|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 06 2015 03:25 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2015 03:11 Cowboy64 wrote:
There is a great deal of evidence that women having access to segregated bathroom spaces can decrease the risks of rape. Rural India is an example where thousands of women are exposed to rape every year because they don't have access to proper bathrooms. I don't think this necessarily has anything to do with the trans issue specifically, but I think it is relevant to the "segregated bathrooms are for prudes" argument. Rural India is not a good comparison to schools in America. There are cultural differences there. You might as well argue that spicy food causes rape.
There's definitely cultural differences but putting people in vulnerable situations more often will increase their risk of becoming a victim. We already isolate ourselves to use the bathroom, which increases the risk right there, but the less regulated the space, the higher the risk. Right now, if I see a woman enter a woman's bathroom and a man follow her in, I can assume there is something going on that shouldn't be going on. Some form of intervention is likely in that scenario. If men and women sharing bathrooms was perfectly common, then I would most likely think nothing of it, and intervention becomes less likely.
|
You don't need research to know that certain things can be psychologically harmful, you are just being obtuse by insisting on such a thing. If you don't see how being shunned and ostracized and marginalized by society is psychologically damaging then you are showing signs of being a sociopath. The fact is that if they identify as a woman or man, and that is how they live their day to day lives, then they should be given the courtesy of not having some asshats tell them which rooms aren't for them because of what genitals they were born with.
This is just another argument you will lose as time goes on, but being on the wrong side of things has never seemed to slow you types in the past so I don't expect it here either.
|
I don't think I am advocating shunning, ostracizing or marginalizing. I am just telling them to use the penis-room instead of the vagina-room if they have a penis. Their gender identity has nothing to do with their sex. Fine. But until their sex catches up to them (assuming they are even interested in surgery), they have to accept that other girls are discomforted by their penis, and it is thus best for everybody if they go into the penis room (or vice versa). It's only when the genitals come flopping out that this is an issue, which makes it an issue with genitals, and not with gender.
|
On December 06 2015 04:29 Acrofales wrote:
I don't think I am advocating shunning, ostracizing or marginalizing. I am just telling them to use the penis-room instead of the vagina-room if they have a penis. Their gender identity has nothing to do with their sex. Fine. But until their sex catches up to them (assuming they are even interested in surgery), they have to accept that other girls are discomforted by their penis, and it is thus best for everybody if they go into the penis room (or vice versa). It's only when the genitals come flopping out that this is an issue, which makes it an issue with genitals, and not with gender.
the very act of putting sex before gender in itself marginalizes people who's gender doesn't line up with their sex. and the only reason you put sex before gender is cultural where the entire culture has traditionally marginalizedd trans people.
|
They are called the womans and men rooms, not penis and vagina rooms. This sheltering children attitude is annoying as well because its the parents who have the issue the large majority of the time.
Again though, other than 'because they have the wrong genitals' and 'it makes certain uneducated and ignorant people uncomfortable', there has been no argument put forth as to why a person who lives their day to lives as a male or female and identifies as such shouldn't be able to use the corresponding rooms. Beginning to seem like there isn't one, who would have thought!
|
I wouldn't be surprised if the two are connected. It's a combination between gun safety, gun education, background checks, updating our interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, reducing poverty, taking mental illness and depression seriously, and finding other ways to reduce the desperation that some people feel that leads them to attempt to end their own (or others') lives. A lot of it is intertwined.
What particularly annoys me is that there is a very large intersection between the following two groups:
1. The people who want to dismiss the daily mass shootings as isolated incidents that are only caused by mentally deranged freaks and nutjobs;
2. The people who think that bullying is "building character" and that the victims of bullying just need to "man up" and stop being such "pussies", and that there's no psychological damage being done to kids and young adults in schools who are ostracized, not treated fairly, or experiencing problems at home.
Those students who become depressed and feel disenfranchised- and have no support system- are exactly the kinds of kids who grow up with a violent chip on their shoulder... one that isn't necessarily caught by a background check because they haven't had an efficient and simple mass-killing machine. Until now.
|
Has there ever been any hard evidence that bullying leads to mass-murders? I know that this idea became more popular after Columbine, but I'm pretty sure that it was proven the Columbine kids weren't really bullied, and that in many cases they were the actual bullies. I've always kind of hated the stereotype anyway, because it almost seems to reverse justify the bullying.
On December 06 2015 04:38 Kickstart wrote:
Again though, other than 'because they have the wrong genitals' and 'it makes certain uneducated and ignorant people uncomfortable', there has been no argument put forth as to why a person who lives their day to lives as a male or female and identifies as such shouldn't be able to use the corresponding rooms. Beginning to seem like there isn't one, who would have thought!
Do uneducated people not have rights?
|
On December 06 2015 05:03 Cowboy64 wrote:Has there ever been any hard evidence that bullying leads to mass-murders? I know that this idea became more popular after Columbine, but I'm pretty sure that it was proven the Columbine kids weren't really bullied, and that in many cases they were the actual bullies. I've always kind of hated the stereotype anyway, because it almost seems to reverse justify the bullying. Show nested quote +On December 06 2015 04:38 Kickstart wrote:
Again though, other than 'because they have the wrong genitals' and 'it makes certain uneducated and ignorant people uncomfortable', there has been no argument put forth as to why a person who lives their day to lives as a male or female and identifies as such shouldn't be able to use the corresponding rooms. Beginning to seem like there isn't one, who would have thought! Do uneducated people not have rights?
No, but their opinions on complicated matters generally aren't very useful. When they are uneducated and ignorant about it that is.
|
On December 06 2015 04:38 Kickstart wrote:
They are called the womans and men rooms, not penis and vagina rooms. This sheltering children attitude is annoying as well because its the parents who have the issue the large majority of the time.
Again though, other than 'because they have the wrong genitals' and 'it makes certain uneducated and ignorant people uncomfortable', there has been no argument put forth as to why a person who lives their day to lives as a male or female and identifies as such shouldn't be able to use the corresponding rooms. Beginning to seem like there isn't one, who would have thought!
You are just being fucking obtuse. The argument is that pre-op trans people don't have the requisite genitals. But according to you there haven't been any arguments put forward about why we segregate the rooms at all. So if you are going to continue to be so obstinate by refusing to acknowledge the primary argument being presented here maybe you should stop posting the same thing over and over and over.
EDIT: The premise held by you that the rooms are gender separated rather than sex separated is not held hy the side you are arguing with. Gender-separation of bathrooms as a premise makes your argument incoherent because even though you are advocating for trans people to have access to the "right" gendered bathroom you are simultaneously pushing out all gender-queer and gender-fluid people from the binary bathroom system, and exposing them to the same "damaging" social influences that trans people might experience under sex-divided bathrooms.
Second edit: I will say that I think Cowboys argument about sexual assault and segregated bathrooms is at least worth thinking about.
|
On December 06 2015 05:03 Cowboy64 wrote:
Has there ever been any hard evidence that bullying leads to mass-murders? I know that this idea became more popular after Columbine, but I'm pretty sure that it was proven the Columbine kids weren't really bullied, and that in many cases they were the actual bullies. I've always kind of hated the stereotype anyway, because it almost seems to reverse justify the bullying.
Simply put, Yes.
"A review of 45 previously published studies confirms the link between bullying behaviors and violent acts, finding that bullies and their victims are more likely to carry weapons than the kids who don’t become involved in those type of abusive relationships. For studies conducted in the U.S., researchers found the strongest correlation between being a “bully-victim” — a child who becomes a bully after being a target of bullying themselves — and carrying a weapon.
“Bullying was already found harmful for victims in previous studies, but bullying may also be related to a more unsafe atmosphere in school for all attending children and the personnel through an increased likelihood of weapon carrying,” the study’s lead researcher, Mitch van Geel of the Institute of Education and Child Studies at Leiden University in the Netherlands, explained."
~ http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/06/11/3447787/school-shooting-bullying/
"Experts say bullying is a serious and widespread problem that can lead to school shootings and suicide. At the same time, they say, it is dangerously underrated, as schools and adults are not taking the problem seriously enough.
"For the child who's been targeted by a bully, their life is a living hell," said Glenn Stutzky, a school violence specialist at Michigan State University. "Bullying is probably the most frequently occurring form of violence in American schools today and it's really the engine that's driving the majority of violence. It's a huge problem."
Even though several states have now passed anti-bullying legislation, Stutzky said the American school system is 10 to 15 years behind countries like Australia, Scandinavia, Great Britain and Japan, all of which deal with bullying as a serious social problem.
"We have allowed a culture of abuse to thrive unchecked in our nation's schools," said Stutzky, "and we are paying for it with the bodies of our children."
Physical and Emotional Toll
Though it seems so hard to understand the anger that would fuel children to plot a massacre at their high school, sadly, many children can relate to the feelings of loneliness, abuse or resentment.
"Once I got teased, I could see where that anger comes from and what can make someone want to kill," said Stefan Barone, a 14-year-old from Staten Island, N.Y., who said he was bullied during seventh and eighth grades. "Even though I never got to that point, I could understand where it was coming from."
Day after day throughout the country, kids wake up terrified to go to school, knowing they will be the victims of teasing, taunting, name calling or physical abuse."
~ http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123984&page=1
"A new study based on a survey of more than 15,000 American high school students found that victims of bullying are nearly twice as likely to carry guns and other weapons at school."
~ http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/05/bullying-victims-carry-weapons-guns
"In 12 of 15 school shooting cases in the 1990s, the shooters had a history of being bullied."
~ http://www.stopbullying.gov/at-risk/effects/
|
On December 06 2015 01:30 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2015 01:23 killa_robot wrote:On December 06 2015 01:07 Toadesstern wrote:On December 06 2015 00:58 killa_robot wrote:[...] On December 06 2015 00:33 Toadesstern wrote:On December 05 2015 23:57 killa_robot wrote:On December 05 2015 15:11 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On December 05 2015 15:07 killa_robot wrote:On December 05 2015 13:53 KwarK wrote:On December 05 2015 12:59 IgnE wrote:
I just find it funny that Kwark responds to hypothetical parent objections of type: "I don't want a penis near my daughter" with arguments that "trans girls are entitled to access to the same things as cis girls." Everyone who has actually given serious, critical thought to this issue should know that this is hardly a response at all. It is a response. If you say "I don't want a penis anywhere near my daughter" that's fine. if you say "I don't want a penis anywhere near my daughter so take rights away from trans girls", that's where you lose my support. Some girls have penises. Cis ones don't and they are the vast majority but trans girls do exist. The rights of trans girls trump the discomfort of the parents of other girls. It is a response, some girls have penises, get over it. It's rather disturbing that you actually believe this. I don't see what's disturbing about it. It's just saying people's rights override other people's perceptions and feelings. if you say its not right your basically telling the trans perosn that because they've been marginalized by society for so long they can't do what everyone else can. They've already been marginalized to an extent and to further marginalize them because of their historical lower standing in rights serves to exasperate the problem. to put it another way the only reason people feel uncomfortable is culturally trans people have been seen as problematic or disturbed and thats cause the fact that people don't feel comfortable. so in order to break the cycle which is unfair to trans people you have to force society to face their cultural prejudices. Except their "right" to go to the change room they identify with ultimately is just a matter of their feelings, not any sort of rights. You're trying to make it out like people who disagree are all just scared bigots, when in reality what you're asking is for us to just go along with whatever trans (or marginalized people) want so that way their feelings aren't hurt, regardless of how everyone else feels. And saying girls can have penises is just factually incorrect. The literal definition of a woman is someone with a vagina, and the literal definition of a girl is a young woman. what do you make of stuff like this? Intersex people are born with sex characteristics (including genitals, gonads and chromosome patterns) that do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies.
Intersex is an umbrella term used to describe a wide range of natural bodily variations. In some cases, intersex traits are visible at birth while in others, they are not apparent until puberty. Some chromosomal intersex variations may not be physically apparent at all.[1]
Another definition states that biological sex is determined by five factors present at birth:[16]
the number and type of sex chromosomes;
the type of gonads—ovaries or testicles;
the sex hormones;
the internal reproductive anatomy (such as the uterus in females); and
the external genitalia.
People whose five characteristics are not either all typically male or all typically female at birth are intersex.[17] The number of intersex people depends on the definition used. The Intersex Society of North America suggested that 1 percent of live births exhibit some degree of sexual ambiguity.[115] Between 0.1% and 0.2% of live births are ambiguous enough to become the subject of specialist medical attention, including surgery to assign them to a given sex category (i.e., male or female).[31] According to Blackless, Fausto-Sterling et al., on the other hand, 1.7 percent of human births are intersex.[116][31] (wikipedia) Why are you lumping intersex in with trans? The two are completely different. because, and I quote The literal definition of a woman is someone with a vagina, and the literal definition of a girl is a young woman. So it seems like you're wrong? Interesting. I thought you were going the route of where I thought they should be. If it's just the definition then I'm not wrong. An intersex person wouldn't qualify as either sex, hence why they are categorized as intersex to begin with. [...] the point I was getting at is along the lines of: 1) what you said sounded like there's only that: Either a boy with a penis or a girl with a vagina and nothing else because that would be hippies doing weird shit 2) that's not the case already in other, natural situations as you just said 3) so if there is such a thing as an inbetween for that, why not take that definition and use it in general?
I've already suggested that the best results would either be one large common room or individual change rooms, so unless I'm missing something, we're on the same page for that.
On December 06 2015 01:37 Kickstart wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2015 01:31 m4ini wrote:
As a small "out of interest" question.. What changing room do gays use? Whichever one we get to see the most naked men in. But, is anyone going to put forth one good reason why trans persons shouldn't be able to use the changing room of their choice? The only thing I've heard is a bunch of fuss about genitals and about how since not everyone gets to choose which changing room they use trans persons shouldn't be able to either. Neither of which are good reasons.
"A bunch of fuss about genitals" is kind of the entire reason separate change rooms exist to begin with. Rather amusing you think not only that you can dismiss their original purpose as a non-issue, but that the onus is on everyone else to come up with a reason as to why we should enforce their original purpose, lol.
If trans people are allowed to use their preferred change room, then everyone else should be allowed as well, and if that's the case then separating them is meaningless.
|
The problem is that this happens/can happen in both rooms.
edit: the bullying.
|
On December 06 2015 05:30 killa_robot wrote:
"A bunch of fuss about genitals" is kind of the entire reason separate change rooms exist to begin with. Rather amusing you think not only that you can dismiss their original purpose as a non-issue, but that the onus is on everyone else to come up with a reason as to why we should enforce their original purpose, lol.
If trans people are allowed to use their preferred change room, then everyone else should be allowed as well, and if that's the case then separating them is meaningless.
In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.
|
On December 06 2015 04:23 Kickstart wrote: but being on the wrong side of things has never seemed to slow you types in the past so I don't expect it here either.
i'd stick to the details and facts instead of trying to assign the person you debating to some kind of "group" or "type". when you do that you weaken your argument about the precise issue being debated and turn it into something else.
|
On December 06 2015 04:16 Cowboy64 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2015 03:25 KwarK wrote:On December 06 2015 03:11 Cowboy64 wrote:
There is a great deal of evidence that women having access to segregated bathroom spaces can decrease the risks of rape. Rural India is an example where thousands of women are exposed to rape every year because they don't have access to proper bathrooms. I don't think this necessarily has anything to do with the trans issue specifically, but I think it is relevant to the "segregated bathrooms are for prudes" argument. Rural India is not a good comparison to schools in America. There are cultural differences there. You might as well argue that spicy food causes rape. There's definitely cultural differences but putting people in vulnerable situations more often will increase their risk of becoming a victim. We already isolate ourselves to use the bathroom, which increases the risk right there, but the less regulated the space, the higher the risk. Right now, if I see a woman enter a woman's bathroom and a man follow her in, I can assume there is something going on that shouldn't be going on. Some form of intervention is likely in that scenario. If men and women sharing bathrooms was perfectly common, then I would most likely think nothing of it, and intervention becomes less likely.
The right thing here to do would be to remove the cultural values that promote rape from a society and punish the rapists. Basing the idea of separate rooms on this kind of thing sounds like an excuse along the lines off "well if you put men and women into the same room they're going to rape them, they just can't help themselves".
The same is true for having male and female divisions in the military. Women shouldn't feel the need to avoid certain places because they could run into rapists.
|
On December 06 2015 05:14 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2015 04:38 Kickstart wrote:
They are called the womans and men rooms, not penis and vagina rooms. This sheltering children attitude is annoying as well because its the parents who have the issue the large majority of the time.
Again though, other than 'because they have the wrong genitals' and 'it makes certain uneducated and ignorant people uncomfortable', there has been no argument put forth as to why a person who lives their day to lives as a male or female and identifies as such shouldn't be able to use the corresponding rooms. Beginning to seem like there isn't one, who would have thought! You are just being fucking obtuse. The argument is that pre-op trans people don't have the requisite genitals. But according to you there haven't been any arguments put forward about why we segregate the rooms at all. So if you are going to continue to be so obstinate by refusing to acknowledge the primary argument being presented here maybe you should stop posting the same thing over and over and over. EDIT: The premise held by you that the rooms are gender separated rather than sex separated is not held hy the side you are arguing with. Gender-separation of bathrooms as a premise makes your argument incoherent because even though you are advocating for trans people to have access to the "right" gendered bathroom you are simultaneously pushing out all gender-queer and gender-fluid people from the binary bathroom system, and exposing them to the same "damaging" social influences that trans people might experience under sex-divided bathrooms. Second edit: I will say that I think Cowboys argument about sexual assault and segregated bathrooms is at least worth thinking about.
But I said aside from genitals and comfort levels, and you brought up genitals. And I am not arguing for any 'system' of rest/changing rooms, I am saying it isn't a big deal to let an individual use the restroom that is appropriate for THEM. You are making it about the genitals, which is dumb for many reasons. Many trans people never get that operated on, but hormonaly and in every other aspect of their lives they have 'transitioned'.
And you accuse me of repeating things yet your first point is to say that pre-op trans persons don't have the correct genitals. Again, some trans persons never have this procedure done.
I just don't think their is a strong case for not allowing a trans person to use the rooms they are more comfortable in. I understand that fundamentally if a certain person is allowed to choose which room they wish to use then that should be afforded to everyone, and likewise if norms dictate that persons should use certain ones then they should be used. The main problem is that this 'system' didn't take these unique circumstances into account. So the argument now, in my mind, is how to resolve this issue in a system that didn't plan for trans persons. I tend to side with the 'minority' on things like this. If it were simply a matter of comfort, then I would tend to agree with the line of thought that they just need to suck it up and go with what is generally viewed as acceptable, but the way I see it is that it is only a matter of comfort for the people opposed to trans people being in certain rooms. For trans persons, it is more than just comfort, they live their lives as a certain gender and want their activities to be in line with this, which includes things like using the men's or women's restrooms and the like.
|
On December 06 2015 06:06 Kickstart wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2015 05:14 IgnE wrote:On December 06 2015 04:38 Kickstart wrote:
They are called the womans and men rooms, not penis and vagina rooms. This sheltering children attitude is annoying as well because its the parents who have the issue the large majority of the time.
Again though, other than 'because they have the wrong genitals' and 'it makes certain uneducated and ignorant people uncomfortable', there has been no argument put forth as to why a person who lives their day to lives as a male or female and identifies as such shouldn't be able to use the corresponding rooms. Beginning to seem like there isn't one, who would have thought! You are just being fucking obtuse. The argument is that pre-op trans people don't have the requisite genitals. But according to you there haven't been any arguments put forward about why we segregate the rooms at all. So if you are going to continue to be so obstinate by refusing to acknowledge the primary argument being presented here maybe you should stop posting the same thing over and over and over. EDIT: The premise held by you that the rooms are gender separated rather than sex separated is not held hy the side you are arguing with. Gender-separation of bathrooms as a premise makes your argument incoherent because even though you are advocating for trans people to have access to the "right" gendered bathroom you are simultaneously pushing out all gender-queer and gender-fluid people from the binary bathroom system, and exposing them to the same "damaging" social influences that trans people might experience under sex-divided bathrooms. Second edit: I will say that I think Cowboys argument about sexual assault and segregated bathrooms is at least worth thinking about. But I said aside from genitals and comfort levels, and you brought up genitals. And I am not arguing for any 'system' of rest/changing rooms, I am saying it isn't a big deal to let an individual use the restroom that is appropriate for THEM. You are making it about the genitals, which is dumb for many reasons. Many trans people never get that operated on, but hormonaly and in every other aspect of their lives they have 'transitioned'.
And you accuse me of repeating things yet your first point is to say that pre-op trans persons don't have the correct genitals. Again, some trans persons never have this procedure done.
Just because you, personally, don't think it's a big deal is not a reason to change anything. The problem here is that your line of argument doesn't address the primary argument of the opposition because you don't have the same premises, dont' argue why those premises are valid/invalid, and don't seem to care. As I and other posters have put it, for you, anyone can use any restroom. Well great, then let's just take the signs down altogether. That's a completely different argument though, and it's making my eyes bleed for people to argue one thing and then have you just say, "well I don't care, I think X" repeatedly. We all know what you think. We all know you either don't grasp or don't care about the arguments. Fine.
The bolded part just seems to an exemplar of your haphazard thinking on this subject. What does my accusing you of repeatedly ignoring what the opposition is even saying have to do with whether some trans persons never have genital reassignment surgery? So what?
EDIT in response to your edit:
There are some things in life that are not, and never will be, ideal. The fact that trans people are born into bodies that they do not feel is "right" for them is something that is always going to be psychologically painful/uncomfortable/whatever. A trans woman with a penis getting naked in a women's changing room is always going to be conscious of the fact that she has a penis. This is not going to go away by simply letting her use whatever room she wants. There are cis men here, on this forum, that admit that they feel uncomfortable getting naked around any strangers. Yet they don't demand single stalls. You and others have argued that trans people have a "right" to use women's-designated areas as some form of positive self-extension that expresses their gender to themselves or to others. But that already assumes a competing notion of why these areas are segregated in the first place: as a choice that expresses male-ness or female-ness. So forgive me for pointing out that a perhaps majority of people don't see the raison d'être of sex-segregation that way. And you saying, "I don't care" is neither relevant nor persuasive.
|
The problem is that neither of the two options are satisfactory. Allowing trans people to use the restroom of their choice brings up a whole host of issues, while forcing them to use rooms that go against their identities isn't fair to them either. I just posit that allowing them to use the restroom of their choice is a better solution than not allowing it. For reasons we've been over, I think the potential damage of denying a trans person to use the rooms they identify with is greater than the discomfort some my face in seeing a trans person in a changing room. I can see how the changing room itself is a point of contention because of the chance that people will be exposed, but in the case of trans people, I think knowledge and understanding would ease the discomfort of the other people.
I find the argument against restrooms ridiculous because genitals wont be flopping about so it is basically a non-issue. While a communal changing room is admittedly different in that regard, I still think that of the two solutions being discusses, allowing the trans person to use the changing room they identify with seems to me the better of the two solutions, though I agree that it isn't a perfect one and there are many issues surrounding such a decision.
|
The entire concept of bathroom/locker room separation is built on the concept that men want to have sex with women and vice versa, and that's it. And no, it has little to no bearing on modern realities.
The issue with what bathroom transgenders use just brings out how outdated the entire setup is.
|
On December 06 2015 06:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:
The entire concept of bathroom/locker room separation is built on the concept that men want to have sex with women and vice versa, and that's it. And no, it has little to no bearing on modern realities.
The issue with what bathroom transgenders use just brings out how outdated the entire setup is.
Pretty much.
I would also like to point out that the discomfort levels from having someone who identifies as a woman, dresses as a woman, plays on a woman sports team, socializes with other girls as a woman, and then forcing them to change in the boys changing room, are going to be far greater than letting said person change with the girls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
