I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
No they aren't intimidating to women and children in bathrooms. They go in and do the typical things that women/girls do in public bathrooms and they leave. Don't address the transwoman, address the feelings of th he few who are bothered. Public education is relatively cheap as compared to enforcement of a bathroom law.
You just keep arguing that there's a problem that needs some in immediate remedy. There's not. That's the right wing media amplifying this right wing "concern" so that their consumers believe that there's a real issue that needs to be addressed. As you demonstrated yourself, there's not a plethora of cases of transsexuals exposing themselves in bathrooms or attacking women in bathrooms or locker rooms. There is no evidence that transsexuals are a danger to women in any setting.
So why is this a huge conservative republican issue?
That's right... it's manufactured to agitate conservatives in another "us versus them" exercise. Fascists and authoritarians use anxiety about "others" to consolidate their support. History teaches us this.
Make everyone feel safe by using facts and not lying to conservatives about transgender attacks on women.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
No. You are not supposed to misrepresent facts such as "back logs" as "police will not use rape kits because they are too expensive".
If you read my comment again. I accused both parties of not collaborating with eachother and throwing jabs at eachother for political purposes.
BOTH PARITIES.
And I lf politicians do not get their heads put of their butts, this will result in BOTH GIRLS, WOMEN AND TRANS- WOMEN BEING HARMED.
Except I didn't misrepresent facts... that's just your BS
I know what you said... the remark was trying to lay that lack of empathy and collaborative interest on both sides... more BS. It's not both sides, clearly.
You should specify that the REPUBLICAN party should get their heads out of their butts because the Democrats aren't making laws that target transfolk, Republicans are. Poorly thought out legislation like the antiabortion laws.
Police don't use rape kits because they are too expensive? Have a source for that one?
Rape is against the law so 8f an assult happens in the men's bathroom they should call the police. Isn't that what you said women and children should do?
You are irrational and cannot see past the debate in order to make everyone feel safe and comfortable. Including transwomen. You are more upset about conservatives opinion and beliefs. This is a reflection of the far left culture, media and Democrat politicians.
I do not imagine this discussion will go anywhere.
What! This discussion has definitely taken off. Maybe not the way you'd like but there are some very valid points made.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
OK thanks. I'm saying political interest of both parties are not helping anyone.
Republicans are not fascist. They were elected under a DEMOCRACY.
Trying to get the mostly peaceful just an idea far leftist riled up?
In your opinion both parties even though it's not democrats offering the intrusive and dangerous legislation. Are facts irrelevant in formatting of your opinion on social matters?
Derp. Did you know that Hitler was elected in a democracy? Sounds like maybe not. Sounds like you might believe that democracies are impervious to the threat and dangers of fascism. I have to wonder what informed that belief that is in conflict with fact and evidence.
Your last attempt to spin an idea was just lost in confusion... try spinning less... maybe the words will make sense.
So you don't know details about rape either? Even Arkansas, the state that just passed a bathroom bill recognizes the rape kit backlog.
LOL
No I'm not irrational. I am not expressing a fear or anxiety that isn't supported by facts and evidence. No I'm not upset about conservative opinion and beliefs (that are unfounded in evidence) as long as they don't pass laws based in those unfounded opinions and beliefs. Did you forget the paslrt about the actual laws that target the transwomen? Maybe you forgot that it's not just about opinions and beliefs.
Clearly the discussion can't go anywhere when one side of the discussion is unaffected by facts and evidence. That belligerent refusal to accept facts and evidence obligates the discussion to a circular framework. We must always circle back to the fear and anxiety about the memberes that may linger under the clothing of the transwomen. That leads to anxiety about exposure or attacks. Lack of evidence to support the fear and anxiety is dismissed to circle back around to the feelings or beliefs. All done while ignoring the needs of and threats to the trans person. It's like a right wing square dance around the truth.
And there it is! I don't think Roitrn can get past the fact that a transwoman no longer identifies as a male.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
HiddenAngels said:
Hmm, logically, I don't think that a man that still has his natural bodyparts would be exposing himself right out there in the open in the woman's locker room either. There are private stalls, corner stalls and such. The thing you keep forgetting is that this man doesn't identify as male and he will do everything in his power to make others around him comfortable. Even if he has to take his showers separate.
She also can't provide any body of evidence that demonstrates her concern playing out in reality. She tried. All that can be presented is a few complaints across the entire continent (two countries) over 10 years. Complaints that are easily addressed with current laws.
Not sure why you went off, but, my point is that I could see how some men might be intimidating towards her because that's what people do some of the time, they bully people. That's nothing new, even you know that. So if a transwoman were forced to use a men's bathroom and let's just be plain here, he is a man identifying as a female, perhaps dresses wears hair and acts feminine, some men might just be aholes and intimidating bullies.
Let me keep following you; woman don't enter men's spaces because it is dangerous, period. We are sexual creatures. You shouldn't have to ask me that.
The key that makes them (transwoman) different is that they no longer identify as men. Why is this hard for you to understand?
What should stop a cisman as posing as a transgender woman to gain access to intimate spaces is the law.
If they want to do this, than they are criminals, period.
Thank you. That was much more positive and constructive than other replies.
I do not want trans-women to have to feel uncomfortable or not safe in any way. I'm not saying they have to use what's reflective of what was or is between their legs.
I agree. They were born a man or possibly intersex and now identify as a woman. I can easily understand this. I have encountered some who cannot aknowl3dge that this person identifies as something other than what was presented at birth. (Not saying mind body cannot be mismatched).
Law should prevent people from many things, it simply does not.
How do we know who's the criminal and who's the genuine trans-person? Especially because it's expected that we acknowledge this at the moment the person says they are. Also, you are not permitted to question this either.
So what's your idea of a solution? I think gender neutral intimate areas. Not perfect but nothing is perfect.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
I'm not sure. Baloney introduced the "person in a costume" description.
This isn't about laws or what intimate spaces people shpuud use. My intent is to discuss what can be done to make everyone feel comfortable and safe.
Your chicken egg comment suggest you are not interested in a discussion.
Do you haveca suggestion? If not, feel free to sanctimoniously assert your virtue now. I will not respond to post not focused on solutions.
I didn't offer the example of the man dressed up in a costume who used that costume to access a women's bathroom and attack a woman...I think that MaybeeRN thought that was a good example of a transwoman attacking a woman.
So far you've mostly discussed why you think there's a risk factor or problem that must be addressed regarding transwomen in bathrooms. Something about the feelings of non-trans women and girls who are afraid or uncomfortable, even though there's no evidence to suggest they should be (except in right wing justifications for these new laws).
BS...most of your own posts aren't even focused upon solutions, they are focused on repeating this right wing notion that women's concerns are being ignored as related to transgender bathroom usage. That's just fabricated angst. The solution is to stop trying to make gay and transpeople appear as dangerous to our society.... that's what fascists do to divide populations into us v. them groups.
I need you to tell me what dominant male characteristics you're talking about? IF you're talking about member, how and why would a man's member or for that matter a woman's vajayjay be exposed to another woman or some children.
Well, member and testicle is a good start. Perhaps someone who is very early in their transition. Full beard, body hair.
Many people in a locker room undress freely. Especially children. This doesn't apply to bathrooms as much. However I've been in plenty of locker rooms with naked women walking around.
However I think it would be inappropriate for a trans-woman to walk around fully exposed male genitals.
I didn't offer the example of the man dressed up in a costume who used that costume to access a women's bathroom and attack a woman...I think that MaybeeRN thought that was a good example of a transwoman attacking a woman.
So far you've mostly discussed why you think there's a risk factor or problem that must be addressed regarding transwomen in bathrooms. Something about the feelings of non-trans women and girls who are afraid or uncomfortable, even though there's no evidence to suggest they should be (except in right wing justifications for these new laws).
BS...most of your own posts aren't even focused upon solutions, they are focused on repeating this right wing notion that women's concerns are being ignored as related to transgender bathroom usage. That's just fabricated angst. The solution is to stop trying to make gay and transpeople appear as dangerous to our society.... that's what fascists do to divide populations into us v. them groups.
You need to read the full comment before you start reacting. You were referring to someone who is not trans but dresses like a woman is someone wearing a costume.
I have not once said, I want a law, there should be a law. Not one time.
Yes. Assessing rusk is how we go about preventing it. I gave you examples. I guess you do not agree. Doesn't make them magically dissappear because of your opinion. You have provided no evidence that there is not a risk.
I made a solid point that both women/children/trans-women are being ignored while our political parties are too busy flinging mud at eachother.
Is it fabricated angst tho? You have not once said anything about women and children. Their safety or comfort. Seems the "right wing' notion is at least partially true in regards to you.
Yes. Anyone who has a different opinion is fascist according to you. Ironic. No one is advocating for firing squads shooting people in the bathrooms. Or persecuting and removing rights because of someone's gender choice.
Keep up with that hyperbole. You might incite some mostly peaceful violence.
Hmm, logically, I don't think that a man that still has his natural bodyparts would be exposing himself right out there in the open in the woman's locker room either. There are private stalls, corner stalls and such. The thing you keep forgetting is that this man doesn't identify as male and he will do everything in his power to make others around him comfortable. Even if he has to take his showers separate.
His chosen identity doesn't remove his member and testicle, facial hair at the moment they say it.....
Locker rooms are filled with naked people. Not everyone uses stalls and usually there isn't very many.
Perfect. Then every trans-woman should be discrete and not expose their member and testicles. If they want everyone arround them to be comfortable. Or use gender neutral areas.
HiddenAngels
1,089 Posts
???