nc

Do I agree that's your conclusion?

Why would I disagree that's your conclusion? Once you realize I didn't say that, the rest is creative writing. I'm not one to stifle creativity.

I didn't attribute it as a direct quote from you. In my post I said it was a logical conclusion. Do you disagree?

All I needed to know was "That wasn't a direct quote from you."

Feel free to check the references provided.

I didn't think so. I'm usually more precise in my language than that, though I obviously slip from time to time.

That wasn't a direct quote from you. Instead it was a logical inference. You repeatedly stated that churches are places where sexual assaults happen. Hangs stated that one is most likely to be sexually assaulted at a family reunion. Many family reunions happen at churches. Simple logic. My conclusion was that if males were banned from females' shower facilities the opportunity to commit sexual assault would be lessened.

As it is we have no standard for what "transgendered" really means. The condition is based on how an individual feels. My fear is not that the actual transgendered male will commit a sexual assault (though it happens) but rather that perverts will take advantage of the confusion and prey.

shouldawouldacoulda (view profile)
Posted 1:31 pm, 07/23/2019

Just out of curiosity, does the Y have changing areas?

Facts.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03...index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03...index.html

Okay. Where did I say "men are taking advantage of every opportunity (even family reunions and church services) to sexually assault women."

Unfortunately, the settlement is not limited to restrooms. While the linked news report seems to limit the ruling to only restrooms the actual settlement includes all "public facilities" which would include any shower facilities or changing facilities (if any) in State Parks.

True they said bathroom, but they did not extend it to changing area's and shower rooms.

Yes. I had other, more important things to attend to in between, but I didn't want you to feel left out.

Is that in response to my 9:45 question?

At 2:12 pm on 7-18-2019 Hangsleft posted that straight white men shouldn't be in the same room as women because they [I am not sure which group this "they" was referring to] cannot be trusted to control themselves. And, today at 9:48am the same poster wrote "There is more likely someone at your family reunion that has committed sexual assault than the local public restroom." Earlier (at 5:53 am on the same date) the poster had written "You have a much greater chance getting sexual abused at a family reunion than by a transgender at the YMCA." At 7:58 Hangsleft wrote "But statistics show that you would have at least one male [family] member that has commit sexual assault at a reunion."

On 07-21-2019 at 11:03 am and again at 12:13 pm Shouldawouldacoulda refereed to the sexual abuses that take place in some churches and referred to that crime's frequency.

In the interest of accuracy and to show my contrition I will rewrite my post of 9:17am today to properly reflect what has been said. I have indicated the appropriate changes in bold face just so there is less confusion.

"Hangs; I would be interested to see where you find your statistics about the number of males who have committed a sexual assault. I would also think one would have to more precisely define "Family member" in order to to put the statistics in context. Are we limiting "family member" to third cousins and closer or what?

Antithesis: I agree that there are a lot more documented cases of transgendered persons being the victims of crimes rather than the criminal [Referring to a post on this thread at 9:14pm on 7-22-2019]. However, there are cases of transgendered persons committing sexual assaults as well. I provided a link to a website earlier in this thread that chronicled some of those cases.

You [still referring to Antithesis] also sated correctly that there are no documented cases of people being arrested for pretending to be transgendered in order to "sneak a peek." Quite simply there is no law (that I am aware of) against pretending to be transgendered. Sadly, merely claiming to be transgendered is a ready-made defense against such a charge [a violation of "Peeping Tom" statutes.] While perverts and pedophiles are disgusting and, in my opinion, evil they are not necessarily dumb. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to realize that by merely claiming "I feel like a woman today" any man can walk into the women's showers at Rose's Gym with no fear of repercussion. As "Smalltownman" so eloquently pointed out [at 8:17pm on 7-22-2019] such people are not required to wear name tags of ID badges.

The logical conclusion from all of this is we ought to keep men out of the women's showers. If we believe Hangsleft and Shoulda then men are taking advantage of every opportunity (even family reunions and church services) to sexually assault women. "Smalltownman" points out that we can't identify the good guys from the bad guys just by looking and as Antithesis points out there is no penalty for a bad guy pretending to be a good guy.

By the simple administration of a rule that requires males to stay out of the females' showers in public gyms we could provide a safe place for women that exceeds that of a family reunion held at a church-at least according to Shoulda and Hang's reasoning."

This is really going to help the Socialists in the next election. https://dailycaller.com/201...er-waxing/

Should a woman be forced to do this? Lose your business over some tranny? https://www.breitbart.com/e...-testicles

It's not coming up, Ozzy.

Just out of curiosity, does the Y have changing areas?

Her right to privacy and to feel comfortable in the WOMEN'S locker room.