Trending Content
| +89 | Zoomers are doing life wrong | 28 | 1d | |
| +70 | GF doesn’t care about her looks | 46 | 3h | |
| +39 | Insurance as High Finance? | 10 | 1d | |
| +36 | Affair with my Associate… In Desperate Need for Advice | 21 | 6h | |
| +35 | 400k/year in HVAC sales? | 26 | 8h | |
| +32 | Would you rather live alone in an outer borough or with roommates in Manhattan? | 23 | 1d | |
| +31 | Framed Photo of CEO on desk. | 16 | 1d | |
| +24 | BO -> ??? | 14 | 5d | |
| +23 | Why do people listen to Jim Cramer Investing Advice? | 9 | 2h | |
| +22 | When do you plan to buy your first house and how much do you expect to spend? | 24 | 19h |
Career Resources
I tend to keep my opinion to myself on such new-age controversial topics because people inevitably get riled up. But I just don't understand why it's so outrageous nowadays to hope that if you're born with the male sexual reproductive organ you use the men's room, and vice versa. Irrespective of how you "feel inside" or how you've disfigured your body.
You go into the bathroom to excrete bodily waste. If you're transexual, then you'll (hopefully) use the bathroom stalls whenever you decide to urinate in another sex's bathroom. No one else is going to see what is going on except for the individual discarding their bodily waste.
Also, let's conduct a thought experiment. Imagine a transexual female by sex, who is male by gender. According to some southern states' laws, these individuals are required to use the female bathroom. In which case, all of the females will see what looks like a male enter their bathroom, since that is what the law requires.
The (southern) US is the only place in the western world where this is an issue. No one else in the western world gets this excited about who uses which toilet to discard of their shit and piss.
There are real problems in the world that we need to deal with (climate change, Islamic ideology, ect.) - who uses which toilet to excrete shit and piss is not one of them.
islamic extremism*
I am a guy either way I feel men should always use the mens bathroom.
And no matter how may sh*t points I get I am still stick to my opinion!
I agree with you OP that this type of legislation should've never been considered. Reminds me of all the dumb social shit my socialist state fights over instead of worrying about very pertinent economic and fiscal issues...
The question everyone should be asking is...who gives a fuck what restroom transgender people want to use? Are there really that many transgenders there where this is becoming a state-wide problem? If a dude has spent his whole life feeling like he's a woman, spends thousands of dollars and hours of his time also trying to look like one, then you would assume he would probably use the woman's restroom. If not, what happens if he uses the men's restroom then? The average straight southerner male thinks "what the fuck", talks about it to his buddies at the bar, then moves on. And Visa-versa. If someone who I think is weird as fuck enters the bathroom when I'm at the urinal, I usually mind my own business, shake off, and refrain from calling my state representative. I'm sure the police are making enforcement of the bathroom law a top priority and Carolinians are happy to see their taxpayer money used for such a pressing issue...
We are in an era where everyone wants to legislate their feelings away (or reinforce them). Leave people the fuck alone and let adults deal with adults. I don't care if you want to marry your pet rock, identify as a pony, adopt only gay kids, what ever. If people want to make decisions that might get them a lot of unwanted attention, they have every right to do so as long as you aren't infringing upon anyone else's rights (you do not have a right to feel comfortable).
The issue i have is when people are trying to push their beliefs on me, I am not into this gender fluid stuff but it does not mean I am preaching hate, people should be able to to agree to disagree. This is more of a problem in this type of arguments.
Food for thought: Rachel Dolezal got lambasted by the media for living as an African American. Doesn't her treatment set the precedent that your mental and social identity are irrelevant?
I don't care who uses what bathroom as long as they aren't making a mess.
I identify as a billionaire, therefore society should accommodate me as such.
what really blows my mind is that trannies have been entering the bathroom of their identified sex as long as there have been trannies, only now are we calling attention to this.
what I'm much more concerned with is the nearly perfect correlation between age, propensity to be nude, and droopage among men at my YMCA. every day I come home with tales of a new awkward glance after a workout.
I would have to second the feeling of despair related to the increasing prevalence of AARP-card-holding testicles in my face every time I try and sit in a sauna. I will sign your petition.
I use the Dolezal example because she effectively changed her race and integrated into a community with no resistance. Her big misstep was being so good at working towards racial equality from that side of the fence that she was a figurehead and recognized for who she was - or wasn't. The parallels that can be drawn are very similar, even down to the support received from the NAACP - ie women who embrace transgenders, accept LGBT etc. In reality, its old wrinkly white men spewing hate on TV to the delight of uneducated bigots; rallying the blue collar dad who doesn't want some creep to abuse a loophole and rape his daughter. I can guarantee that the type of person who would attempt to abuse this "loophole" would look about as out of place in a women's bathroom as a pterodactyl would working a summer analyst stint at GS SSiG.
I find it interesting that the same people who would post a video of Bruce Jenner accepting the Arthur Ashe Award on social media with 400 clapping emojis for a caption, and would rally to accept transgender bathroom rights, would also be the first to go on a wine-induced, all-caps rant about how Dolezal was so wrong in what she did. You could argue that race is a much more ambiguous distinction than gender, given that race can be roughly identified through bone structure, pigmentation and certain genetic traits, with varying degrees of certainty. Gender, on the other hand, is a much easier distinction.
i've been frequenting the locker room at my gym more recently because my new gym has a pool/sauna... and haha some guys have no shame, full conversations in the buff. Sure, more common among the elder but it's pretty lax for all. Anyways no big deal, to each his own.
The below is not my own, but this copypasta more or less sums up my feelings on the matter.
"I sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of soaring over the oilfields dropping hot sticky loads on disgusting foreigners. People say to me that a person being a helicopter is Impossible and I’m fucking retarded but I don’t care, I’m beautiful. I’m having a plastic surgeon install rotary blades, 30 mm cannons and AMG-114 Hellfire missiles on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me “Apache” and respect my right to kill from above and kill needlessly. If you can’t accept me you’re a heliphobe and need to check your vehicle privilege. Thank you for being so understanding."
I wish brady was here to flame her. I'm sure he'd make some case of her being a race hustler lol!
This should not be an issue and wasn't one until the ignorant made it one. Trans people should be able to use the restroom of the gender they identify with. All the absurd illogical reasons for why they shouldn't are thinly veiled justifications for their bigotry and/or ignorance. President Obama does not have to push a "liberal agenda" to have a legacy. He has certainly created one. I don't think people realize just how consequential his presidency has been in a number of major areas.
Mostly it just blows my mind that this is such a big national "issue." I can't help but think there are more important things for the government to fuck around with.
I can think of about 19.2 trillion more important things, I keep having to ask myself "why the fuck are we still talking about this?"
The reason why it's a big deal is essentially that the state passed a law to DENY a certain group rights that the municipality chose to grant.
The Governor of North Carolina is wrong because: 1) He claims states' rights, yet he denied municipalities' rights by passing the law 2) Refusing to protect and recognize transexuals as a protected class is one thing. Outright banning future protections of transexuals or attempted protections in a lower form level of government is a whole different matter. 3) Substantively, the valid social purpose of the law is next to nonexistent. It's a law that doesn't make anyone safer, nor solve an ongoing problem facing society. It's a law that certainly codifies the mistreatment of certain peoples. That's why it is absolutely wrong. (Example: Segregation did not solve any real problem. It, instead, gave full government-backed leniency for society-at-large to mistreat certain groups of people). a) No outstanding issue of trans people committing crimes in bathrooms. Frankly, older males going to the bathroom with younger males and committing crimes is much more likely and actually seen in society. b) No method of enforcement. There is no gender-detecting bathroom door that prevents people from using the bathroom they want. c) Irrational basis. Again, no issue of trans committing crimes. No issue of people pretending to be trans committing crimes. If people want to commit crimes masquerading as women, they can do so with or without this law on the books.
1) States have power over municipalities. 2) This is good, because then we don't have to waste time and governments with ridiculous nonsense when there are REAL issues (17 trillion dollar debt, foreign affairs etc.,) 3) Do not compare this to segregation. Transexuality is not biological in the same way that race is. ( or in my belief at all) A) Then why give them their own bathroom? I would be fine with shitting next to a tranny, but I really wouldn't want one in the same room as my daughter, especially while shes naked and vulnerable. B) Method of enforcement is being sued for sexual harassment. C) Again, no rational basis for making it a law.
I think people forget that even if you change your parts below the waist you still have an xy or yy chromosome.
yy chromosome? And I was told there are no informed debates on the internet...
Yeah yy is one the best chromosomes, along with xs, yk, and hw
Personally, I am someone that understands that there is no sexual behavior involved with going to the bathroom. I think that there doesn't even need to be separate gender bathrooms. America is so freaked out about nudity and body image that it just acts unreasonable in these circumstances. I really could care less if I am taking a shit next to a girl or male, because it makes no difference. America just needs to chill and get its shit together.
pun intended
If this is such a trivial issue that you don't really care about and you believe other issues are far more important why are you guys posting and complaining about it? You could simply move on with your lives.
It's insane that this has blown up into such a big 'issue.' The solution lies in economics. It would save people money to only have one bathroom that is unisex. So long as you're doing your business in the stall and washing your hands in the common area, it's not like anything crazy needs to be going on. To save on time you could have a separate row of urinals where self-selection ensures that only people who are comfortable peeing standing up go.
Over my dead body will I take a shit next to someone born with female genitalia.
If you knew the kind of disgusting explosive alcoholic shits I take, you would understand why I say this. It's very embarrassing.
There's a couple of issues here, the most important one being the information asymmetry you have when you force a trans person to use a bathroom that does not fit with their identity. I have a trans brother (born my sister). To me I will always look at him and see my sister but to everyone who has met him in the last five years, he's male. He is not out as trans to literally anyone in his professional community. If you force him to use a female restroom, you're are effectively legislating that he must out himself to the entire world (or at least any random person he may encounter in the restroom). This is completely asinine imo.
Secondly, there's a safety issue. Unfortunately it is still the case that the trans community is heavily discriminated against, including physical violence if discovered. This is probably more common for trans women who get discovered by other men, but they can literally get the shit kicked out of them by ignorant bigots. Force trans women to use the bathroom that matches their biological gender and you're going to see the instance of this kind of violence skyrocket. That's a real problem, and it doesn't seem there is anywhere near the same safety concerns when trans people are able to use gender-identified bathrooms.
Now there are some complicated issues with this coming down the pike for sure. The one that still worries me is athletics. I think it's only a matter of time before a trans woman (born male) starts to shatter previous athletic records at the high school or collegiate level. State mile times, high jump, softball pitching stats, soccer etc. You are going to have people who transition at an early age who find they are extremely competitive in a field of women. Imagine the college applications; you apply to Stanford having put up a 4:18 mile, beating the national women's record by 10 seconds (yet still not too uncommon for fast HS boys). How can they enforce biological gender based records when on the other hand the states are likely to recognize all of their rights based on gender identity? How will race directors even know? Are they going to make them strip down and look at their pee pee? It's going to get really messy, and will be a shame for all the female athletes who will have their names expunged from the record books... Anyways, super complicated topic but I for one am glad it's getting some national attention.
I think your last point leads to another important discussion: At what age should one legally be allowed to declare a gender different from their sex, and in addition, take action to convert their biological physicality to that gender (surgery, hormone replacement, ect)? Unlike the topic discussed in the OP, this is a real issue that requires our focus and effort. It's important that we protect children (non-adults) from the influences and actions of irresponsible and unintelligent parents, as well as the 'experimentation' that occurs during that age. A lot of these common medical treatments, such as hormone replacement, are permanent, and should not be undertaken until one is mature enough to take full responsibility for their own actions (adulthood). This would make a good discussion.
The size of the trans population would have to be enormous for this to be a legitimate concern.
You'd need a trans athlete who was naturally gifted enough to be exceptionally talented, who transitioned early enough to be fully female by the time high school athletics started, and who didn't suffer any physical side effects - in terms of athleticism - from an enormous dose of hormones and the removal of hormone producing organs during a critical period in physical development.
caitlyn jenner and brittney griner lmao
question out of complete ignorance: I know that not everyone has gender reassignment surgery (which makes you legally whatever sex you're assigned). has your sibling had this? do you think it even matters? I just ask because if someone had the surgery, they'd biologically be a male or female, instead of trans. but again, I'm ignorant on the issue, hence the probably dumb question.
At the risk of being pedantic, biologically no they wouldn't. Hormonally they may be through hormone therapy, but genetically it's pretty hard to undo them there XXs and XYs.
Now of course that's "sex" -- "gender", of course, is a social construct and blah blah blah.
I'm not an expert on the legal definitions. My brother has had what they call "top surgery" but not "bottom surgery" as far as I'm aware. We don't spend a whole ton of time talking about it tbh. He's been on testosterone for close to six years now, so clearly if you saw him you would think he's make. He almost immediately started balding after he started the hormones and has a beard. He's also pretty bulked out (certainly more upper body strength than me), ex military, you get the idea... I'm pretty sure he has a driver's license that identifies him as male with his new first name, but I don't think the birth cert. has been changed.
Also QGKZ - I completely agree with you that we need to have the discussion around age and when a child can be considered mature enough to make this kind of decision. It bothers that shit out of me that some parents almost seem to be encouraging their children to explore this. I actually think most college age kids probably don't have the maturity or life experience to credibly make this transition. It is a pretty irreversible decision and there is a reason that suicide rates among the trans community are 10x the general population.
also it's "transgendered" not "trannie", get it right
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lance-bass/why-we-shouldnt-use-the-word-t…
AndyLouis
Please pick a better source than the politically correct Huffington Post.
it was a joke sorry i didnt make that obvious enough?
also Andy, take this off the frontpage please. the last thing we need is businessinsider picking up this post.
What annoys me about the Left on this topic is that organizations all over the country have sought compromises. When there was a single "transsexual" at a public school, for example, the school would allow that person to have his/her own bathroom. But the Left considers that an afront to the dignity of the trans person because they are being "denied" their gender identity. It's insane.
Ultimately, I don't think there will be widespread abuse of a system that allows people to use whatever bathroom they want, but I wish the Left would have allowed a compromise on this topic. Like, even my church has a men's, women's, and unisex (for changing kids) bathroom. The Left doesn't want this arrangement--they want a men's and women's bathroom with open access or a single unisex bathroom that everyone uses at once. Why can't they just compromise on this topic? Or why can't they allow private organizations to choose their own policies?
Southern, Christian Conservative here. I agree. Also +1 for correct use of word hanged. Spoken like a true southern gentleman.
If you have a right as an individual to shit all over biology, religious freedom, and cause psychological trauma in children by flaunting your idiosynchratic views on gender and sexuality, where is my right as the MAJORITY to raise a child in a conservative (dare I say Christian?) environment, free from your perversions?
Why can't a respectful, upright state take steps to protect itself from the pervasive moral decay in a country which was once the shining example of decency internationally? Why do we insist on minimizing freedom by seeking evermore outrageous 'rights' to codify? Didn't we fight for hundreds of years in this country for a system that MAXIMIZES freedom?
Third, and perhaps most importantly, the scientific research on the books today PROVES THAT GENDER DYSMORPHIA IS A MENTAL ILLNESS. The DSM says a transsexual has a very real mental problem, and other research suggests there are altered neurochemical pathways which affect this disease. If you want to claim that this research is incorrect, I would be very happy to see your PhD in Neurobiology, then read any research you have written which was published by a respectable journal (or even a shitty journal, for that matter). Otherwise, you are full of shit and are rationalizing your logic based on the media and other fanciful social influences, rather than really searching for the truth.
How can we be so quick to throw out religion for science, then turn around and cast out science for our FEELINGS.
Gender dysmporphia is a mental illness and as of right now, the best treatment is to give in to the sufferer's delusions. By minimizing the physical difference between what he brain thinks and the body is the sufferer can minimize their anguish. This is like treating cancer skin cancer with limb amputation. The science must improve and in the meantime it is important not to glorify a mental disease as a society. Accept transsexualism as its best treatment at this stage? Perhaps. Demonize Transsexuals for their illness? No. But praise and encourage this type of sickness as a nation? Absolutely not.
I won't get into your conversation about gender dysmorphia as a mental illness. I'm not a shrink and don't know the first thing about it.
However, you're whining about protecting freedom. How its being minimized by a big government. So your solution is having the government tell us that someone with a beard, adam's apple, and functioning penis should be forced by law to use the women's bathroom? That doesn't sound very small government, especially when it comes to how this law could even conceivably be enforced....
if they have a functioning penis, she's likely had reassignment surgery, in which case her birth certificate will now read male, and she'd use the male restroom. I had the same question, but apparently that's the answer. the issue lies with the people in limbo (vagina, beard, adams apple, no tits).
Wow.
I've followed a lot of your posts and gleaned a lot of great career advice from you. For that, thank you. But I've got a couple problems with the above. Lets get involved:
1) "States Rights." Is the south still going on about this? It was used as a cover for discrimination back in the 1800's, and it still is today. Governor McRory doesn't give a flying fart about "States rights"; he's looking to score cheap political points with bigots by going on the record and forcing a solution to a non-existing problem which by the way just happens to involve denying a certain group of people rights (in response to local government, not federal government, LOCAL TOWNSHIPS asserting and granting these rights).
2) "Liberal Agenda" - Firstly, the guy really isn't that liberal. Secondly, if protecting the ability of local municipalities to grant rights to whomever they see fit is pushing a "liberal agenda", call me a pinko wackjob communist.
3) "Obamacare is failing." Firstly, the ACA was written by the guy who he ran against for President in 2012. So if you hate it that much, you probably shouldn't have voted for Romney. Obama initially wanted a nationwide single-payer plan (which, btw, if presented neutrally and without attribution to a specific party/policy theory, polls ridiculously well with everyone, including white male Republicans) Secondly, it has insured more people than his administration said it would, for less cost than his administration said it would. It has even beat the CBO cost estimate per person insured. Please tell me how this was a failure?
4) "Choice" Now, I'm neither gay nor a transsexual. However, using the line of logic that people cannot control their sexual orientation, yet they can somehow choose to ignore their gender orientation is...well, flimsy at best to me. You can say, well of course one can feel like they should be a woman, but they have a choice to just remain a man. My response to that is that with that line of reasoning, you could open up a gay conversion therapy clinic.
So in conclusion, please thebrofessor, stick to finance things on a website like this, because I'm sure you know 100x more than I do when it comes to finance. This isn't a social debate forum, and quite frankly, your positions read as ill-informed, poorly thought-out, and even just a little bit bigoted.
kudos for the well thought out reply, thanks for following me, means a lot. I thought long and hard about starting a debate here. I don't intend to start an online pissing match, but I will reply just because I don't want people to throw around that I'm a bigot on this forum where I've tried to help a lot of people, that's a pretty strong accusation, and I think I angered you because we clearly reside on different sides of the political spectrum, but by no means am I a bigot.
states rights. read what I wrote again. I am not supportive of this legislation, the south is using this idea of states rights as their reason for going after the feds, that's all. so yes, they are still barking about this. they're mad for all the reasons I mentioned, some of which I agree with, most of which I don't. I'm most concerned with the south staying as a good place to do business, because that's good for my business. I could give a fuck less if someone is gay, trans, whatever.
liberal agenda. we'll agree to disagree. if you don't think obama is that liberal, then you wouldn't like having a beer with me. again, read what I wrote, am I saying I support the law? didn't think so.
my bad, I clearly struck a chord with you on obamacare. I guess maybe I'm self interested because UNH has been one of my clients' top performers for 3 years now, so I have a vested interest in ACA failing. you think it can work? wonderful, I hope it does, but I really don't care, that was more an inflammatory comment than anything, clearly it worked.
choice, this is one I will concede, because I just don't know. in case you haven't followed all of my posts, my mom's side is black, my dad's side is white (but helped blacks register to vote during the civil rights movement, and thus alienating themselves from other southern whites). I mention that because I think it's important to know that because of my family, I know what discrimination can do. my mom's side to this day has an inherent distrust of white people, because of the things they had to go through. their parents and grandparents were literally second class citizens, who couldn't hide behind some testosterone pills and baggy jeans to get by. believe me, if there was a pill they could take that would lighten up their skin during the day, they'd have done it. but they couldn't, they had no choice in the matter. now I didn't know about trans bashing, that is terrible, violence is never the answer and if this is a common occurrence, excuse my ignorance, but if you're just afraid of that violence? then welcome to America. there are still assholes out there who beat up people for all kinds of reasons. natural selection will eventually weed them out, but as long as there are people alive, there will be bigots, you can't escape it, and no amount of legislation will change that.
although judging by your reply, you don't know either about "choice," you just attack my line of logic, which I guess is fair. the way I look at it, unless it truly is a mental illness and someone born with a penis and testicles has the brain of a woman, hormones like a woman, whatever, then yeah, maybe it is similar to a genetic mutation or something over which you have no control. but I just don't know, I suppose a trans person says they have no control over it, but I wonder if you asked them the same thing when they were 10 years old, what the answer would be. again, my point is whether or not being trans is a choice is still up for debate. you say it's not, apparently there are studies suggesting it is. there is no debate to things like national origin, skin color, physical handicap, etc.
side note: it's inflammatory replies like this that I think discredit your political beliefs. saying things like I'm bigoted when in fact I never said I disagreed with trans rights, saying I should open up a gay conversion clinic when I said I support gay marriage, and mentioning something polls well with while male republicans as if that strikes a chord with me...c'mon man. just because you're liberal doesn't mean I want to destroy you, but when you reply with personal attacks that are unfounded, you make your side look bad. smoke some weed and chill the fuck out (something else this southern conservative male supports).
I'll reply once more and then dip out of this debate, as this is just internet bs at this point.
1) I never called you a bigot. I said some of your positions stated above read as bigoted. Everyone's a little bit racist etc, etc, and I wasn't trying to go PC police on you. Its more that I don't think you realize how some of what you wrote comes off.
2) We can agree to disagree on whether or not Obama is a liberal. Hell, I do agree that he is a liberal, probably just not to the degree that you do. What I'm trying to articulate, however, is that supporting the ability for a municipality to grant and preserve rights to a group of individuals, and being against a law that takes those rights away...strikes me as the opposite of "big government intervention" in the way of something like...over-regulation of a product or service. Essentially, you (at least from how I'm interpreting what you wrote) believe that Obama is trying to weigh in to promote a liberal agenda, whereas I believe he is simply preserving the rights of a group of individuals.
3)Well, I'm not a huge fan of the ACA. That's probably because it was written in the 90's by the heritage foundation. I'm a much bigger proponent of a single-payer system, because...well all the objective research says that that is the cheapest way to overhaul our healthcare system. However, what I object to is the trigger-point demonization. Guy A proposes a solution. Guy B says no...solution B is better. Guy A says, ok, lets compromise and make a solution based off of solution B. Then Guy B turns to the country and says SOLUTION B IS PROOF THAT GUY A IS AN IDIOT, when in actuality, it was B's idea all along. The fact is, that despite my reservations, its working ok, and if it wasn't being attacked in asinine ways (multiple repeals, governors pulling funding of plans that would help their constituents all to make a political point, etc, etc) it'd probably be working even a bit better.
4) I hate your last few sentences on this. They read to me as intellectually dishonest. Of course there will all be bigots, and of course no amount of legislation will fix that. But then....when did anyone suggest legislation to make bigotry illegal? You're attacking a point that no one made. The only legislation suggested by anyone, is the laughable law that NC is currently doubling down on. I think this stupid law should go away, not be replaced by other legislation.
Side note to respond to your side note: Other than your belief that I called you a bigot (which I didn't) I didn't say anything inflammatory or condescending. I just completely disagree with many of your positions stated. I didn't suggest you should open a gay conversion clinic, and you know that. I merely pointed out the fallacy of choice when it comes to being a transsexual. The male, white ,Republican quip was made with the full knowledge that you aren't white (well, I thought you were black and not bi-racial, but there you are). It was merely me plugging the fact that despite what rhetoric you may here on the campaign trail, a single-payer system just makes sense to a large swath of people when looked at objectively and dispassionately.
As an additional side note, I hate the line of thinking where you can respond to a logical, well thought argument with "Stop being divisive." Much like the "class warfare" and "thats socialist" lines used to quash debate, its just a crappy crutch used in place of actual logic. Who gives a shit if my rhetoric is harsh if my point is valid?
Anyhow, back to spreadsheets I go.
Gave you a SB to balance out your MS. Don't see why people have to shit on (mostly) cool-headed debate.
The whole gender thing just boils down to tradition. Americans believe in virtues such as modesty, honesty, honor, and courage etc. I'm from the South and when a person says something, it's expected that they mean it. This breeds valuable business principles, as well as admirable leadership principles more generally speaking. Some of the greatest men in world history and U.S. history are from the South. Even Winston Churchill praised the people of the South. North Eastern people look down on folks from the South because their not as 'refined' and as 'educated'. But, I have great appreciation for the man that knows what honor is. This whole progressive stuff has let the honorable tradition of the past fade from the text. Tradition is not for nothing; it is one's identity, held on by those not easily waned by external parties. This is very respectable, though no one would dare admit it. Remember that it takes conviction to succeed as an entrepreneur, as a pivotal social influence, and as a trail blazer. It was admirable that Lincoln, a southerner, pushed through in the American Civil War to unify the country. It was also admirable that the South would not give in without a fight, no matter how despicable their beliefs. As today is full of bullshit PC folks, there is no reason to be appalled that this is an issue for many people, nor do I believe it is something that should just be pushed under the rug, to die a PC death. This is a legit issue that has to do with culture and social interactions. At least it is to me and I have not even looked twice at this thing. I just know where I come from and what we all stand for back home.
I'm sure I'm not the only who has been to the Smith for Brunch in NYC.
At first the one large co-ed bathroom was kind of weird but then you realize your taking a piss next to a hot hungover NYC hipster chick and the idea doesn't seem so bad.
Not enough real estate in NYC for dual RR.
Honestly? This is what I hate about the idea of single-sex bathrooms. I don't want to think of the hot chick taking a dump. That's not an association that I appreciate. This is quite literally the ideal scenario that liberal Democrats want to force onto society so that 0.3% of the population doesn't have their feelings hurt. It's un-fucking-believable.
I mean, sure, fat chicks and ugly chicks take dumps. But hot chicks? Wow. I can't believe you even wrote that.
Did you learn biology in a trailer park home school or do you just hate beautiful people?
I'm a little perturbed that people give this much of a shit about this. Both sides are escalating something that just doesn't matter - the informal system in place worked, and formally protecting / ending people's right to choose isn't helping anyone.
I really, really, really, wish we could get back to having a government that focused on real problems.
Agree with this 100%.
This issue is really just a Shibboleth.
I think next WSO poll should be if Virginia Technology is a closet socialist
Officia eum doloribus laudantium. Voluptate est iusto nobis voluptate reprehenderit. Dolor nesciunt officia maiores. Laudantium veritatis sed id eius nostrum velit.
Neque aut et vel consequatur. Beatae aut vel consectetur omnis sit et. Rerum ad inventore labore reprehenderit. Possimus quia quis quae numquam in et aut.
A est ex qui ducimus quibusdam. Nobis sit est tempore excepturi eum enim quae.
Voluptas inventore dolorem sapiente illo deleniti. Quia unde ut molestias eaque. Natus facilis facilis et qui qui. Natus sed suscipit facere impedit earum maxime fuga.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Esse laudantium aut ad nostrum ipsam earum deserunt voluptas. Omnis sint ullam dolore.
Architecto a suscipit delectus a at. Quidem deserunt aut culpa ratione aut.
Laborum facere sit quidem voluptates quis. At voluptatem quidem necessitatibus nemo voluptatem. In aliquam voluptas dolore eligendi esse repudiandae.
Facilis omnis rerum et repellat veritatis velit impedit. Similique qui necessitatibus qui omnis sit ipsam molestiae. Sapiente aspernatur optio impedit sit nisi eos.
Ipsam voluptate nostrum odio asperiores. Perspiciatis et dolore amet. Sed omnis quaerat tempora perspiciatis aut earum. Corrupti veritatis doloribus minus quae nihil.
Doloremque quidem eos voluptas soluta. Tenetur voluptatum aut ut. Cumque modi odio facere voluptatem vel veritatis. Atque aspernatur dignissimos qui. Eos labore sed sint velit quos. Maiores et ratione voluptatem sequi. Placeat omnis sed id.
Qui sit magni nobis porro natus libero. Quia qui blanditiis deserunt neque ut voluptatem. Soluta similique iusto nisi.
Modi quo architecto atque nemo et omnis. Vel id soluta sit dolorem dolorum harum. Sed illum ut dolor qui. Officiis illo suscipit et harum.