Guess I won't be wearing a skirt anymore

[r.m.anderson]

I heard on CNN today that the US Justice Dept. sent a letter to the Governor of NC that their bathroom law violates federal law and warned the Governor to not enforce it. The letter also gave the Gov. a deadline by which to respond.
So while a lot more states than I would have ever imagined have passed such laws, it looks like they're going the way of the dinosaur.

The Federal government threatened to cut off funding for roads bridges transportation education. With several hundred million $ almost close to a billion $ in Federal aid
at risk and merchants hotels and convention traffic being forfeited - cooler heads are asking the NC Legislature to repeal the bad law.
The Federal funds are tied to Title IX the anti-discrimination Act.

[JeffB1959]

While I have little love for discussing politics, I read somewhere a week or two ago that the current campaign of harassment against transgenders regarding the bathroom issue is payback by conservatives and bible thumpers for SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) giving the green light to gay marriage last year, so the legions of holier-than-thou haters moved on to a softer target to unload their prejudice. I don't know how much truth there is to that rumor, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case.

Nor I. If you're going to play holier-than-thou, you have to pick someone to play the part of thou.

In any event, I can fully understand Bamaskirting's reticence to wear skirts, especially given all the religious mania and intolerance in the South.

That's hard to believe there's anywhere in the USA you can get beat up for wearing a skirt but, not having been there in the rural South for some time, I really have no personal insight.

Sadly, there's always a first time. Just because something like that hasn't happened doesn't mean it can't. That's why I choose busy downtown areas and malls chock full of people too interested in their own affairs to bother with me, and I never venture out after dark ANYWHERE. As for the restroom issue, I always use the men's room, there's no reason to use the women's, regardless of how I'm dressed. It's just common sense.

[dillon]

If you don't identify as female, then you SHOULD be using the men's room. Yes...at some point, it seems likely that one of us may be accosted for our style. Not that I expect it in my own realm, or wish it upon anyone, but when it happens, out little community will then join the ranks of those who have paid the cost of freedom.

[dillon]

I heard on CNN today that the US Justice Dept. sent a letter to the Governor of NC that their bathroom law violates federal law and warned the Governor to not enforce it. The letter also gave the Gov. a deadline by which to respond.

So while a lot more states than I would have ever imagined have passed such laws, it looks like they're going the way of the dinosaur.

It actually was adressed to the UNC System President Margaret Spellings, former GW Bush Admin Secretary of Education, who, many believe, received her appointment late last year as a political patronage pay-off (essentially from a Republican Governor and Legislature) who received the mandate to announce whether the UNC System would comply with the Civil rights Act, or obediently comply with the GOP legislature, still locked in their decision, like the mafia stoolie with his feet cast in concrete, heaped with disgrace and awaiting his own death. This could cost NC $4,300,000,000 from higher education.

What a gang of thuggish imbeciles...Cant wait to vote those gerrymandered bastards out.

[Sinned]

I think that the problem arises, not in the true transgendered, but in the pseudo ones. An example. I, being male and having the usual dangly bit, dress up as a female complete with wig, makeup, heels and so on. I announce that I now identify as female but do nothing to move towards SRS. It would be an uncomfortable situation for any women for me to use their toilets and possibly me spying on them as it would probably still be obvious that I was still a man in woman's clothing. Under present legislation I'm not sure of a really good answer to this but the NC legislation sure isn't it. But it would be an equally uncomfortable situation for a ftm full transsexual, now having the dangly bit through SRS, to use the female toilets because her/his original birth certificate said female. And of course the situation would apply vice versa.

[Bamaskirting]

I think that the problem arises, not in the true transgendered, but in the pseudo ones. An example. I, being male and having the usual dangly bit, dress up as a female complete with wig, makeup, heels and so on. I announce that I now identify as female but do nothing to move towards SRS. It would be an uncomfortable situation for any women for me to use their toilets and possibly me spying on them as it would probably still be obvious that I was still a man in woman's clothing. Under present legislation I'm not sure of a really good answer to this but the NC legislation sure isn't it. But it would be an equally uncomfortable situation for a ftm full transsexual, now having the dangly bit through SRS, to use the female toilets because her/his original birth certificate said female. And of course the situation would apply vice versa.

where i live it would spill over to me. just for wearing a skirt totally presenting as a man i am going to be roped in with trannies. i consider myself a crossdresser for various reasons. but i totally present as a man. but i will be considered the problem by these south alabama hicks. that is why i say it has been a problem. all i hear about is target target target. tomorrow i am wearing my grey pencil skirt. hell, i may even go to target

[dillon]

I think that the problem arises, not in the true transgendered, but in the pseudo ones. An example. I, being male and having the usual dangly bit, dress up as a female complete with wig, makeup, heels and so on. I announce that I now identify as female but do nothing to move towards SRS. It would be an uncomfortable situation for any women for me to use their toilets and possibly me spying on them as it would probably still be obvious that I was still a man in woman's clothing. Under present legislation I'm not sure of a really good answer to this but the NC legislation sure isn't it. But it would be an equally uncomfortable situation for a ftm full transsexual, now having the dangly bit through SRS, to use the female toilets because her/his original birth certificate said female. And of course the situation would apply vice versa.

I think the point is, Dennis, that SOMEONE may be made uncomfortable whichever way the issue is settled. I would contend that the probability of some disturbed pervert making trouble in a public restroom, effectively declaring himself to be trandgendered to chance a virtually unobtainable peep at some woman seated on a toilet. or to expose himself, is remote, especially since he could see whatever he wants on the internet. Not that there aren't nuts out there, but how would the existence of the law alone thwart the commission of a perverse act? It won't. It only criminalizes a reasonable fear of "bashing" by transgendered citizens. Plus, acts of male "indecent exposure" occur far more often in public stores and parks than in restrooms, despite the fact that "ladies' rooms" are obviously vulnerable sites for misbehavior.

Too, in this country, most public bathrooms have doored dividers for sit-down toilet stalls. Men's rooms are different, as urinals are frequently un-partitioned, though IMO they should be, but no law requires it. The question is whether the MTF transgender is at greater physical risk and psychological distress when forced to use a male-only restroom than women who might be in the enclosed privacy stalls next to "her" in gender-tolerant restrooms. After more than a year of study, and two public hearings, the City of Charlotte decided that was indeed the case.

I think some acceptable compromise could have been found for places where nudity is unavoidable, such as school locker rooms, but, as with most of their acts, Republican politicians turned the issue into an opportunistic power grab, and the hastily-passed response went far beyond a rational compromise. It rejected ANY transgender accommodation, prohibited local governments from reflecting the will of their own populace, and institutionalized the most repressive theocratic response possible. The Republican legislature debated their law for less that 2 days.

Our spineless, insipid Governor has the unenviable role of playing cheerleader for these Talibanic automatons; he has repeatedly lied about HB2 and the reaction to it, and tries at every juncture to downplay the full measure of the law's ramifications. He should have been the "grown-up" in this shameful affair, but apparently doesn't have the nads to stand up to the lunatic fringe of his own Party.

Part of the problem is that we are perhaps less aware of the generational change in regard and acceptance of transgendered individuals. But we must move forward. I hope that we as a society, can make it as unacceptable to castigate based on sexual orientation and gender identity as it is now to utter a racial or religious slur. Of course, we still have the demagogues like our illustrious Republican Hero whose strategy is to make the unthinking dopes in the electorate comfortable with their bigotry, racism, xenophobia, and misogyny. I don't know how to deal with people who choose to live with their heads deeply lodged up their own Trumps...

http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2016/05/06/andrew-sullivan

[Sinned]

Thank you Carl, not being American and since I don't think we have the same problem over here because of our differing political and local authority structure, I failed to see how things could have gotten as bad as they are. Thank you for enlightening me. I don't think that the same situation could happen here because any attempt would be immediately illegal under our equality laws. Yes, on the internot you can get access to pretty much anything you want so what would drive someone to risk trying a peek is anyone's guess. Incidentally some gent's toilets her edo have a porcelain or melamine separator between urinals but it isn't the general rule. Most large places have a gents, ladies and disabled toilets with the gents also having baby changing facilities. To be honest it wouldn't bother me if all toilets were unisex as long as the sit-downs were in separate stalls with doors. Not even bothered if they did away with urinals either as it may be awkward for the ladies if some man is standing at one when she comes in. The only problem with that is that some men are either too bone idle to lift the seat or so inconsiderate and uncaring to just spray all over and not clean up after them. On second thoughts maybe keep the urinals.

[crfriend]

Thank you Carl, not being American and since I don't think we have the same problem over here because of our differing political and local authority structure, I failed to see how things could have gotten as bad as they are. Thank you for enlightening me.

I believe you want to thank Dillon, not me. He's been vastly more eloquent on the topic than I.

[Sinned]

Sorry Dillon I just didn't credit you as I should have done, no excuses I just didn't properly read from whom the missive issued. And thanks Carl for pointing this out.

[moonshadow]

Not even bothered if they did away with urinals either as it may be awkward for the ladies if some man is standing at one when she comes in. The only problem with that is that some men are either too bone idle to lift the seat or so inconsiderate and uncaring to just spray all over and not clean up after them. On second thoughts maybe keep the urinals.

I agree, and have long advocated western cultures gradual shift to unisex restrooms, however as someone who has spent many-a-times working in women's restrooms cleaning them, stocking the, repairing them, etc... let me just say that when it comes to bathroom edicate, women can be just as big as offenders as men. Just as in everything else, there are proper women, and nasty women, proper men, and nasty men.

When I worked at fast food restaurants as a teenager, I have had to clean my share of menstrual blood off of toilet seats and flush feces someone left behind down the commode. Trash cans ran over, and sometimes the whole room could just be an outright mess. Don't get me wrong, the mens room was no better, but I'm just making the point... women ain't as proper and dainty as people like to think they are... make no mistake... their sh!t stinks too.

It really just comes down to one simple fact... in the restroom especially, most humans are slobs.

To tell you the truth... I've about had a bathroom burn out.

It's ironic that I brought this up [unisex restrooms] on facebook, and the pro-transgender feminist chimed in and declared that they didn't want to share a restroom with big old burly men, they feared they would be raped... and thus I lost a little respect for the pro TG rights movement that day. I wanted to find a wall and hit my head against it.

So liberals think that a TG person should have the right to use whatever bathroom they want, and conservatives don't.

But liberals don't want to share any restroom with regular men because they might get raped.

Conservatives don't want TG's to share restrooms with anyone because they feel TG people might rape little girls.

Interestingly in that regard they are both on the same side. That being, men are rapist pigs.

Here's what I think, liberals, conservatives, politicians, and people in general have one thing in common with the bathrooms they choose to occupy... they all stink, and they all are full of crap!

Piss in the woods, be happy.

[dillon]

I don't believe I ever actually took a position on whether or how bathrooms could or should be made gender-neutral. What I've been saying is that a one-party legislature with an obvious theocratic agenda has claimed to know better than local governments what is right and wrong for EVERY county, city, town or community, and that they have dismissed, evidently without examination, the concerns that led to the passage of Charlotte's ordinance. I think a compromise position could have been found to address as much as possible those issues.No one is going to be totally happy whichever way the matter is ultimately resolved, but to dismiss it with such prejudice was simply unconscionable and unethical. But it is par for the course with this legislature and other things they have done or undone. I think that both sides have valid concerns, though the arguments of the conservatives seem rather feeble and outmoded, as if they either had not considered how they would defend their actions, or as if don't even think they need to try and defend their actions. That is why I will be giving my time and what little I can afford in $$$ to see that the bums are tossed out. As I have said, anti-gay, anti-gender politics affects my immediate and extended family, and I am not of a mind to forgive or forget.

[moonshadow]

I know what you're saying Dillon. You're basically saying the party of "small government" made a sweeping move in "big government style" stripping local governments the ability to legislate this issue on their own, and that it was more or less done so because the party of "small government" (The GOP) has an ax to grind with the LGBT community.*

Thus, when it comes to the LGBT community, the GOP is all for "big government", enacting all sorts of laws and regulations to effectively make life difficult for LGBT people.

As our REPUBLIC is built on the tenets of individual freedom and liberty, you would think that REPUBLICans would embrace freedom and justice for ALL. But... I guess not.

* The real question is WHY? What to republicans have to gain from all of this harassment and bigotry? Don't these people realize that when we trod all over the rights of the minority view then we ALL are in danger of having our civil liberties stripped? The anglo-saxon, protestant Christian class of people are thinning out. More and more people are becoming at least moderate with diverse religious beliefs, diverse moral codes, diverse races, and now diverse family structures.

Before you know it, anglo-saxon, white protestant Christians WILL be the minority. Then they'll be clinging to the separation of church and state, as that will be the only thing keeping the heathen view out of the public square.

[Caultron]

...What to republicans have to gain from all of this harassment and bigotry?...

Lower taxes and higher profits for the wealthy.

That's it.

All this talk about smaller government is a mask for cheaper government, one that takes lower taxes to operate and that eliminates regulations that diminish profits.

But how can you get a majority of citizens to vote for the rich to get richer at the expense of the poor and middle classes? One way is to appeal to single-issue, hot-button interests, such as gun ownership, religious enforcement, anti-abortion, and racism. Another way is to convince the middle class that they're worse off because the Democrats have stolen their money through taxation and given it to the poor. (You have to wonder who'd believe that the poor are getting all the money, except that people apparently do).

And then there are all the character assassinations, false accusations, baseless investigations, name-calling, lies, and threats paid for by corporations and extremely wealthy individuals who channel their money (bribes, in my book) through non-profits to maintain anonymity.

It's a sad result that the ideals of Americsn democracy have fallen to such a base level.

(Sorry for the politics, couldn't help myself, self-flagelating, returning to my hideyhole...)

[Bamaskirting]

I did go out in my skirt today. A denim one. Felt nice to run around the craft store in that