California city prohibits gender specific restrooms

[Straw Man]

Which one is you?

find a 3rd grader to read my screen name to you

[Dos Equis]

So?  And?


that only brings us back to this:
Your words....

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

Actually it brings us back to your refusal to talk about the definition of gender identity and how you interpret the definition.  

Turns out I did post about this years ago.  Back then, you acknowledged how confusing the definition is:

I don;t see why it's complicated.

penis = man

vagina = woman


Why doe it get some complicated?

That's not what the definition says:

"Gender identity or expression" includes a person's actual or perceived gender, as well as a person's gender identity, gender-related self-image, gender-related appearance, or gender-related expression, regardless of whether that gender identity, gender-related self-image, gender-related appearance, or gender-related expression is different from that traditionally associated with the person's sex at birth.

So it's not as simple as penis and vagina. 

that's why i don't agree with it.  in the military people with penises will have to dress like men and vice versa.  that definition is for lawyers.

[Straw Man]

Mumble under his breath 'liberal, the left, liberal liberals liberals left left liberal left' whilst stomping to the restaurant exit. He grabs a chair, jumps on, open restaurant door , jump off and proceed to leave. Before the door closes he turns around and squeal, 'You just don't get it do you!!' . And he's gone.

I suspect he would stand there confused for a few hours watching both men and women going into the bathroom
As the urge to shit became too much to handle he would make a frantic phone call to Beach Bum who would warn him to not enter the bathroom or he will automatically be rendered gender neutral and then he will be legally required by the state to get gay married to an illegal alien

[Primemuscle]

I really dont see why the need for neutral bathrooms...


you still have a dick? you use the men's room.. you have a vag.. use the women's room...


end of discussion... you dont like it... get a sex change

I see no need for gender specific restrooms.

[Straw Man]

I see no need for gender specific restrooms.

it really appears that the fact that we're talking about single occupant bathrooms is lost on these dipshits

every single plane they have ever flown in has gender neutral bathrooms

every little mom and pop restaurant, bar, bookshop, etc.. with a single occupant bathroom has a gender neutral bathrooms

watching Bum have a panic attack for 5 pages over gender identity given this specific set of circumstances is f'ng absurd

[Coach is Back!]

find a 3rd grader to read my screen name to you

Are you sure? Maybe you're just confused.

[Straw Man]

Are you sure? Maybe you're just confused.

As usual, the only one that is confused is you

[Coach is Back!]

I have two bathrooms in my gym. Both are "unisex". I don't expect anything else but one person at a time.

[James28]

I have two bathrooms in my gym. Both are "unisex". I don't expect anything else but one person at a time.

 

So what are you bitching about?

[Straw Man]

 

So what are you bitching about?

Allen West told him to get mad

get mad first

ask questions later

or not at all

first step.... get mad

[Coach is Back!]

Allen West told him to get mad

get mad first

ask questions later

or not at all

first step.... get mad

Mad? Why would I be mad? It's just too damn easy to call out the utter stupidity of the left..."mad". Lol

[whork]

Mad? Why would I be mad? It's just too damn easy to call out the utter stupidity of the left..."mad". Lol

Its almost too easy right Coach?

[James28]

Its almost too easy right Coach?

Yep, easy

Coach came here and 'fooled' us all. See how easy he done that. That's because he's 'Right' and others are 'Left' and the 'Right' is well, right. The 'Left's is not 'Right' or right, so they're wrong.

Now that you've seen the extent of his world and intelligence, don't let him fool you again!

[whork]

Yep, easy

Coach came here and 'fooled' us all. See how easy he done that. That's because he's 'Right' and others are 'Left' and the 'Right' is well, right. The 'Left's is not 'Right' or right, so they're wrong.

Now that you've seen the extent of his world and intelligence, don't let him fool you again!

I have been an idiot. Off course it all makes sense now.

Coach is not dumb he is smarter than all of us. Us simpletons cannot fathom his mighty intellect he is really that smart. I wish i was more like Coach.

[OzmO]

Actually it brings us back to your refusal to talk about the definition of gender identity and how you interpret the definition.  

Turns out I did post about this years ago.  Back then, you acknowledged how confusing the definition is:

That's before i read the wiki one.

Now that i have  "decided" on a definition...so what?

If all you have is to point out a murky definition while ignoring other more simple definition it explains why you still refuse to answer questions based on assertions you brought up:

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

[Dos Equis]

That's before i read the wiki one.

Now that i have  "decided" on a definition...so what?

If all you have is to point out a murky definition while ignoring other more simple definition it explains why you still refuse to answer questions based on assertions you brought up:

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

You decided on a definition?  How exactly does that work?  Actually, you're using something someone posted on the internet, rather than the actual definition enacted into law by a number of states.  That's your attempt to avoid admitting how ambiguous the language is.  But no worries.  You already acknowledged it back when I first made a thread about it. 

[OzmO]

You decided on a definition?  How exactly does that work?  Actually, you're using something someone posted on the internet, rather than the actual definition enacted into law by a number of states.  That's your attempt to avoid admitting how ambiguous the language is.  But no worries.  You already acknowledged it back when I first made a thread about it. 

No its your attempt to distract and deflect from my point because you can't answer questions about it. 

Your only hope is to get me to agree that the definition is confusing. I agreed with you then, but now I do not because the simple definition sums it up.

Why are you so afraid of the simple definition?  Why do you refuse to answer my questions about YOUR statements? 

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

Is it because when asked about them, your statements look like a conspiracy theory?

[whork]

Beach is a lying coward and a hypocrite.

He cant answer your questions so he deflects like a little bitch.

I still cant get a response as to why he didnt serve.

Look at the MM/Sniper thread to see BB in action.

He is just pathetic.

[Dos Equis]

No its your attempt to distract and deflect from my point because you can't answer questions about it. 

Your only hope is to get me to agree that the definition is confusing. I agreed with you then, but now I do not because the simple definition sums it up.

Why are you so afraid of the simple definition?  Why do you refuse to answer my questions about YOUR statements? 

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

Is it because when asked about them, your statements look like a conspiracy theory?

They are attempting to eliminate gender differences, because "gender" is defined as something I saw in the movies once. 

Actually I just made that up.  Sort of like you avoiding a definition that's actually on the books in many states in favor of a one-liner you read on the internet, solely in an attempt to avoid having to discuss how problematic that definition is. 

[OzmO]

They are attempting to eliminate gender differences, because "gender" is defined as something I saw in the movies once. 

Actually I just made that up.  Sort of like you avoiding a definition that's actually on the books in many states in favor of a one-liner you read on the internet, solely in an attempt to avoid having to discuss how problematic that definition is. 

Doesn't seem so problematic with the definition i provided.

You are  still avoiding/deflecting.  Your whole line of questioning is moot.

It would have made no difference if I said I interpret the Hawaiian definition of Gender Identity as:  A person who sees themselves as other then the one they are.

So back, if you can, to the discussion about your assertions that may suggest a conspiracy:

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

[Dos Equis]

Doesn't seem so problematic with the definition i provided.

You are  still avoiding/deflecting.  Your whole line of questioning is moot.

It would have made no difference if I said I interpret the Hawaiian definition of Gender Identity as:  A person who sees themselves as other then the one they are.

So back, if you can, to the discussion about your assertions that may suggest a conspiracy:

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

What is moot is you accepting some definition that isn't even on the books.  You are the one avoiding/deflecting.  I asked about specific parts of the actual definition (and something someone posted on the internet).  For example, what does "gender related self image" mean and how does someone discriminate against a person based on "gender related self image"?   

[OzmO]

What is moot is you accepting some definition that isn't even on the books.  You are the one avoiding/deflecting.

No I am not.  I answered you clearly.  You just won't accept it for the reasons i listed.

I asked about specific parts of the actual definition (and something someone posted on the internet).  For example, what does "gender related self image" mean and how does someone discriminate against a person based on "gender related self image"?    

More attempts by you to avoid my questions and deflect.

Why do you keep avoiding my questions?

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

[Dos Equis]

No I am not.  I answered you clearly.  You just won't accept it for the reasons i listed.

More attempts by you to avoid my questions and deflect.

Why do you keep avoiding my questions?

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

You're avoiding mine.  One dodge deserves another.   

Here is partly how California defines gender identity:

"In this introduction, we would like to emphasize that a person’s gender identity is that person’s sense of self regarding characteristics labeled as masculine, feminine, both or neither. An individual determines their own gender identity and the sole proof of a person’s gender identity is that person’s statement or expression of their self identification."

http://sf-hrc.org/compliance-guidelines-prohibit-gender-identity-discrimination

What the heck does "neither" mean when it cones to gender??  I don't expect you to answer, because you've got Wiki, so it's all good.

[OzmO]

You're avoiding mine.  One dodge deserves another.  

Here is partly how California defines gender identity:

"In this introduction, we would like to emphasize that a person’s gender identity is that person’s sense of self regarding characteristics labeled as masculine, feminine, both or neither. An individual determines their own gender identity and the sole proof of a person’s gender identity is that person’s statement or expression of their self identification."

http://sf-hrc.org/compliance-guidelines-prohibit-gender-identity-discrimination

What the heck does "neither" mean when it cones to gender?? I don't expect you to answer, because you've got Wiki, so it's all good.

go back to my definition/interpretation of Gender identity:

"A person who sees themselves as other then the one they are."

So neither would mean: not male, not female.  (other then)

quid pro quo    

"Attempt to eliminate gender differences"    "Broader agenda of indoctrination"   To what end?

[Straw Man]

What is moot is you accepting some definition that isn't even on the books.  You are the one avoiding/deflecting.  I asked about specific parts of the actual definition (and something someone posted on the internet).  For example, what does "gender related self image" mean and how does someone discriminate against a person based on "gender related self image"?   

no one gives a fuck about gender

News Flash - if you use a gender neutral bathroom your gender remains exactly the same as before you used the bathroom

You've decided this story is about your fear of "gender" and perhaps people who identify as a different gender than how they were born and fuck it you're going to the story about that regardless of the facts

I suspect your issue with gender is part of your larger issue of gay people (even though they are different topics) and really having to acknowledge anyone who is different than you and who you don't personally approve of

Well, I got good new.  It's not about that.

It's about making single occupant bathrooms more convenient

that's it

It's not the start of a revolution or a battle in the imaginary revolution you think it's underway

It's just about making it more convenient for everyone to take a evacuate their blander and bowels