Let's be clear on one thing. Someone will always bitch about something and the mainstream media will exploit that to iverly sensationalize any issue de jour.
6 year old kid suspended for 3 days because he fired an IMAGINARY bow and arrow. I just thank Baby Jesus he didn't make a finger gun. Can you IMAGINE?! I hope this goes on the child's permanent record. He belongs in jail. That will scare him straight.
They recognize it, and they understand it. But they are too committed to their gun control nonsense that they need to use shootings as fodder to promote their positions. Its the Democrat tag line to "Never let a good tragedy go to waste." (Famously said by Rahm Emmanuel).
Reminds of the assault weapons ban the left was trying to push after the Newtown shooting. Biden even admitted that the law would essentially have no impact on murder rates, but still stood behind it. There are ways legislation could make at least a somewhat meaningful impact, but arbitrarily sorting through types of semi-automatic guns isn't the way to do it. Especially if you're going to go after the guns that are responsible for such a small percentage of murders. Banning one type of gun will reduce murders from that particular weapon, and just marginally raise it for others. I think the motivation for this kind of legislation is just a need to feel like they've won something. A 12 to 10 bullet clip isn't going to save anyone, but it's a victory over the gun nuts. However, I will say that the people who continuously claim more guns everywhere on everyone all the time is somehow going reduce homicides are far crazier.
A couple of days ago the people of Houston voted on a measure that would allow men that say they're trans gendered to use female restrooms/dressing rooms/locker rooms. It was defeated 61% to 39%. Now the LGBT community is calling for folks to boycott Houston, and for the NFL to move the 2017 Super Bowl because Houston is homophobic. Or anti trans. Or some fucking thing. Who cares any more? Houston has an openly gay mayor. Yeah, Houston's homophobic alright. And the NFL pretty much told them to go fuck themselves. This is getting beyond ridiculous. A friend told me yesterday she was in a dressing room at Target trying on bathing suits and a fucking guy walked into the dressing room common area with clothes while she was showing the suit to a friend. She thought they were maybe in the wrong dressing room. They checked the sign on the door...nope..."Womens" She went to the attendant and let her know there was a man in the women's dressing room and was told "He considers himself female and by law is allowed to be there." This whole "Gender is a choice" thing is not going to end well.
Man, based on the number of posts you've dedicated to this topic, this seems like a huge issue for you. Unfortunately, you really left out a lot of relevant information about the Houston ordinance. The ordinance, in fact, banned discrimination in housing, private employment, and businesses based on race, religion, sexual orientation and gender identity. This ordinance would have aligned with similar measures in other Texas cities, including Austin and Dallas. It makes it illegal for a landlord to refuse leasing an apartment to LGBTQ individuals, for a company to fire someone for being gay or trans. I assume you would support such laws. It makes no mention of bathrooms. In fact, an earlier version included language specifically allowing trans people to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with and they removed that provision. This shouldn't have been controversial. But opponents successfully made it about men going into women's bathrooms. And the voting public thought that's what the ordinance was about. It's especially funny since it would still be illegal for a guy to go into a women's bathroom and do anything other than use the bathroom. The opponents ran a commercial where an older man went into a bathroom after a small girl, then went into her stall. Guess what ? If this ordinance was law, and that occurred, it would be illegal! People are still very ignorant of trans issues, so I don't blame them for voting it down based on the outright lies and general misinformation. But too often these situations are really about people being weirded out or generally unaccepting of trans people, or perhaps just being ignorant and unfamiliar with what it means to be transgender. And when you here about what transgender people have to go through, the outrageously high rates of violence against transgender people and suicide among transgender people, it would be nice if we can ensure that at least the government has their back. But like I said, I don't think the Houston public were being bigoted by voting this down. I get it. When I hear about the idea of a 16 year old boy who identifies as a girl but still anatomically looks like a boy wanting to change and shower in the girls' locker room, I get why those girls might be uncomfortable. But would they also be uncomfortable if they shared a locker room with a girl who was out as a lesbian? Then again, if I had a 15 year old daughter who went to LA Fitness and she told me a middle aged man walked into the locker room, I might very well be upset by that. That would be my natural reaction. Let's not pretend, however, that the people bankrolling the opposition, the pastors and the leaders of the coalitions are just people out worried about their kids. They hate gay and trans people. That's what this is about. I just don't understand why the pro-ordinance side didn't try to include language addressing this specific concern. As a political operative, I can say with confidence that they bungled the hell out of this.
This is not about the difficulties that transgendered people go through, everyone on this board understands they get a raw deal. This is more about suddenly The problem today is how SJW's demand that anybody different from the "norm" be right about anything they say. It doesn't matter if the entire school of girls and their parents is uncomftorable with a guy with a shaft in their only private place in the school, THEY are the bigots because HE says they are. Despite being outvoted 1000 to 1. The Fake Outrage Community has managed to create this twisted form of reality where the very few who are offended somehow outweigh the titanically bigger opposition who are NOT offended. The so-called "moral high ground" gives you the win every time because everyone kneels to being shamed with guilt. These people do not go away if you ignore them. They (for example Leigh Alexander) destroy actual lives simply for disagreeing with them on the fucking Internet. That's right: dox in you and hunting you down in your personal life to get you fired for typing criticism on a keyboard. This insane version of human being is to the left what yahoo, bible-thumping assholes who bring snowballs on to the floor of congress are to the Right: an embarrassing fucking disgrace. Toytoy is right. Houston has an openly gay mayor while being the fourth biggest city in America and because the Fake Outrage Crew can't have the entire fucking tree, their reaction is to poison every root. "Boycott Houston" give me a break. I'm sorry, but no matter what side you take losing is supposed to taste like a shit sandwich. I would know, I'm a Redskins fan. The parents and their daughters have spoken and they don't want that. I sorry, but I can't blame them. But you explain this to the other side, because this "other side" honestly now believes that genders do not exists, but are something simply "assigned to a human by a doctor at birth in a prejudicial matter". These people are supposed to be on the side of science yet science proves them wrong.
Thinking the transgender stuff is weird doesn't make someone a bigot. I support them getting rights as they need, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a little bizarre.
I could not agree more. It's rare and counter to the social existence of most people, and if your reaction is confusion (or even revulsion!), well, that's being a human being. The idea that it's simply SJW pushing the idea that "gender is a choice" is both dangerous and counterfactual. Let's look at some numbers: Over 40% of trans people will attempt suicide at some point. They are four times more likely to be living in extreme poverty, here defined as an annual income as $10,000 or less. I'm less clear on the homicide statistics, since they're grossly underreported, but at minimum they're murdered at rate way higher than the general population. Part of that is violent anger from (men) who felt revulsion over their identity. Part of that is just the reality of being poor and having few resources, because one in five has been homeless, and one in 10 has been evicted for their gender identity at some point. I ask you -- we have some narcissistic people in the world, but who would choose all of that just to gain moral high ground on the internet? Could the ordinance have led to a lying man committing violence in a woman's bathroom? Of course. But you know what is a statistically much much much much more likely occurrence? A trans woman getting beaten for using the men's room. It's not even close in terms of the threat, and if you find me any evidence that men barging into women's bathrooms and saying their trans is a trend anywhere where being trans is a protected class, I will eat my hat. As far as it being a choice, maybe we're looking at different science, but the papers that I have found strongly suggest that gender is a function of brain chemistry rather than genitalia. By that measure, it's no more a choice than having synesthesia. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7073469 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15724806 If you're interested in an interpretation, one from the WSJ: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304854804579234030532617704 I fail to see how Houston having a gay mayor or being highly populated is relevant to any of the above, but as always I am open to being proven wrong.
The safety aspect of the whole thing is not what appalls me the most about this. It's the fact that in many cases they are bypassing already provided gender neutral rooms and DEMANDING they be let in the room of THEIR choice. They're making this to be about the world getting along with THEM, not them figuring out how to get along with the world like the rest of us have to. The excuse for not using the gender neutral facility is usually it makes them feel excluded. There are (Or should be) laws in place about excluding them and I agree with that. There should not be laws against things that make them FEEL excluded, especially when it infringes on the safety, privacy, and security of others.
100% Agreed. I think the issue with SJWs is they latch on to the issue du jour, adopt it, and then scream and yell at anyone who questions any aspect of it, no matter how extreme or downright silly. Speaking as a straight cis white male, I think when most people think of transgendered people, they picture Caityn Jenner. And from an outsider's perspective she's a terrible poster child for the trans movement. I have to believe there's other people out there that would be much more virtuous in that role. She was an attention whore as a man, and her growing her out and taking hormones doesn't absolve her of being a shitbag. If the public has a negative impression of the anointed they won't take them or by extension, the movement, as seriously as it deserves.
As far as the transgender thing, the Evelyn Beatrice Hall quote sums up my views nicely: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." I think it's more a "you get used to me, I get used to you" sort of thing. While obviously this has existed for a very long time, it's only recently that transgender issues have been thrust into the public spotlight. It'd be naive to think that they'll be solved quickly.
Isn't it already illegal to discriminate based on sex, race, age, ,mental health, sexual preference and so on? If that's the case why would we need another law on the books to protect those who identify as the opposite sex? It seem redundant because trans people should be protected by both the sexual preference and mental health discrimination laws we already have.
So in other news, the Austin P.D. is up to their old tricks again: I can personally attest that Austin P.D. officers are fucking dickheads when it comes to jaywalking: When I was 16, I went to a UT Austin football game, and when the outcome of the game was inevitable (I don't even remember who won, but they were playing the Cornhuskers), I volunteered to get my dad's car out of a surrounding parking lot. I came to an intersection with a cop, and no cars coming for a country mile in either direction. I took a couple of steps into the street, and he called me back. Why? Because the sign said "DONT WALK." He was as serious as a heart attack, and he said that he could cite me for jay-walking. In retrospect, I should have told him to kiss my ass and then run off (I was 16 and in better shape than him, but I used to actually follow the rules). But that event made made a very important impression on me. That point: Austin sucks. Fuck Austin. It seems like everybody and their brother is ready to kneel down, open wide and suck Austin's dick, talking about how great it is, but look at that shit! Austin is the most overrated place I've ever had the misfortune of visiting.
It is illegal to discriminate based on age, race, religion, disabilities, and sex. Many states and cities also have laws prohibiting discrimination against LGBTQ, but many states and cities do not. In these states/cities, you can be fired for being LGBTQ.
In Ohio you can definitely be fired for being LGBTQ. I regularly try to get them to cancel Ohio State games in protest. I'm a shitty SJW.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...brating-today-could-be-fired-monday-being-gay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States