Transgender, a Challenge for the Conservative Mindset

Herdfan said:
This is where we disagree. I don't think a majority of teenage girls would be comfortable changing clothes in front a biological boy, regardless of how they identify. So at that point, they are hurting someone.

And quite frankly as a teenage boy, I'm not sure I would have been comfortable showering with a girl in a locker room.

I would like to make a point about this thread. Have you noticed that almost none of the females here have participated in this thread. Wonder why that is.
Click to expand...

Actually, there are only about five or six females on this forum anyway, and just for kicks I went back and looked through the entire thread and guess what -- we all at one point or another have posted in this thread. So whatever point you were trying to make isn't going to cut the mustard.....
 
Clix Pix said:
Actually, there are only about five or six females on this forum anyway, and just for kicks I went back and looked through the entire thread and guess what -- we all at one point or another have posted in this thread. So whatever point you were trying to make isn't going to cut the mustard.....
Click to expand...

But out of 10 pages, I don't think they are carrying the discussion. It is mainly men.
 
Herdfan said:
This is where we disagree. I don't think a majority of teenage girls would be comfortable changing clothes in front a biological boy, regardless of how they identify. So at that point, they are hurting someone.

And quite frankly as a teenage boy, I'm not sure I would have been comfortable showering with a girl in a locker room.

I would like to make a point about this thread. Have you noticed that almost none of the females here have participated in this thread. Wonder why that is.
Click to expand...
Is this argument to support your post about the SC upholding the transgender ban. Sorry I was on hiatus during the holiday break, and had minimal pop ins with this forum. So I don't want to read into things before I responded to you.

However on your second point, no one in the legal suit in question is arguing about letting a boy in the girls shower room.
 
rdrr said:
Is this argument to support your post about the SC upholding the transgender ban. Sorry I was on hiatus during the holiday break, and had minimal pop ins with this forum. So I don't want to read into things before I responded to you.

However on your second point, no one in the legal suit in question is arguing about letting a boy in the girls shower room.
Click to expand...
It's just their way of taking things to a level that doesn't exist in order to display faux outrage. I suspect it's much like it was back in the days of segregation "they want to take over and invade our sense of decency!" type of thing, when in reality it will have zero impact on their every day lives.
 
here is one example. all doors have a regular lock they are all wide open and sicks all exposed so people can feel safe.
IMG_1267.jpg
 
Eric said:
It's just their way of taking things to a level that doesn't exist in order to display faux outrage.
Click to expand...

I remember this being said in regard to the potential of biological boys, who identify as girls, sexually assaulting girls in a girls bathroom.

And then it happened. Thrice. One kid did it twice, the second time after he was transferred to another school to keep it quiet. And then it happened again in another district.

So these things do exist.
 
Herdfan said:
I remember this being said in regard to the potential of biological boys, who identify as girls, sexually assaulting girls in a girls bathroom.

And then it happened. Thrice. One kid did it twice, the second time after he was transferred to another school to keep it quiet. And then it happened again in another district.

So these things do exist.
Click to expand...
Wow did you take the ball and fabricate a whole new narrative with that... So in the Virginia case where it happened twice with the same accuser, it was not about a transgender assault on a girl in the bathroom. This was a relationship sexual assault in which they agreed to meet up in the bathroom at a predetermined time. They had a consensual sexual relationship in the past, but this time she wanted just to talk and said no. That is clearly a sexual assault but not a transgender taking advantage of a "loop hole" to assault girls as in the argument you are clearly trying to make. Also, the perpetrator in the case was indeed wearing a skirt, but they didn't have authorization to use the girls bathroom. The third attack didn't happen in the bathroom, it happened in an empty classroom. So yes we do have an individual here that seems to have some criminal activity, but does this mean all transgendered people are criminals? Should we put this case up against all the countless boys sexually assaulting girls in bathrooms, and countless other areas in schools across this country?
 
rdrr said:
Wow did you take the ball and fabricate a whole new narrative with that... So in the Virginia case where it happened twice with the same accuser, it was not about a transgender assault on a girl in the bathroom. This was a relationship sexual assault in which they agreed to meet up in the bathroom at a predetermined time. They had a consensual sexual relationship in the past, but this time she wanted just to talk and said no. That is clearly a sexual assault but not a transgender taking advantage of a "loop hole" to assault girls as in the argument you are clearly trying to make. Also, the perpetrator in the case was indeed wearing a skirt, but they didn't have authorization to use the girls bathroom. The third attack didn't happen in the bathroom, it happened in an empty classroom. So yes we do have an individual here that seems to have some criminal activity, but does this mean all transgendered people are criminals? Should we put this case up against all the countless boys sexually assaulting girls in bathrooms, and countless other areas in schools across this country?
Click to expand...

I stand corrected on this one. I had not read this information and it seems it came out at trial.

What is not clear though is the circumstances around the second girl he assaulted at a different school. Sounds like the boy has issues.
 
Herdfan said:
I stand corrected on this one. I had not read this information and it seems it came out at trial.

What is not clear though is the circumstances around the second girl he assaulted at a different school. Sounds like the boy has issues.
Click to expand...
Correct about the second sexual assault. I am wondering who dropped the ball at that school district. One thing is for sure, is that there is too much "boys will be boys" attitude in this country, and sexual crimes in school do not get the same amount of scrutiny that an adult would get.
 
rdrr said:
Correct about the second sexual assault. I am wondering who dropped the ball at that school district. One thing is for sure, is that there is too much "boys will be boys" attitude in this country, and sexual crimes in school do not get the same amount of scrutiny that an adult would get.
Click to expand...

The superintendent was fired in December. You can't cover that sort of thing up.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top