Is He Right?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, seeker said:

Yeah, except it's way more complicated than that.  There's a person's physical gender and then there's the gender they identify themselves with.  So when you say "female" washroom who are you referring to - the person who was born female or the person who identifies as female and started their hormone therapy yesterday but is still physically male or the guy who just wants to go into the women's washroom and plans to claim he's always thought of himself as female?  The only true solution is to have a whole row of individual washrooms with no gender specified at all which obviously is not possible in some places due to space and is massively more expensive even if there is room to build them. 

That I can agree with.

[DEFCON]

"Anyone who believes that their right to discriminate should hold sway at the Supreme Court over someone else's right to be free from discrimination is dreaming in Technicolor."

What form of discrimination are you referring to?

    

"There's a much simpler answer. If we could stop sexualizing absolutely everything, we'd go a long way towards making these first world problems disappear. I've used gender neutral washrooms in Europe on several occasions. It's not even close to a big deal at all."

I'm don't think I'm sexualizing life; I'm just a guy that's watching over and waiting for his twelve year old daughter to exit a public facility when a man dressed in female attire begins to head into the facility.

How would you respond to the situation JO?

 

[Airband]

2 hours ago, DEFCON said:

I'm don't think I'm sexualizing life; I'm just a guy that's watching over and waiting for his twelve year old daughter to exit a public facility when a man dressed in female attire begins to head into the facility.

C'mon Defcon, show a little tolerance....

[J.O.]

5 hours ago, DEFCON said:

How would you respond to the situation JO?

 

Using a washroom is a simple human bodily function. Go to AMS airport and you'll see just such a scenario dozens of times a day. If you are worried that every man in a unisex washroom is a child molester in waiting, then your lack of trust in your fellow man is pretty sad, IMHO. 

[mo32a]

6 hours ago, DEFCON said:

"Anyone who believes that their right to discriminate should hold sway at the Supreme Court over someone else's right to be free from discrimination is dreaming in Technicolor."

What form of discrimination are you referring to?

    

"There's a much simpler answer. If we could stop sexualizing absolutely everything, we'd go a long way towards making these first world problems disappear. I've used gender neutral washrooms in Europe on several occasions. It's not even close to a big deal at all."

I'm don't think I'm sexualizing life; I'm just a guy that's watching over and waiting for his twelve year old daughter to exit a public facility when a man dressed in female attire begins to head into the facility.

How would you respond to the situation JO?

 

If the bathrooms were all uni-sexual you could go in with your daughter and make sure nobody bothered her.

[deicer]

10 hours ago, mo32a said:

If the bathrooms were all uni-sexual you could go in with your daughter and make sure nobody bothered her.

Now that is parenting.

[DEFCON]

" If you are worried that every man in a unisex washroom is a child molester in waiting, then your lack of trust in your fellow man is pretty sad,"

Really? If you are a parent, is it your practice to expose your children to unnecessary risk?

All it takes is one slime-ball to destroy a woman's life and knowing there's no shortage of sexual deviants out there looking for an opportunity it seems kind of nuts to set the stage for the disaster that will surely follow for some, but hey, we don't want to offend anyone right.

Regardless, if someone with gonads is able to put on a dress and use women's washrooms, we already have unisexual facilities.

Accordingly, heterosexual males have a short window of opportunity to move the issue forward on behalf of whomever by taking advantage of the normally 'clean' state of women's rooms to serve our own needs. I mean, female sensitivities be damned; I'd much prefer to use a woman's washroom than the men's, but in short order, the disgusting habits of men will have eliminated the 'cleanliness advantage'.

If & when the day does come where we're all sharing, I'm certain the females will be impressed and accepting of the standard of care / cleanliness that males routinely leave behind in those places they do their business; in practice, raised toilet seats won't even begin to represent the kind of offence women are going to have to become accustomed to.

 

 

 

[Seeker]

21 minutes ago, DEFCON said:

 

I'd much prefer to use a woman's washroom than the men's, but in short order, the disgusting habits of men will have eliminated the 'cleanliness advantage'.

If & when the day does come where we're all sharing, I'm certain the females will be impressed and accepting of the standard of care / cleanliness that males routinely leave behind in those places they do their business; in practice, raised toilet seats won't even begin to address the kind of offence women are going to have to become accustomed to.

 

 

 

You are so wrong.  Just do a quick google search and you will see - in every study and test conducted men's washrooms were found to be much cleaner than women's.

[Kip Powick]

1 minute ago, seeker said:

You are so wrong.  Just do a quick google search and you will see - in every study and test conducted men's washrooms were found to be much cleaner than women's.

Agree - 100 %...........At resorts and/or marinas, the women's wash-rooms are normally disgusting....(says she)

[deicer]

5 minutes ago, seeker said:

You are so wrong.  Just do a quick google search and you will see - in every study and test conducted men's washrooms were found to be much cleaner than women's.

If you ever worked in the fast food industry, you would know this too!  I worked at a McD's across from a high school, and learned at a young age what the fairer sex could be like.

[DEFCON]

All right then, it's clear, the people want to share ... enjoy!

 

 

[FireFox]

27 minutes ago, seeker said:

You are so wrong.  Just do a quick google search and you will see - in every study and test conducted men's washrooms were found to be much cleaner than women's.

Wow... I never thought that would be the case.

I stand corrected.

[Seeker]

1 minute ago, FireFox said:

 

I stand corrected.

Hah!  Being able to "stand" is one of the reasons, apparently. 

[DEFCON]

On ‎07‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 9:54 PM, J.O. said:

 If you are worried that every man in a unisex washroom is a child molester in waiting, then your lack of trust in your fellow man is pretty sad, IMHO. 

I've got to ask; you're kidding right?

The condom that protects you from the animals is extremely thin. For the sake of the gentle souls, god forbid it ever fail.

 

[Mitch Cronin]

Defcon....  Please allow me to offer an uninvited thought here...:

You seem to have gotten your fill of bad/sad news about our species, and have become a little sour. I know how that feels. When I get that way, there are those around me who help to steer me away from all the ugliness that's so easy to focus upon.... In such times I've found such things as a healthy dose of "People Are Awesome" videos can help.... but the main thing is to steer clear of bad news for a while.

There's just too many depressing things going on and when it's only the shocking/horrible/frightening news that gets reported, one can quite easily find the world looking terribly dark. Remember there are more good people with us on this rock than any "news" reporting is ever going to show.

Cheers,

Mitch

 

[DEFCON]

Thanks Mitch; your comments are very thoughtful.

 

 

[DEFCON]

PS

Believe it, or not, I do make my best effort to be a cheery guy. From time to time I stop to experience the feel good sort of boost that comes from watching ‘people are awesome’ type video, especially ones involving happy little kids, their pets and all the other acts of human kindness that can be seen on YouTube; my better half makes sure I do.

 

I live in a rural setting and find my greatest pleasure comes from feeding various species of wildlife over winter, even feral cats. This activity does have a very calming effect on my soul.

 

My nature was forged by my earlier experience in life, which taught me a great deal about the true nature of the human animal. I’m paraphrasing, but someone else put it best I thought when he said; ‘ideals are always rosy, but history is a demonstration in ugliness'.

 

On occasion I’ve found myself wondering if the present world situation could really be as precarious as it appears, but then reality strikes ... again, which makes the answer all too obvious and renders any opinion to the contrary disingenuous, dangerous to the collective well-being and in need of a respectful rebuttal ... imho.

 

I think it’s safe to say and I think everyone might agree that the world is in a bit of a troubled state at present. That being the case and as this board is something of a debating forum, I respond without regard to political correctness, bluntly to say the least, when posters seem to seek to avoid fact in favour of wishful, but impossible outcomes.

 

The industry that supports most of us here depends almost entirely on a peaceful geopolitical climate. Accordingly, shouldn’t the voice emanating from this forum be something of a call to leadership to wake up, smell the roses and make wise decisions instead of ones that favour political correctness and or are guided by a Party’s ego and their need to dominate at all costs?

 

Just an after thought that has nothing to do with you Mitch, but when it comes to washrooms, sexuality, political correctness and perceived Rights, may I suggest an alternative; the more conservative amongst us should have bathrooms available to us as they are now, male & female. The would be 'progressives' could experiment by having one which they can share with all their new friends and bear the consequence for their choices alone.   

 

 

    

[boestar]

What consequences?

You seem to thing that every LGBT individual is some sort of sexual predator.  In fact nothing can be further from the truth. In fact you would be in more danger in an all mens bathroom with other men.

Equating the LGBT group to "Sexual deviance" is way off course and frankly, even though I do not belong to this group, I find it offensive and you obviously have absolutely no understanding of that group as a whole.

I work with and know personally members of this community and your fear of them only serves to display your ignorance

 

[Guest]

Well stated boestar, I too have worked with and know LGBT individuals and they are def. not a threat to others. Those who might pretend to be LGBT so as to gain access to "sexed" facilities are the dangerous ones and impossible to weed out  / stop.

[DEFCON]

Well thanks for clearing up all the confusion for me guys, but my comments had nothing whatsoever to do with LGBT Rights.

My point; the new approach to washroom use provides a really handy avenue for perverts to access places where they would have stood out like a herpes sore prior.

Will panty checkers of some sort be needed at the entrances to screen the wheat from the chaff?

[Guest]

One decision that Mr. Trump may not have made but I guess Mr. Obama felt that as long as Vietnam was going to buy weapons anyway, the US might as well try to be the suppliers. Lots of $$$$$$ in arms sales as our Government also knows.

Quote

HANOI, Vietnam (AP) — U.S. President Barack Obama on Monday lifted a half-century-old ban on selling arms to Vietnam, looking to bolster a government seen as a crucial, though flawed partner in a region that he has tried to place at the center of his foreign policy legacy.

Obama announced the full removal of the embargo at a news conference where he vowed to leave behind the troubled history between the former war enemies and embrace a new era with a young, increasingly prosperous nation. Obama steered clear of harsh condemnation of what critics see as Vietnam’s abysmal treatment of dissidents, describing instead modest progress on rights in the one-party state. Activists said his decision to lift the embargo destroyed the best U.S. leverage for pushing Vietnam on abuse.

“At this stage, both sides have established a level of trust and cooperation, including between our militaries, that is reflective of common interests and mutual respect,” Obama said.

“This change will ensure that Vietnam has access to the equipment it needs to defend itself and removes a lingering vestige of the Cold War.”

Obama also had more current motivations. His move was the latest step in a yearslong and uneven effort to counter China’s influence in Asia. Obama’s push to deepen defense ties with a neighbor was certain to be eyed with suspicion in Beijing, which has bristled at U.S. engagement in the region and warned officials not to take sides in the heated territorial disputes in the South China Sea.

Obama claimed the move had nothing to do with China, but made clear the U.S. was aligned with the smaller nations like Vietnam.

The United States and Vietnam had mutual concerns about maritime issues and the importance of maintaining freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, he said. While Washington doesn’t take sides, he said, it does support a diplomatic resolution based on “international norms” and “not based on who’s the bigger party and can throw around their weight a little bit more,” a reference to China.

READ MORE: Global military spending nears $1.7 trillion amid Mideast conflicts

China outwardly lauded the lifting of a U.S. arms embargo, saying it hoped “normal and friendly” relations between the U.S. and Vietnam are conducive to regional stability. A spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said bans are a product of the Cold War and shouldn’t have existed.

China itself remains under a weapons embargo imposed by the U.S. and European Union following 1989’s bloody military crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrations centered on Beijing’s Tiananmen Square.

For Vietnam, lifting the arms embargo was a psychological boost for leaders. The United States partially lifted the ban in 2014, but Vietnam pushed for full access as it tries to deal with China’s land reclamation and military construction in nearby seas.

It was unclear whether striking the ban would quickly result in a boost in arms sales. Obama said that each deal would be reviewed case by case and evaluated based on the equipment’s potential use. But there would no longer be a ban based on “ideological division,” he said.

“There’s been modest progress on some of the areas that we’ve identified as a concern,” Obama said, adding that the U.S. “will continue to speak out on behalf of human rights we believe are universal.”

RELATED: Obama delivers a commencement speech at Rutgers

Vietnamese President Tran Dai Quang embraced the chance to enter a new era in U.S-Vietnamese relations. He praised the expansion in security and trade ties between “former enemies turned friends” and, standing next to Obama before reporters, called for more U.S. investment.

Ahead of the visit, in what was seen as a goodwill gesture, Vietnam granted early release from prison to a prominent dissident Catholic priest.

Some U.S. lawmakers and activists had urged the president to press the communist leadership for greater freedoms before lifting the arms sale embargo. Vietnam holds about 100 political prisoners and there have been more detentions this year. In March, seven bloggers and activists were sentenced for “abusing democratic freedoms” and “spreading anti-state propaganda.” Hanoi says that only lawbreakers are punished.

“In one fell swoop, President Obama has jettisoned what remained of U.S. leverage to improve human rights in Vietnam – and (has) basically gotten nothing for it,” Phil Robertson, with Human Rights Watch, said.

 

[deicer]

A solution for the washroom issue is very simple and it would probably cost way, way, way less than the kerfuffle that is going on. 

Simply mandate that new buildings have to have three washrooms:  Men, Women, Everyone Else.

That way, all the rules in place now still hold sway, Men to Men's, Women to Women's and Everyone Else to Everyone Else's.  And if there is an issue with Men going into Women's, etc, then current laws are in place for that.

[Wolfhunter]

LOL, how did we go from terrorism to washrooms? If ever there was a first world problem, I guess this would be it. I can just imagine explaining all this to a village elder in Sudan...

 

Want to know what he/she would say? Check between your legs and pick a door. If it comes to enforcement, that's a security gig you won't see me working.

[Guest]

Wolfhunter, Deicier is in tune with other items in this thread as initiated on April 6 by Defcon. The thread after all is not about terrorism but rather about certain views held by some the current US Presidential candidates.

Deicer: great idea except for the labels, I think - Male, Female and co-ed would be more definitive, this would allow for those who have had a "surgical" gender change to use those that apply to their new gender. I also imagine the long lineup to the female washrooms at most sporting events would be shortened as those in need could use the co-ed facilities. 

[deicer]

And getting to the weapon sales....

The U.S. Military Industrial Complex has been in charge of the government for decades.  How else do you increase your GDP other than through sales.

And when it comes to the security issue, what better way to defend yourself than by knowing which weapons the enemy has?