Now the Left is angry at J.K. Rowling

chanatron1000

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:28 am

amother [ Babypink ] wrote:

Anti semitism is literally an incitement to voilence as we saw the begining of the year in brooklyn...

Anti-trans violence is not acceptable either.

simcha2

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:28 am

amother [ Babypink ] wrote:

Anti semitism is literally an incitement to voilence as we saw the begining of the year in brooklyn...

Do you think trans people aren't violently attacked for being trans.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/18......html

chanatron1000

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:30 am

But there are not many comparable issues because there is no "acceptable" form of ethnic discrimination that can be compared to gender-segregated restrooms and other spaces.

Last edited by chanatron1000 on Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:31 am; edited 1 time in total

Fox

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:30 am

Raisin wrote:

Good for JK Rowling. I entirely agree with her. Not that I think bathrooms or changing rooms are a huge issue (I dunno, I lock the door) but spaces such as women's only swimming pools, shelters, gyms etc are more of a problem.

This. Restrooms and changing rooms are low-hanging fruit in most cases.

The examples Raisin mentions are much bigger, and bigger still is women's sports. Martina Navratilova sounded this alarm a few years ago and was publicly excoriated and eventually forced to walk back her opinions. But as she predicted, biological males are now regularly shutting out biological females in women's sports, particularly track and field. This was an area where women fought for decades to even get a foot in the door, let alone achieve anything akin to equality.

chanatron1000

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:35 am

When it comes to free speech, any form of criticism, including criticism of the fact that someone is speaking (even something as blatant as "people with hazel eyes shouldn't speak"), cannot be compared to the actual suppression of speech that is becoming increasingly common on social media.

SixOfWands

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:35 am

chanatron1000 wrote:

You are not addressing any actual points.

What points are you making?

That those meanies on the left have criticized JK Rowling?

That its scary if someone you can't see might have different plumbing than you, and is daring to pee?

If there's something else, I haven't seen it.

SixOfWands

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:37 am

chanatron1000 wrote:

But there are not many comparable issues because there is no "acceptable" form of ethnic discrimination that can be compared to gender-segregated restrooms and other spaces.

The government of the United States argued that it should be legal to discriminate against people who are gay or transgender. (They lost. Today.)

So you're right that its not comparable. As no one today argues that its legal to say No Jews May Apply.

#BestBubby

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:38 am

Fox wrote:

The goal is to abolish women's sports, separate rest rooms and changing rooms by comparing it to segregation.

Very scary! And Insane!

[Political comment removed, reminder to post those as a spinoff in the politics section - mod]

#BestBubby

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:41 am

SixOfWands wrote:

Women and girls - CHILDREN - have been assaulted by men going into women's bathrooms.

There is a REASON why there are separate bathrooms for women and girls.

banana123

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:44 am

chanatron1000 wrote:

Anti-trans violence is not acceptable either.

Your sentence has extra words in it.

Let me help you out.

chanatron1000 wrote:

~~Anti-trans~~ violence is not acceptable either.

Violence is not acceptable either.

SixOfWands

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:45 am

#BestBubby wrote:

Women and girls - CHILDREN - have been assaulted by men going into women's bathrooms.

There is a REASON why there are separate bathrooms for women and girls.

Few, if any, such assaults have been by transgender people. See, eg, https://www.nbcnews.com/featur.....11106

If you want increased safety in restrooms, great idea.

But it has nothing to do with wear people may urinate.

#BestBubby

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:45 am

SixOfWands wrote:

Here is the Difference:

WE THE PEOPLE through our ELECTED representatives voted for no discrimination based on religion.

But the law giving Civil Rights to Transgender in employment was not voted for by our ELECTED officials but TREASONOUS SCOTUS imposed a decree upon the country - in violation of the Constitution!

Folks, we are ruled by Ayatollahs in the Supreme Court who violate the Constitution and impose their decrees upon the country.

chanatron1000

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:47 am

Six of Wands, this is progress. You have responded to specific points this time. However, you have neglected to limit your response to the points that have actually been said.

amother

Seagreen

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:48 am

Sorry if I am being naive, can someone please explain the argument to me?

All people with female genitalia need to use the restroom labeled "women", and all people with male genitalia need to use the restroom labeled "men."

If you want to be able to use the other restroom, get surgery to change your genitalia.

End of story. What exactly are people taking offense about?

#BestBubby

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:49 am

SixOfWands wrote:

Any MAN can walk into a women's bathroom by saying he is trans - isn't that right, SOW???

Barring all with MALE GENITALIA from women's bathrooms increases safety.

SixOfWands

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:49 am

#BestBubby wrote:

It is the job of SCOTUS to interpret statutes and the Constitution.

You are essentially arguing for the overthrown of the US Constitution and the form of government under which the US exists.

chanatron1000

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:49 am

banana123 wrote:

Violence is not acceptable either.

In that case, the "either" is an unnecessary addition. Like the part you deleted, it applies in the context in which it was used.

SixOfWands

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:50 am

#BestBubby wrote:

Any MAN can walk into a women's bathroom by saying he is trans - isn't that right, SOW???

Barring all with MALE GENITALIA from women's bathrooms increases safety.

How are you going to check?

Shall we make you pull up your skirt and show me your vajayjay before you can pee?

#BestBubby

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:53 am

SixOfWands wrote:

How are you going to check?

Shall we make you pull up your skirt and show me your vajayjay before you can pee?

Those who look obviously male should be barred.

If a trans looks totally like a female they would be allowed in.

banana123

Mon, Jun 15 2020, 11:56 am

amother [ Seagreen ] wrote:

Exactly that.

The argument is that it doesn't go by genitalia but by how you "identify." Which, by the way, is fluid and can change by the hour.