Fuck North Carolina Republicans

[bandl]

BTW:
The best coffee shops in Seattle are pretty much the gay ones...

and:
Art galleries

and:
Suits - gay guys are great at helping with a nice suit


As is evidence in my fancy Ted Baker suit here

Did you finally kick the ironing addiction? Good on you, mate!

Yep, you can tell by the wrinkled suit and baggy shirt.

[89Hen]

So gays stick up for transgenders by default?

Most of us do.

And the NC law goes FAR beyond the whole bathroom issue - it legalizes discrimination against gays and lesbians in all areas of the state - Government, private businesses, etc can legally discriminate.

Jon, I honestly haven't been following this one, but from the little I've read it seems your statement above is not decided as fact. I'm sure you've read much more, but I'm also pretty sure you're probably only reading one side.

[CID1990]

Most of us do.

And the NC law goes FAR beyond the whole bathroom issue - it legalizes discrimination against gays and lesbians in all areas of the state - Government, private businesses, etc can legally discriminate.

Jon, I honestly haven't been following this one, but from the little I've read it seems your statement above is not decided as fact. I'm sure you've read much more, but I'm also pretty sure you're probably only reading one side.

ya think?

see my previous post re: drama queen

[Skjellyfetti]

And the NC law goes FAR beyond the whole bathroom issue - it legalizes discrimination against gays and lesbians in all areas of the state - Government, private businesses, etc can legally discriminate.

Jon, I honestly haven't been following this one, but from the little I've read it seems your statement above is not decided as fact. I'm sure you've read much more, but I'm also pretty sure you're probably only reading one side.

The law makes it impossible to sue in state court for discriminatory firing. Not just LGBT... but, ANY discriminatory firing.

A section of House Bill 2, dubbed the Public Facilities Privacy & Security Act, rewrote state employment law, however, making it impossible to sue in state court for discriminatory firing.

"We thought this was really a bill about bathrooms and state and municipal government, but it turned out that it was much bigger," said Raleigh lawyer Chris Nichols, president of North Carolina Advocates for Justice.

"What that's done is it's put everyone – employers and employees – into federal court, which is not really the place you want to be," Nichols said.

Federal court is slower, more complex and more expensive, which could discourage some lawsuits, he said. It also offers a much shorter window for fired employees to file suit.

http://www.wral.com/lawmakers-make-it-h ... /15598291/

[89Hen]

That would be a big deal probably. Mrs89 used to have to deal with discrimination cases on the county level. Some were legit, some were just bad employees. Having to go to federal court would suck.

[Skjellyfetti]

[89Hen]

I'm really dense on this one. What does that tweet mean?

[Skjellyfetti]

He's a transgendered female.

He has to use the women's restroom in North Carolina now.

[89Hen]

He's a transgendered female.

Cid would fail his "100 dudes" challenge with that one. I did.

[Ibanez]

He's a transgendered female.

He has to use the women's restroom in North Carolina now.

How enforceable is this? I was in downtown Charlotte this morning and there were a few "sit ins" in bathrooms. I couldn't tell from looking at them if they were trans-gendered or not. A few, yeah. They stuck out like a sore thumb.

[kalm]

[CID1990]

He's a transgendered female.

He has to use the women's restroom in North Carolina now.

you called her "he"

on most college campuses you'd be undergoing some shaming and a self-criticism session or two

btw does he have a pecker, a vadge, or both?

if i had only a bearded taco I would only want to use the ladies' room. Toilet seats are disgusting in the mens'

[CAA Flagship]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/28/news/ec ... igh-point/

A massive furniture expo that brings billions of dollars to North Carolina's economy each year said Monday that the state's new bathroom law is threatening its business.

The statute, which was enacted last Wednesday, requires transgendered individuals to use the bathroom that coordinates with their anatomical gender at birth, rather than the gender they identify with.

Jon, I haven't been following this at all.
I see what the new statute requires, but what do the people who oppose it want? Do they want freedom to choose based on "what gender they identify with", or something else like "current equipment"?

[dbackjon]

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/28/news/ec ... igh-point/

A massive furniture expo that brings billions of dollars to North Carolina's economy each year said Monday that the state's new bathroom law is threatening its business.

The statute, which was enacted last Wednesday, requires transgendered individuals to use the bathroom that coordinates with their anatomical gender at birth, rather than the gender they identify with.

Jon, I haven't been following this at all.
I see what the new statute requires, but what do the people who oppose it want? Do they want freedom to choose based on "what gender they identify with", or something else like "current equipment"?

yes, the gender they identify with. See some of the pictures in the thread for examples of men that will have to use a women's restroom and vice-versa

[CAA Flagship]

Jon, I haven't been following this at all.
I see what the new statute requires, but what do the people who oppose it want? Do they want freedom to choose based on "what gender they identify with", or something else like "current equipment"?

yes, the gender they identify with. See some of the pictures in the thread for examples of men that will have to use a women's restroom and vice-versa

Got it. Thanks.

[Pwns]

Let's just have restrooms based on one's ostensible sex, and be done with it. And you have an androgynous appearance just use whichever one you want.

[89Hen]

Let's just have restrooms based on one's ostensible sex

Forcing Rosie to use the mens room seems kinda mean spirited for you pwns.

[Skjellyfetti]

btw does he have a pecker, a vadge, or both?

I don't know and don't care.

Are you missing your SE Asian tranny hookers? He might send you a pic if you tweet him.

[dbackjon]

btw does he have a pecker, a vadge, or both?

I don't know and don't care.

Are you missing your SE Asian tranny hookers? He might send you a pic if you tweet him.

He is going back to SE Asia...

[CID1990]

btw does he have a pecker, a vadge, or both?

I don't know and don't care.

Are you missing your SE Asian tranny hookers? He might send you a pic if you tweet him.

it was actually a serious question

your cliche default questioning of my own sexuality (I'm not defined by mine, BTW) is duly noted

[andy7171]

Welp, at least "he's" not going to rape her.

[UNI88]

Jon, I haven't been following this at all.
I see what the new statute requires, but what do the people who oppose it want? Do they want freedom to choose based on "what gender they identify with", or something else like "current equipment"?

yes, the gender they identify with. See some of the pictures in the thread for examples of men that will have to use a women's restroom and vice-versa

Jon, I can understand that bathroom choice is a cause for concern for individuals that identify with a different gender and have no problem being sensitive to those concerns. The problem is that I also find it ironic that so called progressives like to label and belittle people who express any opposition to such attempts. While some of the opponents might be bigots do you believe that all of them are? IMO these "progressives" are being hypocrites by ignoring the possibility that some people might be uncomfortable sharing a bathroom with such individuals. Are they simply bigots whose feelings and comfort don't matter? Is it ok to marginalize one group of individuals in order to advocate for another? Can't we search for a solution that recognizes the comfort and concerns of everyone?

[CAA Flagship]

yes, the gender they identify with. See some of the pictures in the thread for examples of men that will have to use a women's restroom and vice-versa

Jon, I can understand that bathroom choice is a cause for concern for individuals that identify with a different gender and have no problem being sensitive to those concerns. The problem is that I also find it ironic that so called progressives like to label and belittle people who express any opposition to such attempts. While some of the opponents might be bigots do you believe that all of them are? IMO these "progressives" are being hypocrites by ignoring the possibility that some people might be uncomfortable sharing a bathroom with such individuals. Are they simply bigots whose feelings and comfort don't matter? Is it ok to marginalize one group of individuals in order to advocate for another? Can't we search for a solution that recognizes the comfort and concerns of everyone?

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this.

I'm OK with this:



But if it was a female that turned into a male............. ..............I can live with it Pre-Op.
If Post-Op, the standard buffer rule applies.

[JohnStOnge]

This idea that you can will yourself to be female when you're biologically male or visa versa is SO stupid. Yet it's gained popular acceptance. If you're born biologically a male you're a male. If you don't "identify" with that then you're just a sick puppy. And there's no reason society should be bending over backwards to accommodate sick puppies.

[kalm]

yes, the gender they identify with. See some of the pictures in the thread for examples of men that will have to use a women's restroom and vice-versa

Jon, I can understand that bathroom choice is a cause for concern for individuals that identify with a different gender and have no problem being sensitive to those concerns. The problem is that I also find it ironic that so called progressives like to label and belittle people who express any opposition to such attempts. While some of the opponents might be bigots do you believe that all of them are? IMO these "progressives" are being hypocrites by ignoring the possibility that some people might be uncomfortable sharing a bathroom with such individuals. Are they simply bigots whose feelings and comfort don't matter? Is it ok to marginalize one group of individuals in order to advocate for another? Can't we search for a solution that recognizes the comfort and concerns of everyone?

So we're basing our laws on squishy feelings now? I'm going into the bathroom to take a crap. I could give a flying fuck about the plumbing on the other dude who looks like a dude in the restroom. If it's different from mine so be it, but I'm not going to check and I'm not going to wonder about it. I'm there to take a crap. Folks who do care about that kind of stuff have something wrong with them and I'm not going to shed a tear over their feelings.

Unless you're being satirical here (which I admit you might be) in which case, nice work.