Print

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

[Rockphed]

The Lt. Gov. of Texas is trying to push his version of the NC bathroom bill.

You'd think the economic backlash would be enough of a deterrent, but nope.

EDOOOOT!: Six other states too!. Washington state is the odd one out though, the rest are all deep red Republican states.

What economic deterrent?  North Carolina has one of the strongest economies in the US and only faltered a little during the last year.

I have never seen a problem with unisex bathrooms. I think it's kinda ridiculous people are so fed up with bathrooms. Especially people who are against it. Like. Are you so insecure in yourself that someone of the opposite sex is using the bathroom?

I mean. The imagined scenarios of a bearded guy in drag raping a poor defenseless woman in the bathrooms are never going to happen. I dunno, maybe I'm just weird in thinking that. because, as I said, I have no idea why it's such a big deal.

The whole bathroom thing is just a shadow fight over what conservatives are really steamed about: unisex school locker rooms.  It is just easier, and more intellectually consistent, to fight all government attempts to blur gender lines than to focus solely on school locker rooms.  And fighting government attempts is what most of these bills do.  HB2, the North Carolina one, was passed in response to a city passing a law that required unisex bathrooms of all businesses in the city.  I periodically read about "trans" students in high school who spend most of their time in the locker room harassing other students, often to the point that the other students find it necessary to change in private.

[origamiscienceguy]

Rape would be a rare issue, but smaller harrasments would also be waaay more common. Creepers peeking over the stalls, etc.

Are you actually 100% comfortable having a conversation with a guy in the urinal next to you?

[hector13]

Surely that's still be a problem regardless of who's allowed to use the bathroom?

The hell kinda logic is that, of course it's still a problem

Well it appeared you were using it as an argument against unisex/trans bathrooms, but evidently not

Are you actually 100% comfortable having a conversation with a guy in the urinal next to you?

I'm curious what your point is here.

[Criptfeind]

The clear answer is to make all restrooms single occupancy.

[Rolepgeek]

But if your strategy is suboptimal that's not proof that the task is unfair. Look at all those articles about female superiority because they have different multitasking strategies to men.

If women are only equal to men at test-taking when there's no possibility of a penalty for being wrong, how does that translate to actual real world conditions? In the real world there are no magical wonderlands where mistakes never have a cost.

Merely removing the condition that might show a difference between the genders might be just whitewashing whatever is the underlying cause away: "oh that test where there's a 0.1% penalty for wrong answers gives lower scores for women, therefore it's an invalid test which must never be spoken of again: use the PC test which has been designed to give equal scores". In other words, we avoid the problem by just not asking the question.

Because it's not inherent to the biological status of being female, which is what people think it os, and because now you can get a more accurate picture of how good they are at math, period, which is what the test is searching for. Math was brought up specifically because STEM and it's one of the things tested for on ACT and SAT tests.

I understand it's not intentionally sexist and is both accidental and unexpected, but your skill at math has nothing to do with your strategy of guessing or not, yet having a test where that's involved means people think 'well, women are just bad at math' when actually what it is is 'well, women have suboptimal strategies for the specific task of taking multiple choice tests with penalties for wrong answers'. The reason they have those suboptimal strategies is unlikely to be biological differences between the sexes so much as it is learned differences in appropriate behavior.

Any time your skill at taking tests, rather than your skill with the subject at hand, is being tested, and can be minimized, you do so. I say this as someone who is very good at taking tests (associative memory, very good memory when it comes to things I find interesting, and being interested in most academic fields really helps).

Calibrating your tests so that they accurately measure the subject skill of the test-takers is an important part of making a test. That includes controlling for and reducing the effects of the other major variable, test-taking ability.

[SalmonGod]

It's like OWS in a lot of ways, in that the local flavour is different depending on where you are, and it doesn't really have a national leadership so much as it does a national consensus. Anyone can say that they are BLM and not exactly be lying, so the actual crazy types who would've acted alone or joined an explicitly extremist group like the NBPP pick up the label to get themselves a sense of legitimacy and poison the well as a whole.

Isn't the lack of a true consensus what did Occupy in?

No, I'm pretty sure that was overwhelming surveillance/infiltration/police brutality.  The camps were broken up with extreme force.  There are organizations that spawned out of the Occupy movement that were using the label, active, and doing good things up until a couple years ago.  May still be, but that's around the point I no longer had the time to pay close attention.  There was a one Occupy group that organized to eliminate millions in debt for people who needed it.  Multiple organizations in various cities that helped people fight against foreclosures.  A couple others that helped with disaster relief in impoverished areas.  That's just off the top of my head.  All operating under the Occupy banner long after the camps had been destroyed, and frequently discussing their activities with the larger movement on social media.

But the mainstream portrayal of Occupy was just a bunch of people camping out in public spaces being unruly.  Those people would still be around if they weren't shot with rubber bullets and tear gas, and mass arrested for weeks on end, and after police cleared that up, the mainstream portrayal of what Occupy was had been essentially eliminated.  And then the story was pushed that they all broke up and wandered back to their individual lives, because they had no organization or clear message...

Seriously, there are videos out there of some of the larger war camps looking like 3rd world urban warzones, and it took many such sweeps over the course of weeks to get erase their presence.  There was no lack of solidarity or tenacity, and it pisses me off the historical revisionism that I see about it so frequently, when it's not even been 5 years yet.

Disclaimer:  Not sure if anyone else has commented on this, but I'm still working on catching up on the thread (I haven't been caught up in here in like a month).  But I'm getting close, and thought this was recent enough that I could get away with a response.

[Sergarr]

It's like OWS in a lot of ways, in that the local flavour is different depending on where you are, and it doesn't really have a national leadership so much as it does a national consensus. Anyone can say that they are BLM and not exactly be lying, so the actual crazy types who would've acted alone or joined an explicitly extremist group like the NBPP pick up the label to get themselves a sense of legitimacy and poison the well as a whole.

Isn't the lack of a true consensus what did Occupy in?

Lack of leadership is what did Occupy in. Without leadership, there was no one to set the consensus from the inside, and no one to negotiate with for anyone from the outside. It met the end of every other anarchic movement in existence, thus furthermore proving the necessity of strict hierarchy and discipline for any group that wants to achieve its goals.

[Rolan7]

Yeah, I mean obviously the recidivist rapist arrested in the toilet with a gun, a roll of duct tape and a camera will have to be released as soon as he pretend to be a woman. How will we make toilets safe ever again?

The strawman is strong with this one.

Except the ads here in NC were literally saying that we wouldn't be allowed to stop rapists.  From entering the "wrong" bathroom, of course, but the ads made it look like we wouldn't be allowed to stop the rapes or charge them.

[TheBiggerFish]

@Sergarr:I wouldn't say it's done in every anarchic movement.  There are such things as collectives.  They just don't fly the same flag.

[LoSboccacc]

http://uk.businessinsider.com/shooting-reported-at-floridas-ft-lauderdale-airport-2017-1?r=US&IR=T


more fuckery

[smjjames]

Yeah, multiple people dead, they do have the shooter in custody, but theres a ton we don't know right now.

[Sheb]

http://uk.businessinsider.com/shooting-reported-at-floridas-ft-lauderdale-airport-2017-1?r=US&IR=T


more fuckery

1) Isn't the baggage area AFTER the flight ? How was this guy allowed to have a gun there?

2) If he was laying on the floor without his gun, how come the police shot him?

[LoSboccacc]

Coming from europe I was puzzled as you. Seems domestic usa airports section don't have egress only doors as we use, a relic from when every flight involved customs.

[Culise]

Even ignoring the possibility he simply snuck it through, you're allowed to have firearms in your checked baggage (the stuff that goes in the dedicated cargo areas) as long as you don't actually have it on the flight itself.  To wit, unloaded guns and ammunition may be transported as checked baggage only, and unloaded guns must also be stored in a hard-sided, locked container for which the passenger has the key.  The ammunition also cannot be in the same container as the gun.  Basically, the rules are meant to prevent you from operating a firearm on the plane itself.  At a guess, and again assuming he didn't sneak it through, he picked up his baggage at the baggage check, unlocked the gun, loaded it, and went to work. 

[MetalSlimeHunt]

1) Isn't the baggage area AFTER the flight ? How was this guy allowed to have a gun there?

In most airports I've been to, the baggage pickup is outside the security zone. You can just walk into the airport and be there.

2) If he was laying on the floor without his gun, how come the police shot him?

Assuming that's what truly happened, because cops.