(CA) K-12 Transgender Law Repeal

Onorgul... I think whatever message you have kinda gets lost in your anger/outrage/insults or whatever you wanna call it... I mean you're insulting pretty much everyone here now, even the people that agree with you... like you're above the type of poster that would come here...

Ok, this is a genuine question. If everyone on the opposite side of the fence is telling me that "the genitals of the person in the stall next to you are NBD", then why are we wasting thousands of dollars (and hours of time) trying to make a law over it? Not to over-simplify but you're essentially saying "the genitals of the other people in the stall only matter when we want it to matter to us".

Nevermind that if we do have to make this policy, we'll have to blow thousands/millions of dollars (depending on the scale the laws go into effect) to facilitate something that "is totes no biggie" when it bothers me but is "a massive injustice and a severe infringement on the basic human rights" of the other party. You really can't have it both ways. If it's not a big deal then why can't someone with girl/boy parts go in the correct facility?

P.S. I was genuine about the "sorry if i upset you too much". I like to give a bit of ribbing, and get people riled up, but I would be horrified to know that I genuinely upsets (sad or mad) someone that didn't deserve it. To be honest, even if they did deserve it I would probably feel awful. IRL I'm a huge pushover and an empath.

Points of ellipsis are not a substitution for periods, Flavin. It makes you sound wishy-washy and insincere. Not that I'm suggesting you're actually being sincere.

If I wanted to be insulting, I could be so much worse. But as far as insulting the people who agree with me, I think that's a comprehension failure on your part (or a deliberate lie to bulk up your point-of-view -- cheers if that is the case as it is a valid tactic). Debates like this are always a shouting match, especially on a forum, and pretending otherwise is self-delusion. I didn't say people are kindergarteners, merely that the "discussion" is little different from a large group of 5-year-olds.

lmao, I love this quote, & if I am ever unfortunate enough to see another one, that is going to be the first thing to come out of my mouth, just for fun.

*edit*

the quote, not the penis.

It's about accepting people as they are... not about preventing people from watching you pee... Acceptance yo...

Do you really go into the bathroom worried that someone is going to check you out while you're taking a piss? I mean you said you're not self conscious but then you say it bothers you so I'm confused... you don't think about it and it doesn't affect your stream but the though of the possibility of it ever happeneing no matter how low or even discernable bothers you?

See the thing is I don't think anyone even thinks twice about it or would even notice... or hell, even be put in the situation for that matter... Its not like anyone we're discussing is that guy who sneaks into the girls bathroom to watch them pee... it's just BAU...

It always comes back to the ellipsis... silly people lol... They are replacements for everything... see there it replaced an exclamation point... I use them for commas and colins too... you should try it some time it's.... very... soothing... :)

Is there any law we can write that will make everyone have a "comfy" bathroom experience? Do you have any clue how ridiculous you sound trying to "smooth out" the results of an individual's visit to the bathroom? What about when it's uncomfortable for me because I have diarrhea? Are you mandate sanitary cheese dispensaries at each bathroom too?

First off, what does NBD mean? Never seen that abbreviation before.

Anyhow, why make a law? Not the worst question I've ever heard and I'm a believer that anything linked to the phrase "There ought to be a law" probably shouldn't. In this case, it seems rather clear that the law is protect people from the knee-jerk "You're different and I must kill you" response that is hard-coded into our genes. Please don't debate this, either. I know full well that most people in most situations do not act on that impulse, but it does color our thinking in that our first genetic impulse is to distrust anyone not of our tribe. The US is founded on the idea that tribalism is bad, so the law is just conforming to our national morals (which, as with all morals, evolve and change with time).

Have you actually read the law, though? It really just says that schools can't treat people differently because of their sex. The majority of the verbiage is about not giving girls different career advice than boys and making sure that if there's a cooking class (I despise the term "home economics"), then boys and girls should both have access. The bit regarding transgendered people is practically the smallest part of the bill.

Anyhow, my point is that the arguments I've seen in this thread largely deal with people getting freaked out by someone else in the bathroom. I consider it a non-issue. No money will need to be spent for any reason. There really is nor ever has been a reason for sexed bathrooms because urethras and anuses work the same regardless of sex chromosomes. I assume the only reason for sexed bathrooms today is a holdover from Victorian/Sharia fear that men will rape anything vaguely female. Not only is that hideously misogynistic, but it is ridiculous on its face. About all that sexing a bathroom accomplishes is a slight savings on water because urinals use less to flush... and even then, there's no reason a unisex toilet couldn't have urinals.

Seriously, what accommodations are being mandated by this law? Near as I can tell, it is making sure that teachers can't tell students what sex they are (a literally one-in-a-million situation) and gives transgendered students a small bit of protection from a parent (in that Allie can be a girl at school even though her mom still lists her as a male in the records). The only thing remotely controversial or costly about treating a transgendered person by their declared gender involves varsity sports in high school. If you wanna talk about that, I'm all for it, because I really cannot figure out a good answer. I'll still argue that it's an almost non-existent situation as we're talking about an infinitesimal population in that it involves a sub-population of a sub-population ("transgendered" and "athlete" are both rather small groups of "students").

But most of the argumentation I've seen here is assuming some weird and costly accommodation for someone with boy-parts but a girl-brain wanting to use the girls' room. Who cares? It's protecting her mental state. She's already likely to be in a lousy position because some jerk of either sex is going to give her crap (just like happens to 90+% of everyone regardless of minority status or lack thereof).

Sanitary cheese dispensaries make having diarrhea a more comfortable experience? As good as an idea that may be I don't think it will pass sanitation codes...

I guess using shorthand there was a bad idea as you took it to mean that the toilet seats should be made of satin pillows and after your done it will wipe your *** for you...

The point was made that a transgender child is going to be uncomfortable wherever he or she goes to the bathroom... The solution was to continue to let them be uncomfortable as it is their problem I guess... I was simply commenting that the legislation looking to get passed is just trying to make it so they don't have to feel uncomfortable performing such a simple every day task... but appearantly people would rather demonize them and make it out to be like they are there to eye rape you while you're using the facilities...

If i walked into the women's showers and said "it's cool, I have a doctor's note", it would be completely asinine of the women to get mad or be uncomfortable, right?

EDIT: ndb - no big deal

Not going to touch the bathroom/locker room issue.

As for sports, tryouts would prevent kids who are not up to par to participate. However, for obvious reasons, it would be easier for a male born person to get onto a girls team and to have a huge advantage. For example, there are male runners in high school, who are not elite, who could break many female world records. The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) does do Gender Verification to determine if an individual is eligible to participate in a female category. This, however, is more for the world stage and not for elementary or junior high athletics. High school may blur the line as there are plenty of 18 year olds who have the talent and ability to compete at the highest level.

I apologize for not sifting through the thread again to find who touched on this, but...How could UIL approach this, and what does it mean for athletic scholarships?

EDIT: Beaten to the subject change!

On the shower thing, I have to actually claim ignorance. I skipped physical education in high school by using my extracurricular dance classes instead. I did have a discussion with some friends on the topic of high school showers a couple weeks ago and they all basically said that they did anything they possibly could to avoid using them. That might be the bias of who I am friends with, but outside of pornography, I really have never heard of teenagers willingly going into a public shower room.

That said, the showers that no one used in my lower school had stalls and curtains. I really don't know what other schools do or don't have.

Every transgendered person I've met has been heterosexual, though. If a bunch of high school girls can get over being naked with each other, being naked with one more person who happens to have a useless flaccid penis is probably not going to change things. If you want to claim to be a girl just to pop wood in some hypothetical shower room, I'd love to introduce you to the internet.

Basically, I repeat: the situation doesn't happen. You're fishing for a 1-in-billions chance to refute a law that causes no harm.

Did you bring the doctors note with you?

You're trying to compare an apple to a carrot... I would imagine that at most times it would probably be more noticeable to hop into the bathroom/shower of their birth sex... I'd imagine that there would be many times where people didn't even question it or maybe there would be just as much of a problem in the facility that they are "supposed" to use...

Personally idk though... these are all just assumptions on my part...

If you think that there are less sick perverted people in the world than transgendered, I think I understand you a bit more.

Also, I don't think transgendered people have "useless flaccid penises" lol.


Testosterone is like the definition of perfomance enhancing drug.

Do you want me to state the obvious about people who assume others are perverts? Related note: there is a massively higher chance that if you're showering with another person, he's a gay dude who might be interested in checking you out (but probably isn't, anyhow). Wouldn't that freak you out considerably more than seeing someone with a vagina in the same room?

Perhaps not, but heterosexual women with penises aren't getting aroused by other women. Idiot.

you guys are waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy too uptight, mmmmaaaaaaann.

Stange relation in that sentence, if that verb "heard" wasn't there I think I would be more disgusted than I am laughing.

That's America and that tends to be kids who haven't actually just said F' it! and went and did it. It's that old puritanical influence that should have died in the 60's but somehow remains in the subconcious. I used to be one of those kids but then after taking a shower in public it was NBD. Though I think for my case it was a trip to Japan on a good will tour for the Nanka Yudanshakai. That lasted a couple of months and you had to shower and bathe with a group that ultimately removed the anxiety for me.

No, because I am not wired that way and he doesn't even enter into me caring what he thinks about my body. My whole point from the start was that I'm not comfortable with something I perceive as female being in a facility designed for my privacy. If a "girl" comes in while I'm naked, I'm not going to think "oh, i bet she's a man in her head", I'm going to think "WHAT THE ***".



k. I'd like to ask the mods not to take offense at this. I however, am done responding to you.

edit:


I have a folder on guildwork named "my boobs" in relation to my character. If you're implying that I'm a pervert you'd be correct. I however, would never try to abuse a system to gain access to said boobs (other than "the bar").

Just remember kids:

No label whether sex, gender or ethnic makes a person infallible from acting like a condescending douchenoozle to others. Especially on a medium of anonymity like internet forums. Just because a person is either transgendered, transexual, homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual, educated or uneducated they do not suddenly obtain a mandate of sagacity.

my boobs: http://guildwork.com/albums#/5218a66ec16e4d062dece9dc

I'm quite proud of them actually.

So basically, if we get past all the flappery and obfuscation, you're saying that you think showers in schools should have stalls and curtains. Again, operating from very limited experience here: what is the current arrangement for showers in schools? Every gym I've been in as an adult has had stalls and my old K-8 school that was built in the 50s had them, too.

Either way, it seems like the ONLY objection you can raise to all of this is that you don't want to be weirded out in a hypothetical public shower. And the solution that removes your weird would be to get rid of communal showering in favor of limited privacy. And I'd bet easy money that practically everyone regardless of gender or orientation would prefer that in school assuming it isn't already that way. So the net result of beating your skull into the ground has been that the only way this bill costs money is if it accomplishes something that would please everyone. What a tragedy.

Edit:
I just remembered that I was housed in a high school gym just this past year. You know what it had for both the boys' and girls' locker rooms (it was all-male housing so we used both): individual stalls and curtains. It was a high school built in the past 10 years, too, so I'm guessing that is the standard, anyhow. And that's in Ohio, which is a long way from California and its crazy decisions to care about minorities.

I'm going to preface this with, I'm aware some people aren't keen on anecdotes, but...

I went to a relatively small school where guys' soccer was introduced (and automatically received UIL status) three years before I was there and ladies' soccer was introduced two years after I had been there ("club" status Junior year, then UIL recognized my Senior year).

Many girls who played recreationally or in commuted to clubs within DFW were still apprehensive about playing with guys, even though it was an open opportunity, and it's not like they could say no because that would have been obviously discriminatory. There were a few who played, but that trial usually lasted one season.

Now, because my school was on the cusp of rural and suburbia, when we reached club and finally UIL status, we did have to scrimmage against guys. The coaches would try to divide the teams equally among both genders and JV and Varsity (club had no established JV/Varsity division yet, so it was determined by individual player ability), but they would mostly have us swap out for each other on the same position...Halfback. (Basically, the mid-field, endurance position.)

As good as you think you are, awareness of your limitations is a physically harsh lesson for someone who is 5'8" 119 pounds when you hit a brick wall of someone who is four inches taller and twenty pounds heavier, bounce off like a rubber ball, and roll head over heels a couple of times. Both genders are more timid about immersing themselves in the game (thrown-elbows and slide-tackling is something both genders would dance around). It was fun, but no one is that aggressive in a sport when social norms about gender are on the forefront.

Also, you do become a little more conscientious of the unintentional nut-shot that's a non-factor when playing with girls. If you do go in for a slide-tackle that becomes a direct head-to-man parts, oh the jokes! :/

Again, college campuses already have this situation happening daily. If you're so afraid of the opposite sex, shower when no one is around. Stalls and private areas with clearance are all you need to maintain the comfort of most people.

Towel -> Stall -> Open door -> Close door -> Disrobe -> Get to business.

All this talk of rape and people staring at someones junk/chest speaks more about American prudeness than the reality of what would happen in nearly all situations. If you want to stare at some old grandmas on the toilet or feel some womans going to emasculate you by seeing you at a urinal then take appropriate evasive action. Even in a typical mens bathroom some guys go straight for the stalls instead of using a urinal for whatever reason.

I'm sure there are, but I've personally never seen gym showers with doors or curtains, so while they're still separated you should see why someone might feel uneasy.
As for changing room though there are no "private spots" there, it's just a matter of don't look around you, however if you're there with the idea that there's someone of the opposite sex, again it might raise uncomfortableness(does this word exist?)

As you can see from some replies here, some people are indeed uncomfortable around the opposite gender when naked.

edit: I think this is more heavy in a middle school-highschool situation where people tend to be more wary of their bodies.

When I was at school we had an open shower in the boys locker room it was a corridor with shower heads on both sides of the wall. It was exactly the same in swimming pools as well but over here in the uk we do most stuff different to you guys in the states.

Technically, any word that can be understood exists. But "discomfort" would be the more natural English word you're looking for.

Seriously, anyone in the US (other countries have other customs), did your middle/high school showers have stalls or not? For that matter, did anyone have a boys' bathroom with trough-style urinals? I know they're common at baseball stadiums and provide zero privacy, but I've never seen them in the few schools I attended/visited. We're a rather prudish culture and I just haven't seen many opportunities to have my privacy violated.

I never liked the college showers mostly because you get notes from you're school like... Since someone defecated in the showers and no one came forward to take the blame you will now share the cost of the biohazard cleanup...

or please stop masturbating in the showers... ehhhh....

When I have to have sandals specifically to walk into a place I go to clean myself... forever unclean!!!!

My dorm bathroom once got covered in ***, blood, and vomit. As I stated earlier, I'd be cool with having more bio-F men. Then again, I've heard women say their bathrooms have been pretty noxious, too, so maybe I'm sexist in thinking women are clean.

I do suspect both sexes are cleaner when they think the other is watching, though. Just saying.

In high school we had showers with curtains (that eventually got torn down) and that was connected to a bathroom with 3 toilet stalls and a couple of urinals.

I was pretty self-conscious in high school so I'd just shower with my boxer shorts on then swap to a new pair afterwards or simply not shower. Most people didn't shower because the way schedules were setup you either had gym early in the morning or at the end of the day. Then again, I grew up in the city so that'd be completely different from rural/suburban life.

That never stopped some guys from running around naked and putting themselves on display (ah high school homoerotics) but you could simply use stalls to change if you wanted and most people simply changed a far enough distance from others to not make it awkward.

Plenty of times, the locker room would be empty when classes were in session or you could also opt to change in the normal bathrooms right up stairs.