Can someone please Explain why this is not a breach of American Law?

[Cute Tink]

No it's not. And gender biology is black and white. Male/Female.
You are overstating to imply the entire medical community concurs with your perspective. This is not true. Dr. Joseph Berger is one such person. There are others.

*The all capitals is the exact copy of the PDF article title as copied.

BODY DYSMORPHIC DISORDER: SOME KEY ISSUES
FOR DSM-V

Gender dysphoria is a distinct diagnosis from body dysmorphic disorder.

The APA itself disagrees with Dr. Joseph Berger. Then again, every major medical organization does officially agree with me.

The fact that intersex people exist is all the demonstration I need that biology is not black and white. Facts and reality and all that.

 

[Four Angels Standing]

Then you see how the law discriminates against those who have had surgery.

After all, the law requires people to use the bathroom designated for the gender on their birth certificate.

For those who have had the surgery, bottom being the foremost area of gender identity, I feel they are entitled to use the bathroom that best fits that alteration.
I pray God we're not in a country as yet where there are Birth Certificate police at the doors of every bathroom. Further, to my understanding, someone who has had the full surgery to augment their biological sex at birth are able to petition the court to alter that Birth Certificate to reflect that new sex.

Whereas a full male should have to use the men's room. The issue of safety can't discriminate or be itself illogical. A man who claims he's not safe using a men's room when attired as a female is asking, when he insists on access to a woman's facility, that his presence should make women feel unsafe.
While a biological female who appears as a male, including but not limited to facial hair, would hardly draw attention in a men's room. Especially when she says she already feels like a male. Why would she be opposed to entering a facility designated for the gender she claims of herself?
While sans the facial hair in today's fashion unless she's incredibly masculine in appearance, she shouldn't have an issue using the same bathroom as she did before.

The point being, Trans people can't have it and shouldn't expect to be hypocrites in their own self-identification. Nor should they show disrespect for the privacy of others or the sense of safety.

Personally, with all that is expended to debate this issue in the legislative sector, States should spend the money instead on bathroom and dressing room and locker room facilities expressly designated for use by the Trans person. "Unisex" facilities as an option. Not that there would be any way of policing use of that either.

What I don't understand is a people who demand respect but refuse to give respect. Transpeople demand to be tolerated and respected, but they rarely exhibit the same for those who are not on board with their identities or opinion. And they rarely respect the privacy of others or understand that when a dressing room can be a giant room full of mirrors, as it is in the mall shops here for the most part so as to avoid shoplifting opportunity, a mother shopping with her daughter doesn't want a full male undressing there in order to try on a dress.
Especially if he likes to go commando.

 

[Four Angels Standing]

But it's objectively not black and white. There are a variety of ways people don't fit the male/female binary view even if you completely ignore transgendered people. People born with both male and female genitalia for one, people born with female genitalia but a Y chromosome as another example. It's rare, but it does happen and demonstrates that sex & gender is not always a cut and dried issue.

When it is not a cut and dried issue it is called a birth defect.

 

[Cute Tink]

When it is not a cut and dried issue it is called a birth defect.

The existence of birth defects mean it's not cut and dried.

For those who have had the surgery, bottom being the foremost area of gender identity

Gender identity is not based on genitalia.

 

[Four Angels Standing]

Gender dysphoria is a distinct diagnosis from body dysmorphic disorder.

The APA itself disagrees with Dr. Joseph Berger. Then again, every major medical organization does officially agree with me.

The fact that intersex people exist is all the demonstration I need that biology is not black and white. Facts and reality and all that.

I take it you didn't read the PDF linked. It does refer to Transsexualism.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

The article said that they would be required to use the restroom that they biologically identify with. So if a man still has a penis then he is indeed a man and should use the men's room.

How would you know if a man (or anyone) has a penis or not?

 

[Cute Tink]

I take it you didn't read the PDF linked. It does refer to Transsexualism.

I don't need to. I have a copy of the DSM 5 and I know that body dysmorphic disorder and gender dysphoria are two separate diagnoses.

 

[Four Angels Standing]

Gender Identity Disorder was replaced with Gender Dysphoria when the DSM 5 was published.This remains that it is considered a treatable disorder. Though the pathology being labeled dysphoria I would think would outrage the Trans sufferer given the implications within the definition of Dysphoria. a state of dissatisfaction, anxiety, restlessness, or fidgeting.
While Disorder was apt to identify the pathology that even with DSM 5 is still considered a pathology requiring treatment. a disturbance in physical or mental health or functions; malady or dysfunction.

Gender Identity Disorder Today DSM IV Gender Identity Disorder

http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Gender Dysphoria Fact Sheet.pdf
APA Publication - Gender Dysphoria
Gender Dysphoria
In the upcoming fifth edition of the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(DSM-5),
people whose gender at birth is contrary to the one they identify with will be diagnosed with gender
dysphoria. This diagnosis is a revision of DSM-IV’s criteria for gender identity disorder and is intended
to better characterize the experiences of affected children, adolescents, and adults.

 

[Cute Tink]

Since you missed my edit, I'll ask this as a new post. What are these people in your black and white classification system:

Is a woman born without a uterus still considered female?
Is a woman who lost her breasts to cancer no longer female?
Is a man who suffered the loss of his testes to cancer is no longer a man?

Or will you agree that there is more to what a person is than their genitalia?

 

[Ana the Ist]

No, that is not the suggestion. Where a company spends its money is not relevant to my query, it is the basis of that choice, does it breach the law or not? Clearly the basis of this choice looks like a breach to me, since they have chosen to make that choice on the basis of sexuality, which [as I am often told] is illegal. If a bakery or flower shop is not entitled to make a choice on this basis, why is a large company? Companies should be run on an a-political basis.

It also annoys me that said company is using my purchasing clout to push an agenda against my will. I do not approve of the director's personal opinions being used as my voice. This is a breach of my personal rights. I say Paypal should be called to account. It has no right to make a decision on the basis of sexuality or belief system.

No...it's not against the law. It's against the law to deny someone services based upon gender or sex...but that isn't what's happening here.

PayPal has decided not to spend it's money in a state based upon the laws of that state. Companies do this all the time, usually over laws related to taxes, license issues, etc. While it's not normal for a company to avoid a state because of it's laws regarding civil rights...they're certainly entitled to do so.

 

[Dave-W]

When it is not a cut and dried issue it is called a birth defect.

"Defect?" really? The inter-sexed are not a defect.

 

[Maren]

No...it's not against the law. It's against the law to deny someone services based upon gender or sex...but that isn't what's happening here.

PayPal has decided not to spend it's money in a state based upon the laws of that state. Companies do this all the time, usually over laws related to taxes, license issues, etc. While it's not normal for a company to avoid a state because of it's laws regarding civil rights...they're certainly entitled to do so.

Actually, that is what is happening here. This wasn't just a "bathroom bill." What most companies are complaining about, including PayPal, is that also invalidated local civil rights protections, including against gays, veterans, and others. I posted the link showing that is what PayPal is protesting earlier in the thread.

 

[Ana the Ist]

What gets me shaking my head about these bathroom laws...is the sheer ridiculousness of it. The mere possibility of a person born a man using a women's bathroom is reason enough to write and pass a law to stop it.

At the same time, we know roughly 50,000 people in the U.S. will die by gunfire this year...and the slightest hint of some common sense legislation to make it more difficult for criminals to get guns, and the next thing you know is that all the people afraid of a man in the woman's bathroom will start screaming about their rights under a chorus of "they're gonna take our guns!"

 

[JustOneWay]

For those who have had the surgery, bottom being the foremost area of gender identity, I feel they are entitled to use the bathroom that best fits that alteration.
I pray God we're not in a country as yet where there are Birth Certificate police at the doors of every bathroom. Further, to my understanding, someone who has had the full surgery to augment their biological sex at birth are able to petition the court to alter that Birth Certificate to reflect that new sex.

Whereas a full male should have to use the men's room. The issue of safety can't discriminate or be itself illogical. A man who claims he's not safe using a men's room when attired as a female is asking, when he insists on access to a woman's facility, that his presence should make women feel unsafe.
While a biological female who appears as a male, including but not limited to facial hair, would hardly draw attention in a men's room. Especially when she says she already feels like a male. Why would she be opposed to entering a facility designated for the gender she claims of herself?
While sans the facial hair in today's fashion unless she's incredibly masculine in appearance, she shouldn't have an issue using the same bathroom as she did before.

The point being, Trans people can't have it and shouldn't expect to be hypocrites in their own self-identification. Nor should they show disrespect for the privacy of others or the sense of safety.

Personally, with all that is expended to debate this issue in the legislative sector, States should spend the money instead on bathroom and dressing room and locker room facilities expressly designated for use by the Trans person. "Unisex" facilities as an option. Not that there would be any way of policing use of that either.

What I don't understand is a people who demand respect but refuse to give respect. Transpeople demand to be tolerated and respected, but they rarely exhibit the same for those who are not on board with their identities or opinion. And they rarely respect the privacy of others or understand that when a dressing room can be a giant room full of mirrors, as it is in the mall shops here for the most part so as to avoid shoplifting opportunity, a mother shopping with her daughter doesn't want a full male undressing there in order to try on a dress.
Especially if he likes to go commando.

After all this, I still did not see where you agreed that the law does discriminate.

I do like the way you blame transgendered people for this whole issue....they are hypocrites, they demand tolerance ect....

Would you prefer they simply went back into the closet?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Actually, that is what is happening here. This wasn't just a "bathroom bill." What most companies are complaining about, including PayPal, is that also invalidated local civil rights protections, including against gays, veterans, and others. I posted the link showing that is what PayPal is protesting earlier in the thread.

I think you misread my post.

 

[JoeP222w]

TECH GIANT LEAVES NORTH CAROLINA OVER SAME SEX BATHROOMS

North Carolina is paying a high price after striking down Charlotte's bathroom ordinance bill. PayPal says it is cancelling plans to bring more than 400 jobs and a $3.6 million investment into the city with its new operation centre. The decision comes after North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory signed a bill repealing the transgender bathroom ordinance in Charlotte. People expressed concern over the ordinance, saying it would allow anyone identifying as transgender to use a public facility based on the sex they identify with rather than their biological sex. The risk became that any man, perhaps a sex offender, could enter a woman's restroom simply by calling himself transgender.

The new law limits the use of bathrooms, locker rooms and showers to persons of the same biological sex. According to PayPal President and CEO Dan Schulman, "The legislation invalidates protections of the rights of lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, and transgender citizens and denies these members of our community equal rights under the law." Schulman also says the new law promotes discrimination. "I'm going to respect people who disagree with our commonsense rules," McCrory responded. "This has a real impact on Charlotte and North Carolina families, and I'm urging our legislature to find some kind of legislative remedy as soon as possible," Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts said. North Carolina's next step is not yet clear, but PayPal says it will seek an alternative location for their operations centre.

Paypal are refusing to do business with the State of North Carolina on the basis of sexuality. The precedent has already been set in court of law. Why is Paypal not being called to account? Business should keep its nose out of such politics.

While I think Paypal is completely corrupt and hypocritical in this, if they choose to do this, I don't think they are violating any law.

As evidenced by this:

"Schulman also says the new law promotes discrimination." All the while Schulman discriminates against those who hold to Biblical standards, Schulman demonstrates the very definition of hypocrisy.

 

[Four Angels Standing]

I don't need to. I have a copy of the DSM 5 and I know that body dysmorphic disorder and gender dysphoria are two separate diagnoses.

GD is a severe form of BDD. The parallels should be obvious outlining the relationship between body dysmorphic disorder having a relationship to the body and gender identity. They are all pertaining to identity disorders.


What Body Dysmorphic Disorder and Gender Identity Disorder Have in Common

....At the risk of offending the politically correct LGBT crowd, I will state my personal view that Gender Identity Disorder involves the same process. The experience of profound shame (resulting from an emotionally catastrophic infancy and early childhood) is equated in the person’s unconscious mind with her anatomical gender. This usually occurs at a very early age, often before language develops; it is for this reason that the transgender person will argue that she has “always felt that way.” For all intents and purposes, she has. On an unconscioius level, she early on came to believe that she was actually a boy trapped in a girl’s body; in later life, she convinces herself that surgically altering her body is the solution to her psychological pain, her depressive feelings, her sense of being an outsider. Gender transition is the solution to shame, just as plastic surgery is the solution to shame for people like Toby.



Look, no one here is going to change anyone elses mind that is made up when they defend biological males and female sexes or that of the Transperson.
The issue here is actually PayPal and their supposed plans now scrapped as pertains to opening a facility in North Carolina. What we're arguing is the meat behind the issue of the bathroom bill that PayPal objects to.

PayPal isn't important save as an example their human rights precepts aren't consistent in company policy.
The Trans issue isn't going to be solved here either. People have their opinions. We're getting nowhere fast.
Again, I ask for tolerance for the Christian and our faith. Especially being this is a Christian community. Those who argue we must set aside our faith and values in order to be tolerated by those who are opposed are not demonstrating charity, tolerance, or respect.

Let's just stop all that. I know I will no longer engage in such an atmosphere as this. I also know I closed my PayPal account today so as to walk my talk.
God Bless us all.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I pray God we're not in a country as yet where there are Birth Certificate police at the doors of every bathroom.

Sometimes when God answers your prayers, the answer is "no." Sometimes it's worse.

A Kansas bill allows university students, public or private, the chance to sue the university for $2,500 if the catch a transgender student in the "wrong" bathroom.

Who needs police when you've got bounty hunters?

 

[Maren]

For those who have had the surgery, bottom being the foremost area of gender identity, I feel they are entitled to use the bathroom that best fits that alteration.
I pray God we're not in a country as yet where there are Birth Certificate police at the doors of every bathroom. Further, to my understanding, someone who has had the full surgery to augment their biological sex at birth are able to petition the court to alter that Birth Certificate to reflect that new sex.

Actually, it isn't true that someone that has had sex reassignment surgery can change their birth certificate. Some states do not allow the birth certificate to be changed, only allowing a change on a person's ID with possibly a notation added to the birth certificate. Other states only allow an amended birth certificate -- where it shows that the sex was change but still shows the original sex assigned at birth.

Whereas a full male should have to use the men's room. The issue of safety can't discriminate or be itself illogical. A man who claims he's not safe using a men's room when attired as a female is asking, when he insists on access to a woman's facility, that his presence should make women feel unsafe.

So using the pictures that were linked above, would the person that looks male with a cowboy hat make people more uncomfortable if he goes into the girl's room or the men's room, particularly when your logic wants him in the women's room? Same with the picture of what appeared to be a cute girl -- would she make men uncomfortable. In what way does her using the men's room make anyone feel safer, or actually just as safe or safer?

While a biological female who appears as a male, including but not limited to facial hair, would hardly draw attention in a men's room. Especially when she says she already feels like a male. Why would she be opposed to entering a facility designated for the gender she claims of herself?
While sans the facial hair in today's fashion unless she's incredibly masculine in appearance, she shouldn't have an issue using the same bathroom as she did before.

But that is part of the issue, as well. Many of these people do appear as the gender they are trying to be, even if they haven't had "the operation." Hormones are powerful things, particularly if taken while still relatively young (before 25 or so), and the closer they are taken to the onset of puberty the more powerful the changes are. Most male to female transsexuals don't need breast implants or "falsies", especially those that start hormones earlier -- they grow breasts when they go on hormones. Females on male hormones get male pattern body and facial hair (and baldness, if they have the genes). Even without the surgery, these people do (after time on hormones) tend to look -- other than the genitals -- like the gender they are trying to emulate. In fact, for your example, even without facial hair a female to male will often have the 5 o'clock shadow that would make them stand out in a women's bathroom.

The point being, Trans people can't have it and shouldn't expect to be hypocrites in their own self-identification. Nor should they show disrespect for the privacy of others or the sense of safety.

Personally, with all that is expended to debate this issue in the legislative sector, States should spend the money instead on bathroom and dressing room and locker room facilities expressly designated for use by the Trans person. "Unisex" facilities as an option. Not that there would be any way of policing use of that either.

What I don't understand is a people who demand respect but refuse to give respect. Transpeople demand to be tolerated and respected, but they rarely exhibit the same for those who are not on board with their identities or opinion. And they rarely respect the privacy of others or understand that when a dressing room can be a giant room full of mirrors, as it is in the mall shops here for the most part so as to avoid shoplifting opportunity, a mother shopping with her daughter doesn't want a full male undressing there in order to try on a dress.
Especially if he likes to go commando.

I can tell you have no clue about transsexuals. As a group, they want people to see their genitals even less than others want to see it. Since they feel they aren't that sex, that they shouldn't have those sexual organs, they are very sensitive, in cases even "ashamed" (not quite the right word but close), of their genitals -- the last thing they want is for others to see it.

Next, most transsexuals have no desire for people to know they are transsexual. This is no different than people who were born with a birth defect don't go around telling people they were born with a cleft palate or a club foot. While it may be necessary at times, it is the last thing most ever want to reveal about themselves -- especially with so many who will look at them as freaks if it is found out they were born as the opposite sex.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

Because women in rest rooms are gross and embarrassing. My wife has told me horror stories that I can't imagine happening in men's rooms.

Four years a ta gas station cleaning mens and womens bathrooms. I concur. No offense ladies, but a lot of you are seriously nasty,