On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 10:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keith says; Scott Benson says it is reasonable to change the law to enable
one or two, twenty or two hundred, honorable and sincere persons with penises to
enter, be on premises, and utilize a women's restroom.
Given that the highest prevalence estimate for transsexualism is 1/10,000, Minneapolis has at most about 20 persons with the appendage you describe using the women's room. Sex reassignment surgery having been available for about half a century now, we're probably looking at a universe of less than 10 women with the appendage you describe possibly using the thousands of women's rooms within our corporate limits. Even if said less than 10 women have very week bladders the odds of meeting one in the women's room are pretty slim.
I think it is very disruptive. Further, to allow men to loiter in the
ladies' restroom, in our predatory society, and presume an innocent intent is
dangerous. And subsequently, if there is a problem/alleged crime, to have
authorities face the burden of proving criminal intent. Hey, he was just standing in the
ladies room holding, and rubbing, his exposed penis. "What's the problem,
officer?"
Agreed. What we need to do is create an exemption just big enough to relieve the pressure on a small group of people with disabilities, their caregivers, transsexuals, intersexuals, and families with small children; And no bigger.
Would it not be more reasonable, and less dangerous, and finally, less
disruptive, to simply require that transgendered, and other gender benders, use the
restroom that society deems appropriate:
Agreed- the transgendered crossdressers and folks who wish to make a social statement by blurring the gender lines should be welcome and feel safe to enjoy our city, but the "weekend woman" has no right to share the woman's room.
Males in the men's room, females in the ladies' room?
But if only biology, to say nothing of endocrinology, genetics, and psychology was so simple... It is quite well documented that women with XY chromosomes and men with XX chromosomes exist, in fact some go through life completely undiagnosed. Then there are the folks with XXY, X0, etc., chromosomes- which restroom are they to use?
My opinion; some few gender challenged folks feel uncomfortable using
society's assigned restroom, and I sympathize with their feelings. But how can we
then deny, and not sympathize with, the uncomfortable feelings of the masses of
other folks? Folks who do not want a "person with penis" hanging in the ladies'
room, when their discomfort is compounded by safety issues?
Conversely, I assume you intend in "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" manner to assign the men without the appendage you mention to the women's restroom. From a practical point of view these strapping young men without the appendage you mention would cause a good deal more commotion in the women's room than a woman packing the appendage you mention.
And to be honest Keith, do you really want a tall buxom blonde intruding on your privacy while you stand there, exposed, relieving yourself?
relieved in Hawthorne,
Dyna Sluyter
TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. 2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.)
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
