lostboy

You entirely miss the point about the language used by oppressors of minorities.

You also talk about men in women's toilets when that is not the issue. The law prohibits Trans females using female toilets. Your claim to any right not to see a man in a woman's toilet is beating up a complete non issue. Nobody is talking about that except for the bigots pushing for legislation to discriminate against minorities.

Just spoke with my wife. Here in Thailand, in her experience, ladyboys use the men's bathroom. Not the ladies. A trans gender female is still a male. Operation or not.

Transgenders are a minority. But it's a travesty to compare them to my minority Native American Indian tribe. As well as others.

As far as I know, the North Carolina legislation does not apply to Thai ladyboys. I am wondering what they have to do with anything. I am further wondering about your believe that your minority status gives your discrimination against Transgender people any validity. You have want evidence to make the statement that Transgender females are males?

If you want to argue which minority is the most oppressed then you will have to start another thread because it has nothing to do with this one. This thread is about laws that discriminates against LGBT people. The law allows employers to dismiss people who are gay. It denies LGBT people access to public funding. The toilet issue is a complete diversion.

You seem to only convince those established bigots who also reject the rights of other minorities to equality. Your last statement identifies you as part of the whole potty paranoia thing and not worth the time for serious people to make any rational responses.

President Obama, like everyone else, is entitled to his/her opinion. I, for one, happen to disagree.

As Americans, we all still have the right to partake in political discourse in the public square-whether real world or virtual. Unfortunately that right is at increased risk due to the tyranny of a fascistic minority that seeks to stifle free discussion and debate.

The non-logic behind this stupid bigoted homophobic law is preventing something that has never happened and odds are never will. All the restroom problems seem to be Republican Congressmen. There is no rational reason for laws like this except right wing bigotry. It is transgendered people that are and have been in danger. Maybe they should introduce some of those redneck crackers to some of the ladyboys over here. Mighty embarrassing to have to admit getting one's ass kicked by a transgendered woman...lol.

Interesting post above.

The poster uses the words "bigoted" and "bigotry" but then follows up with the racial slur, "red neck crackers".

Secondly, the point of the post seems to be that transgenders pose no threat, but then imagines someone getting physically assaulted by transgenders. And then laughs about it.

If you don't like being called bigoted, simple solution - don't be a bigot. Don't promote hatred against minorities.

sgtsabai is a member of a minority group. He is allowed to use race references. You are not. Deal with it.

This is not a freedom of speech issue. This is freedom from discrimination issue. The President of the United States understands this. You and your fellow potty paranoics do not.

Being a member of a minority groups gives you no special privilege to be a bigot. It's 100% wrong. Sinclair's post is spot on.

I'm from a minority group. I have rights also, as does my wife...to not see men in her toilet.

You entirely miss the point about the language used by oppressors of minorities.

You also talk about men in women's toilets when that is not the issue. The law prohibits Trans females using female toilets. Your claim to any right not to see a man in a woman's toilet is beating up a complete non issue. Nobody is talking about that except for the bigots pushing for legislation to discriminate against minorities.

More than 182,000 people have signed a pledge to boycott Target after the retailer said it would welcome transgender customers to use any bathroom or fitting room that matches their gender identity.

The boycott pledge was started by the conservative American Family Association (AFA).

"Target's policy is exactly how sexual predators get access to their victims," AFA President Tim Wildmon said in an open letter. "This means a man can simply say he 'feels like a woman today' and enter the women's restroom ... even if young girls or women are already in there."

http://www.businessinsider.com/target-boycott-over-transgender-bathroom-policy-2016-4

Target has 1,793 stores in the US. Its global workforce is 341,000. The numbers who signed this petition are only about half the size of the workforce. https://corporate.target.com/press/corporate

Not very impressive.

How many transactions would be required to reach the $72.6 billion in revenue in 2014 https://corporate.target.com/annual-reports/2014/financials/financial-highlights

Why should we be concerned with the views and beliefs of such an insignificant proportion of the Target customer population.

Do all of these people who pledge to boycott Target actually shop there? The median age of the Target customer is aged 40. So they are millennial, you know, the ones that don't support religious bigotry and discrimination. 57% of them are college educated, so you know, not the ones who only have their minds on potty issues.

So who are these people? Well you don't provide any information beyond citing the promoters of this 'boycott' as one of the very religious bigot organisations that form the coalition of support for the anti LGBT legislation. Another organisation with strong voices of bigotry and hatred is the Family Research Council. You know, the one that appointed Josh Duggar as an office holder of the organisation. The FRC, which routinely argues that LGBT people should not work with children appointed a member of a religious bigot family who confessed to sexually abusing his sisters in their family home - not even in a female toilet. FRC, AFA, all these religious bigots harbouring sex offenders at the same time they discriminate against LGBT people.

180K people? Five times more people signed the petition to keep Trump out of the UK. Again, why take notice of such a small percentage, an insignificant number, a trivial representative group of Target non-shoppers?

North Carolina has made provisions in the law for these people to use single stall bathrooms. This is entirely fair to all concerned.

If they aren't available, it is most certainly not.

There are single stall, handicapped bathrooms everywhere in the US. These people can use the handicapped single stall toilets when no other single stall bathrooms are available. If the good people of North Carolina need to change an existing law to allow this, I think that they would.

And guess what. If there is no handicapped bathroom available in that particular building, they're just going to have to hold like normal people always do when there isn't a bathroom available.

Again, let's remember that we're talking about less than 1% of the entire population. Most credible data puts it at 1/3 of 1%.

This is minoritarianism run amok.

Transgender people are not handicapped. Calling them so is discriminatory. The good people of North Carolina are getting their butts kicked over this issue.

Still with the mind in the toilet. Still making up pseudo-intellectual terms to try and justify your bigotry. The moderator of this thread was right, you can't fix stupid.

http://www.glaad.org/reference/transgender

Thanks for that, though I still can't say for certain I know what transgender means. Would I be correct in saying this is a gay person?

I cannot believe that you are seriously asking this question. Access to information has never been so easy. There is no excuse for any question such as this unless it is being deliberately incendiary.

Taking the comment at face value, here is a reference prepared by psychiatrists who are also LGBT people http://www.aglp.org/pages/LGBTFactSheets.php

This battle in the culture war ended last year with SCOTUS. The trans potty paranoia is just a feeble attempt at pushback by the religious bigots. It will soon pass. Their opinion is a minority, marginal viewpoint that is not accepted by the majority of people.

Yes, it is a sincere question. I don't understand what is a transgender person if it is not a gay or transexual person. Is it a transvestite? I can't think of too many other options.

I would imagine that very few, in fact almost no posters on TVF would have a definitive answer on this issue. I am not Trans so neither do I. However, I have read somewhat about LGBT issues.

Transsexual seems to be an older reference, possibly used at a time when the understanding of Trans issues was slim. What has become clear is that sexual orientation i.e. the LGB is not the same as gender identity i.e. the T.

Also, in my opinion, there was some confusion at the time of the word transexual having currency about the difference between cross dressers, which seems to be a psycho-sexual characteristics and transgenders. It is now understood that Transgender is the more acceptable term.

In my view the key difference is that Transgenderism is probably genetic while Cross Dressing and similar activities are an expression of sexuality, not necessarily homosexuality but in any case not related to gender identity.

"This paper represents the first comprehensive review of the scientific evidence that gender identity is a biological phenomenon," explains corresponding author Joshua D. Safer, MD, FACP. "As such it provides one of the most convincing arguments to date for all medical providers to gain the transgender medicine skills necessary to provide good care for these individuals," he added. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150213112317.htm

While not everything is known and LGBT studies is still in its infancy, it seems that what scientific research has been done supports my view.

LGBT people are connected because we are genetically destined to be the way we are. There is absolutely no reason why people should say we are abnormal and absolutely no reason why we should not be treated equally under the law and maintain our human right to dignity as people.

The 1st Article of the Declaration of Universal Human Rights is:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

Headlines last month in Charlotte, North Carolina

“The NBA is dedicated to creating an inclusive environment for all who attend our games and events,” the league said in the statement. “We are deeply concerned that this discriminatory law runs counter to our guiding principles of equality and mutual respect, and do not yet know what impact it will have on our ability to successfully host the 2017 All-Star Game in Charlotte.”

The backlash, the Movement that the bigots predict? Well it is seems like it is going the wrong way. For them.

In any case, I may well be a B. That's the thing. Not everything is known. The role of Genetics. The role of Environment. Serious study into sex and sexuality didn't really start until the 50's. Even Freud's view was mainly supposition.

So you admit that not everything is known and that serious study is in its infancy, yet you are forcefully advocating for this experiment to continue.

In my opinion, this is a perilously cavalier attitude to have. But it's certainly within your rights to have that attitude, and I would never support anyone denying your right to express it. But those of us who have wives, girlfriends and daughters can't afford to be so cavalier. We have legitimate concerns about this and prefer to proceed cautiously.

Not only are you wrong about me but you are wrong about others with your parochial 'fathers of daughters, husbands of wives' line of attack.

"Here's what I do not worry about: I don't worry about her being attacked in a restroom by a trans woman because (a) it has never happened; and ( trans women are the most victimized group of people I've ever met, and the least likely to commit a crime of indecency in a restroom, because they are afraid of getting beat up when all they want to do is pee. And here is something else I don't worry about: I don't worry about my daughter being cruel and inhumane to trans men, women or kids, because my wife and I have raised her to have values and because she is a kind person."

https://www.facebook.com/steve.rudner/posts/10154115477302929

Father of a 21 year old daughter. A Texas attorney. A member of the Board of Director of Equality Texas.

Someone who actually 'gets it'.

In any case, I may well be a B. That's the thing. Not everything is known. The role of Genetics. The role of Environment. Serious study into sex and sexuality didn't really start until the 50's. Even Freud's view was mainly supposition.

So you admit that not everything is known and that serious study is in its infancy, yet you are forcefully advocating for this experiment to continue.

In my opinion, this is a perilously cavalier attitude to have. But it's certainly within your rights to have that attitude, and I would never support anyone denying your right to express it. But those of us who have wives, girlfriends and daughters can't afford to be so cavalier. We have legitimate concerns about this and prefer to proceed cautiously.

You have what entitlement to put words in my mouth? You have what basis to claim I am saying anything? I have never supported your contention that this is an experiment. You know this, yet you attempt to implicate me in this toilet diversion. Your opinion of my attitude is entirely irrelevant. I certainly don't give a toss if you think it is cavalier or not. And your theme of Defender of Women crashed and burned long ago.

Just sent my daughter back up North with her mother this morning after a delayed Songkran in Bangkok. Visited many shopping centres. We all used the toilets. Not concerned for one moment if a Trans female was going to use the ladies. Why? Because I, like everyone else who is not an agenda driven bigot knows that there has never been a case of a Trans person using access to a female toilet for sexual predation of females.

On the issue of knowledge about sexuality and gender identity, I was not address comments to you. You have demonstrated no capacity to grasp simple facts about LGBT issues. You may not take my words and use them for your own mission to promote hate and discrimination against minorities.

http://www.glaad.org/reference/transgender

Thanks for that, though I still can't say for certain I know what transgender means. Would I be correct in saying this is a gay person?

I cannot believe that you are seriously asking this question. Access to information has never been so easy. There is no excuse for any question such as this unless it is being deliberately incendiary.

Taking the comment at face value, here is a reference prepared by psychiatrists who are also LGBT people http://www.aglp.org/pages/LGBTFactSheets.php

This battle in the culture war ended last year with SCOTUS. The trans potty paranoia is just a feeble attempt at pushback by the religious bigots. It will soon pass. Their opinion is a minority, marginal viewpoint that is not accepted by the majority of people.

Presidential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz weighed in on the North Carolina law yesterday:

"Grown adult men — strangers— should not be alone in a bathroom with little girls. And that's not conservative. That's not Republican or Democrat. That's basic common sense."

I agree with Senator Cruz. Some might disagree, and that's fine. But what those that disagree can't do is ban us from the public square and prohibit us from expressing our opinion on this topic.

What we're witnessing in North Carolina is minoritarianism at its insidious worst. 1/2 of 1% forcing the majority to bend to its beliefs by means of extortion. It's unconscionable and it is my hope that it will be met with equal push back.

80% of people under the age of 34 support LGBT equality. What is this minoritarianism that you talk about. Just making up words to go with made up data. The number of minority people does not lessen their equality under the law. To argue otherwise is clearly bigotry.

Hate speech must be removed from the public square. Those who promote hate speech and discrimination against minorities must bear legal and social consequences. The KKK has learned the lesson the hard way. Anti-semites, Racists, Homophobes, Transphobes, Misogynists all of them. You are not fighting for liberty but against it. You are fighting for discrimination. None of this belongs in the public square. You sound like Santorum and you know what his name is now a by-word for. Cruz is even more of a creep than Santorum. His comments on this matter are not worth a response.

Nope. Just curious how this bathroom issue has affected you personally. You seem incredibly interested about what's happening in MS and NC so curiosity got the better of me.

Which toilet do you use in Afghanistan?

Why would not a gay man be interested in religious groups pushing states to pass laws that discriminate against LGBT people? I am surprised you asked.

Last time I visited the US Embassy, I used the toilet there. It is a single occupancy, unisex and handicapped access facility. Now you can go on about the Lefty State Department types. The toilets in the government offices are best avoided. They are like toilets in Vietnam and China were in the late 80's, early 90's.

Since you are a 'G' and not a 'T', I guess that makes my burka question redundant.

Ta.

You thought I was trans? Sorry to disabuse you. However since the T is in LGBT, I am apparently in a political alliance with Trans people. I watched this evolve over my life and I have my own views on this. Sexual Orientation is not the same as Gender Identity but the impact of discrimination and the rights of that minority to equality and dignity remain the same.

I know of some larrikin types who have gone out in public in a burqa. In my youth I participated in fund raising events by my aussie rules footy team which involved male football players putting on dresses, mainly tutus for extra effect. That has never been my thing. Afghanistan, indeed any non developed, non western country really has no relevance to the issues on this thread. The false equivalency being argued about Saudi Arabia and such is clearly diversionary.

In any case, I may well be a B. That's the thing. Not everything is known. The role of Genetics. The role of Environment. Serious study into sex and sexuality didn't really start until the 50's. Even Freud's view was mainly supposition. What is clear is that such topics represent a significant threat to many straight while males. The fear, anxiety and paranoia represented on this thread is palpable. Well, welcome to the world of LGBT people in having to confront reality and a hostile, dangerous and often violent society.

All men are forced to use mens toilets.

So what?

Is this something you just discovered?

I'll tell you something else astounding - women have to use womens toilets too.

This is the way it has been and the way it should be.

Congratulations. You've just done an absolutely first class job of demonstrating that you do not have a clue what this thread is even about.

Although I really thought that when I posted that under a comment referring to "trans men" that a little light bulb might have gone off, but there you go.

And in case you don't know what a transgender woman is either, which I suspect is the case:

Nope not at all confused. I know full well what a transexual is. You are simply reading something that isn't there.

Allow me to recap.

Women can use womens toilets.

Men can use mens toilets.

A man in a dress is still a man. Hence, he uses the mens toilets. I don't mind sharing.

Now - when the LGBT community screams 'oppression' because girls will be boys and boys will be girls, and they want to swap toilets, well - you don't always get your way just because you throw your toys out of your pram and call everyone a bigot or an idiot.

More potty paranoia. More shallow, superficial, discriminatory hate speech against transgender people. References to men in dresses in relation to the issue of transgender people has already been ruled off topic and deleted. Yet here it emerges again.

Why are you talking about transexuals? This topic is about Transgnder. Who cares if you claim you know about transexuals since they are nothing to do with this topic.

Your persistent and wilful misrepresentation of the issue is hate speech directed against a minority. Unless of course you are demonstrating the actual depth of your comprehension of these matters. Then it is you who need treatment instead of censure.

For the benefit of those who might be taken in by your hate speech:

"not allowing trans youth to use a bathroom only perpetuates feelings of isolation or depression that lead 41% of transgender people to attempt kill themselves at some point in their lives, compared to the 4.6% in the general population." http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/24/north-carolina-anti-transgender-bathroom-law-dangerous-discrimination

And people like you actually feel proud of their bigotry.

Personal experiences of my black friend, in a band that travels thru the area.

Well your undocumented anecdote is not believable ... I toured the South East U.S. in 2013 in my motor home using mostly back road ... 4000 miles of going through Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia - North and South Carolina and Alabama ... going into truck stops, cafes, service stations,etc. I never saw one incident as you describe. In fact I saw the reverse ... blacks and white integrating in public venues.

Your opinion is garbage.

What a classy -- no what a low brow comeback ... I saw hundreds of places over a month long trip all over the South of the U.S. with my own eyes for over 4000 miles of mostly back roads. And you pretend that some stories you heard from some friend are the truth beyond reproach ... hhahahahahahahahahahahah

You only saw what you expected to see. You are white. You do not experience racism or discrimination as do other minorities.

"Surrounded by a world that makes it clear that white people are only a minority part of the picture, we nevertheless go on making movies in which nearly everybody is white" http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0223-grimsley-white-conversations-racism-20160223-story.html

Why is it that even blind people can be racist and blind black people know when they are being discriminated against?

"Racism – both the personal kind and the systemic kind– isn’t necessarily triggered by the visual cue of another person’s skin color. Racism is about the social value we assign to people and their actions based on their physical attributes, and neither blind nor colorblind people avoid that acculturation just because they lack the visual cues." http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/26/do-not-see-race-ignoring-racism-not-helping

I would most certainly not give any credence to your holiday 'experience' in the face of actual personal experience of minorities. You only see what you expect to see. It is your white privilege.

This controversy has hardly even started. People in America do not want to change societal norms that have existed since well before the nation was founded to accommodate less than 1% of the population that destroys the privacy rights of the 99%. This controversy goes well beyond being fueled by the Christian Religion. The actions by retread celebrates only increases the resolve of the actual citizen voters in each state to push for more legislation. The legislation will be taken up by state after state until the celebrates will eventually have to boycott 30 states and mores . At that point if they keep their vows they may have to retire or focus their concerts where they already continue to perform such as in Middle Eastern countries were arrest, stoning and outright killing of gays and transvestites is a monthly occurrence. Their moral outrage does not seem to extend outside the USA.

It seems to me that a rationale that is based on the idea that the discrimination has been going on for a long time so it should continue and that only a small fraction of the population is affected is not really the basis for a credible argument against change.

Physically handicapped people demanded access to public facilities and now nobody thinks twice about wheelchair ramps or separate restrooms for them. Children with autism or other challenges are provided extra resources to accommodate their special education needs. Advanced societies consciously make provisions for minorities all the time. Just because a minority is a minority does not diminish their right to equality and dignity.

This fantasy civil reaction against LGBT equality that you keep going on about - well, this is not how history works. Surprising for someone who fetishises select parts of the US Constitution. The process for LGBT equality is almost concluded. The change has happened at lightening speed. In my opinion, contributing factors were the coming out of LGBT people until it was obvious that almost everyone knew or knows an LGBT person as a person not as a symbol of hate and discrimination and the next generation of citizens overwhelmingly flatly embrace inclusiveness irrespective of race, sexual orientation or gender identity.

There will be no boycotts by the fringe right. The existing anti LGBT laws will be overturned on Constitutional grounds. And live for we minorities will continue without the harassment and haranguing of old straight white male reactionaries.

No my words do not - you just want to twist words and create a false meaning to my post. Less that 1% just does not rise to the occasion to change societal norms... There is not a Constitutional right for someone born of one sex to change their minds about their identity (the gender confused) then demand access to public restrooms of a gender that they actually are not. A good portion of the people wanting to do this are not true trans-gendered people. Rather there are more who are just transvestites taking advantage of the controversy (all of their male equipment is still intact under the skirt) Others are perverts who just want to dress up like women to get access to little girls or even little boys. The big problem with this issue - is it is the Person who says and not even out loud of course that they are are trans-gendered and it can be anyone - trans-gendered - transvestite or pervert ... There is not going to be any litmus test as to who goes in a restroom under wide open laws to protect trans-gendered people. Fathers and Mothers - husbands and wives (VOTERS) want to protect their children from the perverts who will abuse wide open laws to molest and rape women and children. If you think the 99% of Americans are going to give up the right of privacy and protection to grant less than 1% special privileges -- then you live on another planet.

You make a Constitutional argument AGAINST transgender people using public restrooms. You are certainly correct that we occupy completely different planets but I'm afraid that your planet is fast going the way of Krypton. All of your hysterical scare scenarios are just a complete nonsense and your understanding of trans issues equates to that of a 3 year old. I have posted links to the American Psychiatric Association information on LGBT issues. Why not start with actual real information from learned, credentialed and scholarly observers instead of your silliness about transvestites and such.

The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Many view it as the attempt to uphold the professed “all men are created equal” clause written in the Constitution. The Equal protection law implies that no State has the right to deny anyone within jurisdiction equal protection of the law.

http://constitution.laws.com/equal-protection-clause

That is my argument FOR LGBT people to not be subject to discrimination on religious grounds, or any other grounds for that matter.

Your metrics for what rises to the level of changing 'societal norms' is based on what rationale? What defence can you provide that what you claim are societal norms are actually societal norms. Your perception of societal norms, you view on what is or is not acceptable conduct is learned behaviour. It is inculcated into young people by others with cultural biases and prejudices. It does not stand up to an analysis of justice, equality and dignity. The same arguments were used against African Americans, Indigenous Americans, Gays, Lesbians etc. Just pick a minority.

No twisting of words. I took them exactly as you delivered them and reflected them back. It is a common technique. I am certain that you are the type of person who would appreciate the opportunity to learn more about reflective listening from this source http://cultureofempathy.com/projects/Empathy-Movement/References/Reflective-Listening.htm

If you don't like the way your words sound, then maybe it is time to choose other ones.

Lostboy:

Just curious when were you last in the US?

Well chuckd, you wouldn't be wanting to get information to use against me would you?

July 2014 was my last visit. I had been going there annually since 2008 for my work with a Thai agency and dealt mainly with government officials, regulators and energy industry corporates. The 2014 visit included meetings with gas industry people in Dallas, Houston and Freeport. I hadn't been to Texas since 1981 so that was fun. We finished up in Boston when the General sent a message overnight ordering everyone back to Bangkok for dismissal. So that was also fun. We cancelled all the meetings and went shopping at Wrentham Outlet Mall.

My current work still engages me with government officials and bankers in the US, predominantly Washington DC.

I have met a number of actual Republicans. I knew this because they were appointed by their Party to various government Commissions but I did not socialise with them beyond official receptions. I only ever socialised with an self admitted Republican in Afghanistan when I visited the US Embassy but he was a self declared "California Republican" and was pro decriminalisation of marijuana and not really into the other culture wars.

Interestingly, I catch up with a young Afghan American in Kabul. He is an MBA working for ISAF and I meet him because ISAF has the best coffee shop in Kabul. He was saying that most of the Afghans he knows going to the US now, don't go to the 2 main communities in California and Washington DC but to Texas. They do this because all the Americans they knew from Afghanistan come from Texas so they think that they will be well received there!

Anyway, this is all very much off topic. I guess you are angling for some information so you can say that I have no idea about what is going on in America at the moment. Firstly, it is necessary for my career/vocation to maintain close links with certain agencies in the US and, secondly, my assessment of the response to issues such as the LGBT debate comes from engagement with younger people both professionally and personally. They just absolutely reject the whole minority discrimination thing. You may call them naive or inexperienced or whatever but this is a cultural sea change as big as the sexual liberation of your generation in the 60's (that's if you were on the right side of history back then with the bra burning, LSD and Woodstock).

Anyway, make of the above what you will. I am sure there will be some zinger bouncing back or some humbly presented outrageous news article from the Right Wing machine.

Nope. Just curious how this bathroom issue has affected you personally. You seem incredibly interested about what's happening in MS and NC so curiosity got the better of me.

Which toilet do you use in Afghanistan?

Why would not a gay man be interested in religious groups pushing states to pass laws that discriminate against LGBT people? I am surprised you asked.

Last time I visited the US Embassy, I used the toilet there. It is a single occupancy, unisex and handicapped access facility. Now you can go on about the Lefty State Department types. The toilets in the government offices are best avoided. They are like toilets in Vietnam and China were in the late 80's, early 90's.

In the Carolinas there are many, many restaurants and bars where blacks still cant go into with their white friends. Still. This is not just racism... it is race hatred.

You witnessed this of course -- took photos I am sure... Or did you hear about the accusation on some left wing blog? I suppose you have some relatively recent - like in last decade reputable news articles to back up your claim - don't young. If you can produce some real evidence of your accusation I will be glad to stand corrected...

I can't contribute to this I'm sorry Cousin Eddie. I only ever went to Arby's when I went below the Mason-Dixon line. Wouldn't eat what they call food there of course, just go to use the restrooms. Plenty of African Americans and the special sort of White Male in those places.

Didn't really see any other Queers. Well, at least not in the open. Certainly no trans people.

Lostboy:

Just curious when were you last in the US?

Well chuckd, you wouldn't be wanting to get information to use against me would you?

July 2014 was my last visit. I had been going there annually since 2008 for my work with a Thai agency and dealt mainly with government officials, regulators and energy industry corporates. The 2014 visit included meetings with gas industry people in Dallas, Houston and Freeport. I hadn't been to Texas since 1981 so that was fun. We finished up in Boston when the General sent a message overnight ordering everyone back to Bangkok for dismissal. So that was also fun. We cancelled all the meetings and went shopping at Wrentham Outlet Mall.

My current work still engages me with government officials and bankers in the US, predominantly Washington DC.

I have met a number of actual Republicans. I knew this because they were appointed by their Party to various government Commissions but I did not socialise with them beyond official receptions. I only ever socialised with an self admitted Republican in Afghanistan when I visited the US Embassy but he was a self declared "California Republican" and was pro decriminalisation of marijuana and not really into the other culture wars.

Interestingly, I catch up with a young Afghan American in Kabul. He is an MBA working for ISAF and I meet him because ISAF has the best coffee shop in Kabul. He was saying that most of the Afghans he knows going to the US now, don't go to the 2 main communities in California and Washington DC but to Texas. They do this because all the Americans they knew from Afghanistan come from Texas so they think that they will be well received there!

Anyway, this is all very much off topic. I guess you are angling for some information so you can say that I have no idea about what is going on in America at the moment. Firstly, it is necessary for my career/vocation to maintain close links with certain agencies in the US and, secondly, my assessment of the response to issues such as the LGBT debate comes from engagement with younger people both professionally and personally. They just absolutely reject the whole minority discrimination thing. You may call them naive or inexperienced or whatever but this is a cultural sea change as big as the sexual liberation of your generation in the 60's (that's if you were on the right side of history back then with the bra burning, LSD and Woodstock).

Anyway, make of the above what you will. I am sure there will be some zinger bouncing back or some humbly presented outrageous news article from the Right Wing machine.

This controversy has hardly even started. People in America do not want to change societal norms that have existed since well before the nation was founded to accommodate less than 1% of the population that destroys the privacy rights of the 99%. This controversy goes well beyond being fueled by the Christian Religion. The actions by retread celebrates only increases the resolve of the actual citizen voters in each state to push for more legislation. The legislation will be taken up by state after state until the celebrates will eventually have to boycott 30 states and mores . At that point if they keep their vows they may have to retire or focus their concerts where they already continue to perform such as in Middle Eastern countries were arrest, stoning and outright killing of gays and transvestites is a monthly occurrence. Their moral outrage does not seem to extend outside the USA.

It seems to me that a rationale that is based on the idea that the discrimination has been going on for a long time so it should continue and that only a small fraction of the population is affected is not really the basis for a credible argument against change.

Physically handicapped people demanded access to public facilities and now nobody thinks twice about wheelchair ramps or separate restrooms for them. Children with autism or other challenges are provided extra resources to accommodate their special education needs. Advanced societies consciously make provisions for minorities all the time. Just because a minority is a minority does not diminish their right to equality and dignity.

This fantasy civil reaction against LGBT equality that you keep going on about - well, this is not how history works. Surprising for someone who fetishises select parts of the US Constitution. The process for LGBT equality is almost concluded. The change has happened at lightening speed. In my opinion, contributing factors were the coming out of LGBT people until it was obvious that almost everyone knew or knows an LGBT person as a person not as a symbol of hate and discrimination and the next generation of citizens overwhelmingly flatly embrace inclusiveness irrespective of race, sexual orientation or gender identity.

There will be no boycotts by the fringe right. The existing anti LGBT laws will be overturned on Constitutional grounds. And live for we minorities will continue without the harassment and haranguing of old straight white male reactionaries.

A transgender person is not a Man who thinks he is a Woman.

What?

That has to be typo.

If it's not a typo, I really look forward to you explaining how a "transgender" person is not a man who thinks he is a woman.

From the American Psychiatric Association. Here is the Report of the APA Task Force on Gender Identity and Gener Variance where they discuss terminology.

"Is it preferable to call dissatisfaction with one’s primary and secondary sex characteristics sex dysphoria (arguably more accurate) or gender dysphoria (the established term of art in the field)? Are pretransition adult female-to-male transsexuals more appropriately called biologic females (arguably more consistent with their identities) or women (arguably more consistent with usual APA style, and not redundant)? In our report, we attempted to balance the competing goals of consistency, recognition of established terms of art, respect for the expectations of scholars in related disciplines, and respect for the identities of transgender persons while realizing that our use of terminology will inevitably not please everyone at every point."

http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/policy/gender-identity-report.pdf Page 12

Your puerile, childish references to 'Trannies', your references to Men in Dresses, your contempt for the idea of Identity and this nonsense above with the silly emoticons in response to an issue that affects real people. All of this is the hallmark of a Troll.

For those who do not wish to strip away the dignity of a group of fellow human beings because of some pathetic inability to grasp the idea of Difference, I would highlight the concerns of the APA to:

1. Respect the expectations of scholars in related disciplines; and,
2. Respect the identities of transgender persons

This is what serious discussion is about. Your Tranny Toilet fetish is abnormal, infantile and disrespectful.

Why don't you read the report? You might possibly learn something. However, whatever you do, realise that you do not dictate the agenda of those you seek to oppress with your bigotry. Rule Number One of Identity Politics. If you attempt to do so, you reveal your Powerlessness and are made to look small and stupid.

An thought provoking take on this contentious topic is below.

I've only copied the first 3 sentences of the article, and it's worth clicking through to read the entire thing.

The rules of bigotry, according to the left, represent a constantly shifting kaleidoscope of nonsense.

This week, we learned that if you don't want your small daughter sharing a restroom with a man who thinks he is a woman, you are a bigot; if you are a woman who is uncomfortable with a man who thinks he is a woman whipping out his male genitalia to urinate in front of you, you are a bigot; if you are a religious person who doesn't want to participate in an activity you consider sinful, you are a bigot.

Conversely, if you are a man who thinks he is a woman and you want to force a small girl to pee next to you, you are a freedom fighter; if you are a large man who thinks he is a woman and you want to be one of the girls, right down to hulking into a Macy's ladies room, you are a hero; if you are a gay man and you want to force a religious person to serve you, you are a hero.

http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/ben-shapiro/your-daughter-must-share-restroom-man-and-you-will-be-compelled-agree

Extremist, alarmist garbage from the Right Wing propaganda voices posing as 'news' services.

A transgender person is not a Man who thinks he is a Woman.

Gay men have every right to be treated as all other citizens without discrimination.

Just an anti-leftist, anti LGBT rant by some anonymous nobody. When will people get their minds out of the toilets and the bakeries? Are such people incapable of mature thought? it seems so.

This might be of interest to some:

Target: Use the bathroom of your 'gender identity' identity'

Who will undoubtedly be interested are the shareholders of Target stock, because many groups will likely be organizing a boycott of Target stores. If the boycott catches on (and none of us know if it will or not), it will be interesting to watch what happens.

What boycott? There is none. There will be none except from the looney fringe like One Millions Moms Iactually just a few dozen now because all their funding dried up after the SCOTUS marriage equality decision) and similar.

In fact Target being an 'early mover' on this issue will increase its sales by supporters of equality. The Shareholders know this and this is why the Board of Directors who represent the shareholders support this decision.

There will be few reports of anything because this is the new normal. Nothing out of the ordinary. Just people going about their business and not trying to take away the rights of fellow citizens. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the 'backlash'.

There are now almost no commercial activities that any private citizen can do in America that does not require some kind of license or permit from a State Authority (and in The State not A State). Irrespective of the extent of reach government has into the activities of private businesses and corporations, the precedent is set that private businesses are not free or have no right to do what they want.

If denying service to a minority places that business in conflict with their licensing provisions or other legislative instruments, then such businesses must be penalised. The role of the government is to ensure a level playing field and non discrimination for all its citizent. Debt Management is a strategy, not an objective or a public 'value'.

I have never heard of any baker that has refused to bake a cake for gay people. They have rejected the theme of the cake, but they will still bake a cake for gay people.

I wonder what would happen if hardcore Christians went to gay bakeries and asked for cakes that had some anti-gay Bblical quote on it?

I wonder if any baker would be required to bake a cake for the American Nazi Party (yes, one exists) with evil Nazi slogans on it?

What is a gay bakery? Is there some special marking that indicates the bakery's gayness?

What is it with the cakes? I am sure that gay people who may also be bakers and perhaps operate a commercial entity called a bakery, would happily write a verse from Leviticus for 'hardcore' - you know what that means right? - christians just as they will probably be happy to put a pink triangle on a cake for American Nazis. Those people, will of course have watched The Blues Brothers and seen John Belushi and Dan Ackroyd's views on Nazis. So don't worry about gay bakeries and cakes for Christians or Nazis. In fact don't worry about cakes or flowers or anything like that. Worry about the real discrimination.

You are aware that the North Carolina law allows employees who are straight to be dismissed if they support same sex marriage? You are aware that LGBT people can be denied access to public facilities. These issues are real, not like the cake stories or the toilet stories. Replace the term LGBT with any racial minority and would you then take this seriously?

Wonder about gay bakeries if you like. If you find one, please point it out to the rest of us because I am quite certain none exist in the world. But the persistent trivialisation of the issues of LGBT youth who are bullied and now denied access to support services, of LGBT employees whose livelihoods are at risk and many other circumstances of discrimination in the name of 'sincerely held belief' are stirring massive backlashes from people who recognise the fundamental unfairness of this treatment of fellow citizens.

Numbers of people who identify as religious have been steadily diminishing. The bigotry and latest salvo in the culture wars that were lost in 2015 is backfiring. Badly. It is not just Springsteen. it is a counter-reformation.

Bruce Springsteen has refused a paid service based on his belief that people should not be allowed to refuse a paid service based on their beliefs.

Hypocrite.

An oroboros is a mythical serpent or dragon eating its own tail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros

Just like the above post. You have twisted your logic to such an extent that you are now eating your own tail. You clearly have no formal training in Rhetoric. "Circular logic is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

https://www.google.co.th/imgres?imgurl=https://openclipart.org/image/2400px/svg_to_png/215030/Ouroboros.png&imgrefurl=https://openclipart.org/detail/215030/ouroboros&h=2400&w=2400&tbnid=ca8-Hn23msWpwM:&tbnh=160&tbnw=160&docid=yFPMUWhnCgRnYM&itg=1&client=safari&usg=__Y96Ou8ARAX-_mi0RjWa_WYjsask=&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAzJzujJ_MAhWIFJQKHTmZBiUQ9QEIJDAA

Bruce Springsteen has refused a paid service based on his belief that people should not be allowed to refuse a paid service based on their beliefs.

Hypocrite.

No, it would only be hypocritical if he refused to let anyone that agreed with the law into his concert. If the baker does not want to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, then he/she should stop making wedding cakes altogether.

Nice try though...

TH

Private businesses should be able to choose who they serve. Gov't should stay out of it, that is not their job or responsibility. They have a hard enough time doing the job they are authorized to do under the Constitution.

Private citizens have all the right in the world to protest or publicly shame private businesses. Do it right and the business might be pressured to change their policies. Private citizens being threatened by the gov't to change should scare any citizen regardless of race, religion, politics or, yes, gender identification.

As hypocritical as Springsteen & Bryan Adams are (no problem playing in countries that outlaw LGT all together and maybe even assign the death penalty for it), at least they are private citizens and have the right to do what they are doing. Other private citizens can choose to support them or not...to buy their music or not.

What is the role of gov't? They should be figuring out how to get the country out of debt, enact policies to get people back to work, etc.

The role of government? Government is a consumer of money to provide services for citizens. Money for government comes from taxing transactions and borrowing. Debt underpins the capitalist economy. It is always humorous to watch all the right wing ideologues acting as rapid debt hawks on this issue.

There are now almost no commercial activities that any private citizen can do in America that does not require some kind of license or permit from a State Authority (and in The State not A State). Irrespective of the extent of reach government has into the activities of private businesses and corporations, the precedent is set that private businesses are not free or have no right to do what they want.

If denying service to a minority places that business in conflict with their licensing provisions or other legislative instruments, then such businesses must be penalised. The role of the government is to ensure a level playing field and non discrimination for all its citizent. Debt Management is a strategy, not an objective or a public 'value'.

I specifically referred to transgender people and they are not the same thing AT ALL. Transgenders are not even necessarily gay. Only transgenders suffer from gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder, not typical homosexuals.

So your position is that LGBT people are not normal?

Post 168. Your words copied and pasted here exactly - "F430murci is just a normal hetero-sexual guy and he seems disgusted"

If F430murci is a 'normal heater-sexual' then by implication homosexuals are abnormal.

DELETED