Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[palsch]

-Matt Stone & Trey Parker
-Respectable

Respected.

Respectable or not (whatever the fuck that means these days) a lot of people pay attention to them. Their comedy has been influential to a whole mess of new comedians and their views are often parroted online and (in my experience) real life. Those groups they mock? More likely to be mocked with the examples and terms they used in the show than they were before Matt and Trey targeted them.

Like it or not, they have no small power. And using that to beat up on those without power isn't cool.

[Owlbread]

It could be quite easily sorted in the USA if it was written into federal law that transsexuals should have access to the bathrooms of their chosen sex. Unisex bathrooms aren't necessary, although they are more convenient.

[Gervassen]

Good news, it seems. A new Economist article reports that the global climate may be much less sensitive to change than previously thought, with wide-ranging implication for social policy.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

It could be quite easily sorted in the USA if it was written into federal law that transsexuals should have access to the bathrooms of their chosen sex. Unisex bathrooms aren't necessary, although they are more convenient.

This is not going to be considered a federal issue, as it has barely even started up.

[Truean]

Basically, here's the problem: Society and law are really slow to change and don't know how to adapt well to much of anything. Also the backlash to any change is huge, and, though people often forget this, the desire to stay the same is often just as big as the desire to change....

Tragically, there are people who would abuse this whole situation. There are people who are perverts and who do stupid and wrong things (I've had the displeasure of representing some of them and the disgust won't wash off). There is a reason the sex offender registries in the US are huge....

That said, there's a legitimate group of people being harmed by the sweeping efforts of combating those other people.... The sweeping generalization that gays = pedophiles is unfortunately alive and well in the US. It has been since before I was a kid and it will tragically be around for several more decades. I predict it will take 30 or 40 years minimum for this notion to significantly fade out of the U.S. Population. You can point all you want to the strides GLBT rights have made recently. Think of every person you know who was alive before 1972 when homosexuality was no longer considered a mental disease or disorder, and realize that tons of those people are still alive, part of an aging population and the bastards vote.... There is significant opposition to GLBT rights in the US even today. Read the comments section of any pro gay article on the yahoo and google and you'll have a harder time arguing with me, because the bigots have a field day there....

Now, we transgendered people have not come nearly as far as gay people in the US (who still have a ways to go themselves).

The whole public restrooms thing comes down to one thing: people actually accepting transgendered individuals as people.... Not a disease, not a perversion, not something else, just people.... The main obstacle here is people actually having to associate be in the same space, however briefly with such an individual as an equal when they very much don't wanna.... Yes, there are terrible people out there doing terrible things: different gender bathrooms aren't stopping them, never have, never will. People like to think they live in a safe world and that there are things they can do to prevent or discourage people from doing bad things in it: they can't. "Deterrence" (harsher sentences to show other criminals not to do a certain crime) doesn't work. Also, we can't prevent these crimes. People have been killing each other since the dawn of time (or Cain and Able if you're religious) and we've dealt out the worst punishments we can think up for murder for thousands of years.... Still happens....

What people don't know or don't want to acknowledge is that "separate bathrooms" is a tragically laughable prevention mechanism for some of the most terrible crimes you can think of. Misidentifying transgender people as the perpetrators of these crimes is just ... incorrect.

The following things would have to happen for the whole stupid misguided transgender bathroom situation to resolve with society as a whole or at least a real super-majority of it:

1.) People need to stop thinking GBLT = criminals and/or likely to molest them/their kids.
2.) People need to actually just chill the hell out about the differences between gay and straight.
3.) People would need to actually stop looking down their nose at GLBT people.

Until then.... Yeah, there's a reason I'm closeted.

[Devling]

The above wall of text contains lots of good points.
I have one point. Misidentifying a transgender person thinking that they are in the wrong bathroom is awkward for everyone. I guess it's unreasonable to ask transgender people to do something that is wrong to them.

(Unisex bathrooms continue to be terrible ideas, mostly because people are immature and shit. School with a unisex student bathroom? Yeah, no.)

[kaijyuu]

(Unisex bathrooms continue to be terrible ideas, mostly because people are immature and shit. School with a unisex student bathroom? Yeah, no.)

Believing this sort of thing is what perpetuates its existence.

If we had unisex bathrooms for the entirety of the school system, such wouldn't happen. The process of segregating them is what makes people act immature.

[MonkeyHead]

As part of my research work I have been into many highschools. A small but signifigant number of these have unisex toilet areas. I make a point of asking about the implementation of such a thing (as in why, what resistance and from who, and what problems and benefits). The general trend seems to be that seperate gender bathrooms were linked with antisocial and criminal behaviours (normally bullying, vandalism, drinking/smoking/drugs or even sexual activity). The main resistance comes from parents, not pupils. Benefits include a drop to near zero incidences of antisocial or criminal behaviour. Problems asscoited with them - normally complaints from self concious laddy boys who dont like the idea of sharing space with girls, and girls complaining that boys arent tidy/clean enough. Seems like quite small potatoes for the benefits.

[scriver]

So basically, if I was five seconds from pissing myself and the door to the men's room was locked (likely because some mafia story event inside or something) and I rushed into the ladies', I would risk court. Can't they see how this proposition is stupid on every level, from the moral and equality issues straight down to the common sense and practicality stuff? Aren't these the people who are supposed to be the small government? I'm pretty sure "don't make laws about what toilets people can use" is a cornerstone of that position.

(Unisex bathrooms continue to be terrible ideas, mostly because people are immature and shit. School with a unisex student bathroom? Yeah, no.)

Believing this sort of thing is what perpetuates its existence.

If we had unisex bathrooms for the entirety of the school system, such wouldn't happen. The process of segregating them is what makes people act immature.

I had unisex toilets ky whole schoollife. There never were much trouble with those. Then again, they were all single rooms, or clusters of rooms, rather than booths.

[lordcooper]

As part of my research work I have been into many highschools. A small but signifigant number of these have unisex toilet areas. I make a point of asking about the implementation of such a thing (as in why, what resistance and from who, and what problems and benefits). The general trend seems to be that seperate gender bathrooms were linked with antisocial and criminal behaviours (normally bullying, vandalism, drinking/smoking/drugs or even sexual activity). The main resistance comes from parents, not pupils. Benefits include a drop to near zero incidences of antisocial or criminal behaviour. Problems asscoited with them - normally complaints from self concious laddy boys who dont like the idea of sharing space with girls, and girls complaining that boys arent tidy/clean enough. Seems like quite small potatoes for the benefits.

Probably worth bearing in mind that attitudes towards this kind of thing are likely far different over yon watery expanse.

[palsch]

I regularly attend events at a bar that has unisex bathrooms on one floor. It's just two separate large cubicle rooms, similar to a disabled toilet.

The only issue I can imagine coming from having these instead of regular bathrooms is if you need more toilets, given they do take up slightly more space for each loo than regular communal toilets. Other than that I've never noticed any problems, and they are a great boost for GLBT events held at the bar.

Not to mention there are lots of places that have a single publicly accessible toilet that everyone uses in turn. Not advertised as unisex, but unisex in practice.

Most of the complaints I see online (never actually heard people complain in real life...) are from people who have never used them. Or at least not noticed them. So they centre around imagined problems like young girls having to walk past a busy row of urinals.

[Bauglir]

As part of my research work I have been into many highschools. A small but signifigant number of these have unisex toilet areas. I make a point of asking about the implementation of such a thing (as in why, what resistance and from who, and what problems and benefits). The general trend seems to be that seperate gender bathrooms were linked with antisocial and criminal behaviours (normally bullying, vandalism, drinking/smoking/drugs or even sexual activity). The main resistance comes from parents, not pupils. Benefits include a drop to near zero incidences of antisocial or criminal behaviour. Problems asscoited with them - normally complaints from self concious laddy boys who dont like the idea of sharing space with girls, and girls complaining that boys arent tidy/clean enough. Seems like quite small potatoes for the benefits.

Probably worth bearing in mind that attitudes towards this kind of thing are likely far different over yon watery expanse.

I think that might be the point, even. That the attitudes are the only problem, not anything that would actually happen.

[Truean]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/us/osha-emphasizes-safety-health-risks-fester.html?ref=health&_r=0

"The free market would never willfully kill or cripple people...." ~Libertarians....

Asbestos, the exploding pinto, and now factory glue fumes. I'm not joking.

"Company officials were told to ventilate to the outside. They bought pedestal fans instead, and when OSHA inspectors returned, they found the fans turned off or malfunctioning. OSHA demanded respirators that would have cost the company $18. Managers instead handed out 90-cent dust masks — the type inspectors had told them were useless in blocking vapors. "

" ... the OSHA official wrote at the time, adding that the agency could not levy fines or mandate respirators because there was no federal safety standard involving nPB. "

" “If the cost of compliance to our rules outweighs the penalties for breaking them, companies just take a ‘catch me if you can’ approach to worker safety and health,” he said. And serious violations of the rules should not be misdemeanors, he said, but felonies, much like insider trading, tax crimes and antitrust violations.

But Jeff Ruch, the director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a public health advocacy organization, said that, on average, OSHA now conducts health inspections and collects air samples less than half as often as it did under the Reagan administration.

“You can’t hit someone with a fine,” Mr. Ruch said, “if you aren’t on site looking to find the violations.” "

As the women stood up to leave, several grabbed the wall for balance. Ms. Farley added a parting thought.
“And all the while everyone thinks you’re just faking,” she said. The women agree that this is the worst part.

Respectuflly no, I think this is the worst part: " As fast as workers were getting sick, managers found replacements.

“Folks was limping in and getting worse,” said Dewaun Teague, a former Royale manager. “Then they would be let go, and we would hire more.”

Mr. Teague said Royale was a good company to work for in many ways. The owner, Clyde Goble, looked you in the eye when he shook your hand and remembered your children’s birthdays, Mr. Teague said, adding, “This was family.”

I don't recall poisoning my family with glue for profit and threatening to plunge them into poverty/leave for another country's labor over an $18 a pop air mask....

[SalmonGod]

"The free market would never willfully kill or cripple people...." ~Libertarians....

What drives me crazy is I'm the one who's called naive for my political beliefs, when mine are centered on the idea that if you provide people the motive (the imperative, even) and the means by which to abuse each other for personal gain, there are people who will and people who won't... meanwhile, the normal belief is that everyone is at their worst when they're not provided those motive and means to abuse each other (what?) and that we can trust people who successfully competitor-stomp their way into positions of power to then be responsible with them.   

We're told that these problems can resolved with diligence and care with our votes/dollars.  What the fuck good is that when every single option is the same, because any that chooses not to be corrupt and exploitative can't survive against the ones that are...

[Luke_Prowler]

Of course the free market would never willfully kill someone. That would be murder, and you need limbs to murder, and as everyone knows the free market doesn't have any limbs at all. [/insanity]

The fact that they were willing to buy masks that they wer told would not work is just mind boggling