Man cites 'gender identity' rule after stripping in women's washroom

[Slava]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

If his point was to prove that spiteful regressives will ruin it for everyone else, then I guess point made?

I think there are two separate issues here. I have zero problem with Trans people having equal rights and access and all of that. I think that's great.

I do think that we need to be careful not to enact policies with bad unintended consequences though. So if this current law allows a guy to act in this manner, not once but twice, with zero consequences and no recourse then it highlights a problem. Is this guy just being an ass? Probably. But we have to have some way to deal with that also.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think there are two separate issues here. I have zero problem with Trans people having equal rights and access and all of that. I think that's great.

I do think that we need to be careful not to enact policies with bad unintended consequences though. So if this current law allows a guy to act in this manner, not once but twice, with zero consequences and no recourse then it highlights a problem. Is this guy just being an ass? Probably. But we have to have some way to deal with that also.

[GullFoss]

this was only a matter of time, and if a high profile case happens in Alberta, it will likely be the end of the NDP. I'm a big Notely fan; some of the stuff they did - carbon tax, higher marginal tax rates - had to be done. But boy...being ideological also makes you very stupid.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

So the solution is....sassy Hispanic homosexuals?

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think there are two separate issues here. I have zero problem with Trans people having equal rights and access and all of that. I think that's great.

I do think that we need to be careful not to enact policies with bad unintended consequences though. So if this current law allows a guy to act in this manner, not once but twice, with zero consequences and no recourse then it highlights a problem. Is this guy just being an ass? Probably. But we have to have some way to deal with that also.

They/we do have ways of dealing with this. Trespassing, mischief, causing a disturbance, peeping, indecent exposure, break and enter, assault. Pick any one depending on where you live. I'm not sure why he was not charged but maybe there should be a specific charge of impersonation or something. It's important to realize this is an outlier much the same way Levant is a journalist. Though enacted recently this law has actually been legislated since 2006.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

It's too early in the morning to exchange debate about this, but later articles from more legitimate sources stated that the man was a previously vocal opponent of the new law, does not identify as a woman, and was doing this because he doesn't understand what gender identity is but thought he was proving a point.

Look at how utterly shocked I am. This just strikes me as one of those things that is not a real, actual problem but a simplistic point of opposition dreamed up by people who are generally opposed to the concept of transgender rights. It reminds me of the people who opposed gay marriage because "next someone's going to try to marry a tree". No, no one is actually going to do that.

That being said, here's a question: instead of assuming that the sign on the door refers to gender, why can't we instead assume it refers to sex? Why would this be an objectionable way to resolve this silly "problem"? Human beings remain a sexually dimorphic species. Gender identity does not change this. I'm serious, this is my proposed solution, unless someone can give me a good explanation for why it's a bad one.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Look at how utterly shocked I am. This just strikes me as one of those things that is not a real, actual problem but a simplistic point of opposition dreamed up by people who are generally opposed to the concept of transgender rights. It reminds me of the people who opposed gay marriage because "next someone's going to try to marry a tree". No, no one is actually going to do that.

That being said, here's a question: instead of assuming that the sign on the door refers to gender, why can't we instead assume it refers to sex? Why would this be an objectionable way to resolve this silly "problem"? Human beings remain a sexually dimorphic species. Gender identity does not change this. I'm serious, this is my proposed solution, unless someone can give me a good explanation for why it's a bad one.

No you're wrong, someone absolutely is going to try and do that.

The key is to let them do their thing without allowing it to bother you.

If you're opposed to hot foliage luvin then you have to learn to just let it go rather than try and stop them.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

They/we do have ways of dealing with this. Trespassing, mischief, causing a disturbance, peeping, indecent exposure, break and enter, assault. Pick any one depending on where you live. I'm not sure why he was not charged but maybe there should be a specific charge of impersonation or something. It's important to realize this is an outlier much the same way Levant is a journalist. Though enacted recently this law has actually been legislated since 2006.

He probably wasn't charged with those things because those things don't apply?

Really though, we're probably on the same side here in that I have zero issue with the trans rights. I do have an issue where we start to have weirdos and jerks using the laws to get their kicks. I don’t think that is limited to just me or call small subsection of the population either.

And yeah, I don't have an easy answer to this. I don’t even know what the answer would be. I just know that people aren't going to be fond of having their wives/girlfriends/daughters exposed to this kind of thing. Which really doesn't seem particularly unreasonable either.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Investigated and brought to trial? Where is the money for that coming from? And how would a court determine if someone is trans-gendered without infringing on their right to privacy?

And you didn't answer my question: what are the staff at the pool supposed to do?

You are so bloody narrowminded. You are missing the whole point of this - the most important thing is to tick the "progressive" box. Money and practical life applications are just trifles. You want to burn in hell with Justice Scalia don't you?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

You are so bloody narrowminded. You are missing the whole point of this - the most important thing is to tick the "progressive" box. Money and practical life applications are just trifles. You want to burn in hell with Justice Scalia don't you?

Whoa, hey man! You cant put a price on morality and social justice.

I mean, they have a cost but you cant put a price on them.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Investigated and brought to trial? Where is the money for that coming from? And how would a court determine if someone is trans-gendered without infringing on their right to privacy?

And you didn't answer my question: what are the staff at the pool supposed to do?

As this case is American, the right to privacy applies, but if you were to extend it into Canada, Canadians do not have a Charter right to privacy.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Slava

He probably wasn't charged with those things because those things don't apply?

Really though, we're probably on the same side here in that I have zero issue with the trans rights. I do have an issue where we start to have weirdos and jerks using the laws to get their kicks. I don’t think that is limited to just me or call small subsection of the population either.

And yeah, I don't have an easy answer to this. I don’t even know what the answer would be. I just know that people aren't going to be fond of having their wives/girlfriends/daughters exposed to this kind of thing. Which really doesn't seem particularly unreasonable either.

If there is no law covering men using women's bathrooms, then why would we need a law allowing transgender men to use women's bathrooms? Whether it's invasion of privacy or harassment or whatever, the law is most likely dependent upon intent. But there is most definitely a law for this guy in every state if someone chooses to pursue it.

Why would someone be "not fond" of transgender people peeing in the appropriate bathroom? Are transgender people more dangerous pee'ers?

[REDVAN]

Was this "man" making any comments, was "he" filming the girls, was "he" touching himself?

If the answer is no, then it is my opinion that the girls in the changing room are the ones doing something wrong/immoral because they have no right to question someone else's sexual identity.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

Was this "man" making any comments, was "he" filming the girls, was "he" touching himself?

If the answer is no, then it is my opinion that the girls in the changing room are the ones doing something wrong/immoral because they have no right to question someone else's sexual identity.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat?


I don't understand what would be so traumatizing for a man who indentifies as a woman to change in front of other men? Unless youve had surgery to change that, than you can be whoever you want on the inside but you are still in a mans body. I cannot understand for the life of me how people could argue that. Allowing this to happen is absolutely going to have people using these new "rights" to abuse them. Doesn't the women's right to feel comfortable in the change room come into play? I doubt someone who has not had any changes done to their body is going to be "sexualized" in the men's change room, they are more likely to have people oogling them in the women's room. Sometimes I feel like people feel like they want these things just to push the boundary cause they can.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

Was this "man" making any comments, was "he" filming the girls, was "he" touching himself?

If the answer is no, then it is my opinion that the girls in the changing room are the ones doing something wrong/immoral because they have no right to question someone else's sexual identity.

[insert not sure if serious gif here]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Sometimes I feel like people feel like they want these things just to push the boundary cause they can.

I wouldn't say that about transgendered people themselves, but it's pretty clearly the motivation for a lot of the people crusading on their behalf. In 10 years it will be something else. Basically, anything that can be used as a cudgel to attack the Normative Hegemonic Patriarchy will be seized by people for whom progressive doesn't really have any meaning other than an endless war against anyone perceived to have more Privilege. In this case, it's eleven year old girls who need to be shaken out of their complacency and give up their uptight notions of safety and privacy.

But this is one battle the crusaders won't win. Because if there's one group you don't want to piss off in this day and age, it's moms.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat?


I don't understand what would be so traumatizing for a man who indentifies as a woman to change in front of other men? Unless youve had surgery to change that, than you can be whoever you want on the inside but you are still in a mans body. I cannot understand for the life of me how people could argue that. Allowing this to happen is absolutely going to have people using these new "rights" to abuse them. Doesn't the women's right to feel comfortable in the change room come into play?.

The main answer to your question is that it is very risky for a transgender woman...man who became woman...to use a male bathroom. Lots of dummies still think it's a threat or are just scared by something different. And a person living as a woman is going to create all kinds of unwanted attention by going into a men's room.

And also I think most people have no concept of what transgender is. It's weird to expect someone living as a woman to use the men's room.

[RougeUnderoos]

Basically the idea here is that creepy straight men will abuse this and use it as an excuse to do their creepy things, so transgendered people are out of luck.

I hope this kind of thing never happens to me and my group (of straight men). For example, I hope they don't take away my right to drive because lesbians might drive drunk.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Basically, anything that can be used as a cudgel to attack the Normative Hegemonic Patriarchy will be seized by people for whom progressive doesn't really have any meaning other than an endless war against anyone perceived to have more Privilege. In this case, it's eleven year old girls who need to be shaken out of their complacency and give up their uptight notions of safety and privacy.

But this is one battle the crusaders won't win. Because if there's one group you don't want to piss off in this day and age, it's moms.

I also agree that non transgendered men should be kept from changing in women's bathrooms as was the case here. And I suspect mothers of trans kids may disagree with you.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think there are two separate issues here. I have zero problem with Trans people having equal rights and access and all of that. I think that's great.

I do think that we need to be careful not to enact policies with bad unintended consequences though. So if this current law allows a guy to act in this manner, not once but twice, with zero consequences and no recourse then it highlights a problem. Is this guy just being an ass? Probably. But we have to have some way to deal with that also.

Personally, I think that the problem could be solved in a cut and dry way by having people state gender for ID cards, passports, etc. instead of sex. That way no one gets to ask other people about their genitals because it isn't anyone's business but their own.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I also agree that non transgendered men should be kept from changing in women's bathrooms as was the case here. And I suspect mothers of trans kids may disagree with you.

I don't think that anyone disagrees that non-trans men should change in the mens change room. The problem here is that this guy did, apparently just because the law allows him to, and there doesn't seem to be a lot that can be done to stop that.

Like I said before this has less to do with the rights of trans people and more to do with how that law is written, or what kind of accommodations are made.