• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

In Houston nondiscrimination is on the line (beheadings to follow)

Ladewig said:
The proposed ordinance would provide rights to people who self identify as opposite gender. Therefore creepy men could claim to identify as opposite gender and go into women's restrooms and locker rooms where they would supposedly expose themselves to girls with impunity.
Click to expand...

...and you couldn't identify that by the inevitable erection? I get that a person can be sexually motivated without having an erection, but it's not like perverts are well known for their sexual self control. I also haven't heard of male-on-male sex or rampant erections in group shower facilities becoming the norm in our High Schools, despite the fact that homosexuality itself is becoming more accepted.

Honestly, we'd be a lot better off if the girls and boys showered together -- along with the usual societal more of not staring and not having an erection in such circumstances that already sort of applies in an all-male shower. At the very least it would help with some of the lack of self control that sort of helps cause sex crimes.

Sure, it may seem extreme to people that grew up any other way, but personally I think that separation is actually the cause of a lot of problems, rather than a solution to anything.
 
Last edited:
The biggest gap in the pro-HERO logic is the fact that "trans" is not an objective, falsifiable standard. Anyone can claim to be trans at anytime for any reason. In effect, the law would have outlawed gendered bathrooms.
 
Tony said:
The biggest gap in the pro-HERO logic is the fact that "trans" is not an objective, falsifiable standard. Anyone can claim to be trans at anytime for any reason. In effect, the law would have outlawed gendered bathrooms.
Click to expand...

My stance is that perhaps we should do exactly that. However, I do get that this isn't the intent. I wish it was. English (and by extension American) prudishness needs to be banished to the depths of forgotten history. It has brought us nothing but problems.
 
Last edited:
Travis said:
I have walked in on my mom while undressed and somehow I did not climb a clocktower as a result.
Click to expand...

Distracted1 said:
Good for you, but that is kind of dodging the question.
Would you feel comfortable in a locker room nude with your also nude mother? In close proximity for the amount of time it takes to disrobe, attend to your various personal hygiene issues, and get dressed? Would she feel comfortable under the same circumstances?
Click to expand...

The fact that we would not feel comfortable is what's disturbing. If we were comfortable in the fact that we are all nude under our clothing things would be a lot easier. This attitude could change rather quickly if we wanted it to.

I was sitting in my parents hot tub one night - sans clothing - when my Mom, Step Dad, and Aunt came out in their robes to join me. They had nothing on under the robes and I was like "what the...oh no!"

It was uncomfortable for sure, but after a few minutes it was slightly less uncomfortable, and so on. We're family. Most of our mothers changed our diapers when we were babies - the last people on Earth we should be ashamed to be naked in front of are our parents. I wasn't nearly 100% comfortable by the time I got out of the tub, but after so many years it takes time to get past such things.

So screw it! Let's just have one bathroom for everyone and deal with it. We would be a healthier society if we got over the phobia of our own nakedness and sexuality. This is truly pathetic. Time to grow up. This could be a step in the right direction. You're not special and neither am I, so whip it out!
 
^I'm uncomfortable seeing MYSELF naked, let alone anyone else. Kindly refrain from whipping anything out in my vicinity. Unless of course you are totally hot ;).
 
Distracted1 said:
Good for you, but that is kind of dodging the question.
Would you feel comfortable in a locker room nude with your also nude mother? In close proximity for the amount of time it takes to disrobe, attend to your various personal hygiene issues, and get dressed? Would she feel comfortable under the same circumstances?
Click to expand...


Certainly. Why not?

I'd be more worried about the ones who didn't feel comfortable. What exactly is going on in their minds?
 
Travis said:
Why are supposing that men are going to be just whipping out their penis on purpose?

I was proposing accidental exposure like a girl walking in a male family member getting out of the shower which, somehow, doesn't cause the world to end every time it happens.
Click to expand...

He was just using it as an illustration that girls and women typically don't want to see penises that aren't invited.

The issue, though, is not men whipping out their penises in front of girls or women. The issue is with women and girls whipping out their penises in front of other women and girls.

Title IX, as interpreted today, is very clear on this subject. Any woman or girl may use gender segregated facilities, without restriction, regardless of whether or not those women or girls have penises. School districts who discriminate against those girls who have penises can lose funding. Discrimination includes forcing them to change in a different part of the school from the other girls. Concave or convex, they all use the same showers.

Observation of most transgender females suggest that very few would want to expose their genitals in such situations, but they have the right to do so, and some have chosen to exercise that right.
 
Tony said:
Why not?
Click to expand...

Most people aren't good enough actors to pull it off, especially when the deviance causes them personal distress (which would be "usually" to "always" in the case of the sort of perversion implied). Pulling that sort of thing off sort of requires a lack of emotional investment that arguably does not generally exist in someone desperate enough to try it. A person that could actually manage it would likely be more prankster than pervert -- not that the "victims" would always care about the difference, but there is a difference.

Yeah, I do realize that you weren't asking me, but there's my take on it anyway. The bottom line is that those most interested in doing such a thing are the ones least likely to have the guts to actually try it. The prankster personality would be the exception, but even that wouldn't exactly be an easy sell unless they're already somehow desensitized to both intersexual nudity and their own gender identity -- which sort of defies the root assumptions motivating the gender separation anyway, so why would it even matter?
 
Last edited:
Manopolus said:
Most people aren't good enough actors to pull it off, especially when the deviance causes them personal distress (which would be "usually" to "always" in the case of the sort of perversion implied). Pulling that sort of thing off sort of requires a lack of emotional investment that arguably does not generally exist in someone desperate enough to try it. A person that could actually manage it would likely be more prankster than pervert -- not that the "victims" would always care about the difference, but there is a difference
Click to expand...

Most people? How do you know this? And how does your ability to judge weather someone is trans enough effect how they identify? Isn't it likely that someone can be trans while not conforming to your prejudiced idea of how a trans person should act? Does the law include a provision allowing people to personally judge whether someone is really trans or only "acting" trans? If so, your point might make sense. But it would pretty much undermine the law since anyone can say that the person identifying as trans wasn't acting trans "good enough" and therefore shouldn't use the bathroom of their choice.
 
Last edited:
Manopolus said:
The bottom line is that those most interested in doing such a thing are the ones least likely to have the guts to actually try it.
Click to expand...

You're literally making this up as you go. Why would someone need guts to do something that is perfectly legal? I would have no problem temporarily identifying as a woman (i am gender fluid after all) if it meant I legally wouldn't have to wait in line to go to use the men's room.
 
mgidm86 said:
The fact that we would not feel comfortable is what's disturbing. If we were comfortable in the fact that we are all nude under our clothing things would be a lot easier. This attitude could change rather quickly if we wanted it to.

I was sitting in my parents hot tub one night - sans clothing - when my Mom, Step Dad, and Aunt came out in their robes to join me. They had nothing on under the robes and I was like "what the...oh no!"

It was uncomfortable for sure, but after a few minutes it was slightly less uncomfortable, and so on. We're family. Most of our mothers changed our diapers when we were babies - the last people on Earth we should be ashamed to be naked in front of are our parents. I wasn't nearly 100% comfortable by the time I got out of the tub, but after so many years it takes time to get past such things.

So screw it! Let's just have one bathroom for everyone and deal with it. We would be a healthier society if we got over the phobia of our own nakedness and sexuality. This is truly pathetic. Time to grow up. This could be a step in the right direction. You're not special and neither am I, so whip it out!
Click to expand...
Yet this attitude is far outside the norm just about everywhere on Earth. An overwhelming majority of humans do not wish to be exposed to- or expose- genetalia that is not fundamentally similar in form and function to their own, and even then the locker room environment is far from relaxed for many of us.
Were I to walk into a locker room wherein a group of girls/women were in various states of undress I would certainly walk right out again.

If feels like this argument goes in reverse. People are hung-up on the pronouns, and walking backwards from the word to the deed to make a silly point. Change the doors from "men's" and "women's" to "penises" and "vaginas" and the entire premise of it becomes moot.
 
Manopolus said:
...and you couldn't identify that by the inevitable erection? I get that a person can be sexually motivated without having an erection, but it's not like perverts are well known for their sexual self control. I also haven't heard of male-on-male sex or rampant erections in group shower facilities becoming the norm in our High Schools, despite the fact that homosexuality itself is becoming more accepted.
Click to expand...

Well there have been some articles about heterosexual men engaging in male male sexual encounters more. The Bro Job I believe some call it.
 
Tony said:
Most people? How do you know this? And how does your ability to judge weather someone is trans enough effect how they identify? Isn't it likely that someone can be trans while not conforming to your prejudiced idea of how a trans person should act? Does the law include a provision allowing people to personally judge whether someone is really trans or only "acting" trans? If so, your point might make sense. But it would pretty much undermine the law since anyone can say that the person identifying as trans wasn't acting trans "good enough" and therefore shouldn't use the bathroom of their choice.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about acting "trans" I'm talking about acting remotely sincere when claiming it.
 
Tony said:
You're literally making this up as you go. Why would someone need guts to do something that is perfectly legal? I would have no problem temporarily identifying as a woman (i am gender fluid after all) if it meant I legally wouldn't have to wait in line to go to use the men's room.
Click to expand...

Was it illegal per se for a man to enter the women's restroom in the first place? I'm not so sure that it ever explicitly was, most places. I honestly don't know for sure either way. All the laws that I'm aware of require access rather than denying it. I'm thinking it's more of an unwritten societal rule than a law in most cases (well, it's written only in terms of the sign on the door itself, anyway).

I don't think I've ever even seen a written policy regarding who is allowed in which bathroom in the past. The word on the door is pretty much all there's ever been as far as I know.
 
Last edited:
Distracted1 said:
Would you feel comfortable in a locker room nude with your also nude mother? In close proximity for the amount of time it takes to disrobe, attend to your various personal hygiene issues, and get dressed? Would she feel comfortable under the same circumstances?
Click to expand...

I don't know about anyone else, but when I'm in a locker room, I'm not looking around at anyone.

quadraginta said:
I'd be more worried about the ones who didn't feel comfortable. What exactly is going on in their minds?
Click to expand...

^This. While I know some men do use locker rooms as pick-up spots, the men I know don't. It's a place to change clothes and move on to the reason you are at the gym/pool/etc.
 
BardKesnit said:
I don't know about anyone else, but when I'm in a locker room, I'm not looking around at anyone.
Click to expand...

Yeah... that was sort of my point on a lot of this too. The way that guys tend to use locker rooms, I don't think we'd even notice if there was a girl in there with us as long as she was quiet enough. Seriously, we don't tend to do much looking at each other. What's more, I'm not actually sure that would change in a unisex locker room. I think most guys would be too worried about accidentally popping a boner to behave any differently. I dunno, maybe girls have different habits in these situations though. They don't have a visible sign of arousal to worry about, so that alone suggests a possible difference in the way they approach the situation.

Don't get me wrong, some guys seem more comfortable with the situation than others, but there's a certain level of prohibitive etiquette that isn't generally crossed, and I don't think that would even change in the presence of females as long as there are other guys there and there's not alcohol involved or something -- particularly once people got adjusted to it.

I honestly don't think that a unisex situation would be even close to what a lot of Americans think about when they consider it. I don't think the experience would really be much different than gender-separate.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom