General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat Is It About Christians and Bathrooms?
The citizens of Houston are voting on an equal rights ordinance that, among other things, gives protections to transgender people. Opponents are worried about bathrooms. They've printed up signs that say, "NO Men in Women's Bathrooms." They're worried that predatory men will use the ordinance as a way to enter public bathrooms and assault girls and women.
This reminds me of the campaign against the ERA. I remember as a child in a conservative church being warned that if the ERA passed, women would have to use the same restrooms as men. And so we needed to oppose the ERA to protect the sanctity of women's bathrooms.
What is it about civil rights that gets some people so worked up about bathrooms?
*Some conservative Christians of Houston are using this sense of vulnerability to mask the misogyny and homophobia that are the roots of their opposition to the equal rights ordinance. Men are not suddenly going to claim to be women so they can lurk in bathrooms and attack girls and women. The truth of the matter is that bathrooms are much more dangerous for transgender and gender non-conforming people right now than they ever will be for girls and women because of a civil rights ordinance. And, in fact, the most dangerous place for a woman in the United States is not a public bathroom but her own home. As we know, most violence against women and girls does not come from strangers but from family and friends.
*Especially distressing is the willingness of some conservative Christians intentionally to use fear, misinformation, bigotry, and misunderstanding of what transgender means to perpetuate stereotypes and to try to block equal protections for all citizens. This fear-mongering and misinforming seems a far cry from the truth-telling Christians claim for themselves."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-m-shaw/what-is-it-about-bathroom_b_8453064.html?utm_hp_ref=transgender
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)stall and the "pervert" pushing their way into the stall to harm the little girl. It started about transgender people use of restrooms in public places in Houston. I have worked in a situation where men and women used the same restroom, everyone went to a stall and as far as I was concerned it was not any different in being in a restroom with another of the same sex. if a "pervert" wanted to enter a restroom and do harm it will happen, now they have the right to arrest the trespasser for being in the wrong restroom. Now does this make sense?
damnedifIknow
(3,183 posts)Seems to me the real perversion is their ad.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)I had the same question.
You know, they used this bizarre bathroom thing back in the 70's to argue against the ERA.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)female genitalia, and how to control them, mostly keep it from happening. Bathrooms are dangerous, inadequately controlled places where pants are opened and panties dropped. The connection's clear enough to me.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)except for the naugty bits. Those were made by the Debbil.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)When I was younger I found that exciting. Now I just hope they don't make too much of a mess around here.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)were African American and Hispanic voters we will need in our corner.
This appears to be a wedge the Rethugs may use between minority voters and the Democratic party.
randys1
(16,286 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)So Democrats, no matter which candidate they support, should join in the fucking crazy?
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You do recall that, once that Prop. 8 claim was looked into, there was far more correlation religiousness, than race. IOWs, there may have been Black voters; but the bigger determinant was the degree of religiousness ... that tracked closely to how white Christians voted.
Democrats have no real worries for Black votes in 2016, as neither the primary or G/E will raise religious-belief issues.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)And couldn't the candidacy of a religious minority person like Carson or Rubio be a threat to the Democratic coalition?
You are right, of course, that religiousness was a bigger factor than race in the Prop. 8 race. However, African and Hispanic Americans are the Democratic groups that have the highest numbers of people of faith. That's part of why I think that Clinton or O'Malley has a better chance overall than an agnostic like Sanders.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)will not move Black folks to carson.
And (again), I suspect only a small minority of Blacks would NOT vote for Bernie because of his being an agnostic.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)And Dems mocked Reagan mercilessly, but the joke was on us.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and Reagan was personable (not to be mistaken for "quiet" and "gentle" and all the other descriptors of carson. Not even close
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)And when he was re-elected, he clearly already had Alzheimers. But it didn't matter to the public or his puppeteers.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)not a biggie I think.
DFW
(54,437 posts)Man, the things you learn on this board.......
niyad
(113,556 posts)Snobblevitch
(1,958 posts)The vote was on Tuesday.
Zing Zing Zingbah
(6,496 posts)They're not worried about predatory women going into men's bathrooms to assault them?
Throckmorton
(3,579 posts)I for one will just go pee in the parking lot if that happens.
randys1
(16,286 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)A HERETIC I AM
(24,377 posts)I mean, when men and women live together, how do they work it out with the one or two bathrooms in the house?
I have no idea how I survived when I lived with my EX, her daughter and two sons.
It was 3 against 2 and I'm sure somewhere along the way, all hell must have broken loose with all that different sexes sharing the same bathroom naughtiness.
Or not.
What a complete and utter waste of time.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)and checking the oil, I figured I would use the restroom so I wouldn't have to stop again between there and my exit about 45 miles away. There was a men's room and a women's room, designed for just one person at a time.
There was someone in the men's room at the time, and 2 guys waiting in front of me. The woman behind the counter finally looked over and said "One of you can use the ladies room if you want to, both bathrooms are identical except for the sign on the door". The other 2 guys just stood there, one of them looking mortified at the thought! I went in, raised the seat, took care of business, flushed, put the seat back down, washed my hands and walked out. The same 2 guys were STILL standing there waiting! I walked past them and said "There's nothing in there that's going to bite you or anything, go ahead!", said "thank you, and have a great day" to the lady behind the counter and was on my merry way!
What's the big deal??
Peace,
Ghost
REP
(21,691 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Oh, wait... I thought you said "COOKIES".
Never mind.
Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Aha!
You were only in there a few minutes and already succumbed to unreasonable demands of female domination.
Next thing you'll tell us you sat down to pee.
Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)Now, in MY house, I'm single and have my own bathroom in my bedroom. The seat in there stays UP, and I always joke with any women who use it by telling them "make sure you put the seat back UP when you're done".
Now you've got me wracking my brain trying to remember which movie it was that someone's "Indian Name" was 'Squats to Pee'.
Peace,
Ghost
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)midget on the Unicycle!
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)I'm holding a straight flush.
Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)I got unfriended on FB by someone who was making those arguments and worse
I sent her info on the number of murders of transgender women and told her the the mentality that leads to those incidents begins with the rhetoric. Response: "I have a right to stand up for what is "right." As if to say, "people may be dying, but my beliefs are more important."
The back and forth eventually included Christian persecution rhetoric. The thing that was really noticable was that she interpreted caring about what happens to the people she was bashing online as a personal attack.
She acquired those attitudes only within the last year after having been saved and baptized in a Chrustian funadamentalist church. Following that, she had been posting stuff about how her self-esteem had recovered via church.
I don't think it has anything to do with bathrooms. It was an opening for people to publicly look down on people and therefore elevate themselves. It turns out to be especially satisfying for people who feel guilty about something in their past to find a way to look down on others.
meow2u3
(24,773 posts)It's to use them for scapegoats to deflect attention from the real predatory men who'd use the law to assault women: the conservative Christians themselves.
rustydog
(9,186 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)and not one thing more or less. It's very revealing of what the sewers they call minds really are.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Initech
(100,102 posts)These people are not Christian in any sense of the word. Instead they're fucking ignorant assholes. It's a damn shame that the first time a true ERA is proposed, these fucking ignorant assholes boil it down to "sexual predators can claim they're trans and use the women's facilities".
Did I mention that they're fucking ignorant assholes?
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)So the democratic voters said no. Doesn't make sense since they voted a lesbian mayor in the city.
Initech
(100,102 posts)I'm guessing that groups completely outside of Houston had something to do with it. I'm guessing most likely Kochs and or insane fundamentalist groups. If you notice the majority protesting this law were old, fat white men.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Skittles
(153,193 posts)cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)This should come as no surprise at all.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)in bathrooms. And real followers of jebus are terrified of the naughty bits. The REAL fundies would probably ban bathrooms altogether.
The "godly" could just hold it all in until they exploded. Which is a nice thought.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)Public women's rest rooms are some of the nastiest places I've ever had the misfortune to enter. I will never understand why someone would want to show others that part of them. As if what comes out their orifices is a sight to behold. SMH
Xolodno
(6,401 posts)The corrupt Catholic/Orthodox churches at the time instituted rules and regulations about sex (and many other things). Why? Sex was celebrated among Pagans...and worse....Jews. Plus, it was also an easy way for population control (as they dogmatized it as purely for procreation) and a way to stamp out free expression. Centuries later, Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant still have not shed the influences from the Dark Ages....and those that do, are called heretics and vilified.
You can go through ALL the Bible's sex "laws" and discover absolutely no consistency. Because, they often adopted the sex culture around them at the time and evolved as the culture evolved. There is really only one constant in the sex laws of the Bible. Adultery. Because it was viewed as a violation of property rights and inheritance. Nothing else.
olddots
(10,237 posts)because I believe in dog .
MisterP
(23,730 posts)the crappers are full of rapists waiting to spring forth cunningly disguised as fellow sisters of the Weaker Sex, ever-assailed by macho Michoatec construction workers