Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   This Bathroom Law Confusion
14174dm
Member (Idle past 1138 days)
Posts: 161
From: Cincinnati OH
Joined: 10-12-2015


(2)
Message 43 of 166 (782927)
04-30-2016 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
04-29-2016 3:13 PM


Reality of Politicians
First thoughts - Smoke & Mirrors or Bread and Circuses - a show to distract from any meaningful issues. Pander to the small minds with loud voices. Best if it fires up the loudest of the opposition so everything is US or THEM.
Is this really a problem? What's the percentage of the population we're talking about? According to Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law guestimate - maybe 0.3% of population is transgender. How long are you in a public bathroom anyways?
What's the percentage of children living in poverty? According to US Dept of Education National Center for Education Statistics - 21% of children
That's what's important to politicians - Where a handful of people pee.
Because millions of hungry, cold children aren't worth their time.
Frankly I think a lot of conservative issues are more about not spending "My Money" rather than fixing OUR PROBLEMS. Hungry kids, broken water systems, failing bridges are to be ignored because they cost money. Let's spend all our time fixing problems that don't exist because they are cheap and sound good to the loudest of the base.
The ME generation in operation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 04-29-2016 3:13 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Faith, posted 04-30-2016 8:59 PM 14174dm has replied

  
14174dm
Member (Idle past 1138 days)
Posts: 161
From: Cincinnati OH
Joined: 10-12-2015


Message 63 of 166 (782979)
05-01-2016 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Faith
04-30-2016 8:59 PM


Re: Reality of Politicians
I apologize for ranting only about conservatives.
The liberals are just as bad.
I am sure we can find equally stupid laws from the liberal side.
==== Warning more ranting ====
Why do we have make a law about everything? You just create reasons for lawyers to split hairs. Then you have to go back and "fix" your law. When the legislature changes party, they feel obligated to change the law again.
So NC state government has now overruled any accommodation that local schools, etc. have come up with to solve their own situation.
Did the authors of this law actually think it through? Who gets to check what's in a patron's pants and on the birth certificate? Talk about government intrusion!
Do we have to have bathroom licenses now? Coming next are the sit-ins as protest and civil disobedience. It will be hard to give good television interviews with the flushing and running water noises.
This may be the NC push to get what all parents want - a single use / family bathroom everywhere where we can take our opposite gender child or children of both genders. With a changing table. And short toilets. And coat hooks.
Edited by 14174dm, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Faith, posted 04-30-2016 8:59 PM Faith has not replied

  
14174dm
Member (Idle past 1138 days)
Posts: 161
From: Cincinnati OH
Joined: 10-12-2015


Message 77 of 166 (783012)
05-02-2016 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by jar
05-02-2016 10:42 AM


Re: No more M/F bathrooms
Being an unattractive male, I can only guess at why some people are concerned about safety.
A lone woman in an infrequently used restroom may feel vulnerable to being trapped by a man. She could be subject to everything from the creepy stare to unwanted/uninvited advances to peeping to sexual violence.
Yes it will happen with or without the law. I think the intent is to at least let women know if they see an obvious male in the women's bathroom that he shouldn't be there.
I just think the way the law is written and enacted doesn't do what was intended as far as safety. It worked for polarizing politics.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by jar, posted 05-02-2016 10:42 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by jar, posted 05-02-2016 12:01 PM 14174dm has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024