Political Correctness thread

JTLA

Active member
Messages
231
Reaction score
73
Let's let it play out over the next few months. I feel safe in asserting that we'll see numerous instances of non-trans people taking advantage of the fact that they can go into any restroom they like by claiming to be trans, and then using that easier access to flash, peep, molest, rape, or otherwise sexually assault. When it happens, will you then admit it wasn't completely irrational to expect it to happen?

Absolutely! And good luck with that. Again, trans people have been going to the bathroom for a long time. Let me repeat my question though. Assuming you are referring to adult male perps, why aren't they flashing, peeping, molesting, and raping all the little boys they can every chance they get?

Shouldn't we focus on laws to protect little boys from adult male predators? I'm being facetious here, but why in the world do we allow adult males to pee in the same room as little boys? We are the most dangerous group to be sure. Where are all the new laws to stop us from doing all that flashing, peeping, molesting, and raping in the little boys' room?
 

JTLA

Active member
Messages
231
Reaction score
73
Serious question.............. how is requiring people to use a plumbing appropriate bathroom discriminatory?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by plumbing appropriate?

It's discrimination to put someone in a position where they are forced to use a restroom that does not match with their physical appearance. It's that simple. There are many states that already legally accommodate this and have for years (http://www.hrc.org/state_maps), and there are no reported uprisings I'm aware of where male pervs are now perving because now they can pretend to be the other gender. In California, where I live, AB1266 was passed in 2013, and we're all just fine, I assure you.

The issue for most trans people is that they don't look like on the outside what their genitals or birth certificate may look like. If you require by law that a feminine looking trans woman use the men's room, she is at a minimum going to make me very uncomfortable and at most is at much higher risk for violent attack from men.

Likewise, a trans man in the women's room will result in complaints and possible fear based attacks as well. I detailed one story from my own experience about a friend I met who faced this struggle every day at work. It's just one story, but it's emblematic of the real issue here, not the hyperbole and hatred being spewed by those who haven't really thought about it.

No one is asking anyone here to suck a d!ck or wear a dress. I don't personally even care what you think of people born with penises who do. But why in the world would your hatred and fear of them make you want to deny them access to a place to pee? And why do you want to make damn sure they do it with YOU!
 

RDU Irish

Catholics vs. Cousins
Messages
8,622
Reaction score
2,722
Can we get Tom Hanks to weigh in on this? WWBBD (What would Bosom Buddies do?)
 

NorthDakota

Grandson of Loomis
Messages
15,693
Reaction score
5,994
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by plumbing appropriate?

It's discrimination to put someone in a position where they are forced to use a restroom that does not match with their physical appearance.

The restroom is not based on your appearance. There is a room for males...and a room for females...and at some places...a family one. Super cut and dry. Real easy.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
It's discrimination to put someone in a position where they are forced to use a restroom that does not match with their physical appearance. It's that simple.

That's a bunch of horsesh!t. If I dress like a dog, you are not required to accept that my physical appearance means that it is discrimination for you to keep me from pi$$ing and sh!tting in public. After all, according to your beliefs, forcing me to use a restroom would be discriminatory. So maybe it's not that simple after all, eh, sport?

There are many states that already legally accommodate this and have for years (http://www.hrc.org/state_maps), and there are no reported uprisings I'm aware of where male pervs are now perving because now they can pretend to be the other gender.

So that means that there are many states that DO NOT accommodate this, and there are no reported mass lynchings, mass killings of transgendered people that I am aware of, because reasonable say that if you have a d!ck, you need to use the men's room.

The issue for most trans people is that they don't look like on the outside what their genitals or birth certificate may look like. If you require by law that a feminine looking trans woman use the men's room, she is at a minimum going to make me very uncomfortable and at most is at much higher risk for violent attack from men.

Why? No one is asking you to suck a d!ck or wear a dress.

No one is asking anyone here to suck a d!ck or wear a dress. I don't personally even care what you think of people born with penises who do. But why in the world would your hatred and fear of them make you want to deny them access to a place to pee? And why do you want to make damn sure they do it with YOU!

Homophobia has nothing to do with the subject. I neither hate, nor fear, transgendered people. And asking them to use a plumbing appropriate restroom is certainly NOT "denying them access to a place to pee". Your misplaced indignation isn't going to change that.
 

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
On another topic, those who claim to be against PC, at what point is PC a good thing vs diminishing returns?

For instance, I would never present swastikas to a Jew or call a black person a nigger. Where is the line drawn? I know many won't even use the n word, even in a purely neutral context.

One of my nephews has Down syndrome and he has encountered grown adults calling him retard. IMO, that is too far.

So where is the line, because even the most fervent anti-PC person has a limit? I think.

My view is this, people with leisure time can come up with much to be offended about, and on the flip side, can come up with ingenious ways to be offensive...A look into industrial production floors in the mid 1900s might give folks some insight. Those people were often crude, and hard on each other, but were fiercely loyal to one-another...ie they had a sense of shit that mattered...as life in general started to be less, shall we say "intense" in terms of survival, I think folks had more leisure time to contemplate things like PC. All well and good, but we are less bound than we ever were, even though we speak more civilly. Anyway, today, I think the issue arises when PC stops being something on a personal level...and it infringes on the discourse. In the early 90s it was more about folks self-regulating...it is far more than that now, where groups define and attempt to enforce language...even co-opting words with legitimate purpose as something you shouldn't say. I've never had time to fuss over PC, and hadn't ever needed it...Thanks mom and dad.
 

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
Milo for Press Secretary!

Oh Please, please, please, please...

Milo saunters to the podium...takes a deep breath, and

"Daddy says you press people are all being whiny pre-menstrual bitches, so no words for you today other than...we don't care how you feel"
 

GoldenDome

New member
Messages
808
Reaction score
61
50 Cent airport incident

<iframe allowfullscreen frameborder="0" width="698" height="573" scrolling="no" id="molvideoplayer" title="MailOnline Embed Player" src="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/embed/video/1288113.html"></iframe>
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,127
Reaction score
11,075
Why is that in the politically correct thread?

That's been a big deal around Cincinnati. Local bars and businesses all over have been boycotting/"liquidating" their stocks of his vodka in response.

(As an aside: I had no idea 50 Cent had a brand of vodka. What does that say about the business lol?)
 

GoldenDome

New member
Messages
808
Reaction score
61
Why is that in the politically correct thread?

That's been a big deal around Cincinnati. Local bars and businesses all over have been boycotting/"liquidating" their stocks of his vodka in response.

(As an aside: I had no idea 50 Cent had a brand of vodka. What does that say about the business lol?)

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PX9reO3QnUA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Double standard, or is it just me considering the Republican nominee and the other is getting his products banned?

Either way, both are morons. But it is interesting that the intent is quite different between the two situations. One most likely is an honest mistake, the other not so much.
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,127
Reaction score
11,075
Neither situation is okay by any means, so I don't know why this would be a question of political correctness.

But, that's just my opinion.
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
Alabama city abandons law targeting transgender bathroom use (May 4, 2016)

The law passed last week appeared to be the first in the country to threaten violators of such bathroom rules with criminal penalties. The council had sought to impose a possible punishment of a $500 fine or six months in jail for the misdemeanor offence.

Council members voted 3-2 at a special meeting on Wednesday to repeal the ordinance, the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBT rights group, said in a statement.

"This sends a welcome message of inclusion to Oxford's families, businesses and visitors, and sets an example for other communities that may be considering similar legislation," said the group's Alabama State Director Eva Walton Kendrick.

No one can say Alabama journalists don't have a sense of humor. Targeting?

Alabama city passes transgender bathroom ordinance (April 26, 2016)

It is now illegal to use a public bathroom or changing room which does not match the gender on your birth certificate in Oxford, Ala.

A law was passed Tuesday night in response to Target’s policy allowing employees and shoppers to use bathrooms and changing rooms that match their gender identity.

“The policy creates an unsafe environment,” said Steven Waits, council president.

There’s a Target store in the Oxford Exchange.

“It’s being put in to protect women, children and families from voyeurs, child molesters, exhibitionists, sexual predators and others who might use these policies to their advantage,” said Waits.

When asked if the law then associates transgender people with sexual predators, Waits replied “that’s not the spirit of this law.”

The ordinance carries penalties of a $500 fine or six months in jail, according to Police Chief Bill Partridge.

Enforcement of the misdemeanor will be the same as other misdemeanor city laws. A person would have to call police to complain, when police arrive the officer would have to witness the crime. After that, a person’s information is gathered and the person who called in the complaint would have to sign out a warrant, according to Partridge.

Waits says the ordinance was spurred by people contacting city hall concerned about safety after Target announced their policy.

To quote the law passed (in article above):
Section One: Purpose: An Ordinance regulating the utilization of multiple occupancy bathroom or changing facilities in places of public accomodation within the city of Oxford, Alabama and its police jurisdiction. The City Council finds that its citizens have a right to quiet solitude and to be secure from embarassment and unwanted intrusion into their privacy while using multiple occupancy bathroom and changing facilities by members of the opposite biological sex. The City Council asserts that there is a long-standing history of restricting access to single sex public facilities on the basis of sex and that users of multiple occupancy and the use of multiple occupancy bathrooms or changing facilities do not reasonably expect to be exposed to individuals of the opposite sex while utilizing those facilities. The Council further asserts that single sex public facilities are places of increased vulnerability and present the potential for crimes against individuals utilizing those facilities which may include, but not limited to, voyeurism, exhibitionism, molestation and assault and battery.


Oxford's lawmakers seemed to be bullied into this repeal despite the inherent dangers of abandoning this protection for their women, children and families and exposing them to acts "which may include, but not limited to, voyeurism, exhibitionism, molestation and assault and battery".

Oxford's lawmakers, who local media said had unanimously backed the ordinance initially, appeared to shift their opinions in the wake of growing opposition that included the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center, which had threatened legal action if the measure was not reversed.

It is unclear how many of the above acts of depravity have been committed in stores and schools throughout Oxford in recent years. But clearly legislators have Target in their bullseye due their policy creating "an unsafe environment" ripe for sexual predation and that legislators will be watching their bathrooms closely.
 
Last edited:

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,577
Reaction score
20,030
Just put some urinals in the ladies rooms and rename all restrooms "Unisex". Problem solved.
 

ACamp1900

Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
Messages
48,945
Reaction score
11,225
Just put some urinals in the ladies rooms and rename all restrooms "Unisex". Problem solved.

Just tear down all public restrooms and replace them with giant community holes... progress
 

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
Why is that in the politically correct thread?

That's been a big deal around Cincinnati. Local bars and businesses all over have been boycotting/"liquidating" their stocks of his vodka in response.

(As an aside: I had no idea 50 Cent had a brand of vodka. What does that say about the business lol?)

50 Cent Vodka? Doesn't sound like something I'd be willing to try.
 

Black Irish

Wise Guy
Messages
3,769
Reaction score
602
So you want to make sure that Chad only can use the restroom with you and little boys?

Or wait... you want to protect little girls, but little boys will be just fine. Chad thanks you for that reasoning, so does Jerry Sandusky, so does Dennis Hastert, and so does the Catholic church for that matter.

Or wait... wait... what does any of this have to do with where people are allowed to pee? Stop hiding your hatred and intolerance of others behind a bullshit law that doesn't address any real problems.

Lumps the Catholic Church at large in with individual sexual predators.

Claims others are spewing intolerance and hatred.

Got it.
 

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
No, leave the stalls with doors, just add the urinals.

will not fly in schools...short of walls floor to ceiling with doors, people will not accept it. So at what cost do you start to question this trans toilet pick 'em.
 

military_irish

New member
Messages
4,725
Reaction score
304
To make it extremely easy on everyone. From now on we all must wear diapers in public. Since using a public toilet has become such an issue.
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
In other news,

The Catholic vote in 2016 (2/4/16)

E.J. Dionne is fond of saying that "there is no Catholic vote and it is important." His point is that Catholics do not vote as a bloc. But they are important because they have voted for the winner of the popular vote in almost every presidential election since Roosevelt (they did not vote for Ike in 1952). We might modify Dionne’s saying to read "there is no Catholic vote and that is why it is important."

Today the Catholic vote is divided into two major parts, white Catholics and Hispanic Catholics. Traditionally, white Catholics voted Democratic beginning in 1928 when Al Smith was pilloried by anti-Catholic bigots supporting the Republican candidate. The Great Depression and the New Deal solidified their support for the Democratic Party.

Today, however, the children and grandchildren of these working-class white Catholics are just as likely to vote Republican. Thanks to their parents, the GI Bill, and a prosperous economy, these children went to college and joined the professional and business classes. Their taxes went up with their incomes and they forgot their roots.

According to the Pew Forum, 54 percent of Catholic Republicans think that Donald Trump would be a good/great president. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio have almost equally high numbers (52% and 51%). Ben Carson got only 39 percent saying this. Since Pew did not force respondents to choose, we will have to wait for the exit polls to find out how Republican Catholics actually vote.

According to the Pew Forum, 69 percent of Catholic Democrats say that Clinton would be a great/good president. Only 46 percent say the same thing about Bernie Sanders. Unlike Republican Catholics who categorize three of the candidate in almost equal numbers as great or good presidents, Catholic Democrats lean by 23 percentage points toward Clinton.
 
Last edited:

BeauBenken

Shut up, Richard
Staff member
Messages
16,041
Reaction score
5,491
Daryl Hall has a message for critics crying cultural appropriation: “Shut the f*ck up” - Salon.com

One of the current debates is over “cultural appropriation” – The idea that white people should not appropriate the culture of ethnic and racial minorities. I know that you don’t like the term “blue eyed soul.” Have you followed this conversation?

Are you trying to say that I don’t own the style of music that I grew up with and sing? I grew up with this music. It is not about being black or white. That is the most naïve attitude I’ve ever heard in my life. That is so far in the past, I hope, for everyone’s sake. It isn’t even an issue to discuss. The music that you listened to when you grew up is your music. It has nothing to do with “cultural appropriation.”

I agree with you entirely, because…


I’m glad that you do, because anyone who says that should shut the fuck up.

Well, this entire critique is coming back…

I’m sorry to hear it. Who is making these critiques? Who do they write for? What are their credentials to give an opinion like that? Who are they?

Much of it is academic.


Well, then they should go back to school. Academia? Now, there’s a hotbed of idiocy.

Anyone who knows about music, about culture in general, understands that everything is much more natural. Everything is a mixture.

We live in America. That’s our entire culture. Our culture is a blend. It isn’t split up into groups. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool – worse than a fool – a dangerous fool.
 

GDomer09

Chronic Dialect
Messages
554
Reaction score
41
This is what the issue is actually all about.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uJhSVxR7uMg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

For this transgender teen, the importance of being seen as 'one of the guys' | PBS NewsHour

I'm just going to go ahead and say it. "I'm just a guy trapped in a girl’s body". If this doesn’t sound like a mental illness or science fiction, I don't know what to tell you. This situation and kids like this would be much better off if we treated it as such. Allowing a 7th grader to go through a "transition" so young, really! Oh I know, how dare I, they just want to make there kid happy. Do they know how damaging it could be for this kid when they actually grow up and find they made a mistake? I'd like to know what this kid went through in her upbringing to believe these things at such a young age. Don't give me the old, "There parents were completely normal and parented wonderfully" speech without proof either. I know quite a few people with sexual inflictions and the reason can perfectly be pointed to their upbringing and/or a traumatic event in their life.

With all that entirely aside, with the population of transG being below .05%, why is there a need to screw things up by making laws and changing restrooms. Forcing Gender neutral bathrooms isn't the same as just letting transG people use what bathroom they want like the opposition claims they always have. It's renaming/confusing a common norm to appease to what most consider a mental disorder (until proven otherwise).

I can’t believe this has even become a debate. We have officially went completely overboard on letting people be whatever they want to the point it’s pushing others to change their ways. Not Cool!

Don't worry everyone this will be fully normalized before you know it and I will be deemed a crazy bigot for not believing that this is completely normal. It won't be my fault though. I will have learned by then that, "I'm a super accepting progressive dude trapped in a bigots body".
 

NDohio

Well-known member
Messages
5,869
Reaction score
3,060
Just put some urinals in the ladies rooms and rename all restrooms "Unisex". Problem solved.

Yesterday my wife and my teenage daughter walked into a Target bathroom and there, leaning up against the wall, was a man. She said he looked at her and said "Target is OK with this, just in case you haven't been watching the news." He was in there with his 7-9 year old daughter, but he wasn't helping her, he was standing up against the wall and watching. My wife's response was "Well, Target might be OK with it but I am not. I'll wait until you leave."

She was not too happy when she got home from that Target trip.
 
Top