What Do You Think About The Recent Transgender Issue

[romansh]

I agree Soma. We need to protect those who appear different than ourselves. But you have not answered the question... Is America ready for this solution to the issue or is there a better current solution than the directive in your opinion?

 

Whether America is ready or not is quite an interesting question, and I think the answer is likely no. A more interesting question is are we as individuals ready and how are we going to advocate for the position we feel is logical.

 

Waiting for a breeze in the right direction is one possibility and tacking into the wind is another.

[soma]

I don't think America is ready, and it will never be ready unless we speak out. My crazy dharma is I have to speak out on what I feel is the truth and sometimes I am wrong, but I would never have learned anything if I hadn't spoken. I paid the price for speaking out, demonstrating against the Vietnam War and had to pay a price for speaking out when we bombed Iraq into the stone age. I was in India when Indira Gandhi established marshal law, Korea when there Chun Do Hwan lead a coup'd tat and the revolution in Iran. None of these countries were ready for change and there are many people vested in keeping the status quo, but we must start somewhere. I am practical so feel your suggestion to use the bathroom we have already for special needs be used is a good first step. I really feel the issue is being used as a political football to score points, but feel we can all learn from the situation, first by bringing it out in the open to discuss and debate. Before I retired I worked at an at risk school and the administration was abusing the ESL program for other purposes, no one spoke out because they were concerned with promotions, or to be placed on the Sh.t list. When I got on the list I had nothing to lose so continued while other teachers were afraid they came to me to express their concerns about the problems we were facing. I don't think it is everyone's dharma to be in the front and get your legs chopped off, but it is a good place to be to learn quickly.

[romansh]

Another thought crossed my mind was how many years have transgendered people used the bathroom where the felt most safe?

Was there an issue?

How big an issue was it, assuming there was one.

Nobody was asking is America ready; apparently it was, by and large, unaware that America was unready.

 

This whole storm in a teacup was brought to an overflowing boil by the North Carolina politicians (and perhaps some other states).

[soma]

Every time we have an election the Republicans get on the social issues bandwagon. The Republican voters eat it up and don't even care about the other issues and after the election everything dies down, but now corporate America formed the Tea Party, it is really not grass roots it was thought up by politicians and funded by corporate America so they keep the issues alive to elect the people they want and make it look like they are doing something. You are right before transgender individuals used the bathroom they were comfortable with and dressed for and no one minded, but the whip of social issues pushes the Christian right into witch hunting mode. It is sad that very few people have the integrity to stand up for their individual truth because they are afraid of the masses. The Republican elite were saying Trump was bad for America, but now they support him, maybe bad for America, but they think good for the GOP. He has cemented the white Supremacist, KKK and other right wing groups to support him. Even the Evangelicals are warming up to him and his anti-Christian rhetoric, it is like being in the Twilight Zone.

[PaulS]

This 'development' so to speak probably turns out to be a great leap forward for transgender people because it makes people stop and actually think about the issue, probably discuss it, and I think in many instances people will come to the understanding that there is very little to be concerned about here. Apart from the lady in the video above that Rom referenced (I sincerely doubt she would be open to any consideration of the alternative view) I think the majority of citizens will come around to seeing this as no biggie, in due course.

 

I think once people start thinking it through, many will eliminate the issues they thought might otherwise be cause for concern.

 

I'm not disregarding people's concerns, but when you break this down I really think the main 'threat' is probably only that a male, pretending to be a transgender female, might enter a female toilet and spot a woman doing her business through a crack in the door. To me the odds of this occurring on a regular basis seems so minuscule to the issue that it's a risk worth having to broaden our acceptance of trans people in our community.

[romansh]

I'm not disregarding people's concerns, but when you break this down I really think the main 'threat' is probably only that a male, pretending to be a transgender female, might enter a female toilet and spot a woman doing her business through a crack in the door. To me the odds of this occurring on a regular basis seems so minuscule to the issue that it's a risk worth having to broaden our acceptance of trans people in our community.

 

At the end of the video I linked there was a clip of a lady not being allowed into the ladies' change room (I think) because she looked to much like a man.

 

Implementing such laws is going to be problematic ... showing ID to get into a bathroom?

A masculine looking woman being refused entry into a bathroom?

 

All this, by and large, is an unnecessary nonsense.

[PaulS]

A much more eloquently put argument than I could come up with:

 

http://progressivechristianity.org/resources/the-transgender-body-of-christ/

[soma]

Thanks Paul he did express the issue in a nice way.

[romansh]

A much more eloquently put argument than I could come up with:

 

http://progressivechristianity.org/resources/the-transgender-body-of-christ/

 

Paul

He expressed it primarily in terms that would be meaningful to Christians or more generally followers of the Abrahamic faiths. This is fine of course.

 

I have heard that there are studies to getting people to change there attitudes, logical debate and evidence can end up being counter productive. It just entrenches their deeply held views. So while the argument within the link does nothing for me, I think it might be appropriate for a Christian community.

[PaulS]

Yeah, I can understand that Rom. Certainly this Christian is targeting a Christian audience with the language/meaning that they may find understanding in. Naturally that would unlikely work well for somebody who doesn't share such beliefs.

 

I can imagine those studies you mention. If emotionally one has a strong tie to what they believe, all the evidence and logic in the world often cannot move that person. Yet, when something emotionally triggers a change, the change comes naturally.

[romansh]

I can imagine those studies you mention. If emotionally one has a strong tie to what they believe, all the evidence and logic in the world often cannot move that person. Yet, when something emotionally triggers a change, the change comes naturally.

 

So to manipulate people, well some people, (and here I use manipulate in an neutral sense) we have to engage their emotions to get them to move in the direction we want.

 

It sounds cold and manipulative (in its negative sense).

 

Reason and logic I think tells us that reason and logic is incomplete, I have no problem with this. If we decide to live our lives on some emotional level, that is fine but I can't help thinking reason and logic should point in vaguely the same direction for some sort of guidance to our emotion? As we have seen in these threads we can't argue or discuss our individual perceptions of faith, because these are highly internal.

 

But we can discuss our internal assumptions (axioms) and how we have applied logic to those assumptions. Here we have a way of reviewing our direction.

 

Those that rely on faith (as described in the other thread) simply either agree with one another, or if like me on the outside looking in, wonder what g on. I have friends who are YEC, and when sufficient evidence is provided, they simply pull out the "faith" card and assert an inerrant Biblical old Earth .

[JosephM]

Paul,

 

i agree it is cisgender people who are the problem for our youth and children. Real transgenders are usually victims rather then predators. The problem with the directive as written that upsets people i know is that of removing the gender identity of all bathrooms and lockerooms. that opens up a Pandora's box for cisgenders that would take advantage of the situation.because the criteria in the Presidents directive was too loose. Anyone could just walk in any bathroom or lockerroom without question. I don't think even California allows that.

Afterall there are some real weirdos in that state. Of course none that read here on this forum.

[PaulS]

 

Reason and logic I think tells us that reason and logic is incomplete, I have no problem with this. If we decide to live our lives on some emotional level, that is fine but I can't help thinking reason and logic should point in vaguely the same direction for some sort of guidance to our emotion? As we have seen in these threads we can't argue or discuss our individual perceptions of faith, because these are highly internal.

 

But we can discuss our internal assumptions (axioms) and how we have applied logic to those assumptions. Here we have a way of reviewing our direction.

 

Those that rely on faith (as described in the other thread) simply either agree with one another, or if like me on the outside looking in, wonder what g on. I have friends who are YEC, and when sufficient evidence is provided, they simply pull out the "faith" card and assert an inerrant Biblical old Earth .

 

Yes, the problem with reason and logic is they are not always the same thing to different people. Even reason and logic from hard, indisputable, scientific evidence, is still interpreted differently amongst others.

 

Certainly discussing how we got to a certain point/opinion helps review direction, if we are open to such review.

[PaulS]

Paul,

 

i agree it is cisgender people who are the problem for our youth and children. Real transgenders are usually victims rather then predators. The problem with the directive as written that upsets people i know is that of removing the gender identity of all bathrooms and lockerooms. that opens up a Pandora's box for cisgenders that would take advantage of the situation.because the criteria in the Presidents directive was too loose. Anyone could just walk in any bathroom or lockerroom without question. I don't think even California allows that.

Afterall there are some real weirdos in that state. Of course none that read here on this forum.

 

Having been to California in the early nineties I can vouch for their weirdness, Joseph! . Just jokes of course.

 

I have no doubt there will be people who abuse the intent of these changes, I just don't think it will be on a scale that outweighs the benefits it will provide to society and our transgender brothers and sisters.

 

I think if the community spent more time worrying about real perverts and lawbreakers (and taking appropriate action to deal with these issues) than they did about trans people sharing their toilet, the world would be a much better place.

[soma]

I feel the directive is to give the latitude to deal with different problems in a local area with their own wording, but the main purpose is to protect the transgenders who are the target and victims of hate crimes. I feel the conservatives instead of using the freedom to act in their own unique way are refusing to act and use that freedom against doing anything to help the victims.