Today...

[Ammako]

Ya, and that's the problem. People judging on appearances all the time.

Let's cry about trans women using women's bathrooms because supposedly we're all perverts who are in it just so we can go in women's bathrooms unnoticed and spy on them/molest them. Nevermind the fact not every one of us is even gonna be attracted to women in the first place. Nevermind the fact HRT kills our sex drive anyway. Nevermind the fact not anyone can just claim to be transgender and gain access to those bathrooms.

 

I dunno about other places, but over here I'd probably need to, at the very least, present a letter from my psychologist. You can't just go and pretend you're trans and suddenly you are given free access to women's bathrooms. Which is what people complain about. Complaining that allowing trans people from using the right bathrooms would allow any pervert to pretend to be a woman and use the women's bathrooms.

 

And then no-one talks about trans men using men's bathrooms. Double standards.

If they tried applying the same logic to trans men, they'd quickly realize they're morons.

Make trans men continue using women's bathrooms, see how that goes. What? You'd rather not have a guy using the women's bathrooms? Then why do you complain about trans women using women's bathrooms, asking for them to continue using the men's bathrooms?

Let's see... trans woman on HRT, sex drive is almost gone, very little chances of us wanting to go to those bathrooms just to peep on women and molest them. We just want to pee.

Trans man on HRT, the testosterone makes their sex drive go way up. You should be far more worried about that. If you're gonna want to demand trans women keep using the men's bathrooms, then you should also demand that trans men continue using the women's bathrooms.

 

(Keep in mind, when I say "you", I'm not referring to you in particular, but anyone who uses that logic and believes in that.)

 

But of course, that's all bullshit. We just want to pee.

 

Speaking of elections/voting results from Tuesday, only 14.3% of Cumberland County, NC citizens voted. The incumbent mayor of Fayetteville, whose policies and stances are against the interests of just about everyone but most especially youths, won by some 600ish votes. His opponent pushed for policies to decouple Fayetteville from its dependence on the military/Fort Bragg by aligning with the Research Triangle (Raleigh [lots of medicine companies and research], Durham [see Duke University, a premier medical school], Cary [Epic is located there--y'know, Unreal Engine/Unreal Tournament/etc], and Chapel Hill) to move towards the tech and medicine sector, as well as properly reduce crime (i.e., education, community, and reducing poverty; the incumbent used higher property taxes to hire more police and line the police budget, amazingly backwards).

 

If only ~5% of voters 18-24 or ~3% of those 18-29 had actually voted (and voted in their interests), our new mayor wouldn't be some Republican stereotype. I was #92 to vote in my area approaching 11:00 am (4-5 hours after polling started), and probably one of the youngest to turn up (out of the four others who voted while I was there, they were all at least 20 years older, most probably more). There was an issue with my brother's voter registration (thank you, Republican poll quiz advancements!) so he was unable to vote, sadly, but that should be fixed before the upcoming primaries...

 

Vote in local elections. Vote in state elections. Vote in presidential elections. Vote in mid-term elections. Apathy is a terrible excuse, and enables abuses of the political system, especially in local elections, where a few hundred votes can make a dramatic difference. Not voting is worse than voting against your interests; at that point, you might as well live in a dictatorship.

Also this is relevant: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=2461

[Estonian dude]

I still believe in nature and I don't support any surgic or hormonal treatments designed to change appearance.

I am happy with my body and I am not ashamed of it, even though I most definitely do not fit into the general standards of attractiveness.

I was made that way and the only way I can and want to change it is through exercise and diet.

As such, I find it interesting and petty that people even care that much that they can't visit the same bathroom.

Like for [bleep]s sake, everyone takes a dump and pees once in a while, as long as you are in a stall, who gives a damn if there is a dude or a lady waiting in the sinkroom(?).

Who gives a [bleep] if someone might happen to accidentally see you half-naked? Is it a disaster, will you become a hermit because of that?

We can see naked bodies all around the internet, if we want to. I can see a naked body in the mirror any time I want to.

I don't even see the [bleep]ing point in this petty argument about transgender or homosexual or whatever people using the bathroom.

We have a saying that there is one place where even the kings and emperors go on their own feet and where they do it themselves, and that is in the restroom. Everybody is equal there anyways.

[Veiva]

Ya, and that's the problem. People judging on appearances all the time.

 

 

Conservatives likes to paint liberals as "feels over reals." Interestingly enough, it seems those who are primarily conservative--typically religious zealots or xenophobes or just all-around ignorant scum (unless they're exceedingly wealthy, at which point it's a method to protect their power and the rest is a show)--tend to promote their irrational, wishy-washy moral beliefs over humanist values, in turn using "feels over reals."

 

See: erosion of inalienable rights in the name of security. In the case of transgender individuals, it's discriminating against them on because "women will be raped!" Of course, they don't mention that transgender individuals are the victims of heinous crimes at an exceedingly higher rate than someone who identifies with their physical sex... Let's not get started on the war on terror (or, in other words, the war on anyone-who-looks-like-a-stereotypical-Muslim in order to enable mass surveillance of the population), war on crime (or, in other words, the war on those with a low socioeconomic status), war on drugs (see war on crime), the red scare, and so many others...

 

After all, conservative ideology is based on the individual being the sole responsibility for his or her actions, which is undeniably wrong. The fact is an individual is a culmination of all his or her experiences, and experiences are caused by external actors, most of which the individual has no control over (genetics, upbringing, culture, society). Since conservative thought is based on a lie, truth is the enemy.

[RpgGamer]

If we could teach our culture that sexual assault is bad but nudity is fine I think unisex bathrooms would work out a-ok

[obfuscator]

Ya, and that's the problem. People judging on appearances all the time.

I don't disagree, but when it is a biological urge driven by millions of years of evolution as opposed to a concious thought process it's not likely it can just be turned off at a snap of the fingers.

 

Let's cry about trans women using women's bathrooms because supposedly we're all perverts who are in it just so we can go in women's bathrooms unnoticed and spy on them/molest them. Nevermind the fact not every one of us is even gonna be attracted to women in the first place. Nevermind the fact HRT kills our sex drive anyway. Nevermind the fact not anyone can just claim to be transgender and gain access to those bathrooms.

I don't think the assumption is that trans people are the perverts, it's that allowing this makes it easier for actual perverts (who are probably not trans) to do bad things. I don't agree that this in itself is a good argument against gender neutral bathrooms, but it's clear that this has happened and will continue to, so it's not entirely irrelevant.

 

And then no-one talks about trans men using men's bathrooms. Double standards.

 

If they tried applying the same logic to trans men, they'd quickly realize they're morons.

Make trans men continue using women's bathrooms, see how that goes. What? You'd rather not have a guy using the women's bathrooms? Then why do you complain about trans women using women's bathrooms, asking for them to continue using the men's bathrooms?

Let's see... trans woman on HRT, sex drive is almost gone, very little chances of us wanting to go to those bathrooms just to peep on women and molest them. We just want to pee.

Trans man on HRT, the testosterone makes their sex drive go way up. You should be far more worried about that. If you're gonna want to demand trans women keep using the men's bathrooms, then you should also demand that trans men continue using the women's bathrooms.

 

(Keep in mind, when I say "you", I'm not referring to you in particular, but anyone who uses that logic and believes in that.)

 

But of course, that's all bullshit. We just want to pee.

Society tends to place the protection of woman above that of men. However, I have seen some discussion of the opposite case. Even the increasing numbers of homosexual people (men and women) cause similarly problematic circumstances.

 

I suppose the best way to go about it is only create individual bathrooms (for any gender, obviously). However, that's significantly less efficient and it's unlikely to catch on quickly.

[obfuscator]

If we could teach our culture that sexual assault is bad but nudity is fine I think unisex bathrooms would work out a-ok

This tired argument is brought up time and time again. Nowhere in our culture is it taught that sexual assault is a good thing. Sexual assault is perpetrated by disturbed criminals, not by "brainwashed" but otherwise healthy members of society.

 

You can teach that "nudity is fine" on an intellectual/societal level all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that humans have a visceral biological reaction to nudity in most cases. You can't legislate that away no matter how much you try.

[Ammako]

 

Ya, and that's the problem. People judging on appearances all the time.

I don't disagree, but when it is a biological urge driven by millions of years of evolution as opposed to a concious thought process it's not likely it can just be turned off at a snap of the figures.

 

lel

[obfuscator]

 

 

Ya, and that's the problem. People judging on appearances all the time.

I don't disagree, but when it is a biological urge driven by millions of years of evolution as opposed to a concious thought process it's not likely it can just be turned off at a snap of the figures.

 

lel

 

Jeez. That was an accident. Am I becoming dyslexic?

[Lower Levelled]

Oh, Tim. You gotten away from your family yet?

[Ammako]

 

 

 

Ya, and that's the problem. People judging on appearances all the time.

I don't disagree, but when it is a biological urge driven by millions of years of evolution as opposed to a concious thought process it's not likely it can just be turned off at a snap of the figures.

 

lel

 

Jeez. That was an accident. Am I becoming dyslexic?

 

Not talking about that. That statement is just completely incorrect.

(And I believe that was covered earlier already.)

[RpgGamer]

 

If we could teach our culture that sexual assault is bad but nudity is fine I think unisex bathrooms would work out a-ok

This tired argument is brought up time and time again. Nowhere in our culture is it taught that sexual assault is a good thing. Sexual assault is perpetrated by disturbed criminals, not by "brainwashed" but otherwise healthy members of society.

 

You can teach that "nudity is fine" on an intellectual/societal level all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that humans have a visceral biological reaction to nudity in most cases. You can't legislate that away no matter how much you try.

Absolutely valid, I only argue that there is an inherent atmosphere in western culture that doesn't so much say that sexual assault is good, it just doesn't adequately say that it is bad

[obfuscator]

Not talking about that. That statement is just completely incorrect.

(And I believe that was covered earlier already.)

 

No, it wasn't covered already. It was blown off with some irrelevant hand waving about the occasional ancient civilization walking around naked.

 

Absolutely valid, I only argue that there is an inherent atmosphere in western culture that doesn't so much say that sexual assault is good, it just doesn't adequately say that it is bad

Sexual assault is:

 

A) A serious crime, which can lead to life inprisonment and even the death penalty.

B) Looked down on generally by society (so much so that murderers in prison even have a special distaste for rapists).

 

What more do you want? How can it be "more adequately described as bad"?

[Ammako]

Plenty of civilizations, even now, walk around bare-chested, even women. Humans have lived for over thousands of years like that and it wasn't a problem.

It's a problem because our society sexualized women so much that it got to the point where even just showing your shoulders is considered too lewd (in more extreme cases.)

Nothing to do with biology.

[obfuscator]

Plenty of civilizations, even now, walk around bare-chested, even women. Humans have lived for over thousands of years like that and it wasn't a problem.

It's a problem because our society sexualized women so much that it got to the point where even just showing your shoulders is considered too lewd (in more extreme cases.)

Nothing to do with biology.

This is laughably incorrect. It's a well understood phenomenon that humans (and most mammals) are aroused by viewing sexual activity, and primary sexual characteristics such as sexual organs. Your argument holds up a little bit when it comes to secondary sexual characteristics like legs or hair, for example.

 

All throughout history bodies (more female than male) have been recorded with ideal primary sexual characteristics such as large breasts and hips, which directly correlate to childbearing success, which is the ultimate driver for the biological urges that drive the impulse to mate.

 

 

I think you're describing a sterile, asexual dream world where sexual attraction is based purely off an objective rational assessment of someone's personality and intelligence. That's nice, I suppose, but it doesn't reflect reality.

 

Here's a question for you: If primary sexual characteristics do not effect sexual attraction, what does?

[Ammako]

lol, okay

[obfuscator]

lol, okay

Of course, it's easier to make fun of someone than actually debate intelligently. I love the internet.

[Albel]

Fallout 4 pip-boy edition ordered. Check

Computer upgraded with new RAM. Check

Fallout pip-boy app installed on phone. Check

Total amount of social time with friends and family. Going down hill fast.

 

Cannot wait for Fallout 4 :3

[RpgGamer]

 

Not talking about that. That statement is just completely incorrect.

(And I believe that was covered earlier already.)

No, it wasn't covered already. It was blown off with some irrelevant hand waving about the occasional ancient civilization walking around naked.

 

Absolutely valid, I only argue that there is an inherent atmosphere in western culture that doesn't so much say that sexual assault is good, it just doesn't adequately say that it is bad

Sexual assault is:

 

A) A serious crime, which can lead to life inprisonment and even the death penalty.

B) Looked down on generally by society (so much so that murderers in prison even have a special distaste for rapists).

 

What more do you want? How can it be "more adequately described as bad"?

In major cases yes, even the hardest criminals look down on child molesters but the benevolent sexism is still very real. For example, there is nothing sexual about a female breast but thanks to modern society, we've oversexualized the female body. It's the very same nurture that allows all of the things we fear (like perverts) to develop and thrive. If nurture taught us that everything involving nudity was totally normal and not at all taboo, there would be far less problems involving these topics. Does that reflect reality? Perhaps not, but to say that it wouldn't help i would simply disagree with

[obfuscator]

In major cases yes, even the hardest criminals look down on child molesters but the benevolent sexism is still very real. For example, there is nothing sexual about a female breast but thanks to modern society, we've oversexualized the female body.

This is completely untrue. Female breasts are a secondary sex characteristic that have a great deal to do with reproduction and sexual attraction. As I mentioned earlier, there is ample evidence of early human cultures viewing breasts sexually as well as other animals doing the same thing.

 

I'll also take issue with saying we've "oversexualized the female body". Men are sexualized as much as women, it's just in different ways: male sexuality typically is attracted to female fertility which is demonstrated by body composition, whereas female sexual attraction is more nuanced and involves things like power additionally.

 

I'm sure I've posted this video before, but it's spot on:

 

 

It's the very same nurture that allows all of the things we fear (like perverts) to develop and thrive. If nurture taught us that everything involving nudity was totally normal and not at all taboo, there would be far less problems involving these topics. Does that reflect reality? Perhaps not, but to say that it wouldn't help i would simply disagree with

Society would certainly be different if nudity was commonplace, but once again the nurture aspect of sexual attraction is extremely small compared to the nature aspect. The nurture side deals more with things like fashion and personality, which make up a small percentage of what drives sexual attraction.

[Alg]

 

lol, okay

Of course, it's easier to make fun of someone than actually debate intelligently. I love the internet.

What's there to argue, anymore? Using a public restroom doesn't really involve that sort of situation, unless Canadian public restrooms are vastly different than the ones down here...? There's someone in the stall next to you who's also peeing. You can't see them unless you really work at it.

 

Again though, why does the bathroom thing matter at all? It's like, the logic is "if transpeople use the bathroom, it'll make certain people uncomfortable (because apparently the thought of someone peeing in the stall next to yours is that overpowering?) therefore they don't deserve the same basic legal protections as everyone else". This isn't debating intelligently, this is at best a fairly silly strawman that relies on a harmful stereotype that has very little basis in reality.

 

I mean, even for the nudity thing: a cursory glance of western art in a 500 year period is going to give you a fair number of different body types, even in the context of purely erotic art. You're going to get extremely slim and willowy women (Botticell), overweight women (by our standards) with large hips and average-to-small breasts (Titian), highly unrealistic figures with questionable anatomy (Ingres), and then just curves everywhere (Renoir). And that's just one 'region', for one subject, in one genre, for a fraction of the period where we've had art at all.

[obfuscator]

What's there to argue, anymore? Using a public restroom doesn't really involve that sort of situation, unless Canadian public restrooms are vastly different than the ones down here...? There's someone in the stall next to you who's also peeing. You can't see them unless you really work at it.

We'd moved on from that point.

 

Again though, why does the bathroom thing matter at all? It's like, the logic is "if transpeople use the bathroom, it'll make certain people uncomfortable (because apparently the thought of someone peeing in the stall next to yours is that overpowering?) therefore they don't deserve the same basic legal protections as everyone else". This isn't debating intelligently, this is at best a fairly silly strawman that relies on a harmful stereotype that has very little basis in reality.

As I said, my last point was much more specific and didn't really deal with bathrooms at all.

 

I mean, even for the nudity thing: a cursory glance of western art in a 500 year period is going to give you a fair number of different body types, even in the context of purely erotic art. You're going to get extremely slim and willowy women (Botticell), overweight women (by our standards) with large hips and average-to-small breasts (Titian), highly unrealistic figures with questionable anatomy (Ingres), and then just curves everywhere (Renoir). And that's just one 'region', for one subject, in one genre, for a fraction of the period where we've had art at all.

Yes, I don't disagree that societal preference for women (and men) has changed a lot over time (in fact I said as much already). Fashion and behaviour are to some extent fluid and follow from the current social climate at the time. But sexuality is still fundamentally based on emphasizing sexual characteristics as attractive.

[muggiwhplar]

 

Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott ® and others — insisted in commercials, on television and in newspaper stories that allowing transgender women (individuals born male who identify as women) would leave women and girls suddenly vulnerable to attacks by crafty and now legally enabled sexual predators.

Idek what to say about that. It's just so wrong

 

 

I thought liberals were all about protecting women from the evil men of the patriarchy... I guess all of a sudden they trust men again? >_>

 

Some of the people ITT are rambling on about how there's problems with sexual assault in modern society... yet they trust these alleged perpetrators of sexual assault in this context? I feel like I'm missing something here :lol:

[RpgGamer]

There is a picture that comes to mind that I can't figure out how to post on my new phone but Google "do I look like I belong in this bathroom"

 

And you'll be met with a female to male citizen who is forced to use the female bathrooms despite being virtually entirely male

[muggiwhplar]

There is a picture that comes to mind that I can't figure out how to post on my new phone but Google "do I look like I belong in this bathroom"

 

And you'll be met with a female to male citizen who is forced to use the female bathrooms despite being virtually entirely male

 

I don't think it's entirely honest to say he's "forced" to use the female bathrooms. Do you really think he'd ever get "caught" using the male bathrooms?

[RpgGamer]

He likely wouldn't get caught but he has the right to not feel discrimated against just as much as the cisgendered