happening. Predators abusing the new laws. Do you just disregard this?

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Pure speculation and conjecture. But carry on with the hysterics festival, you seem to be enjoying it.

Speculation and conjecture LOL. You just put your hands over your eyes and discount the countless stories posted and out there for you to read and acknowledge. The doors are opened Tibs and the preds are walking in.

Keep on denying. It's what you do.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

This is a gender thing, not a privacy thing. PUBLIC bathrooms were always PUBLIC. It's not the same as your house. There are things you can do in your house that are illegal to do in public bathrooms. Also, you have no right to public bathrooms.

Oh, the entitlement!

Public bathrooms have always been segregated by gender. In what world do you live where they are not? Croatia?

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

The point of the links is that banning transgendered people from using women's bathrooms doesn't prevent children from being assaulted in bathrooms. People don't have to disguise themselves to assault other people. Heck, if a girl's alone in a public bathroom a MAN can walk into the bathroom dressed as a MAN and assault her. It's already illegal whether he's dressed as a man or dressed as a woman.

Nope it doesn't. But it certainly increases the risk. This is unarguable.

But ya'll are arguing it.

 

[JMM]

We used to be such a proud country. We used to make fun of Europeans who would get embroiled in similar nonsense. We even used to fly space shuttles. Times like these we need to hear Ken Shabby talking about cleaning public lavatories:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jhm4SMlGnbk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Not again!

http://www.fpiw.org/blog/2016/02/25...-to-womens-locker-rooms-through-bathroom-law/

Convicted sex offender seeks access to women’s locker rooms through bathroom law

Seattle-based transgender rights activist Johanna Wolf has been among the most vitriolic in her responses to privacy activists, claiming that it’s only their “hatred” and “bigotry” that is trying to keep her and others out of the locker rooms and showers.

Recently we have discovered that Johanna used to be a man, Jonathan Adrian Wolf, who is a sex-offender convicted of raping a 20-year old deaf girl in Nebraska in 2006.

Why is this relevant?

Because a sex-offender is now seeking access to a woman’s locker room through this open bathroom policy.

Wolf, now identifying as a woman (view the name change document here), appears to be shocked and offended that people in Washington want to take away “her” rights to use the locker room and shower of “her” choice

We're just wearing tin foil hats

 

[Troglodyte]

You just put your hands over your eyes and discount the countless stories posted and out there for you to read and acknowledge.

On the contrary, what's being discounted is the BILLIONS, if not HUNDREDS of BILLIONS, of people using public bathroom in the same time period without any crime being committed whatsoever.

Perspective: the bane of hysteria

 

[Superman]

On the contrary, what's being discounted is the BILLIONS, if not HUNDREDS of BILLIONS, of people using public bathroom in the same time period without any crime being committed whatsoever.

Perspective: the bane of hysteria

Interesting opinion. I guess we can apply this same train of thought to other issues as well.

 

[Troglodyte]

Interesting opinion. I guess we can apply this same train of thought to other issues as well.

What train of thought? It's perspective.

 

[21STEELERS21]

Priests have caused more damage to children than transgenders, maybe we should prevent priests from using
public rest rooms, particularly those in church.

 

[Superman]

What train of thought? It's perspective.

so this perspective can be applied to other issues.

 

[Rod Farva]

Supe- this is about the trannies isn't it?



I would like to ask Tibs, who has quit this thread apparently, or others who have argued his side of this thread this.....Since you seem to be willing to have us all assume some risk, no matter how miniscule it may be, of enhanced access to public toilets, showers, etc., (because, freedom), are you also willing to have us all (and by us I mean you, me, everyone) assume some miniscule risk and permit an openly armed public (which is a right that actually IS acknowledged in our Constitution)?

Cope- appreciate your response,.......haven't been parenting a young child in some time......unaware of what accommodations are like for that these days. But what's at issue here to me is not whether one chooses to look at dick in the bathroom but whether one who chooses to show dick to others has now had at least some of the former barriers to doing so removed.

My thoughts are that penises belong in mens rooms, vages in women's. If someone surreptitiously uses the room not designated for their natural, physical makeup I don't care because I'll never know. That is why as Supe has said many times.......IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT!
But the way this Imperial Decree has been handed down is 1. None of Obama's ******* business. 2. Incredibly poorly thought out and knee jerkingly issued. It's an absolute ******* free for all........if it feels good, do it.

Those who believe they are wrongly gendered are not normal. It's in your head. In the end that's it. Your head is what's wrong, not the rest of your body. Why does the rest of normal society have to accommodate YOU? The world doesn't ******* revolve around YOU! We're trying to have a society here....I know....in today's culture what's "normal", right? Are we even allowed to use that word anymore? What other aberrant behaviors will we begin to accept as normal? I'm not going to debate this. It's been done. I'll be called out for my caveman views and lack of progressive foresight, etc. Fire away. But there actually IS such a thing as the rhetorical and over used thing known as the"slippery slope." We're on it now.........I just hope at some point the ice picks of reality and reason can stop the slide before we get to cliff's edge.

I'm done now too............before I lose my ****.

 

[Troglodyte]

so this perspective can be applied to other issues.

It's not "this" perspective or "my" perspective. It's perspective as defined by a ratio - numerator / denominator. You can apply it to anything that can be quantified.

 

[oneforthebus]

Since you seem to be willing to have us all assume some risk, no matter how miniscule it may be, of enhanced access to public toilets, showers, etc., (because, freedom), are you also willing to have us all (and by us I mean you, me, everyone) assume some miniscule risk and permit an openly armed public (which is a right that actually IS acknowledged in our Constitution)?

Absolutely. We should not bar law abiding people from owning guns simply because a small percentage of miscreants will take advantage of it in order to harm people.

But what's at issue here to me is not whether one chooses to look at dick in the bathroom but whether one who chooses to show dick to others has now had at least some of the former barriers to doing so removed.

Yet any man who wants to show his dick to any little boy does not have, and has never had, those same barriers. Why don't we have men rampantly showing their dicks to little boys? Or gay men rampantly showing their dicks to other men? Because the vast, vast majority of people do not do that sort of thing. People who show their dicks inappropriately can and should be prosecuted, whether they are in a men's room, walking down the street, straight gay transgendered or anything else. Purposely engaging in lewd and lascivious behavior in public is already illegal, as it should be. Which has to lead to the conclusion that fear of people showing their dicks is not the real issue here.

Those who believe they are wrongly gendered are not normal. It's in your head. In the end that's it. Your head is what's wrong, not the rest of your body. Why does the rest of normal society have to accommodate YOU?

I can't say I really disagree with you...I'm not sure transgender isn't a mental illness, a hormonal imbalance, a fetish or a choice. No one however is asking to be "accommodated". You don't have to stand there and watch them go to the bathroom nor allow them to watch you. If someone is living life passing as a woman for whatever reason, they shouldn't have to announce their choice to be doing what they're doing by walking into a men's bathroom dressed completely as a woman. The government should not interfere with where I choose to go to the bathroom as long as I'm not bothering anyone else.

 

[oicu8ad]

I have skimmed over lots of this thread, but here are my thoughts:

Target has a right to have the bathroom policy that desire (as ****** up as it is).
I have the right to not do business with them because I disagree with it.

Simple as that.

[/IMG]

My issue with it is that you are giving predators EASY access to women and children that they wouldn't have had otherwise. Not saying just the transgenders, but perverts of all sexes, religions, colors, & walks of life. Why make it easier?

 

[IndySteel]

Why make it easier?

Because liberals and the political correct are insane.